HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-08-2017 Council PacketAgenda for Council Meeting Set for Monday, May 8, 2017, 7: 00 P.M.
Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356
952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us
The public is invited to address the council regarding any item on the regular agenda. If your topic is not
on the agenda, you may speak during the Public Comments section.
Roll Call
Pledge of Allegiance
Approval of Agenda
1. Consent Agenda — Consent agenda items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by
one motion by the City Council under this section of the agenda. Items on the Consent Agenda
are reviewed in total by the City Council and may be approved through one motion with no
further discussion by the Council. Any item may be removed by any Council Member, staff
member or person from the public for separate consideration. The City Council may add agenda
items to be considered as part of the Consent motion. If you wish to remove any item from the
Consent Agenda, please state the item number and description of the item. Memos regarding
each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet located in the lobby near the sign in
sheet.
Consent Agenda
2. Council Meeting of April 24, 2017
3. Council Work Session Meeting of April 24, 2017
4. Claims/Bills
5. Licenses — Kennel License
6. Public Works Roof Repairs
7. # 17-3 927 — Nathan & Beth Brandenburg, 825 Forest Arms Lane, Variance — Resolution
8. #17-3928 — Mike Hart, 25 10 Casco Point Road, Conditional Use Permit — Resolution
9. #17-3918 — Rehkamp Larson o/b/o Bill Toles, 1095 Ferndale Road West, Variances & CUP —
Resolution
Public Comments — (Limit 5 Minutes per Person)
This is an opportunity for the public to address matters not on the agenda. The council will not engage
in discussion or take action on items presented at this time. However, the council may refer issues to
staff for follow up or consideration at a future meeting. Speakers should state their name and home
address at the podium before speaking.
Presentation
10. Recognition of Big Island Donations
Public Works/City Engineer Report
11. ADA Transition Plan Proposal
12. Orono Youth Football use of Hackberry Park
12a. Resolution Supporting Reasonable Access to County Road 112, Wayzata Boulevard For the
Orono Station
Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us — follow links for Stay Connected & Email Notification
Agenda for Council Meeting Set for Monday, May 8, 2017, 7: 00 P.M.
Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356
952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us
Planning Department Report - Planning Commission Representative Bruce Lemke
13. #17-3911 — Lake West Development, LLC, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard West, Zoning Code Text
Amendment — Allow Interim/Temporary Uses
14. #17-3910 — Lake West Development, LLC, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard West, Interim Use Permit:
Temporary Use for Construction Staging
15. #17-3931 — Lake West Development, LLC o/b/o Rick & Barbara Lupient, '3580' Lupient Place,
Sketch Plan Review
16. #17-3922 — City of Orono, Text Amendment: Wetlands Regulations
17. Authorize to hire City Planner
Mayor/Council Report
City Administrator's Report
City Attorney's Report
Adjournment
Upcoming Events
2017
05-15-17 — Planning Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:30 p.m. (Wendy Dankey)
05-22-17 — Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m.
05-22-17 — Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m.
05-29-17 — Memorial Day, Monday, City Offices Closed
06-05-17 — Park Commission Work Session, Monday, 1:00 p.m.
06-12-17 — Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m.
06-19-17 — Planning Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:30 p.m. (Dennis Walsh)
06-26-17 — Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m.
06-26-17 — Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m.
07-03-17 — Holiday Observed, Monday, City Offices Closed
07-04-17 — Independence Day, Tuesday, City Offices Closed
07-10-17 — Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m.
07-11-17 — Planning Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:30 p.m. (Richard Crosby)
Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us — follow links for Stay Connected & Email Notification
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, April 24, 2017
7:00 o'clock p.m.
ROLL CALL
The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor
Dennis Walsh, Council Members Richard Crosby, 11, Wendy Dankey, Aaron Printup, and Victoria Seals.
Representing Staff were City Administrator Doug Reeder, Finance Director Ron Olson, Community
Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, City Planner Melanie Curtis, City Attorney Soren Mattick,
Consulting City Engineer David Martini, and Recorder Jackie Young.
Mayor Walsh called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
1. CONSENT AGENDA
Item Nos. 14 and 15 were added to the Consent Agenda.
2. City Council Meeting Minutes of April 10, 2017
3. Claims/Bills
4. Paperless Payroll
5. Backup Generators for Lift Stations #7 and #20
6. Stormwater Pond Assessments
7. Public Works Maintenance Worker Resignation and Recruitment
This item was removed from the Consent Agenda.
8. #17-3912 — Bruce E. Birkeland, 1298 Wildhurst Trail and Lot 3, Block Wildhurst,
Variances — Resolution No. 6755
9. Appointment to Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee
10. Special City Council Work Session for May 1, 2017
Printup moved, Crosby seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: Ayes 5,
Nays 0.
Page I of 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, April 24, 2017
7:00 o'clock p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Jim Buck, Orono resident, stated he has a serious concern that has emerged regarding County Road 6 and
Old Crystal Bay Road. There are long backups of cars waiting to turn right onto Crystal Bay and left onto
County Road 6. As a result, drivers will take turns turning right or left, which generally works okay, but
the problem is that the drivers turning left do not always realize that vehicles traveling down County
Road 6 at 55 miles per hour do not have to stop. Buck stated he has observed near fatal collisions
multiple times and that the problem on County Road 6 will only get worse given the construction on
Old Highway 12.
Buck indicated he has informed the police and talked to people at the school about this problem and that
he is happy to assist somehow in dealing with this situation
Crosby asked what the response of the police department was.
Buck stated he was told to let the City Council know about the problem.
Walsh commented the City needs to have a startup conversation about this, and since it is a Hennepin
County Road, the City will need to work with them as well. Walsh recommended the City Administrator
reach out to the parties to schedule a meeting to discuss it.
Crosby questioned whether that section of County Road 6 should be part of the school zone since then the
speed limit could be reduced down to 30 or 35.
Stacey Royal, 3135 Jamestown Road, stated Trinity Lutheran Church has recorded 200 accidents near
Brown Road and County Road 6 and that she would love to see the speed limit reduced or a stoplight
installed on Old Crystal Bay Road. Royal stated there are a significant number of high school kids that
drive in that area and someday there will be a fatal accident. Royal stated she would be happy to work
with Jim and anyone else from a citizen perspective.
Edwards stated Hennepin County could be requested to conduct a speed study, which requires a
resolution from the City Council, but the actual speed limits are set by the state. Edwards noted Staff has
attempted to work with the school, the County, and Three Rivers as recently as last year to look at
solutions to this problem but they were not successful other than Three Rivers Park District did apply for
and received a $10,000 grant to study safety at that particular crossing. In addition, the school hired SRF
to conduct a traffic flow study and they looked at both intersections. Edwards stated in order to move this
forward, the City Council will need to adopt a resolution requesting a speed study.
It was the consensus of the City Council to move forward with a resolution requesting a speed study and
to schedule a meeting with Hennepin County and perhaps the residents in the area.
Darren Rosha stated his office is located at 2160 West Wayzata Boulevard and that he has been working
with Brad and Kristi Erickson, the owners of the Orono Gas Station and shopping center. Rosha stated as
the road project on Old Highway 12 proceeds forward, a question has arisen about how wide the driveway
locations should be to this location. As it is currently configured, there are two driveways, with one
driveway being roughly 80 feet. The City's ordinance requires the driveway be 32 feet wide. Rosha
noted this is not a change being requested by the Erickson's but by Hennepin County.
Page 2 of 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, April 24, 2017
7:00 o'clock p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - Continued
Rosha stated the position of the Erickson's is that what they have now works very well, and if the
entrance is narrowed down, ingress and egress will become problematic. The Erickson's position is what
is there should remain there. Rosha stated the Erickson's have done a great job improving the property
and that egress/ingress is important and helps dictates the success or failure of a business. There is also a
safety concern with the narrower driveway.
Rosha stated there is some dialogue taking place between Erickson's and Hennepin County, and that he
would request the City take a formal stance that the driveway be permitted to remain as wide as it
currently is.
Walsh commented it is a unique property since there is a gas station, a retail mall, and some professional
service offices located there. Walsh stated from a philosophical standpoint, he would say they should be
able to keep what they have since it is no fault of their own that this road project is happening. Walsh
stated he would be supportive from a grandfathering standpoint that they should be able to keep what they
have unless there is some overriding safety issue that needs to be addressed.
Printup stated from a policy standpoint, he would be okay with leaving the driveway at its present width
since the City routinely allows people to replace homes with like, kind and quality. Printup stated he
would want to make sure the City does not have any liability or be used as a negotiating tool with the
County.
Rosha noted there are condemnation proceedings with a couple of property owners, including Orono
West, which is related to the issue of the taking component during the pendency of the construction. The
condemnation action was withdrawn and it comes down to the question of valuation. Rosha stated in his
view it is highly unlikely there will be any impact on that pending litigation by the City Council
expressing its position on the width of the driveway remaining as is.
Seals stated there is value to the wider driveway for safety reasons and that she does not see any reason
why the City would not support that.
Walsh asked whether Mr. Rosha is interested in something more than a general consensus of the City
Council.
Rosha stated from a procedural postural standpoint, the City Council can go and articulate a consensus
but that it would not be nearly as effective as being able to present something in writing. Rosha stated the
document could contain language that there is no evidence at this time that the wide driveway has created
a safety hazard.
Walsh suggested he communicate with the City Attorney on a memorandum of understanding.
Edwards stated from an engineering perspective, the project is at the end of a three-year design process,
which the City was a part of. The City had indicated they are not interested in the County holding to the
City's 32 -foot width but rather would like them to apply best engineering principles to make the driveway
as wide as practical given the new configuration of the road. In its current plan, Hennepin County has a
36 -foot wide access through the trail section out to a 45 -foot wide access at the new curb.
Page 3 of 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, April 24, 2017
7:00 o'clock p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENTS — Continued
Edwards stated it is important to note that a number of things have happened with the road as a result of
this project and that in his view it would be important to invite Hennepin County to discuss this prior to
the City Council taking formal action on this item. Edwards noted there has been a change in the curb
location in that it moves south from where it currently is, the addition of a trail, and the removal of the
center medians along Wayzata Boulevard that now allows left turns into that business. Edwards stated
since there have been a number of design considerations that have gone into the plan, it might be prudent
to hear those in detail from the County.
Seals asked what the time frame is on this project.
Edwards stated it will be mid to late May before concrete is poured.
Rosha noted around three years ago, this was not an operating business and there were just a few
businesses on the side of the mall and not people with boats, which is not the case today. Rosha stated he
does understand that there is a conversation about a trail and the other changes but that the driveway is
currently 80 feet wide. Rosha noted the temporary driveway is now the narrower width, and the concern
is once the status quo changes, it changes the obligation for the property owner and that he now has to
come and prove why it should not be changed. Rosha stated if this is pushed out, that could leave them
with no option.
Mattick noted this is a county road, and while the County will work with the City and take some
suggestions on the design, as a county road, it is the County's project. Mattick stated if the Council
would like to do something to support the status quo, the Council can do it in the form of a resolution or
something else, but that the County may want to speak with the City about this. Mattick noted he cannot
draft the resolution tonight but that he can have something ready to go for the next meeting.
Rosha stated he will be in touch with the City Attorney.
Reeder suggested the County be asked not to commit to pouring concrete until the City is able to meet
with them.
Walsh concurred with that suggestion. Walsh noted this is Phase I of the project and that there are three
phases total and that at times things are fluid. Walsh stated philosophically he supports the right of the
property owner to retain what he currently has.
Brad Erickson, 2160 Wayzata Boulevard, stated all the city codes were in place when they chose to make
it as wide as they did and that none of the codes have changed since that time. Erickson stated he is not
sure if there are any studies that were done to prompt them to leave it that wide but that there likely is
something. Erickson noted in 1999 or 2000 was when the road was redone the last time.
Erickson noted they were involved early on in the planning process and that they never wanted the
narrower driveway in the first place. Erickson stated he does not want to see his rights as a property
owner be trampled on for some theoretical reason and that he has four years of experience that shows it is
not an issue. Erickson noted with the removal of the median, they will be doubling the amount of traffic
in and out of that entrance and that it does not make any sense to reduce the width when the amount of
traffic will increase.
Page 4 of 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, April 24, 2017
7:00 o'clock p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENTS — Continued
Allan Engleman, 315 Old Crystal Bay Road, stated a solution on County Road 6 might be a roundabout.
Engleman stated he would like to thank the people who were responsible for getting the crusher moved
from state land down to county land but that it seems the City is not done with Eureka yet. Engleman
noted they put in a new fence in there. The permit authorized the applicant to place crushing operation on
the through 12 right-of-way at Old Crystal Bay Road in the City of Orono as shown on the plan sheet.
The next page of the permit says it is expressly understood that this permit is issued subject to the
applicant's compliance with the MPCA, MPDES permit for construction activities, and any other affected
governmental agencies. Engleman asked if Orono isn't a governmental agency.
Walsh noted they are not doing the rock crushing there anymore but they are using it as storage.
Engleman noted the permit does not say that. Engleman stated before this project is done, they will be
using the entire site. Engleman asked if anyone with the City is aware of them fencing in part of the
property.
Walsh stated he was not aware of it and that perhaps a phone call could be made to the contractor telling
him that his permit does not allow storage.
Engleman noted the site is zoned two -acre residential and that he is not sure how he can have storage
there.
Mattick stated cities have limited ability to regulate the state. Mattick noted the City's ordinances do not
say they can do rock crushing at all but that the state is not subjected to city rules. Mattick stated while
the permit says they are subject to local governmental regulations, which typically comes down to hours
of operation or screening and not the use.
Walsh stated he would be happy to speak with the contractor about his hours of operation, etc., to obtain
more information about what is going on.
Engleman stated he does not understand how they can do what they are doing since it is not zoned
commercial.
PRESENTATION
11. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT — VICKIE SCHLEUNING
Vickie Schleuning, LMCD Executive Director, addressed the Orono City Council regarding their
upcoming activities in 2017. Over the past few months, the LMCD has looked at community engagement
and how to get people involved and educated about the LMCD. Lake Minnetonka is a great resource with
approximately 125 miles of shoreline and ten public access ramps. The goal of the LMCD is to balance
the needs between commercial properties and the lake residents and lake enthusiasts.
Schleuning stated the LMCD looks at ways to preserve the lake and helps to promote the Lake
Minnetonka experience. The LMCD was established in 1967 as a regulatory agency to address water
quality issues. Over time the agency has grown and it currently has 14 member cities, a board member
Page 5 of 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, April 24, 2017
7:00 o'clock p.m.
PRESENTATION — Continued
appointed from each city, and 3.5 staff positions. The agency is funded by city levies, licenses, permits,
grants, and contributions. In addition, the LMCD partners with a number of public agencies, including
the DNR, the MCWD, Hennepin County Water Patrol, Three Rivers Park, Hennepin County, MPCA,
residents, businesses, and special interest groups.
The LMCD manages all season activities on the lake from an environmental, safety, and nuisance
standpoint. Schle-uning indicated she has been working with realtors and prospective buyers the past few
months educating them on their dock rights. In addition, the LMCD has created a brochure on lake rights
and regulations which has been sent out to various stakeholders, residents, and dock installers.
Schleuning stated the goal with the brochure is to make the codes clearer to everyone.
The primary duties of the LMCD are to look at docks and structures, watercraft density and storage,
watercraft for hire, liquor consumption on the lake, and de-icing operations. Schleuning noted the current
issue before the LMCD is a review of the ordinance regarding underage drinking and social hosting. The
LMCD will be discussing this issue at its Wednesday meeting. Schleuning stated a number of cities have
social host ordinances and regulations on underage drinking but they do not always work out on the
water. Last year the Water Patrol had one of the highest numbers of boating while intoxicated cases and
that they are looking at ways to curb and manage that behavior. Schleuning stated the proposed ordinance
will provide more accountability to people who provide alcohol to minors in addition to a Good
Samaritan type of clause.
Walsh asked if the adult owner of the boat would be responsible for everyone on the boat.
Schleuning stated if the person is an adult and they know about the underage drinking and did not try to
do something or they provided the alcohol, that person could be held liable.
Seals stated people are wondering how it will be enforced. Seals stated it obviously is not a good idea to
provide alcohol to minors but that it seems to be a little overreaching or the luck of the draw on who gets
stopped. Seals noted she probably received 15 phone calls on this issue after the newspaper article.
Schleuning stated the City Council can encourage the residents to call her.
Schleuning stated the LMCD also regulates special events, temporary structures, special projects, and
referrals to the appropriate agency of a hazard, etc. Schleuning noted the LMCD is already receiving
calls about Super Bowl events and they will be working with the Water Patrol and others to ensure there
are appropriate resources to handle all the events that will occur.
The LMCD also deals with prevention and management of aquatic invasive species. The LMCD has an
AIS taskforce that meets with all of the stakeholders. Schleuning stated the LMCD has seen a reduction
in grants to deal with AIS and that she is not sure where it will go next year. Schle-uning noted Lake
Minnetonka is a very high use lake and the LMCD wants to make sure the types of aquatic invasive
species do not expand.
Seals asked what the LMCD does to deal with watercraft going in and out of the lake. Seals commented
the residents love the lake and would be happy to help out financially to some extent but that there are
also a number of people who use the lake who do not contribute.
Page 6 of 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, April 24, 2017
7:00 o'clock p.m.
PRESENTATION — Continued
Schleuning indicated the LMCD does milfbil and nuisance plant harvesting as well as watercraft
inspections, but those do not occur at every access point. In addition, the LMCD has had a number of
discussions about ways to monitor vehicles coming in and one avenue is the Lake Service Providers Pilot
Program the DNR is looking at that can be used to implement some type of tagging system or recording
system. Currently the LMCD or DNR does not have anything in place to monitor that.
Crosby asked whether a registration sticker specifically for Lake Minnetonka could help generate funds to
combat AlS. Crosby noted the aquatic invasive species are coming from people who visit the lake and do
not dock their boat on the lake.
Schleuning stated an additional fee on the DNR licenses was proposed but that did not pass. Schleuning
stated she would need to look into that further.
Schleuning stated some of the other items the LMCD has been working on include the Save the Lake
Fund, which contributes towards education, safety, and environmental, sponsoring a boater safety class on
June 19, and a solar lights program for navigational safety.
The LMCD 2017 initiatives include the following:
• Recodification to update standards to today's needs and technology and to provide a user friendly
format.
• Enhance communications to increase public education through printed materials, an online
presence, website, events, and fairs.
• Collaborations with various agencies to focus resources through the sharing of information and
dealing with electric shock drowning, the AIS and LSP pilot program, and carbon monoxide.
Walsh asked if the LMCD videotapes their meetings.
Schleuning stated the LMCD has two meetings per month, with one meeting being primarily a work
session which is not videotaped, and the formal board meeting that is videotaped.
Walsh noted out of the 14 members, Orono consists of seven percent, but that they pay a lot more than
seven percent. Walsh stated in his view Orono should only be paying seven percent of the budget rather
than 20 percent and that the LMCD's levy needs to align more with the City's membership percentage.
Walsh stated when LMCD Chair Jay Green was before the Council last year and presented the budget, he
talked about the LMCD raising fees two or three percent but using $65,000 of reserves. Walsh asked how
the LMCD is adjusting to resolve that situation to avoid depleting reserves.
Schleuning indicated the LMCD will be discussing the budget this Wednesday and that the proposed
budget is online. Schleuning stated one issue they have seen are the grant amounts decreasing through the
years but that the revenue via the city levy has been fairly consistent. Schleuning stated she will have to
take a hard look at what is being done with the reserves.
Crosby asked what the LMCD's annual budget is currently.
Schleuning stated it has been decreasing over the years but that it is currently $549,000.
Page 7 of 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, April 24, 2017
7:00 o'clock p.m.
PRESENTATION — Continued
Walsh asked how much of that consists of revenue from the cities.
Schleuning indicated she does not have that information tonight but will provide it. Schleuning stated she
also would be willing to come back before the Council to discuss the budget.
Dankey asked if someone from Orono is currently on the Board.
Reeder indicated that position is currently being advertised.
Seals suggested adding solar lights to more of the buoys in the busier areas of the lake since the buoys are
very difficult to see.
Schleuning stated she will bring that idea forward to the Board.
Mayor Walsh asked if anyone from the public would like to comment.
Tim Johnson, 1432 Shoreline Drive, stated Orono's position is basically ignored since the city is only a
fraction of the membership. Johnson noted the LMCD does not contribute to AIS control on Crystal Bay
but that they do contribute to the treatment on some of other bays.
Johnson stated in his view more dialogue between the City and the LMCD is important to help keep
Orono's interests a priority. Johnson stated when there is an issue in Orono, the LMCD sends basically a
rubberstamped type letter to Staff about it, such as the expansion of a commercial dock. In that case, the
letter asked for the recommendation of the City's reviewer. Staff said their recommendation was
approval. Johnson noted that letter shows up as a page in the final findings and facts when it goes to the
LMCD Board. Johnson stated the recommendation of approval from Staff is far from what is happening
in reality and that that might be a conversation that should be had with Staff.
Richie Anderson, 3205 Crystal Bay Road, stated he currently owns three marinas in the City of Orono
and that he has been dealing with the LMCD since 1976. Anderson stated it is a pleasure to see that the
City Council is pushing back on the LMCD. Anderson noted Orono has one vote and there are 13 other
member cities that have a vote that do not represent Orono.
Anderson noted the LMCD has restrictions on how close property docks can be to each other, but if the
neighbor does not protest that, the docks could end up being side by side. Anderson commented the
neighbor likely does not want to complain about that when he has to deal with him six months out of the
year. Anderson stated the LMCD should be enforcing the rules, noting that there is a 20 -foot setback on
each side but yet the docks are shoehorned in there.
Anderson stated the LMCD also makes decisions at their work sessions and they are not videotaped.
Anderson stated in his view the LMCD has outworn their effectiveness and that they are ineffective at
dealing with AlS. Anderson noted zebra mussels have been discussed as far back as 1985 and they are
now here to stay. Anderson commented zebra mussels help clean the water but there are not that many
this year, which could mean it is a limited life cycle type deal.
Page 8 of 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, April 24, 2017
7:00 o'clock p.m.
7. PUBLIC WORKS MAINTENANCE WORKERS RESIGNATION AND RECRUITMENT
Edwards stated Maintenance Worker Justin Hirsch resigned his position effective April 14. The Public
Works Department maintains six full-time maintenance worker positions. The purpose of this item is to
accept the resignation and to let the City Council know the recruitment process has begun.
Crosby moved, Seals seconded, to accept the resignation of Maintenance Worker Justin Hirsch and
approve the recruitment of a replacement. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER REPORT
12. FOX STREET REHABILITATION AWARD
Edwards stated following the City Council's approval to solicit bids, the City received a number of bids
for the project. Staff is asking for approval to award the rehabilitation contract to Park Construction in
the amount of $750,485.03. Staff is also recommending the Council approve Bolton & Menk's proposal
to provide construction services for an amount not to exceed $75,500.
Edwards noted the estimated fund balance ending year for 2017 for MSA construction should be
$267,717 after Fox Street rather than the $585,968 listed in Staff s report.
Walsh noted he did receive communication from a couple of residents on Fox Street who would like to
see the City spend an extra $50,000 to get the project completed by July.
Seals stated it is a valid concern but the City has a long list of other roads to complete and that they can
use that money towards another road project.
Edwards noted the contractor completed Watertown Road by mid-August even though they had a
substantial completion date of September and in both cases the road pavement portion of the project were
done by mid-August.
Printup moved, Crosby seconded, to award the bid for the Fox Street rehabilitation project to Park
Construction in the amount of $750,485.03 and to approve Bolton & Menk's services in an amount
not to exceed $75,500. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
13. 2017-2018 STREET MAINTENANCE
Edwards stated at the work session the Council discussed which projects to proceed with in 2017 and then
start the planning for the roads scheduled to be completed in 2018 this year. A separate proposal will be
brought to the Council in June for the 2018 projects. Edwards indicated he did add a couple of road
projects that were not discussed at the City Council work session. East Lake Street was added to the list
for 2017 because the project is directly across the street from Tonkawa Avenue and the City might be able
to receive a better price. In addition, full width patches at $100,000 was added to redo Chevy Chase
Road, Minnetonka Highlands, and a couple of other roads. Edwards indicated the idea is to patch some
sections of those roads that are in poor shape, which would allow the City to postpone the full repaving of
the road.
Page 9 of 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, April 24, 2017
7:00 o'clock p.m.
13. 2017-2018 STREET MAINTENANCE — Continued
Edwards noted the funding numbers in Paragraph 5 are pre -Fox Street bid. Since the bid for that project
came in lower than projected, there will be approximately $79,000 more that would be available in that
fund.
Seals noted Leaf Street is included under 2018 MSA street maintenance but that Old Crystal Bay Road is
not included.
Edwards indicated the City will need to determine what projects will be done in 2018.
Walsh stated the City will be looking at Leaf and Old Crystal Bay Road in the near future. Walsh
suggested the City eliminate the preventative maintenance on the road patching and add Minnetonka
Highlands, West Lafayette and Lyric to the list on top of the other items that were outlined in Edwards
recent email to the Council. Walsh noted the other streets listed in the email included Fox Street from
OCB to Willow, Tonka Avenue, East Lake Street, Northern Avenue, Minnetonka Avenue, the Post Office
parking lot, Forest Lake. Wildhurst Trail and Vine Place.
Seals moved, Printup seconded, to approve the 2017-2018 road maintenance plan and to accept the
proposal from Bolton & Menk to perform the engineering and design for the 2017 projects, with
elimination of the full width patching and with the addition of Minnetonka Highlands, West
Lafayette, and Lyric to the 2018 street maintenance plan. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
19 W.111 a a I aft 11 D) 91.111 ko-a I UV I D) 1z 18 61-Tot0e) "RI
*14. #17-3917 —JAMES AND VICKI SPLINTER, 4005 NORTH SHORE DRIVE,
VARIANCES, RESOLUTION NO. 6756.
Printup moved, Crosby seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6756, a Resolution Approving
Variances from Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-330 and 78-1279, File No. 17-3917, for the
property located at 4005 North Shore Drive. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT
Seals reported she attended the Communications Committee meeting and that they are reviewing different
website providers as well as how to expand the City's presence on social media sites.
Seals noted on May 17 the Jake Anderson Leadership Symposium will be held at the Orono High School
in the morning and then at OIS in the afternoon.
Printup reported he attended a meeting with the Long Lake Fire Advisory Committee and that the Fire
Department contract is up for renewal in 2020. Preliminary discussions are underway on that contract.
Printup stated he also represented the Sons of American Revolution color guard last week at the
elementary school and that they had a nice talk about the flag and patriotism in general.
Dankey noted there was a Code Review Committee meeting last week and that they are reviewing what
can be done to simplify the permitting process.
Page 10 of 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, April 24, 2017
7:00 o'clock p.m.
MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT — Continued
Walsh stated the City Council has already spent quite a bit of time reviewing the amendment changes that
have been recommended and that the committee will continue to bring forward other recommendations.
Dankey noted this coming Saturday is the Orono Red and Blue Gala.
Walsh reported he attended the Big Island Committee meeting and a discussion was had regarding the
possible improvements that can be done to the Island and a vision for the future. On May 8 there will be
an event acknowledging all the people who donated time or money or free storage for the City's dock.
Walsh stated he has had a number of citizen meetings over the last few weeks to discuss issues with the
residents and that it is good to see and discuss some of these things firsthand.
Walsh noted on May 6 there will be the Step -To -It -Challenge walk with the Mayor starting at 9 a.m.
CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
City Administrator Reeder reported the dock has been installed out on Big Island.
*15. IMPLEMENTATION OF PAPERLESS AGENDA SYSTEM
This item was added to the Consent Agenda.
16. FIRST QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT
Olson reviewed the City's first quarter financial report. Olson noted the City's first property tax receipts,
which represent 52.5 percent of the budget, will not be received until June. Overall expenditures are at
24.95 percent. Some departments over 25 percent include Administration, the Mayor and Council
Department, Law and Legal Services, City Attorney, Fire Protection Services and Central Services.
Olson noted the Mayor and Council Department is high simply because the yearly membership dues are
paid at the beginning of the year. The administration budget is higher than normal is due to the
resignation of the past city administration and will likely be over budget at the end of the year since the
previous city administrator was a .75. Olson noted the new city administrator will be a full 1.0, which is a
25 percent increase.
Olson noted Legal services and Central Services are just under 30 percent, which is a little higher than he
would like for this time of the year. Olson noted one of the things influencing that line item is the
ordinance changes that have been done as well as the publication fees. In addition, the City has been
named in a lawsuit, but because there is no liability to the City, the MN League of MN Cities does not
cover the City. Olson stated to his knowledge that lawsuit is almost wrapped up but it amounted to
approximately $5,000 that was not budgeted.
Olson stated fire protection is simply higher at this time of the year because the City paid the first half
payment but that overall the City will be fine on that budget item by the end of the year.
Page 11 of 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, April 24, 2017
7:00 o'clock p.m.
16. FIRST QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT — Continued
Olson noted first quarter expenditures for 2017 were at 24.95 and that he expects those to be at around
100 percent by the end of the year. For the first quarter, the City had one new investment, which is a CD
paying 2 percent for three years.
Olson reviewed the City's top 10 vendors. The top three for the first quarter include Mark J. Traut
Wells, Inc., for well number four construction, Insituform Technologies for 2016 sewer projects, and the
League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust for the City's liability and workers compensation insurance.
Olson noted the majority of the vendors relate to construction projects.
Printup requested the vendor list also be included in the public packet.
The City Council took no formal action on this item.
PUBLIC COMMENTS, CONTINUED
Richie Anderson, 3205 Crystal Bay Road, stated he would like to have a ribbon cutting ceremony for the
new generator that is next to his property. Anderson stated he could coordinate the event and that he will
follow up with Adam Edwards.
Walsh commented it is a great idea.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
Mattick stated he had nothing to report.
M 1111111 t-WIL15 I Bla N
Printup moved, Seals seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 9:20 p.m. VOTE:
Ayes 5, Nays 0.
ATTEST:
Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor
Page 12 of 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Monday, April 24, 2017
5:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Mayor Dennis Walsh, Council Members Richard Crosby 11, Wendy Dankey, Aaron
Printup, and Victoria Seals. Representing Staff were Interim City Administrator Doug Reeder, and
Community Development Director, Jeremy Barnhart.
Mayor Walsh called the work session to order at 5:00 p.m.
1. Consider future sale of HRA owned land
Jeremy Barnhart presented information to the City Council concerning the land lease owned
by the Orono HRA for land where the Orono Woods Senior Apartments are located on the
northwest comer of Brown Road and Wayzata Boulevard. The apartments were built in 2001
and were assisted by the HRA establishing a TIF district. The current owner is asking the City
Council whether they would allow the transfer of the lease to a new owner or allow an
amendment to the TIF agreement to sell the land. The City Council discussed the request and
agreed that they would review a proposal if the owner submitted one.
Barnhart left the Work Session at 5:30 p.m
2. Discussion on City Planner Position
Interim City Administrator Reeder reported to the City council that the staff had completed
preliminary interviews with the top candidates for the City Planner position and recommended
that this process continue to move forward so that the appointment could be put on the May
22nd City Council agenda. He noted that due to a petition to allow city employees to consider
establishing union representation that the implementation of the staff reorganization which the
City Council had previously discussed has been delayed. City Council consensus was that the
process of hiring a new City Planner should continue.
3. Discussion on City Administrator Candidates (Sharon Klump)
The City Council met with Sharon Klumpp of Waters & Company (Springsted) to discuss the
candidates who had applied for the position of City Administrator. After discussing the
candidates the Council agreed to meet again at 4:00 PM on May I st to further discuss the
candidates.
Adjourned at 6:45 pm
ATTEST:
Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor
AGENDAITEM
Item No.: 4 Date: May 8,2017
Item Description: Claims/Bills
Presenter: Ron Olson Agenda Consent Agenda
Finance Director Section:
1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to approve payment of claims made on the City for
services and/or products provided to the City.
2. Background. The attached claims for payment have been received by the City. Staff has reviewed
the claims and is recommending approval of the listing for payment. The claims will be paid by checks
107352 to 107433, totaling $275,926.35.
3. Noteworthy Payments.
Vendor
Amount
Description of Payment
# 107387 League of MN
Cities
$130,972.00
Payment for 2017 Comprehensive Municipal Liability
insurance
#107366 City of Mound
$7,723.38
Payment to the City of Mound for 2017 Admin Citations,
charges for semi -trucks driving overweight on City roads.
#107410 Prolawns
$ 8,125.20
Payment for 2017 park maintenance and city hall lawncare
4. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of a motion authorizing payment to the claims
list as presented.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to approve the claims list as presented.
Exhibits
A. Check Register
Prepared By: Oaa Reviewed By: Daa Approved By: D5R,
City of Orono
Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT
Check Issue Dates: 4/25/2017 - 5/8/2017
Check
Check
Invoice
Invoice GIL Account Description
Department
Payee
Issue Date
Number
Number
ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIO
05/08/2017
107352
329514665
101-41900-413
CH Copier Lease -04/20/17-05/20/17
Central Services
ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIO
05/08/2017
107352
329538441
101-42110-413
Police Copier 04/20-05/20/2017
Police Department
Total 107352:
ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIO
05/08/2017
107353
INV131737
101-41900-221
Shipping -Toner
Central Services
Total 107353:
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC[
05/08/2017
107354
129242-1742
101-42400-433
Membership J. Barnhart
Building & Zoning
Total 107354:
AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS CO
05/08/2017
107355
30908
601-49400-405
service at Well 3
Water
Total 107355:
BCA TRAINING & DEVELOPMEN
04/25/2017
107166
31360
101-42110-437
Onlin Trg Reg -DMT -G Recert-J. Needham
Police Department
Total 107166:
BUDGET PRINTING
05/08/2017
107356
4270
101-45200-225
Dog Park Tags-Lurton Park
Parks
BUDGET PRINTING
05/08/2017
107356
4294
101-45200-489
Appreciation Plaque
Parks
BUDGET PRINTING
05/08/2017
107356
4364
101-45210-352
Golf Punch Cards
Golf Course
Total 107356:
C&C Embroidery
05/08/2017
107357
1951
101-43000-226
PPE Jacket for Gregg -PW
Public Works Department
Total 107357:
CANVAS SOLUTIONS INC
05/08/2017
107358
827408150
101-42110-437
2017/2018 -software firearms training tracking
Police Department
Total 107358:
CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES, L.
05/08/2017
107359
1848160
101-45210-091
beer for resale
Golf Course
Total 107359:
CARDMEMBEIR SERVICE
05/08/2017
107360
AE042017
101-45210-221
Age Verification ID Scanner for Golf Course
Golf Course
Page: 1
May 04,2017 12:45PM
Invoice
Amount
9 14111 4R
2,671.88
31.51
31.51
525.00
525.00
301.30
301.30
75.00-
205.80
30.00
82.00
196.80
196.80
405.49
City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 2
Check Issue Dates: 4/25/2017 - 5/8/2017 May 04,2017 12:45PM
Payee
CARDMEMBEIR SERVICE
CARDMEMBEIR SERVICE
CARDMEMBEIR SERVICE
CARDMEMBEIR SERVICE
CARDMEMBEIR SERVICE
CARDMEMBEIR SERVICE
CARDMEMBER SERVICE
CARDMEMBER SERVICE
CARDMEMBEIR SERVICE
CARDMEMBER SERVICE
CARDMEMBER SERVICE
CARDMEMBER SERVICE
CARDMEMBER SERVICE
CARDMEMBER SERVICE
CARDMEMBEIR SERVICE
CARDMEMBEIR SERVICE
CARDMEMBER SERVICE
CARDMEMBEIR SERVICE
Total 107360:
CARGILL SALT
Total 107361:
Check Check Invoice Invoice GIL Account
Issue Date Number Number
05/08/2017 107360 CF033017 101-42110-437
05/08/2017 107360 CF040417.2 101-42110-437
05/08/2017 107360 CF041717.2 101-42110-437
05/08/2017 107360 CF042417 101-42110-437
05108/2017 107360 CF042517 101-42110-437
05/08/2017 107360 CF042517.2 101-42110-437
05/08/2017 107360 CF042617 101-42110-437
05/08/2017 107360 CF042817 101-42110-437
05/08/2017 107360 CF043017 101-42110-437
05/08/2017 107360 CF043017.2 101-42110-437
05/08/2017 107360 DJG042517 101-41900-403
05/08/2017 107360 R0042417 101-41110-439
05/08/2017 107360 RO042417.2 101-41110-439
05/08/2017 107360 RO0425.17 101-43000-221
05/08/2017 107360 R0042517 101-41900-221
05/08/2017 107360 RO042517.2 614-49840-221
05/08/2017 107360 R00502017 614-49840-221
05/08/2017 107360 S0040517 101-43000-212
Description
Department Invoice
Amount
Meal-March/17-Lake Area Emergency Managers Mt
Police Department
Lodging-Deposit-PLEAA Conf-K.Herzog & H. Gehla
Police Department
1 Officer -DMT Recert Trg
Police Department
Lunches -MN Cheifs of Police Conf-C.Farniok, T Wit
Police Department
Lunches -MN Cheifs of Police Conf-C.Farniok, T Wit
Police Department
Lunches -MN Cheifs of Police Conf-C.Farniok, I Wit
Police Department
Hotel Room -3 nights -MN Chiefs Conf-C. Farniolk
Police Department
Lunch -Lake Area Emergency Mgmt Mtg
Police Department
Lanier Parking -Parking for Explorer Conference -Roc
Police Department
Hotel Room-Exolorer Conf-Rochester-C. Farniok
Police Department
Replace Drinking Fountain PW
Central Services
Cookies -Council Mtg-04/24/17
Mayor & Council
Food for Council Work Session -04/24/2017
Mayor & Council
Apple Airport for ipad Displaying -PW -A. Edwards
Public Works Department
Flash Drives for City Staff
Central Services
Tablets-PLanning Commission & Council
Cable Franchise
Spare AC Adapters-Council/Planning Mbmrs & Spar
Cable Franchise
Fuel-Chainsaws
Public Works Department
05/08/2017 107361 2903360394 601-49400-216 salt
Water
13.60
200.00
75.00
22.86
28.13
38.51
327.00
11.60
13.00
182.65
608.33
6.99
73.00
98.12
72.89
3,819.88
518.91
34.39
6,550.35
4.693.05
4,693.05
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN
05/08/2017
107362
8000015865-
601-49400-381
April/1 7 -Gas -03/22/17-04/20/17
Water
631.41
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN
05/08/2017
107362
8000015865-
602-49450-381
April/1 7 -Gas -03/22/17-04/20/17
Sewer
278.91
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN
05/08/2017
107362
8000015865-
101-41900-381
April/I 7 -Gas -03/22/17-04/20/17
Central Services
412.61
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN
05/08/2017
107362
8000015865-
101-42110-381
April/17-Gas-03/22/17-04/20/17
Police Department
131.17
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN
05/08/2017
107362
8000015865-
101-45210-381
April/1 7 -Gas -03/22/17-04/20/17
Golf Course
79.76
Total 107362:
CHRIS FISCHER 05/08/2017 107363 CF042617 101-42110-437
CHRIS FISCHER 05/08/2017 107363 CF042617 101-42110-437
CHRIS FISCHER 05/08/2017 107363 CF042617 101-42110-437
Total 107363:
CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 05/08/2017 107364 0014690 101-42110-402
Parking -St. Cloud Convention Center-Trg
Lunch-Trg-St. Cloud- C. Fischer
Lunch-Trg-St. Cloud- C. Fischer
#843 -oil change, service, transmission service
1,533.86
Police Department 5.00
Police Department 8.07
Police Department 9.17
22.24
Police Department 392.50
City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 3
Check Issue Dates: 4/25/2017 - 5/8/2017 May 04,2017 12:45PM
Payee
Check
Issue Date
Check
Number
Invoice
Number
Invoice GIL Account
Description
Department
Invoice
Amount
CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO
05/08/2017
107364
0014694
101-42110-402
#246 -Oil change, filter, service
Police Department
45.79
CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO
05/08/2017
107364
0014702
101-42110-402
#244 -Oil change, filter, service, inspect noise left fro
Police Department
144.91
CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO
05/08/2017
107364
0014709
101-42110-402
#245 -Oil change, filter, service
Police Department
45.79
CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO
05/08/2017
107364
0014720
101-42110-402
#241 -oil change, filter, service, check engine light
Police Department
284.57
CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO
05108/2017
107364
0014724
101-42110-402
#238 -Test Battery, oil change
Police Department
77.21
Total 107364:
990.77
CITY OF MINNETONKA BEACH
05/08/2017
107365
2017 ADM Cl
101-35105
2017 Admin Fines
2,013.75
Total 107365:
2,013.75
CITY OF MOUND
05/08/2017
107366
2017 ADM Cl
101-35105
2017 -Admin citations
7,723.38
Total 107366:
7,723.38
CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH
04/28/2017
107351
PW RECYCL
101-10300
2017 PW Recycling Day -Change Fund
200.00
Total 107351:
200.00
COMMERCIAL ASPHALT
05/08/2017
107367
170415
101-43000-224
Road Pot Hole Patching
Public Works Department
800.74
Total 107367:
800.74
CONNELLY INDUSTRIAL ELEC
05/08/2017
107368
10674
601-49400-405
Navarre plant repair
Water
394.94
Total 107368:
394.94
CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CO
05/08/2017
107369
448928 -CRC
602-49450-227
Wasp Away, Rid 0 Grime Towels,
Sewer
420.99
Total 107369:
420.99
DEPUTY REGISTRAR
05/08/2017
107370
04/28/2017
101-42110-441
PID Tabs-VIN#'s I FM5K8AR4HGC86283, 1FIVI5K8A
Police Department
87.00
Total 107370:
87.00
EGM PUBLISHERS INC
05/08/2017
107371
483133
602-49450-352
Public Works Worker AD
Sewer
92.50
ECM PUBLISHERS INC
05/08/2017
107371
485047
101-41900-352
May 15 2017 -Public Hearing
Central Services
137.08
ECM PUBLISHERS INC
05/08/2017
107371
485584
602-49450-352
Public Works Worker AD
Sewer
92.50
City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 4
Check Issue Dates: 4/25/2017 - 5/8/2017 May 04,2017 12:45PM
Check Check Invoice Invoice GIL Account
Payee Issue Date Number Number
Total 107371:
FERGUSON WATERWORKS #25 05/08/2017 107372 0234512 601-49400-227 meter parts
Total 107372:
* & K SERVICES
05/08/2017
107373
1006437690
101-43000-226
uniforms
* & K SERVICES
05/08/2017
107373
1006437690
101-43000-221
towels
* & K SERVICES
05/08/2017
107373
1006440047
101-41900-404
mats
* & K SERVICES
05/08/2017
107373
1006440048
101-41900-404
mats
* & K SERVICES
05/08/2017
107373
6006448861
101-43000-226
uniforms
* & K SERVICES
05/08/2017
107373
6006448861
101-43000-221
towels
Total 107373
Description
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA
05/08/2017
107374
358108
101-43000-402
#431 Transmission Air filter
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA
05/08/2017
107374
3582222
601-49400-402
#712 -Air filter, oil filter
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA
05/08/2017
107374
3582222
602-49450-402
#712 -Air filter, oil filter
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA
0510812017
107374
358735
101-45210-402
Air Filter, Oil Filter, Mirror #610
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA
05/08/2017
107374
358745
101-45210-402
Oil Drain Plug Gasket -#610
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA
05/08/2017
107374
359490
101-42110-402
Squad Headlight Bulbs
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA
05/08/2017
107374
359733
101-45200-402
HeadLight
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA
05/08/2017
107374
359738
101-45200-402
Halogen Lamp #210
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA
05/08/2017
107374
477737
101-43000-240
Shop Supplies
Total 107374
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 05/08/2017 107375 7040625 601-49400-489 locates
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 06/08/2017 107375 7040625 602-49450-489 locates
Total 107375
GREAT LAKES COCA-COLA 05/08/2017 107376 3601203463 101-45210-092 beverages for concessions
Total 107376:
HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TE 05/08/2017 107377 1000083691 101-41900-319 network support -11/2016
Department Invoice
Amount
Water
Public Works Department
Public Works Department
Central Services
Central Services
Public Works Department
Public Works Department
Public Works Department
Water
Sewer
Golf Course
Golf Course
Police Department
Parks
Parks
Public Works Department
Water
Sewer
Golf Course
Central Services
322.08
786.29
786.29
2.63
10.80
21.92
54.12
—1-
148.49
11.48
11.47
35.42
1.98
64.95
10.99
10.99
401.67
238.28
238.27
476.55
293.23
293.23
50.00
City of Orono
Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT
Check Issue Dates: 4/25/2017 - 5/8/2017
Payee
Check
Issue Date
Check
Number
Invoice Invoice GIL Account Description
Number
Total 107377:
2016 SCADA Project
JANE SZCZEPANIK
IN CONTROL, INC.
HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF
05/08/2017
107378
1000092781 101-41600-309 jail charges-March/2017
Total 107378:
Water
Total 107379:
HOLIDAY STATIONSTORES #25
04/30/2017
107295
091712143 101-43000-212 Chainsaws Fuel
Total 107295:
INTEGRATELECOM
05/08/2017
107380
Department
Law/Legal Services
Public Works Department
IN CONTROL, INC.
05/08/2017
107379
16189MA02
601-16500
2016 SCADA Project
JANE SZCZEPANIK
IN CONTROL, INC.
05/08/2017
107379
17071MA01
601-49400-405
Emergency Engineering Svcs -Brent Thomas
Water
Total 107379:
JEREMY BARNHART
05/08/2017
107383
INTEGRATELECOM
05/08/2017
107380
14606424
101-42110-321
Phone service
Police Department
INTEGRATELECOM
05/08/2017
107380
14606424
101-41900-321
Phone Service
Central Services
INTEGRA TELECOM
05/08/2017
107380
14606424
601-49400-321
Phone Service
Water
INTEGRATELECOM
05108/2017
107380
14606424
602-49450-321
Phone Service
Sewer
Total 107380:
JACKIE YOUNG 05/08/2017 107381 APRIL 2017 101-41300-319 CC meetings, 04/10 & 04/24 Administration
JACKIE YOUNG 05/08/2017 107381 APRIL 2017 101-42400-319 PC meeting -04/17/2017 Building & Zoning
Total 107381:
JANE SZCZEPANIK
05/08/2017
107382
JS012117
101-42110-226
Uniforms -Investigation Clothing
JANE SZCZEPANIK
06/08/2017
107382
JS042717
101-42110-437
Food -Explorer Conference 2017
Total 107382:
JEREMY BARNHART
05/08/2017
107383
JB042517
101-42400-331
Mileage -Community Engagement -St. Paul
JEREMY BARNHART
05/08/2017
107383
JB042517
101-42400-331
Mileage -Ethics Training -St. Louis Park
JEREMY BARNHART
05/08/2017
107383
JB042517
101-42400-331
Mileage -Site Visits/inspections
JEREMY BARNHART
05/08/2017
107383
JB042517
101-42400-331
Mileage -Site Visits/inspections
Total 107383
Police Department
Police Department
Building & Zoning
Building & Zoning
Building & Zoning
Building & Zoning
Page: 5
May 04,2017 12:45PM
Invoice
A—-
50.00
626.00
626.00
34.39-
34.39-
26,809.00
1,264.00
301.80
422.52
70.42
211.27
550.00
400.00
950.00
54.94
58.00
23.54
12.84
6.42
8.03
City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 6
Check Issue Dates: 4/25/2017 - 5/8/2017 May 04,2017 12:45PM
Check Check Invoice Invoice GIL Account
Payee
Issue Date
Number
Number
Nuts & Bolts, Bowl Cleaner, Soap Refill, Paint Brush
JOSH NEEDHAM
05/08/2017
107384
JN032717
101-42110-437
Total 107384:
Public Works Department
Gloves, Paint Tray Liner
Parks
Fail MOwer Repair- BungeeCords
KANIVE, JUSTIN
05/08/2017
107385
2012-00424
101-22205
Total 107385:
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES
05/08/2017
107386
2437
703-49960-37C
Total 107386:
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TR
05/08/2017
107387
10003335.AP
703-49960-361
Total 107387:
LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE
05/08/2017
107388
B389670
101-43000-224
LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE
05/08/2017
107388
B389893
101-43000-404
LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE
05/08/2017
107388
B390692
101-45210-201
LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE
0510812017
107388
B391074
101-45210-222
LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE
05/08/2017
107388
B391933
101-43000-224
LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE
05/08/2017
107388
B391936
101-43000-404
LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE
05/08/2017
107388
B392288
101-45200-221
LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE
05/08/2017
107388
B392470
651-49910-402
Total 107388:
LUBE TECH ESI
05/08/2017
107389
913360
601-49400-227
LUBE TECH ESI
05/08/2017
107389
925268
101-43000-212
Total 107389:
MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT
05/08/2017
107390
P05915
101-43000-402
Total 107390:
MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY
05/08/2017
107391
20253848
101-42110-212
MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY
05/08/2017
107391
20253849
101-43000-212
Description
Department
Meals -Use of Force Trg-J. Need ham -03/27-03/31/20 Police Department
Escrow Refund-2012-00424-905OWillow View Drive
Private Data Claim
Comprehensive Municipal Libility
Fait Washers
Public Works Department
Shop Supplies
Public Works Department
Nuts & Bolts, Bowl Cleaner, Soap Refill, Paint Brush
Golf Course
Gloves & dish cloth -Golf Course
Golf Course
Dock Sections
Public Works Department
Rust Pellet
Public Works Department
Gloves, Paint Tray Liner
Parks
Fail MOwer Repair- BungeeCords
Storm Water
Lubriplate Grease
Diesel Additive
sweeper parts
Unleaded Fuel
Diesel Fuel
Water
Public Works Department
Public Works Department
Police Department
Public Works Department
Invoice
Amount
57.19
2,500.00
2,500.00
130,972.00
12.69
3.99
15.91
10.09
31.78
53.34
13.57
7.07
78.06
136.89
214.95
817.10
817.10
2,870.05
482.46
City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 7
Check Issue Dates: 4/25/2017 - 5/8/2017 May 04,2017 12:45PM
Payee
Check
Issue Date
Check
Number
Invoice
Number
Invoice GIL Account
Description
Department
Invoice
Amount
Total 107391:
3,352.51
MEDIACOM
05/08/2017
107392
0004327. MA
614-49840-329
internet-05/2017
Cable Franchise
593.50
MEDIACOM
05108/2017
107392
0004327. MA
101-41900-329
internet-05/2017
Central Services
296.75
MEDIACOM
05/08/2017
107392
0004327. MA
101-42110-329
internet-05/2017
Police Department
296.75
Total 107392:
1,187.00
MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTA
05/08/2017
107393
0001066495
601-49400-441
2017-Annl Permit Fee
Water
450.00
Total 107393:
450.00
METRO WEST INSPECTIONS S
05/08/2017
107394
MARCH 201
101-42400-310
March/17-Inspection Services
Building & Zoning
8,745.00
Total 107394:
8,745.00
METROPOLITAN AREA MANAG
05/08/2017
107395
2529
101-41300-437
Luncheon Meeting -04/13/2017
Administration
30.00
Total 107395:
30.00
MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPA
05/08/2017
107396
20021234
101-42110-221
Medical Oxygen, Hazardous Materials Charge
Police Department
91.53
Total 107396:
91.53
MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT
05/08/2017
107397
P54473
101-45210-440
Leaf Blower-Glof Course
Golf Course
249.95
Total 107397:
249.95
MISSION COMMUNICATIONS ILL
05/08/2017
107398
1007718
602-49450-406
17/18 -Annual alarm service LS 2,6,7,12,18,21,26,28
Sewer
4,206.60
Total 107398:
4,206.60
MN DEPT OF HEALTH
04/28/2017
107217
031517C.SC
601-49400-441
Water Supply System Operator Class D license C. S
Water
23.00 -
Total 107217:
23.00 -
MN NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS
05/08/2017
107399
6732517
101-21710
Pera life 05/2017
224.00
City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT
Check Issue Dates: 4/25/2017 - 5/8/2017
Check Check Invoice Invoice GIL Account Description
Payee Issue Date Number Number
Total 107399
Department
MOUND TRUE VALUE
05/08/2017
107400
142967
101-42110-402
Tire Foam, Cleaning Wipes
Police Department
MOUND TRUE VALUE
05108/2017
107400
142967
101-42110-223
Winclex, Clorox Wipes, Cleaning Wipes
Police Department
MOUND TRUE VALUE
05/08/2017
107400
142975
101-42110-404
PP2, Ant Bait
Police Department
Total 107400:
05/08/2017
107403
1300279129
101-42110-221
Flash Drives
Police Department
NAVARRE HARDWARE
05/08/2017
107401
301315
101-43000-403
Nuts, bolts, screws
Public Works Department
NAVARRE HARDWARE
05/08/2017
107401
301390
101-42110-228
9/16" Staples
Police Department
NAVARRE HARDWARE
05/08/2017
107401
301401
602-49450-223
Hardware Stake
Sewer
NAVARRE HARDWARE
05/08/2017
107401
301533
101-43000-489
Tag/Ring, Split Ring
Public Works Department
Total 107401:
NELSON ELECTRIC MOTOR RE 05/08/2017 107402 8083 602-49450-406 replaced phase monitor LS#2 Sewer
Total 107402:
NEWEGG INC
05/08/2017
107403
1300257694
101-41900-221
USB Mouse -5
Central Services
NEWEGG INC
05/08/2017
107403
1300258222
101-41900-401
Wireless Mouse -2
Central Services
NEWEGG INC
05/08/2017
107403
1300270290
614-49840-221
Council Tablet
Cable Franchise
NEWEGG INC
05/08/2017
107403
1300279129
101-42110-221
Flash Drives
Police Department
NEWEGG INC
05/08/2017
107403
1300279129
101-41900-221
Flash Drives
Central Services
NEWEGG INC
05/08/2017
107403
1300281480
101-43000-221
Apple Air Port/Router
Public Works Department
Total 107403:
NORLINGS
05/08/2017
107404
32596
101-45200-404
Repair grass from Tire Ruts-Hackberry Park
Parks
Total 107404:
NORTON HOMES
05/08/2017
107405
2015-01345.
101-22205
Escrow Refund -#2015-01345-425 Lakeview Parkwa
Total 107405:
OFFICE DEPOT
05/08/2017
107406
9218955870
101-41900-201
Stamp, napkins
Central Services
OFFICE DEPOT
05/08/2017
107406
9218955980
101-41900-201
Forks, Tape, Plates, note pads
Central Services
Page: 8
May 04,2017 12:45PM
Invoice
Amount
224.00
18.97
24.04
7.49
50.50
1.16
16.47
134.55
13.78
165.96
515.27
515.27
44.20
29.71
389.99
36.45
36.44
98.12
634.91
836.00
836.00
10,000.00
10,000.00
20.66
50.28
City of Orono
Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT
Check Issue Dates: 4/25/2017 - 5/8/2017
Page: 9
May 04,2017 12:45PM
Check
Check
Invoice
Invoice GIL Account Description
Department
Invoice
Payee
Issue Date
Number
Number
Amount
Total 107406:
70.94
OLSEN CHAIN AND CABLE INC
05/08/2017
107407
597972
101-41900-403
hoist insepction
Central Services
160.00
Total 107407:
160.00
OPTUM
05/08/2017
107408
944322
101-41900-319
QI/17-HSA account maintenance fee
Central Services
191.00
Total 107408:
191.00
PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR
05/08/2017
107409
468681
101-43000-403
Snow Plow Repair
Public Works Department
197.21
Total 107409:
197.21
PROLAWNS
05/08/2017
107410
2017
101-45200-404
2017 -park maintenance/City Hall lawncare
Parks
4,062.60
PROLAWNS
05/08/2017
107410
2017
101-41900-404
2017 -park maintenance/City Hall lawncare
Central Services
4,062.60
Total 107410:
8,125.20
QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC
05/08/2017
107411
33426
602-49450-406
Repairs LS#9
Sewer
399.00
Total 107411:
399.00
RANDYS SANITATION INC
05/08/2017
107412
APRIL 2017
101-41900-404
April/17-Trash Svcs
Central Services
256.71
RANDYS SANITATION INC
05/08/2017
107412
APRIL 2017
101-45210-404
April/17-Trash Svcs
Golf Course
59.10
RANDYS SANITATION INC
05/08/2017
107412
APRIL 2017
101-45200-404
April/17-Trash Svcs
Parks
349.16
Total 107412:
664.97
REED WHOLESALE/OFFICE CO
05/08/2017
107413
9359
101-45210-094
concessions Resale
Golf Course
226.70
Total 107413:
226.70
SCOTT BORIS
05/08/2017
107414
SB042617
101-42110-437
reimb meals -Lunch First Respond er-Bo ris, Wocken,
Police Department
66.79
Total 107414:
66.79
SCOTT OBERAIGNER
05/08/2017
107415
S0012317
101-43000-441
reimb-2017 license renewal
Public Works Department
44.25
City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT
Check Issue Dates: 4/25/2017 - 5/8/2017
Page: 10
May 04,2017 12:45PM
Department Invoice
Amount
44.25
Central Services 108.00
108.00
Parks 55.21
55.21
2,500.00
2,500.00
499.70
3,333.04
Police Department
Check
Check
Invoice
Invoice GIL Account
Description
Payee
Issue Date
Number
Number
58.39
Water
31.50
31.50
Central Services
1,435.50
Total 107415:
1,039.50
SECOND NATURE GRAPHICS
05/08/2017
107416
210
101-41900-352
business cards
Total 107416:
SHERWIN WILLIAMS
05/08/2017
107417
2312-3
101-45200-403
paint for picnic Tables
Total 107417:
STONEBAY BUILDERS, LLC
05/08/2017
107418
2015-00108
101-22205
Escrow Refund -2015-00108, 2015-00111, 2015-001
STONEBAY BUILDERS, LLC
05/08/2017
107418
2016-00303
101-22205
Escrow Refund -2016-00303, 2016-00305, 2016-003
Total 107418:
SUN LIFE FINANCIAL
05/08/2017
107419
237745
101-21714
STD-May/2017
SUN LIFE FINANCIAL
05/08/2017
107419
237745.MAY
101-21710
Life Ins-May/2017
SUN LIFE FINANCIAL
05/08/2017
107419
MAY 2017
101-21713
LTD-May2017
Total 107419:
TACTICAL SOLUTIONS
05/08/2017
107420
6088
101-42110-580
Speed interceptor & holster
Total 107420:
TALLEN AND BAERTSCHI
05/08/2017
107421
APRIL 2017
101-41600-306
Prosecution Services -4/2017
Total 107421:
TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY
05/08/2017
107422
10183808
101-43000-415
argon
Total 107422:
TRI CITY LAB
05/08/2017
107423
APRIL 2017
601-49400-489
P/A Total Coliform
Total 107423:
VANGUARD CLEANING SYSTE
05/08/2017
107424
52092
101-41900-407
Janitorial service
VANGUARD CLEANING SYSTE
05/08/2017
107424
52092
101-42110-407
Janitorial service
Page: 10
May 04,2017 12:45PM
Department Invoice
Amount
44.25
Central Services 108.00
108.00
Parks 55.21
55.21
2,500.00
2,500.00
499.70
3,333.04
Police Department
538.00
538.00
Law/Legal Services
2,703.98
2,703.98
Public Works Department
58.39
58.39
Water
31.50
31.50
Central Services
1,435.50
Police Department
1,039.50
City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 11
Check Issue Dates: 4/25/2017 - 5/8/2017 May 04,2017 12:45PM
Payee
Check
Issue Date
Check
Number
Invoice
Number
Invoice GIL Account
Description
Department
Invoice
Amount
Total 107424:
2,475.00
VARNER MOBILE SERVICES LL
05108/2017
107425
5511
101-43000-402
#431 Repairs
Public Works Department
237.13
VARNER MOBILE SERVICES LL
05108/2017
107425
5512
101-43000-402
#427 Repairs
Public Works Department
111.75
Total 107425:
348.88
VERIZON WIRELESS
05/08/2017
107426
9783397455
101-42110-321
Cell Phones -03/07/17-04/06/17
Police Department
1,483.55
VERIZON WIRELESS
05/08/2017
107426
9783397455
101-41900-321
Cell Phones -03/07/17-04/06/17
Central Services
154.11
VERIZON WIRELESS
05/08/2017
107426
9783397455
101-45210-321
Cell Phones -03/07/17-04/06/17
Golf Course
81.33
VERIZON WIRELESS
05/08/2017
107426
9783397455
601-49400-321
Cell Phones -03/07/17-04/06/17
Water
70.02
VERIZON WIRELESS
05/08/2017
107426
9783397455
602-49450-321
Cell Phones -03/07/17-04/06/17
Sewer
70.02
VERIZON WIRELESS
05/08/2017
107426
9783397455
101-43000-415
Cell Phones -03/07/17-04/06/17
Public Works Department
35.01
Total 107426:
1,894.04
WACONIAIFORD
05/08/2017
107427
FOCS111116
101-42110-402
Repairs Squad #223
Police Department
570.32
Total 107427:
570.32
WATER CONSERVATION SVC IN
05/08/2017
107428
7585
601-49400-405
April 17 Watermain Leak Survey -Leak Locates
Water
1,568.00
Total 107428:
1,568.00
WIDMER CONTSTRUCTION
05/08/2017
107429
4293
601-49400-405
Installed 1 " waterline -Narrows Bridge
Water
7,979.00
WIDMER CONTSTRUCTION
05/08/2017
107429
4297
602-49450-406
Reapired sanitary svcs-1 076 Wildhurst Trail
Sewer
4,975.00
Total 107429:
12,954.00
WINDSTREAM
05/08/2017
107430
69001148
601-49400-321
water plant phone
Water
3.08
Total 107430:
3.08
Wooddale Bid, Inc
05/08/2017
107431
2015-00798
101-22205
Escrow Refund -2015-00798 & 2015-00800-2450 &
2,500.00
Total 107431:
2,500.00
WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC
05/08/2017
107432
3502551568
101-43000-386
Electrical Svc -03/01/17-04/01/17
Public Works Department
112.58
WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC
05/08/2017
107432
3502551568
602-49450-381
Electflcal Svc -03/01/17-04/01117
Sewer
33.41
City of Orono
Payee
Total 107432:
XCELENERGY
Total 107433:
Grand Totals:
Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT
Check Issue Dates: 4/25/2017 - 5/8/2017
Check
Check
Invoice
Invoice GIL Account Description
Issue Date
Number
Number
05/08/2017
107433
544288532
101-43000-386 Electric -03/27/17-04/09/17
Page: 12
May 04,2017 12:45PM
Department Invoice
Amount
145.99
Public Works Department 456.93
456.93
275,926.35
AGENDAITEM
Item No.: 5 Date: May 8, 2017
Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval
Presenter: Rachel Dodge, Agenda Consent Agenda
Administrative Assistant Section:
1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to approve the below listed Kennel License.
2. Background. The residential kennel license applicant has met the requirements and
submitted a complete application.
3. List of Licenses to be Approved.
a. Georgette Jabbour
� 4455 Bayside Rd
4. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the 2017 residential kennel license
application.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Consider a motion to approve the above listed license.
Exhibits
A. Kennel license application and inspection slip
Prepared By: Rachel Dodge
Reviewed By:
Approved By: D5R
Owner: U
Property Address:
RECEIVED Exhibit A
City of Orono I FOR Crr U
P,O. Box 66 APR 03 Z0171 kennel hwpected By.
2750 Kelley Parkway
Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Date inspected
(952) 249-4600 CITY OF ORON4
Recown=ds — AMOY& Dmal
ORONO KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION
Effective January 1, jj_ to December 31, 17
Mailing Address (if different):
Phone: (home)
city and zip)
(work)
RESEDENTUL KENNEL LICENSE FEE: $50.00
(payment must accompany application)
C9 V,
DOGS
Current # of dogs owned (over 6 months of age): �3
Maximum # of dogs to be kept at one time (over 6 months of age): ?.
Breed(s): L
M0,4,1.4 , M-011 -6 neAl'a.roo
Purpose for dogs/cats: P01-tZ
Dogs normally kept: #,tLJnside ouW'de
Cats normally kept: inside outside I
CATS
Current # of cats owned (over 6 months of age):
Maximum # of cats to be kept at one time (over 6 months of age):
CONLMIERCLA-L Kennel License Fee: S150.00
(payment must accompany application)
Name of Business:
Business Activities;
(example. boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.)
Normal Business Hours:
After Hours Contact: (name) (phone)
Dog runs/exercise areas are: -inside -outside both
The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as specified an
this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is pennissive only and does not grant any
authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigned hereby
grants the City permission to inspect the premises prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time
during the license duration; and the undersigned agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code
Chapter 62, Article jil, Vivision 3; including any special conditions imposed by the City Council as part of
any kennel liccl I I
Applicant "V�� Date
E
te
cc
'K
12
;It
441
11 WORK SATWACTORM. PROCEM
• CORRECT WORK& PROICEED
• CORRECTWOK CALL FOR REINISPECTION
BEFORE COVEFONG
El CORRECT UNSAFE CONDITION WFTHIN — HOUFtS.
INSPEUM VALL RETURN
0 STOP ORDER POINTED. CALL INSPECTOR
0 INSPECT*N FIMUIRED. CAILL TO ARRANGE ACCESS,
11 PROJECT COMPLETE
[3 'SSUECEFMFIOATE OF OCCUPANCY
TEMPOPARY
—PERMANENT
E) PHOTO TAKEN
0 CITATION OWED
C8N kw OW nWd hapecdon 2A hours In advancs. (952) 249-4600
Inspectoc.
While Oopyfinqmftft File
Canary Coriffille Notice
-2 OZ) LIV3 D
CITYOFORONO
TIME
CALLEDIN A::g�;p
INSPECTION NOTICE
SCHEDULED
PERMIT NO.
COMPLETED
ADDRESS 4�c;
--r-, I cle 2H
' 6 bfE'f.'EPRONE NO. I c, 12-
O`WNER CCOjef-f-Ta ZA
CONTRACTOR
DESCRIPTION
FOOTING
DEMO -FINAL SEPTIC FINAL
POURED WALL
0 PLUMBING RI E3 EXCAVIGRADING/FILLENG
[3 FOUNDATION WATERPROOF
[3 PLUMBING FINAL 0 TREE REMOVAL
[3 RADON SLAB
[3 MECHANICAL RI [3 SITE INSPECTION
13 FRAMING
[3 MECHANICAL FINAL 13 RATED WALLS
[--] INSULATION
0 WOOD BURNER/FIREPLACE [3 COMPLAINT
0 FINAL
13 WATER HOOK-UP, 13 FoLLow-up
1:1 AS BUILT -SURVEY
0 SEWER HOOK-UP [3 FOUNDATIONIREMOVAL
13 DEMO - SITE
[3 SEPTIC INSTALL
OWNINMONTRACTOR TO NEU YOU:_ ya _No
COMMENTS:
i?-Sve
e�ele—A
11 WORK SATWACTORM. PROCEM
• CORRECT WORK& PROICEED
• CORRECTWOK CALL FOR REINISPECTION
BEFORE COVEFONG
El CORRECT UNSAFE CONDITION WFTHIN — HOUFtS.
INSPEUM VALL RETURN
0 STOP ORDER POINTED. CALL INSPECTOR
0 INSPECT*N FIMUIRED. CAILL TO ARRANGE ACCESS,
11 PROJECT COMPLETE
[3 'SSUECEFMFIOATE OF OCCUPANCY
TEMPOPARY
—PERMANENT
E) PHOTO TAKEN
0 CITATION OWED
C8N kw OW nWd hapecdon 2A hours In advancs. (952) 249-4600
Inspectoc.
While Oopyfinqmftft File
Canary Coriffille Notice
AGENDAITEM
Item No.: 6 Date: May 8, 2017
Item Description: Public Works Roof Repairs
Presenter: Adam T. Edwards Agenda Public Works Director/
Public Works Director/City Engineer Section: City Engineer's Report
1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to gain approval to proceed with roofing repairs on the
public works building.
2. Background. The skylights to Public Works have a long history of leaking. A recent analysis by
Mint roofing points to a design issue that allows a buildup of snow and water at the curb of each skylight.
In addition the entry way to Public Works is in need of a down spout to prevent erosion damage to the
area around the entryway.
3. Project Scope. Fabricate/install sheet metal crickets for 6 skylights, caulk side walls of western
dormers and install downspout and splash guard block on entryway roof.
4. Cost. The City received a not to exceed estimate of $14,560 from Mint Roofing.
5. Funding. This project will be divided between the public works related funds: Water, Sewer, Storm,
and Streets.
6. Staff Recommendation. I recommend that the city council authorize the repair of the public works
building roof.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to authorize Mint to repair the public Works building roof for a sum not to exceed $14,560.
Exhibits
A. Proposal
Prepared By: Reviewed By: Approved By: D5R
Adam Edwards
City of Orono
2750 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356
Proposal for Roofing Repairs at:
Orono Public Works
2700 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356
We propose to furnish the necessary labor, material, and equipment required to perform the
roofing work on the above referenced job per the specifications listed below. I recommend
performing these repairs as follows:
Fabricate/install Sheet Metal Crickets (6 total):
Reason for scope: There are six existing skylights on curbs on the east side of the roof. The
current design allows rain/snow & ice to run down the roof field and stop at the backside of the
curb, allowing water to enter the facility. Each skylight's curb leaks on the backside of the curb,
as evidenced by attached photos.
April 14, 2017
Scope of work:
1. Six existing skylights currently have no sheet metal crickets installed behind them, allowing
water and snow to sit behind the skylight curb and leak into building
2. Fabricate sheet metal crickets out of 24 -gauge galvanized steel
3. Cut existing roof panels to allow for sheet metal cricket installation
4. Slip new sheet metal crickets underneath existing roofing panels, sealing joint with water cut-
off mastic
5. Screw sheet metal crickets to purlins and seal off all fasteners
6. Clean up all debris and download
Sidewall Caulking:
Reasonforscope: On a previous site visit, numerous holes from fastener backout were noted,
which allows any wind -driven rain from the west to infiltrate the facility.
Scope of work:
1. Lightly brush all debris from vertical sidewall panels on west dormers
2. Apply new clear silicone sealant and trowel smooth
3. Clean up all debris and download
:Z k: Z=S '.. U r, r-4 i i i - , �=i i i q i i -i Lcima LAKE, MN 55356 PHomc. 49S21 473-0060 rAx. 1952) 473-OaO5
Cut Gutter/install End Cap on Entrance:
Reasonforscope: Current entryway gutter system does not have end cap installed, which allows
water to spill directly onto the ground. Existing soil has been washed away and poses a safety
risk in the wintertime for employees (see photos).
Scope of work:
1. Cut gutter back within 4 inches of entrance roof
2. Install gutter end cap and seal
3. Clean up all debris and download
Install Gutter Splash Guard:
Reasonforscope: Downspout from upper roof is routed into entryway gutter. In a medium rain,
the water is expelled from the downspout at a high velocity, allowing water to spill over the
gutter. Existing soil has been washed away (see photos).
Scope of work:
1. Fabricate and install one- 18" gutter splash guard to the front of the gutter
2. Clean up all debris and download
Install Downs pout/Spi ash Block:
Reasonforscope: Currently no gutter end cap or downspout installed on entryway gutter
system. Landscaping and soil has been damaged from rainstorms and poses a safety risk in the
wintertime for employees (see photos).
Scope of work:
1. Furnish and install new 3" x 4" corrugated downspout to allow for safe walking conditions
during winter months
2. Install new small concrete splash block
3. Clean up all debris and download
TOTAL PRICE: Not to Exceed $14,560.00
NOTES:
1) Work listed above is a Not -To -Exceed contract value. If Mint Roofing is able to save on labor
or materials, cost savings will be passed onto customer.
2) By agreeing to proposal, customer agrees to provide one parking spot for service vehicle.
3) If there is any deviation from the above -listed scope, Mint Roofing will complete on a T&M
basis.
4) Price listed above does not include any night or OT work. If required to work on weekends or
on OT, Mint Roofing will charge at our cost above listed contract figure.
5) Price is for work to be completed in any season other than winter conditions. If snow or ice
removal is necessary, Mint Roofing will document, complete, and will charge at normal T&M
rates.
2295 DANirLS STREET LaNG LAKE, MN 55356 PH13NE: �952� 473-SDE30 FAX: J952) 47:3-0805
6) All work listed above includes all OSHA -required safety equipment.
Work to Proceed Authorization
I hereby authorize Mint Roofing, Inc., to provide roof repair and/or maintenance services as
outlined above; and agree to pay the above stated price for these services. Furthermore, I
understand that if it is discovered that additional work or service is needed, Mint Roofing will
furnish an outline of these services, and associated costs, prior to performing the additional
work.
Company Name
Name/Title
Date
Printed
If you have any questions, or if I can be of further assistance, please feel free to call me.
Gavin Tugana, Project Manager
2295 DANIELS STREET LONG LAKE, MN 55356 PHONE: �952) 473-SOED FAX: �952) 473-0805
AGENDAITEM
Item No.:
Date: May 8, 2017
Item Description: #17-3927, Nathan & Beth Brandenburg, 825 Forest Arms Lane,
Variance — Resolution
Presenter: Melanie Curtis Agenda Planning Department
Planner Section: Report
1. Purpose. This application is regarding an average lakeshore setback variance for an addition to
an existing home.
2. MN§15.99 Application Deadline. The application was received and considered to be complete
on March 15, 2017. Therefore the 60 -Day review period expires on May 14, 2017.
Background. The applicants have applied for an average lakeshore setback variance in order to
conduct structural improvements to the upper level on the lake side of their home ahead of the
average lakeshore setback line. The proposal includes construction of a 780 square foot 2nd story
expansion over the existing garage within the existing footprint of the home. A 6' x 7.5' portion
of the new 2nd floor area is proposed to bump out over the existing deck, however structural
coverage and hardcover levels will not change.
4. Planning Commission Comment. On April 17, 2017, the Planning Conu-nission held a public
hearing and reviewed the application. Following the public hearing the Commission voted 6 to 0
in favor of a motion to approve the variance as requested.
5. Public Comment. Supportive comments from the neighbors were received and included in the
Planning Commission packet; no additional comments from the public were received regarding
this application.
6. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to adopt or amend the approval resolution.
Exhibits
Exhibit A. Draft Resolution
Exhibit B. Proposed Plans
Exhibit C. Draft PC Minutes
Exhibit D. PC Staff Report
References
1) PC Exhibits 04/17/17
Exhibit A. Application
Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form
Exhibit C. Survey/Site Plan
Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations
Exhibit E. Submitted Hardcover Calculations
Exhibit F. Aerial Photos
Exhibit G. Neighbor Comments
Exhibit H. Property Owners List
Exhibit 1. Plat Map
Prepared By: YY)GG
Reviewed By: J. Bamhart
Approved By: D5P,
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
A RESOLUTION
APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM
MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 78-1279
FILE NO. 17-3927
WHEREAS, on March 15, 2017, Nathan Brandenburg and Beth Brandenburg,
husband and wife (hereinafter the "Applicants]), applied for a variance from the City Code for the
property addressed 825 Forest Arms Lane and legally described as:
Lot 3, Block 2, Forest Arms, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the
"Property");
WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a
variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow construction of a 2n, story
addition to the home lakeward of the average lakeshore setback; and
WHEREAS, on April 17, 2017, after published and mailed notice in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, at which
time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to
speak thereon; and
WHEREAS, on April 17, 2017, the Planning Commission recommended approval
of the variance; and
WHEREAS, on May 8, 2017, the City Council reviewed the application and the
recommendations of the Planning Commission and City staff; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota
hereby approves the requested variance as described above based on one or more of the
following findings of fact concerning the Property:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #17-3927. The analysis contained within
staff memos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the above
mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings are
hereby incorporated by reference.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
2. The Property is located in the LR -1 B Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District.
3. The Property contains 1.26 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 235 feet at the
ordinary high water level and 206 feet at the 75 -foot setback.
4. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25% according to the Stormwater
Quality Overlay District.
5. Applicant has applied for the following variance[s]:
a. Average Lakeshore Setback
6. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and
recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variance
upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values
of property in the surrounding area.
ANALYSIS:
1. "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of the ordinance . . . ." The variance is in harmony with the Ordinance as the
properties along the channel generally face the channel frontage and not the lake itself.
Therefore lake views will not be impacted by the proposed addition.
2. "Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the
comprehensive plan." The variance resulting in a permit for construction of an addition to
the single family residence in a residential zone are consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan.
3. "Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are
practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. 'Practical difficulties,' as used in
connection with the granting of a variance, means that:
a. The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner,
however, the proposed use is not permitted by the official controls.
The request to permit construction over a portion of the existing home lakeward of
the average lakeshore setback appears to be reasonable as the owners of the
adjacent properties have stated that they are not adversely impacted; the entire
home on the Property is located lakeward of the average lakeshore setback line;
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
and the mature vegetation and topography separate the Property from the adjacent
neighbors.
b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created
by the landowner.
The neighboring home to the north is set back further from the lake than the subject
home; the curved channel frontage; and the location of the neighboring homes
closer to the rear/street lot line result in the severe average lakeshore setback
applied to the Property.
c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. "
It does not appear that the requested average lakeshore setback variance to
permit an addition over a portion of the home will adversely impact views of the
lake currently enjoyed by the adjacent property owners.
4. "Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties." Economic
considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination.
5. "Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight
for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth -sheltered construction as
defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter
78." This condition is not applicable.
6. "The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under
Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is
located." This condition is not applicable, as the use for a residence and additions to the
residence are an allowed use in the LR -1 B District.
7. "The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one -family dwelling
as a two-family dwelling." This condition is not applicable.
8. "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such
property or immediately adjoining property." The setbacks of the neighboring homes and
the curved channel shoreline (lake frontage) is not in character with other lakeshore
properties on Forest Lake.
9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the
land is located." The majority of the homes both to the north and south of the Property are
closer in proximity to the road and are generally in line with each other. The curvature of
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
the channel shoreline and the location of the lake proper at the southern end of the channel
are conditions unique to the Property and the immediately adjacent properties.
10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant." The home cannot be expanded in any way within
the setback without variances; the applicants state that the variance is necessary.
11. "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or
morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter." The variance
resulting in an addition to the existing home lakeward of the average lakeshore setback
will not impair health, safety, comfort, or morals. The project is in line with the intent of
the chapter.
12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but
is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty." The topography, the channel, and location
of the adjacent home to the north create practical difficulties affecting the Property; the
variances are necessary and not merely serve as a convenience to the owners.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS:
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a
variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow construction of a 780 square
foot 2 nd story addition to the existing home lakeward of the average lakeshore setback line, subject
to the following conditions:
1. Council approval is based on the entire record
2. The approved project shall conform to the building plans submitted by the Applicants and
annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A.
3. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require
further Planning Commission and City Council review.
4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicants, but are
permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new
construction and commencing construction of said project. A framing inspection must be
completed within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on
that date (May 8, 2018).
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution may
result in the termination of any authority granted herein.
ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this 811 day of May, 2017.
ATTEST:
CITY OF ORONO:
Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor
C,
16
*9 al.
M i
01I
11, M
1, un
L ja
M MV.
'i Ilk
AMPI —!PW
HIM,
z
HBO -
!Hp I
i V!
al
j 0 8V fi.
H. 4�
1 m -1
W IKE
2 Elm A
z
jH1
191
l
N-
W 'IN"
R 4
j H1 zi.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - — — — — — — — — — —
------------------------
t9ESS NW'ONMJO
H
I NVI SMV -LSTd 0:1 ST8
EisnOH D�jno N](INV�JO
ti
16
*9 al.
M i
01I
11, M
1, un
L ja
M MV.
'i Ilk
AMPI —!PW
HIM,
z
HBO -
!Hp I
i V!
al
j 0 8V fi.
H. 4�
1 m -1
W IKE
2 Elm A
z
jH1
191
l
N-
W 'IN"
R 4
j H1 zi.
LL
0
0
w
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - — — — — — — — — — —
------------------------
r
d o
LL
0
0
w
-V9ESS
NW'ONMJO
I NVI SMV -LSI�10:1 ST8
M
EisnOH D�jnONI(INV�JO
um
-V9ESS NW'ONMJO
I NVI SMV ST8
<
M
-LSI�10:1
EisnOH D�jnONI(INV�JO
t9ESS NW'ONMJO
NVI SMV 0:1 ST8
<
He
-LSI'd
EisnOH D�jnONI(INV�JO
0
LU
U)
0
IL
0
ly
CL
z
w
F-
00
w
-V9ESS NW'ONMJO
I NVI SMV -LSI�10:1 ST8
<
M
EisnOH D�jnONI(INV�JO
d I'
0
LU
U)
0
IL
0
ly
CL
z
w
F-
00
w
0
w
C/)
0
0-
0
w
IL
z
0
w
F-
U)
w
3:
0
z
D
x
LU
z
0
w
-V9ESS NW'ONMJO
I NVI SMV ST8
<
-LSI�10:1
3snOH D�jnONI(INV�JO
0
w
C/)
0
0-
0
w
IL
z
0
w
F-
U)
w
3:
0
z
D
x
LU
z
0
w
0
LU
U)
0
IL
0
of
(L
z
w
m
0
z
(D
F -
x
LU
z
LU
-V9ESS NW'ONMJO
I NVI SMV ST8
<
-LSI�10:1
Ej s nOH D�jnONI(INV�JO
�2 o
0
LU
U)
0
IL
0
of
(L
z
w
m
0
z
(D
F -
x
LU
z
LU
w
0
w
0
z
0
F-
F -
U)
LU
z
�e
0
z
F-
C)
LU
U)
z
ob
:5
0
0
w
co
2
F-
C/)
w
0
�e
0
z
0
F -
w
U)
t9ESS NW'ONMJO
NVI SMV 0:1 ST8
He
-LSI'd
Ej s nOH D�jnONI(INV�JO
d k m
w
0
w
0
z
0
F-
F -
U)
LU
z
�e
0
z
F-
C)
LU
U)
z
ob
:5
0
0
w
co
2
F-
C/)
w
0
�e
0
z
0
F -
w
U)
AS -BUILT SURVEY FOR:
H ESTIA H 0 M ES
L= 116.56
A =35*08'5r
0 R= 190.00
1CF0 C-8RG.=S3W34'34�E
x C=1 14.74
4QEDAR 2
A\k %
16k\O
%
2 3-8"
OAK\
q/� 0\ ED, \0
to
928.6 AREA\
N
04
b �O 5�1 N
%'P R D�
0
0 z'
z 0 �k'
-4)
OA
N LEGAL DESCRIPTION
S 928.8 LOT 3, BLOCK 2,
A4A FOREST ARMS
16,77'9 S.F.--\
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MN
00. 928.6
A
28.6
I hereby certify that this pion. survey, or report was DRAWN.
J.W.D.
928.6 nranAr.A h� -A.' A'_" _" I I
SCALE: 1"=40'
a
If
f
825 FOREST ARMS LANE
NEW 2ND STORY
ADDITION
SUIRU"�l .. TPII"T
APEA 11- '1
2.j 9.95 - ----
HE
--- - -----------
-----------
19692
FORESTLAKE
SITE PLAN
!�q SCALE: 1 " � 21'
STRIJCTURAL NOTES
FOUNDATION
BRANDININEEl HORUSI
82 5 V)RIEST ARMs L,,N[
555364
SALA * I W( A
A RC H ISTRUCTURES * 17 01 -11
SOIL QUALITY
Shumis, : If - no, - uth,nzod I so
nspo", minimum soil quNly h,11 b, g-usd
I th, follo,im
AfRCfNbkR4O1.4.1:PPtwfo,dm,
.g .1u. of mundshm,
F-9 -19. st-Eld To, this pmjR.t All
to III, h... boom uh-E61.1h, d.119m;c] to
=11h, minimum ood-quirsit Wnd,,d of
1500 ESE .0 moring padty.
SIR d -m: ME f -mg. shmuld -oly
- I, I,i,u, 2000 FEE Sol, d.fim,d I
sInd , suty Bonn, Iyy -d. SRI gon,II
EI yo -L
C-Usol I.E.-
PH. I I .... bruoti- If - Im, not
,uth-d , ,it prL I,ont-, should
__ _m .. - In- p.m.,
.p ... ibilly So, u.1 SIR EondI
D.,iml soos.- If Emm-, should
1EIB un,uhl .R., u.h to ....N.Ey
'I.wy 0, siby oft' o' 'y 'Ims, m"u'I oR
_mdI u.h
:.pw, quIlifty fill .1 .i�
-oun: I Sol Is in dmunt,
sh.uid bbsn' seuvi o.f oy . g, . to To d
= dd U.n.1
ts to, Rod 'Xud' ,It posprod", It,, -
I -I rud,,q, End ohnshumimn.
SOIL PREPARATION:
I- E-wo E.... us duM, to Rut,
gmd. b.E,i.g .1-s.
M itiom.1 Inso-ti.. If minimum 2000 FEE
.its - - dosmituod mon- - .1 lot m=
.md It th. Wti.i uub�rod. III �.
to, .y mshy I-. III until thm,
found. Aftonusufly, ,nt,d,, ,y I IS
dl,.&.d by ..it
STRUCTURAL NOTES
F R A M I N G
BRIONOINEllull Fl
82 5 111 ARM, L-1
ORC.. VA 5553&4
SALA * 16066
ARC H ISTRUCTURES * 1701 -11
S.-phying - ot-iflostion.
B III -E: Communion Emit L. in ... M
,nh 11 --1 p Won, of th, umonly
,dopts,t Mhummon, =mffsf Cook, EMRC),
,,us mI I ... I non-
ItEst p E11- All - EI b. of -m.
mmity, .-ing th mmst poun- of th. usol
End -muf-unsm I
Wmd I.Ed.: E-. -. is J.s,T.d bur
nnininnur, 21 pRf sts.1 And Im.d .. q.i,.d by
MInhoso. Roidomhuf Cod.
R.of so- lood: So- ul.mmg. d.. to
dI bm ul -f mJI dififfirt, to. b..
.dd. to uniform I.. mut sh.. b.I., I
-ul- by d..
I dI I.md: Indus.. h.othing, frEmi.g,
m.uII ol.h.m.1, -, but I. Ihi.k..
ston., om-nost, " g�th' c"1nu,t "gi.... K
oth..I...
DE.E.. hunt.
1. El no- S Im.d
D=d 1..& 1111111
Till bon.
2, Fl.- I.N. mul: 40 1
Loud od: 15 pEf
Thi-st , IS: NEms
C,momt. N.m.
Gh"nHo Nunn
2. D -B: U. lood: SO Puf
Loud - 5 PH
P -m No..
STRUCTURALCIERTIFIC-Ohl
C.mOmma, I, P -MEd to, ETntumI -I'" To
- 11111 Isht, Efl.rEfs-sh
Th, omm-, mmmus -I mr no -
Il 1. I-od ALI ft ItIltuoll dlligl.
WTI- uhh-1 is th, my romEk
fi-I to th. smi d.Eigl.
ENGINEERING STANDARD OF CARE:
Th. somd.ol of - to, .11 sh,chu.1 E.9i-
�.Ilg Islill, pm1idEd to, ft, pj,,t h,1I
th. 1-1 of 11,11 & .1 shlimudly
by 1 -.1 Ing.- prionommg RETIRE,
E.'i'2m On. Emm. 1 -ft IT th. ... Sit.,
Ei f-tini, My oo.p.tion I up .
odgm.1 ub-g,.d. .1-fi. h.11 b. wth good
qu.hby Ind (SIMI E, SE),
- C-Poct In 8' to 12, lift in 98% of ms.unum
EXCAVATION SAFETY:
C.mm- I. osp.-U. 111 -.1 f I
" I' Iy
Sturud- OSHA 2. CIR, 1.1 SubEPE1
P. 'E. -him & Ths.h.."
MASONRY CONSTRUCTION
Sts. M: Sh.11 nom, to .11 P-,- of ACI
5- E.RAng Cm� Rm- sho' Sp-
t1mosomyssVot-
Ifimbod.l.:
CMU bII ASTM CEO, Typ, 1, n,.,l
Imight ..mms bI.k F'm=l 700 pi md..
li n-hing - ASTM A615, gmd,
W. Fy = W,000 EPEE.
li Sh,11 c,nf,. to PIploson Soout-
..U.. fASTM C270.
Rihf .. d urboul Typo 'l F.
2800 psi.
Un,.iHft,.d
Mos, Smith, Rod -,11, ,p,,,,:
Tp, 'S' . P-2800 ps,�
Abohn, gold. .� imsmi.,
Typs 'NT. F m=3050 PE
Gboun, ASTM C476. Minnum Ig -20M pRL
. Stumb, S' to 11' PE, ASTM C143.
MASONRY SQUARE PIERS
Dm,,I1 V,him,t .W -mg 5 mt, footing
M12 IZ by 17 rn .... � own (1) #5 VsHic,l
M,m ME h.,ght E -Int -
CONCRETE CONSTRUCT�b:
li ... .... hus, shro'gill for ME, pmj,,t:
F..ti.g, IS piEns: En = 3000 1 with IT,
nomm! sulmi- thIt moYd. - & -
-Rt.... squI,RI,mE to It IIIM SON 10
%.. MIRC Tumi. P4321, IT. S.
AIR S, -fins 1� - 4EN, TEE -
'So, 1,, MRC Tool, R402 2 ' fin, , d , f
SLIBI rubf.m1mg b.- ASTM A615, �Q,'60.
md. linnill, lircurnst,1111, No gul-I 11
Ey. humm.. , innsiod, is rumt..
DESIGN RESPONSIBIUTY
Sthuotums! migimus, R.."'s.11n. E, d.Elgh of
'POETRY trudumb - such Is ... End post,
& fin.b.gs - th momm XoRd in Hum, of mumb-
- on.
C.T R.Eohn.ibl. to, .11 on.,
..pt " 'p"ifiw " 'buctu'l d,m,g,.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Poll 0 somboutoo, 11,111 Imnly
,xistog ... dhbm, to b. Is h.. on d..hg,
.md thot I- Runudw I. ..Ptibi. Ath
EXIST, .. dfti If offinmIss., w M
.hohns. End .1P1.1 E, 11iI.d d.110n.
WOOD CONSTRUCTION
S..d.M: Sh.11 of.. . .11 pohi.l.m. of
ANSVAWC YES Naboof Dough Sp,,O,,ti,,
m, Wood Gnmmon"uh.
T"IE.LSIm1Ib.P2SPFEI
W.11 shul' MIRY b, Ind 911d. SEE,
C.m....:
IS bi ASTM A307.
High =th I.- Wh' EP..Emd on
PER., I - to - ;th
-1 high b."th E -E,
MOISTURE EXPOSED LUMBER
ImIn., 1ImEI Ah oocl I
d.- -.E. To homm, ommu.. -diftions.
.u.h IS hy -d in dh.ct ht.ct mth
m-EtE. -11 b. - RIS ..uffi.,n P...
DRok, Ild ottull InsoRrill 111ditill, Smil I
nninnurn #2 C-1, .1 p".'"'. "'E" IS
So th.. PIT.. So. for -.1
Ep.n -
So I , ..... sms f,, trulbul Ilood All bEst
mus, hunts, -g-, It.. sh.11 ths 9.1h. -d
End pp -.d by rhomfi..., In, us.
PoI.I.N. t -d -.d.
_CF.
FIX mil plild, on, folloviiIii 1111111d,fim,
If th, APA Ao,11ood Floubg Com -non
Guid. I.. bssh ... numoti-d:
Who, p.EI silgh' ly Rod., no, b...
I P
,m,ff,,d It EXtow, d .. I mmdow p.hing.,
PRE-ENGINEERED WOOD TRUSSES
FIblil.t."I Intilo If firmi brull Ely- -11
hom thmt Eh.n .. mowings, -brolt I -to,
dl..hg To ..g'T.:mEpr., to f.bdI.b to,
_mu.fimo wth o' '11,n
Thuss d -n, In- P, -1,d by
m,lsm- n,ih ...
n.. bl..ihu must ths Eh-. on mcbm,
donwng.
C -m -e, snoti- Prior to fm."oh, I
V,nfy 11 - dinn-EX, to 'Enfoom W h _
mmmtl ..h. -I End S-
tull d,,Ing,, WE, 'qus"'ITE, h,ight
mshintimn., -
SI -ABS -ON -GRADE
PIKEM11- Comosoto, 11mil ,k. III
pro-io, W rninimus, EmnImg, , Mtl,m,nt
= �,, holloving I, nd.d:
I It... thi.l 4 In.h., uni... moRd
oth-w I, pI,m I, hydrono Wbum
no'I" g"t'H.
SIR posiums,11- S. E
C.11onts sholgth: SIR Iloo-
R,Imfo,,mq: 6 . 6 1 WT4 . W- �EII
wo, - , ASTM A185. Support on CIRSI
.pp..d mms . rhimmour, ... ih.h
so- tsho. .61.
Onnit only with End ..hiumf,
.pl
Absom- With -hitocLs pp ,IL I
nbsoh ,y W usibstitutoo,
SI..Eh2"toTpo,ASTMC143-E?0..
C ... HERB, '-pou"I., IsEmn S" 'hunlu'l
burning hot., und.,
F20 PAD FWTINGS:
R.I.ftrohng Ill ...... : Pi.c. Imns on
p,,,,d h,[,, 3 in,h,, d- bom SOL
witt, (2) � onton, - -, -y
F20 V-8* 1 V-8' I S' dVop
Ath (2) OS boff- b,, -h �y
EXISTING WALL FOOTINGS:
Wh ,, mil f-ing Immm A,ting 1-ing,
Ims, IT I .. smmion mud - L.R.Ohm,
(2� Out by 2'4E long tons,
Dn�t ... ou,somr, -1 4� inno A.hing V,RR
.,th A by 1'�' ong minfrcing Ims @ 16'
no. (,It,,n,t, --pins).
FOOTING B
Sh.11 ssmno to MC Ruh, 1 M3.1600:
Z.mE2:B,m,34'b,1.finiEhqmc..
E ... Bull Who,,,, footing, so, hot so -
It to . h..t.d p..., EX., minimum
b.1- lhi.h onut., unI.E.
.utimsity pp... I...
F,- pou.u.: Co.- to pro0d. I.-
qu." to I footing. mud .11 on.,
Shn.-m Irmh ImEt dumug nthmim.
MOST RECENT RE!VISION; 5 F& ... n, 2017
LVI_ BEAMS
Mmin... &.19. Imrs....: 2600FI, 1.9E
b.l., f., mirm.d n... lumb., (LVL).
li ply b .... : F.Boon hugs1h., iss,
nuft.tu.r. Iquirs-
W.mth., p-.[..: All LVL .1mould
.o.I. I l I -in.h.p.go.tEd
,v,d,y: WoblosInuf by T-4,1II, ,
DOOR AND WINDOW JAMES
F,,W, -1, p.i, of Studs Ytt, (1) 10d ,(I @
16'....
Ms. -b -.-
J224 TWIoBI � p,,I,g, 1, 2,4 -d umll:
(1) �4 himm., � (1) �4 king stud
J226 TWi,,l BE pB,i,g, 1, 2,6 t,d m1l;
(1) - hiumn., - (1) � Wing sud
MINIMUM BEAM BEARING
B... f.11 I,idth mf ths.. on but Width & mngth of
.p.ifi. J..b. Post ., tonsfI, - 6.1 -
SPECIAL BEAM CONNECTION&
4200 ., imnil.r nunn.n..1 ousk indi.H..
mm In- mquiul b- nonn-OV, , upEXXt
umd n Po.nd. Th T -y .'P.'.' I
""t
J- hRr. I n.n-..nd.,d bsom ., post son-
imn,s Inquirod.
Con.�.,i...p.n.ibi.f.,.Ilb..�.uppIt
;mnontin', not fully d- on dou.ng.
E, -hiboXt', Rmussitm, ngin,,r ,y too
mmo-ot fu, I- on..
SHEATHING STANDARDS.
ME ,of. fimm, Rod n,r husul mil b.r
III APA,tomp
PIMo.d:AFAFE1,mPoEu.Im,..EE,m.
OSB: APA PS2. Eum, I , EXhuior.
l pM : Shosbung to mfh� Joist , Sold:
P..RI RdEE So (SE 6� .
All offim, ,pp,ft: M @ IT o.
ROOF SHEATHING -
Minimum SRI. HnIng Rod ""o"
I." .... EiRsul.g: R211S, 1SMS'.
24" .... Bossing: 40)20, U/37�
SURELOOR SHEATHING
Minimum nding Rod Ohms, .... :
IS" pEu,I.q: 48/24, 26/3Z'.
Eus-E, O(E(32 111E.
BE, , dfiIuP Sh,11 onol to APA AFG-DI.
Thi-st III. Im.- MI 1 W .... joist sp-mg.
EXTERIOR WALL SHEATHING
Minimum p.. nflung bd II
. 16" & M' .... p..ing: 3�16, 15132�.
r2-� LOWER LEVEL/FOUNDATION PLAN
"�� �j SCALE 111" � 1'-1"
(a) STRUCTURAL UPPER LEVEL FRAMING PLAN
it Al I tIGALI = 1'-U'
ROOF FRAMING PLAN
SALA ARCHITECTS
SALAARC.COM
MINNEAPOLIS
T 612.379.3037
F 612.379.0001
326 E HENN PIN AVE #200
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55,U4
STILLWATER
T 65�.35�.0961
F65 . 35 .7327
904 SOUTH 4TH STREET
STILLWATER, MIN 55082
LU
V)
D
0
T
0
c/_
D
co
z
LU
0
z
LU
z
10
rr)
Lo
Z
0
LU
c� Z
c) 0
LL c!,
Lr) 0
r_4
00
og/3o/16 EX'ETN.
01/06/17 BEE/HT-S SRI ATIL #1
01/12/17 REVISSY/sEVISIONS
REVIEW
02/16/17 PERMU
P11111 "1111R
1 6066
RE ACT ARCHTECT
PAUL EUUtA, MA
DRNWN BY FE
SHEET NO. Al
SHEETINDEX
Al
I SITE PLAN, LOWER LEVEL PLAN & STRUCTURAL
DI
DEMOLITION PLANS
A2
MAIN LEVEL PLAN
A3
UPPER LEVEL PLAN
A4
EAST ELEVATION EXISTING AND PROPOSED
AS
WEST ELEVATION EXISTING AND PROPOSED
AIS
NORTH/SOUTH ELEVATIONS EXISTING AN
A7
BUILDING SECTIONS
If
f
825 FOREST ARMS LANE
NEW 2ND STORY
ADDITION
SUIRU"�l .. TPII"T
APEA 11- '1
2.j 9.95 - ----
HE
--- - -----------
-----------
19692
FORESTLAKE
SITE PLAN
!�q SCALE: 1 " � 21'
STRIJCTURAL NOTES
FOUNDATION
BRANDININEEl HORUSI
82 5 V)RIEST ARMs L,,N[
555364
SALA * I W( A
A RC H ISTRUCTURES * 17 01 -11
SOIL QUALITY
Shumis, : If - no, - uth,nzod I so
nspo", minimum soil quNly h,11 b, g-usd
I th, follo,im
AfRCfNbkR4O1.4.1:PPtwfo,dm,
.g .1u. of mundshm,
F-9 -19. st-Eld To, this pmjR.t All
to III, h... boom uh-E61.1h, d.119m;c] to
=11h, minimum ood-quirsit Wnd,,d of
1500 ESE .0 moring padty.
SIR d -m: ME f -mg. shmuld -oly
- I, I,i,u, 2000 FEE Sol, d.fim,d I
sInd , suty Bonn, Iyy -d. SRI gon,II
EI yo -L
C-Usol I.E.-
PH. I I .... bruoti- If - Im, not
,uth-d , ,it prL I,ont-, should
__ _m .. - In- p.m.,
.p ... ibilly So, u.1 SIR EondI
D.,iml soos.- If Emm-, should
1EIB un,uhl .R., u.h to ....N.Ey
'I.wy 0, siby oft' o' 'y 'Ims, m"u'I oR
_mdI u.h
:.pw, quIlifty fill .1 .i�
-oun: I Sol Is in dmunt,
sh.uid bbsn' seuvi o.f oy . g, . to To d
= dd U.n.1
ts to, Rod 'Xud' ,It posprod", It,, -
I -I rud,,q, End ohnshumimn.
SOIL PREPARATION:
I- E-wo E.... us duM, to Rut,
gmd. b.E,i.g .1-s.
M itiom.1 Inso-ti.. If minimum 2000 FEE
.its - - dosmituod mon- - .1 lot m=
.md It th. Wti.i uub�rod. III �.
to, .y mshy I-. III until thm,
found. Aftonusufly, ,nt,d,, ,y I IS
dl,.&.d by ..it
STRUCTURAL NOTES
F R A M I N G
BRIONOINEllull Fl
82 5 111 ARM, L-1
ORC.. VA 5553&4
SALA * 16066
ARC H ISTRUCTURES * 1701 -11
S.-phying - ot-iflostion.
B III -E: Communion Emit L. in ... M
,nh 11 --1 p Won, of th, umonly
,dopts,t Mhummon, =mffsf Cook, EMRC),
,,us mI I ... I non-
ItEst p E11- All - EI b. of -m.
mmity, .-ing th mmst poun- of th. usol
End -muf-unsm I
Wmd I.Ed.: E-. -. is J.s,T.d bur
nnininnur, 21 pRf sts.1 And Im.d .. q.i,.d by
MInhoso. Roidomhuf Cod.
R.of so- lood: So- ul.mmg. d.. to
dI bm ul -f mJI dififfirt, to. b..
.dd. to uniform I.. mut sh.. b.I., I
-ul- by d..
I dI I.md: Indus.. h.othing, frEmi.g,
m.uII ol.h.m.1, -, but I. Ihi.k..
ston., om-nost, " g�th' c"1nu,t "gi.... K
oth..I...
DE.E.. hunt.
1. El no- S Im.d
D=d 1..& 1111111
Till bon.
2, Fl.- I.N. mul: 40 1
Loud od: 15 pEf
Thi-st , IS: NEms
C,momt. N.m.
Gh"nHo Nunn
2. D -B: U. lood: SO Puf
Loud - 5 PH
P -m No..
STRUCTURALCIERTIFIC-Ohl
C.mOmma, I, P -MEd to, ETntumI -I'" To
- 11111 Isht, Efl.rEfs-sh
Th, omm-, mmmus -I mr no -
Il 1. I-od ALI ft ItIltuoll dlligl.
WTI- uhh-1 is th, my romEk
fi-I to th. smi d.Eigl.
ENGINEERING STANDARD OF CARE:
Th. somd.ol of - to, .11 sh,chu.1 E.9i-
�.Ilg Islill, pm1idEd to, ft, pj,,t h,1I
th. 1-1 of 11,11 & .1 shlimudly
by 1 -.1 Ing.- prionommg RETIRE,
E.'i'2m On. Emm. 1 -ft IT th. ... Sit.,
Ei f-tini, My oo.p.tion I up .
odgm.1 ub-g,.d. .1-fi. h.11 b. wth good
qu.hby Ind (SIMI E, SE),
- C-Poct In 8' to 12, lift in 98% of ms.unum
EXCAVATION SAFETY:
C.mm- I. osp.-U. 111 -.1 f I
" I' Iy
Sturud- OSHA 2. CIR, 1.1 SubEPE1
P. 'E. -him & Ths.h.."
MASONRY CONSTRUCTION
Sts. M: Sh.11 nom, to .11 P-,- of ACI
5- E.RAng Cm� Rm- sho' Sp-
t1mosomyssVot-
Ifimbod.l.:
CMU bII ASTM CEO, Typ, 1, n,.,l
Imight ..mms bI.k F'm=l 700 pi md..
li n-hing - ASTM A615, gmd,
W. Fy = W,000 EPEE.
li Sh,11 c,nf,. to PIploson Soout-
..U.. fASTM C270.
Rihf .. d urboul Typo 'l F.
2800 psi.
Un,.iHft,.d
Mos, Smith, Rod -,11, ,p,,,,:
Tp, 'S' . P-2800 ps,�
Abohn, gold. .� imsmi.,
Typs 'NT. F m=3050 PE
Gboun, ASTM C476. Minnum Ig -20M pRL
. Stumb, S' to 11' PE, ASTM C143.
MASONRY SQUARE PIERS
Dm,,I1 V,him,t .W -mg 5 mt, footing
M12 IZ by 17 rn .... � own (1) #5 VsHic,l
M,m ME h.,ght E -Int -
CONCRETE CONSTRUCT�b:
li ... .... hus, shro'gill for ME, pmj,,t:
F..ti.g, IS piEns: En = 3000 1 with IT,
nomm! sulmi- thIt moYd. - & -
-Rt.... squI,RI,mE to It IIIM SON 10
%.. MIRC Tumi. P4321, IT. S.
AIR S, -fins 1� - 4EN, TEE -
'So, 1,, MRC Tool, R402 2 ' fin, , d , f
SLIBI rubf.m1mg b.- ASTM A615, �Q,'60.
md. linnill, lircurnst,1111, No gul-I 11
Ey. humm.. , innsiod, is rumt..
DESIGN RESPONSIBIUTY
Sthuotums! migimus, R.."'s.11n. E, d.Elgh of
'POETRY trudumb - such Is ... End post,
& fin.b.gs - th momm XoRd in Hum, of mumb-
- on.
C.T R.Eohn.ibl. to, .11 on.,
..pt " 'p"ifiw " 'buctu'l d,m,g,.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Poll 0 somboutoo, 11,111 Imnly
,xistog ... dhbm, to b. Is h.. on d..hg,
.md thot I- Runudw I. ..Ptibi. Ath
EXIST, .. dfti If offinmIss., w M
.hohns. End .1P1.1 E, 11iI.d d.110n.
WOOD CONSTRUCTION
S..d.M: Sh.11 of.. . .11 pohi.l.m. of
ANSVAWC YES Naboof Dough Sp,,O,,ti,,
m, Wood Gnmmon"uh.
T"IE.LSIm1Ib.P2SPFEI
W.11 shul' MIRY b, Ind 911d. SEE,
C.m....:
IS bi ASTM A307.
High =th I.- Wh' EP..Emd on
PER., I - to - ;th
-1 high b."th E -E,
MOISTURE EXPOSED LUMBER
ImIn., 1ImEI Ah oocl I
d.- -.E. To homm, ommu.. -diftions.
.u.h IS hy -d in dh.ct ht.ct mth
m-EtE. -11 b. - RIS ..uffi.,n P...
DRok, Ild ottull InsoRrill 111ditill, Smil I
nninnurn #2 C-1, .1 p".'"'. "'E" IS
So th.. PIT.. So. for -.1
Ep.n -
So I , ..... sms f,, trulbul Ilood All bEst
mus, hunts, -g-, It.. sh.11 ths 9.1h. -d
End pp -.d by rhomfi..., In, us.
PoI.I.N. t -d -.d.
_CF.
FIX mil plild, on, folloviiIii 1111111d,fim,
If th, APA Ao,11ood Floubg Com -non
Guid. I.. bssh ... numoti-d:
Who, p.EI silgh' ly Rod., no, b...
I P
,m,ff,,d It EXtow, d .. I mmdow p.hing.,
PRE-ENGINEERED WOOD TRUSSES
FIblil.t."I Intilo If firmi brull Ely- -11
hom thmt Eh.n .. mowings, -brolt I -to,
dl..hg To ..g'T.:mEpr., to f.bdI.b to,
_mu.fimo wth o' '11,n
Thuss d -n, In- P, -1,d by
m,lsm- n,ih ...
n.. bl..ihu must ths Eh-. on mcbm,
donwng.
C -m -e, snoti- Prior to fm."oh, I
V,nfy 11 - dinn-EX, to 'Enfoom W h _
mmmtl ..h. -I End S-
tull d,,Ing,, WE, 'qus"'ITE, h,ight
mshintimn., -
SI -ABS -ON -GRADE
PIKEM11- Comosoto, 11mil ,k. III
pro-io, W rninimus, EmnImg, , Mtl,m,nt
= �,, holloving I, nd.d:
I It... thi.l 4 In.h., uni... moRd
oth-w I, pI,m I, hydrono Wbum
no'I" g"t'H.
SIR posiums,11- S. E
C.11onts sholgth: SIR Iloo-
R,Imfo,,mq: 6 . 6 1 WT4 . W- �EII
wo, - , ASTM A185. Support on CIRSI
.pp..d mms . rhimmour, ... ih.h
so- tsho. .61.
Onnit only with End ..hiumf,
.pl
Absom- With -hitocLs pp ,IL I
nbsoh ,y W usibstitutoo,
SI..Eh2"toTpo,ASTMC143-E?0..
C ... HERB, '-pou"I., IsEmn S" 'hunlu'l
burning hot., und.,
F20 PAD FWTINGS:
R.I.ftrohng Ill ...... : Pi.c. Imns on
p,,,,d h,[,, 3 in,h,, d- bom SOL
witt, (2) � onton, - -, -y
F20 V-8* 1 V-8' I S' dVop
Ath (2) OS boff- b,, -h �y
EXISTING WALL FOOTINGS:
Wh ,, mil f-ing Immm A,ting 1-ing,
Ims, IT I .. smmion mud - L.R.Ohm,
(2� Out by 2'4E long tons,
Dn�t ... ou,somr, -1 4� inno A.hing V,RR
.,th A by 1'�' ong minfrcing Ims @ 16'
no. (,It,,n,t, --pins).
FOOTING B
Sh.11 ssmno to MC Ruh, 1 M3.1600:
Z.mE2:B,m,34'b,1.finiEhqmc..
E ... Bull Who,,,, footing, so, hot so -
It to . h..t.d p..., EX., minimum
b.1- lhi.h onut., unI.E.
.utimsity pp... I...
F,- pou.u.: Co.- to pro0d. I.-
qu." to I footing. mud .11 on.,
Shn.-m Irmh ImEt dumug nthmim.
MOST RECENT RE!VISION; 5 F& ... n, 2017
LVI_ BEAMS
Mmin... &.19. Imrs....: 2600FI, 1.9E
b.l., f., mirm.d n... lumb., (LVL).
li ply b .... : F.Boon hugs1h., iss,
nuft.tu.r. Iquirs-
W.mth., p-.[..: All LVL .1mould
.o.I. I l I -in.h.p.go.tEd
,v,d,y: WoblosInuf by T-4,1II, ,
DOOR AND WINDOW JAMES
F,,W, -1, p.i, of Studs Ytt, (1) 10d ,(I @
16'....
Ms. -b -.-
J224 TWIoBI � p,,I,g, 1, 2,4 -d umll:
(1) �4 himm., � (1) �4 king stud
J226 TWi,,l BE pB,i,g, 1, 2,6 t,d m1l;
(1) - hiumn., - (1) � Wing sud
MINIMUM BEAM BEARING
B... f.11 I,idth mf ths.. on but Width & mngth of
.p.ifi. J..b. Post ., tonsfI, - 6.1 -
SPECIAL BEAM CONNECTION&
4200 ., imnil.r nunn.n..1 ousk indi.H..
mm In- mquiul b- nonn-OV, , upEXXt
umd n Po.nd. Th T -y .'P.'.' I
""t
J- hRr. I n.n-..nd.,d bsom ., post son-
imn,s Inquirod.
Con.�.,i...p.n.ibi.f.,.Ilb..�.uppIt
;mnontin', not fully d- on dou.ng.
E, -hiboXt', Rmussitm, ngin,,r ,y too
mmo-ot fu, I- on..
SHEATHING STANDARDS.
ME ,of. fimm, Rod n,r husul mil b.r
III APA,tomp
PIMo.d:AFAFE1,mPoEu.Im,..EE,m.
OSB: APA PS2. Eum, I , EXhuior.
l pM : Shosbung to mfh� Joist , Sold:
P..RI RdEE So (SE 6� .
All offim, ,pp,ft: M @ IT o.
ROOF SHEATHING -
Minimum SRI. HnIng Rod ""o"
I." .... EiRsul.g: R211S, 1SMS'.
24" .... Bossing: 40)20, U/37�
SURELOOR SHEATHING
Minimum nding Rod Ohms, .... :
IS" pEu,I.q: 48/24, 26/3Z'.
Eus-E, O(E(32 111E.
BE, , dfiIuP Sh,11 onol to APA AFG-DI.
Thi-st III. Im.- MI 1 W .... joist sp-mg.
EXTERIOR WALL SHEATHING
Minimum p.. nflung bd II
. 16" & M' .... p..ing: 3�16, 15132�.
r2-� LOWER LEVEL/FOUNDATION PLAN
"�� �j SCALE 111" � 1'-1"
(a) STRUCTURAL UPPER LEVEL FRAMING PLAN
it Al I tIGALI = 1'-U'
ROOF FRAMING PLAN
SALA ARCHITECTS
SALAARC.COM
MINNEAPOLIS
T 612.379.3037
F 612.379.0001
326 E HENN PIN AVE #200
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55,U4
STILLWATER
T 65�.35�.0961
F65 . 35 .7327
904 SOUTH 4TH STREET
STILLWATER, MIN 55082
LU
V)
D
0
T
0
c/_
D
co
z
LU
0
z
LU
z
10
rr)
Lo
Z
0
LU
c� Z
c) 0
LL c!,
Lr) 0
r_4
00
og/3o/16 EX'ETN.
01/06/17 BEE/HT-S SRI ATIL #1
01/12/17 REVISSY/sEVISIONS
REVIEW
02/16/17 PERMU
P11111 "1111R
1 6066
RE ACT ARCHTECT
PAUL EUUtA, MA
DRNWN BY FE
SHEET NO. Al
UPPER LEVEL DEMO PLAN
�UALI,: 114 1
SALA ARCHITECTS
SALAARE.COM
MINNEAPOLIS
T 612.379.3037
F 612.379.0001
326 E HENNEPIN AVE #200
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55A 14
STILLWATER
T 651.351.0961
F 651.331.7327
904 SOUTH 4TH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
ui
V)
D
(D
0
z
Lu
r)
z
rl)
Lu
z
10
rr)
Lo
Z
Lu
ry Z
00
LL r"
Lr) 0
r-4
Co
- -IRIPTI-
09/30/16 EXISTING
01/06/17 EIE/ESTI-E SET ATL #1
01/12/17 REVIEW/REVISIONS
REVIEW
02/16/17 PERMIT
P1.1- .-R
16066
RE - ARCHTECT
PAUL EUUtA, AA
SIR
SHEET NO. D
MAIN LEVEL PLAN
III � T -W
SALA ARCHITECTS
SALAARE.COM
MINNEAPOLIS
T 612.379.3037
F 612.379.0001
326 E HENNEPIN AVE #200
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55A 14
STILLWATER
T 651.351.0961
F 651.331.7327
904 SOUTH 4TH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
ui
V)
D
(D
0
z
ui
n
z
N. <
rl
PROJECT rn
N . *"
Lu
z
10
rf)
U)
Z
Lu
ry Z
00
LL r"
Lr) 0
r-4
Co
- -IRIP-N
09/30/16 EXISTING
01/06/17 SID/ESTI-E SRI ATL #1
01/12/17 REVIEW/REVISIONS
REVIEW
02/16/17 PERMIT
P1.1- .-R
16066
RE - ARCHTECT
PAUL EUUtA, AA
SIR
SHEET NO. A2
P-1
UPPER LEVEL PLAN
�3
I
PROJECT
N . *"
SALA ARCHITECTS
SALAARC.COM
MINNEAPOLIS
6�22.3379.3037
6 . 79.0001
326 E HENN PIN AVE #200
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55�14
STIL WATER
T 65�11��0161
F65 5 7327
90 SOUTH 4TH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
ui
0
7
0
r1l
D
co
z
Lu
z
r1l
r1r)
Lu
z
rn
Ln
Z
Lu
C!� Z
00
LL C!�
Lf) 0
r'l
00
- -IRIP-N
09/30/16 EXISTING
01/06/17 SID/ESTI-E SET - #1
01/12/17 REVIEW/REVISIONS
REVIEW
02/16/17 PERMIT
P1.1- .-R
16066
PR - ARCHTECT
PAUL RUUtA,
SIR
SHEET NO. A3
'R.: P-1
rj I
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
- - — - — - — - — - — - — - — - — - — - — - — - — - — - — - — -- msllm��
-------------------------------------
----------------------------
EAST ELEVATION PROPOSED
�UAL_t: 1/4 = V�0�
------------------ - -
SALA ARCHITECTS
SALAARE.COM
MINNEAPOLIS
T 612.379.3037
F 612.379.0001
326 E HENNEPIN AVE #200
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55A 14
STILLWATER
T 651.351.0961
F 651.331.7327
904 SOUTH 4TH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
ui
V)
D
(D
7-
0
c/_
D
co
z
Lu
r)
z
rl)
Lu
z
10
rf)
Lo
Z
Lu
ry Z
00
LL r"
Lr) 0
r-4
Co
09/30/16 EXISTING
01/06/17 SID/ESTI—E SET ATL #1
01/12/17 REVIEW/REVISIONS
REVIEW
02/16/17 PERMIT
— – — – — – — – — – — – — – — – — – — – — – — – — – — – — – — -- LASt."E�* P1.1— .—R
16066
IR111 1111TEIT
.".. f_ _
------------------------- --
EAST ELEVATION EXISTING SHEET NO. A4
6�ALI,: 114' � I' -I"
I-------------------------------------
-----------------------------------
WEST ELEVATION PROPOSED
----------------------------------- L I I
WEST ELEVATION EXISTING
��Al-�: 114 � I -U
SALA ARCHITECTS
SALAARC.COM
MINNEAPOLIS
T 612.379.3037
F 612.379.0001
326 E HENNEPIN AVE #200
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55A 14
STILLWATER
T 651.351.0961
F 651.331.7327
904 SOUTH 4TH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
ui
0
7
0
ILI
D
co
z
Lu
z
r1l
r1r)
Lu
z
rn
Ln
Z
Lu
C!� Z
00
LL C!�
Lf) 0
r`I
00
- -IRIPTI-
09/30/16 EXISTING
01/06/17 RID/BTI-E SET - #1
01/12/17 REVIEW/REVISIONS
REVIEW
02/16/17 PERMIT
PRO- IUMEER
16066
PR - ARCHTECT
PAUL RUUtA,
DI
SHEET NO. A
I NOTES: I
- - - - - - - - - - I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
------------------------------------ ---- I
NORTH ELEVATION EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION PROPOSED
��ALL 114 - 1 -1 IM - 1 -11
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
.7 ----------------------------------------
L
'7 ---------- -----------------------------------
SALA ARCHITECTS
MINNEAPOLIS
T 612.379.3037
F 612.379.0001
326 E HENNEPIN AVE #200
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55A 14
STILLWATER
T 651.351.0961
F 651.331.7327
904 SOUTH 4TH STREET
ui
V)
D
(D
z
Lu
r)
z
rl)
Lu
z
10
rr)
Lo
Z
Ln
Lu
ry Z
00
LL r"
Lr) 0
r-4
Co
.11�6/17 RIE/BTI-E SET ATL #1
REVIEW/REVISIONS
REVIEW
02/16/17 PERMIT
16066
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
--------------------
SHEET NO. A6
SOUTH ELEVATION EXISTING
SOUTH ELEVATION PROPOSED
6�ALI, 114 � 1 -1
6�ALI,: 114' � 1 -0
SECTION LOOKING EAST @ M. BEDROOM & NEW HALL SECTION LOOKING WEST @ ADDITION ABOVE GARAGE
�UALI� 'I' � I -U �UALE: 1/4' = V-0�
SALA ARCHITECTS
SALAARC.COM
MINNEAPOLIS
T 612.379.3037
F 612.379.0001
326 E HENNEPIN AVE #200
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55�14
STILLWATER
T 651.351.0961
F 651.351.7327
904 SOUTH 4TH STREET
STILLWATER, MN 55082
ui
V)
D
(D
0
c/_
D
co
z
Lu
r)
z
rl)
Lu
z
10
rr)
Lo
Z
Lu
c� Z
00
LL r"
Lr) 0
r-4
Co
- -IRIP-N
09/30/16 EXISTING
01/06/17 SID/ESTI-E SET ATL #1
01/12/17 REVIEW/REVISIONS
REVIEW
02/16/17 PERMIT
P1.1- .-R
16066
PR J- ARCHTECT
PAUL EUUtA, AA
SECTION LOOKING NORTH @ BEDROOM & M. BATH SECTION LOOKING NORTH @ GARAGE & M. BEDROOM SHEET NO. A7
��Al_�: 114 � V -V 3�AL� 114 � 1 -0
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
6. #17-3927 NATHAN AND BETH BRANDENBURG, 825 FOREST ARMS LANE,
VARIANCE, 9:02 P.M. — 9:05 P.M.
Nathan Brandenburg, Applicant, was present.
Curtis stated the applicants' entire home is situated lakeward of the average lakeshore line as determined
by the two adjacent neighboring homes. The applicants have applied for an average lakeshore setback
variance in order to conduct structural improvements to the upper level on the lake side of their home
ahead of the average lakeshore setback line. The proposal includes construction of a 780 square foot
expansion over the existing garage within the existing footprint of the home. In addition, a 6' x 7.5
portion of the new second floor area is proposed to bump out over the existing lakeside deck. However,
structural coverage and hardcover levels will not change.
Staff provided an analysis of practical difficulties within the memo and the Planning Commission may
choose to review the individual criteria.
The configuration of the property along the channel creates a unique situation regarding the view. Most
of the homes are situated primarily toward the channel. The neighboring home to the north at 815 Forest
Arms Lane is set back further on their property than the applicants' home. 815 Forest Arms Lane has
little to no direct lake views over the applicants' property since their home is oriented to the west. The
neighbor to the south at 8 3 5 Forest Arms Lane faces southwest toward the channel.
Supportive comments from the neighbors were received and have been included in the Commission's
packet.
Planning Staff recommends approval.
The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff.
Nathan Brandenburg, Applicant, stated the application speaks for itself and that he would be available to
answer any questions.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 9:04 p.ni.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 9:04 p.m.
Thiesse commented this is a pretty straight forward application.
Landgraver noted the property owners are not increasing the structural coverage on the lot and that some
thought was put into the plan.
Schwingler moved, Leskinen seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. 17-927, Nathan
and Beth Brandenburg, 825 Forest Arms Lane, granting of a variance per Staff's recommendation.
VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0.
Landgraver noted an email was received from Mike McElligott in support of the proposed project but that
he did express concerns regarding the condition of the road.
Curtis indicated she did forward the email to the City Engineer.
Date Application Received: 03/15/17
Date Application Considered as Complete: 03/15/17
60 -Day Review Period Expires: 05/14/17
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members
Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator
From: Melanie Curtis, Planner YYIGG
Date: 17 April 2017
Subject: #17-3927, Nathan & Beth Brandenburg, 825 Forest Arms Ln,
Variance
Public Hearing
Application Summary: The applicants are requesting an average lakeshore setback variance
for an addition to the upper level of the home.
Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval.
Background
Structural improvements must meet all required setbacks; on lakeshore properties this includes
the 75' setback and the average lakeshore setback. The average lakeshore setback line is
determined by a straight line drawn between the most lakeward structural portions of two
adjacent/neighboring homes. Based on the neighboring home locations, the home on the
subject property is entirely lakeward of the average lakeshore setback line.
The applicants have applied for an average lakeshore setback variance in order to conduct
structural improvements to the upper level on the lake side of their home ahead of the average
lakeshore setback line. The proposal includes construction of a 780 square foot expansion over
the existing garage within the existing footprint of the home. A 6' x 7.5 portion of the new 2 n1
floor area is proposed to bump out over the existing deck, however structural coverage and
hardcover levels will not change.
LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Section 78-330 & 78-1279 - Setbacks:
LR -1B
Required Existing
Proposed
Rear/Street
30' 73'
No change
North Side
10, 38'
No change
South Side
10, 37'
No change
Lakeshore
75' +180'
No Change
Average Lakeshore
The existing home is situated entirely lakeward of the
average lakeshore setback line.
FILE # 17-3927
17 Apr 2017
Page 2 of 5
Section 78-330 - Lot Area/Width:
LR -1B Lot Area Lot Width
Required 43.560 s.f. (1.0 acres) 140'
Actual 55,025 s.f. (1.26 acre) 206' @ 75'/ 235'@ OHWL
Section 78-1403- Structural Cover
Total Lot Area
Total Structural Coverage
55,025 s.f. (1.26 acre)
Allowed: 11,005 s.f. (20%)
Existing: 2,776.6 s.f. (5%)
Note: The Structural Coverage regulations were amended by the City Council on March 13,
2017, raising the limit from 15% to 20% of the lot area.
Section 78-1680 and 78-1700 -Hardcover Calculations:
Stormwater
Total Area in
Allowed
Existing
Proposed
Overlay District
Zone
Hardcover
Hardcover
Hardcover
Tier
13,756 s.f.
4,495 s.f.
4,495 s.f.
Tier 1
55,025 s.f.
(25%)
(8.17%)
(8.17%)
Applicable Regulations:
Variance (Section 78-1279
The entire home on the subject property is situated lakeward of the average lakeshore setback
line as determined by the two adjacent neighboring homes. City Code Section 78-1279 requires
all new structure to be located at or streetward of the average lakeshore setback line. The
applicants' addition is proposed to be constructed over the existing garage, and will encroach no
closer to the lake than the existing home.
Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123)
In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the
proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and
anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger offire, risk to the public safety, and the effect
on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider
recommending approvalfor variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances
where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique
to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is
demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning
Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties
also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems.
Variances shall be granted for earth -sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06,
subd. 2, when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a
variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the
affected person's land is located. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary
use of a one -family dwelling as a two-family dwelling.
FILE # 17-3927
17 Apr 2017
Page 3 of 5
According to MN §462.537 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when:
1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The
requested average lakeshore setback variance is in harmony with the Ordinance as the
properties along the channel generally face the channel frontage and not the lake itself.
Therefore lake views will not be impacted by the proposed addition.
2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variance resulting in a
permit for construction of an addition to the single family residence in a residential zone
are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties.
The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not
permitted by the official controls; The request to permit construction over a
portion of the proposed home lakeward of the average lakeshore setback
appears to be reasonable as the owners of the adjacent properties have stated
that they are not adversely impacted; the entire home on the Property is
located within the average lakeshore setback area; the mature vegetation and
topography separate the Property from the adjacent neighbors.
b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner;
The neighboring home to the north is set back further from the lake than the
applicants' home; the curved channel frontage and the location of the
neighboring homes closer to the rear/street lot line result in the severe average
lakeshore setback applied to the Property; and
c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. It does not
appear that the requested average lakeshore setback variance to permit an
addition over a portion of the home will adversely impact views of the lake
currently enjoyed by the adjacent property owners.
Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be
granted as follows:
4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic
considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination.
5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight
for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth -sheltered construction as
defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter
78. This condition is not applicable.
6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under
Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is
located. This condition is not applicable, as the use for a residence and additions to the
residence are an allowed use in the LR -IB District.
7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one -family dwelling
as a two-family dwelling. This condition is not applicable.
8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such
property or immediately adjoining property. The setbacks of the neighboring homes and
the curved channel shoreline (lake frontage) is not in character with other lakeshore
properties on Forest Lake.
9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which
the land is located. The majority of the homes both to the north and south of the
Property are closer in proximity to the road and are generally in line with each other.
The curvature of the channel shoreline and the location of the lake proper at the
FILE # 17-3927
17 Apr 2017
Page 4 of 5
southern end of the channel are conditions unique to the property and the immediately
adjacent properties.
10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant. The home cannot be expanded in any way
within the setback without variances; the applicant states that the variance is
necessary.
11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort
or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the
requested variances will not adversely impact health, safety, comfort, or morals; nor will
it be contrary to the intent of the Code.
12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but
is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The topography, the channel, and
location of the adjacent home to the north create practical difficulties affecting the
Property; the variances are necessary and not merely serve as a convenience to the
owners.
The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances.
Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the
impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use
permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located.
Septic System Status
The property is served by City sewer.
Practical Difficulties Statement
Applicant has completed the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and
should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application.
Practical Difficulties Analysis
The property fronts on the long channel on the north end of Forest Lake and is disconnected from
the lake proper. The configuration of the property along the channel creates a unique situation
regarding the view. Most of the homes are situated primarily toward the channel. The
neighboring home to the north at 815 Forest Arms Lane is set back further (closer to the road) on
their property than the applicants' home. 815 has little to no direct lake views over the applicants'
property; their home is oriented to the west. The neighbor to the south at 835 Forest Arms Lane
faces southwest toward the channel.
The properties along the lake side of Forest Arms Lane have deep lake yards and the homes are
situated nearer to the street than the lake. The depth of these lake yards combined with the
curvature of the channel shoreline result in difficulty for the property owners in identifying a
conforming location for structural improvements to their properties. Additionally, there are
mature trees separating the applicants' property from their neighbors which will likely screen
most of the views of the addition.
Engineer Comments
There is no grading or site changes proposed; the City Engineer has not reviewed the plans.
FILE # 17-3927
17 Apr 2017
Page 5 of 5
Public Comments
Supportive comments from neighbors have been received; the comments are attached as Exhibit
G.
Issues for Consideration
1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the
property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control?
2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the
essential character of the neighborhood?
3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the
impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)?
4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application?
Planning Staff Recommendation
Planning Staff recommends approval.
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A.
Application
Exhibit B.
Practical Difficulties Documentation Form
Exhibit C.
Survey/Site Plan
Exhibit D.
Proposed Plans and Elevations
Exhibit E.
Submitted Hardcover Calculations
Exhibit F.
Aerial Photos
Exhibit G.
Neighbor Comments
Exhibit H.
Property Owners List
Exhibit /.
Plat Map
AGENDAITEM
Item No.:
Date: May 8, 2017
Item Description: #17-3928, Mike Hart, 2510 Casco Point Road, CUP — Resolution
Presenter: Melanie Curtis Agenda Planning Department
Planner Section: Report
Purpose. This application is regarding a conditional use permit (CUP) for grading and filling
activities.
2. MN§15.99 Application Deadline. The application was received and considered complete on
March 22, 2017. Therefore the 60 -Day review period expires on May 21, 2017.
Background. The applicant is requesting a CUP in order to conduct grading and filling activities
on the property to support the construction of a new residence. They propose fill on the property
to accommodate a first floor garage; the site currently includes a home with a tuck -under garage.
The grading and filling activities will be in excess of 500 cubic yards of material and the property
is located within the Shoreland Overlay District, therefore a CUP is required. The proposed
redevelopment of the property will conform to all applicable zoning regulations; no variances are
requested.
4. Planning Commission Comment. On April 17', the Planning Commission held a public hearing
and reviewed the application. Following the public hearing the Commission voted 6 to 0 on a
motion to approve the CUP with the following conditions:
a. The applicant must comply with the City's and MCVv'D's erosion control regulations.
b. Conformance with the City Engineer's requirements at the time of the building permit.
c. Hauling shall occur during allowed construction hours only Monday through Friday 7 am
to 8 pm (and between 8 am and 8 pm on weekends and holidays).
d. The street swept daily, or as needed, to keep debris off of Casco Point Road.
e. Contractor shall post a contact number and be able to respond to complaints in a timely
fashion.
5. Public Comment. No additional comments from the public were received.
6. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval with the conditions as noted.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to adopt or amend the approval resolution.
Exhibits
Exhibit A.
Draft Resolution
Exhibit B.
Proposed Plans
Exhibit C.
Draft PC Minutes
Exhibit D.
PC Staff Report
Prepared By: YYIGG
Reviewed By: J. Barnhart
Approved By: NZ
AGENDAITEM
References
1) PC Exhibits 041717
Exhibit A.
Application
Exhibit B.
Narrative
Exhibit C.
Proposed Survey/Site Plan
Exhibit D.
Proposed Plans and Elevations
Exhibit E.
Submitted Hardcover Calculations
Exhibit F.
City Engineer Memo
Exhibit G.
Site Photos
Exhibit H.
Property Owners List
Exhibit 1.
Plat Map
Exhibit J.
Neighbor Comments
Prepared By: VY)GG Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By: Nz
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
A RESOLUTION
APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PURSUANTTO
MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTIONS 78-967 AND 78-1286
FILE NO. 17-3928
WHEREAS, on March 22, 2017, Mike Hart (hereinafter the "Applicant"), applied for a
conditional use permit for the property addressed 2510 Casco Point Road and legally described as:
The Northeasterly Half of Lot 4, Block 6, Townsite of Langdon Park, according
to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "Property");
WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a
conditional use permit (hereinafter the "CUP") pursuant to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections
78-967 and 78-1286 to allow grading and filling activities on the Property in excess of 500 cubic
yards of imported material; and
WHEREAS, on April 17, 2017, after published and mailed notice in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, at which
time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to
speak thereon; and
WHEREAS, on April 17, 2017, the Planning Commission recommended approval
of the CUP with conditions; and
WHEREAS, on May 8, 2017, the City Council reviewed the application and the
recommendations of the Planning Commission and City staff;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota
hereby approves the requested CUP as described above based on one or more of the following
findings of fact concerning the Property:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #17-3928. The analysis contained within
staff memos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the above
mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings are
hereby incorporated by reference.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
2. The Property is located in the LR -1C Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District.
3. The Property contains 0.52 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 63 feet.
4. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25% according to the Stormwater
Quality Overlay District.
5. Applicant has applied for the following:
a. Conditional Use Permit for Grading
6. In considering this application for CUP, the Council has considered the advice and
recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed CUP upon
the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions,
light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in
the surrounding area.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ANALYSIS:
The City Council may grant a CUP as the use permit was applied for or in modified form. On the
basis of the application and the evidence submitted, the city finds that the proposed use at the
Property is or will be:
1. Consistent with the community management plan; The intent for the proposed grading is
residential in nature, is consistent with the permitted uses for the property, and is compliant
with the zoning code and comprehensive plan.
2. Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as
required by article V, division 3 of the City Code; The proposed grading is residential in
nature which is consistent with the permitted uses for the Property.
3. Adequately served by police, fire, roads, and stormwater management; This statement is
true.
4. Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system; This statement is
true.
5. Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; This
statement is true.
6. Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is planned
2
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
to be used in the future; This criteria relates to whether the proposed grades resulting from
the earth moment are appropriate and in character with the surrounding land and
neighborhood. The re -grading of the Property will be more in conformance with the
neighborhood and will provide a smoother transition from one property to the next. Once
completed, the grading will have no impact on surrounding lands. The grades, once vegetated
and landscaped should not have an adverse impact on the neighborhood.
7. Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is
called for in the community management plan; The proposed grades will help to facilitate
stormwater runoff down property lines, and not toward adjacent properties as is the current
condition. The proposed grades should not result in a negative impact to neighboring
properties.
8. Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding area,
unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; The
Applicant is proposing to re -grade the Property to facilitate a first floor garage where a tuck
under garage is the existing condition, as well as improve Stormwater management. It is
likely adjacent lakeshore properties will not be impacted. The grading will be reviewed and
monitored closely by the City's engineer to assure that all existing drainage patterns are
maintained and adjacent properties are not adversely impacted.
9. Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area or
have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to the
impairment or impact of generally permitted uses; This standard requires that the proposed
grading and improvements must not substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the
properties in the area or have an adverse impact on the property values in the area when
compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses. The result of the
proposed grading will not change the intended residential use of the Property so there
should be no change in the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties resulting from the
export of fill materials. However, activity of exporting approximately 500 cubic yards of fill
and active grading of the Property can have a temporary adverse impact on neighbors. The
import, and grading work on the Property as well as the forthcoming construction of the
proposed home could result in additional noise, dust, vibration and traffic on the haul routes
and immediate neighbors. To the degree possible, negative impacts should be limited and
mitigated.
10. Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and activities
likely to disturb surrounding uses; The finished grade will be vegetated and landscaped; it
should blend into the Property and the neighboring properties. The project, once
completed, should not result in undesirable views requiring mitigation.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
11. Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise, glare, vibration, odors, fumes, dust,
electrical interference, general unsightliness, or other means; See #9 above.
12. Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that cause a
demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties, traffic congestion, or unsafe access;
The Applicant will be required to keep debris off of the public roadways. The noise resulting
from the trucks hauling and equipment moving the material in and around the site should be
minimized to the extent possible. Casco Point Road is a dead end road. The grading project
will be monitored by the City Engineer and planning staff so as to minimize nuisances during
the project.
13. Designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area and to
minimize environmental impact; This standard requires that the project be designed to
take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area and to minimize
environmental impact. The long term effect of the project should result in minimal
environmental impacts. The project will be monitored by the City, to prevent erosion from
the site.
14. All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the public
right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; There should be no lighting or glare
resulting from the grading project; and
15. Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. The Applicant will be
required to keep debris off of the public roadways. The noise resulting from the trucks
hauling and equipment moving the material in and around the site should be minimized to
the extent possible. Casco Point Road is a dead end road. The grading project will be
monitored by the City Engineer and planning staff so as to minimize nuisances during the
project.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS:
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a
CUP pursuant to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-967 and 78-1286 to allow import of
fill material in excess of 500 cubic yards; subject to the following conditions:
1. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings.
2. The approved project shall conform to the survey dated March 21, 2017 by Carlson
McCain submitted by the Applicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution
as Exhibit A.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
3. The Applicant shall comply with the City's and MCWD's erosion control regulations.
4. The Applicant shall conform to the City Engineer's requirements at the time of the building
permit.
5. Hauling shall occur during allowed construction hours only Monday through Friday 7 am
to 8 prn (and between 8 am and 8 prn on weekends and holidays).
6. The street shall be swept daily, or as needed, to keep debris off of Casco Point Road.
7. Contractor(s) shall post a contact number and be able to respond to complaints in a timely
fashion.
8. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require
further Planning Commission and City Council review.
9. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicant, but are
permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a permit and commencing
construction of said project within one year of the date of Council approval, the conditional
use permit will expire on that date (May 8, 2017).
10. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution may
result in the termination of any authority granted herein.
ATTEST:
ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this 8 1h day of May, 2017.
CITY OF ORONO:
Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor
z
-p -p
<� <�
A
N
77
SITE PLAN
C)
'V
v X %
<
0
% j
MIKE HART
7701 East River Road
McCain
4,/
Fridley, MIN, 55432
11111111111 -1U NG
X,
C'
I �e;P
3890 Pheasant Ridge Dri ve NE,
Orono, Minnesota
Suite 100, Blaine, MIN 55449
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
R
,a
C)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
T;
z
a
-p -p
<� <�
A
N
77
SITE PLAN
C)
'V
v X %
<
0
% j
MIKE HART
7701 East River Road
McCain
4,/
Fridley, MIN, 55432
11111111111 -1U NG
X,
C'
I �e;P
3890 Pheasant Ridge Dri ve NE,
Orono, Minnesota
Suite 100, Blaine, MIN 55449
a
-p -p
<� <�
A
N
77
SITE PLAN
C)
'V
<
0
MIKE HART
a
m 2�
(7�
>
C-- t7-
>
C/)
>
0
n
-p -p
<� <�
A
N
77
SITE PLAN
Carlson
T)
<
MIKE HART
7701 East River Road
McCain
Fridley, MIN, 55432
11111111111 -1U NG
C'
2510 CASCO POINT ROAD
3890 Pheasant Ridge Dri ve NE,
Orono, Minnesota
Suite 100, Blaine, MIN 55449
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
R
,a
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
m 2�
(7�
>
C-- t7-
>
C/)
>
0
n
-p -p
<� <�
SITE PLAN
Carlson
T)
<
MIKE HART
7701 East River Road
McCain
Fridley, MIN, 55432
11111111111 -1U NG
C'
2510 CASCO POINT ROAD
3890 Pheasant Ridge Dri ve NE,
Orono, Minnesota
Suite 100, Blaine, MIN 55449
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
I CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
47
933,9
1934.5
NORTHEASTERLY HALF OF LOT 4, BLOCK 6,
934.4\ -7/
TOWNSITE OF LANGDON PARK,
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
�,342
—.7
'4
PRELIMINARY
A14.4
C�
932 7 A3-
��!3 7
11 1 NV 932.4
�1 933A
8,
93 2
a
1 MBA
e,"
-932 2 e
34.2
l9
5 1- 1z PARCa DESOWP7701V (pa, H p47 C—ty 7b,
Kxl o
The N.,thted, Half of Let 4, 31-1, 6, TOWNSITE OF LANGDON PARK, --ding t. the --ded plat thereof, H—epin County, Ml .t..
�1 7
X,931.7
33 a 01
Ni, —.7 61AWERAL MOMS'
I ) The field work far title su—y we. c—pleted a D—babe, 27th, 2DI6.
.933.7
a"" , lec� 2) 13—inge �ha here .. ... be -tred.
—.2
�3 3) BENCHMARK. Mi ..... t, D,p,,t,,,t of Trcn,o,rt,t1,, Geodetic Monument GSID t,ti,n nnbar 11192, M,DOT BE 7180 El-,tl,, 945,96
7
(NGVD 29)
'e, 4) B ... d.ry �h here., i� L d on . �cy prepared by Sch-11 & Madsen, lac. dated May 19, 1998,
5) Due to ad Mate, .-dit[o,., odifl.nel p --at, may at have been Wble at the time of ,r,,y.
9 9411 6) Sanitary ... c, ad .t,,,,in h n be,,,., a- utdity .—builts p,,,idd by the City of 0—o.
-5 CLR7ZRCA 770v-
-9-2
Z
-A 13 —.4 1 hcreby certify to Mike Hcl'14h" or report prepared by nab or under ray direct supercision and that I am a duly lic—ad load
K an ay.r u, der the — of state to
Dated thi. 21st day of March, 2017,
—s.
TM94 5 �7 FT 7 T S[gned: Carl— McCain,
-94 0
b, 9-1 X D R A F T
By+.
Tham. R. i L.S.
114 1
933 8 Minne..t. Lle.... No. 40361
L
L
�3 —.7 c,'fp 0 a �16
3
B—sluIl
ou
-41.8 +
a',
/ .. 2
*07.5
4
N
y�w'� X `1
-137.. � 11 � 5
I Bw? 7.0
21S.D
-z" X I, -
01A11 I'll
3
936.4 41
s '7 "N" LEGEND
.5
0 - Denotes Found Iron Monument
—a - Denotes Existing Spot Elevation
1161 3.�, 2 '1, Denotes Existing Tree
"N
.7, Denotes Clearout
1 13- Denotes Flog Pole
/< Denotes Gas Meter
1 341 (
Denotes Catch Basin
.9W.4 0 Denotes Electric Meter
Minimum Lowest Floor Elevation: 932.5
Denotes Telephone Box
112c
b
PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATIONS e 4� - Denotes Utility Pole
Lowest Flo 935
or Elevation: .5 - Denotes Flared End Section
Top of Foundation Elevation: 944.2 kj�
el 12 - Denotes Miscellaneous Manhole
933.1.
Garage Slab Elevation (at door): 943.8 1-1 -2
13- - D:not:s 0—head Electric
- D.not.s Stom Sewer
7
- D nots Sanitary Sewer
-23
FP
- Denotes Watermain
- Denotes Exrsting Fence as noted
N
9-5 - Denotes Gr—I Surface
T.tol L�t Aroo ±23,071 �q. ft.
ibr�pd H -Se Are. ±2,556 �q ft. X - Denotes Concrete Surface
1�di g Huuoc, Gnrogc, F—t Stoq,, (:;�' 4 q� at
11-11 .1 932— �2 \ = - Denotes Bituminous Surface
n1 I 1—ol lolol)
Iri,—Y A— R�ght �f W.y Line ±2,547 q. ft.
F _d i t� Aren ±111 �qJt�
1r,,p S d—olk ±452 sq, ft. '-tee - Denotes E.f.ting Contour
Prup—ed Sincil, C- G.rogo
o lo 2o 4o T�tuj J�p ervious ±5,666 �q, ft, - Denotes Proposed Contour
Tot.i Imp-vious C—roge ±24,61-
(5,66 6123,071)
IN FEET - Denotes Tapered Engineered Wall,
unless otherwise noted
M
C CL
00 6'.� Lr'
ILI X
-Immu 22
U --Fa
z
_j UD C) C�
U 'a -O)
Z.(--
wa- a)
x 0 :!:!
Z on =5
0 00 LI) r,
>
z
LU 0
0
z
z
0
_j 0 CE
ull 0 -
0
W) 4 0
L)
0
74
LIM
ru N
0 r)
Ed t :'r;
Lr)
X
LU
LU
0
REVISIONS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
DRAWN BY: WS/Rja
ISSUE DATE: 3/21/17
FILE NO: 1360
C,
of
WPER FLOOR
Top OF
FIRST FLOOR
TOP OF SEFLIQ
--2T CLXAEL
COPYFRIGHT 2016, ALEXANDER E)E5lrN C�ROUI-, INC,
FRONT ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4'-1'-0'
rf'� LEFT ELEVATION
11-u SCALE; 1/4--l'-O'
FIRST FLOM
94FLI!--
51�
COPYRIGHT 201e, ALEXANDrR DESIGN GROUP, INC,
A*=-=-,
MID POW OF
IM40T WK=
*0 T&LEST fwop
LAKE ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4"-1'-0"
RIGHT ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4".I' -C"
LOWER LEVEL PLAN
SCALE: II
41'-21/2'
AL� PATIO �E
PATIO
AL� PATIO EO -
El - - - - - - - - - - - -
"0
1 24--l" L
PATIO
-LA-SCAP_ LAKE �W
�T
----------------
EXEFQSE
-�R
- - - - - - - - - - - - - 0
_j -ITI
(I "TY
MATH #4
OT
zIN
4'
15AR TA�Lll
S�4
I I L
71
5AR
�T
M04/51OR
--t. 00
F
24 -V X 22-"
G'P. w I PAINT
[ F -W V-11 V2' 21' -
COPYRIGHT 2016, ALEXANDER DIESIGN GROUP, INC,
MAIN LEVEL PLAN
SCALE: 1/4" -I' -C"
COPYRIGHT 2016, ALEXANDER DESIGN GROUP, INC,
A2'.O--
MAJ;��UARE FOOTV;E
TOT� (FIN
F.W.
I� L ------- t ------------------- t ------- 1 1
UFFER LEVEL FLAN
SCALE: 1/4" -I' -C"
11-0.
T-0-
COPYRIGHT 2016, ALEXANDER DESIGN GROUP, INC,
9
I
FNT 5QUARE FOOTAGE11
24'-V'
F
I
F��Lj 1
STAIR GARAGE
L'ILL J
<-A-R>
�. p-
I.l. 1. 1.-0. L ill.
COPYRIGHT 2016, ALEXANDER DESIGN GROUP, INC,
DETACHED GARAGE PLANS
ar-ALr:
kE SL-,'
Hjj�'
Millis 011.1
�11 Il6i
1141
wil"I V111PI"
Ll
NIT -- -----------
Bill
low
"Mia
liu�l
Lt
nill,
iw�
L��
77
lo�
0
Loll
obb �
IN
Ado MEN
Adds ONE
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
7. #17-3928 MICHAEL HART, 2510 CASCO POINT ROAD, CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT, 9:05 P.M. — 9:13 P.M.
Michael Hart, Applicant, was present.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit in order to conduct grading and filling
activities on the property to support the construction of a new residence. The applicant proposes to
accommodate a home with a first floor garage. The site currently includes a home with a tuck -under
garage. The grading and filling activities will be in excess of 500 cubic yards of material and the property
is located within the shoreland. Therefore a conditional use permit is required.
The proposed redevelopment of the property will conform to all applicable zoning regulations and no
variances are requested.
Staff provided an analysis of the conditional use permit criteria within the memo and the Planning
Commission can review that criteria tonight.
The applicant is proposing to change the nature of the property to support a different housing style. The
proposed housing style is more in keeping with the immediate neighborhood. To accomplish the desired
house style, the grade must be adjusted to fill the area previously used as driveway for a tuck -under
garage. The proposed home will have a first floor garage elevated above the current grades by
approximately seven feet.
The City Engineer has conducted a review of the preliminary proposed grading plans and a more detailed
review will be performed at the time of the building permit. Additional conditions may be applied at that
time.
Comments from the neighbors have been included in the Commission's packet.
Planning Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit with the following conditions:
The City Engineer and Watershed District shall approve the erosion control plan.
2. The street should be swept daily or as needed to keep debris off of Casco Point Road.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
The applicant must conform to the City's and MCWD's erosion control regulations.
4. Only clean fill is to be imported to the site.
5. Conformance with the City Engineer's requirements at the time of the building permit.
6. Hauling shall occur during allowed construction hours only Monday through Friday 7 a.m. to
8 P.M.
7. The contractor shall post a contact number and able to respond to complaints in a timely
fashion.
The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff.
Michael Hart, Applicant, stated Staff has done a greatjob describing the project and that he can answer
any questions the Planning Commission may have.
Thiesse asked if there is room for drainage on the side to keep the runoff off the neighbor's property.
Hart indicated there is.
Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 9:11 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 9:11 p.m.
Landgraver commented this is a well -reasoned re -use of the property and that he appreciates Staff s
recommendation regarding contractors.
Schwingler moved, Landgraver seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. 17-3928,
Michael Hart, 2510 Casco Point Road, granting of a conditional use permit, subject to the
conditions outlined in Staff's report. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0.
Date Application Received: 03/22/17
Date Application Considered as Complete: 03/22/17
60 -Day Review Period Expires: 05/21/17
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members
Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator
From: Melanie Curtis, Planner YYIGG
Date: 17 April 2017
Subject: #17-3928, Mike Hart, 2510 Casco Point Road,
CUP
Public Hearing
Application Summary: The applicant is a conditional use permit in order to conduct filling and
grading activities within the Shoreland in excess of 500 cubic yards in conjunction with the
construction of a new home.
Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval with conditions.
Background
The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit in order to conduct grading and filling
activities on the property to support the construction of a new residence. They propose fill to
accommodate a first floor garage, the site currently includes a home with a tuck -under garage.
The grading and filling activities will be in excess of 500 cubic yards of material and the property
is located within the Shoreland Overlay District therefore a conditional use permit is required.
The proposed redevelopment of the property will conform to all applicable zoning regulations;
no variances are requested.
Section 78-350 - Lot Area/Width:
LR -1C Lot Area Lot Width
Required 21,780 s.f. (0.5 acres) 100,
Actual 23,071 s.f. (0.52 acre) 63'@ 75'& @ OHWL
Applicable Regulations:
Conditional Use Permit (Section 78-967 and Section 787-1286:
According to the City Code, grading and filling activities exceeding 500 cubic yards conducted on
properties within the Shoreland Overlay District require a CUP. The applicant has proposed
importing approximately SOO cubic yards of material to the property to accomplish the
proposed grading plan for the new home. A CUP is required.
Sec. 78-1286 Topographic alterations/ grading and filling
(d) Except for those projects requiring permits for construction of structures, sewage
treatment systems and driveways, a land alteration permit will be required as follows:
FILE # 17-3928
17 April 2017
Page 2 of 4
(3) For movement of more than 500 cubic yards of material within the Shoreland
Overlay District, conditional use permit approval by the city council is required in
addition to the required land alteration permit.
Conditional Use Permit (Section 78-916)
The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council may grant a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) as the use permit was applied for or in modified form. On the basis of the
application and the evidence submitted, the city must find that the proposed use at the
proposed location is or will be:
1) Consistent with the community management plan; The intent for the proposed
grading is residential in nature, is consistent with the permitted uses for the
property, and is compliant with the zoning code and comprehensive plan.
2) Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as
required by article V, division 3 of the City Code; The proposed grading is residential
in nature which is consistent with the permitted uses for the property.
3) Adequately served by police, fire, roads, and stormwater management; This
statement is true.
4) Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system; This
statement is true.
5) Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; This
statement is true.
6) Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is
planned to be used in the future; This criteria relates to whether the proposed grades
resulting from the earth moment are appropriate and in character with the
surrounding land and neighborhood. Staff believes the re -grading of the property will
be more in conformance with the neighborhood and will provide a smoother
transition from one property to the next. Once completed, the grading will have no
impact on surrounding lands. The grades, once vegetated and landscaped should not
have an adverse impact on the neighborhood.
7) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character
is called for in the community management plan; The proposed grades will help to
facilitate stormwater runoff down property lines, and not toward adjacent
properties as is the current condition. The proposed grades should not result in a
negative impact to neighboring properties.
8) Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding
area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan;
The applicant is proposing to re -grade the property to facilitate a first floor garage
where a tuck under garage is the existing condition, as well as improve Stormwater
management. It is likely adjacent lakeshore properties will not be impacted. The
grading will be reviewed and monitored closely by the City's engineer to assure that
all existing drainage patterns are maintained and adjacent properties are not
adversely impacted.
9) Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the
area or have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when
compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses; This standard
requires that the proposed grading and improvements must not substantially
impair the use and enjoyment of the properties in the area or have an adverse
FILE # 17-3928
17 April 2017
Page 3 of 4
impact on the property values in the area when compared to the impairment or
impact of generally permitted uses. The result of the proposed grading will not
change the intended residential use of the property so there should be no change in
the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties resulting from the export of fill
materials. However, activity of exporting approximately 500 cubic yards of fill and
active grading of the property can have a temporary adverse impact on neighbors.
The import, and grading work on the subject property as well as the forthcoming
construction of the proposed home could result in additional noise, dust, vibration
and traffic on the haul routes and immediate neighbors. To the degree possible,
negative impacts should be limited and mitigated.
10) Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and
activities likely to disturb surrounding uses; The finished grade will be vegetated
and landscaped; it should blend into the property and the neighboring properties.
The project, once completed, should not result in undesirable views requiring
mitigation.
11) Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise, glare, vibration, odors, fumes,
dust, electrical interference, general unsightliness, or other means; see #9 above.
12) Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that
cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties, traffic congestion, or
unsafe access; The applicant will be required to keep debris off of the public
roadways. The noise resulting from the trucks hauling and equipment moving the
material in and around the site should be minimized to the extent possible. Casco
Point Road is a dead end road. The grading project will be monitored by the City
Engineer and planning staff so as to minimize nuisances during the project.
13) Designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area
and to minimize environmental impact; This standard requires that the project be
designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area
and to minimize environmental impact. The long term effect of the project should
result in minimal environmental impacts. The project will be monitored by the City,
to prevent erosion from the site.
14) All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the
public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; There should be no
lighting or glare resulting from the grading project; and
15) Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. See #12
above.
A CUP may be granted subject to such conditions as the Council may prescribe. Additionally,
a CUP shall remain in effect as long as the conditions imposed by the City Council are
observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the city from enacting or amending official
controls to change the status of conditional uses.
Septic System Status
The property is served by City sewer.
Conditional Use Permit Analysis
The applicant is proposing to change the nature of the property to support a different housing
style. The proposed housing style is more in keeping with the immediate neighborhood. To
accomplish the desired house style the grade must be adjusted to fill the area previously used as
FILE # 17-3928
17 April 2017
Page 4 of 4
driveway for a tuck -under garage. The proposed home will have a first floor garage elevated above
the current grades by approximately 7 feet.
Engineer Comments
The City's engineer has conducted a preliminary review of the proposed grading plans; more
detailed review will be performed at the time of the building permit and additional conditions
may be applied at that time.
Public Comments
The public comments received are included as Exhibit J.
Issues for Consideration
1. Does the Planning Commission find that the conditional use permit, if granted, will
not alter the essential character of the neighborhood?
2. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the
impacts created by the granting of the requested conditional use permit?
3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application?
Planning Staff Recommendation
Planning Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit with the following conditions:
1. City engineer and watershed district shall approve the erosion control plan.
2. The street swept daily, or as needed, to keep debris off of Casco Point Road.
3. The applicant must conform to the City's and MCWD's erosion control regulations.
4. Only clean fill to be imported to the site.
5. Conformance with the City Engineer's requirements at the time of the building permit.
6. Hauling shall occur during allowed construction hours only Monday through Friday 7 am
to 8 pm (and between 8 am and 8 pm on weekends and holidays).
7. Contractor shall post a contact number and be able to respond to complaints in a timely
fashion.
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A. Application
Exhibit B.
Narrative
Exhibit C.
Proposed Survey/Site Plan
Exhibit D.
Proposed Plans and Elevations
Exhibit E.
Submitted Hardcover Calculations
Exhibit F.
City Engineer Memo
Exhibit G.
Site Photos
Exhibit H.
Property Owners List
Exhibit /.
Plat Map
Exhibit J.
Neighbor Comments
AGENDAITEM
Item No.:
Date: May 8, 2017
Item Description: #17-3918, Rehkamp Larson o/b/o Bill Toles, 1095 Ferndale Road W,
Variances & CUP — Resolution
Presenter: Melanie Curtis Agenda Planning Department
Planner Section: Report
1. Purpose. This application is regarding variance and conditional use permit (CUP) approvals in
order to develop the property.
2. MN§15.99 Application Deadline. The application was received and considered as complete on
February 22, 2017. A 60 -day extension was taken by the City; therefore the 120 -Day review
period expires on June 22, 2017.
Background. The owner is requesting the following approvals in order to construct a new
residence on the property: lot area, lot width, lake setback, hardcover within the 75 -foot setback,
and average lakeshore setback variances. The owner is also requesting approval of a CUP relating
to the amount of grading in excess of 500 cubic yards, and a conditional use permit to allow
installation of a full bathroom within the proposed detached garage. Similar variances have
previously been approved, and the grading is necessary to elevate the house above the flood
elevation.
4. Planning Commission Comment. On April 17', the Planning Commission held a public hearing
and reviewed the application. Following the public hearing, the Commission voted 6 to 0 in favor
of a motion to approve the requested variances and CUPs.
5. Public Comment. No additional comments from the public were received.
6. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval with the following conditions:
a) The Applicant shall obtain the appropriate permits from the MCWD prior to
commencement of work on the property.
b) The Applicant shall comply with the City's and MCWD's erosion control regulations.
c) The Applicant shall conform to the City Engineer's requirements at the time of the
building permit.
d) Regarding the landscape plan, the Applicant agrees to work with the neighboring
property owner to avoid limiting the light, air, and open space they currently enjoy at
I 10 1 Ferndale Road West Hauling shall occur only during allowed construction hours
only Monday through Friday 7 am to 8 pm (and between 8 am and 8 pm on weekends
and holidays).
e) The street shall be swept daily, or as needed, to keep debris off of Ferndale Road West.
f) Contractor(s) shall post a contact number and be able to respond to complaints in a timely
fashion.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to adopt or amend the approval resolution.
Prepared By: YYIGG
Reviewed By: J. Barnhart
Approved By: Nz
AGENDAITEM
Exhibits
Exhibit A. Draft Resolution
Exhibit B. Proposed Plans
Exhibit C. Draft PC Minutes
Exhibit D. PC Staff Report
References
1) PC Exhibits 04/17/17
Exhibit A.
Application
Exhibit B.
Practical Difficulties Documentation Form
Exhibit C.
Existing Survey
Exhibit D.
Proposed Survey/Site Plan
Exhibit E.
Proposed Building Plans and Elevations
Exhibit F.
Variance Comparison Overlays
Exhibit G.
Floodplain Mitigation Plan
Exhibit H.
Submitted Hardcover Calculations
Exhibit 1.
Aerial Photos
Exhibit J.
Landscape Plans
Exhibit K.
City Code Sections
Exhibit L.
Public Comments Received
Exhibit M.
Resolution Nos. 5872, 6038, 6152, 6463, & 6679
Exhibit N.
60 -Day Extension Letter
Exhibit 0.
Property Owners List
Exhibit P.
Plat Map
Prepared By: YYIGG Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By: Nz
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
A RESOLUTION
APPROVING VARIANCES FROM
MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTIONS 78-305; 78-1279; and 78-1680
AND
GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
PURSUANT TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTIONS 78-967; 78-1126; 78-1286; AND 78-1437
FILE NO. 17-3918
WHEREAS, on February 22, 2017, Rehkamp Larson Architects, Inc. (hereinafter the
"Applicant"), on behalf of the property owner William M. Toles, a single person (hereinafter the
"Owner"), applied for variances and conditional use permits from the City Code for the property
addressed 1095 Ferndale Road West and legally described as:
All that part of Lot 9, North Shore Cottage Acres Lake Minnetonka, lying
Southeasterly of the Southeasterly lines of Registered Land Survey No. 441
and Registered Land Survey No. 902, and lying Northwesterly of the
Northwesterly line of Registered Land Survey No. 1372, Hennepin County,
Minnesota;
Subject to perpetual easements for sanitary sewer purposes in favor of the City
of Orono over that part of the above land as specifically described in Hennepin
County Recorder Document No. 4608875 and in Hennepin County Recorder
Document No. 4608876;
Per Certificate of Title Number 1120830 (hereinafter the "Property");
WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for variances
from Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-305 to allow development of the Property which
has 1.27 acres in area and 176 feet of width at the ordinary high water level (hereinafter the
"OHWL") and 180 feet at the 75 -foot setback where 2.0 acres and 200 feet of width are required;
and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for variances
from Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow construction of a new residence
lakeward of the average lakeshore setback and within the 75 -foot setback where no structure is
permitted; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance
from Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1680 to allow 2,386 square feet of hardcover
consisting of structural and non-structural improvements within the 75 -foot setback where no
hardcover is permitted; and
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a
conditional use permit pursuant to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1437 to allow the
installation of plumbing consisting of a bathroom with bathing facilities within a detached
accessory garage; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a
conditional use permit pursuant to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-967 and 78-1126
to permit grading and filling on the property in excess of 500 cubic yards for mitigation of areas
below the 1 % annual chance floodplain in order to develop the property; and
WHEREAS, on April 17, 2017, after published and mailed notice in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, at which
time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to
speak thereon; and
WHEREAS, on April 17, 2017, the Planning Commission recommended approval
of the variances and conditional use permits; and
WHEREAS, on May 8, 2017, the City Council reviewed the application and the
recommendations of the Planning Commission and City staff; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota
hereby approves the requested variances and conditional use permits as described above based
on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning the Property:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #17-3918. The analysis contained within
staff memos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the above
mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings are
hereby incorporated by reference.
2. The Property is located in the LR -1A Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District.
3. The Property contains 1.27 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 176 feet of width
at the OHWL and 180 feet at the 75 -foot setback.
4. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25% according to the Stormwater
Quality Overlay District.
5. Applicant has applied for the following variances:
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
a. Lot Area Variance;
b. Lot Width Variance;
c. Variance for Hardcover within the 75 -foot setback;
d. Lake Setback Variance; and
e. Average Lakeshore Setback Variance.
6. In considering this application for variances and conditional use permits, the Council has
considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of
the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and
anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the
effect on values of property in the surrounding area.
VARIANCE ANALYSIS:
1. "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of the ordinance. . . ." The lot width and area variances requested are consistent
with the general intent of the Ordinance. The requested average lakeshore setback
variances is in harmony with the Ordinance as the lake views enjoyed by the adjacent
neighbors will not be impacted by the new home. The lake setback and hardcover
variances are reasonable and necessary as the highest points of the Property for
construction of the home above the 1% annual chance floodplain are located toward the
lake.
2. "Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the
comprehensive plan." The variances resulting in a permit for construction of a single family
residence in a residential zone are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
3. "Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are
practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. 'Practical difficulties,' as used in
connection with the granting of a variance, means that:
a. The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner,
however, the proposed use is not permitted by the official controls.
The request to permit construction of portions of the proposed home lakeward of
the average lakeshore setback appears to be reasonable as the owners of the
adjacent properties have stated that they are not adversely impacted; the existing
tree stands, proposed landscape plan and curved shoreline create separation of
the Property from the adjacent neighbors.
b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created
by the landowner.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
The presence of the 1% annual chance floodplain on the Property creates
increased difficulties in locating a conforming building location. The new house will
be properly elevated out of the floodplain. The sub -standard size of the Property
was not the result of actions by the landowner. The neighboring homes are
oriented toward the lake away from the Property.
c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. "
The lot area and width variances will not alter the character of the neighborhood;
a home previously existed on the Property. It does not appear that the requested
variance to permit portions of the new home and terraces lakeward of the average
lakeshore setback will adversely impact views of the lake currently enjoyed by the
adjacent property owners. The lake setback and hardcover variances are
reasonable and necessary as the highest points of the Property for construction of
the home above the 1 % annual chance floodplain are located toward the lake. The
hardcover is mitigated by the proposed landscape plan for the Property.
4. "Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties." Economic
considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination.
5. "Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight
for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth -sheltered construction as
defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter
78." This condition is not applicable.
6. "The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under
Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is
located." This condition is not applicable, as the use for a residence is an allowed use in
the LR -1A District.
7. "The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one -family dwelling
as a two-family dwelling." This condition is not applicable.
8. "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such
property or immediately adjoining property." The substandard lot width and area of the
Property are not uncommon in the surrounding neighborhood. The presence of the 1%
annual chance floodplain on the Property creates increased difficulties which drive the
building pad location and improvements toward the lake.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the
land is located." The property to the east has a higher grade than the Property. The two
properties to the west have similar floodplain challenges.
10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant." Granting the requested variances will provide
relief to the applicant regarding the lot size and floodplain on the Property.
11. "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or
morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter." Granting the
requested variances will not adversely impact health, safety, comfort, or morals; nor will it
be contrary to the intent of the Code.
12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but
is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty." The size of the Property; the
flood plain/topog raphy create practical difficulties affecting the Property; the variances
are necessary and not merely serve as a convenience to the owners.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ANALYSIS:
The City Council may grant a conditional use permit on the basis of the application and the
evidence submitted, the city must find that the proposed use at the proposed location is or will
be:
1 . Consistent with the community management plan; The bathroom within an accessory
building and the proposed grading to elevate the home and portions of the Property
above the 1 % annual chance floodplain is residential in nature, are both consistent with
the permitted uses for the Property, and is compliant with the zoning code and
comprehensive plan.
2. Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as
required by article V, division 3 of the City Code; The detached garage where the
bathroom will be located will be otherwise conforming in location, and height on the
Property. The proposed grading is residential in nature which is consistent with the
permitted uses for the Property.
3. Adequately served by police, fire, roads, and stormwater management; The proposed
use will be adequately served by existing services and facilities.
4. Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system; This
statement is true; the proposed detached garage with plumbing will be connected to
City sewer and private well.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
5. Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; Staff
believes this criterion is met.
6. Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is
planned to be used in the future; The import of and movement of fill material and re-
grading of the Property, once completed, will have no impact on surrounding lands.
The grades, once vegetated and landscaped should not have an adverse impact on
the neighborhood or the lake. The detached garage will be residential in character and
its use is expected to be compatible with the surrounding area.
7. Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character
is called for in the community management plan; The detached garage will have a
residential visual character in keeping with the proposed home and is expected to be
compatible with the surrounding area. The proposed grading activity will help to slow
runoff from leaving the Property and impacting neighboring properties. The floodplain
mitigation proposed will not result in a negative impact to neighboring properties or the
lake.
8. Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding
area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan;
The Applicant is proposing to substantially regrade the Property to mitigate filled
floodplain areas for the building site as well as facilitate better stormwater
management. It is likely adjacent lakeshore properties will not be impacted. The
grading will be reviewed and monitored closely by the City's engineer and MCWD
staff to assure that proper grading is conducted and that adjacent properties and the
lake are not adversely impacted. The architectural styling of the detached garage will
be residential in character and consistent with that of the proposed home on the
Property.
9. Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area
or have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when
compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses; The use of the
detached garage for garage storage and as a personal yoga studio is not expected to
have any adverse impacts. No information has been presented to indicate such. The
temporary grading and construction activity may impact neighboring properties, but
sustained impacts are not expected. To the degree possible, negative impacts should
be limited and mitigated.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
10. Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and
activities likely to disturb surrounding uses; The finished grade will be vegetated and
landscaped; it should blend into the Property. The project, once completed, should
not result in undesirable views requiring mitigation.
11. Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise, glare, vibration, odors, fumes,
dust, electrical interference, general unsightliness, or other means; There should be
no change in the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties resulting from the import
of fill materials and grading. However, activity of importing approximately 1,200 cubic
yards of fill and active grading of the Property can have a temporary adverse impact
on neighbors. The grading work on the Property as well as the further construction of
the residence could result in noise, dust, vibration and traffic on the haul routes and
immediate neighbors. To the degree possible, negative impacts should be limited and
mitigated. The proposed detached garage with plumbing is not expected to cause any
of these undesirable impacts.
12. Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that
cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties, traffic congestion, or
unsafe access; The Applicant will be required to keep debris off of the public
roadways. The noise resulting from the trucks hauling and equipment moving the
material in and around the site should be minimized to the extent possible. The
grading project will be monitored by the MCWD, the City Engineer, and planning staff
so as to minimize nuisances during the project. It is anticipated that the proposed
detached garage with plumbing will not generate any of these undesirable issues.
13. Designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area and
to minimize environmental impact; The proposed detached garage with plumbing will
not affect these features or have a negative environmental impact. The project is
being designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the
area and to minimize environmental impact. The long term effect of the project should
result in minimal environmental impacts. The project will be monitored by the City to
prevent erosion from the site.
14. All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the
public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; There should be no
lighting or glare resulting from the grading project; the applicant shall be advised of
the lighting requirement regarding the home and detached garage; and
15. Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. The Applicant
will be required to keep debris off of the public roadways. The noise resulting from the
trucks hauling and equipment moving the material in and around the site should be
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
minimized to the extent possible. The grading project will be monitored by the MCWD,
the City Engineer and planning staff so as to minimize nuisances during the project.
Staff believes this criterion is met.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS:
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants the
following:
• Variances from Section 78-305 to allow development of the Property which has 1.27 acres
in area and 176 feet of width at the OHWL and 180 feet at the 75 -foot setback where 2.0
acres and 200 feet of width are required;
• Variances from Section 78-1279 to allow construction of a new residence lakeward of the
average lakeshore setback and within the 75 -foot setback where no structure is permitted;
• A variance from Section 78-1680 to allow 2,386 square feet of hardcover consisting of
structural and non-structural improvements within the 75 -foot setback where no hardcover
is permitted;
• A conditional use permit pursuant to Section 78-1437 to allow the installation of plumbing
consisting of a bathroom with bathing facilities within a detached accessory garage; and
• A conditional use permit pursuant to Sections 78-967 and 78-1126 to permit grading and
filling on the property in excess of 500 cubic yards of disturbance for mitigation of areas
below the 1 % annual chance floodplain in order to develop the property.
Subject to the following conditions:
1. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings.
2. The approved project shall conform to the survey by Cornerstone Land Surveying, Inc.,
dated 04/06/17; civil plans by Pierce Pini & Associates dated 04/06/17; building plans by
Rehkamp Larson Architects, Inc., dated 04/06/17; and landscape plans by Travis Van
Liere Studio dated 04/06/17 referenced collectively as The Plans as submitted by the
Applicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibits A, B, C &
D.
3. The Applicant shall obtain the appropriate permits from the MCWD prior to
commencement of work on the Property.
4. The Applicant shall comply with the City's and MCWID's erosion control regulations.
5. The Applicant shall conform to the City Engineer's requirements at the time of the building
permit.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
6. Regarding the landscape plan, the Applicant agrees to work with the neighboring property
owner to avoid limiting the light, air, and open space they currently enjoy at 1101 Ferndale
Road West.
7. Hauling shall occur during allowed construction hours only Monday through Friday 7 am
to 8 pm (and between 8 am and 8 pm on weekends and holidays).
8. The street shall be swept daily, or as needed, to keep debris off of Ferndale Road West.
9. Contractor(s) shall post a contact number and be able to respond to complaints in a timely
fashion.
10. Any amendments to The Plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require
further Planning Commission and City Council review.
11. The Owner agrees to a covenant recorded against the title of the Property providing that
the accessory building will not be:
a) Used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the city or if
allowed by this Code.
b) Used as a dwelling unless a guest house conditional use permit is obtained.
c) Rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any
circumstances.
12. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Owner, but are
permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new
construction and commencing construction of said project. A framing inspection must be
completed within one year of the date of Council approval, or the approvals will expire on
that date (May 8, 2018).
13. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution may
result in the termination of any authority granted herein.
14. The undersigned Owner has read, understands and hereby agrees to the terms of this
resolution and on behalf of the Owner and the Owner's heirs, successors and assigns,
hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the Property.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this 811 day of May, 2017.
ATTEST:
CITY OF ORONO:
Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor
10
William M. Toles, Property Owner
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.
This instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of 20_, b
William M. Toles, a single person.
Notary Public
11
'Ilk
z
� -,'- 3- ;- �-- 9 �', ;�, -, � 4"; �--, t = - i� 6
9�6 ,
z
p z
>*
FE 0
p
1p
ZIPP M. _ P
z =1
o
0
41/
-------------
'4
>
0 1-0
z, z.
Wz
'o, A is
z
!2 z; z. zo
abb
o.
z�
.0 < > > < >
B E
0
=1 g >
z
PIM.HH-TH I zz z q P
z
lock
> z.
p:� -. -. u 3
z,
z
Ol
N
H9
z.
s, ��O 6 R o-
--z
�q,p 05, z
A
VH
>zm
o
z
< > n < < < > < > < < >
z 0 0
X
-0 3 9z 10
X r8 flw Fz E <
0
z
z> ;0 * R
A 0 0 0 z
z 0 - r .
m m > 0 Z n
< n
Z
0 ES
Ln
E!
g z z, zm
C=
A
rn 'z
0
0
0
El
INN-[
Pi
05, W� 000000
1�21
xxzzzc)
cl-,: lc-�' tzzj
o o o o o
m m t-1 t-1 M
i4 �4 2 2
00000
r) 0
0 �4
>
0 2� .3
0
I oR,
Noo-
W,
19-
- " L
-00
11
12
,p I !�. H
ID
Z
c
00
0
0 z
CD U
INN-[
Pi
05, W� 000000
1�21
xxzzzc)
cl-,: lc-�' tzzj
o o o o o
m m t-1 t-1 M
i4 �4 2 2
00000
r) 0
0 �4
>
0 2� .3
0
I oR,
Noo-
W,
19-
- " L
-00
11
12
,p I !�. H
onjus is "n H -M imm Hi 1" nor -up gHH! logo P 3: U 1H Im UHUH in: p
5"ISH
W.Rep 91 NN, 9-9, "M noun 2
HUM RI 0-
.1 R.Nm Og� 'mog M. 95
I" "y — . 1.
aiOp Mjp gn It AN 64" "Wo ON Sp! WH A q. NQ MP
E H.g.g o9i -�O ISM on! H Rom vvy"HIS pop W
EE 5� P.�J59v- mo.
MPH
A52 'M -1 �gj!g J"
HH� �n .-
f–py – �u jjjh� , 0
, R
OHM a nO. M- a, E
Hia. H O -R, H_ finaN rd 'Wn H
Hqu q 9 " gmn REP j HUY, i
NMI
H I
P N
I HUM,
0" 21 H "i So 1HU HHHHOUH in uu-H !HM2 �-.g
H H 1H 4 HHH–m-p— 1, HUNH MMI UN
H go H. no"Im HHMHHM 1H NgHlfi ungg quill- RPM 1 1 OHM
" " "I - I"" H "I"NOW1
M H H HS H NO W H ; - H 1P RUN 'HBO; U1412 mum""! 1p
WH
H1jHHjHIR9r----- 0W
Ham
PUNY
�fl E�IoO. WIN im.
MOONo.
W
-a"s IMI–S. gn HW IMN HM -1 –"nng –H- unpul inn 1UHH OMIHH ng
20 9 E -' 'I ' W, a a HH, N 01 RHYNH HH11 up
HIM= SO was 51 QQ01 10v� A.H. �
iuN GYPH E ill" how" up; W49 1.00 Mao DOM ip
-WA 3W MAH HM94 H5
2,09wR
SHW 4
RUN 1NN" "W!" 1g.
RnHyn= IR
RM, -O ". my � an _Mul
WIN -1PIPUR j4H yaw, vq�q gympy qm� son W"
Nwi THP "Plu own vri g
H5 i
UH
RIB NJ! M I= Nang won WIP
I MUM NO 1H -
uR H H
n PH I HIS on IN
our 1,
mnl�i
10 to 0
loin i
WIN!
r) M
OR
win
MMU
�Jji
-. >
ZZ
c
0
HI
0
"on
�ipr
"17
It I -
>
k./) M
ID
r) 9"
r)
Co ID
E�
0
CD
Iff 00
P4
on
sm
FIR
V ID
hqgio
mm
rn
11 Ell
I aE A
OT
m
0
ID
Ila
c
z
00,
zzloo
p
z, -j Z
rri
U,
Ila
zzloo
z, -j Z
rri
U,
Ila
z, -j Z
rri
U,
x
q M W S 5H HS D
F q
W;
f
HHAIA"� T� G �5- P'. IWARHENH
ONO
g
N --,.! 4 P-9
A0.
V Mg!
-W -8,� OP PP
p I; I N
fi.---0 Us'
HAM -R.
E, 190 Mg M P 5 22 , _§
Offf ;1 ffi
uln
Am N
MX� 4 A -�!R 5 Nqi pm
1.8
H
A 24 1 nN8
3 g -a
�O --- A
6 ual COE"
Rau
2E -
pp 'g
15
M;
N 1-2 H
'0
2- gp p..
g �
-E-E� — h . - -
-,jg
MU 0 M- H
M8HOW RN2 N N, H. -a
'01
E'� 0,4_q W -A
OTj �Il u; -Alp an 0.
�4 K �n J
ME W -D
A MH s-.- -
w
U7 5�i
U 39� M
� A i w—U A -F
Uh --2 Oz- X -M. AN
PT�
Np� W, H, 22
H
�-; I
Hn A -Z
P 4f�,u-
qx�
-H, jpPMEM
MW
voz- 42 2.�
A
-24. Nop E
"R, _5 tE - -M, w
I 'N
N, 6 ah 4 T
Han I N
M �---T-
n
W
21 2;0y
'N N
61. so
2 1
4 A 4�4 -2 SEA
u Ng
T, o�� R.m -!XN. AR'n SpI �up 2nvix H ff Hls� yg� V�; I
-22
H ml . .... . h
�2!2 -Iff �R�Vz — ffi'.M--.,-�-- P.M.55-H
Wo -'N - M.
U9 2 4� �A R'R "M R
'�OA �W- -M " o'n
M
'W Anan AE
5. - A��j
x L- 2 op w
H 19M. q HA
MM
GH
W p6A -Wu� 0- A-3
W gg
E
-ERA
9 ft ;z
2. n R. 04_�2�
u --2 UAI.
qN'.'
, '09 H 1 p.-
�z
T"
R�. ix,
6A
RA, %
N
P-9 --a
2 2 xj�4� q8
Alma 2,
H
2 >
r)
ID
J-41
r) M
Z,
ID
0) P
M
w , >
0
ID
ig
Fo
E
"'A
� A
OX
c
1
z
-,,0
rri
0-38
sm
I
N -H
ID
HI
)-
I. D
H n
I
0
�g
4 T'.
h� MA
T
v A
0 M
>
qh!
>
4
ANA
64
p ilt
i-
M�- 2
g
C--.
Z9 4-
0.
o 41,
t74
M
IS
R 4
P,
u
�g
< My
ID
V) m
51
C) r)
A r) m
z --i
>
P4
PH6101
gill 0
j zj
I'M
Jill
91
cn
__1
0 -111H Ill
it I
jp
H
CM
0
:E
z
Cf)
0
so
c
1 D ilk
C) T
Ll
Cf)
:13
W i
�NNRW'Yflg
608A1 '
1 G 0
1 �.
1�2 10;
Ha
ME,
mm
Melillo
m
ligillillo
r)
11111111110
111111111111mm
HWI
111111
111111111110121
1111111111m
1�2 10;
Ha
ME,
mm
m
Z Z
51
r)
C)
HWI
0
CD
�mo
v 9
�f —opp%-
'.4 7. qm F'z-'� p
Hl'-2�'Nm-p Mpp�!�—
, D8'HmM- 96M '<
c o I I z o
"c
o
�5 � I i � 9 � I I I � F, . p
I z pm K PT
b h,
mz1z
z 10.1omo,
om o�K
M
o
z
F
z.
VARIANCE SET - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
m
—4
80
co r—
cn M
n cn
0 (D
0 >
K Z
z
cn 0 cn
CL
* m
(D Cn
m
z
0
m
; 1.
2 2
>
z I
g
c)
C)
Toles Daniels New House REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.
1095 Ferndale Road West 2732 West 43rd Street, Mpls, MIN 55410
Orono, MIN 55391 Tel. 612-285-7275 Fax. 612-285-7274
A P
g g
1, .
M�q
1
8
mm
M,
p
000
P.
�mo
v 9
�f —opp%-
'.4 7. qm F'z-'� p
Hl'-2�'Nm-p Mpp�!�—
, D8'HmM- 96M '<
c o I I z o
"c
o
�5 � I i � 9 � I I I � F, . p
I z pm K PT
b h,
mz1z
z 10.1omo,
om o�K
M
o
z
F
z.
VARIANCE SET - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
m
—4
80
co r—
cn M
n cn
0 (D
0 >
K Z
z
cn 0 cn
CL
* m
(D Cn
m
z
0
m
; 1.
2 2
>
z I
g
c)
C)
Toles Daniels New House REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.
1095 Ferndale Road West 2732 West 43rd Street, Mpls, MIN 55410
Orono, MIN 55391 Tel. 612-285-7275 Fax. 612-285-7274
- >r Toles Daniels New House REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.
0
1 22 1095 Ferndale Road West
02 2732 West 43rd Street, Mpls, MN 55410
Orono, MN 55391
Tel. 612-285-7275 Fax. 612-285-7274
' m
03 CA
0
>
0
X
----------- --- -------
z
710
E: =! 0
Z < In
m
m m —i
U)
G) Mm
>
M'a 0
Z
ILL", ML
-- - ---------
--------------------
q�
I L
I
-----------
-------
---- ---- -- -------
------
---- -------
K
>9
-- --------
Z
m
m
0
0
7
11 --- --------
4
M------
------------
i
cl
z
m r.
q 0 en
03 ;1 m
6�
> c:: 0
0 z X
m m m
VARIANCE SET - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
- >r Toles Daniels New House REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.
0
1 22 1095 Ferndale Road West
02 2732 West 43rd Street, Mpls, MN 55410
Orono, MN 55391
Tel. 612-285-7275 Fax. 612-285-7274
VARIANCE SI
>
0 z
z
�Mp LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.
Toles Daniels New House REH
1095 Ferndale Road West 2732 We.' 43rd Street, Mps, MN 55410
Orono, MN 55391 Tel 612-285-7275 Fax. 612-285-7274
; 1.
2
�Mp LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.
Toles Daniels New House REH
1095 Ferndale Road West 2732 We.' 43rd Street, Mps, MN 55410
Orono, MN 55391 Tel 612-285-7275 Fax. 612-285-7274
a
VARIANCE S
0 >
0 M
2 2 Toles Daniels New House REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.
1095 Ferndale Road West 2732 West 43rd Street, Mpls, MN 55410
Orono, MN 55391 Tel. 612-285-7275 Fax. 612-285-7274
�ml
M
cn
--1
m
m
<
>
0
11 IZ
VARIANCE SET - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
2 2
>
00
Z m
0
I
IN Mal
MEE
mom
mom
0
MEMO
011 W:
FEMEM-1
Immmm,
>
0
- 'z
> 0
1>
Toles Daniels New House REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.
1095 Ferndale Road West 2732 West 43rd Street, Mpls, MN 55410
Orono, IVIN 55391 Tel. 612-285-7275 Fax. 612-285-7274
'R
F
RM
p >
ch
N M
r
m
I
I
0
m-2
o
I
2 2
00
zm
0
Toles Daniels New House REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.
1095 Ferndale Road West 2732 West 43rd Street, I MN 55410
Orono, MN 55391 Tel. 612-285-7275 Fax. 612-285-7274
X
1 90
-F-
o
>
M
m
9
IM
0
z
ft
L -1
VARIANCE SET - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
I
2 2
00
zm
0
Toles Daniels New House REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.
1095 Ferndale Road West 2732 West 43rd Street, I MN 55410
Orono, MN 55391 Tel. 612-285-7275 Fax. 612-285-7274
z
5.0
K -n -( -1 0
0 OX m
U) X 0
1 2: -0 0
;0 0 0 c/)
m c: U) m
U) U) m
imo
03 0 0
rj)
mmm U)
U) X - m
Mod
q C ;0
co U) >
>MZ
0 (7)
X m
U M m
r Z o
>mc
z U)
m �
M
M K
M>0
0 CO) X
L/) m
Z -U
> G);o
zom
M -n U)
.. m
> a:
0 0
0 c:
K U)
co m 0
2 * z
> > 0
-i u) -n
5 G) m -n
Z�o 0
oza X
n --j U)
-i m m
X 0
M --I X c:
-4 a: x cn
> m m
--I Z
> m
7 >
M;0
U) 0
50M
m 0 c)
U) < C
MMM
--I X U)
ca 90 --1
.P U) z
0
M
A >
90 ca
> M
0 >
M X;0
> <
< >
mXo
x �; <
> Z m
Q OX
M M 90
U)
;rN
m c) cl)
ct) C) >
:r CD 0
0 X
X <
m >
U) ;0
m >
---1 z
co 0
> M
0
m —i
U) m
m > I
0,
0
U) z <
m m m
VARIANCE SET - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
j 2
z 11 � q
z 22
G)
W —
>
M
cf)
A
z 0
m -4
m
-n
0
X
-17
0
c
cf)
m
90
-0
70
0
U
0
cf)
m
0
cf)
m
K
0
cn cn
m --I
I I
co m
0 >
z <
m m
Toles Daniels New House
1095 Ferndale Road West
Orono, MN 55391
0
a
0
cn
m
0
c
co
m
REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.
2732 West 43rd Street, Mpls, MN 55410
Tel. 612-285-7275 Fax. 612-285-7274
VARIANCE SET - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
02
00
2
Toles Daniels New House REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.
1095 Ferndale Road West 2732 West 43rd Street, Mpls, MN 55410
Orono, MN 55391 5 Tel. 612-285-7275 Fax. 612-285-7274
'0
M
m
z
M
9 M
>
0
9 z
VARIANCE SET - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
�0
m
z
'0
m
m
0
4z
o
M
:i 0)
m
r
m
- M
0
Z
9
Toles Daniels New House REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC.
1095 Ferndale Road West 2732 West 43rd Street, Mpls, MN 55410
Orono, MN 55391 5 Tel. 612-285-7275 Fax. 612-285-7274
m
9-0
F -
iL
n
m o 5i
Z
> �o
NO
z IN � , , 11
no
7 9, iz-
no
z
0 >
WHIM
0?,31! MD
'4j)
M2
Ul
Up
El El M El
0
H,
N
iL
n
m o 5i
Z
> �o
NO
z IN � , , 11
no
7 9, iz-
no
z
0 >
WHIM
0?,31! MD
1 z
40
Cf)
C)
M
1 11 11 H 1
n 11H 11 H141HI
ham,
CD
T
(_x,
W
1p
Eel,
El E] 0 0
1 11 11 H 1
n 11H 11 H141HI
ham,
CD
G)Soeeq
T
(_x,
W
1p
El E] 0 0
INN
HHU
1
H.
lou"
Hjq
p
I
Iq
M
0�
3>
5,
G)Soeeq
T
(_x,
W
El E] 0 0
INN
FOUN
,RON
(1,2
PROP
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
All that part of Lot 9, North Shore Cottage Acres Lake FERNDALE ROAD RESIDENCE
Minnetonka, lying Southeasterly of the Southeasterly lines of
Registered Land Survey No. 441 and Registered Land Survey
No. 902, and lying Northwesterly of the Northwesterly line of
Registered Land Survey No. 1372. ORONO, MINNESOTA
Subject to perpetual easements for sanitary sewer purposes
in favor of the City of Orono over that part of the above land
as specifically described in Hennepin County Recorder
Document No. 4608875 and in Hennepin County Recorder
Document No. 4608876.
Per Certificate ofTitle Number 1120830
AREA: CONTACT:
PARCEL AREA (TO OHW) 55,423 SQ. FT. - 1.27 ACRES TRAVIS VAN LIERE
TVLS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
211 IST STREET NORTH #350
MIN N EAPOLIS, MIN 55406
TITLE NOTES: PHONE: 612.760.094
EMAIL: travis@tvistudio.com
1. Variances per conditional use permit per Doc. No. T4992780.
SURVEY
COUNTY/CITY:
BENCHMARKS
Ill Ill I—= F- I r1Jl
ELEVATIONS BASED ON INFORMATION AS SHOWN ON THE M NDOT
GEODETIC WEBSITE. SURVEY DISK DARUS MN053 WITH AN
ELEVATION OF 941,44 WAS USED TO ESTABLISH VERTICAL
CONTROL FOR THIS SURVEY (NAVD 88)
<=>
ZONING:
ZONING=LR-I A LAKESHORE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT
SURVEY NOTES:
REVISIONS7
1. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON COORDINATES SUPPLIED BY THE
DATE REVISION
HENNEPI N COUNTY SURVEYORS OFFICE.
10-19-15 INITIAL ISSUE
2. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN PER GOPHER ONE LOCATES AND
10-27-15 AREA/SETBACKS
PREVIOUS SURVEY PROVIDED BY THE OWNER. THERE MAY SOME
02-22-17 UPDATE 4 VAR. SUBM
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, GAS, ELECTRIC, ETC. NOT SHOWN OR
LOCATED.
3 . THIS SURVEY 15 HAS RELIED UPON A SURVEY BY GRONBERG &
ASSOCIATES , INC DATED 10 /31/12 FOR PRE-DEMOUSION
INFORMATION AND PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION OF PROPERTY
BOUNDARIES.
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOTES:
CERTIFICATION:
THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN HAVE BEEN LOCATED FROM
I h,rby,,nifvthM thi, pl,, — p,,p d by
FIELD SURVEY INFORMATION AND EXISTING DRAWINGS. THE
me, or under my dire—up—m-, nd thm I m
SURVEYOR MAKES NO GUARANTEE THAT THE UNDERGROUND
, duly UC—ed L,rd Su,,y,, under th, 1— of
UTILITIES SHOWN COMPROMISE ALL SUCH UTILITIES IN THE AREA,
tho—t—fMinno—
EITHER IN SERVICE OR ABANDONED. THE SURVEYOR FURTHER
DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN
ARE IN THE EXACT LOCATION INDICATED ALTHOUGH HE DOES
CERTIFY THAT THEY ARE LOCATED AS ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE
D.mIl L. Th.mm, Rogi--V,..b- 2S71 i
FROM THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE. THIS SURVEY HAS NOT
'ate: 10- 19-15
PHYSICALLY LOCATED THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. GOPHER
STATE ONE CALL LOCATE TICKET NUMBER(S) 152741934 SOME
MAPS WERE RECEIVED, WHILE OTHER UTILITIES DID NOT RESPOND
TO THE LOCATE REQUEST. ADDITIONAL UTILITIES OF WHICH WE
ARE UNAWARE MAY EXIST.
Gopher State One Call
—NCNFY REA 651-454-0002
LmLLNREE. 1-800-252-1166
PROJECT LOCATION:
—I C) III S
FERNDALE ROAD W.
PID#0211 723430023
LEGEND:
0 1111—u— IRI De". 1*111-01
—T
C"LE � PICIII" &
A I _om..IR
noll-1-11—
b—c—c-L
Suite #
Suite #'
+
6750 Stillwater Blvd. N.
SO St' "Wate Blvd N
'wat' I, M N 5, 082
Stillwater, MN 55082
Ph 2rC7
I S � ig
Phone 651.275.8969
- 6 '9'
I FFIC 11-
Fax 651.275.8976
Clang
ssu _e'
C) 1 11— IPCT E--
=�ONE
Le5
net
M ANHOU
=R�
0 IN
A, DE—L—E
0
+
U—RoCno—
UnI—R.CNICAILEI
UNC-RCCN.11—o—
CORNERSTONE
C—A-11
LAND SURVEYING, INC.
UNI—RCCN.—
=I— =.IAIER
FILE NAME SURVSTR36
PROJECT NO. STR15036
—CA.
—nn.
BOUNDARY/TOPOGRAPHIC
SURVEY
EXISTING HARD COVER AREA KEY: PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
FERNDALE ROAD RESIDENCE
All that pan of Lot 9, North Shore Cottage Acres Lake
GARAGE FLOOR 935.0
MAIN FLOOR 935.0 Minnetonka, lying Southeasterly ofthe Southeasterly lines of
0o DETACHED GARAGE 934.0 Registered Land Survey No. 441 and Registered Land Survey
No. 902, and lying Northwesterly ofthe Northwesterly line of
ORONO, MINNESOTA
NORTH ELEVATIONS BY OTHERS (SEE ARCHITECTURE AND Registered Land Survey No. 1372.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PLANS FOR DETAILS.
0 so 'PROPOSED BUILDING PLAN AND INFORMATION PER Subject to perpetual easements for sanitary sewer purposes
in favor ofthe City ofOrono met that part ofthe above land
ARCHITECT APRIL 5, 2017. as specifically described in Hennepin County Recorder
D cument No. 4608875 and in Hennepin County Recorder
..GRADINGSAND SITE PLAN INFORMATION PER TRAVIS Document No. 4608876.
VAN LIERE STUDIOS APRIL 5, 2017.
Per Certificate of Title Number 1120830
—ENGINEERING PLAN INFORMATION PER PIERCE PINI
Z 'TINRER APRIL 6, 2017. (SEE ENGINEERING PLAN FOR CULVERT
WAL�5 AND DRAINAGE DETAILS)
—CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AREA: CONTACT�
ELEVATIONS WITH FINAL CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
4z B
EFORE CONSTRUCTION. TRAVIS VAN LIERE
PARCEL AREA (TO OHW) 55,423 SQ. FT. 1.27 ACRES TVLS LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURE
211 IST STREET NORTH #350
Z
TITLE NOTES: MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55406
10 PHONE: 612.760.094
..Efifional use permit per Doc. No. T4992780.
0 EMAIL: travis@tvistudio.com
TI BFIZ 4\
10 1 A �x
WALL
A COUNTY/CITY:
BENCHMARKS
WALL 0 z F= 9—= F- I
I z , X ELEVATIONS BASED ON INFORMATION AS SHOWN ON THE MNDOT
GEODETICWEB ITE. SURVEY DISK DARUS MN053 WITH AN
q ELEVATION OF S94 *44 USED TO ESTABLISH VERTICAL
41 CONTROL FOR ZS SUWRVAESY (NAVD 98)
-30,
ZONING:
FOUND 1, 91, ZONING=LR-1 A LAKESHORE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT
IRON PIPE
SURVEY NOTES: REVISIONS:
DO, S)
131,2
A
4 1. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON COORDINATES SUPPLIED BY THE DATE REVISION
HENNEPIN COUNTY SURVEYORS OFFICE. 10-19-15 INITIAL ISSUE
tz
WELL 2. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN PER GOPHER ONE LOCATES AND TRACKS
10-27-15 AREA/SE
112 q (D PREVIOUS SURVEY PROVIDED BY THE OWNER. THERE MAY SOME -22-17 PROPOSED FOR VAR.
M
93$ 02
Cb UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, GAS, ELECTRIC, ETC. NOT SHOWN OR 04-06-17 REV. HOUSE/LA
34 LOCATED.
3. THIS SURVEY IS HAS RELIED UPON A SURVEY BY GRONBERG &
'N"
'E� X� X
Y'. --------- -DEMOLISION
ASSOCIATES INC DATED 10/31/12 FOR PRE
INFORMATION AND PREVIOUS INTERPRETATION OF PROPERTY
ZVI, BOUNDARIES.
z 1': 3- i
X
X
93,�
_X
9" UNDERGROUND UTILITIES NOTES: CERTIFICATION:
40-
137 .61 936 -1 T E UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN HAVE BEEN LOCATED FROM I -by Etfy III lhi� pl.n pN,pd by
-00 IH
F D .-d., y di,- �,,pmwd th.t I
936 X1302 EL SURVEY INFORMATION AND EXISTING DRAWINGS. THE
.00 JRVEYORMAK NO GUARANTEE THAT THE UNDERGROUND Ell UE,xi Land Su—y., uI,dE, th� I— Elf
-S th,Etya, Elf
UTILITIES SHOWFN COMPROMISE ALL SUCH UTILITIES IN THE AREA,
EITHER IN SERVICE OR ABANDONED. THE SURVEYOR FURTHER
DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN
;15
z
"V ARE IN THE EXACT LOCATION INDICATED ALTHOUGH HE DOES
FO D,,IeIL.Thu,,,, Registralon)Numb 25718
CERTIFY THAT THEY ARE LOCATED AS ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE
X
RON PIPE—,
FROM THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE. THIS SURVEY HAS NOT 10 -15
Ile __1�11 X D- -19
.00 HARD SURFACE KEY: PHYSICALLY LOCATED THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. GOPHER
112
9 STATE ONE CALL LOCATE TICKET NUMBER(S) 152741934 SOME
�l --POUNP 314
0 IRON PIPE MAPS WERE RECEIVED, WHILE OTHER UTILITIES DID NOT RESPOND
_v 932 DENOTED PROPOSED HARD SURFACE TO THE LOCATE REQUEST. ADDITIONAL UTILITIES OF WHICH WE
I I " ARE UNAWARE MAY EXIST.
IOINII I
IRON
36�
N
1�7
PROP. LINE) 1, �Jl DENOTES EXISTING HARD SURFACE
X,
Gopher Stat'e One Call
P, TWINC-AR.
1L93s,,_5
v, o
------------ ------ 935 q36 PROPOSED HARD COVER AREAS TOLLFREE, -NO-252-1166 PROJECT LOCATION
------ -------- 9�16.
-250'ZONE FROM O.H.W.
X
75
4-935,7
-- ----------------- 933--- 5 A, A HOUSE 2894 SQ. FT. LEG EN D:
B DRIVEWAY 2754 SQ FT.
FERNDALE ROAD W
TA 932 C A FIT 2845 SQ, FT, -ND MINUMENT 11�E
NTRY WALK 76 SO� FT. PID#021 1723430023
MASTER TERRACE 285 SQ, FT, 0
D. EUTO COU
eo
-------- 93 � / ___'0qOkOUT E.
F LAKESIDE TERRACE 311 SQ.. FT
7 E. PAVED PADS 54 SQ. FT. —El -Ell
30
-------------
9 9,3�'
H. DET. GAR. DRIVE 467 SO. FT.
0� 1. DET. GARAGE 748 SO, FT. N111AT11-1
i MECH AREA 130 SO. FT. V_
0 WATTI
--------- —q3O
--------- K. ALITOCOURT FOUNTAIN 40 SQ. FT.
L. COURTYARD WALL 62 SQ. FT N.A.
M. AUTOCOURTWALL 106 SQ. FT.
N. ENTRY COLUMNS 8 SQ. FT. + 6750 Stillwater Slvitl' 'N'.
0. FREE STANDING WALL 114 SQ. FT. -x 0 -R- Stillwater, MN 55082
@
EXISTING HARD COVER AREAS T
0
--- ---- M TZZ " Phone 655�.27,5.:969
FOUND 5PIKE TOTAL 894 SQ, FT, Fax 6 .2 7 . 976
tAK1EA4//VtVC7,I IN A 112" 75-250'ZONE FROM O.H.W. , 4013031 SQ. FT. IN ZONE 0 1.�TT danC-
120H PIPE 27.0% HARD SURFACE AREA IN ZONE 0
"T . ....
0 .
O/VKA A PAVED DRIVE 2811 SQ. FT.
B GRAVEL DRIVE 1192 SQ. FT. 0-75'ZONE FROM O.H.W.
C TIMBER WALL 14 SQ. FT, X
TOTAL 4017 SQ. FT.
40331 SQ. Fr. IN ZONE AA HOUSE 989 SQ. FF.
9 10% HARD SURFACE AREA IN ZONE FF LAKESIDE TERRACE 980 SQ. Fr. U
GG MASTER TERRACE 273 SQ. FT.
TOTAL
0-75'ZONE FROM O.H.W. HH. BRIDGE WALKWAY 144 SQ. FT.
2386 SQ. FT.
D TIMBERWALL 62 SQ. FT. 15092 SQ. FT. IN ZONE CrO OHM
NORTH 15.8% HARDS CORNERSTONE
E DECK 16 SQ. FT. URFACE AREA IN ZONE
TOTAL 78 SQ. FT. =.AIN" LAND SURVEYING, INC.
15092 SQ. Fr. IN ZONE (TO OHW)
0 20 40 0. 5% HARD SURFACE AREA IN ZONE
TOTAL HARD SURFACE BOTH ZONES EPNT FILE NAME 2PROPCERT-STR36
TOTAL HARD SURFACE BOTH ZONES — — — — — — PROJECT NO. STRIS036
TOTAL 13280 SQ� FT. 4
I�U.83 EErT
TOTAL 4095 SQ. FT. .55423 SQ. FT. IN ZONE CTO OHM
24. 0% HARD SU RFACE AREA IN ZON E
.55423 SQ. Fr. IN ZONE (TO OHW) PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
7.4% HARD SURFACE AREA IN ZONE SURVEY
LAKE MINNETONKA
BROWNS BAY
FERNDALE ROAD RESIDENCE
CIVIL SITE DESIGN PACKAGE
40
4kc
SHEET NUMBER
DRAWING TITLE
Cloo
COVER SHEET
C200
GENERAL NOTES AND LEGEND
C300
SITE DEMOLITION PLAN
C400
UTILITY PLAN
C500
DOWNSPOUT DRAINAGE PLAN
C600
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN - GENERAL INFORMATION
C601
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN - NARRATIVE
C602
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN - EXISTING CONDITIONS
C603
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN - PROPOSED CONDITIONS
C604
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN - DETAILS
C700
CIVIL DETAILS
LOCATION MAP SITE PLAN
�o' So, 12 D' I "- 40'
m I I I I I . I I
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
211 IST STREET NORT14
_NEAMLljSUffE3ES
t 1112-0194
PIERCE PINI
ASSOCIATES
9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE,
SUITE 312
BLAINE, MN 55434
TEL 763.537.1311
FAX 763.537.1354
FERNDALE ROAD
R E S I D E N C E
d-.. - —n� h..,, -d� .11
-1 — phi. ..d p�.— th—,
P,p l�� 1,d —111 � .0�, 6p—d
T—is
0 �pyng t 2016 T—. Li.. E-.. -l-C. All dgh�
I hmby My thm th', pl�,, 1plffl�111, �' lwft 11,
:p— y .. ., .. . -1 .. lh. I
d�ly L �d P—i— E�g,— .-, th� 1.
'R�–A"S—
PATRICK SVEUM
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
I.. R. . .
liw —2-7
COVER SHEET
D—. y: '..s.
..612017
ci 00
GENERAL NOTES
EROSION CONTROL NOTES
LEGEND
1. A U EXISTING INFORMATION TAKEN FROM SURVEY BY
26. ALL STUMPS F OM TREASS REMOVED WITHIN PRILTOCT
I IN L PERIMICIPER EROSION COOPPECIL AT THE LOCATIONS
CORGERST NE LAND SURVITYRING, INC. PEG,JECT NO.
LIMITS SHA BE GROUND AND REMOVED IN THEIR
.
SHO ON THE PLANS PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION. (HAY
IEOISRTY LINE
STRIE036, DACED OCTOBER 19,2015.
ENTGEE
SALES ARE NOT AN ACCEPTABLE PERINETRE CONTROL)
-S.-T
2. A GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORNTER AND ENGLINITERING
REVIEW WAS COMPLETED FOR THIS SITE BY NO EFC4
TEC NOLOGIES, INC. PROCECT NO. 16.61301. 100 DATEPI
27, ALL SNVEMENT MARKINGS WITHIN EXISTING PAVEMENT
AREAS TO BE REWO ED T. MATCH ICUSTING UINUEEK
NOTED OPPHERWERS.
2. B FORE BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION, INSTALL A TEMMEARY SOCK
CON TRUCTION ENTRANCE AT EACH POINT WHERE VEHICLES EXOT
EXISTING CAST IRON MONUMENT
FEB. 23,2GI7.
THE CONSTRUCTION SIT. USE 2 INCH OR GREATER DIAMETER
EXISTING CABLE TV PEDESTAL
3. CONTRACTOR M FIELD FIERREY ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS
28. DRAWINGS DO NOT INDICATE AREAS FTEMPUPPRARY
SE RT SYSTEMS. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE
ROCKI A�ER��ST121NCHES�ICKAC�SS�EE��
WIDTH OF THE ENTRANCE, EXTEND THE ROCK ENTRANCE AT
EXISTING ELECTRIC MANHOLE
INCLUDING LOCATIONS OF EXISTING, UTILITIES, AND
NOCTIFY ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO
FOR ALL MEANS AND METE DS AND WILL HAVE TOTAL
CONTROL THE TYPES ANT) DESIGN OF ACIL SHORRG,
LEAST 50 FEET IWO THE CONSTRUCTION ZONE, US A
GEOTENTLEFABSED ENEAFFITHEAGGREGATERNORDENTO
EM
F
EXISTING E -TRIC METER
STAFFING CoNSPORUCTION.
SHEETING, BRACING, ANCHORAGES, EXCAVATION SUPPORT
, DIRECTIONAL BOEING, ANGER IAIKONG, -L
PRENNG-0 OFSOILINTOTHEROCEFROM-LOPY. SEE
EROSION CONTROL DISTARS.
fc-P]
EXISTING ELECTRIC PEDESTAL
'L ACL AS DINPOLIKEED BY CONSTRUCTION WHICH ARE
OUT ETHELIMITSOFFAVINGAREMBERESFORED
STABILRATION AND OTHER METHODS OF PROTECTING,
EXISTING SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR
3. REMOVE ALL BOMB AND SEDIMENTS TRACKED OR OTHERWISE
M
EXISTING ELECTRIC TRIOISFORMER
AND
SUBMITTAL REQUEREMIEN-
DEPOSITE ONTOPUBUCANDPRINATEPAVERESTAREAS.
E BE ON A DAILY BASIS WHEN TRACKIN. OCCURS,
EXISTING LIGHT POLE
5. ALL UTILITY B-MOUTION AND/OR ABANDONMENT TO BE
29. STORAGE AND PROTECTION � EXISTING SITE IOLVTJ BE
SWEEPING MAY BE ORDERED .1 AT -1 TIME IF CONDITIONS
.R- IN ACC OR BAN CE WITH CITY OF ORONG AND
STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS.
WHICH NEED TO BE REMOVEDAN REPLACEDFOR
CONSTRUCTION OF PEDOECT ARE THE RESPONSTEPLITY OF
WAR -T. EW ..N. EFEALL BE MAINTAINED 1.E.UGHOBT THE
DURATION OF THE CONSTRODTION AND DONE IN A MANNER TO
EXISTING GUY WIFE
EXISTINDU LITIESARESEOWDIENTHEIIIAPPROXIMATE
THE
OF SCONTRACTOR, STO AGE SHALL BE WITHIN THE LIMITS
TAGING AREA CON I RACTOR SHATI. PREVENT E
PRE -T DOW KING FILOWN M ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
EXISTING POWER POLE
LDCATI NS� CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VEIRIET THE LOCATION
OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH MAY INCLUDE BUT IS
OR THEFT OF THESE ITEMS AND TO REPLACE AT WNG
4. INSTALL INUST PR ON AT ALL PUBLIC AND PRIVATE U,VPCH
BASIN INUETC, WHICH RECEIVE RUNOFF FROM THE DIRTURBED
EXISTING GAS MANHOLE
N T LIMITED TO: ELECTRIC, TELEPHONE, GAS, CABLE TV,
EXPENS..
A EAS. BATCH BASIN INSERTS ARIS REQUIRED IN UNDISTURBED
EXISTING GAS METER
COMPUTER CAP E, FIBER OPTIC CABLE, SANITARY SEWPGt.
WCRM BE M, WCAM, CONDENSATE, ELECTRICAL DUCT
30. CONTRACTOR TO RECORD EX-INIS CONDITIONS AS
NEEDED (PHOTOGRAPHS, VIDEO PHOTOGRAPHY, FIELD
AN AS THAT RECEIVE PGRONE FROM DISTURBED AREAS. NOT.
DAY SALES OR FILTER FABRIC WRAPPING, THE GRAJIMS ARE NOT
EXISTING TELEPHONE MANHOLE
BANK AND WATER MAIN. CONTRACTOR M CONTACT
SURVEYING, ETC l TO ENABLE RECONSTRUCTION TO
EFFECTIVE OR AN ACCEPTABLE FORM OF INLET PROTECTION.
EXISTING TELEPHONE PEDESTAL
GOPHER ONE -CALL BEFORE EXCAVATING.
MATCH EXIS IING CONDIT DNS AS REQUIRED CONTRACTOR
TO DOCUMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS SO THAT
5. LOU TE SOIL OR DIET STOCKPILES NO LESS PHAN 25 FEE r FROM
7. ALL EXISTING UTICITTES AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS ARE
TO REMAIN UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISIC
RECONSTRUCTED AREAS WILL HAVE FINIONVE DRAINAGE
A PUBLC OR PRIVATE SCADWAYOR DRAINAGE CIIANNFL, IF
REMAINI G FOR MORE THAN SEVEN DAYS, STABILIZE THE
EXISTING SAIRTARY CLEANOUT
SINHIJ,R TO EXISTING.
STOCKPTUFS BY MULCHING, VEGETATIVE CO -R, TARBS, OR
EXISTING SANITARY MANHOLE
S CONPTRA TO PROTECT FROM DAMAGE ALL EXISTENG,
31. WHERE DEMOUPTION, EXCAVATION. UNDERMINING, PICK
OBBLE M- CONTROL EROSION FROM ALLSTOCKPILEBS BY
EXISTING CATCH BASIN
IMPROVEMENTS, LANDSCAPING, STRUCTURES AND
UTILITIES THAT ARIE TO REMAIRL CONTRADPGR TO REPAIR
DRIVING, COMPACTING OR SIMILAR WORK IS TO BE
PLACING SILT BARRIERS AROUND THE PPLES� TEMPORARY
PIPES LOCATED ON SURFACES MUST BE NO LESS
ANY DAMAGE A7P OWN EXPENSE,
PERFORMED AD,JACENT TO OR IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY
OF PSTSTING STRUCTURES, THE CONTRACT R �
WOC
THAN TWO FEET FROM THE DRANAGE/GUTTER LINE AND SHALL,
0 ffn
EXISTING STORM DRAIN
9� C WRACTOR TO FIELD VIERIFY THE JCAkCT LOCATION AND
PER BUILDING PURVEYS AN. SCISMIC MCCII-RING.
BE COVERED IF LEFT MORE THAN 24 HOURS.
EXISTING PLARED END SECTION
ELEVATTO OF EXISTING STORM AND SANGN,EY SEWER
C NFRACTUOR IS RESPONSIBLE NOR MONITORING OF
BUILDING AND KEEPING OWNER INFORMILD OF
6. MAINTAIN ALL TEMPORARY EROSION AND SE]AMENT CONTROL
EXISTING WORM MANHOLE
PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION.
OPERNTIONS THAT MAY IMPACT STRUCTURES.
DEVICES IN PLACE UNTIL THE CONTRUEUTDIG DRAINAGE ARIO,
GAS BEEN STARILIZED, INSPECT TEMFORANY EROSION AND
10. PROVIDETHE
32. CARE MUST BE TAKEN DURING CONSTRUCTION AND
SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES ON A DAILY BASIS AND REPLACE
EXISTING HYDRAW
OF PIPE AS FOLLOWS:
EXCAVATION TO PROTECT ANY SURVEY MONUMENTS
DETERIORATED, DAMAGED, OR ROFIED EROSION CONTROL
Q
EXISTING WATER WELL
A. OFF
AND/OR PROPERTY PRONS-
DEVICES --.
::
B EVER BANDA Y SEWER
33, AS A CONDITION OF THE APPROVED SITE PLAN, THE
7. TEMPO �LYORPE��E�����CON�U=ON
(9
EXISTING WATER WELL
E. 2'.-STORMSEWER
APPLICART MUST ISOVID. --BUILT DRAWINGS (PAPER OR
AREA WHICH HAVE SEES EIMSH GRADED, AND ALL AREAS IN
EXISTING WATER M-
ME) OF ALL GRADI G AND STOPMWKIER FEATURES. THE
WHICH G ING OR SITE BUILDING CONSTRUCITON OPERATIONS
11. ALL WORK TO C NFORM WITH CITY OF ORONO AND STATE
OF MINNESOTA STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS.
CONSTRUCTION AE -BUILT BRAWINGS SHALL SPI BUT
ARIE NOT CRATTED TO, SUCH INFORMATION AS THE EXACT
ARE NOT ACTIVELY UNDERWAY AGAINST PLEDSION DUE M RARI,
WINDANDRUNNINGWATERWPFNEN DAY&USESCEDINGAND
EXISTING POST INDICATOR VALVE
SITE, LEN TH, TYPE AND LOCATION OF PIPES; LOCATICIN
MULCHING, E OSPON CONTROL MATTING, AND/OR NEDDING AND
EXISTING WATER MALVE
12, ALL EXCAVATIONS MUST COMPLY WITH THE
AND SIZ OF MANHOLES AND CATCH BASINS; DEPTH AN"
STAKING IN GREEN SPACE AREAS. APPLICATION OF GRAVEL BASE
REQUIREMENTS F OSHA 29 DFR, PART 1926, SUBEART P
-CAMATIONS AND TRENCHE '. THIS DOCUMENT STATES
SLOPES OF PFFENTION BASINS, THE CONSTRUCTION
AS BUILT DRAWINGS SHALL SHOW ALL WORK AS ACTUALLY
ON AREAS TO BE PXVED IS RECONIMENDED FOR MINIMIZING
EROSION POTENTIAL
EXISTING UNKNOWN MANHOLE
ON PARETY IN TH. SOL. RESPONSIBILITY
OF THE CONTRACTOR.
INSTALLED AND AS FIELD VERIFIED BY GENERAL
8. REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY SYNTHETIC, STELICTU-,
EXISTING SOM BOEING
13. CATE BASINS AND MANHOLES ARE SHOWN ON PLAN
CONTRA- A SIGNED LETTER ON COMPANY
SLETTERHEADATTESTI GTOACCJRACYOFTHEA`B"MM
HA L BE SUBMITTED TO I HE CIVIL ENGINEER WITHIN 30
NON -BIODEGRADABLE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
DEVICES AFTER FEE SITE HAS UNDEFEK)RE FINAL STABILIZATION
11 TEIG CONIFEROUS -1
EXISTING DECIELIOUS FREE
LARGER THAN ACTUAL SIZE. CO RDINATE LOCATION OF
.0- COVER AND EASTEN. SO THAT IT IS 1R.P.-
DAYS OF COMPLETING ALL SITE WORK.
AND PREACIPENT VEGETATION GAS BEEN ESTABLISHED, MINIMUM
VEGWON ESTABLISHMENT IS 70X COVER, MAINTAIN ALL
EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION
LOCATED AT THE BACK OF CURB LINE FOR THE CURB
INUETSOREENTERE INTHEARISAASSHOWRONTHE
34. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A CONTINUOGS,
ACCESSIBLE AND SAFER PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY THAT
TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES UNTIL 70%b
ESTABLISHED COVER IS ACHIEVE.
95o,o
EXT ROD '._Uu_
PLAN FOR THE AREA DRAPNS AND MANHOLE COVERS.
MEETS ADA AND MR MUTCD WANDARDS IF WORKING IN A
9� READY MIXED CONCRETE AND CONCRETE BATCH PLANTS
14. PROVIDE BARRICADES AT S- AND SIDEWALKS PER
SIDEWALK AREA, AND TRAFFIC CONTROL FIGI MN MUTCD
PROHIBITED WITHIN THE INTELIC EIGHT 0- UNDER NO
EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC
Cl7f OF ORONO REQGIREMENTS.
REQUIREMENTS MR WORK IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTOR-WAY.
CIRCUMSTANCES MAY WASHOUT WATER DRAIN ONTO THE PUBLIC
EXISTING UNB.RG.OUN. CALL. TV
15. SITE UTILITY CONTRACTOR TO FURNISH AND INSTALL ALL
35. ALL CONSTRUCTION WORK SPIALL BE COMPLETED WITHIN
SHIFT OF WAY OR TWO THE STORM SEWER. CONTRACTOR SHAUL
BERES INSIBLE FOR PREYVEDINGDESENNATED CONCRETE
.R.AP , SAN-- E.WER AND WORM E -E
C ITY OF ORONO APPROVED WORKING HOURS.
WASHOUT AREA THAT COMILDES WITH MMA REQUIREMENT.
EXISTING UNDERGEOUNG 11D.F GETIC
FACILITIE AND APPURTENANCES TO WITHIN FIVE FEW
36. A PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING IS REQUIRED
EXISTING UNDERGROUND TELEINRTNE
OUT IDE THE BUILDING, COORGINATIR WITH MECHANICAL
C NTRAkLPOR FOR ENACT LOCATION AND DEPTH OF
CONNECTION WITHIN BUILDING.
WATEEFHKD AND CITY STAFF PRIOR TO ANY MOBILIZYDON
OF _AYENCTON EQUENMENT OR MATEELL.
I(L ALL EROSION CONTROL ELEMENTS ARE TEIWPO
CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL EROSION CONTROL ELEMENTS PRIOR TO
START OF LAND DI RBINe ACTIVITIES, MAINTAIN IN GOOD
EXPWRIG OVERPEAL LOILLITY
16. CONTRACTOR SHAU COORDINATE WITH ANCHITECTS
37. A COPHER STATE ONE ALL IS REQUIRED BEFORE ANY
N WORN CAN C.MMIGN-
BOND ON DURING CONSTRUCTION AND REMOVE FROM THE SITE
UPON COMPLEFTOR OF PANING AND TURE ESTABLISHMENT.
EXISTING UNDERGROUND GAS
DRAWHIGS TO VERIFY LOCATOON, SIZE AND QUANTITY OF
ALL ROOF DRANS AND UTRFPY CONN C110- LIMITS OF
38, ALL, WORK MUST E IN COMPLIANCE WITH ME MINNEITURA
11. ERB ION CONTROL S� BE PLACED ALONG THE PERIM OF
XISTING SANFARY S. -H
PROP BED SITE PLUMBING FACILPTLES SHAUL, BE EVVE
EDG. 01 UILDING UNLESS OTHERWISE
CREER -H.. IWNCCT PPNE- FOR TH. BIT..
THE SPER EXCAVATION. EROSION CONTROL SHAL BE PLACED SO
a DOES IN T DISTILRB THE EXISTING PAVEMENT OR DRIVE LANES
EXISTING WORM SIOVEIR
NOTED.
- THE C.-RACTIOR IS REEPONSIBLE ME -N. ALL
THAT ASK TO REMAIN. MANY METHODS 01 EROSION C.RGL
EXISTING WATEIRMAIN
17, CONTRACTOR SEA U OBTAIN ALL REQUIRED PERMITS
PERMITS. ALL PERMITS MURST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION.
WILL WEEK AND IT IS THE CONTRACTOR E RESPONSIBILITY TO
INSTALL THE MEASURE MOST APPROPRIATE M THE SGIS
EXISTING F..C.
T. STARTING COSSIBLICTIOR.
CONDITION AND THAT WHICH RIBETS THE CI OF ORONO AND
18, ALL WORK TO CO FORM M CITY OF ORONO STANDARDS.
MBCA STANDARDS. GRAPHICALLY SHOWN ON THE PLANS MR
EXISTING CURB
ALLCOMPLEIREJEWO ISSUBJECTTOINSPECTIONSYTHE
CLANITY BUT SONALL BE PLACED IN FILE MOST APPROPERANE
�CAnONSNMTOMMGECXISTING�MEn�/0 CUBES
EXISTING GRAVEL TO BE REMOVED
C SEWER MILITY DEPARTMENT AT A REASONABLE TIME
BENORE BACKRUINEL
TO REMAIN. DAMAGILB PAVEMENT AND/ OR CURIAS SHAU. BE PAID
FOR SOLELY BY THE CONTRACTOR, SEE DETAILS AND
EXT TING BITUMINOUS TO 11 RENRYIED
19. ALL MATERIALS MR PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OR REPAIR
SPECIFICATIONS.
E STING TRINE TO BE REMOVED
OF ENTSTING FACILITIES SHALL BE NEW PRODUCTS DIRECT
CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE TEMPORARY SEED AND MULCH ON
FROM THE FACTORY AND FREE FROM BEFECTS.
ALL NON- VED AREAS WITHIN 7 DAYS AFTER ROD IT
EXISTING UTILITY TO BE REMOVED
20. WHEN WORKING AROUND EXISTING TELEPHONE OR
GRADING IS COMPLETED. SEED WITH ANNUAL FIVE SEED AT
ODD
PROPOSED CLEANOBT
ELE CA1, MILES, THE CONTRACTOR SHKLL BRACE THE
POLE FOR SUPPORT.
60 UPS PER ACRE AND WOOD MULCH FIBER AT 45 LES FEE
I.00G BF.
PRO EUG SAN -EY s-
21. WHEN WORKING AROUND EXISTING UTILITIES THAT
13. C N`PRACR TO PREVENT DIRT AND/OR DEBRIS FROM
W
PROPOSED WATER SERVICE LINE
BECO EXPOSED, THE CONTRACTOR $HALL PROVIDE
C SUP -ST T. NT EXCESPIVE -BE ON
EN RING STORM SEWER OR BEINGTEhNSFORTED ONE -SPIE
IN AN UNCONTROLLED MAN NINE. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY AT
PROPOSIT. WORM S
THE PIPING. THE CONTRACTOR 15 FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR
PROJECT LQIIECUTTHAT STORM SEWER SYSTEM ISCLEAR
ANYDAMAGESCAUNEDBYFAILURETOPCL, LYLOCATE
OF SEDIMENT AND/CR DEBRIS AND IS FULLY FUNCTIONAL,
PROPOSED DOWNSPOUT DRAIN
AND PRESERVE THESE UNDERGROUND FACILITIES.
PROPOSED FLARE END WITH RIP RAP
WASTE MATERIALS INCLUDING PAVEMENT REMOVED
DURING CONSTRUCTIDIN WASTE PIPING AND SUPPLIES,
PROPOSED ROOF DOWN SPOILT
CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS AND EXCESS EXCAVATED
MATERIAL SHALL B COME THE PROPERTY OF THE
o'.
PROPOSED DOWN SMUT CATCH BASIN
CONTRAE RANDSHALLBEREMOVEDEROMILLE
PROJECT SITE AND DISPOSED OF PROPERLY BY THE
PROPOSED CAME BASIN
CONTRACTOR.
0
PROPOSED MANHOLIS
23. MAXIMO CROSS -SLOPES MR SIDEWALKS AND AGA
ACCESS ROUTES SHALL NOT EXCEED 2BM. MAXIMUM
PREYPOSWI WELL
s -PES So. -.I ACCESS AISLES S -L NOT
SILT FENCE
EXCEED 5.00% ALONG THE PATH OF TRAMEL,
IID-AGII-111
EROSION CONTROL AT C./M.
:1-ION-MIS-NITI
DIRECT EXCESS DRADAGBE ONTO ADJACENT PROPERTY.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
5� ADEQUATE DRAINAGE SHALL BE MAINTAINED AT � TIMES
DURING CONSTRUCTION AND ANY DRAINAGE -H OR
STRUCTURE DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BIS
RESTORED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THIS OWNING
ADEPTYRITY, A L CONSTRUCTION ITIRM RUN.11 SHALL
C NIPLYWITNTHENATIONALPOLUBTASTDISCHARGE
ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NMES) REQUIREMENTS,
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
211 IST STREET NORTH, SURE -
MINNEAPOLIS, MN SSIH
1 6127411)(1,1114
PIERCE PINI
ASSOCIATES
9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE,
SUITE 312
BLAINE, MN 55434
TEL 763.537.1311
FAX 763.537.1354
FERNDALE ROAD
R E S I D E N C E
1895 FERNDALE ROAD W, ORONO, MN 56391
d..N.. � - n1NA1 h..,, d.dN .11
-1 d -IF, F�� - PFrfi.. th-,
-p-,, ,,d III 1A, o�. d�pld
--ly l, -1. - w. A-1
---g --d " �y i�
At, ft -
0 C�pynght 2016 1-. - Lt.. ftdl.. - All dIft
h -by
:�P.by.111 111y,11-p-1-IdthIll
d�l, L I,d P -i -I E,C -B, ft
_S_.MNAA
PATRICK EVEOM
N-; NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
I.. R.
IS.. E
-6-7
-g:
CIVIL NOTES
AND LEGEND
D. By: P.W s.
0." ov-017
Sh- C200
NORT�
/-l-"\SITE DEMOLITION PLAN
a 20' 40' 60' 1 '= 20'
TRAViS VAN LIERE STUDIO
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
2111 ST STREET NORTH
MINNEFFOLliSLUTE 3EG
, NN —1
t 5127600494
PIERCE PINI
ASSOCIATES
9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE,
SUITE 312
BLAINE, MN 55434
TEL 763.537.1311
FAX 763.537.1354
FERNDALE ROAD
R E S I D E N C E
1895 FERNDALE ROAD W, ORONO, MN 56391
lh�by
-p— by .111 M, M d1ld I
d�ly L - P—i-1 E�S,— -�, ft 1.
.1 lh�
PATRICK SVEUM
I.—
NOTE: NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
I.. . R. . .
liw —
�ww 04-17
D.img�
SITE DEMOLITION
PLAN
D... BY: P.w s.
—017
S-1: C300
NORTH
UTILITY PLAN
a 20' 40' BID,
1 1
1195n
NQIE5;
SToRMWATER'S PIPES NTH
LESS THAN 3' OF COVER
REOUIRE INSULATION.
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
2111 ST STREET NORTH, SUITE —
MINNBU%PBUS, MN 5—
t 6127NIHIR
PIERCE PINI
ASSOCIATES
9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE,
SUITE 312
BLAINE, MN 55434
TEL 763.537.1311
FAX 763.537.1354
FERNDALE ROAD
R E S I D E N C E
1895 FERNDALE ROAD W, ORONO, MN 56391
d-.. —,, - —nI,A1 h..,, .-N .11
-I —, H�,, �p�—.,, th—,
,p -,, 1,,d 1-11 10�. d�pl—d
_—I, 111 —1. � I. �'. A—,
-- g �y III
At, M —
0 C�pyng t 2016 T—. Lt.. S-.. U -C. All nghll,
I h -by My th,t IN, pl,,, .md —
:�P�— by .111 11 ly d1ld -- - th1t I
d,,ly L d P—i—1 E,,g—, -, ft
I. SIAH . --..
PATRICK BVEUM
N—; NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
D. By: P.W s.
U_ ov-017
Sh.: C400
KEY NOTES
1 24" KIDS SOUARE CATCH BASIN
RIM = 935.W, SEE DETAIL 2/C700
2 35 LF 6" F� STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
3 6" PVC INV - 931.87
4 5 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
5 6" PVC INV = 931.81
6 26 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10X
7 6' PVC INV = 931.52
8 3 LIF B" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
9 6" PVC INV - 931.49
10 32 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
11 6" PVC INV = 931.14
12 2 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
13 6" PVC INV = 931.12
14 2 LF 6" PVC STORM SEV,ER 0 1.10%
15 6" PVC INV - 931.10
16 47 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
17 6" PVC INV - 930.58
18 2 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
19 6" PVC INV = 930.56
20 2 LF 6' PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
21 8" PVC IW = 930.54
22 22 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
23 8" PVC INV -930.25
24 10 LF 6* PVC STORM SEWER 0 IAOX
25 6" PVC IbIl
26 10 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
27 6" PVC INV -930.50
28 21 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
29 6" PVC INV -930.27
30 2 LF 6* PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
31 23 LF 8" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
32 8" P�CqS ORM BRAIN QVTLET
INV 30.00, SEE DETAIL 6/C700
33 6 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
34 6" PVC INV=932.46
35 45 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1AD%
36 6" PVC IbIl
37 3 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
38 6" PVC INV -931.93
39 24 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
40 6" PVC INV=931.67
41 3 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
42 3 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
43 6" PVC INV -932.14
44 45 LF 6" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1,10%
45 8' PVC INV=931.64
46 58 LF 8" PVC STORM SEWER 0 1.10%
47 8* PVC STORM DRAIN OVTLET
INV = 931.00. SEE DETAIL 6/C700
929.0
NORTH
r1'�Q0WNSP0IJT DRAINAGE PLAN
1.- 2.- 30'
TRAViS VAN LIERE STUDIO
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
211 IST STREET NORTH, SU� 3W
MINMENIPCILIS, MR 5WI
t 5127600,194
PIERCE PINI
ASSOCIATES
9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE,
SUITE 312
BLAINE, MIN 55434
TEL 763.537.1311
FAX 763.537.1354
FERNDALE ROAD
R E S I D E N C E
1895 FERNDALE ROAD W, ORONO, MN 56391
T. -,.. I— - —n- I.— -C,l, .11
-- d—- 91,phl. th—,
b, gp
bv— .0b, p—i. b, I T—, ., L— —lb,
T— — —,I�H� b, -I�d -b— bd
by bh— .-O,N
C �py, H 2016 T-1. L.— St.di., — All light,
-b—
lhb�by
p p
,p— by .111 M, M dl1d bld thbt I
d,,1yL -P—ibb.lEbg,b—bdb,thbl.
ffib
EXISTINu 3 --
PATRICK SVEUM
I.—
d.
NOTE: NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
N. R. . .
11
rl= —
Mw 04—M17
D.img�
DOWNSPOUT
DRAINAGE PLAN
Or By: P.. s.
D . ..612017
Sh- C500
USGS VICINITY KAAP
NOT TO SCALE
SITE
LAKE MINNETONKA
BROWNS BAY
SITE LOCATION MAP
NOT TO SCALE
ACREAGE SUMMARY
TOTAL SITE ARD, 1.28 ACRES
DN—STM DISTURBED AREA 1,2' RES
OFF—SIM DISTURBED ARElk .7 ACRES
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA 1.35 ACRES
EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA o.lo ACRES
PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA 0.31 ACRES
ESTIMATED BMP QUANTITIES
SILT FENCE l000 U,
FLOATING SILT CUR.N 50D LF
CATCH BASIN INSERTS I� EAP.
ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
INUET PROTECTION 15 EN"
TREE PROTECTION FENCING 300 LF
EROSION CONTROL BLANKET 23DIDI) SF
NOTE: QUANTITIES ME FOR INFORMATI NAL PURPOSES ONLY. CONTRACTOR
SHALL DETERMINE FOR THEMSELVES THE EXACT QUANTITIES FOR BIDDING AND
CON TRUCTION. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT RELY ON THESE OUANTITIES FOR THEIR
BID AND CIVIL ENGINEER IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR COST ESTIMATES OR ACTUAL
CONSTRUCTION COSTS.
CONTACT INFORMATION
OWNER
CONTACT P—N, TIRE:
ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE:
EMAIL:
PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM MAINTENANCE
CONTACT PERSON. TITLE:
AD.—
TELEPHONE:
EMAIL:
CONTRACTOR
B -NESS:
CONTACT PERSOI,l. TITLE:
ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE:
EMAIL:
CONTRACTOR'S ONSITE REPRESENTATIVE
BUSINESS:
CONTACT PERSON. TIRE:
ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE:
EMAIL:
ALTERNAM CONTACT:
PH E:
EMAIL:
N TE: CONTRACTOR'S ONSITE REPRESENTATIVE SHALL BE COMPLETED ON THE
P N SET KEPT IN THE CONSTRUCTION TRAILER. THIS INFORMATION SHALL ALSO
BE PROVIDED TO THE OWNER AND CIVIL ENGINEER.
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
211 IST STREET NORTH
M1NNEAMLIjSUM3E0
t 111276—
PIERCE PINI
ASSOCIATES
9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE,
SUITE 312
BLAINE, MN 55434
TEL 763.537.1311
FAX 763.537.1354
FERNDALE ROAD
R E S I D E N C E
1895 FERNDALE ROAD W, ORONO, MN 55391
d..N.. — - —ril-I h..,, -,Il .11
-1 phi. p�. th—,
l�� IM -111 .01 6p d �
. —, , —1. — �'. ,,' IL�
T—is - � -b,
LUC I—d
0 �pyrg t 2016 T-. U.. E-.. LUC. All dgh�
Ihmby tfythwthI1plI,p1Sl,V1111wft111
:p- by ., , M, m d— -—lo,, - th,X I
� dt,ly L �d P—i— E,,G ., th� 1.
IX I. — . M-...
"S
PATRICK SVEUM
NOTE: NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
K. . R. . .
liw —
Mw 04-17
—F
SWPPP- GENERAL
INFO
D.. BY: PW s.
D_ _612017
Sh- C600
SWPPP NARRATIVE - EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
A STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWFPP) 15 REOUMLS ZRTZ ME ���P IT
AI=TID I%AMINIR= AN C U T"
550CIATIO-WITH UNDER THE NATIONAL
P.
PG"�JTAR DISPOSAL SYSTEM (SD5) CONSTRUCTION
5 ORMWATER PERMIT FOR THE PROJECT. ALL SITE WORK SHALL FOLLOW THE PERMIT GUIDELINES AND
RULES.
THE GOAL OF POLLUTION PREVENTION EFFORTS DURING PROJECT CONSTRUCTION IS TO CONTROL SOL AND
POLLUTA TS ON THE SITE AND PREVENT THEM FROM LEAVING THE PROUE T SITE AND FLOWING TO SURFACE
WATER . THE PURPOSE OF THIS SWPPP IS TO PROVI E GUIDELINES FOR ACHIEVING THAT GOAL. ME SWPPP
MUST BE KEPT ONSITE AND UPDATED AS NECESSARY DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION TO KEEP IT
CURRENT WIN ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THE POLLUMN CONTROL MEASURES BEING UTILIZED.
THIS PROJEC CONSISTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSE AND DRIVEWAY ON LAKE
MINNETONKA IN ORONO. MINNESOTA.
THE PROPOSED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DESIGN WILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF ORONO
A D THE M(NNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT. THIS PROJECT IS NOT REQUIRED TO MEET THE MPCA
PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE THE INCREASE IN IMPERVIOUS AREA IS LESS
THAN ONE ACRE.
THE STORM TER MANAGEMENT CONSISTS OF A SERIES OF ROOF DRAINS AND DOWN SPOUTS THAT WILL
DISCHARGE TO GRACE AND EXISTING STORM SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE ON-SITE THAT ULTIMATELY CONNECTS To
LAKE MINNETONKA.
REGULATORY CONTEXT:
PAIRED WATER HIN I IL
-THIS PROJECT DISCHARGES TO LAXE MINNETONKA (LOWER LAKE NIS WATER BODY IS IDENTIFIED AS
AN IMPAIRED WATER ON THE MPCA'S 303(D) IMPAIRED WATERS LIST FOR MERCURY IN FISH. NO
ADDITIONAL BMPS ARE REQUIRED FOR COMPLIANCE.
_N/A
DRINKING WATER SUPPLY MAN
-N/A
THE PROJECT ST RMWATER DISCHARGE IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO IMPACT MY OF THE FOLLOWING:
-OUTSTANDING RESOURCE VALUE WATERS, TROUT WATERS, WETLANDS. CALCAREOUS FENS, PROPERTIES
LISTED BY THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES OR ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES
TH PROJECT STORMWATER DISCHARGE IS NOT SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL REGULATION DUE TO ANY OF THE
FOULOW1 G:
-OTHER FORMAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS, ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES
F1T==I!S "IDENTIFIED BY THE NPDES PERMIT.
1 THE OWNER AND CONTRACTOR
2. CONTRACTOR SHAL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL ON-SITE IMPL MENTATION OF THE SWPPP, INCLUDING THE
ACTIVITIES OF ALL OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SUBCONTRACTORS.
3.CONT TOR SHALL PROVIDE A PERSON(S) KNOWLEDGEABLE AND EXPERIENCED IN THE APPLICATION OF
EROSI N PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS TO OVERSEE ALL INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF
BIAPS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PERSON(S) MEETING THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PERMIT TO
CONDUCT INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS IN
ACC RDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS 0 THE PERMIT. ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUAL(S) MUST BE AVAILABLE
FOR AN ONSITE INSPECTION WITHIN 72 HOURS UPON REQUEST BY MPCA. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE
TRAINING DOCUM NTATION FOR THESE INDIVIDLI AS REQUIRED BY THE NPDES PERMIT. THIS TRAINING
DO UMENTATION SHALL BE RECORDED IN OR WITH THE SWPPP BEFORE ME START OF CONSTRUCTION OR
AS SOON AS THE PERSONNEL FOR ME PROJECT HAVE BEEN DETERMINED. DOCUMENTATION SHALL
I CLUDE:
.1. NAME OF THE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT THAT ME REQUIRED TO BE TRAINED PER
PART III.F. I OF THE PER IT.
4.2. DATES OF TRAINING AND NAME OF INSTRUCTOR AND EMITY PROVIDING TRAINING.
4.3. COWEN OF TRAINING COURSE OR WORKSHOP INCLUDING THE NUMBER OF HOURS OF TRAINING.
5. FOLLOWING FINAL STABILIZATION AND THE TERMINATION OF COVERAGE FOR ME NPDES PERMIT, THE OMER
IS EXPECTE TO FURNISH LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (0 & M) OF THE PERMANENT STORM
WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.
THE FOLLOWING SIZING CRITERIA AIP LY TO THE DESIGN OF STORMINATER TREATMENT FACILITIES. N/A
INDICATES NOT APPLICABLE OR NOT CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT.
1. TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS: N/A
2 PERMANENT WET SEDIMENTATION BASINS: N/A
3. PERMANENT INFILTRATION/FILTRATION : SEE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
, . PERMANENT REGIONAL PONDS: N/A
5. ALTERNATIVE METHODS: N/A
TH FOLLOWING SEQUENCE DESCRIBES. IN GENERAL. THE WORK ON THE SITE:
I . C NTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THAT ALL PERMITS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED AND/OR OBTAIN THE NECESSARY
P RMITS.
2. CONTRACTOR SHAL PERFORM SITE INSPECTIONS, RECORD KEEPING AND RECORD RETENTION IN
ACCORDANCE WITH ALL PERMITS.
3. C NTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ALL PERIMETER AND DOWN -GRADIENT EROSION CONTROL AND SEDIMENT
C WROL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS). CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES AND INLET PROTECTION
0 CES PRIOR TO SITE GRADING, EXCAVATION, STOCKPILING OR DISTURBING EXISTING VEGETATIVE COVER.
4. C NTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM SITE GRADING. EXCAVATION, STOCKPILING WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
S ORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAIN (swppp).
5. C NTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL. INSPECT, MONITOR AND MAINTAIN TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION
CON OL BMPS AS SHOWN ON PLANS & IN CONFORMANCE WRIA NPDES PERMIT, CONTINUOUSLY DURING
THE WOW. CONTRACTOR SHALL STABILIZE AL EXPOSED SOILS NO UVER THAN Zj2M AFTER THE
C NSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN THAT POUTON OF THE SITE HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED.
6. CONT TOR SHALL REPLACE OR REPAIR EROSION CONTROL AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BmPs THAT ME NOT
FUNC IONING PROPERLY.
7. C WRACTOR SHALL PERFORM SITE RESTORATION ACTIVITIES FOR PERMANENT VEGETATIVE ESTABLISHMENT.
TL CONTR TOR SHALL REMOVE SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES PRIOR TO SUBM17ING NOTICE OF TERMINATION
(NOT).
9. SUBMIT NOTICE OF TERMINATION TO MPCA WITHIN W DAYS OF FINAL STABILIZATION.
1. CONSTRUCT ON ACTIVITY FIELD 9
ALL FIELD REQUI EMENTS SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ME REQUIREMENTS OF THE
NPDES PERMIT AND STGRMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (swpp).
A. ME CONTRAC OR MUST IMPLEMENT THE SWPPP AND PROVIDE BMPS IDENTIFIED IN THE SWPPP IN AN
APPROPIRIATE AND FUNCTIONAL MANNER.
B. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RESPOND TO CHANGING SITE CONDITIONS AND IMPLEMENT/SUPPLEMENT
EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES UTILIZED TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE
FROM ION OF DISTURBED SOILS AND ADEO ATE PREVENTION OF SEDIMENT TRANSPORT OFF-SITE.
AT A MINIMUM. THE FOLLOWING STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FIELD
REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE FURNISHED BY THE CONTRACTOR.
2,
C WRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FOLLOWING EROSION PREVENTION PRACTICES:
A. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ATTEMPT TO PHASE ALL WORK TO MINIMIZE EROSION AND MARRAIN
VEG TATIVE COVER TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE. THE LOCATION OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED MUST
8 DELINEATED ON THE SITE BEFORE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS.
B. STABILIZATION ON ALL EXPOSED SOILS MUST BE INITIATED IMMEDIATELY WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITY HAS P RMANENTLY GR TEMPORARILY CEASED ON ANY PORFON OF THE SITE AND WILL NOT
RESUME FOR A PERIOD EXCEEDING MR DAYS INCLUDING STOCKPILES WIN = SILT,
CLAY OR ORGANIC COMPONENTS. ST MUST BE COMPLETED WITHIN ZSAM
C. THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF MY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCH THAT DRAINS
WATER MGM A CONSTRUCTION SITE OR DIVERTS WATER MOUND A SITE MUST BE STABILIZED By
CON TRACTOR WITHIN 200 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY EDGE, OR FROM THE POINT OF DISCHARGE TO
ANY SU FACE WATER WITHIN 24 HOURS OF CONNECTING TO A SURFACE ATER. TEMPORARY OR
P RMANEW DITCH SWALES BEING USED AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM DO NOT NEED TO BE
STABI IZED UNTIL THEY ARE NO LONGER USED AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM, AFTER WHICH
THEY MU T BE STABILIZED WITHIN 24 HOURS.
D. TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSIPATION AT PIPE OUTLETS MUST BE PROVIDED WITHIN 24
HOURS OF CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER.
E. THE CONTRACTOR MUST DIRECT DISCHARGES FROM BMPS TO VEGETATED AREAS OF THE SRE IN
OR ER TO INCREASE SEDIMENT REMOVAL AND MAXIMIZE INFILTRATION UNLESS INFEASIBLE. THE
C WRACTOR MUST UTILIZE VELOCITY DISSIPATION DEVICES IF NECESSARY TO PREVENT EROSION WHEN
DIRECTING STORMWATER TO VEGETATED AREAS.
CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FOLLOWING SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES:
A. CONTRACTOR MUST INSTALL ALL DOWN GRADIENT PERIMETER CONTROLS BEFORE ANY UP GRADIENT
DISTURBAN E BEGINS. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN PERIMETER CONTROLS UNTIL FINAL STABILIZATION
HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED,
B. CONTI OR SHALL PROVIDE GRADING AND BMP INSTALLATION TO UNIT ALL SLOPES OF 3H:IV OR
ST EPER TO AN UNBROKEN LENGTH OF 75 FEET OR LESS.
C. IF DOWN GRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROLS ME OVERLOADED. THE CONTRACTOR MUST INSTALL
ADDITIONAL UPGRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES OR REDUNDANT BMPS TO ELIMINATE
OVERLOADING. THE SWPPP MUST BE AMENDED TO IDENTIFY THESES ADDITIONAL PRACTICES.
D. TIMING AND INSTALLATION OF SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES CAN BE ADJUSTED BY CONTRACTOR TO
ACCOMMODATE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITIES SUCH AS CLEARING AND GRUBBING OR VEHICLE PASSAGE. ANY
SHOW -TERM AC WITY MUST BE COMPLETED AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE AND THE SEDIMENT CONTROL
PRACTICES MUST BE INSTALLED IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE ACTIVITY IS COMPLETED AND IN ALL CASES
PRIOR TO THE NEXT PRECIPITATION EVENT.
E. ALL PUBLIC AND PRIVATE STORM SEWER INLETS AND OUTLETS SHALL BE PROTECTED BY CONTRACTOR
WITH APPROPRIATE BIAPS DURING THE WORK. THESE PRACTICES SHAL REMAIN IN PEACE UNTIL THE
POTENTIAL SOURCES FOR DISCHARGING SEDIMENT TO INLETS HAVE BEEN STABILIZED BY CONTRACTOR.
F. TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILES MUST HAVE SILT FENCE OR OTHER EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROLS.
SOIL STOCKPILES SHALL NOT BE PLACED IN SURFACE WATERS OR STORMWATER CONVEYANCES.
AC EPTABLE PROTECTION INCLUDES COVER OF MULCH. EROSION CONTROL MATS, OR PLASTIC
S EETING.
G. ROCK CO STRUCTION ENTRANCES OR EOUNALENT SYSTEM MUST BE INSTALLED By CONTRACTOR TO
MINIMIZE TRACKING FROM SITE. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE STREET SWEEPING AS NECESSARY IF
B PS ME NOT ADEQUATE TO PREVENT SEDIMENT FROM BEING TRACKED ONTO THE STREET.
H. C NTPACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS AS REQUIRED BY ME PERMIT.
1. CONTRACTO MUST MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION AND PRESERVE TOPSOIL, UNLESS INFEASIBLE.
MINIMIZING SOIL COMPACTION IS NOT REQUIRED MERE ME FUNCTION OF A SPECIFIC AREA OF THE
SITE DICTATES TH T IT BE COMPACTED.
j� THE CONTRACTOR MUST PRESERVE A 50 FOOT NATURAL BUFFER OR PROVDE REDUNDANT SEDIMENT
CONTR LS WEN A SURFACE WATER IS LO TED WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE PROJECT DISTURBANCE
LIMITS AND STORMWATER FLOWS TO THE SURFACE WATER.
X. IF P LYMERS. FLOCCULANTS. OR OTHER SEDIMENTATION TREATMENT CHEMICALS ME USED ON SITE.
THE GO TRACTOR MUST COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS.
TH CONTRACTOR MUST USE CONVENTIONAL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS PRIOR TO
CHEMICAL ADDITION TO ENSURE EFFECTIVE TREATMENT. CHEMICALS MAY ONLY BE APPLIED
WHE E TREATED STORMWATER IS DIRECTED TO A SEDIMENT CONTROL SYSTEM WHICH ALLOWS
FOR ME SETTLEMENT OF THE FLOC PRIOR TO DISCHARGE.
b. CH MICALS MUST BE SELECTED THAT ARE APPROPRIATELY SUITED TO THE TYPES OF SOILS
LIKELY TO BE EXPOSED DURING CONSTRUCTION. CHEMICALS MUST BE USED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH ACCEPTED ENGINEERING PRACTICES. AND WIN DOSING SPECIFICATION AND SEDIMENT
REMOVAL DESIGN SPECIFICATION PROVIDED BY THE MANUFACTURER.
4,
CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FOLLOWING DEWATERING REQUIREMENTS:
A. C WRACTOR'S DEWATERING ACTIVITIE THAT HAVE SEDIMENT -LADEN DISCHARGE WATER MUST BE
DISCHARGED INTO A TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASIN WHENEVER POSSIBLE,
OTHERWISE IT MUST E DISCHARGED THROUGH SOME FORM OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE (BMP)
BY CONTRACTOR To LIMIT SEDIMENT FROM UEMMG THE SITE. PRIOR TO DISCHARGE. THE
CON RACTOR SHALL PERFORM A VISUAL TEST TO ENSURE ADEQUATE TREATMENT IS OBTAINED IN THE
BASH OR BMP AND APPLY ADDITIONAL TREATMENT AS REQUIRED TO ENSURE ADEQUATE TREATMENT.
8. THE CONTRACTO SHALL DISCHARGE WATER FROM DIEWATERING IN A MANNER NAT WES NOT CAUSE
NUISANCE CONDITIONS. THE DISCHARGE WATER SHALL BE DISPERSED OVER AN ACCEPT D ENERGY
DISSI ATION MEASURE AND NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE RECEIVING WATER OR DOWNSTREAM
CMDDMERS OR WETLANDS.
C. IF CONTRACTOR IS USIN FILTERS WITH BACKWASH WATER. ME CONTRACTOR SHALL HAUL THE
BACKWASH WATER AWAY FOR DISPOSAL, RETURN THE BACKWAS WATER TO THE BEGINNING OF THE
TREATMENT PROCE S. OR INCORPORATE THE BACKWASH WATER INTO THE SIM IN A MANNER THAT
DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION.
5,
CONTRACTO SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PERFORMING THE FOLLOWING INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE:
A. WHEN INSPECTIONS FIND EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BIAPS THAT ME
NONFUNCTIONAL, ALL NONFUNCTIONAL BMPS MUST BE REPAIRED. REPLACED, OR SUPPL ENTED TH
FUNCTIONAL EMIRS WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER DISCOVERY OR OTHERWISE IN ACCOR CE WRH THE
NP ES PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO PLACE ANY ADDR'D = EROSION
CON ROL MEASURES DEEMED NECESSARY BY MPCA WITHIN 24 HOURS OF NOTICE FROM MPCA_
8. THE CONTRACTOR MUST ROUTINELY INSPECT THE SITE ONCE EVERY 7 DAYS DURING ACTIVE
CONSTRUCTION AND WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER A RAINFALL EVENT GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES IN 24
HOU S.
C. ALL INSPECTIONS AND MANTENANCE CONDUCTED DURING CONSTRUCTION MUST BE RECORDED IN
WRITING BY CONTRACTOR AND RETAINED WITH THE SWPPIP By CONTRACTOR. MAINTENANCE MUST BE
C MPLETED BY CONTRACTOR IN CONFORMANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT. CONTRACTOR'S RECORDS MUST
NCLUDE:
,. DATE AND TIME OF INSPECTION.
b. NAME OF PERSON CONDUCTING INSPECTION.
,. FINDING OF INSPECTION INCLUDING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION.
d. DETAILS OF CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN (DATE- TIME, PARTY COMPLETING MAINTENANCE
ACTIVITIES).
It. DATE AND MOUNT or RAINI GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES IN 24 HOURS.
I. IF MY DISCHARGE IS OBSERVED TO BE OCCURRING DURING THE INSPECWN. A RECORD OF
A L POINTS OF THE PROPERTY FROM WHICH THERE IS A DISCHARGE MUST BE MADE, AND THE
DISCHARGE SHALL BE DESCRIBED ICOLOR, ODOR. FLOATING, SETT ED, OR SUSPENDED SOLIDS,
FOAM, OIL SHEEN, AND OMER INDICATORS) AND PHOTOGRAPHED.
g. DOCUMENTATION OF CHANGES IMAGE TO SWPPP.
D� IN AREAS OF PROJECT WHERE FINAL STABILIZATION IS COMPLETE INSPECTIONS CAN BE REDUCED TO
ONCE A MONTH. THESE AREAS SHALL BE INSPECTED BY CONTRACTOR FOR MINIMUM PERIOD OF '2
NO -WINTER MONTHS AND WITHIN 24 HOURS OF FIRST SPRING RUNOFF OR PRIOR TO RESUMING
CONSTRUCTION FOLLOWING My WINTER STOPPAGE, WHICHEVER COMES FIRST.
E� THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF EMIRS UNTIL MOTHER
P RMITTEE HAS OBTAINED COVERAGE. OR THE PROJECT HAS UNDERGONE FINAL STABILIZATION AND AN
NOT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE MPCA.
F. ALL EM ION CONTROL MEASURES MUST BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED BY CONTRACTOR ACCORDING
TO THE DETAILS INCLUDED IN THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PRODUCT MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
G. ALL PERIMETER CONTROL DEVICES MUST BE REPAIRED. REPLACED OR SUPPLEMENTED By THE
CONTRACTO WHEN THEY BECOME NON-FUNCTIONAL. OR THE SEDIMENT REACHES ONE-HAUF THE
HEGHT OF THE DEVICE. CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPI_AC DEVICE THAT IS NONFUNCTIONAL
By THE END OF THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY AFTER DISCOVERY, OR THEREAFTER AS SOON AS FIELD
CONDITIONS ALLOW.
H. TEMP RARY AND PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASINS MUST BE DRAW AND SEDIMENT REMOVED BY
CONTRACTOR ONCE THE SEDIMENT COLLECTED REACHES ONE HALF THE STORAGE VOLUME WITH 72
HOURS OF DISCOVERY, OR AS SOON AS FIELD CONDITIONS ALLOW.
1. ALL SEDIMENT DEPOSITS WITHIN SURFACE WATERS OR STORMWATER Go ANCES MUST BE REMOVED
AND RESTABILIZED BY CONTRACTOR WITHIN 7 DAYS OF DISCOVERY OR SOONER IF IT PRESENTS A
FLOW RISK, INCLUDING DELTAS AND STORM SEWER SEDIMENT DEPOSITS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL
B RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL PERMITS REQUIRED. IF NECESSARY. FOR SUCH SEmmENT
REMOVAL.
j� CO RACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBI. FOR KEEPING EXISTING PAVED SURFACES CLEAN OF SEDIMENT
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHALL BE CHECKED DAILY BY CONTRACTOR. IF THE ENTRANCE BECOMES
INUNDATED WITH SEDIMENT, THE ENTRANCE WILL BE CLEANED OR REPLACED AS APPROPRIATE By
CONTRACTOR. STREETS LEADING TO AND FROM THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SHALL BE CHECKED
DAILY BY CONTRACTOR FOR OFF-SITE SE IMENT TRACKING ONTO PAVED SURFACES THESE AREAS
WILL BE SWEPT C EAN OF ANY TRACKED MATERIALS BY CONTRACTOR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AND
TIRTHIM 24 HOURS OF DISCOVERY AND AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXTEND
SWEEPING TO THE EXTREMITY OF ANY SEDIMENT TRACKING THAT OCCURS OFF-SiM.
K. CONTRAC OR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE TO REMOVE MY OFF-SITE SEDIMENT ACCUMULATIONS IN A
MANNER AND AT A FREQUENCY SUFFICIENT TO MINIMIZE OFF-SITE IMPACTS.
L. ALL INFILTRATION/FILTRATION AREAS MUST BE INSPECTED By CONTRACTOR TO ENSURE THAT NO
S DIMENT FROM ONGOING CONSTRUCTION IS ACCUMULATING OVER THE INFILTRATION/FILTRATION AREA.
SEDIMENT ACCUMULATED OVER INFILTRATION /RLTRATION MUST BE REMOVED BY CONTRACTOR.
M. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT INFILTRATION/FILTRATION AREAS FROM SEDIMENTATION AND
OVER -COMPACTION. DURING EXCAVATION. SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL DEVICES MUST BE
UTILIZED By CONTRACTOR TO PREVENT SEDIMENRATON AND THE AREA MUST BE STAKED OFF AND
MARKED SO THAT HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WILL NOT COMPACT THE SOIL.
N. INSPECTIONS CAN BE SUSPENDED DUE TO FROZEN GROUND CONDITIONS UNTIL FIRST RUNOFF
OCCURS OR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES RESUME.
CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RES NSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTING THE FOLLOWING POLLUTION PREVENTION
MANAGEMENT MEASUR S ON THE SITE:
A. THE COW TOR SHALL MINIMIZE THE EXP SURE OF ALL PRODUCTS, MATERIALS. AND WASTES FROM
STORMWAT R WHICH MAY BE A SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION TO STORMWATER DR ME NOT DESIGNED
TO BE EXPOSED TO STORMWATER.
B. BUILDING PRODUCTS THAT MAY UEkCH POLLUTANTS MUST BE UNDER COVER (PLASTIC SHEETING,
TEMPORARY ROOFS, ETC.) TO PREVENT THE DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS OR PROTECTED BY A
SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE CONTACT WITH STORMWATER.
C. PESTICIDES, HERBICIDES. INSECTICIDES, FERTILIZERS, TREATMENT CHEMICALS, AND LANDSCAPE
MATERIALS MUST BE UNDER COVER (PLASTIC SHEETING. TEMPORARY ROOFS. ETC ) TO PREVENT THE
DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS OR PROTECTED By A SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS RSIGNED TO MINIMIZE
CONTACT WITH STORMWATER.
D. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, TOXIC WASTE. (INCLUDING OIL, DIESEL FUEL, GASOLINE, HYDRAULIC FLUIDS,
PAINT SOLVENTS, PETROLEUM-BASED PRODUCTS, WOOD PRESERVATIVES. ADDITIVES, CURING
COMPOUNDS. AND ACIDS) MUST BE STORED IN SEALED CONTAINERS TO PREVENT SPILLS, LEAKS OR
OTHER DISCHARGE. RESTRICTED ACCESS STORAGE AREAS MUST BE PROVIDED TO PREVENT VANDALISM.
STOWE AND DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MUST COMPLY WITH ALL STATE REQUIREMENTS.
E. SOLID WASTE MUST BE STORED, COLLECTED. AND DISPOSED IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL STATE
REQUIREMENTS.
F. PORTABLE TOILETS MUST BE POSITIONED SO THAT THEY ARE SECURE AND WILL NOT BE TIPPED OVER.
SANITARY WASTE MUST BE DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL STATE REQUIREMENTS.
G. THE GO TRACTOR SHALL TAKE REASONABLE STEPS TO PREVENT THE DISCH RGE OF SPILLED OR
LEAKED CHEMICALS, INCLUDING FUEL, FROM ALI_ AREAS WHERE CHEMICALS OR FUEL WILL BE LOADED
OR UNLOADED. THE CONTRACTOR MUST CONDUCT FUELING IN A CONTAINED ARISA UNLESS INFENSHEILE.
THE CONTRACTOR MUST ENS RE ADEQUATE SUPPLIES ME AVAILABLE AT ALL TIMES TO CLEAN UP
DISCHAR ED MATERIALS AND THAT AN APPROPRIATE DIS OSAL METHOD IS AVAILABLE FOR RECOVERED
SPILLED MATERIALS. ALL SPILLS MUST BE CLEANED UP AND REPORTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE
REQUIREMENTS. DRY CLEAN UP MEASURES SHALL BE USED WHERE POSSIBLE.
H. THE CONTRACTO MUST UNIT VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT WASHING TO A DEFINED AR MEN
C MPLETED ON ME PROJECT SITE. RUNOFF FROM THE WASHING AREA MUST E CONTAINED IN A
SEDIMENT BASIN OR OMER SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE CONTROLS AND WASTE FROM T E WASHING ACTIVITY
MUST BE PROPERLY DISPOSED OF. THE CONTRACTOR MUST PROPERLY USE AND STORE SOAPS.
DETERGENTS, OR SOLVENTS. NO ENGINE DECREASING IS ALLOWED ONSITE.
I THE CONTRACT R MUST PROVIDE EFFECTIVE CONTAINMENT FOR ALL LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES
GENERATED BY WASJiOUT OPERATIONS (CONCRETE. STUCCO, PAINT, FORM RELEASE OILS. CURING
COMPOV DS. AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS) RELATED TO THE PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
ACTIV3Y. NO WASHO T WASTES MAY CONTACT THE GROUND. AND THE CONTAINMENT MUST BE
DESIGNED SO THAT IT DOES NOT RESULT IN RUNOFF FROM THE WASHOUT OPERATIONS OR ME
LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL MPCA
R LES. A SIGN MUST BE INSTALLED ADJACENT TO EACH WASHOUT FACILITY TH. REQUIRES SITE
PERS NNEL TO UTILIZE PROPER FACILITIES FOR DISPOSAL OF CONCRETE AND OTHER WASHOUT
WASTES.
7.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE FINAL STABILIZATION OF THE SITE. FINAL STABILIZATION REQUIRES THE
FO LOWING:
A. AL SOIL DISTURBING ACTIVRES ME COMPLETE AND A UNIFORM PERENNIAL VEGETATIVE COVER "TH
A DE SITY OF 70% OVER THE ENTIRE PERVIO S SURFACE HAS BEEN ACHIEVED, INCLUDING
STAGI IZATION OF ALL DITCHES AND SWALES.
B. CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT ALL PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS ME
CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PERMIT.
C� CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY SYNTHETIC AND STRUCTURAL BMPS.
-THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE THE SW PP. INCLUDING ALL CERTIFICATES REPORTS. RECORDS, OR OTHER
INFORMATION OF THE PERMIT, AVAILABLE TO F DERAIL. STATE. OR LOCAL OFFICIALS WITHIN 72 HOURS UPON
R QUEST FOR THE DURATION OF THE PERMIT AND FOR THREE YEARS FOLLOWING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE
NOTICE OF TERMINATION.
-TH CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE THE RESPONSIBLE PERSON, TRAINED AS REQUIRED By THIS PERMIT,
AVAILABLE ON SITE WITHIN 72 HOURS WHEN REQUESTED BY THE MPCA FOR AN ONSITE INSPECTION.
-THE CONTRACTOR MUST ALLOW ACCESS AS REQUIRED BY STATE REGULATIONS FOR REPRESENTATIVES OF
THE MPCA OR My MEMBER THEREOF MEN AUTHORIZED BY IT, TO ENTER UPON THE PROJECT SITE FOR
THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING INFORMATION. EXAMINATION OF RECORDS, OR CONDUCTING SURVEYS OR
INVESTIGATIONS.
-PERMITTE MUST SUBMIT A NOTICE OF TERMINATION (NOT) WITHIN 30 DAYS IF ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN MET:
1. FINAL STABILIZATION HAS BEEN ACHIEVED ON ALL PORTIONS OF THE SITE FOR WHIG PERIAITTEE IS
RESPONSIBLE INCLUDING THE REMOVAL OF ALL TEMPORARY MEASURES SUCH AS SILT FENCE.
2. MOTHER OMER HAS ASSUMED CONTROL OVER ALL PORTIONS OF ME SITE THAT HAVE NOT ACHIEVED
FINAL STABILIZATION.
a. Qu&uQLjjD_swp_pe
-THE PERM17EE MUST MEND THE SWPPP AS NECESSARY TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. SUCH AS
ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS. DESIGNED TO CORRECT PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED OR ADDRESS SITUATIONS
WHENEVER:
1. MERE IS A CHANGE IN DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION. OPERATION OR MAINTENANCE. WEATHER OR SEASONAL
CO ORIONS THAT HAVE SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON DISCHARGE- INSPECTION IS REQUIRED WITHIN 24 HOURS
OF A RAINFALL EVENT GREATER THAN ONE-HALF INCH.
2. INSPECTION OR INVESTIGATION BY SITE OPERATORS, LOCAL, STATE OR FEDERAL OFFICIALS INDICATE THE
SWPPP IS NOT EFFECTIVE.
3. ME SWPPP IS NOT ACHIEVING THE GENERAL OBJECTIVE OF CONTROLLING POLLUTANTS OR THE swPPP IS
NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS PERMIT.
4. ME MPCA OETERMINES THAT DISCHARGE MAY CAUSE OR CONTRIBUTE TO NON -ATTAINMENT OF ANY
APPLICAB E WATER QUALITY STANDARDS OR THE SWPPP DOES NOT INCORPORATE THE REQUIREMENTS
RELATED TO AN APPROVED TOTAL MAXIMUM ONLY LOAD (TMDL).
9. 5WRIPE-UMIECAIM;
- THIS STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAIN WAS PREPARED BY INDIVDUAI_(S) TRAINED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE PERMIT'S TRAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION OF SWPPP& IND.DuAL(S)
PREPARING THIS SWPPP:
PATRICK SVEUM, P.E.
RIEKE RINI AND ASSOCIATES
PATISPIERCEPINILCOM
763-537-1311
TRAIN$NG/CERTIFICATION
DATE OF TRAINING/CERTIFICATION: 2016
CERTIFICATION PROGRAM: UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA - DESIGN OF CONSTRUCTION SWPPP
ARDEN HILLS. MN
INSTRUCTOI JOHN CHAIRMAN
CERTIFICATION EXPIRATION: 2019
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
211 IST STREET NORN, SURE 3SO
INNNEAMUS, MIN SHH
1 -7. -1
PIERCE PINI
ASSOCIATES
9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE,
SUITE 312
BLAINE, MN 55434
TEL 763.537.1311
FAX 763.537.1354
FERNDALE ROAD
R E S I D E N C E
1895 FERNDALE ROAD W, ORONO, MIN 56391
- d-.. - tN.nI,A1 h..,, d.dN .11
-1-1 , -NP, �p�.,, th-,
X,V,, ,,d ,1 d�pld �
--ly .0-,' 1, -1. w. A-1 IN,
-P- AS �y III
At, ft -
0 C�pyng t 2016 T-. Lt.. ftdl.. LUC. All ngHP
h -by
111yJI-P-1-IdthIll
d,,ly
I. S_
PATRICK BVBUM
IN 11
NOTE; NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
II F.
12.. .1B
04-B6-7
-.g:
SWPPP- NARRATIVE
D. By: Rms.
U_ ov-017
Sh.: C601
x
e
INSTAI-1- ROCK CONSTRUCTION
ENTRANCE AT A LOCATION WHERE
CON TRUCTION VEHICLES ENTER
AN EXIT THE SITE, SEE DETAIL
4/C60 . CONTRACTOR My USE
OTHER METHODS AS APPROVED
BY ENGINEER
PBP
z 2 CO CRETE WASHOUT
AREA PER MPCA
STANDARDS. CONTRACTOR
TO FIELD LOCATE
D RING CONSTRUCTION
INS L EROSION CONTROL AT ALL C8
WITHIN PROJECT AND DRAINAGE AREA ATER I -E-929.0
D NSTREAM OF PROJECT. TYPICAL, S E
DETAIL Z/CBO�, 7/C604 AND 9/ClD!
c� N� RE
99300
2- I�ELL7E 9V67929,0
R.
c).
v
\� 0 2
15
12
"ol
\A
\A 3
5'
12"
CD
[RON E-/
1 4
11211"'PRE/
"'PR"Rp"t"
T� w —OP
NSTA-L TR
—IT
OF GRADING ACTIVITY, TYPICAI-, —nS T�CREMAIN. SEE
INSTAL FLOATING SILT CURTAIN D
ALO G LAKESHORE DOWNSTREAM 301 FENCING A CURD ALL
E� 604
SEE DETAIL 8/0604
BE
M/At/vEp 1."A"l /2P
IRON PIPE
O/vi(/,
INSTALL PERIMETER ER I
CONTR L AT ALL DOW R
EDGES OF THE SITE E
DETAIL 1 /C604 AND 5 0 .
TYPICAL
NORTH
/-T'�STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN - EXISTING CONDITIONS
20' 40* 60'
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
211 IST STREET NORTH
NUMNEAMLIjSUITE3ED
t 5127600494
PIERCE PINI
ASSOCIATES
9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE,
SUITE 312
BLAINE, MIN 55434
TEL 763.537.1311
FAX 763.537.1354
FERNDALE ROAD
R E S I D E N C E
PR, d-.. — Pd —S-1 h..,, Pd.d,, .11
-1 — grRpR. ..d p�.— th—,
P,p RN� IM —111 6p—d
T—is - -R
ULC —1— r '—,J
I h-bl rVy th. thl� P., �r -1 —
. ty ., — . .. Ih. I
d,,ly L �d P—i— E,,XP—.-, th� 1.
B—
"S—
PATRICK SVEUM
01.2017
NOTE: NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
R
—2-2017
—F
SWPPP- EXISTING
CONDITIONS
D. By: R.$.
D." BE2017
Sh- C602
"><
0, SAN MH
PI—S- INSTALL ROCK CONSTR CTION
C NSTRUCTION VEHICLES ENTER
ENTRANCE AT A LOCATION WHERE
C)� AND EXIT THE SITE. SEE DETAIL
4/C&O . CONTRACTOR MAY USE
OT ER METHODS AS APPROVED
ITY ENGINEER
CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA PE MPrA
STANDARDS. CONTRACTOR TO FIELD
LOCATE DURING CONSTRUCTION
0
61\ ly S/�
21,40
INSTAL EROSION CONTROL AT A�L, CEI INS L TREE PR T COON
FEN G AROUND L
DOWNSTREAM OF PROJECT, Tf ICAL S E e TRE S TO REMAIN, EE
WITHIN PROJECT AND DRAINAGE AREA\
SE
DETAIL 3/C6N. 7/CSO4 AND 9/C�D4 DETAIL 6/C604
4�
0) 'F."IPE IF
INSTALL EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS ON
ALL SLOPES GREATER THAN 5:1 WITHIN
P JECT AND DR.NAGE AREA
D NSTREAM OF PROJECT, —ICAL, SEE
DETAIL 2/C6D4, SHOWN AS HATCHED
AREAS
2 2 2,
,
2
A/
\A
0.
FOUN 1 'o�
A,
A,
R., H
FE
'0. PI,
15 # # I
INSTALL FLOATING SILT CURTA
A NG I-AKESHORE 00.145=42.0
0 GRADING ACTIVITY, TYPICAL 0 ,
..% x�
SEE DETAIL 8/C604 cx'S"�
UO "V
INSTALL EROSION CONTROL
GBLANXETS ON AL SLOPES
RTER THNN 5:1 WITHIN
A
E
PROJECT AND DMINAGE AREA
% %:, Do
FOUND, SP 'WNSTR OF PRCUECT.
/2" PICAL, ME DETAIL 2/C604
C- /W//V/VL
OIVK4
INSTALL PERIM R EROS N
CO ROL. SEE D L 1 6D
AND 5/C60�.. PI
NORTH
r-l'\STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN - PROPOSED CONDITIONS
\$�Loy 0 20' �O' 60'
III
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
211 IST STREET NORTH
MINNSAPOLIIISUITE30
.N—N
1 1112-4
PIERCE PINI
ASSOCIATES
9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE,
SUITE 312
BLAINE, MIN 55434
TEL 763.537.1311
FAX 763.537.1354
FERNDALE ROAD
R E S I D E N C E
1895 FERNDALE ROAD W, ORONO, MN 55391
- d-.. — - —n� h..,, d,l .11
—.1 — phi. p�.— th—,
� Pp AA� IM �.—[ .0,X, 6p—d �
'_-q . —, o — — FU'. .—' TX
— -nni. � & T—Is - -�
U -C —I.S. b, —d
AS
wi , ft —
0 �pyng t 2016 T—. U.. S-.. U -C. All dgHS
I h�by wtfy ft IN, P�1, 1plffl�[11, �, -ft 11,
:P�— by .111 M, M d1d 11P-11� - th,A I
d�ly L �d P—i— E�g,—.-, th� 1.
"S—
PATRICK SVEUM
NOTE: NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
.—C
04-17
—.g:
SWPPP- PROPOSED
CONDITIONS
D— 'Y: Pw s.
D-, —642017
Sh- C603
WIRE MESH REINFORCEMENT.
DA A;��GHSFABRIC TO MR MESH
WWITH
H CID RINGS, PER MNDOT
SP
P TI N 3886 BI.
S E
EC
METAL (OR WOO C DO
POST OR STAKE SILT FE CE
FABRIC
ANC"Ogf
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
MEN . X
WITH TAMr
ED
1. SET FENCES SHOULD BE INSTALLED ON
�FABRICC
NATURAL SOIL
THE CONTOUR (AS OPPOSED TO UP AND
OPENING IN NET
DOWN A HILL) AND CONSTRUCTED SO
DIRECTION OF
61fr
THAT FLOW CANNOT BYPASS THE ENDS.
RUNOFF FLOW
Lo
2. ENSURE THAT TH DRAINAGE AREA IS NO
-5
GREATER THAN 1/� ACRE PER 100 FT OF
STAPLES AT 3' O.0
FENCE.
6'
3. MAK THE FENCE STABLE FOR THE
MIN
10 -YEAR PEAK STORM RUNOFF.
NA'. SOIL
4. WHERE ALL RUNO F IS TO BE STORED
NOTE: SILT FENCE SHALL FOLLOW
BE IND THE SILT FENCE, ENSURE THAT
TH MAXIMUM SLOPE LENGTH BEHIND
MNDOT SPEC. SECTION 3886.
THE FENCE DOES NOT EXCEED THE
FIGURE 1 TYPICAL INSTALLATION FOR SILT FENCE
SPECIFICATIONS SHOWN IN TABLE 1.
TABLE I M"IMUM SLOPE LENGTH AND SLOPE FOR WHICH SILT FENCE IS APPLICABLE
BY CALCULATION
BY CALCULATION 8 ACCEPTED
DESIGN PRACTICES
------- S
LOPE
PERCENT SILT FENCE STORAGE SILT FENCE STORAGE EOLIALS 2 FT MAKM M SLOPE
F -
.:V
EOUALES 2 FT FOR A FOR A 2 -YEAR EVENT OR 3 FT FOR LENGTH
I 00 -YEAR EVENT A 100 -YEAR EVENT
ION
400 FT
900 FT Do
io
il
200 FT
450 FT 75 FT
(2)HEAVY DUTY SILT FENCE
��4� NO SCALE
21-11-P
1. OIL ABSORBENT PILLOW SHALL BE
REMOVED AND REPLACED MEN NEAR
SATURATON
2. PROVIDE BTRUM AS MANUFACTURED
BY DANDY GO NC,
3. AN E LIVALENT CURB INLET
EROSION CONTROL VETH D OR
PRO LOT MAY BE USED WITH
APPROVAL FROM ENGINEER.
EXTEND MATERIAL
ABOUT 40" ON TOP OF
THE GROUND AND
RANDOM. INSERT
STAPLES THROUG THE
MA�E
PIERIAL ABOUT 20'
A ET
AT INLET
—OIL ABSORBENT PILLOW
S GOLD BE PARTIALLY
BLOCKING THE CURB HOOD
WHEN INSTALLED PROPERLY
1) ALL TREE PROTECTION FENCING AND ER SION CONTROL FENCING SHAM BE IN TAMED
AC ORDING TO THE PLANS PRIOR TO ANY DEMOLITION. AFTER DEMOUTION OR AS NECESSARY.
MEE PROT CTION FENCING MAY BE RELOCATED WITH APPROVAL FROM THE LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT. — TREE PROTEC ION FENCING AND EROSION CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE
MAINTAINED FOR THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.
2) CONTRACTOR SHAM NOT STORE ANY MATERIALS OR PARK ANY VEHICLES IN TREE PROTECTION
ZON S. THE FENCE SHAM PREVENT TRAIEFC MOVEMENT AND THE PLACEMENT OF TEMPORARY
FACILITIES, FOUIPMENT. STOCKPILES AND SUPPLIES FROM HARMING VEGETATION WITHIN THE
LIMITS OF PROTECTION.
3) THE CONTRACTOR SHAM CLEANLY CUT ALL ROOTS EXPOSED BY GRADING AS DIRECTED BY
THE ANDSCARE ARCHITECT.
4) THE CONTRACTOR SHAM USE DESIGNATED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES AND STAGING AREAS
DRIPUNE
4— —
TREE PROTECTION FENCING
WETUT
FINISH -
-DE
WIRE SCREEN
112 OPENINGS
R =GGED WTTH
SEDIMENT, REMOVE
STONE,
N— .1 KONE METER
oME
CLEAN AND
REPLACE.
WATER
BALES STAKED IN
T-1 PEACE
INLET
CASITING
��NYLOPLAST INLET PROTECTION
lq�0�4 NO SCALE
0
NO SCALE
SMAPS
_�CB INSERT
,�OIL ABSORB NT PILLOW SHALL
BE PLACED IN THE POUCH ON
TH BOTTOM, ATTACH PILLOW
TO TETHER LOOP
�—.U.Pl.. STRAPS
1. OIL ABSORBE T PILLOW SHALL BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WHEN NEAR SATURATION
2 US DANDYID BAG 11 AS MANUFACTURED BY j)A=@-EffiMULja-jftC.
3: AN EQUI%%LEN CATC"BASIN EROSION CONTROL INSERT METHOD OR PRODUCT MAY
BE USED WITH PRIOR APPROVAL FROM ENGINEER.
CATCH BASIN INSERT
IQ60�4 NO SCALE
SEG.ENT
ON
=-c.
I SKERT (UETTTH
'- " ' --H
VARIER)
IAMAST
T
10' MIN LENGTH
PRE -DRILLED HOLES\
OR -0.5
TUCK THE ENCLOSURE FULAF
��E
STAKE
OPENING IN NET
INSIDE TO COMPLETELY
OIL -SOE PILLOW
OIL
O'R LOG 6
C Co' LOG
R 6 7
ENCLOSE THE GRATE
LALISORBENT
SHALL BE WIDER THAN
S
T THE IN T
HE INLET OPENING ON
'V
EDO VALENT MATERIAL MAY BE
MATERIAL MAY BE
E .. S'
ACH SIDE
STAPLES AT 3' O.0
OIL ABSORBEN PILLOW SHALL BE PLACED IN NEC
HALL K _ LAIMD_� .1 SILIT RATI I
LACE INLET GRATE INTO
STAPLES MUST BE
INSERTED THROUGH
THE POUCH ON THE BOTTOM (BEL -GRADE RAME THROUGH THE
OM
SIDE) OF THE UNIT. ATTACH PILL . TO TETHER IFTING
OVERILAR MATERIAL
L DEVICE LOOPS
LOOP
BASIN CURB BOX INLET
2/3 OF LOG
0 ED.
r3NCATCH
T SVERSE S:
'�- �O4 NO SCALE
BLANKET MAT MUST
OVERLAP AT . '.
STAPI. S INSE TE THRO CH
BO H FABRICS AT A
MAXIMUM SPACING OF 20"
APART
LONGITUDNAL SEAMS:
-D OF SLOPE
BLANKET MAT RLLAL MUST SECURE B1ANXET
OVERLAP AT LEAST 6" AND MATERIAL BY INSERTING
S LES INSERTED THROUGH STAPLES ABOUT 20"
APART THROUGH THE
BOTH FABRICS AT A
MAXIMUM SPACING OF 40" FABRIC
NOTES: APART
1 ERD ION CONTROL BlANKET TO BE GATED RY 4 -COCONUT 2S FOR SLOPES REATER THAN
2" WASHED COMSE
5:1 AND SIDES AND B070M OF ALL DRAINAGE SWALES AND PONDING AREAS AND
CATEGO 2 -STRAW 2S FOR ALL SLOPES LESS THAN 5:1 PER MNDOT SPEC. SECTION
3BB5.
AGGREGATE 12" THICK 1�
GMINIMUM WITH
EOTEXTIL 0
2. INSTALL PER MNDOT SPEC. SECTION 2575
UNDERIAYMENT
r2---�EROSION CONTROL BLANKET
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
\C NO SCALE
(2:)GRAVEL
, �O4
IQ!O�4 NO SCALE
1) ALL TREE PROTECTION FENCING AND ER SION CONTROL FENCING SHAM BE IN TAMED
AC ORDING TO THE PLANS PRIOR TO ANY DEMOLITION. AFTER DEMOUTION OR AS NECESSARY.
MEE PROT CTION FENCING MAY BE RELOCATED WITH APPROVAL FROM THE LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT. — TREE PROTEC ION FENCING AND EROSION CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE
MAINTAINED FOR THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.
2) CONTRACTOR SHAM NOT STORE ANY MATERIALS OR PARK ANY VEHICLES IN TREE PROTECTION
ZON S. THE FENCE SHAM PREVENT TRAIEFC MOVEMENT AND THE PLACEMENT OF TEMPORARY
FACILITIES, FOUIPMENT. STOCKPILES AND SUPPLIES FROM HARMING VEGETATION WITHIN THE
LIMITS OF PROTECTION.
3) THE CONTRACTOR SHAM CLEANLY CUT ALL ROOTS EXPOSED BY GRADING AS DIRECTED BY
THE ANDSCARE ARCHITECT.
4) THE CONTRACTOR SHAM USE DESIGNATED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES AND STAGING AREAS
DRIPUNE
4— —
TREE PROTECTION FENCING
WETUT
FINISH -
-DE
WIRE SCREEN
112 OPENINGS
R =GGED WTTH
SEDIMENT, REMOVE
STONE,
N— .1 KONE METER
oME
CLEAN AND
REPLACE.
WATER
BALES STAKED IN
T-1 PEACE
INLET
CASITING
��NYLOPLAST INLET PROTECTION
lq�0�4 NO SCALE
0
NO SCALE
SMAPS
_�CB INSERT
,�OIL ABSORB NT PILLOW SHALL
BE PLACED IN THE POUCH ON
TH BOTTOM, ATTACH PILLOW
TO TETHER LOOP
�—.U.Pl.. STRAPS
1. OIL ABSORBE T PILLOW SHALL BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WHEN NEAR SATURATION
2 US DANDYID BAG 11 AS MANUFACTURED BY j)A=@-EffiMULja-jftC.
3: AN EQUI%%LEN CATC"BASIN EROSION CONTROL INSERT METHOD OR PRODUCT MAY
BE USED WITH PRIOR APPROVAL FROM ENGINEER.
CATCH BASIN INSERT
IQ60�4 NO SCALE
SEG.ENT
ON
=-c.
I SKERT (UETTTH
'- " ' --H
VARIER)
IAMAST
T
10' MIN LENGTH
PRE -DRILLED HOLES\
OR -0.5
-
-.5
��E
STAKE
OPENING IN NET
SOIL
O'R LOG 6
C Co' LOG
R 6 7
INSTALL SHREDDED HARDWOOD
M� H NO OR RE
MULCH MNDOT TYPE 6)
LC
MINIMUM DLET"E �\
'V
EDO VALENT MATERIAL MAY BE
MATERIAL MAY BE
SUBSTITUTED AT THE DISCRETION OF
SR AT THE DISCRETION
THE ENGINEER.
I ER
STAKE DRIVEN
GG
THEO GH LOG
1 /3 OF L
J/
MESH
_j
2/3 OF LOG
0 ED.
r,---�COIR LOG
II�0�4 NO SCALE
UN—SAL C0NTTSC1DR FOCIT—ON SEGMENT
- TOP TENSION CAERE
TOP LOAD LINE
GROMMETS T
FLOATING SILT CURTAIN
SHORELINE ANCHORING
SHO
"NCHO
S E
Ho
ED
G
/W
GRO1TND WORK
C.-
lE IVA1UR
TO UDD,
cuETAEN
SH- CHANNEH,
ANCHOR ANCHOR
PLAN VIEW
NO SCALE
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
211 IST STREET NORTH, SURE 3W
MINNEAMUS, MIN 5WI
1 612-4
PIERCE PINI
ASSOCIATES
9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE,
SUITE 312
BLAINE, MN 55434
TEL 763.537.1311
FAX 763.537.1354
FERNDALE ROAD
R E S I D E N C E
1895 FERNDALE ROAD W, ORONO, IN 56391
d-.. —ni-I h..,, d.dN .11
-1 , E�� - �p�.. th.—E
RNP � 1�d 1-11 � 10�. d�pld
AS �y i�
0 C�pyng t 2016 T-. U.. —1.. ME. All dIft
h -by
:�P.Y.111 Illy--p-1—IdthIll
��ly L �d P—i—I E�C �, ft
L. S— . ..
PATRICK SVIllUM
N—: NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
I.. R.
124.
0242-2-
-g:
SWPPP- DETAILS
D— 1, P.W s.
ov-017
Sh- C604
-SE PLAIN
FOR PIPE
P R
FOOT
fB" PRECAST OR
C.1 P. BASE
NO ES;
1 '
MANHOLES 8' OR DEEPER THE PRECAST SECTION IMMEDIATELY BELOW THE CONCRETE
2 SECTION SHALL BE V -O" HIGH.
3. PROVIDE STEPS IN MANHOLES OVER 4-0 IN DEPTH.
REINFORCING SH UL BE A MINIMUM OF A SINGLE UNE WIRE FABRIC HAVING AN AREA OF
4. NOT LES THAN 0.12 SO. IN. PER FOOT OF HEIGHT.
PROVIDE SNAP -IN BOOT AT ALL SANITARY SEWER CONNECTIONS TO MA14HOLES.
/,'�iSTANDARD SEWER MANHOLE
lqioy No 95a -
PROVIDE R DENT SCREEN
ON END OF DRAIN TILE
/STALL I CY OF 1 -2 -
CRUSHED ROCK AT DAYLIGHT
IN
LOCATION OF DRAIN PEE
GEOTEXTILE. TYPICAL (MNDOT
3733. TYPE V) UNDER ROCK
6 STORM DRAIN DAYLIGHT DETAIL
,Qoy NO SCALE
S OPE CONCRETE
COU_AR TO DRAIN
!Nh�-NM� VARE POLYLEFIN WITH
U.V. INHIBITOR 24"124" SQUARE
J"t GALV STEEL GRATE KIDS
PLAN #2415V OR APPROVED EQUAL
BUILDING DOWNSPOUT
-4; R FER TO ARCHRECTURAL
Y�RIM ELI -ION, SEE GRADING PLAIN
Co KFILL ITH
COMPACTED SOIL
NOS 24" SQUARE CATCH BASIN
OR'
N
AFF
SLO
S STO
OR PROVED EQUAL
NDS UNIVERSAL 0 TLET OR
APPROVED EQUAL
SLOPE ALL AT 6" PVC OUTLETS TO
TORM SEW R AT 2% MINIMUM. SEE
DOW SPOUT DRAINAGE PIN
INVERT EL TION, SEE UTILITY PLAIN
4'-0" 2 LAYERS 4'.4'.1' HIGH
DENS" INSULAT ON.
S ST. j
TAGGER DINT
CRUSHED AND COMPACTED
ELEVATIO
1.25 B. MINIMUM
NOTE: THE PIPE IS BEDDED
IN COMPACTED GRA LEAR
MATERAL UP TO A HEIGHT
EQU L TO ONE SIXTH THE
OLITSDE DIAMETER OF THE
PPE. THE DEPTH OF THE
/,COMPACTED BEDDING MATERIAL BELOW
GRANULAR THE PIPE IS A MINIMUM OF
1/6 B MAT R 3" FOR 27' DIAMETER AND
SMALLER PIPE, 6- FOR 66-
DIAMET R AND LARGER PIPE.
AND 4" FOR INTERMEDIATE
SIZES. THE REMAINING
I I EMBANK ENT MATERIAL IS
GRANULAR FOUNDATION LIGHTLY COMPACTEID.
CLASS C
/�CLASS C PIPE BEDDING
t 3
lqioy NO SCALF-
NOTE: STORMWATER PIPE'S
WITH LESS THAN 3' OF
COVER WILL REQUIRE
INSULATION.
2' POLYSTYRENE
INSULATION
PER SPECIFICATIONS
�TEO NATIVE SOIL
r __'�CATCH BASIN AT DOWNSPOUT r -'\PIPE INSULATION
2 4
\Qoy NO SCALE \I� �00 NO SCALE
NYLOPLAST 24' DRAIN BASIM 2824AG--X
TOP OF CASTING TO BE FLUSH WITH
FINISH GRADE AT PAVED AREAS; I"
ABOVE FINISH GRADE IN LANDSCAPED
'AS
2" ADJUSTING RINGS AS REO'D.
(2 -MIN, 4 -MAX.) FUEL BED OF
MORTAR BET EEN RINGS -MORTAR
.Nl
OUTSIDE OF RINGS
A
27"0 MAN OLE FRAME AND COVER -ST 04
NAMOMI
U.N.O. S E SCHEDULE WITH MACHINED
ING SURFACES AND 2
DEPTH
CO CEALED PICK HOLES OR
AP ROVED EQUIVALENT
7121111`5W" ��IVAYE
w W�IVNM
RECAST CONCRETE
MANHOLE PER ASTM C478
STEPS-NEENAN R -1980E
48" ALUMINUM 0 16"O.C.
U.N.O. (DOWNSTREAM)
p
ALL BUTTED JOINTS
BETWEEN SECTIONS
SHALL HAVE "0' RING
RUBBER GASKETS
-SE PLAIN
FOR PIPE
P R
FOOT
fB" PRECAST OR
C.1 P. BASE
NO ES;
1 '
MANHOLES 8' OR DEEPER THE PRECAST SECTION IMMEDIATELY BELOW THE CONCRETE
2 SECTION SHALL BE V -O" HIGH.
3. PROVIDE STEPS IN MANHOLES OVER 4-0 IN DEPTH.
REINFORCING SH UL BE A MINIMUM OF A SINGLE UNE WIRE FABRIC HAVING AN AREA OF
4. NOT LES THAN 0.12 SO. IN. PER FOOT OF HEIGHT.
PROVIDE SNAP -IN BOOT AT ALL SANITARY SEWER CONNECTIONS TO MA14HOLES.
/,'�iSTANDARD SEWER MANHOLE
lqioy No 95a -
PROVIDE R DENT SCREEN
ON END OF DRAIN TILE
/STALL I CY OF 1 -2 -
CRUSHED ROCK AT DAYLIGHT
IN
LOCATION OF DRAIN PEE
GEOTEXTILE. TYPICAL (MNDOT
3733. TYPE V) UNDER ROCK
6 STORM DRAIN DAYLIGHT DETAIL
,Qoy NO SCALE
S OPE CONCRETE
COU_AR TO DRAIN
!Nh�-NM� VARE POLYLEFIN WITH
U.V. INHIBITOR 24"124" SQUARE
J"t GALV STEEL GRATE KIDS
PLAN #2415V OR APPROVED EQUAL
BUILDING DOWNSPOUT
-4; R FER TO ARCHRECTURAL
Y�RIM ELI -ION, SEE GRADING PLAIN
Co KFILL ITH
COMPACTED SOIL
NOS 24" SQUARE CATCH BASIN
OR'
N
AFF
SLO
S STO
OR PROVED EQUAL
NDS UNIVERSAL 0 TLET OR
APPROVED EQUAL
SLOPE ALL AT 6" PVC OUTLETS TO
TORM SEW R AT 2% MINIMUM. SEE
DOW SPOUT DRAINAGE PIN
INVERT EL TION, SEE UTILITY PLAIN
4'-0" 2 LAYERS 4'.4'.1' HIGH
DENS" INSULAT ON.
S ST. j
TAGGER DINT
CRUSHED AND COMPACTED
ELEVATIO
1.25 B. MINIMUM
NOTE: THE PIPE IS BEDDED
IN COMPACTED GRA LEAR
MATERAL UP TO A HEIGHT
EQU L TO ONE SIXTH THE
OLITSDE DIAMETER OF THE
PPE. THE DEPTH OF THE
/,COMPACTED BEDDING MATERIAL BELOW
GRANULAR THE PIPE IS A MINIMUM OF
1/6 B MAT R 3" FOR 27' DIAMETER AND
SMALLER PIPE, 6- FOR 66-
DIAMET R AND LARGER PIPE.
AND 4" FOR INTERMEDIATE
SIZES. THE REMAINING
I I EMBANK ENT MATERIAL IS
GRANULAR FOUNDATION LIGHTLY COMPACTEID.
CLASS C
/�CLASS C PIPE BEDDING
t 3
lqioy NO SCALF-
NOTE: STORMWATER PIPE'S
WITH LESS THAN 3' OF
COVER WILL REQUIRE
INSULATION.
2' POLYSTYRENE
INSULATION
PER SPECIFICATIONS
�TEO NATIVE SOIL
r __'�CATCH BASIN AT DOWNSPOUT r -'\PIPE INSULATION
2 4
\Qoy NO SCALE \I� �00 NO SCALE
NYLOPLAST 24' DRAIN BASIM 2824AG--X
.Nl
:E
A
NAMOMI
DEPTH
DEPTH
7121111`5W" ��IVAYE
w W�IVNM
momm==mmm
p
mommm=mmm
umammmmmm
mommmmmmm
mommmmmmm
vo_�_
bw"*m�
mammmmmmm
mmom=mmmm
mommmmmmm
W-1—
moommmmmm
J- -j-
NY14LMC
1. IMM.
NYLOFLAST MIN BASIN W(TH DOME GRATE
.Nl
A
11116"Im'"Im
DEPTH
DEPTH
7121111`5W" ��IVAYE
w W�IVNM
momm==mmm
p
mommm=mmm
umammmmmm
mommmmmmm
mommmmmmm
ummmmm=mm
mammmmmmm
mmom=mmmm
mommmmmmm
W-1—
moommmmmm
TIE EAST (3) JOINTS ON INLET & OUTLET NOTES:
" ' �A --
TER LVANZD TIE
W/ 2-3/4' DIAMETER GALVANIZED TIE B
'T
DOLT FASTENERS PER JOINT INSTALLED AT (D FOR PIPES GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO 30", USE 1.5%
SU FROM TOP OF TH CONTRACTOR, MAY SUBSTITUTE A GEOTEXTILE FABRIC.
PIPE
PER MIN DOT SPEC. SECTION 3601, FOR THE GRA14U
FILTER BLANKET U.N.O. THE FABRIC SHOULD COVER THE
AREA OF THE RIPRAP AND EXTEND UNDER THE CULVERT
A _A f� AFRON 3 FEET.
S
PROVIDE TRASH GUARDS -HAND PLACED RIPRAP. INDIVIDUAL STONES
WHERE INDICATED ON SHALL NOT WEIGH LESS THAN 50 LBS. EXCEPT
PLANS WITH 5/8- THOSE USED FOR C.INKIN.
DIAMETER RODS 0 CO.C.
RASH G D
TO Fi_ARED END *RN (3)
� 2 COATS BLACK PAN',
CONNECT T
HINGED CONNECTIONS (2 X
BOTTOM AND 1 Top)
BOLTED TO CONCRETE,o I
CO%LCTAI RAPS (D
ON 'Tl
BE V NIZED 21/13- . 1.
WITH 5/8- DIAMETER
BOLTS.
MIRAFI 77ODx GEOTEEXRUE OR
FILTER I IET. SEE
TABLE Fr.EPT. (g) SECTION A—
HAND PLACED RIPRAP -\ 6
SEE TABLE FOR DEPT�J .1
T,47:7__�
MIRAFI 700. GEOTEXTILE OR�
FILTER BLANKET;TISEE
TABLE FOR DEF
PROA E RIPRAP A, GRANUI_AR FILTER
(PER MNDOT 2511) AS FOLLOWS
.Nl
A
11116"Im'"Im
DEPTH
DEPTH
7121111`5W" ��IVAYE
w W�IVNM
momm==mmm
mommm=mmm
umammmmmm
mommmmmmm
mommmmmmm
ummmmm=mm
mammmmmmm
mmom=mmmm
mommmmmmm
moommmmmm
/-5`�RIPRAP AT RCP OUTLET
I�Loy NO SCALE
NYLOF LAST TURF TRAFFIC INSTALLATION
12"— W DRAIN BASIN
.Nl
A
7121111`5W" ��IVAYE
w W�IVNM
SUM.,
12'-30"INLINE DRAIN
MIN"',
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
211 IST STREET MORTN, SURE 3W
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 5WI
t 6127MM4
PIERCE PINI
ASSOCIATES
9298 CENTRAL AVENUE NE,
SUITE 312
BLAINE, MIN 55434
TEL 763.537.1311
FAX 763.537.1354
FERNDALE ROAD
R E S I D E N C E
-.l -,N, ..d �p�. - th,
-p ,, 1,,d 1-11 � 10�. d�pld
-1. - �,. A-,
---g --d " �y III
At, ft -
0 �pyng t 2016 T-. - Lt.. ftdl.. U.C. All righll,
h -by
:�P.by.111 IllydII-P-1-IdthIll
d,,lyL dPiE,,g,h
_S....
PATRICK EVEUM
NOTE: NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
1-1,: PW s.
ov-017
Sh.: C700
DRAWING INDEX
AOO TITLE SHEET
All
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
Al 1.2
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN - ENTIRE HOUSE
Al2
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
A20
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
A21
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
A71
3D DIAGRAMS
Bll
STUDIO GARAGE FLOOR PLANS
B21
STUDIO GARAGE ELEVATIONS
GENERAL NOTE:
HALF SIZE SET: 11 " X 17". SCALE AS NOTED.
FULL SIZE SET: 24"X 36'. SCALE AS NOTED.
THE TOLES DANIELS RESIDENCE
1095 Ferndale Road West
Orono, MN 55391
CONTACTS
Owner:
Architect:
Builder:
Landscape: Interior Designer:
Bill Toles & Jill Daniels
Rehkamp Larson Architects Inc.
Don Forman
Travis Van Liere Alecia Stevens
2510 Crescent Ridge Road
2732 West 43rd Street
Welch Forsman
Travis Van Liere Studio, LLC 612.889.7188
Minnetonka, MN 55305
Minneapolis, MN 55410
1. 612.827.4455
c. 612.760.0494
R.O.
1. 612.285.7275
Sim
SIMILAR
STRUC
Contact:
T&G
TONGUE & GROOVE
T.M.E.
Jean Rehkamp Larson, AIA
T.O.
TOP OF
TRT
Jean@rehkamplarson.com
TYP
TYPICAL
ABBREVIATIONS
ASF ABOVE SUBFLOOR
BD BOARD
B.C. BOTTOM OF
BRG BEARING
CL CENTER LINE
CLR CLEAR
CPT CARPET
CONC CONCRETE
CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT
ELECT ELECTRICAL
EXST EXISTING
EXT EXTERIOR
FD FLOOR DRAIN
FDN FOUNDATION
F.F. FINISHED FLOOR
FLR FLOOR
GYP GYPSUM WALL BOARD
HDR HEADER
INT INTERIOR
MAS MASONRY
MAX MAXIMUM
MECH
MECHANICAL
MIN
MINIMUM
NIC
NOT IN CONTRACT
D.C.
ON CENTER
OSB
ORIENTED STRAND BOARD
PLY
PLYWOOD
PTD
PAINTED
REV
REVERSE
R.O.
ROUGH OPENING
Sim
SIMILAR
STRUC
STRUCTURAL
T&G
TONGUE & GROOVE
T.M.E.
TO MATCH EXISTING
T.O.
TOP OF
TRT
TREATED
TYP
TYPICAL
U.N.O.
UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE
VFY
VERIFY
VIF
VERIFY IN FIELD/ SITE VERIFY
VNR
VENEER
WD
WOOD
z
0
I--
0
D
z
0
0
LL
F-
0
z
LU
(1)
W
L)
z
6"
Z
Cf) Lo
F- L0 r --
L) z 6
00
C\I
x
CU
Z LL
0
C/) LO
70 N
71- L0
a. 00
C14
CN
Cl)
r,-
0
0')
(1) 0 L0
z ry
Z
(1) 0
U- I
L0 0
LI) 0-)
a) �?
Z
I --
PROJECT PHASE'
VARIANCE
PROJECT NUMBER:
April 6th, 2017
DRAWN BY
JRL
AOO
COVER
MOTOR COURT
SEE 11.2 FOR FULL
GARAGE PLAN
MOST
RESTRICTIVE
SETBACK LINE
PORCH
ED
ENTRY STAIR
11 0�1
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
-----------
- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
E) ----------- — --- ---------
-- --------------
F -1
L I I
WIN GE KITCHEN
T
El
ED
L --1
:i ------------------
F-11F I
75'SETBACK LINE -
----------
-- mil
- - - - - - - - - - -
PKG RM
BACK ENTRY
COUNTER/
SHELVES
— — — —
imp"
MUDROOM
FM
Z
jiff�
POWDER
L107
BACK HALL FLAT
CEIL
Llml
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-11
DOG RM
Fm -1
0
COURTYARD
17, ------
LAUNDRY F
"6
L
MASTER CLOSET
MASTER BATH
aul
F 1-1
L] L
77—
MASTERIBIEDROOM I I
Pi
r -T PORCH
CEIL
TT-
---- ---- Li ---- a�- - - - - - ------
- — — — — — — — — —
---------------
-------------- -------------- - -----------
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
AVG LAKESHORE--�
SETBACK LINE
75'SETBACK----)
LINE
z
0
cn
z
0
0
u-
0
z
Lu
cn
Lu
C.)
z
U) L0 04
Lf) r --
Z L6
w 00
c\1
x
z co
LL
L0
r.-
-2
co
'IT Lo
Oc)
04
(3)
04
CY)
W (3)
W cj F-
0
0")
co co
4) 0 Lo
z Lr)
to Z
co
0
LL
Lo
m
0
PROJECT PHASE
VARIANCE
PROJECT NUMBER
16-040
April 6th, 2017 1
JRL, JK
All
MAIN LEVEL
FLOOR PLAN
MOST
RESTRICTIVE
SETBACK LINE
EN—
F------
- --------- ---------
---------- -- ---- ----
El
-- ----- I E i -Tl
I ----------- ------- E
-----------
----------
- — — — — — — — — - J
-----------
E
Lv
mu
...RIAM
its
-��ORY 7 ----
c
--------- L— u
IsAMILL '-T
M—ER CLO U
------------
(Di (D
I I I I MASTERIBLDROOM I I I I
ii ii— !— ii ii
—j I I I I I
T— — -Li— I
IEIL
TT -
:x -------- ---- J-
�Lj�
---- POFF ---------
'1�75'SETBACK LINE
T ---
AVG LAKESHORE
------------- SETBACK LINE
LINE
z
0
M
w
z
0
L)
w
-0
—LL-
F -
0
z
Lu
V)
Lu
L)
z
MAIN LEVEL DIAGRAM - ENTIRE HOUSE
Scale; 3/32"= V-0" @ 11 x1 7, 3/16"= V-1)" @ 24x36
u) Lo 04
1-- Lo r -
U z 6
W 00
c�
N
CL —
(c)
x
z M
LL
11—
co Lo
-0 c\j
co
't Lf)
0. — co
(n C14
C�4
X
C�)
W I�
W C14
W
U)
0 -�r)
0
3.. 70
0
z la� LO
U) W Z
Z -�B 2
0
LL -
0 L, 0
U) CF)
.2 0
0
F -
PROJECT PHASE
VARIANCE
PROJECT NUMBER:
April 6th, 2017
JRL, KN
Al 1.2
MAIN LEVEL
FLOOR PLAN
CD
Lr)
L0
Z Lf)
00
c�
N
0-
X
co
LL
�5
70 N
00
CN
co
CN
0
CID
0 L0
z ry
,j) Z
0
LL I
LD 0
m
CD
0
F -
PROJECT PHASE:
VARIANCE
PROJECT NUMBER:
16-040
April 6th, 2017
U��N 6Y:
JRL, JK
I Z) a r- 1 rx
6u
cn
LINE
Lu
N
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
L)
z
Al2
V-." @ �11.11, @ �2W.
UPPER LEVEL
FLOOR PLAN
AREA ENCROACHING ON
MOST RESTRICTIVE
� I � i —I —I I I SLATE -T-71
SETBACK PLANE
T_:=:E==L I I 1 1 T
_71
UPPER LEVEL S.P. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
L T�
S — — — — — — — — —
ml =1 - F1 -
COPPER io —t COPPER
7c
-fREEL-IS—
UPPE�LE�E'L.11
MAIN LEVEL CEIL
nlrm �111 4
_T_
7Ti =171 STUCCO STUCCO
MAIN LEVEL FIF I I �� �� I I 1 11 11 1 1
ELEV:936
-._'vS0UTH-(LAKq ELEVATION — — — — — — - — — — — — — — —
I SCALE: 1/4"m V-0" ON 24X36, 1/8"m V-1)" ON 11 X17
EAST ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4"= 1'.0" ON 24X36,118"= V-0" ON 11X17
z
0
D
cf)
z
0
0
LL
F_
0
z
Lu
(1)
Lu
L)
z
CD
Lr)
L0
z Lo
00
c�
N
o_
x
co
LL
U)
co
00
C\j (o
co
C\j
0
0) 0 L0
z ry
a) Z
a) 0
UIL
0
CD
0
F—
PROJECT PHASE:
VARIANCE
PROJECT NUMBER:
16-040
April 6th, 2017
DRAWN BY:
JRL, JK
EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS
UPPER LEVEL S.P.
LIP
� �M Tyl!".11
MAIN LEVEL CEIL
MAIN EVEL FF
�L V:L-
936
WEST ELEVATION
SCALE: 114" = l' -O" ON 24X36, 118" = l' -D" ON llXl7
- - - - - - -1 --- - - - - - - - - - - - -
EAST ELEVATION
2 SCALE: 1/4" = V-0" ON 24X36,1/8" = l' -O" ON 11X17
z
0
M
z
0
L)
w
0
LL
F-
0
z
LLI
(1)
w
z
C:,
V) L0 04
Lf) r -
L) z L6
00
04
L)
x
co
Z a) LL
0 -
co �5 Lo
rl-
04
4-2
co r,�
It L0
0. (� 00
04
Q) C�4
CID
CN
cy)
r,-
04
4)
W
M -�;
0
cy)
co
0
z 0�
a) Z
F. E
m a) 0
LL
0
0
PROJECT PHASE
VARIANCE
April 6th, 2017
DRAWN BY
JRL, JK
A21
EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS
MOST RESTRICTIVE
SETBACK PLANE
PROPOSED HOUSE -
3D DIAGRAM OF PROPOSED HOUSE REQUESTED VARIANCE VS FOX HOUSE APPROVED VARIANCE
MOST RESTRICTIVE
SETBACK PLANE
FOX HOUSE -
FOX HOUSE & PROPOSED HOUSE
PROPOSED HOUSE
NOTF.(;-
PROPOSED HOUSE
FOX HOUSE
MOST RESTRICTIVE
SETBACK PLANE
FOX HOUSE
"PROPOSED HOUSE" (ORANGE HOUSE): 3D REPRESENTATION OF HOUSE CURRENTLY REQUESTING A HARDCOVER & SETBACK VARIANCE
FOX HOUSE" (BLUE HOUSE): GENERAL MASSING OF HOUSE WAS GRANTED THAT HARDCOVER & SETBACK VARIANCE IN 2009
"MOST RESTRICTIVE SETBACK PLANE" (RED PLANE): A COMBINATION OF THE 75'LAKESIDE SETBACK & THE AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK
z
0
F-
L)
cn
z
0
0
LL
F-
0
z
I --
Lu
cn
Lu
L)
z
Li
Z
U) Lo cj
Lo
z
W co
L) o -
ml<
Z a) LL
0 —
cn 65 Lo
Lo
a. co
N
c�
CN
W
0
col)
0 Lo
z ry Lo
U) a)
.SD
r -
a) 0
LL
)o
0)
CD
Z
F -
PROJECT PHASE:
VARIANCE
PROJECT NUMBER
16-040
April 6th, 2017
A71
3D DIAGRAMS
STUDIO GARAGE MAIN LEVEL PLAN
36
SQ FEET: 748
STUDIO GARAGE UPPER LEVEL PLAN N
l' -G" @ l I xl7,114"= V-0" @ 24x36
SQ FEET: 748
z
0
cn
z
0
0
LL
0
z
Lu
cn
Lu
u
z
(j C,
Z
U) L0 C%4
1-- Lf) r --
C-) z Lh
U.1 00
04
x
Z LL
0
Lo
I'-
2 N
co
lqt L0
0. (� 00
04
Q) C4,
CN
cy)
W r,— (D
M C,4
0
co
4) 0 L0
z of
a) Z
m
-0
E E
('a a) 0
LL 0
0
PROJECT PHASE
VARIANCE
PROJECT NUMBER
16-040
April 6th, 2017
U�WN bY:
JRL
Bll
STUDIO GARAGE
FLOOR PLANS
NORTH ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = 11'.0" ON 24X36,1/8" = V-0" ON lIX17
WEST ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4" = l' -O" ON 24X36,1/8" = 1'-0" ON lIX17
EAST ELEVATION
z
0
cn
z
0
0
0
z
cn
z
6 Z,
Z
cf) Lo
L0
L) z L6
W Co
N
c) -
x
cu
Z (3) LL
0 —
�5 L0
rl-
70 cj
L0
a. co
N
c�
c"!
M
W r,—
W CN
0
CY)
0 Lo
z ry
0
LL 0
Lr)
cy)
CD
PROJECT PHASE:
VARIANCE
PROJECT NUMBER:
16-040
April 6th, 2017
UKAWN bY: JRL —1
B21
STUDIO GARAGE
EXT ELEVS
MON
)000r
#
00"
$
4;'
Jai
IF
aerial photograph - ferndale road residence placement and property line ferndale road residence - orono, minnesota
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO, LLC
REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS
04.06.17
JL�
� 7�--w
LEGEND:
C
FEMA
Special Flood
Hazard Areas
NTS
b
.6 d
4
m 41
a
6
4 d 4
d
4
d
41
0 4 0
4 0 4 0
4 a 4
a 4 m
4 a
4 a 4 m 4 a
d 4
6 d
b d
A
4 4 4
4 d
a 4
m 4 0
4 m
4 m 4 m 4 0 4
m
0 4
0 4
a
4
m 4
m 4
m
4 m 4
0 A
a
4
m
a a 4
w 4
a 4
m 4
0
A-8
V
a
4:4
m 4 v
d Ib
4 d,
9-b d
6
a
4 1 4 d
4
4 d
4
d 4
d 4
d 4
d
4
6 4 d
4 d
4
d
4 d
4 d 4
4
4 d 4 d
A
4
d A
d 4
4 4
d
d t
d
6 d
A
d 6 d
A d
4 d
4
d 4 A
d
4
4b
a
d
4 d 4 d
8 4
A d A d
4 d 4 a
8 4 m 4
4 a b d
4
a 4 m 4 a 4
4 d 4
5 4 m 4 a
A
TOTAL LOT SIZE 55,423 SF
MAX HARDCOVER PERCENT 25%
MAX H.C. ALLOWED FOR LOT 13.855.75 SF
initial site plan (previously demolished structures)
LAKE M-�-N N D 0'� K A
ORDINARY HIGH �TER � 929.4
EXISTING DRIVEWAY (TO BE REMOVED)
N
1.0"= 40.00'
ferndale road residence - orono, minnesota
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO, LLC
REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS
04.06.17
TOTAL LOT SIZE 55,423 SF
MAX HARDCOVER PERCENT 2 5k
MAX H,C. ALLOWED FOR LOT 13,855,75 SF
INITIAL VARIANCE SITE PLAN CALCS.
PROPOSED HOUSE SIZE
4,346 SF
PROPOSED HARDCOVER
9,147 SF
SF BEYOND 0-75' SETBACK LINE
2,522 SF
HARDCOVER IN 0-75' SETBACK
16.2%
HARDCOVER IN 75-250' SETBACK
18.2%
HOUSE SF W/IN 0-75' SETBACK
1,885 SF
(75% of hardcover v
PAVING SF W/IN 0-75' SETBACK
637 SF
(25% of hardcover v
SF BEYOND AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK
3,058 SF
TOTAL HARDCOVER
16.5%
-TONKA
initial variance site plan LAKL A�NNE 929.4
ORDINARY HIGH TER -
PROPOSED DRIVE (VARIANCE)
'ARIANCE)
BEYOND 75'
(ARIANCE)
L01
1.0"= 40.00'
ferndale road residence - orono, minnesota
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO, LLC
REHKAVIP LARSON ARCHITECTS
04.06.17
TOTAL LOT SIZE 55,423 SF
MAX HARDCOVER PERCENT 2 5k
MAX H.C. ALLOWED FOR LOT 13,855,75 SF
PROPOSED NEW SITE PLAN CALCS.
PROPOSED HOUSE SIZE
3,883 SF
PROPOSED HARDCOVER
13,280 SF
SF BEYOND 0-75' SETBACK LINE
1,928 SF
HARDCOVER IN 0-75' SETBACK
12.8%
HOUSE SF W/IN 0-75' SETBACK
585 SF
(30% of hardcover v
PAVING SF WAIN 0-75' SETBACK
1343 SF
(70% of hardcover v
SF BEYOND AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK
2,116 SF
TOTAL HARDCOVER
23.96%
PROPOSED NEW SITE PLAN BREAKOUT
PROPOSED MAIN HOUSE & GARAGE
PAVING:
PROPOSED DRIVEWAY
PROPOSED AUTOCOURT
ENTRY WALK
LAKESIDE TERRACE
MASTER TERRACE
BRIDGE WALK
PAVED PADS
DETACHED GARAGE PAVING
SUBTOTAL:
WALLS:
COURTYARD WALL
AUTOCOURT WALL
STONE ENTRY COLUMNS
FREE-STANDING ENTRY WALL
SUBTOTAL:
MISC:
DETACHED GARAGE
MECHANICAL AREA
AUTOCOURT FOUNTAIN
SUBTOTAL:
TOTAL PROPOSED HARDCOVER:
PROPOSED HARDCOVER PERCENT
3,883 SF
2,754 SF
2,845 SF
76 SF
1,291 SF
558 SF
144 SF
54 SF
467
8,189 SF
62 SF
106 SF
8 SF
114 SF
290 SF
748 SF
130 SF
-1" SF
9 18 SF
13,280 SF
23.96%
-TONKA
LAKL A�NNE
proposed new site plan ORDINARY HIGH WATER - 929.4
PROPOSED NEW ACCESSORY
STRUCTURE
PROPOSED NEW DRIVE
MNING WALL
FREESTANDING WALL
RTYARD WALL
HANICAL AREA
LREA BEYOND
IN NO
"0
MEMORY]
ferndale road residence - Orono, minnesota
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO, LLC
REHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS
04.06.17
TOTAL LOT SIZE 55,423 SF
MAX HARDCOVER PERCENT 2 5k
MAX H,C, ALLOWED FOR LOT 13,855,75 SF
INITIAL VARIANCE SITE PLAN CALCS.
PROPOSED HOUSE SIZE
4,346 SF
PROPOSED HARDCOVER
9,147 SF
SF BEYOND 0-75' SETBACK LINE
2,522 SF
HARDCOVER IN 0-75' SETBACK
16.2%
HARDCOVER IN 75-250' SETBACK
18.2%
HOUSE SF W/IN 0-75' SETBACK
1,885 SF
PAVING SF W/IN 0-75' SETBACK
(75% of hardcover v
PAVING SF W/IN 0-75' SETBACK
637 SF
SF BEYOND AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK
(25% of hardcover v
SF BEYOND AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK
3,058 SF
TOTAL HARDCOVER
16.5%
PROPOSED NEW SITE PLAN CALCS.
PROPOSED HOUSE SIZE
3,883 SF
PROPOSED HARDCOVER
13,280 SF
SF BEYOND 0-75' SETBACK LINE
1,928 SF
HARDCOVER IN 0-75' SETBACK
12.8%
HOUSE SF W/IN 0-75' SETBACK
585 SF
(30% of hardcover v
PAVING SF W/IN 0-75' SETBACK
1343 SF
(70% of hardcover v
SF BEYOND AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK
2,116 SF
TOTAL HARDCOVER
23.96%
-TONKA
LAKL A�NNE
variance / proposed site plan overlay diagram ORDINARY HIGH WATER - 929.4
PROPOSED NEW ACCESSORY
STRUCTURE
PROPOSED NEW DRIVE
PROPOSED DRIVE (VARIANCE)
A,INING WALL
FREESTANDING WALL
RTYARD WALL
'ARIANCE)
:HANICAL AREA
K
LREA BEYOND
BEYOND 75'
(ARIANCE)
L01
1.0"= 40.00'
ferndale road residence - orono, minnesota
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO, LLC
REHKAVIP LARSON ARCHITECTS
04.06.17
TOTAL LOT SIZE 55,423 SF
MAX HARDCOVER PERCENT 2 5k
MAX H,C. ALLOWED FOR LOT 13,855,75 SF
INITIAL VARIANCE SITE PLAN CALCS.
PROPOSED HOUSE SIZE
4,346 SF
PROPOSED HARDCOVER
9,147 SF
SF BEYOND 0-75' SETBACK LINE
2,522 SF
HARDCOVER IN 0-75' SETBACK
16.2%
HARDCOVER IN 75-250' SETBACK
18.2%
HOUSE SF W/IN 0-75' SETBACK
1,885 SF
PAVING SF W/IN 0-75' SETBACK
(75% of hardcover v
PAVING SF W/IN 0-75' SETBACK
637 SF
SF BEYOND AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK
(25% of hardcover v
SF BEYOND AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK
3,058 SF
TOTAL HARDCOVER
16.5%
PROPOSED NEW SITE PLAN CALCS.
PROPOSED HOUSE SIZE
3,883 SF
PROPOSED HARDCOVER
13,280 SF
SF BEYOND 0-75' SETBACK LINE
1,928 SF
HARDCOVER IN 0-75' SETBACK
12.8%
HOUSE SF W/IN 0-75' SETBACK
585 SF
(30% of hardcover v
PAVING SF W/IN 0-75' SETBACK
1343 SF
(70% of hardcover v
SF BEYOND AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK
2,116 SF
TOTAL HARDCOVER
23,96%
LAK\ L WNNE-MNKA,
combined overlay site diagrams ORNNARY "11 VVATER - 929.4
PROPOSED NEW ACCESSORY
STRUCTURE
PROPOSED NEW DRIVE
PROPOSED DRIVE (VARIANCE)
EXISTING DRIVEWAY (TO BE REMOVED)
MNING WALL
FREESTANDING WALL
RTYARD WALL
'ARIANCE)
:HANICAL AREA
K
LREA BEYOND
BEYOND 75'
(ARIANCE)
L01
1.0"= 40.00'
ferndale road residence - orono, minnesota
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO, LLC
REHKAVIP LARSON ARCHITECTS
04.06.17
CutlFill Summary
N—
C.t —11 Fill —11 2d All,
c-
Fill
N't
v�l— s—f—
1 43256.01 Sq. Ft.
o.00 c.. Id.
120G.24 C- Yd.
1200.24 St. Yd—ill,
T,t�l,
43256.01 Sq. Ft.
0.00 C.. Yd.
1200.24 CU. SO.
12DO.24 CU. Yd.lFilll
4
0.458 0.500
I
5
0.500 0.784
6
0.784 1.370
"2.5331
7
370 500
1 8 1
0
Cut/Fill Summary
N.— CNt —t— Fill F—t— 2d Fill
P—p—d V.1— S—f— 931.50 —oo 1.— 25288.38 Sq. Ft. D.DO C— Yd. 1253— C— Yd. 125-0 C— Yd.1-11
T-11 25288.38 Sq. Ft. O.DO — Yd. 1253.OD C- Yd. 1253.DO — Y—Filll
"X
SAN MH
All/
'�o
"0"
FOUND 1
c�
�j
V
ZZ
_7
12
0
1,tJ`
FOUND
1/1'
PIP,
All I
N A 1/1�
IRON PIPE
ro/vk'l cp
NORTH NORTH
/'lEXISTING FLOOD PLAIN EXHIBIT ri\PROPOSED FLOOD PLAIN EXHIBIT
a 20' 40' 6o' a 20' 40'
FFFFFFFFFFF —
Elevations Table
Number
Minimum Elevation Maximum Elevation
Color
1
—0.788 0.000
0
2
0.000 0.233
0
3
0.233 0.458
0
4
0.458 0.500
5
0.500 0.784
6
0.784 1.370
"2.5331
7
370 500
1 8 1
0
"0"
FOUND 1
c�
�j
V
ZZ
_7
12
0
1,tJ`
FOUND
1/1'
PIP,
All I
N A 1/1�
IRON PIPE
ro/vk'l cp
NORTH NORTH
/'lEXISTING FLOOD PLAIN EXHIBIT ri\PROPOSED FLOOD PLAIN EXHIBIT
a 20' 40' 6o' a 20' 40'
FFFFFFFFFFF —
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO
GENERALNOTES: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
1 S E SHEET L001 FOR GENERAL NOTES, 211 IST STREET NOUN, SUITE 3%
2 REFER TO ARCHRECTUI DRAWINGS FOR BUILDING INFORMATION. MINNEAPOLIS, MN -01
3 CLECTRICALCONTRACTO , MECRANICALCONTRACTOR, AND IRRIGATION
00 TRACTORTO COORDINATE W/ PPYING CONCRETE,ANDWALL
CONTRAD R$ ON SLEEVE LOCATIONS UNDER DRIVEWAYS, WALKS, AND
WAL
4� FEE LSTo SHEET TH 0 FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN FOR BOUNDARY
FIR
INFORMATON. ALL STRUCTION STAKING MUST BE PERFORMED BYA
R GISTEREDLAPIDSURVEYOR.
5 DO NOT SCALE THE DRAAMN WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ARE TO BE USED FOR
ALL LAYOUT WORK
THECONTRACTORE UL IMMI NOTIFY THE LANDSCMPE ARCHITECT OF
A LAYOUT DSCRCIES.
1, ALL SITE ELEMENTS IN— BE ITAKII IN TIRE IIEUD AND APPROVED BY
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
S F E AUTDCAD FILEAVAILNELETO CONTRACTOR UPON REQUESTFOR FIELD
PROPOSED NEW 6- ETENTRY ATEAND
ADDRESSM MOMENT NEW IF LEGEND
1 A,
LIM111 [:] 1111ED AREAS
AGGED111 111111GI 1111 11R11111
(At IR11111 El CONCRETE / BIT
X. (D
0 60-5�2'491, 5 E A S) PLANTINI STONE RHAONG
a
JM CONCRETE —11 11111G
/0
P- CDC ------- EXISTING CONTOUR 11DICIE1 -111
A DETACHED
NAREA.EEECI DWGS GA=RAGE i
EXISTING FPCT ELEON PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION
IF—
`7 &M .
a
+ EXISTING TREES TO BE 0 1-1.1ED NEW TRED
S PEO- AND SAVED
MIX
EXISTING TREE$ TO BE REMAIN (D PROPOSED PHRUB/
PENNIAL
&
31 EXISTING TREES TO BE ---- DRAINAGE FLOW
V, TRAFFIC FLOW PROPOSED ENTRANCES
P Y KEYED NOTES
EXISTING ETONM SIGNIFICANT THEEISI, SAVE AND PROTECT
REL EXISTING NO .... RING FROIERTY
NEW 1Z WIDE ENTRY DRIVE 0
PROPOSED S' ITT FREESTANDING WALL Al HIGH WATE. MARK
TF EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREES TO RIP FAR ... RELINE TO BE REM -ED AND REP—E.
REMAIN, SAVE AND PROTECT E I -IN. CITY GTREEI GAVE AND IR.TEOD RE -R ANY DANIAGED AREAS
PER CITY STANDARDS
0 1R- GAS AND ELECTRIC NIETER LOCATIONS. VERIFY IN HELD
V
NdEPUI W IX
GARAGE PROPOSED BOSQUE I KNOT GARDEN
PROPOSED 4'. 10'FCkVN
F
PRORDEEDMECHANICALAREA
l�� 1-1- AILI
-, A:F11.1
MAIN HOUSE
MOST RESTRICTIVE SETBACK UNE—
U
L I
FERNDALE ROAD
T'
R E D E N C E
AP- 1 5 RNIS L I Ro W, R.
Ci_ 09 RE DA E AD 0 NO MN 55391
T
'T
-- ---- ------ I T1. d -DW 0—
- -5-11
lb� -,,d. d1pII.Ad .1
IGd. 11 E.IX .1 lP P,,ft. . tY,
Gp. d T l G,, U -Ib.
L� Th— — f�l �d —1.
'Y
s5 lh ft—HP,
@ �Rydght 2N6 T -P J.. St.di., L -C, All ,H�
------ ----- I
- --- ---- ----
I IA.by HA plM, A.tlo, --d
PI.P by .—ft, , dil Isil - - I
d.ly L- d PRO— t,
NEW RIP FAR EDGE
PROPOSED Ul ITYAREA FOR
WATERELECTRICAND TRAV1,S VAN LIERE
IFFIGATION PUMP, VI.F. 1—, -8
-114
NOTE
NOT FOR
DOCK BY OMER. I
M�NNEToNKA CONSTRUCTION
LAK
0
OFDINARY HIGH VVATER 929.4 PRELIMINARY PRIGING SET ISTO-SIME
VARIANCEAPPLIDATON [2 S2 All
E:::>
LANDECAPE REVISIONS B_
LANDECAPEREVISIGNE 0--7
E
r- — — — — —
D. IS:
SITE PLAN
S Ey
E.1
D_ 'DI,
32
-0
SITE PLAN
1/16" - P -O' Ll 01
(:��SCALE: 1116' = V,0" .F,th "h XqL�1� lb�l
TRAVIS VAN LIERE STUDIO
GENERALNOTES: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
12 S E SHEET L001 FOR GENERAL NOTES, 211 IST STREET NOUN, SUITE 3%
REFER TO AFGHTECTUI DRAWINGS FOR BUILDING INFORMAJION. MINNEAPOLIS, MN AMH
3 CLECTRICALCONTRACTO , MECHANICALCONTRACTOR, AND IRRIGATION
00 TRACTORTO COORDINATE W/ PA/ING GONGRETE,ANDWALL
CONTRAD RE ON SLEEVE LOCATIONS UNDER DRIVEWAYS, WALKS, AND
W
ALES,
4� REFER To SHEET LOW FOR EXISTINISCONDPHONS PLAN FOR BOUNDARY
INFORMATON. ALL STRUCTION STAKING MUST BE PERFORMED BYA
(AF)AUTUMNI1U'&EMfi2E1I I �_ REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR.
5. DO NOT SCALE THE DRAAMNGI WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ARE TO BE USED FOR
ALL LAYOUT WORK
1, CAG SHE TNECONTEfiGDG ILL IMMEDIAGELY NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF
OR A LAYOUTDIOREPANCIES.
us 7 ALL SITE ELEMENTS SHALE BE STAKED IN THE FIELD AND APPROVED BY
S LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
8. AUTOCAD FILE AVAII-ASUE TO CONTRACTOR UPON REQUEST FOR FIELD LAYOUT
PROPOSED NEW 6- ETENTRY ATSAAD N-BRIF - - - - - - -
ADDRESSM MOMENT LEGEND
LAW" 111 1111ED AREAS
00 / K_TE 111111NI 1111 11RIADIND
AOZ.I 1-TCAL-B - 1 -1
(At
ST (D (,J, I * , , - I
Ps) MITE PINE I ST 0 00 1 81 LA IR11111OVIR AQNCFFCF / BIT
12-O.C.1 1&2WHl SPA ED 0 - �60 1 49,,,131 S) --- PLANTING STONE RHAONG
PS MITEPINE 43
CONCRETE —11 1111 1E111G
CDC ------- EXISTING CONTOUR 11DICIE1 -111
RslPN DETACHED
GARAGE
WNG�N`..'IEEY�"�"�'NN 1 '14
14 EXISTING FPCT FLEON PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION
0 �EEA, _A_
EXISTING TREES TO BE
FRO- AND SAVED
0 1-1.1ED NG- TRED
V- MIX
(D ob EXISTING TREES TO BE REMAIN (D
'PROPOSED PHRUB/
G, PENNIAL
& 0 CO)
31 1 EX STING TREES TO BE --- DRAINAGE 1
FE.
&
// o
17_� TRAFFIC FLOW PROPOSED ENTRANCES
KEYED NOTES
--NG NIFICANT THEEB), SAVE AND PROTECT
EXISTIN. ST.F. BRAIN,
RELODATE EXII NO .... RIN. FROIERTY
0
NEW 1Z WIDE ENTRY DRIVE
ITT FREESTANDING WALL HIGH WATF. "ARK
Al
PROPOSED 3 1 EX STING SIGNIFICANT TREES TO RIP FAR ... RELINE TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACE.
T, RE AIN, SAVE AND PROT T
E I -IN. CITY STREEI -E AND IRCTEOD RE -R ANY DANIAGED AREAS
*T, PER CITY STANDARDS
1F- AS AND ELECTRIC NECHER HOLATI.N.. VERIFY IN FIELD
(GT) SKI HONEYLOCUST I Is
2 VIE 5 DAL-. PLANTING SCHEDULE
M TR ... SHRUBS
GARAGE I I
PROPOSED BOSQUE I KNOT GARDEN Sym DEIGRPI —,I
PROPOSED 4'. 10'FCkVN-.
TA AF AGERF 7 S' CAL, BIB VERIFY LOCATION IN FIELD.
. ... .. ALTUMAS= SINGLE STEM SPECIES.
AUTUMN.— PLANTSTUBEF ULFORM
MAR. AND MATURING
AG A E -RX 2 -17117- VERIFY LOCAT ON IN FIELD.
GRANDIFLOl PLANTS TO BE F ILL FORM
1-181 AND MATURING
AUTUMN BRILLIANCE
(GT)SKVLJNEHO EYL0=TI 4 PROFCEEDMECHANICALAAEA SERVIESELERRY
VILF. 1 5 AG)AU IJMNBRILUANCESERVICEBE AS AGER SACCHARLAI 2 T CAL. BIB VERIFY LOCATION IN FIELD.
CAL SUGAR MAPI-E PLANTS TO BE F ILL FORM
10
RRY 1 -12'HI BIB AND MATURING
I F
"ITS
�,A
BE, B- p.1GT1IC,. 1-T CAL+ BIB VERIFY LOCATION IN FIELD.
__F SINGLE STSIM SPECI I
MAIN HOUSE WHITESPIRE BIRCH PLANTS TO BE F ILL FORM
AND MATURING
Ry
R
PS =UffSE SRI NEOB US 57 18 -HTS ED VERIFY LO -IDN IN FIELD.
MOST RESTRICTIVE SETBACK LINE RV REP BIB TOB FROMILOCALSOURCE
43
NI E" I I AND UNSHEARED.
GT GLEGITS4A VERI
ILI "`A- BIB F` LOCATION IN HILID.
AC4NTHOS SINGLE STEM SPECIES,
PNEF., PLANTS TO BE F ILL FORM
SKYU E AND WJ`JRINGU FERNDALE ROAD
HONEYIEDCUST R E S I D E N C E
T -a
7 AV, 1095 FERNDALE ROAD W, ORONO, MN 55391
OIL- PERENNIALS,VINES, GROUNDCOVERS AND ANNUALS
Tl� d-- h., - d --d ft,,- , .�g 11
s- D-11- Q, — DO— _G., 1-1 1� 911p- --H11 thl-I
0 CGRO
PEREENNIAUSTBD SG2 .1 CONT. PLANT 24 IRpl.iPd. 1, E.IX . lP p,Ift. . th�
PATTERN SE PLAINS ..p. � . d T 1� VN, U -Ib.
PER` FOR LOCATIONS TO Th- - dIISR f�l �d -1.
'Y . .-b- P.--
11 SOD I LAWN 788 By ALLAREAS INDFC-A—TED -—PI -9-1 - 11- �PIY " -d-
7,167 BE) ON PLA, . STAGGER Ih
JOINTS 0 SOD HATS.
�2 -N-D "I LAY SOD @ �Rydght 2N6 T -P - J.. St.di., �C, All ,H�
------- vE� 'AS'SUGAR Nl PERFENDIGUILARTO
VFF! 1� CAL. IS CONTOUI
ISGO CUSTOMMEADOWMIX S4J9TSF MESIC - FROM
PEARI MOON
931 ----- --- 11 ~PRUPIEMOONG
OM)ONAFFRUVED I IA.by �ly - HA plM, A.tlo, --d
EQUAL pl- b, - 01 -1 .111sil - - I
d.ly ILI d Pd,P t,
PI. s.. o M.. -
NEW RIP FAR EDGE
PROPOSED UT
RELEBT I S VAN LINERE
TRAVI
IRRIG_ PUMP, F. 1-, -8
----- ------- - NOTE
NOT FOR
DOCK BY OMER. I
E::> LAK E M�NNEToNKA CONSTRUCTION
0,91NARY HIGH VATER 929.4 1. -
PRELIMINARY PRIGING SET 12-SIME
LANDSCAPEREVISIONS —
VARIANCEAPPLICATON [2 S2 All
E::> LANDSCAPE REVISIONS 0SPS-7
LANDECAPEREVISIGNS III
—UT-29-mv
E
r
in B. IS:
LANDSCAPEPLAN
Dr,,. By 'E.1
32
LANDSCAPE PLAN
.- 1, h v L401
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
5. #17-3918 REHKAMP LARSON ON BEHALF OF BILL TOLES, 1095 FERNDALE
ROAD WEST, VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, 8:43 P.M. — 9:02 P.M.
Jean Rehkamp Larson, Applicant, and Charles Fendlayer, Architect, were present.
Curtis stated the owner of the property is requesting the following variances in order to construct a new
residence:
Lot area, lot width, lake setback, hardcover within 75 feet of the OHWL, and average lake
setback. In addition, conditional use pen -nits are requested for site grading in excess of 500 cubic
yards for mitigation of areas of the property below the I percent annual chance floodplain and to
allow a full bathroom within the proposed detached garage.
The currently proposed footprint is depicted in orange and is situated further back from the lake and
oriented on the property for improved lake views by neighbors than was the previously approved plan.
This property has had a number of variance approvals which are still valid until November of 2017. The
original plan is shown in blue on the overhead.
The applicants' request for hardcover, lake setback, and average lakeshore setback variances results in the
property's inability to conform to the administrative approval provision in Section 78-72 regarding lots of
record. Therefore, the area and width variances are also required to develop this property.
The applicants are proposing to encroach as close as 65 feet to the lake with the home where a 75 -foot
setback is required. It also results in an encroachment of approximately 15 feet lakeward of the average
lakeshore setback line. The proposed terraces will encroach as much as 30 feet into the 75 -foot setback.
The total site hardcover is proposed to be below the allowed 25 percent at 23.4 percent of the 12,990
square feet of proposed hardcover for the site. 2,300 square feet is proposed within the 75 -foot setback.
The code provides for installation of a bull bathroom with a shower and/or bathtub within an accessory
building providing the building is conforming and a conditional use permit is granted. A restricted
covenant is required restricting the general use of the building. The applicant is proposing a full
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
bathroom in the upper floor of the detached garage. This building will be used primarily for storage, with
the upper floor to the utilized as a yoga studio for the homeowners.
The filling activities exceeding 500 cubic yards within the shoreline require a conditional use permit. It
appears that 1,200 cubic yards of fill material will be brought to the property. The Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District will be reviewing the proposed grading and mitigation plan to ensure that the overall
volume of flood storage has not been diminished.
Staff has conducted an analysis of the practical difficulties and the conditional use permit criteria within
Staff report. The Commission or the public can request to review the individual criteria tonight.
Staff finds practical difficulties based on the size of the property, the areas impacted by the I percent
chance of annual flood, the elevation of the property to support the variances for lot area and width as
well as the requested hardcover, lake and average lakeshore setback variances for the new home.
The applicants have provided a landscape plan which appears to offer relief to the neighbors to the west
regarding the floodplain as well as areas of mitigation to limit the impacts of the home on the property.
Comments from the public have been received and have been included in the Commission packet. An
email was distributed to the Commission this evening. In addition, Staff has spoken with the neighbor to
the west at I 10 1 Ferridale and she indicated that she generally supports the proposed plan but had
concerns or questions regarding how the proposed trees and other vegetation planted on or near the
common property line would affect the light, air and open space they currently enjoy from their home,
specifically from the windows on the east side of the home.
Planning Staff recommends approval. The applicants have demonstrated practical difficulties to support
the requested variances without generating neighborhood opposition. The proposed landscape plan offers
additional infiltration opportunities offsetting the hardcover and structure placed within the 75 -foot
setback. They have satisfied the criteria for approval of both of the requested conditional use permits. A
covenant should be signed by the property owners relating to the plumbing within the detached garage.
The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Jean Rehkamp Larson, Applicant, stated she is here tonight on behalf of Bill Tores. Larson indicated they
have worked closely with the landscape architect to design a house that has a thoughtful scale and broken
into pieces so the massing is not large, and is a much more sensitive plan than the previous proposal.
Larson stated in their view it does address the neighbors' concerns and creates a view corridor from the
Lebedoff s house.
Thiesse asked if what would happen if they rotated the house to be more in line with the average setback.
Larson stated in her opinion it would create more of an obstruction to the neighbor than it currently does.
If the house is rotated, due to the low level of the site, the drainage that occurs on the northwest part of the
site would be reduced and it would be harder to mitigate the water.
Charles Fendlayer, Landscape Architect, noted the site is a very complex site and there have been a lot of
issues with the complexity of how the house is situated on the property. Fendlayer stated this is basically
an unbuildable lot. The highest point on the property is out towards the lakeside where there is the ridge
at about the 100 -year floodplain, which is where the previous home used to sit. Soil boring testing closer
to the wetland has found peat and other unstable soils in that area.
One of the main requirements and challenges was to mitigate stormwater onsite. Fendlayer noted they
have been working with a civil engineering firm to create a stormwater management plan, which was one
of the requirements from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Approximately two-thirds of the site
is located underneath the floodplain area and subject to flooding. The proposed design mitigates the same
volume and then some over the requirements of the MCWD. The MCWD has reviewed the plan and
have given a green light to proceed forward with the improvements.
From a landscaping standpoint, the proposed house is set back from the previous proposal and further
away from the western property to help maintain a natural outlet to Lake Minnetonka. The majority of
the existing trees on the property will be maintained and additional trees will be planted on the property.
The infiltration areas will essentially be one giant rain garden and a good portion of the site will be
restored to become a natural meadow to help with mitigation. Fendlayer stated because a lot of the
existing site is right at the water table level, there is not much infiltration currently but the prairie should
help with that.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Landgraver asked if one of the neighbors had concerns with vegetation.
Fendlayer indicated they will be working with that neighbor to address their concerns with vegetation but
the final plans for the site have not yet been finalized.
Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 8:55 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 8:55 p.m.
Curtis read the following e-mail received from Christopher Jones:
"To the Orono Planning Commission Members:
I am responding to the Notice of public hearing regarding several properties that directly affect the Long
lake and Lake Minnetonka watersheds, and therefore, the water quality of these watersheds.
Specifically: 17-3918 seeks variances for lot area, lot width, lake setback, average lake setback, and a
0-75 foot hardcover variance. The details of this request is not included in the Public Notice so it is
difficult to assess their individual impacts.
Given the low elevation of this property in relation to Lake Minnetonka, and therefore its potential direct
impact on the lake's water quality, any variance approvals also must seek to include stonnwater runoff
remediation through best management practices. This is particularly appropriate for the hardscape
variance being sought. Again, because of the property's low elevations, infiltration of stormwater runoff
will be difficult, and this fact challenges the appropriateness of any hardscape variance request.
Requiring the installation of numerous rainwater gardens using deep root plants is one solution that could
mitigate the impact of any variances being sought; there are other best management practices available,
too. For example, for every square foot of variance sought, an equal square foot of rainwater garden must
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
be installed. Without this type of trade-off solution building, I encourage the Planning Commission reject
the requests."
Curtis noted the email also discusses Application 17-3929, and concludes by stating: "I truly hope the
Planning Commission will look at these comments as positive and encouraging of the variance process as
long as it includes commensurate requirements for water quality protection so that other efforts to return
Long Lake and Lake Minnetonka's watershed to a healthier state aren't negated."
Thiesse noted the applicant has addressed those concerns and it appears that the practical difficulty has
been addressed. Thiesse commented this is a tough site.
Landgraver stated one of the practical difficulties is the low elevation of the lot and the plan addresses the
overall management of water runoff.
Lemke stated the orientation of the house benefits both neighbors.
Leskinen stated she likes the improvement over the last plan.
Landgraver moved, Leskinen seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. 17-3918,
Rehkamp Larson on behalf of Bill Toles, 1095 Ferndale Road West, granting of variances and
conditional use permits, subject to Staff recommendations. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0.
Date Application Received: 02/22/17
Date Application Considered as Complete: 02/22/17
120 -Day Review Extension Period Expires: 06/22/17
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members
Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator
From: Melanie Curtis, Planner YYIGG
Date: 17 April 2017
Subject: #17-3918, Jean Rehkamp Larson o/b/o Bill Toles, 1095 Ferndale Rd W,
Variances & CUPs
Public Hearing
Application Summary: The applicant is requesting approval of lot area, lot width, lake setback,
hardcover within 75' of the OHWL, and average lake setback variances as well as conditional
use permits for site grading and to allow a bathroom within the proposed detached garage.
Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval.
History
The subject property has a recent history of variances to facilitate redevelopment. Beginning in
2009 the property owner began exploring variances and a grading conditional use permit for
reconstruction of a home on the property they had hoped to sell. Variances were granted and
expired due to inactivity. In 2012 new approvals consistent with the 2009 approvals were
granted, and permits for demolition were issued, though the replacement home was not
constructed. In 2014 the owner again requested the same/similar approvals which were
granted. The 2014 approvals were extended and are now valid until November of 2017 (see
Resolution 6679 attached as part of Exhibit M).
Summary
The current owner is requesting the following approvals in order to construct a new residence
on the property: lot area and lot width; lake setback; hardcover within the 75 -foot setback from
the ordinary high water level (OHWL), and average lakeshore setback variances. The owner is
also requesting approval of a conditional use permit relating to the amount of grading on the
property in excess of 500 cubic yards of disturbance for mitigation of areas below the 1% annual
chance floodplain in order to develop the property, and a conditional use permit to allow
installation of a full bathroom within the proposed detached garage.
Page 6 of Exhibit F showing a comparison of current and previous approvals illustrates an
overlay of the previously approved footprint (in blue) with the current. The current footprint (in
orange) is situated further back from the lake and oriented on the property for improved lake
views by neighbors.
FILE #17-3918
17 April 2017
Page 2 of 9
LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Section 78-305: 78-1279 - Setbacks:
LR -1A
Required
Proposed
Allowed: 11,084 s.f. (20%)
Proposed: 4,631 s.f. (8.3%)
154'house
Rear/Street
50'house
10' detached garage (doors
Proposed Hardcover
10' detached garage <750 sf
in Zone
Hardcover
face away from street)
District Tier
30'house
30.3' house
East Side
10' detached garage <750 sf
14.1' detached garage
West Side
30'
43.6'
Lakeshore
75'
±65'
3,903 s.f.
The proposed home will be as much as 15 feet lakeward of
Average Lakeshore
2,386 s.f.
the average lakeshore setback line.
Section 78-305 - Lot Area/Width:
LR -1A Lot Area Lot Width
Required 87,120 s.f. (2.0 acre) 200'
Actual 55,423 s.f. (1.27 acres) 176' @ OHWL / 180' @ 75'
Section 78-1403- Structural Coverage:
Structural Coverage regulations were amended by the City Council on March 13, 2017, raising
the limit from 15% to 20% of the lot area.
Total Lot Area
Total Structural Coverage
55,423 s.f. (1.27 acre)
Allowed: 11,084 s.f. (20%)
Proposed: 4,631 s.f. (8.3%)
Section 78-1680 and 78-1700 -Hardcover Calculations:
Stormwater
Total Area
Allowed
Overlay
Existing Hardcover
Proposed Hardcover
in Zone
Hardcover
District Tier
192s.. .
Tier 1
55,423 s.f.
13,855 s.f.
3,903 s.f.
(walls)
12,990 s.f.
2,386 s.f.
(25 %)
(7%)
w/in 75'
(23.4%)
w/in 75'
Applicable Regulations:
Lot Area & Lot Width Variances (Section 78-30SI
The property does not conform to the area and width standards for the LR -1A district where it is
located. Zoning Code Section 78-72 provides options for the redevelopment of lots which do not
meet the minimum area or width requirements for the respective zoning district. Substandard
properties within the Shoreland Overlay District, like the subject lot, are able to be redeveloped
without variances if specific standards are met; such as:
1. All setback requirements can be met.
2. A Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, can
be installed or the lot is connected to a public sewer; and
FILE #17-3918
17 April 2017
Page 3 of 9
3. The impervious surface coverage meets all hardcover location and square footage
restrictions of this chapter and the total square footage of hardcover does not exceed
25 percent of the entire lot area.
4. All other zoning district standards can be met.
The applicant's request for hardcover, lakes setback, and average setback variances results in
the property's inability to conform to #1 above. Therefore, area and width variances are also
required in order to redevelop the property.
Lake Setback & Average Lakeshore Setback Variances (Section 78-1279) and 75 -foot Hardcover
Variance (Section 78-1680)
The applicant is proposing to construct a new, accessible home with lakeside terrace on the
property. Previous variance requests have been granted for similar encroachments due to the
difficulties of the property including floodplain, lot size, topography, drainage, etc. The applicant
is proposing to encroach as close as 65 feet to the lake with the home where a 75 -foot setback is
required, resulting in an encroachment of approximately 15 feet lakeward of the average
lakeshore setback line.
To maintain accessibility, lakeside terraces with connecting walkways are also proposed. These
terraces will encroach as much as 30 feet into the 75 -foot setback. Of the 12,990 sf of hardcover
proposed for the site, 2,386 sf is proposed within the 75 lake yard.
Conditional Use Permit for Plumbing (Section 78-1437)
The Code provides for installation of plumbing, including a bathtub/shower, within an accessory
building provided the building is conforming and a conditional use permit is granted. A
restrictive covenant is also required which restricts the use of the accessory building. The
applicant is proposing a full bathroom in the upper floor of the proposed detached garage. This
building will be used primarily for storage with the upper floor to be utilized as a yoga studio for
the homeowners.
Conditional Use Permit for Grading in Excess of 500 Cubic Yards (Section 78-967) & Floodplain
Mitigation Grading (Section 78-1126)
Filling activities exceeding 500 cubic yards in the Shoreland require a conditional use permit.
Further filling activities which exceed 1,000 cubic yards of imported material within the
floodplain requires review of a conditional use permit. It appears just over 1,200 cubic yards of
fill material will be brought in to the property. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
(MCWD) will also be reviewing the proposed grading and mitigation plan to assure the overall
volume of flood storage has not been diminished. The lowest floor of the proposed home must
be at or above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation (RFPE) for Lake Minnetonka which is
932.5 feet; the MCWD's regulations require low openings to be one foot higher at 933.5 feet.
The proposed plan accomplishes both goals with a proposed low (first) floor elevation of 936
feet.
Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123)
In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the
proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and
anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger offire, risk to the public safety, and the effect
on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider
FILE #17-3918
17 April 2017
Page 4 of 9
recommending approval for variances from the literol provisions of the Zoning Code in instances
where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique
to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is
demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning
Code, Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties
also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems.
Variances shall be granted for earth -sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06,
subd. 2, when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a
variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the
affected person's land is located. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary
use of a one -family dwelling as a two-family dwelling.
According to MN §462.537 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when:
1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The
lot width and area variances requested are consistent with the general intent of the
Ordinance. The requested average lakeshore setback variances is in harmony with the
Ordinance as the lake views enjoyed by the adjacent neighbors will not be impacted
by the new home. The lake setback and hardcover variances are reasonable and
necessary as the highest points of the property for construction of the home above
the 1% annual chance floodplain are located toward the lake.
2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variances resulting in a
permit for construction of a single family residence in a residential zone are consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan.
3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties.
a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not
permitted by the official controls; The request to permit construction of portions
of the proposed home lakeward of the average lakeshore setback appears to be
reasonable as the owners of the adjacent properties have stated that they are
not adversely impacted; the existing tree stands, proposed landscape plan and
curved shoreline create separation of the subject property from the adjacent
neighbors.
b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner;
The presence of the 1% annual chance floodplain on the property creates
increased difficulties in locating a conforming building location. The new house
will be properly elevated out of the floodplain. The sub -standard size of the
Property was not the result of actions by the landowner. The neighboring
homes are oriented toward the lake away from the subject property; and
c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The lot area
and width variances will not alter the character of the neighborhood; a home
previously existed on the property. It does not appear that the requested
variance to permit portions of the new home and terraces lakeward of the
average lakeshore setback will adversely impact views of the lake currently
enjoyed by the adjacent property owners. The lake setback and hardcover
variances are reasonable and necessary as the highest points of the property
for construction of the home above the 1% annual chance floodplain are
located toward the lake. The hardcover is mitigated by the proposed
landscape plan for the property.
FILE #17-3918
17 April 2017
Page 5 of 9
Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be
granted as follows:
4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic
considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination.
5. Practical difficulties also include butare not limitedto inadequate access to direct sunlight
for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth -sheltered construction as
defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter
78. This condition is not applicable.
6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under
Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is
located. This condition is not applicable, as the use for a residence is an allowed use in
the LR -1A District.
7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one -family dwelling
as a two-family dwelling. This condition is not applicable.
8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such
property or immediately adjoining property. The substandard lot width of the Property
is not uncommon in the surrounding neighborhood. The presence of the 1% annual
chance floodplain on the property creates increased difficulties which drive the building
pad location and improvements toward the lake.
9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which
the land is located. The property to the east has a higher grade than the subject
property. The two properties to the west have similar floodplain challenges.
10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant. Granting the requested variances will provide
relief to the applicant regarding the lot size and floodplain on the property.
11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort
or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the
requested variances will not adversely impact health, safety, comfort, or morals; nor
will it be contrary to the intent of the Code.
12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but
is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The size of the Property; the
flood pl a i n/topogra phy create practical difficulties affecting the Property; the variances
are necessary and not merely serve as a convenience to the owners.
The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances.
Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the
impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use
permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located.
Applicable Regulation: Conditional Use Permit (Section 78-916)
The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council may grant a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) as the use permit was applied for or in modified form. On the basis of the
application and the evidence submitted, the city must find that the proposed use at the
proposed location is or will be:
1) Consistent with the community management plan; The bathroom within an accessory
building and the proposed grading to elevate the home and portions of the property
above the 1% annual chance floodplain is residential in nature, are both consistent
FILE #17-3918
17 April 2017
Page 6 of 9
with the permitted uses for the Property, and is compliant with the zoning code and
comprehensive plan.
2) Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as
required by article V, division 3 of the City Code; The detached garage where the
bathroom will be located will be otherwise conforming in location, and height on
the Property. The proposed grading is residential in nature which is consistent with
the permitted uses for the Property.
3) Adequately served by police, fire, roads, and stormwater management; The
proposed use will be adequately served by existing services and facilities.
4) Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system; This
statement is true; the proposed detached garage with plumbing will be connected
to City sewer and private well.
5) Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; Staff
believes this criterion is met.
6) Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is
planned to be used in the future; Regarding the import of and movement of fill
material and re -grading of the Property, once completed, will have no impact on
surrounding lands. The grades, once vegetated and landscaped should not have an
adverse impact on the neighborhood or the lake.
The detached garage building is rural residential in character and its use is expected
to be compatible with the surrounding area.
7) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character
is called for in the community management plan; The detached garage will have a
residential visual character in keeping with the proposed home and is expected to
be compatible with the surrounding area.
The proposed grading activity will help to slow runoff from leaving the Property and
impacting neighboring properties. The floodplain mitigation proposed will not
result in a negative impact to neighboring properties or the lake.
8) Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding
area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan;
The Applicants are proposing to substantially regrade the Property to mitigate filled
floodplain areas for the building site as well as facilitate better stormwater
management. It is likely adjacent lakeshore properties will not be impacted. The
grading will be reviewed and monitored closely by the City's engineer and MCWD
staff to assure that proper grading is conducted and that adjacent properties and
the lake are not adversely impacted.
FILE #17-3918
17 April 2017
Page 7 of 9
The architectural styling of the building will be residential in character and
consistent with that of the proposed home on the Property.
9) Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the
area or have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when
compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses; The use of the
structure for garage storage and as a personal yoga studio is not expected to have
any adverse impacts. No information has been presented to indicate such.
The result of the proposed grading will enhance, rather than change, the intended
residential use of the Property; there should be no change in the use and
enjoyment of adjacent properties resulting from the import of fill materials and
grading. However, activity of importing approximately 1,200 cubic yards of fill and
active grading of the Property can have a temporary adverse impact on neighbors.
The grading work on the Property as well as the further construction of the
residence could result in noise, dust, vibration and traffic on the haul routes and
immediate neighbors. To the degree possible, negative impacts should be limited
and mitigated.
10) Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and
activities likely to disturb surrounding uses; The finished grade will be vegetated
and landscaped; it should blend into the Property. The project, once completed,
should not result in undesirable views requiring mitigation.
11) Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise, glare, vibration, odors, fumes,
dust, electrical interference, general unsightliness, or other means; The result of the
proposed grading will enhance, rather than change the intended residential use of
the Property; there should be no change in the use and enjoyment of adjacent
properties resulting from the import of fill materials and grading. However, activity
of importing approximately 1,200 cubic yards of fill and active grading of the
Property can have a temporary adverse impact on neighbors. The grading work on
the Property as well as the further construction of the residence could result in
noise, dust, vibration and traffic on the haul routes and immediate neighbors. To
the degree possible, negative impacts should be limited and mitigated.
The proposed detached garage with plumbing is not expected to cause any of these
undesirable impacts.
12) Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that
cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties, traffic congestion, or
unsafe access; The Applicants will be required to keep debris off of the public
roadways. The noise resulting from the trucks hauling and equipment moving the
material in and around the site should be minimized to the extent possible. The
grading project will be monitored by the MCWD, the City Engineer, and planning
staff so as to minimize nuisances during the project.
It is anticipated that the proposed detached garage with plumbing will not generate
any of these undesirable issues.
FILE #17-3918
17 April 2017
Page 8 of 9
13) Designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area
and to minimize environmental impact; The proposed detached garage with
plumbing will not affect these features or have a negative environmental impact.
The project is being designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic
features of the area and to minimize environmental impact. The long term effect of
the project should result in minimal environmental impacts. The project will be
monitored by the City to prevent erosion from the site.
14) All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the
public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; There should be no
lighting or glare resulting from the grading project; the applicant shall be advised of
the lighting requirement regarding the home and detached garage; and
15) Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. The
Applicants will be required to keep debris off of the public roadways. The noise
resulting from the trucks hauling and equipment moving the material in and around
the site should be minimized to the extent possible. The grading project will be
monitored by the MCWD, the City Engineer and planning staff so as to minimize
nuisances during the project. Staff believes this criterion is met.
A CUP may be granted subject to such conditions as the Council may prescribe. Additionally,
a CUP shall remain in effect as long as the conditions imposed by the City Council are
observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the city from enacting or amending official
controls to change the status of conditional uses.
Septic System Status
The property is served by City sewer.
Practical Difficulties Statement
Applicant has completed the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and
should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application.
Practical Difficulties and Conditional Use Permit Analysis
Staff finds practical difficulties based on the size of the property, the areas impacted by the 1%
chance of annual flood, elevation of the property to support the variances for lot area and width,
as well as the requested hardcover, lake and average lakeshore setback variances for the new
home. The applicant has provided landscape improvements which appear to offer relief to the
neighbors to the west regarding the floodplain as well as created areas of infiltration to mitigate
the impacts of the home on the property.
Engineer Comments
The City's engineer has conducted a cursory review of the plans. At the time of the building permit
a more detailed grading plan review will take place. The MCWD engineers and staff are currently
reviewing the floodplain mitigation plan.
FILE #17-3918
17 April 2017
Page 9 of 9
Public Comments
Comments have been received and are included as Exhibit L.
Issues for Consideration
1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the
property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control?
2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the
essential character of the neighborhood?
3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the
impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)?
4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application?
Planning Staff Recommendation
Planning Staff recommends approval. The applicants have demonstrated practical difficulties to
support the requested variances without generating neighborhood opposition. The proposed
landscape plan offers additional infiltration opportunities offsetting the hardcover and structure
placed within the 75 -foot setback. They have satisfied the criteria for approval of both of the
requested conditional use permits. A covenant should be signed by the property owners relating
to the plumbing within the detached garage.
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A.
Application
Exhibit B.
Practical Difficulties Documentation Form
Exhibit C.
Existing Survey
Exhibit D.
Proposed Survey/Site Plan
Exhibit E.
Proposed Building Plans and Elevations
Exhibit F.
Variance Comparison Overlays
Exhibit G.
Floodplain Mitigation Plan
Exhibit H.
Submitted Hardcover Calculations
Exhibit /.
Aerial Photos
Exhibit J.
Landscape Plans
Exhibit K.
City Code Sections
Exhibit L.
Public Comments Received
Exhibit M.
Resolution Nos. 5872, 6038, 6152, 6463, & 6679
Exhibit N.
60 -Day Extension Letter
Exhibit 0.
Property Owners List
Exhibit P.
Plat Map
AGENDAITEM
Item No.: 10 Date: May 8, 2017
Item Description: Recognition of Big Island Donations
Presenter: Dennis Walsh, Agenda Presentation
Mayor Section:
Purpose. The purpose of this item is to recognize the donations pledged to Big Island Docks
The following people have pledged donations for Big Island:
Tim Stevenson $2000.00
Sean Foy $ 500.00
Denny Walsh Family $ 500-00
Michael Williams $2000.00
John Kwakenat $ 500.00
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Motion to accept the pledges of the donations for Big Island.
Prepared By: A\, IC
Reviewed By:
Approved By: D5R
AGENDAITEM
Item No.: 11
Item Description: ADA Transition Plan Proposal
Date: May 8, 2017
Presenter: Adam T. Edwards Agenda Public Works Director/
Public Works Director/City Engineer Section: City Engineer's Report
Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to gain Council authorization to begin developing a City
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan.
1. Background. The City of Orono does not have an ADA Transition Plan. All local Governments are
required to meet the general requirements of Title 11 of the American Disabilities Act (ADA). To
accomplish this they are required to conduct a Self -Evaluation of all programs; policies/procedures;
maintenance practices; and infrastructure; and identify those that are inconsistent with current ADA
Standards. In addition, local governments are required to develop a Transition Plan which:
• Summarizes the Self -Evaluations results,
• Identifies items that are not in compliance with current ADA Standards; and
• Details how the organization will bring inconsistent items into compliance with current ADA
Standards and ensure that they are accessible to all individuals.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), enacted on July 26, 1990, is a civil rights law
prohibiting discrimination against individuals on the basis of disability. Title 11 of ADA pertains to the
programs, activities and services that public entities provide. Title 11 of ADA provides that, "...no
qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in
or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to
discrimination by any such entity." (42 USC. Sec. 12132; 28 CFR. Sec. 35.130) As a provider of public
transportation services and programs, the City of Orono must comply with this section of the Act as it
specifically applies to local governments.
2. Project Scope. The development of the transition plan will include: Data Collection and Analysis of
existing transportation and access features, facilitation of public involvement and input in to the process,
Self -Evaluation/ analysis of the data collected and input received, the writing of the Transition Plan, and
the incorporation of the data collected into the cities asset management system.
3. Cost. Bolton and Menk provided a not to exceed estimate (NTE) of $9,624 for the assessment
(Exhibit A).
4. Funding. The assessment will be funded by the Engineering Line of the Operating Budget which has
a 2017 budget of $20,000.
5. Staff Recommendation. I recommend the council accept the proposal from Bolton and Menk to
facilitate the development of an ADA Transition plan.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to accept BMI's proposal of NTE $9,624 to facilitate the development of Orono's ADA transition
Plan.
Exhibits
A. Bolton and Menk Proposal.
Prepared By:
Reviewed By:
Approved By: NZ
BOLTON
& MENK
Real People. Real Solutions.
April 18, 2017
Adam Edwards, P.E.
Public Works Director / City Engineer
City of Orono Public Works
2750 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MINI 55356
RE: Letter Proposal for City of Orono Self -Evaluation and ADA Transition Plan
Dear Mr. Edwards,
7533 Sunwood Drive NW
Suite 206
Ramsey, IVIN 55303-5119
Ph: [7631433-2851
Fax: 17631427-0833
Botton-Menk.com
This City of Orono wishes to Complete and ADA Self -Evaluation and development an ADA Transition Plan
that will provide a framework for accessibility for all users within the public rights of way and parks, and
bring the City into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and guidance from the
Minnesota Department of Transportation. It is our goal to ensure the City has what it needs to prioritize
policies, practices, and pedestrian facilities for the efficient and effective identification and removal of
accessibility barriers that may be present. We will incorporate the latest data collection technologies
along with input from the public into the development and maintenance a pedestrian network that is
safe and accessible to everyone. We believe you will find outstanding value in our approach to your
project.
Scope of Services
Data Collection and Analysis: We will collect and store data related to various features included in
your Pedestrian Circulation Routes (PCR) and Pedestrian Access Routes (PAR). Our team will
inventory components of the PCR/PAR environment utilizing the latest GPS technology to collect
data in the field. This data will be imported into GIS for analysis, reporting, and mapping as part of
the Transition Plan. Features to be evaluated for ADA compliance include:
• Pedestrian Ramps 0 Flashing Crosswalk Signs
• Pedestrian Landings 0 Sidewalk and Bike Path Defects
• Curb & Gutter 0 Parks
• Crosswalk
All locations will be tied to a corresponding photo which city staff will be able to access through the
existing web GIS application hosted by Bolton & Menk. We will also develop a prioritization system
for the City to have a thoughtful approach to addressing accessibility barriers based on existing
conditions, public comment, and city process. We will also complete a proximity analysis and review
zoning designations to inform prioritization for places of importance or potentially higher pedestrian
traffic locations.
Public Involvement: While this project was spurred by mandates to achieve ADA compliance, project
N:\Proposals\Orono\ADA Self -Evaluation and Transition Plan - 20170412\2017-04-18 City of Orono ADA Self-Evalution and Transition Plan -Proposal Letter.docs:
Uollc?n 6 Menk 7s an "ual opporlu ty emp I oye�
Name: Adam Edwards
Date: April, 14 2017
Page: 2
outcomes will truly enhance the lives of citizens in the Orono community. Under ADA law, the City is
responsibility to provide the public, including individuals with disabilities or groups representing
individuals with disabilities, the opportunity to provide input by offering comments on the Self -
Evaluation and Transition Plan. This is an opportunity for the public to offer feedback, ask questions,
and confirm any accessibility issues would be resolved. We offer a number of different platforms
where individuals can provide their input, including open houses (including co -hosting with City of
Orono Comprehensive Plan update open house or other event), a project web page, and web based
applications such as the Geoform (an interactive mapping tool that catalogs public input).
Self -Evaluation: While field data collection is a major portion of the Self -Evaluation component of
this process, policy review is equally important. Bolton & Menk staff have ample experience
reviewing and restructuring policies, programs, and practices for municipalities to achieve desired
outcomes. Our firm will work closely with City Staff while performing policy and practice review to
ensure ADA compliance.
Transition Plan: Utilizing outputs from the data collection efforts and the policy and practice review,
Bolton & Menk, under guidance from City staff, will develop an ADA Transition Plan. the Transition
Plan will document the methodology and findings of the Self -Evaluation, provide recommendations
for the prioritized removal of any identified barriers, and meet all the requirements of the ADA law,
including development of a Grievance Procedure. This plan will also incorporate capital costs and a
schedule for removing any identified barriers to accessibility. We will also work to align this portion
of the Transition Plan with the City's capital programming process.
Management System: In conjunction with the Transition Plan, Bolton & Menk can provide the City of
Orono a Geodatabase file that will integrate with the City's existing web GIS. If public works staff
chooses to manage these assets in the Cartegraph One platform, we will generate all web service
connections. Our GIS staff will coordinate with the City to set up and host a public focused GIS web
application, which displays all evaluation results and compliance progress. All site visitors will be
allowed to interact with mapped features to see collected attributes, condition, ratings, and
associated photos. This system will make it simple for the City of Orono to efficiently and effectively
track changes and prioritize future projects.
11. Fee Estimate
We have estimated a not to exceed fee of $9,624 to complete the work described above and provide
the City of Orono an ADA Transition Plan for formal adopted by the City Council.
In continued service to the City of Orono, we are excited at the opportunity to complete the Orono Self -
Evaluation and ADA Transition Plan for you. Please contact me at 612 759 3883 or peterle@bolton-
menk.com if you have any questions regarding our proposal.
Sincerely,
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
peto�, 0M 4..Ae—
Peter M. Lemke
Senior Transportation Project Manager
N:\Proposals\Orono\ADA Self -Evaluation and Transition Plan - 20170412\2017-04-18 City of Orono ADA Self-Evalution and Transition Plan -Proposal Letter.docs:
Uollc?n & Menk 7s an "ual opporlu ly ernploye,
AGENDAITEM
Item No.: 12
Date: May 8, 2017
Item Description: Orono Youth Football use of Hackberry Park
Presenter: Adam T. Edwards Agenda Public Works Director/
Public Works Director/City Engineer Section: City Engineer's Report
1. Purpose. The purpose of this item is to Council authorization for the Orono Youth Football
Association to use Hackberry Park for youth sports activities.
2. Background. The Orono Youth Football association has requested use of space at Hackberry Park
during the fall of 2017 (see Exhibit A). In addition the Orono Thunder Soccer Club has expressed an
interest in using some Orono Park Space for practices. With the exception of the Orono Youth Baseball
Association, the City does not have a policy/ mechanism for reserving park space for athletics. The
genesis for these requests is the pending Orono Schools Field house project which will reduce the number
of outdoor fields available for rent by the various youth sports clubs. At the May I"Park Comr-nission
meeting, the commission voted unanimously to approve the Association's request. In addition, the
commission established a subcommittee to look at the broader issues of organized youth sports use of our
parks. They plan to provide recommendation to the council later this year.
3. Request. The Orono Youth Football Association requests to rent Hackberry Park for their flag
football program (2nd and 3rd graders) for the fall of 2017. The Association would have exclusive access
to two fields on Tuesday and Thursday evening from 5:30-8PM, August 22nd—September 28'. The
association proposes a rental fee of $20 per day.
4. Cost. There are no significant direct costs to the city as the areas are already under the mowing contract
and the football association will be responsible for all field marking and special equipment. The fee
proposed should be sufficient for any minor turf repairs required.
5. Staff Recommendation. I recommend that the council approve the Association's request.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion approve the Orono Youth Football Association's request to use Hackberry Park for Flag Footbal I
in the fall of 2017 for a fee of $20/day.
Exhibits
A. Request
Prepared By:
Reviewed By: —
A -
Approved By: D5R
City of Orono Parks Commission
Attn: Adam Edwards
Orono, MINI
Dear Mr. Edwards,
Please accept this letter as our formal request to rent Hackberry Park for our flag
football program for the fall of 2017. We would like to request exclusive access to a
portion of the park for 2 weeknights (Tuesdays & Thursdays) from August 22nd —
th
September 28
We expect to have approximately 30 players at the park at any point, which is
comparable to the amount that are present during the baseball season. With your
permission, we would also like to add paint lines to a portion of the park that we
would be using. Please see following page for approximate locations that we would
like to utilize.
I would propose a field rental fee of $20 per usage day, which is in line with similar
field rental fees that are paid to Long Lake (Holbrook Park) and Medina (Morningside
Park) by the Orono Baseball Association. A total of $240 for the rental period would
be paid by the football association to the City.
I apologize, but I am unable to attend your meeting on May Ist. It happens to be my
wife's birthday and as much as I enjoy the company of the parks commission, I do
believe that I would end up in hot water. Please let me know if there are additional
items for me to follow up on.
Jake Streich — Flag Football Representative
Orono Youth Football Association
..too
530 ft
528 ft 3A ft
90 fl
264 ft
0
z
AGENDAITEM
Item No.: 12a Date: May 8, 2017
Item Description: Resolution Supporting Reasonable Access to County Road 112,
Wayzata Boulevard For the Orono Station
Presenter: Soren Mattick Agenda Public Works Director/
City Attorney Section: City Engineer's Report
1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to gain approval of a resolution Supporting Reasonable
Access to County Road 112, Wayzata Boulevard For the Orono Station
2. Background. There was discussion regarding the access to County Road 112, Wayzata Boulevard for
the Orono Station at the City Council meeting on April 24'. There had been a request made of the City
Council to support a reasonable access to County Road 112 for the Orono Station a resolution has been
drafted for consideration.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to approve the attached resolution supporting reasonable access to County Road 112, Wayzata
Boulevard for the Orono Station.
Exhibits
A. DRAFT Resolution
Prepared By: AMC
Reviewed By:
Approved By: D5R
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING STATUS QUO IN THE ACCESS TO COUNTY ROAD
1129 2160 Wayzata Boulevard FOR ORONO STATION WEST
WHEREAS, Hennepin County is reconstructing County Road 112 from Highway 12 to
County Road 6; and
WHEREAS, the reconstruction will take place over the next four years; and
WHEREAS, as part of the reconstruction, the County is planning to realign access
Orono Station West (2160 Wayzata Blvd; PIN 34-118-23-21-0002) has to County Road 12; and
WHEREAS, Orono Station West has two accesses to County Road 112; and
WHEREAS, the western access point has historically been and is currently
approximately 80 feet wide and Hennepin County's plan currently proposes to reduce the
western access to 36 feet wide; and,
WHEREAS, the owner of Orono Station West desires to keep the access at least 72 feet
wide consistent with other access points in Hennepin County's plan for County Road 112; and,
WHEREAS, the owner of Orono Station West has expressed concerns that the reduction
in access will likely have a negative impact on customers' ability and desire to frequent Orono
Station West by impeding access from County Road 112, having a negative impact on the
business; and
WHEREAS, the City of Orono fully supports property owners and our business
community and wishes to see all of our businesses thrive; and
WHEREAS, the City of Orono recognizes the importance of this critical corridor and
shares the goal of creating an efficient and safe environment for all road and trail users for
County Road 112 project; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orono City Council does hereby
support maintenance of the west access point to Orono Station West at its historic and current
width of approximately 80 feet subject to any change by mutual agreement of the owners of
Orono Station West and Hennepin county.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held
May 8, 2017.
ATTEST:
Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor
AGENDAITEM
Item No.: 13
Date: May 8, 2017
Item Description: # 17-3911, Lake West Development, LLC, 3245 Wayzata Blvd.
- Zoning Code Text Amendment — Allow Interim/Temporary Uses
Presenter: Mike Gaffron, Senior Planner Agenda Planning Department
Section: Report
1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to consider approval of zoning text amendments
to allow Interim Uses and establish a specific interim use within the RR- I B zoning district.
2. Application Deadline. Rcvd.: 2/21/17 Complete: 2/27/17 Initial 60 -Day Review Period: 4/28/17
Review Period Extended on 3/30/17 to: 6/27/17
3. Background. The applicants have submitted an application (#17-3910) requesting apermit
for temporary use of the property at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard for staging of construction
activities associated with the County Road 112 (Wayzata Blvd.) Improvement Project which
commenced in April. Because construction staging is not an allowed use in any Orono zoning
district and is not a permanent use, the only functional method for approving it is via an Interim
Use Permit. The zoning code currently does not contain provisions for Interim Uses. The
applicants are requesting in this application that the City amend the zoning code in order to allow
Interim Uses.
Please review the attached Planning Commission memo and exhibits.
4. Planning Commission Recommendation. The Planning Commission reviewed this item at
its March 20 meeting and again at its April 17 meeting. On April 17 the Planning Commission
voted 6-0 on a motion to recommend approval of the text amendment to add Interim Uses as an
element of the zoning code, subject to a minor revision to require Council review "at a minimum
at least" annually; and to incorporate "Temporary facilities for construction staging, materials
and equipment storage, and materials recycling..." as an allowed Interim Use within the RR- I B
zoning district. The two text amendments (including the revision noted above) are attached to
this memo as Exhibits A and B, as are the minutes of both meetings.
5. Public Comments. At both the March and April meetings, public comments were received
from Alan Engleman of 315 North Old Crystal Bay Road, generally in opposition to the use of
residentially -zoned lands for what he sees as a commercial industrial use. See minutes from both
Planning Commission meetings. In addition, a letter was received from the Dumas family
objecting to the proposed use in general and specifically at the Eisinger site which abuts their
property — see letter in April 17 PC packet.
6. Staff Recommendation. Council should review the information contained in the Planning
Commission packet and minutes, and discuss with the applicants items of note as well as any
additional concerns of the Council. Subject to Council consideration and direction, staff
recommends adoption of the attached Ordinance Amendments, the first of which establishes the
option of Interim Use Permits within the Zoning Code, and the second of which adds a 1 -item
list of allowable Interim Uses for the RR- I B District. Neither of these documents approves an
Interim Use Permit for the Eisinger site — that is a separate application (17-3 9 10),
17-3911 AGENDAITEM
May 8, 2017
Page 2
Interim Use Text. Note that the change recommended by the Planning Commission in Section
78-1728 for Council review of an 11UP at least annually has been made; also, in 78-1727, the
condition that 'the property must be in compliance with all applicable City Code standards' has
been removed since that is inherently in conflict with the flexibility offered via the Interim Use
Permit provisions.
RR -113 Text. The language of the RR -113 amendment has also been revised slightly from the
version reviewed by the PC to reflect the intent that the use must be for a project in Orono, that
the use must be on a property adjacent to the public road being constructed or reconstructed, and
the submitted plans must also include a schedule and timing of the proposed activity.
As currently drafted, the RR- I B amendment does not contain certain specific parameters for the
construction staging use; that could be added if Council desires. The parameters for discussion
include:
A minimum separation distance from nearby residential structures or lot lines
Minimum lot size
Requirements for site and adjacent road maintenance, and traffic control measures
Allowed only for government sponsore public improvement projects
The Council has wide latitude to approve or deny an Interim Use Permit for any given site, and
may establish any conditions for approval which the Council deems appropriate. The above
bulleted limitations and conditions could be:
- inserted into the RR -IB ordinance as required standards (would require a
determination now as to separation distance or lot size); or
- inserted as simply a listing of parameters (without numerical distances or sizes) to be
discussed in reviewing each IUP request
If Council wishes to establish appropriate numerical standards now, then a discussion should be
held regarding minimum lot size and separation distances,
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Review the proposed use and the draft ordinance text amendments. If Council concludes that the
Zoning Code should be amended to allow for Interim Uses, and that the proposed road
construction & staging activity should be an allowed interim use in the RR- I B zoning district
when all appropriate conditions are met, then the attached Ordinances should be considered for
adoption or amendment.
If Council determines that additional consideration of the requested amendments is needed, then
tabling would be in order. If a referral to Planning Commission is desired, then specific direction
for such additional review should be provided.
ODtions for Action
1. Motion to adopt or amend the attached ordinances:
- An Ordinance Amending the Orono Municipal Zoning Code by Adding Article XIV
Regarding Interim Uses.
- An Ordinance Amending the Orono Municipal Zoning Code by Adding Section 78-421
Regarding Interim Uses Within the RR-lB Zoning District
2. Table
3. Refer back to Planning Commission
Prepared By: Mike Gaffron Reviewed By: Approved By:
17-3911 AGENDAITEM
May 8, 2017
Page 3
Exhibits
A — Draft Interim Use Permit Text Amendment
B — Draft RR- I B Interim Use Text Amendment
C — Notice of PC Action dated 4/25/17
D — Draft PC Minutes of 4/17/17
E — Planning Commission Memo and Exhibits dated 4/17/17
Prepared By: Mike Gaffron Reviewed By: Approved By:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
ORDINANCE NO. _, THIRD SERIES
Council
CITY OF ORONO Exhibit A
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORONO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
BY ADDING ARTICLE 3aV REGARDING INTERIM USES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 78 — Zoning Regulations is hereby amended by adding Article XIV
Interim Uses to read as follows:
ARTICLE XIV — INTERIM USES
DIVISION 1 GENERALLY
Secs. 78-1730 — 78-1749. — Reserved.
DIVISION 2. - PERMIT
See. 78-1725. — Definition, Purpose and Intent.
(a) Definition. An interim use is a temporary use of property until a particular date, until the
occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it.
(b) Purpose and intent. Because of their unusual characteristics, interim uses require
consideration so that they may be located and regulated properly with respect to the
objectives of this chapter and the Comprehensive Plan, and with respect to their impacts
on surrounding properties. In order to achieve these purposes, the City Council is
empowered to grant and to deny applications for interim use permits and to impose
reasonable conditions upon the granting of these permits. Additionally, the intent of
allowing interim uses is:
I - To allow a use for a brief period of time until a permanent location is obtained or
while the pennanent location is under construction.
2. To allow a use that is presently judged acceptable by the City Council, but that
with anticipated development or redevelopment, will not be acceptable in the
future or will be replaced in the future by a permitted or conditional use allowed
within the respective zoning district.
Page 1 of 4
44 3. To allow a use which is reflective of anticipated long range change to an area and
45 which is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan provided that said use
46 maintains harmony and compatibility with surrounding uses and is in keeping
47 with the architectural character and design standards of existing uses and
48 development.
49
50 Sec. 78-1726. - Application Procedure. The information required and the procedures to be
51 followed for all interim use permit applications shall be the same as that required for a
52 conditional use permit as provided for in this Chapter in Sections 78-912 through 78-917. In
53 addition, the following information shall be provided:
54
55 (a) written documentation that includes a complete description of the use, schedule for
56 commencement and termination of the use, hours and dates of operation and anticipated
57 employment.
58
59 (b) any special studies requested by the City when there is evidence that the proposed use
60 may negatively impact public infrastructure, the environment or adjacent land uses.
61 These studies may examine the impacts on such things as traffic, environment, wetlands
62 and utilities.
63
64 (c) evidence of approval or preliminary approval from all other agencies with jurisdiction
65 over elements of the use.
66
67 Sec. 78-1727. - Standards and Conditions. No interim use permit may be granted unless the
68 City Council determines that the use will comply with the following:
69
70 (a) The use will meet the general performance standards in Section 78-916 of this Chapter;
71
72 (b) The use is allowed as an interim use in the applicable zoning district;
73
74 (c) The use will not delay anticipated development or redevelopment of the site;
75
76 (d) The use will not be in conflict with any provisions of the city code on an ongoing basis;
77
78 (e) The use will not adversely affect the adjacent property, the surrounding neighborhood, or
79 other uses on the property where the use will be located;
80
81 (f) The use will not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public;
82
83 (g) The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty; and
84
85 (h) The applicant agrees in writing to any conditions that the City Council deems appropriate
86 for the use, including a requirement for a financial security to ensure removal of all evidence
Page 2 of 4
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
ill
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
of the use upon termination, and restoration of the site to prior or better conditions. The
conditions shall be set forth in a development agreement between the property owner and the
City, which agreement shall be recorded with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrax of
Deeds.
See. 78-1728. - Effect of Permit.
(a) An interim use permit is effective only for the location specified in the approval
documentation.
(b) The issuance of an interim use permit does not confer on the property any vested rights.
(c) Interim use permits shall be reviewed as a minimum at least annually by the City Council.
(d) An interim use permit expires one year after approval if the proposed use has not been
commenced or a building permit for a structure to support the interim use has not been
issued.
(e) An interim use permit expires if the interim use ceases operation for a continuous period
of at least one year.
See. 78-1729. — Termination. An interim use permit expires and the interim use shall
terminate upon the occurrence of any of the following events:
(a) The ten-nination date specified in the interim use permit.
(b) Upon violation of conditions under which the permit was issued.
(c) Upon change in the City's zoning regulations which renders the use nonconforming.
(d) The redevelopment of the use and property upon which it is located to a pennitted or
conditional use as allowed within the respective zoning district.
SECTION 2. EFFECTIEVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its
adoption and publication.
ADOPTED this day, �
and ____pays by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota.
Page 3 of 4
- 2017 on a vote of ayes
13o ATTEST:
131
132
133
134 Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor
135
136
137 Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of_, 2017
138
139
140 V2 5-1-17
Page 4 of 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
is
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
ORDINANCE NO. , THIRD SERIES
CITY OF ORONO Council
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA Exhibit B
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORONO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
BY ADDING SECTION 78-421 REGARDING INTERIM USES
WITHIN THE RR -1B ZONING DISTRICT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 78 — Zoning Regulations is hereby amended by adding Section 78-421.
Interim Uses to read as follows:
Sec. 78-421. - Interim uses.
Within any RR -1B one -family rural residential district, no structure or land shall be used
for the following uses unless an interim use permit has been issued in accordance with the
provisions of Article XIV of this Chapter:
(1) Temporary facilities for construction staging, materials and equipment storage,
and materials recycling, when such facilities are associated with adjacent
(government-sponsored?) public road construction or reconstruction projects in
the City of Orono.
a. Time limit — the facility must be completely removed and the site returned to
its original state or better within six months of project completion.
b. Applicant shall submit plans indicating the site layout, scheduling and timing
of the use, and the routes for trucks hauling materials to and from the site.
c. (For discussion) The facility and activity shall be located at least feet.
from any inhabited nearby residential structures.
d. (FordiscussioO The property on which the facility and activity will occur
shall be no less than acres in total area.
e. (For discussion) Applicant shall adhere to all City and other agency
requirements for site and adjacent road maintenance, and traffic control
measures.
SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its
adoption and publication.
Page I of 2
45 ADOPTED this I , day of
46 and __nays by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota.
47
48 ATTEST:
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
Anna Carlson, City Clerk
2017 on a vote of _ ayes
Dennis Walsh, Mayor
Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of_, 2017
V2 5-1-17
Page 2 of 2
Council
NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Exhibit C
CITY OF ORONO
2750 Kelley Parkway ZONING FILE: 17-3911
PO Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
952.249.4620 DATEOFNOTICE: Apr!125,2017
TO: Curt Fretham COPIES: dana@lwestdev.com
Lake West Development, LLC
14525 Highway 7, Suite 265
Minnetonka, IVIN 55345
TYPE OF REQUEST: Zoning Text Amendment to allow Interim Uses
DATE OF MEETING: April 17, 2017
The Orono Planning Commission voted 6-0 on a motion to recommend approval of the text amendment
to add Interim Uses as an element of the zoning code, subject to a minor revision to require Council
review "at a minimum" annually; and to incorporate "Temporary facilities for construction staging,
materials and equipment storage, and materials recycling..." as an allowed Interim Use within the RR -1B
zoning district.
VOTE: 6 FOR 0 AGAINST
Applicant's next meeting is scheduled as: Monday, May 8, 2017
This is a City Council meeting. The meeting begins at 7:00 PM
If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City
Clerk after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please contact Mike
Gaff ron at maaffron0ci.orono.mmus or 952.249.4622,
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
the average lakeshore setback eing established by the existing houses as co ucted with the
original plat and subject to Staff commendations.
L _foot
Gaffron noted if the house on Lot 3 is %tom wn, it will need to:rct t�he75-foot setback. Gaff-ronasked
whether that house should meet the average seNck as defp4d' by 830 North Arm,
Thiesse stated it probably cannot.
Landgraver asked if the objective is make it conform.
Thiesse indicated it is to :it aoutof the 75 -foot zone.
Schwingler sepfi#ed the motion. VOTE: Ayes
3. #17-3911 LAKE WEST DEVELOPMENT, LLC, 3245 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST,
ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT, 7:23 P.M. -
Curt Fretham, Lake West Development, was present.
Gaffron noted this item was tabled at the March Planning Commission meeting. Due to the cancellation
of the April 5 work session, the Planning Commission should also refer to the attached work session
packet.
The contractor for the Hennepin County Wayzata Boulevard improvement project has obtained a permit
from MnDOT to use a site at 365 Old Crystal Bay Road for the recycling and storage operation for
Phase I of the highway improvements. Gaff-ron stated that takes some of the pressure off in terms of the
timing of this application, but the applicant has requested that their application for a text amendment and
TUP approval continue to be reviewed, as they would like to be prepared for use of the Eisinger site for
later phases of the Wayzata Boulevard improvements..
Page 13 of 72
Council
Exhibit D
MINUTES OF TIM
ORONO PLANNING COA"HSSION MEETING
Monday, Apiril 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
The intent of this review is to look at the advantages and potential disadvantages of an interim use permll
An interim use permit is intended to be temporary and allows for sunsetting of a use for a temporary time
period that may not be appropriate on a permanent basis.
In considering whether the City should adopt an interim use ordinance, it may be helpful to identify
examples where a temporary use may be reasonable but is not appropriate at a given location on a
permanent basis. Examples found in other Minnesota cities' codes are typically tied to specific zoning
districts. While there are some consistencies, it also appears that every city has its own ideas of what to
regulate via an interim use permit.
Gaffron stated area cities that utilize an interim use permit include Plymouth, Medina, and Minnetonka.
Some of the uses defiried as an interim use by those cities are regulated by different methods in Orono,
such as by licensing or special event permit.
Gaffron noted there are a few local governments that list an interim use similar to that proposed by the
applicants. Isanti County lists as an interim use, "Temporary construction facilities associated with road
construction or reconstruction projects. Facility types allowed include blacktopping processing facilities
which includes the processing of recycled materials as well as concrete recycling storage areas."
The City of Andover allows the temporary processing and storage of sand, gravel, or other materials. In
addition, Chisago City allows temporary processing or recycling plant in conjunction with a specific
project.
Adding the ability to allow for specified interim uses within specified zoning districts gives the City and
property owners a method or tool for the temporary use of property. It provides an option for properties
that are expected to be developed in the future in conformity with the zoning code, but for various reasons
such future development will not occur immediately. As it relates to the Eisinger property, the developer
has gained preliminary plat approval for housing, but does not anticipate actual development of the site
for a number of years.
An example of how an interim use permit could have been used in Orono was the former produce market
at County Road 6 and Highway 12. That site was zoned for single-family use and was operating via a
Page 14 of 72
MINIJTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
"nonconforming use conditional use permit" in the 1960s. Later conditional use permits were
for minor expansion of the market use. When the market closed, the building eventually became a
daycare center via a new conditional use permit. When MnDOT determined that the property would be
needed for the Highway 12 bypass, the daycare use discontinued but it was a number of years before that
part of the bypass was constructed. As a result, the building sat empty for a number of years. Because
the City had no interim use ordinance, any temporary use of the site was not allowed.
Potential disadvantages of an interim use permit include property owners proposing land uses that are
inappropriate for a given site or disruptive to the neighboring property owners or would be inconsistent
with the character of the surrounding area. If the Council approves an amendment to the Zoning Code to
allow interim uses, the City, developers and the property owners will have to be very clear about the
parameters for such use. Clear and concise documentation of the allowed land use, activities and time
periods will be required with each lUP issued. The City must be diligent not only in establishing
appropriate interim uses within specified zoning districts but in monitoring those uses for compliance
with the established terms of each issued 1UP.
Before the Planning Commission tonight is a draft ordinance. This is drafted similar to the general code
section on conditional uses. It contains language that mimics the state statute on interim uses and also
contains certain provisions that should pertain to all interim use permits. Sample ordinances from other
cities are also attached. Gaffron stated while the ordinances differ widely, there are four common
elements: A definition purpose and intent; application procedures; standards and conditions; and a
termination clause.
Gaffron noted the companion application to the text amendment includes a request for an interim use
permit in the RR- I B, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. The applicant is proposing
temporary use of the property at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard fo staging of construction activities associated
with the County Road 112 improvement project.
The Planning Commission should review the provided information and discuss the advantages and
disadvantages of having an interim use option in the zoning code and review the draft text amendments.
The Planning Commission should also identify any specific concerns about the proposed construction
staging/materials recycling use and suggest any additional conditions that might be applicable.
Page 15 of 72
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
F
The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff.
Curt Fretham, Lake West Development, stated as Staff has pointed out, the MnDOT contractor has found
another site, which makes it hard to compete since it is free space. Fretham stated he is not sure the
contractor will stay at that site the entire time and that he is hopeful he can still move forward since the
project will be ongoing for three years.
Lemke noted there was a 3 -page letter submitted that raises some concerns.
Fretham indicated he did read the entire letter and that his company has done this type of operation in
areas that were more densely populated. Fretham noted the equipment that is used today is very modem
and controls the dust very well. Fretham indicated he is prepared to adhere to standards that will not
cause problems with the neighbors.
Thiesse asked if he has confirmed whether this would still be a viable operation if materials from outside
the area are not allowed to be brought in. Thiesse noted his understanding is that Phase I will be mostly
concrete recycling and Phases 11 and 1H will be more bituminous.
Fretham stated the previous discussion was about needing a site to recycle material and that he would
have more flexibility if materials from other projects can be recycled in conjunction with this project.
Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m.
Allan Engleman, 315 North Old Crystal Bay Road, stated he is not in favor of Lake West's proposal.
Engelman noted Mike Gaffron made a comment earlier tonight that there is an alternate site with Eureka
on state property and that he wants to know what is going on there. Engleman commented everyone here,
including the City Attorney, says Orono cannot do anything. Engleman stated the City Attorney is not
doing his job and that he wants to know what is happening with Eureka. Engleman asked whether they
will be able to come in there prior to obtaining a permit.
Page 16 of 72
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMDUSSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Gaffron stated the City Attorney has advised that the city cannot issue a permit since it is state land
that Orono does not have permitting authority over state land. Gaffron indicated the City can enforce
certain performance standards on the operation such as times of operation, but that it is difficult to
regulate the operatio since it will occur on state land.
Engleman stated in his view there are things that can be done but they cannot be done immediately.
Gaff-ron stated he understands ?Mr. Engleman had a conversation with the City Administrator today who
has told him basically the same thing.
Engleman asked how the state can move in if it is zoned 2 -acre residential.
Gaffron stated the state trumps city zoning.
Engleman stated in regards to the letter from the Dumases, they will have a bigger problem now than with
Lake West since the equipment will be closer to them.
Thiesse stated unfortunately the City's hands are tied.
Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 7:43 p.m.
Leskinen stated in concept an interim use permit can be a tool for the City. Leskinen noted when the
Planning Commission discussed this a long time ago and to her recollection there were some cautionary
tales. Leskinen stated the City would have to be very diligent about it and that she is concerned there are
uses that can either be inappropriate and hard to get rid of or may do irreparable damage to the site.
Leskinen indicated she is open to the idea but that she does have some reservations.
Landgraver indicated he is in favor of it since it is another tool in the City's toolbox. Currently the only
tool the City has is a conditional use permit, which goes with the land and is permanent, and the interim
use permit only goes for a certain time period. Landgraver stated it would force the City to be disciplined
and make sure all the T's are crossed.
Page 17 of 72
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COAMSSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m. AOA
Leskinen noted in Exhibit A, Section 78-1728c, it states the interim use permit shall be renewed
by the City Council. Leskinen asked if they would be reviewed for compliance if they are renewed
annually.
Gaffron stated when the initial interim use permit is established, there would be a trigger date for when it
ends. If the Council decides they want to conduct an annual review, the Council does have the authority
to require that, and can end the interim use if established conditions are not being met.
Leskinen asked if it can be terminated for cause.
Gaff-ron indicated it can be.
Thiesse asked, once this 1TJP option is adopted, how many interim use permits might be in place at one
time, 30 or 40?
Gaffron indicated maybe three or four.
Thiesse stated if there will not be that many permits, he would like to review thern every six months.
Gaffron stated the time period for the reviews can be written into the 11UP resolution for each specific use
and for each specific site.
Leskinen stated the resolution format would be very much like a traditional conditional use where the
conditions are spelled out. Leskinen asked if the main differences are that it does not run with the land
and has a sunset date.
Gaffron indicated that is correct. Gaffron noted the list of allowed interim uses could be a number of
different uses or it could be limited to one use.
Lemke asked what would happen if the site is not restored to its original condition.
Page 18 of 72
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMM[ISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Gaffron stated with each interim use permit, an escrow could be established. Gaff-ron indicated he
prefer to have incentives to comply included with the approval, such as a larger escrow.
Landgraver asked whether a public hearing would be required.
Gaffron indicated it would be. Gaffron noted Line 50 in Attachment A outlines the application
procedures.
Thiesse asked if the City would be obligated to allow a certain use if it is approved at one site.
Gaffron stated if a specific use meets all the conditions we want to establish for that site, there would be
no reason not to approve it, but the Council has the ability to place whatever conditions it wants on it.
Landgraver commented that would allow some flexibility. Landgraver asked how the ordinance language
in part B relates to the text in part A.
Gaffron indicated B adds a section to the RR- I B District entitled Interim Uses, and lists one allowable
interim use that can be applied for.
Leskinen stated A would be the general interim use permit standards, B would be where it is allowed and
what it is, and C (the application for the Eisinger site) would be to establish the specific conditions.
Gaffron stated once the Planning Commission completes its review of A and B, Section C would need to
come back for review of the specific language for the specific site.
Thiesse noted the Planning Commission is only dealing with A and B tonight.
Thiesse. stated he has concerns with allowing temporary construction facilities in the RR -113 District and
that in his view it should be located adjacent to the construction project and materials from that project
only.
Lemke suggested the Planning Commission take each section at a time.
Page 19 of 72
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MTETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Lemke moved, Leskinen seconded, to recommend approval of text amendment per the attachment
41�*
A of the work session packet, but revising the wording of Line 102 to add "at a minimum"
requiring annual review. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0.
Thiesse asked if Staff has any concerns with B.
Gaffron stated the RR -IB District is a fairly substantial residential district. As an interim use, the City is
saying in general this is a district that might allow this, with specific conditions to be established by the
Council, such as a time limit and site layout. Gaffron noted that does not mean the Planning Commission
or City Council is required to approve the use for any property in the RR-lB District. Amy proposed use
would have to meet all of the 1UP standards contained in A. Gaffron stated if they do not meet those,
even though it is an allowed interim use in the RR- I B district, the City can say no.
Thiesse stated one of his concerns is that the City is j umping forward for a specific project, which is the
Highway 112 project.
Lemke asked if this is the type of thing that would go along with an application.
Thiesse stated in his view the City needs an interim use permit option but that they do not need it right
now. Thiesse commented the City will find out how it works on the MnDOT property and that he is not
sure whether the City has to rush through with this now.
Gaffron stated the applicant has indicated he is looking at future phases should the MnDOT site not work
out.
Thiesse noted Phase 11 is on the other side of Long Lake and that the materials would need to be hauled
through the city.
Gaff-ron stated the urgency is not here today as it was a month or two ago.
Landgraver stated since A was approved, an interim use permit can be issued.
Page 20 of 72
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2.017
6:30 o'clock p.m. 44
440(*'
Gaffron stated B would also need to be approved. Gaff-ron noted that similar to the conditional use code
section, if a conditional use or interim use is not listed in the zoning district, then it is not allowed.
Thiesse stated this type of use would need to be identified in the RR- I B district prior to issuing an interim
use permit.
Leskinen commented she has concerns about this particular use since it is so industrial for the RR- 1 B
district.
Landgraver stated the only identified interim use the City would have is what is listed in B and the only
place where it can be done is in the RR-lB district. Landgraver stated all this is doing is giving the City a
too].
Thiesse noted the RR- I B district cover the majority of the City.
Landgraver stated someone would still have to apply for an interim use permit and meet all the conditions
that will be set.
Leskinen noted the Planning Commission is not approving the specific interim use permit being requested
by the applicant by approving B but they are saying the City now has this new tool in theory that has to
meet all the conditions the City feels are appropriate.
Thiesse noted there will be equipment that will be generating noise, such as backup beepers and trucks
coming and going. Thiesse stated he does not care about the storage of items on the property but that
there will be a lot of noise and distractions that come from a site like this. Thiesse stated he could
understand it if they are taking the material from Orono's road and recycling it, but that he is not looking
for even a short-term business to come in and do this type of work.
Leskinen stated her concern is bringing in materials from outside projects. Leskinen noted the 3 -page
letter also cited concerns with air quality as well as a number of other concerns regardless of the location.
Leskinen stated the use feels so industrial and that she does not want to regret the decision afterwards.
Page 22 of 72
NENUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Landgraver stated ironically it is happening and therefore the City is advocating control.
74 op,
Thiesse commented three years ftorn now the City may not ever see another one of these operations
agam.
Schwingler stated the concerns are legitimate but noted Orono is not the first community to see this type
of operation.
Thiesse commented the City can make a much better decision in a month after they have had a chance to
observe the other site in operation.
Landgraver stated the reasons for an interim use permit are to allow something the City did not think of
and that it is short-term in nature rather than permanent creates a land use opportunity, and allows an
empty lot to be used.
Thiesse stated it would come down to C where all the conditions are listed.
Olson asked if B would be attached to every single C that comes forward.
Thiesse stated every C would be under the interim use and the only one before the City is the current
application.
Gaff-ron stated if someone wants to do a mining operation (the Maple Grove example) that eventually will
become a shopping center, an interim use permit is the perfect way to do it. Gaff-ron stated interim use
permits have been used successfully elsewhere.
Tbiesse stated he is not seeing a big benefit to Orono for this type of use.
Laudgraver moved, Schwingler seconded, Application No. 17-3911, Lake West Development, to
recommend approval of the text amendment put forward by Staff for an interim use permit in the
RR -111 district as written in Exhibit B. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0.
Page 22 of 72
Date Application Received: 2/22/27
Date Application Considered as Complete: 2/27/17
60 -Day Review Period Expires- 4/28/17 (Extended to 6/27/17 on 3/30/17)
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members
Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator
From: Mike Gaffron, Senior Planner
Date: April 17,2017
Subject: # 17-3 911, Lake West Development, LLC, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard
- Text Amendment — Allow Interim/Temporary Uses
- Continued Public Hearing
This item was tabled at your March 20 meeting for further consideration. Due to cancellation of
the April 5 work session, please refer to the attached work session packet for discussion
purposes.
Note that the contractor for the Hennepin County Wayzata Boulevard improvement project has
obtained a permit from MnDOT to use a site at 3 6 5 Old Crystal Bay Road for the recycling
operation for Phase 1 (2017-2018) of the highway improvements. However, the applicants have
requested that their application for a text amendment and IUP approval continue to be reviewed,
as they would like to be prepared for use of the Eisinger site for later Phases.
Attachments
A — Notice of Planning Commission Action 3 /3 0/17
B — Letter Received from Marilyn Gabert (Dumas Family) 4/5/17
C — Work Session Packet of 4/5/17
D — Draft PC Minutes of 3/20/17
Council
Exhibit E
NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
CITY OF ORONO
PC Exhibit A
2750 Kelley Parkway ZONING FILE: 17-3911
PO Box 66
Crystal Bay, MIN 55323
952.249.4620 DATEOFNOTICE: March30,2017
TO: Curt Fretham COPIES:
Lake West Development, LLC
14525 Highway 7, Suite 265
Minnetonka, MN 55345
TYPE OF REQUEST: Zoning Text Amendment to allow Interim Uses
DATE OF MEETING: March 20, 2017
The Orono Planning Commission voted 5-0 on a motion to table the application for further consideration.
Staff to prepare a draft text for a zoning code amendment for review.
VOTE: 5 FOR 0 AGAINST
Applicant's next meeting is scheduled as: Monday, April 17, 2017
This is a Planning Commission meeting. The meeting begins at 6:30 PM
60 -Day Extension Notice. The current deadline for City action on your application based on the February
27 application completion date is April 28, 2017. Because the earliest possible date for final Council action
will not occur until after April 28, the City is extending the time period for City action on application #17-
3911 under Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 3(f). Please note the time period for action on this application is
hereby extended an additional 60 days until June 27, 2017.
If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City
Clerk after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please contact Mike
Gaffron at maaffronCa)ci.orono.mn.u-4 or 952.249.4622.
April 5, 2017
PC Exhibit B
Dear Mike Gaffron and the Orono Planning Commission members,
This letter is in regard to #17-3911, Lakewest, LLC, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard and Curt Fretham's request
for an Interim Use Permit to allow construction staging, materials and equipment storage and materials
recycling at that location (the old Eisinger property).
I am writing this letter to represent the concerns of my parents, Robert & Kathryn Dumas. They are the
owners of Dumas Apple House and are the immediate neighbors to the east.
We realize you are dealing with two separate issues. The Planning Commission and City Council have
discussed adding language to your ordinance to handle requests for an Interim Use Permit as there is no
language now to address this request. The other issue is actually discussing whether an Interim Use
Permit should be issued to Mr. Fretham. We would like to address the second issue.
We have quite a few concerns with allowing Mr. Fretharn to use his property for construction staging,
material and equipment storage and materials recycling — gravel crushing. Rather than list all the
storage and staging we will from here on in just say, "gravel crushing" to encompass every -thing but in
fewer words.
1) Allowing a gravel crushing site on that property is not consistent for the uses which the property
is guided in the comprehensive plan. Neither the current Orono zoning nor the Long Range
Land Use Plan allow for a gravel crushing facility on this parcel of land. Possibly some of you
and/or your predecessors worked very hard on these plans and the results were carefully
arrived at for a reason.
2) Some of you may feel that this is a less populated area than other potential gravel crushing sites,
but those of us that are on the neighboring properties are not any less important.
3) The Orono Preserve development (our neighbor to the east) has already sold four lots/houses
and I'm sure will sell several more this spring. We would think new home owners could be in
their houses possibly within the next year. The four current buyers and any potential buyers
may know nothing of the proposed gravel crushing site. We would think they would have
concerns about a gravel crushing site so close to their newly purchased home in a residential
neighborhood.
4) There is talk of other debris being brought in to this site, not just the asphalt from the Hwy 112
project. Would there really be a way to monitor, regulate or control what else is brought in?
5) Do you know if there would be any burning of any type of materials at this site?
6) Would there be any melting of any type of materials at this site?
7) Noise is an issue. Heavy machinery and gravel crushing makes quite a bit more noise than a
residential neighborhood. Also, Mr. Fretham has stated that some of their gravel crushing and
work will be done at night. Day time noise is bad enough, but night time noise of heavy
equipment and gravel crushing would definitely not be welcome.
From the Orono Code of Ordinances Section 58-119: (b)
Maximum noise levels by receiving land use districts. No person shall operate or cause or
permit to be operated any source of noise in such a manner as to create a noise level
outdoors exceeding the dB limit set in table 1 for the receiving [and use district specified.
Your ordinance states, the maximum noise level for residential land use district is 65 dB(A) —
(which means, A -weighted decibels).
Sounds levels associated with heavy construction equipment range from 80 to 120 dB(A).
8) We also have concerns about lighting. There are three rather large looking proposed spots for
lighting on the preliminary site plan. The gravel crushing machine will also likely have lights on it
and any vehicles will have their headlights on at night. All these extra lights on at night, and
some lights on vehicles moving around, can be quite disturbing.
9) Moving heavy equipment and running a gravel crushing site can cause unwanted vibrations to
neighbors. How far will the vibrations travel? We don't really know. It is a concern.
10) Dumas Apple House is open to the public every fall. The traffic safety on Wayzata Blvd is
something we are worried about. Mr. Fretham has said that the heavy truck traffic will be in
spurts. Some days there might be no trucks or traffic going in and out of his proposed gravel
crushing site. He said some days there may be 50 — 100 trips to the site a day! That means
double that number allowing for ingress and egress? So, it could be 100 — 200 trips back and
forth in front of the Dumas Apple House? With all of our Apple House customers pulling in and
out of our facility, that is quite a safety concern.
11) The Hwy 112 project is starting at the east end of town, and this proposed gravel crushing site is
at the west end of Hwy 112. Since we are right next to the proposed gravel crushing site, the
heavy truck traffic could be going past the Dumas Apple House for the duration of the entire
Hwy 112 project. We have read that the Hwy 112 project could last 3-5 years.
12) Recycling is a good thing, but we do not think this is a spot for a gravel crushing plant. Itseems
like there are a lot of downsides and negative issues attached to this request in return for the
financial gain of one company.
13) Environmental and public health concerns regarding use of Recycled Asphalt Pavement (RAP)
"The bitumen binder used in asphalt paving applications contains a relatively large
concentration of a family of organic compounds which can have the potential to pose human
health and environmental concerns in certain circumstances especially when asphalt material is
ground into very small particles that easily blow off of or wash from the surface. These
compounds, known as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are specified as targeted
pollutants by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and are present in asphalt at
relatively high levels for general use in a loose fashion on land.
Lead has been observed in RAP samples, with the greatest quantity in old RAP samples, likely as
a result of vehicle traffic and emissions.
Asphalt millings used alone without a paved top surface have the potential to significantly
migrate from the roadway through the actions of water, wind, and physical displacement and
possibly contaminate surrounding soils and/or surface water sediments. Traffic traveling on the
unpaved asphalt millings would generate dust containing the compounds referenced above and
the dust would be a major migration route of the asphalt millings to the surround environment."
Reference: compiled by G.Keller 6/12/2013
14) Bitumen definition: a black viscous mixture of hydrocarbons obtained naturally or as a residue
from petroleum distillation. It is used for road surfacing and roofing.
15) We have 30 acres of apple trees at the Dumas Apple House. Itisa hugeconcernto have PAHs
dirt & dust pollutants in the air next to a farm that produces food consumed by humans!
16) Public Health Statement for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) from the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).
"This Public Health Statement is the summary chapter from the Toxicological Profile for
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). It is one in a series of Public Health Statements
about hazardous substances and their health effects. This information is important because
this substance may harm you. The effects of exposure to any hazardous substance depend on
the dose, the duration, how you are exposed, personal traits and habits, and whether other
chemicals are present."
This statement was prepared to give you information about Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
(PAHs) and to emphasize the human health effects that may result from exposure to them.
This information is important because exposure to PAHs may cause harmful health effects and
because these sites are potential or actual sources of human exposure to PAHs.
When a substance is released from a large area, such as an industrial plant, or from a
container, such as a drum or bottle, it enters the environment. This release does not always
lead to exposure. You can be exposed to a substance only when you come in contact with it.
You may be exposed by breathing, eating, or drinking substances containing the substance or
by skin contact with it.
If you are exposed to substances such as PAHs, many factors will determine whether harmful
health effects will occur and what the type and severity of those health effects will be. These
factors include the dose (how much), the duration (how long), the route or pathway by which
you are exposed (breathing, eating, drinking, or skin contact), the other chemicals to which
you are exposed, and your individual characteristics such as age, sex, nutritional status,
family traits, lifestyle, and state of health.
17) We are certainly concerned with the health risks to all our customers at Dumas Apple House and
concerned about any potential liability issues that could arise from this.
18) If you issue an Interim Use Permit for a gravel crushing plant at 3245 Wayzata Blvd, please
remember that you setting a precedent. All future decisions on Interim Use Permits will be
based on what you allow at this time. It would be one thing to allow someone to have a place
to, for example, run a business for a political campaign in a residential district for one year. It is
completely another thing to allow someone to have construction staging, material and
equipment storage and materials recycling — gravel crushing and excavation in a residential
district for three to five years!
19) We ask that you seriously consider all of our concerns before you make a decision to issue an
Interim Use Permit for a gravel crushing facility at 3245 Wayzata Blvd.
Sincerely,
Marilyn Gabert, daughter of Robert & Kathryn Dumas, property owners of Dumas Apple House,
neighboring property to Lakewest, LLC, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard.
Marilyn Gabert
PO Box 323
Boulder Junction, W1 54512
mgabert@centurytel.net
I MEMORANDUM Yor April 5, 2017 PC Work session)
To: Planning Commission PC Exhibit C
From:
Mike Gaffron, Senior Planner
Date:
March 2 8, 2017/h#'�'-
Subject:
Consideration of Interim Use Text Amendment
At your March 20 meeting, Planning Commission tabled applications 17-3810 & 17-3811
regarding the proposed construction staging use at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard, pending ftirther
consideration of the "Interim Use Permit" (IUP) concept as well as the actual intended use for the
site. The intent of this memo is primarily to review the advantages and potential disadvantages of
amending the Zoning Code to allow for Interim Uses.
As noted in the March 20 staff report, remember that while a conditional use permit is permanent,
and runs with the land, an interim use permit is intended to be temporary. It provides for
4sunsetting' a use that may be appropriate for some temporary time period but is not generally
appropriate on a permanent basis.
In considering whether Orono should adopt an Interim Use ordinance, it may be useful to identify
examples where a temporary use may be reasonable, but is not appropriate at a given location on
a permanent basis. Examples found in other Minnesota cities' codes are typically tied to specific
zoning districts. While there arc some consistencies, it also appears that every City has its own
ideas of what to regulate via IUP. In some instances cities are using IUPs to regulate activities or
uses that Orono has historically regulated as permitted, conditional or accessory uses, or even via
licensing.
Here are some examples of what other cities are regulating via Interim Use Permits:
Plymouth:
Commercial dog kennels as a secondary use.
Landfilling and land excavation/grading operations involving over 1,000 cubic yards and
mining operations, as regulated by Section 21185.
Living quarters which are provided as an accessory use to a principal permitted or
conditional use listed, which are located within the principal building, provided that: 1) the
living quarters shall not be used as rental properties; 2) a maximum of one such living unit
shall be allowed; and 3) there shall be a demonstrated and documented need for such a
facility (e.g. nanny, caretaker, security).
Agriculture, nurseries, greenhouses for growing only, landscape gardening, and tree fanns,
including sales of only those products grown on the premises.
Temporary classroom structures for use by public or private schools.
Afedina:
Single family detached dwellings in the Rural Commercial Holding District
Within the Uptown Hamel districts:
(1) Residential dwellings which do not meet the minimum density requirements of the
Uptown Hamel districts.
Page I of 5
(2) Minor Auto Repair.
(3) Electronic and Computer Manufacturing.
(4) Electrical and other Skill Trades, provided there is no Outside Storage.
(5) Small Scale Light Manufacturing of Products for On -Site Retail Sales.
(6) Tire, Battery, and Muffler Stores.
(4) Sauna Manufacturing and Assembly.
Minnetonka:
Residential districts:
a) Home occupations
b) Leasing, sales or management office for a development if the office exceeds 1,000
square feet of floor area
c) Commercial kennel for dogs, cats, or both (with a list of standards)
d) A use or improvement that is not permitted in this zoning district or that does not
comply with the standards for this zoning district, if such action is required as a
reasonable accommodation under the federal Americans with disabilities act, the
federal fair housing act, or other federal or state law.
Business districts (each entry has a long list of standards to be met):
a) transient sales (with a long list of standards);
b) outside sales and display of plant materials except those associated with a
commercial nursery;
c) sidewalk sales exceeding allowable standards described for accessory uses and
carnivals:
d) outdoor entertainment;
Here are two examples of ordinances that allow an interim use similar to that proposed for the
Eisinger site:
Isanti County:
(List of Interim Uses in in Ag/Res District only):
"Temporary construction facilities associated with road construction or reconstruction projects.
a. Time limit — the facility must be completely removed and the site returned to its original
state or better within six months of project completion.
b. Facility types allowed are:
1) Blacktopping processing facilities which includes the processing of recycled
materials; and
2) Concrete recycling storage areas which include storage, grinding, or other
processing."
Andover:
"Highway Construction Materials (Temporary Processing and Storage):
A. Site Plan Requirements: The temporary processing and storage of sand, gravel, or other
materials shall be pen-nitted only by Interim Use Permit. Such Interim Use Permit shall
include a site plan showing:
Page 2 of 5
1. Where the processing is to be done;
2. The location of the plant;
3. Disposal of water;
4. Route of trucks moving to and from the site in removing processed material from
the site.
Tenn of Permit. Such permit shall be granted for a specific period."
Chisago City:
"F. Temporary Processing or Recycling Plant in Conjunction with a Specific Project. A
Temporary Processing Plant located within the Property, right-of-way or adjacent to the specific
project, will be allowed without an Interim Use Permit subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with Regulations. All Federal, State, and City air, water and noise quality
standards must be met.
2. City Authorization. The City Council shall review and authorize a Temporary Processing
or Recycling Plant in Conjunction with a Specific Project.
3. Minimal Effect. The processing equipment must be located so as to minimize its effect on
surrounding property owners.
4. Limited Duration. The Processing Plant may only be on the property for the duration of
the project.
5. Entrance. If an entrance is not available from the Processing Plant to a road, a rock
entrance must be constructed and maintained with appropriate dust control as required in this
chapter.
6. Removal of Material. No materials, outside of the designated right-of-way, may be
excavated or removed from the site without an Interim Use Permit.
7. Restoration. The site shall be restored one (1) year after the road project has been
complete.
8. Performance Standard. The performance standards of 7.5(E) above are met to the
satisfaction of the City Administrator or designee."
1UP Advantages
Adding the ability to allow for specified interim uses within specified zoning districts gives the
City and property owners a method or tool for the temporary use of property. It provides an option
for properties that are expected to be developed in the future in confon-nity with the zoning code,
but for various reasons such future development will not occur immediately.
An example of how the IUP could have been used in Orono: the former produce market at
CR6/Hwyl2 was always zoned for single-family use, and was granted a "nonconforming use
CUP" in 1968. Later CUP s were approved for minor expansion of the market use, When the market
closed, the building eventually became a daycare center via a new conditional use permit as a
conforming conditional use. When MnDOT determined that the property would be needed for the
Highway 12 bypass, the daycare use discontinued, although it would be a number of years before
that part of the bypass would be constructed.
Page 3 of 5
The building then sat empty for a number of years during which staff had a variety of inquiries
from the owner and others about the possibility of a temporary use until NInDOT actually acquired
the site. Most of those inquiries were for relatively benign commercial uses such as an insurance
office or similar business office use. Because the City had no Interim Use ordinance, none of these
commercial temporary uses were available. The ability to allow a temporary use via an IUP would
have allowed the property owner to lease the building rather than have it sit empty.
Potential ]UP Disadvantages and Cautions
If the Council approves an amendment to the Zoning Code to allow Interim Uses, the City,
developers and property owners will have to be very clear about the parameters for such use. Clear
and concise documentation of the allowed land use, activities and time periods will be required
with each IUP issued. To avoid any confusion or misunderstanding, it will be important that all
parties know the conditions and time limitations established for the IUP.
Having an interim use option introduces the potential for property owners to propose land uses
that are inappropriate for a given site, that could be disruptive to neighboring land owners, or be
inconsistent with the character of the surrounding area. Business activities that would potentially
be harmful to the public health, safety and welfare could be proposed. Because of this, the City
must be diligent not only in establishing appropriate interim uses within specified zoning districts,
but in monitoring those uses for compliance with the established terms of each issued IUP.
Inteirim Use Ordinance — Text Amendment
Attachment A is a draft text amendment that, would establish in the zoning code the provision of
an Interim Use option. This is drafted similar to the general code section on conditional uses. Note
that it contains language that mimics the State Statute on interim uses, and additionally contains
certain provisions that should pertain to all interim use permits. Sample ordinances from other
cities are also attached, and you will notice that while they differ widely in terms of layout and
text, there are essentially four elements common to all, including:
Definition, purpose and intent
Application procedures
Standards & conditions
Termination
Attachment B is a companion text amendment that would add an interim use option to the RR- 1 B
Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District, with simply one interim use entry, containing
specific conditions for that use.
Planning Commission Action Requested
As this is a work session, no formal action is to be taken. Planning Commission is asked to review
the provided information, and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of having an interim use
option in the zoning code, and review the draft text amendments.
Additionally, identify any specific concerns about the proposed construction staging/materials
recycling use, suggest any additional conditions that might be applicable, and formulate questions
to be asked of the applicant to help establish whether the use is appropriate for the Eisinger site.
Page 4 of 5
List of Attachments
A — Draft General IUP Text Amendment
B — Draft RR-lB District IUP Amendment
C — Memo and Selected Exhibits from Items 17-3 910/3 911
D — Additional Examples of Other Cities IUP Provisions
Page 5 of 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
is
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
-A
ORDINANCE NO. _, THIRD SERIES
CITY OF ORONO
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORONO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
BY ADDING ARTICLE XIV REGARDING INTERIM USES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 78 — Zoning Regulations is hereby amended by adding Article XIV
Interim Uses to read as follows:
ARTICLE XIV — INTERIM USES
DIVISION I — GENERALLY
Secs. 78-1725 — 78-1749. — Reserved.
DIVISION 2. - PERMIT
See. 78-1725. — Definition, Purpose and Intent.
(a) Definition. An interim use is a temporary use of property until a particular date, until the
occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it.
(b) Purpose and intent. Because of their unusual characteristics, interim uses require
consideration so that they may be located and regulated properly with respect to the
objectives of this chapter and the Comprehensive Plan, and with respect to their impacts
on surrounding properties. In order to achieve these purposes, the City Council is is
empowered to grant and to deny applications for interim use permits and to impose
reasonable conditions upon the granting of these permits. Additionally, the intent of
allowing interim uses is:
1. To allow a use for a brief period of time until a permanent location is obtained or
while the permanent location is under construction.
2. To allow a use that is presently judged acceptable by the City Council, but that
with anticipated development or redevelopment, will not be acceptable in the
future or will be replaced in the future by a permitted or conditional use allowed
within the respective zoning district.
Page 1 of 4
44 3. To allow a use which is reflective of anticipated long range change to an area and
45 which is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan provided that said use
46 maintains harmony and compatibility with surrounding uses and is in keeping
47 with the architectural character and design standards of existing uses and
48 development.
49
50 See. 78-1726. - Application Procedure. The information required and the procedures to be
51 followed for all interim use permit applications shall be the same as that required for a
52 conditional use permit as provided for in this Chapter in Sections 78-912 through 78-917. In
53 addition, the following information shall be provided:
54
55 (a) written documentation that includes a complete description of the use, schedule for
56 commencement and termination of the use, hours and dates of operation and anticipated
57 employment.
58
59 (b) any special studies requested by the City when there is evidence that the proposed use
60 may negatively impact public infrastructure, the environment or adjacent land uses.
61 These studies may examine the impacts on such things as traffic, environment, wetlands
62 and utilities.
63
64 (c) evidence of approval or preliminary approval ftom all other agencies with jurisdiction
65 over elements of the use.
66
67 See. 78-1727. - Standards and Conditions. No interim use permit may be granted unless the
68 city Council determines that the use will comply with the following:
69
70 (a) The use will meet the general performance standards in Section 78-916 of this Chapter;
71
72 (b) The use is allowed as an interim use in the applicable zoning district;
73
74 (c) The use will not delay anticipated development or redevelopment of the site;
75
76 (d) The use will not be in conflict with any provisions of the city code on an ongoing basis;
77
78 (e) The use will not adversely affect the adjacent property, the surrounding neighborhood, or
79 other uses on the property where the use will be located;
80
81 (f) The property on which the use will be located is currently in compliance with all
82 applicable city code standards;
83
84 (g) The use will not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public;
85
86 (h) The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty; and
Page 2 of 4
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
ill
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
(i) The applicant agrees in writing to any conditions that the City Council deems appropriate
for the use, including a requirement for a financial security to ensure removal of all evidence
of the use upon termination, and restoration of the site to prior or better conditions. The
conditions shall be set forth in a development agreement between the property owner and the
City, which agreement shall be recorded with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of
Deeds.
Sec. 78-1728. - Effect of Permit.
(a) An interim use permit is effective only for the location specified in the approval
documentation.
(b) The issuance of
A+ & MWFWOA�
(c) Interim use p s shall be reviel��
(rmit A
does not confer on the property any vested rights.
by the City Council.
(d) An interim use per-m—lTe—xpires one year after approval if the proposed use has not been
commenced or a building permit for a structure to support the interim use has not been
issued.
(e) An interim use permit expires if the interim use ceases operation for a continuous period
of at least one year.
Sec. 78-1729. – Terniination. An interim use pen -nit expires and the interim use shall
terminate upon the occurrence of any of the following events:
(a) The termination date specified in the interim use permit.
(b) Upon violation of conditions under which the permit was issued.
(c) Upon change in the City's zoning regulations which renders the use nonconforming.
(d) The redevelopment of the use and property upon which it is located to a permitted or
conditional use as allowed within the respective zoning district.
SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its
adoption and publication.
ADOPTED this day of 2017 on a vote of ayes
and ___nays by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota.
Page 3 of 4
130
131
132 ATTEST:
133
134
135
136 Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor
137
138
139 Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of_, 20.17.
Page 4 of 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Ma
ORDINANCE NO. _, THIRD SERIES
CITY OF ORONO
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORONO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
BY ADDING SECTION 78-421 REGARDING INTERIM USES
WITHIN THE RR -1B ZONING DISTRICT
THE CITY COUNCIL, OF ORONO ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 78 – Zoning Regulations is hereby amended by adding Section 78-421.
Interim Uses to read as follows:
Sec. 78-421. - Interim uses.
Within any RR- I B one -family rural residential district, no structure or land shall be used
for the following uses without an interim use permit issued in accordance with the provisions
of Article XIV of this Chapter:
(1) Temporary facilities for construction staging, materials and equipment storage,
and materials recycling, when such facilities are associated with public road
construction or reconstruction projects.
a. Time limit – the facility must be completely removed and the site returned to
its original state or better within six months of project completion.
b. Applicant shall submit plans indicating the site layout and the routes for
trucks hauling materials to and from the site.
SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its
adoption and publication.
ADOPTED this – day of . ......... . J 2017 on a vote of — ayes
and ____nays by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota.
ATTEST:
Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor
Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of_, 2017
Page 1 of 1
Date Application Received- 2/21/17
Date Application Considered as Complete: 2/27/17
6D -Day Review Period Expires. 4/28/17 17-3?//
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members
Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator
From: Mike Gaffron, Senior Planner
Date: March 20, 2017
Subject: # 17-3 911, Lakewest, LLC, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard
Text Amendment — Allow Interim/Ternporary Uses
Public Hearing
C
Item 5
Application Summary: The applicants have submitted an application (#17-3910) requesting a
permit for temporary use of the property at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard for staging of construction
activities associated with the County Road 112 (Wayzata Blvd.) Improvement Project expected
to begin in 2017. Because construction staging is not an allowed use in any Orono zoning district
and is not a permanent use, the only fimctional method for approving it is via an Interim Use
Permit. The zoning code currently does not contain provisions for Interim Uses. The applicants
are requesting in this application that the City amend the zoning code in order to allow Interim
Uses.
Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends that Planning Commission
discuss the "Interim Use" concept generally. Staff recommen s adoption of an Interim Use
ordinance similar to that in the attached examples. If Planning Commission concludes that the
proposed temporary use for 3245 Wayzata Boulevard has merit, then staff would also
recommend adoption of a text amendment to the RR- I B District establishing a (very short) list
of allowed Interim Uses, including staging of construction activities subject to appropriate
conditions.
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A, Text Amendment Application & Proposed Use Narrative
Exhibit B. Minnesota Statutes Excerpt re: Interim Uses
Exhibit C Sample Interim Use Ordinances (Plymouth, Medina, Minnetonka)
Exhibit D, Sample Zoning District Interim Use Text (Plymouth)
Exhibit K Zoning Map
Exhibit F. Preliminary Site Use Plan
Exhibit G. Plat Map
Exhibit H. Property Owners List
Background
The applicants received preliminary plat approval for a 27 -lot residential development of the
property at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard in July 2016. Pending more favorable market conditions,
they have chosen to not proceed immediately with the residential development. However, they
have requested to be able to allow temporary use of the site as a staging, storage and materials
#17-39113245 Wayzata Blvd.
March 20, 2017
Page 2
recycling yard for the upcoming CR 112 (Wayzata Blvd) improvement project. The highway
improvement project under the auspices of Hennepin County, is being done in phases, and could
take up to 4-5 years for completion.
The Orono Zoning Code does not have provisions for temporary or "interim" uses. Further, the
proposed use for storage, construction staging and materials recycling is dissimilar to virtually
every Permitted, conditional or accessory use in any Of Orono's zoning districts. The only
remotely similar uses are listed as "Open and outdoor storage as an accessory use" and "Trucking
operations", each of which appears within just the I -Industrial District standards, and requires a
conditional use permit. The applicants' property is guided and zoned for residential use (RR- I B
zoning district, which will be rezoned to RPUD upon final plat approval) and the Industrial District
provisions are not applicable.
Interim Use Concept
Minnesota Statutes Section 462.3 5 97 permits cities to allow "Interim Uses". Interim use is defined
by statute as "a temporary use of a property until a particular date, until the occurrence of a
particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit if'. The Statutes indicate "The
governing body (City Council) may grant permission for an interim use of property if.
(1) The use conforms to the zoning regulations;
(2) The date or event that will tern-iinate the use can be identified with certainty;
(3) Permission of the use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary
for the public to take the property in the future; and
(4) The user agrees to any conditions that the governing body deems appropriate for
Permission of the use.
Any interim use may be terminated by a change in the zoning regulations."
It is important to remember that a conditional use permit is permanent, and runs with the land, not
with the property owner. In contrast, an interim use permit provides the tools necessary to 'sunset'
a use that may be appropriate for some temporary time period but is riot generally appropriate on
a permanent basis. Staff has long felt that an Interim Use ordinance would be a very useful tool
for Orono, because it provides flexibility but with a high level of City control.
Zoning Text Amendment Options
In order to allow the proposed staging use on a temporary basis, the code must be amended.
Factors that need to be considered include: -
I . A general "Interim Use" ordinance should be adopted that establishes parameters for any
interim use regardless of zoning district. This would as a minimum read similar to the statute
language above, and might include additional parameters that the City desires. This section
would be similar to the City code sections that provide required findings for variances and
CUPs. Three example of such an ordinance are attached (Exhibit Q.
2. The RR -113 Zoning District should be amended to include a section entitled "Interim Uses"
(similar to the 'Permitted', 'conditional' and 'accessory' use sections). This would presumably
list just the use now being requested, such as "Construction staging, materials and equipment
storage, and materials recycling".
3. The listing could/should include a number of conditions that must be met in order to be
approved. Those conditions might include, for instance:
#17-39113245 Wayzata Blvd.
March 20, 2017
Page 3
• A minimum separation distance from nearby residential structures or lot lines
• Minimum lot size
• Requirements for site and adjacent road maintenance, and traffic control measures
• Allowed only for government sponsored public improvement projects
• The Council must have the ability to deny an interim use even though it is listed
for a specific zoning district. Item 4 of the statute excerpt would presumably
allow the City to find that appropriate conditions cannot or will not be met, and
that becomes a basis for denial.
Planning Commission should consider whether there are any additional conditions that would
be appropriate for this use.
Comprehensive Plan Considerations
An interim use that might be appropriate on a temporary basis might not fit within the type of uses
for which a property is guided in the Comprehensive Plan. So, if an interim industrial -type use is
allowed in the zoning code as an interim use in an area guided for residential use, does that meet
the standard for being 'in conformity with the Comp Plan'? The City Attorney has indicated that
because zoning needs to be consistent with the Comp Plan, the Comp Plan technically should be
amended to allow interim uses that aren't conforming to the CUT guiding. This requires further
research by staff; potentially some text would be appropriately added to the Comp Plan during its
update due in 2018, That should not impact the ability to add Interim Uses to the zoning code
now.
Public Comments
No comments for or against the proposal have been received to date. Notification to all properties
within 3 5 0 feet of the property was mailed out 10 days prior to this public hearing,
Issues for Consideration
I . Does the Planning Commission conclude that the adoption of an Interim Use ordinance
would be a beneficial tool?
2. If so, does the Planning Commission find that the proposed construction staging use
on an interim basis is appropriate in the RR-lB (2 -acre Single -Family Rural
Residential) Zoning District? What specific conditions are necessary to ensure that a
given property is appropriate for that use? Consider the bulleted criteria above and
attempt to put some numerical standards in place that would limit the use to only
certain locations under certain conditions (as opposed to merely establishing and
imposing conditions on a site specific basis, which could be considered as arbitrary...).
3. Given the three examples from other cities, does Planning Commission have a
preference among them as a template to follow for the general Interim Use text? A
draft text amendment will be forthcoming.
4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application?
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that an Interim Use section be added to the zoning code and that the RR-lB
District be amended to include a list of allowed Interim Uses to include "Construction staging,
materials and equipment storage and materials recycling" under specific conditions.
Date Application Received: 2/21/27
Date Application Considered as Complete: 2/27117
60 -Day Review Period Expires: 4/28/17 0
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members
Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator
From: Mike Gaffron, Senior Planner
Date: March 20, 2017
Item 6
Subject: # 17-3 910, Lakewest, LLC, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard
- Interim Use Permit: Temporary Site Use for Construction Staging
- Public Hearing
Application Summary: The applicants are requesting that the City approve a permit for
interim use of the property at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard for staging of construction activities
associated with the County Road 112 (Wayzata Blvd.) Improvement Project expected to
begin in 2017. This application can only be approved if the companion application for
establishment of an Interim Use Ordinance is approved,
Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of an Interim
Use Permit for this site subject to specific conditions.
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A.
Application
Exhibit A
Preliminary Site Plan and Proposed Use Narrative
Exhibit C
Public Works Director Comments
Exhibit D.
Fire Chief Comments
Exhibit E.
MCWD Permit
Exhibit F.
Hennepin County DOT Permit
Exhibit G.
Plat Map
Exhibit I-1
Property Owners List
Background
The applicants received preliminary plat approval for a 27 -lot residential development of the
property at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard in July 2016. Pending more favorable market conditions,
they have chosen to not proceed immediately with the residential development. However, they
have requested to be able to allow temporary use of the site as a staging, storage and materials
recycling yard for the upcoming CR 112 (Wayzata Blvd) improvement project. The highway
improvement project, under the auspices of Hennepin County, is being done in phases, and could
take up to 4-5 years for completion.
Staff for the last few months has been receiving inquiries from contractors searching for a staging
area for the highway project. There appear to be few suitable options. This site would appear to
score high marks in terms of such a use:
#17-3910 3245 Wayzata Blvd,
March 20, 2017
Page 2
It is open and relatively flat;
It has good accessibility to Wayzata Boulevard;
It is large enough for the intended activities;
It is relatively remote from nearby residential development (7009 to home to the NE
across Wayzata Blvd., 10001+ fi*om any homes to the SW across the fireway, so that
the potential negative impacts such as noise, vibration, glare, dust, etc. should be
minimal as compared to most other locations within the Wayzata Boulevard corridor.
Interim Use Permit Conditions
Under the assumption that an Interim Use ordinance is adopted, and an Interim Uses listing is
added to the RR-lB District standards which includes the proposed use (potentially listed as
"Construction staging, materials and equipment storage and materials recycling"), it is anticipated
that a list of required conditions for the use at any location will also be listed, such as:
A mininiurn separation distance from nearby residential structures or lot lines
Minimum lot size
Requirements for site and adjacent road maintenance, and traffic control measures
Allowed only for government sponsored public improvement projects
Additional site-specific conditions should also be considered in approving the proposed
construction staging use.
Planning Commission should review the applicants' narrative describing the intended activities to
be occurring on the site.
The portion of the site proposed for construction staging at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard is primarily
over the closed landfill area of the property- The landfill has been closed for many years and is
relatively open and flat. Layers of clean fill over the landfill were added by the former owner in
order to establish a suitable cap for the landfill and assure appropriate runoff characteristics. The
current owners have had borings done in the landfill area in order to determine the stability and
extent of the landfill as well as what materials might be encountered if a future phase of residential
development is ever proposed. This infbrmation was obtained as part of their 2016 residential
development proposal. It should be noted that the area which gained preliminary approval for
residential development is not within the proposed temporary staging area.
The proposed site use plan (Exhibit B) indicates the proposed rock construction entrance to be
located where the approved future residential access would be located. This access point has been
approved by Hennepin County as a temporary construction access (see Exhibit F).
The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has approved an Erosion Control Pen -nit for the
construction staging activity (see Exhibit E).
The Long Lake Fire Chief has indicated no issues with� use of the site for construction staging.
Orono Public Work Director Adam Edwards has indicated this location is likely as good a location
as the contractor will find for construction staging (see Exhibits C & D).
The site plan suggests that temporary lighting will likely be employed, and it is likely that to
minimize impact on traffic flow, some work on the highway improvements will be at night, it
would be appropriate to establish that any temporary lighting be downcast and directed away from
residential areas.
#17-3910 3245 Wayzata Blvd.
March 20, 2017
Page 3
The site plan indicates a proposed visual and noise -screening berm along the west and south
boundaries of the site. Applicant is working with the MPCA to establish parameters and obtain
permits for this berm, which will become an amenity for future residential development. The City
will require a grading plan be approved for this, and it potentially will require a Conditional Use
Permit based on the volume of permanent fill material.
The applicants' narrative suggests that this site might be used as a recycling yard for projects other
than just the Wayzata Boulevard improvements (see Narrative). This could put a different slant
on how the site is intended to be used. The applicants should describe what is actually intended,
and how the contractor or Hennepin County expect to operate this site. Will materials from other
projects outside Orono be brought onto the site and not used for Wayzata Blvd. purposes? Will
materials from the Wayzata Blvd. project be recycled and head out to other projects not in Orono?
Is it the City's expectation that this site is intended to be in use exclusively for the Wayzata Blvd.
project and not as a regional recycling yard for other projects? We do -not want this industrial -
level use at this site to become a regional activity, and we want it to have a definite end date
commensurate with the end of the Wayzata Boulevard improvements.
Public Comments
No comments for or against the proposal have been received to date.
Issues for Consideration
- Does Planning Commission have any specific concerns with the location of this site for
the proposed use?
Does Planning Commission have any specific concerns with the level or type of activity
that is likely to be associated with the proposed use? Is the use intended to be specific to
the Wayzata Boulevard improvements, or is it intended for other projects?
Does Planning Commission have any specific concerns with regard to the duration of the
proposed use — is 'the date of completion of the Wayzata Boulevard improvements' a
suitable termination date for the activity, or should it be further limited, such as requiring
an annual review and/or annual approval of an extension?
- Are there any other issues or concerns with this application?
Staff Recommendation
If Planning Commission concludes that this site is appropriate for the proposed use, staff would
recommend that an Interim Use Permit be issued subject to at least the following conditions:
1. Establish an end date of the use to be no later than completion of the Wayzata Boulevard
improvements.
2. Use of the site is intended solely for activities related to the Wayzata Boulevard
improvement project and may not be used to support other projects.
3. Use of the site shall be subject to Orono Code standards with regard to noise, lighting, dust
control, street maintenance, etc.
4. Appropriate permits to be obtained from Hennepin County, Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District, MPCA, and any other agencies or governing authorities as may be required for
activities on the site.
#17-3910 3245 Wayzata Blvd.
March 20,2017
Page 4
5, Construction of a proposed permanent screening berm along the south and southwesterly
boundaries of the site will require conditional use permit application and approval,
6. An annual review of the interim use permit shall be conducted to determine whether the use
remains acceptable during the duration of the Wayzata Boulevard improvement project.
7. Any other conditions that Planning Commission and Council detennine should be included.
City of Orono
Conditional Use Permit Application PC Exhibit A
2750 Kelley Parimay Application # 17-39.1140
Orono, MN 56356 1 Date Received 07-.74-.4
Maln. 952,249-000 staff
fax 952-24"816 Fee $700
MROVAdftsw
P.O. Box 56 Escrow. $700 / NA
Crys1lal Bay. MN 553234006 Nobe
Please complete. Applicant Y49 be notffled vAthin 15 days as to the staWs of the application.
Incomplete applicarUons vAll DA be placed on Planning Commission Agendas.
SITELOCATION: 324!�-Wayo-k-Vw, Okoko AdAlr-559-p
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
sheeft
APPLICANT INFORMATION: PtImck here If ApplicaM address should be used for bIlling
Applicant, Ad Lw.,�
Phone (Pdrnary): 113=
MallIng Address: Aaaaqz sa-4 11 gy R&A[72-107-
Email: dfotEa- [fA IgE5bdeyr. /Frlog elftuo Y. 0011
PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: Mfh'eck here If Property Owner Is same as applicant
13 check here If Property Owner address should be uwd fbr billing
Name: 6a UX4 lie
Phone (Primary): 93Q-.aX%7)
Malling Address:
WEI; z &a A U lav �5 C i t) rL1 11A 2 - ZIP:
. - K
Emall: AnA
APPLICANT ANDIOR PROPERTY OWNER.
• Certify that the Inforinallon supplied Is true and co"sd to ft beg of his/her knmMedgG. The applicant and property
owner moognize tW they are solely responsible for submlWng a cOmP1616 aPpllwWon being aware that upon
failure to do so, the staff has no afternarthre but to rood It until It Is c*MPIGW of to recommend the request for
denial of the request regaridless of its potential medt,
• The Property Owner hereby acknowledges and agmes to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the
prop" by City SUff, consultants, agents. Commission and Coundt Mernbars for purposes of Investigation and ver1fication
of this request.
• Property Owner andfor Appilicant acknowledge they must be present at all schodulad review meetings of the
Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or property owner Is unable to aftend a scheduled mWing,
please make arrangements to hmm an sulhodzed mpresenbdive attend in place of the applicantlawner and advise the City
Planner assigned to your project.
Information vAll be distributed via arnall.
Applicant Signature:
.11 oef�'-
App[Icant Signature:
Property Owner Signature:
Property Owner Signature:
CUP Appkathn - Jenuwy 2017
Page 4
Date:
Date:
Date: iul-& anq
Date:
RECEIVED
FS 2 12017
#3910 crffof�ORONO
RAI S�
1. ALL PVQ MMM SHALL 6E XM 0-M OR C -I Nis Lmm
olf� HOW.
* ALL Nk wmmw sew sHAL.L K soR a5 Lmm an*Rwm
mmm
* SAINM 511MMS SHALL BE 0 PVC SCHEMILE 41L
4. =a Uwm RqPLL K I* T" -r owm vmH f low.
• CDWWM MAL IHSKL WONNT EXTD� AS NEIMAW
"m w HAS � umm 10 MOD OWL= WIN am
OW119L ECIENNONS SHALL. K C=== 19MIDW 10 HVMW
cur.
• MI. wym SHALL K I IV mmm FrApEw LINE
I ALL HOWIS AID WOE SHALL. BE EMOM WITH Si STEEL
OM78 ODE MA OR MWALM FLAXIMANON 0W= MIS SHALL
K t= FOR ALL MWOM FITTKK -
* ALL OP INA SHALL N POLY MVM UTH I MIL FOLY AND MLY I
a ALL Xwm
* AU. PWC & HWE ALL SOMMS SHALL BE Lm mm
UAM WOE PER CITY SMM WX RA71L
11. 61SIALL hvxvxm 5 FEET � MRS.
IL Ir OR Ir WDRANT E)MMMS (ALY. F HYMANT EXIBBONS ARE
USED, SATE VALK OJT U1010911 ML BE IMMUML
WAYZATA 81WO'
PC Exhibit B
---- ------------------------------- ------------
im
L
LL
L
or Pj
r
..4 4
IN
Ife" 5
IP
fm 10111(
1womm
!I1
w
w
w
r
-_j
6i
Nv/
ki
A
31
12 >
sum
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
6
9 cm ft� aLmm Fbnft i V�
CAMPION mm pk� QN& awfir. dwir bw bm hymer
ENGINEERING PAL Im 10 =,R%dkM
owl=
am fts4lat
SERVICES, INC- "al am a 1- VMS =b
Acc mis - 4fjmvr:L 94,1 W mF--ip I
wmw fm
mmmRwr
Imsm
grAF
IMIUAT
Titunt ED -PFDDWr -SMame
7.
51 q- Far4m
am
L�
an AEURAW
TEMMWKy LjetMTUqCr
no"Pumm Im V� WAM
LWOTMA M 0101"m
� OLE
mm
— — — — — — � a URN Evewiff
FWAM WRM DMER MIR
IMAND � AM
On �
CATO Bom
aww � UMHME
� PME Am 001HEM
MZ
IFAIML
OWNEM 24FACE
su"L
ommiMm
bk-
Pinim Log
am's
Bw WA
a Comm
XMA smamuft
RAI S�
1. ALL PVQ MMM SHALL 6E XM 0-M OR C -I Nis Lmm
olf� HOW.
* ALL Nk wmmw sew sHAL.L K soR a5 Lmm an*Rwm
mmm
* SAINM 511MMS SHALL BE 0 PVC SCHEMILE 41L
4. =a Uwm RqPLL K I* T" -r owm vmH f low.
• CDWWM MAL IHSKL WONNT EXTD� AS NEIMAW
"m w HAS � umm 10 MOD OWL= WIN am
OW119L ECIENNONS SHALL. K C=== 19MIDW 10 HVMW
cur.
• MI. wym SHALL K I IV mmm FrApEw LINE
I ALL HOWIS AID WOE SHALL. BE EMOM WITH Si STEEL
OM78 ODE MA OR MWALM FLAXIMANON 0W= MIS SHALL
K t= FOR ALL MWOM FITTKK -
* ALL OP INA SHALL N POLY MVM UTH I MIL FOLY AND MLY I
a ALL Xwm
* AU. PWC & HWE ALL SOMMS SHALL BE Lm mm
UAM WOE PER CITY SMM WX RA71L
11. 61SIALL hvxvxm 5 FEET � MRS.
IL Ir OR Ir WDRANT E)MMMS (ALY. F HYMANT EXIBBONS ARE
USED, SATE VALK OJT U1010911 ML BE IMMUML
WAYZATA 81WO'
PC Exhibit B
---- ------------------------------- ------------
im
L
LL
L
or Pj
r
..4 4
IN
Ife" 5
IP
fm 10111(
1womm
!I1
w
w
w
r
-_j
6i
Nv/
ki
A
31
12 >
sum
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
6
9 cm ft� aLmm Fbnft i V�
CAMPION mm pk� QN& awfir. dwir bw bm hymer
ENGINEERING PAL Im 10 =,R%dkM
owl=
am fts4lat
SERVICES, INC- "al am a 1- VMS =b
EISINGER MEADO
LAKE WEST, LLC
RECEIVED
FEB 2.12017
#3910 CRY OF ORONO
PRELIMINARY SANMARY SEWER & PR"arlm --
WATERMAIN PLAN 15-039
SHEET NO. 5 OF 12 SHE
Acc mis - 4fjmvr:L 94,1 W mF--ip I
41111
grAF
Titunt ED -PFDDWr -SMame
7.
51 q- Far4m
C,-� 9.
TEMMWKy LjetMTUqCr
EISINGER MEADO
LAKE WEST, LLC
RECEIVED
FEB 2.12017
#3910 CRY OF ORONO
PRELIMINARY SANMARY SEWER & PR"arlm --
WATERMAIN PLAN 15-039
SHEET NO. 5 OF 12 SHE
LAKE WEST
DEVELOPMENT, LLC
Condltionai Use Permit Application Narrative
3245 Wayzata Boulevard West, Orono, MN 55356
PID:3211823140002
February 21, 2017
� =1 - M,
Construction and demolition materials are recognized as one of the largest components
of the solid waste stream in the United States. Recycling this material not only makes
sense economically, but keeping this material out of landfills makes sense
environmentally, as it's a smarter use of resources, saves energy and provides a not
decrease in greenhouse gas emissions. In the case of on-site, or near -site recycling
operations, further savings are realized in efficient use of vehicles, fuel and manpower,
reduced wear on adjacent roadways, and better containment of construction impact from
surrounding areas.
County State Aid Highway 112 Project is scheduled to begin the spring of 2017 and
continue through 2019. The property owned by Lakewest LLC, located at 3245 Wayzata
Boulevard West in Orono, offers an Ideal near-ske staging and recycling location for this
project. It is Isolated between Wayzata Boulevard (Old Highway 12 or Highway 112)
and the new Highway 12 in an area with few neighbors. It provides easy access, ample
acreage and minimal preparation to become ready for the contractor. Over the past
several years Lakewest has successfully established and operated similar recycling sites
in the cities of Golden Valley; Minnetonka and St. Louis Park.
Lakewest LLC is seeking a Conditional Use Permit and an Ordinance Text Amendment
to allow the establishment of a staging and concretelbituminous recycling site at this
location.
We appreciate the City of Orono's help in completing and submitting these Applications
and look forward to playing a part in this significant infrastructure improvement for the
cities of Orono and Lonn Lake.
Curt Fretham
CEO, Lake West Development, LLC
Office: 952-653-134
RECOVED
FEB 2 1. 2017
MY OF ORONO
Lake Wed Dwelopment 114525 Highway 7, Sulte 265. Minnetonka, MN 5&345 �,,Phonq 952-930-3000
#3910
Conditional Use Permit Application
A. Contact Information
Owrw of Record I-Akewaot, LLC
14525 Highway 7, Minnetonka MN 5&W
Phone 952-930-3000
AuthorizedAgent Curt Fretham, CEO
Lake West Development LLC,
14525 Highway 7, Suite 285 Minnetonka, MN 55345,
Phone 962-930-3DOO
B. Site Data
Ad*wn 3245 Wayzata Boulevard West
Orono, MN 55358
Zoning
RRAB One Family Rural RgslIgntisl
Parcei Size
26.8 acres
I � 123,933 sq. ft.
PID
3211823140002
DUcripflon
Thai Part Of Government Lot I In Section 32 Township 118
Range 23 Described As Follows: Beginning At A Point In The
East One Of Said Sedan 32;
Notis: This Is A Partial Motes a lbounda D&=rtptlon.
C- Land Characteristics
The entire property consists Ora
00FOXImately 28.8 -acres of vacant land and a4almer
residence situated between Highway 12 and old Highway 12 (also called Wayzata 1310ebeard
and Highway 112) just West of Long Lake. Access to the 'property is an the north from
Wayzata Boulevard
The ParC01 Is made UP of roughly 13.8 acres of wetland, 5.2 =911 of currently developable,
nOnANeUend buffer area, and 10-2 aems Of fcrm&r landfill. - Lakewed has been wo g wfth t
MPCA to deleftne dianup requirements for the I o+ a rkin he
cres Offormer landfill — the area has
been 185118d Oftnalvely and Is currently undergoing flurther environmental analysis.
In 2014 the $lts received preliminary plot approval 1br Ehdnger Meadows, a 2640t detached
townhome development with an additional 24-unft apartment building under consi"rgUgn as a
secondphose. Lakeweat has decided to delay this developmwdio agow other developments
in the area to became established.
D. Intent of the project
In anficipean of the County ftte Aid Highway 112 Project #091 1Q1 the Property owner
intends to establish a Site for environmentally sound pmeesshig and mcYding of recoverable
demolition and construction matenals related to CSAH1 12 and other 1310jecft. A Condfflonal
Use Permit is sought to allow staging equipment, stockpiling materials, processing and
recyiding aggregate and bituminous materials. a" with assodated construction a
1-.
RECEIVEW
FEB 2 1,2017
CrrY- OF ORONO
CUP — Page 2 of 3
#3910
Conditional Use Permit Application
E. Zoning (For Ordinance Text Amendment)
The -property is Zb * nod RRAB, One Ramily Rural Residential, and guided for high-densay
mult4amily rosiderib.al development. In order to allow the allow the 'Site to be used for staging
equipment, stockpiling materials. processing and recyding aggregate and biturriiiious
materials, and other construction adbyllies an Ordinance Text Amendment is requeuted.
Staging & Recycling
The Staging and recycling activities will occupy approximately 5 acres of the total property
(see aite plan). Accen to the site will be provided from Wayzata Boulevard (Highway 112 or
Old Highway 12) at the location established In the Elsinger Meadows Preliminary Plat. A
culvert per county specMcations will be installed and a gravel 4we 9 road at least 24'vdde will
be constructed. A temporary rock stabilization pad of 4-W of recycled 3" minus concrete will
be constructed to accommodate the re�
yding equipment. Two stockpiles, one for raw
materials and one fb.r finished materials wfil be located at efther and of the recycling
equipment, truck Vvfflo flowing countirclockwiae within the site. Lakewesi is currently working
with the MPCA to obtain peffrdsslon to fill an area that will Support a large visual and nolas-
screening berm along the westem and southeM borders; as a buffer to Hiqh%vay 12. The
proposed berm will later be seeded and landscaped as an amenity for the future development.
G. Recyclina & Processinq ODerations
The contractor operating the site during the CSAHII 12 PrOjW Will be responsibie for
• lndallin'g and maintaining access to the site In accordance with local governing
authorities
• Furnishing and maintaining erosion contmi devices as specified by local governing
aixthorlties;
Providing sweeping and dust control services as specified by local governing
authorities, County and/o� land owner
Providing Mo control as dkected by local municipality and/or County
Providing temporary and final turf establishment as required by local governing
authorities
Main taining a safe and clean construction site as directed by contractor's in-place
safety program
Establishing hours of operation in conformance with local municipality
Establishing a fighting photornetric plan as directed by local municipalKy and/or
County (if required)
H. Reclamation Plan
At the conclusion of the CSAH 112 Project ancl/or other recycling PmJ8CtS, the site will be
restored to the same. or better, condition as it is now. The temporaffy rock stabilization pad
and stockpilea YAII be removed and thi3 (potential) large perimeter berm will be seeded and
landscaped. Eventually the site will be used to create Elsinger Meadowt according to the
original vision.
FEB 2 12017 CUP — Page 3 of 3
(;"-OF ORONO #3910
MINNEHAHA CREEK
QUALITY OF WATER
WATERSHED DISTRICT
I -
QUALITY OF LIFE
PC Exhibit E
March 14�, 2017
Lakewest Development LLC
Attn: Dana Brumin
14525 Highway 7, Suite 265
Minnetonka, Minnesota 55356
RE: Nolke of Conditional Approval for MCWD Permit Application No. 174M.- Erosion Control:
Other, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard Wes% Orono, Minnesota 55356
Dear Ms. Brumlitt:
Thank you for applying for a Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) permit for Erosion Control
located at the above-mentioned address. The review of this application has concluded, and the MCWD
has determined the above-mentioned permit application to be complete. Therefore, the application Is
approved with the following conditions:
L Submission of financial assurance for erosion control
2. NPDE5 Permit Number and Coverage Card
Once the abave-mentioned materials have been submitted and a1l pwmlt conditions hmm been met,
sUff wfU in" the Permit. You are reminded that work on the project cannot begin until the permit has
been Issued. The approval expires one year from the date of this letter. if final municipal approval of
the project results In changes to the Project, You must submit revised Pla ns to the MCWD for review,
Please contact me st.rworking!gmall.com or (952) 641-4519 If you have any questions or concerns.
Respectfully,
Rachel Workin
PermittIngTechnician
CC:
aty of orono staff
3/IfM]7
EN
Hnn*n C=fty RVParndt - UMO 2461 PwmW 2017,A304
Application for Temporary / Const Access
Permit
Hennepin County
Hennepin County Public Wbdm
Transpo-te n Departnient (Roads and Bridge&) - Opendlons
1000 Praide Drive
Medina, UN 5534045421
PC Exhibit F
POMM: 2017,A304
Road: 112
Maintenance District Hennlwn co�v
Pernift Is fbr da construction of
Tamomw (renvormy) - Comftcoon, surboad wKh Gravel
Applicant Pr"Mrty Owner
Nam: Done 8 Brumild Nam: LakwW LLC
Addrem: Lda Wlad Devalopmept Addrese: 14525 Highway 7, Sulla 255
MInFwAordta. MN SIMM"534 Minnelonim. MN 55345
Phone: (612) 718-9213 Phone: (952) 6534359
Pager.
Fox-,
Email: dsna@%v9uWay.wm
Enlrarwe Needed By: 06MU2017
Contractor
Name: Lakev" LLC
Addrsu'. 14625 Highmy 7, Sufte 255
Minneforda% MN 55MG
Phone.- (852) W3.1359 -
114
W149" N=w*C=WftMPM&-UW2*JP=WW17-AW
lUOMWOR
The PMPMW enter= is on the 8 " of Qxfty mad no, 112, 0.0 mles W of (Md CipW BW Road.
9hW Addrow 3245 Vbyxmk BoW&var!d, Ormo.
aftemy
V*IM; 20 he
Presert number of drWwmp- o
Skefth
4 Mm CUP She Plen.pff
DesclipUan of Work
PrWMG VeMb BOOM to dftft*wyding oft for COAH 112 Roject
Gensial
1. No ViNk Mal be started untl to OPP&z&m IB approved and ft PUM Imund,
2. Contact the Herimpin COMV Pw" Offbe at a124%*4%W a minkmin of 2 business dqs prior I* doft mwhgftn,
-3. After ddvoway cmubucOon Is compioigd, pwwm mqueeft tia irwigiialon mud no" go pwrnft 011on Mgt eudl we*
WideccepterwabyHonne*County.
4. No dwmW or al P ralans in W&wm@ may be medo at OW *" WtW Witten Pwmkftn *Q1M IM COU* Engineer or
designee. ' .
5. Approwd of Oft pwmk don not dM the Couft Engkow the A*xe ftM to nwbe, rG1900% or don any entrance to
wq)edftthe mw'WWS 0i'veNculer or pedestrim I Ot-, The Cow* riftins ft right to cbm UN qntrancgs) at be
dkaeft, bleed UPOn MIS n§CMW for treft nqAeft% omiti and ad*.
IL Exhft ddvwmp am not automadwity pwp@kmW. In the event of a dmp In land Lm or a major dmge in the traft
OWN Offt mdulng foolfty, new drkwwpy Mppp=ucm maybe nkpired by the County.
7. IndwmW wWw del be Onun for do* of Ow PmIW OW or wA"wWon oftM PrqfM n dblwftW by HannqOn
County.
8- P=ft Or 0013168 811011 be kq* On ft work e1s, whk work Is In progroes, In the custocty of to jndWwI in dmqp. wA
WM be oftbled Won mood by arri courft ffirl 1.
9-Thesegenwalpmmitseqw1wim End sPuffiestionashail b000nsidersdu benh 9 an hteww pertoiroachwW every
Permit ISNOW for OPerations an courdy soadways. The work sumoftad by as pme dal be Om at wmh lme and in guch
manner = dM he consistent wM ft ORW OF to public and dW contm to A requimmentg arid dmndwds of ft Cowdy
Of Hwwm* 46 hwdn spoWed. If at any fte, It sw to found by Henropin CwJ* t11W ft wft Is not bdn& cw has not
been. PFDpwIY Performed. 1he Pernftee, upon being notified, shd ImmedW* w!w tw InGOOSSNY SUM at Mair own
wMerme. to Piece the work In Omftmarm I* said reqLfinwmft or abmWwdL In addition. no resideniial drNwasy may
samd 22 Iiest In wk1h and no commercid d*wWWY 811011 exoned to wift dkbbd by the Home* Courft A=m
ManogmentGuidalroL
10. In the went of 111111ure or negkv% WE or not by add PwmIfte or Pw~e empk*w% to pwbm and am* with the
proscribed oormMons. N61riodons and roguialorks, thaThUsporbSon Dqx*nwd may rwj*s WW amui ft p@mdt and
QnW SSN POMINS to Immediately rernove any and A strudmas or property belonong io said Pormition *M ft WgOI
RD& ofto Foadvay or county propeft
11. The kohdation WM be made In conftmft Wh am appicaUs ipope� nuiptiong end codes cmeft said knialationw Al
InstaliblIons shoX be made Inconftrmft with Fggtftftrw of gwmmrnqnjW ggwdpg jor he pm%Won of ft PLMM
IL Americans w1h I)INUMIes Act - Any work In tw Can" dqhts-W�M Iset kpam any pedestrian fadWas requires Mat
90 =1010don of ft pedestfien %Mos Impodied be nwkmvd to uxftnn to ounwnt ADA requiremank wW ftndwdL
13- If PWOMOM MAdOXY or ft!Arof Vay is darmod; same WW be resbred. In a tir"GlY Owww to its =%hMI or a bWK
OwWWrh at tw Bob 04mm Of Me PSMAIAM POMftW4 Mum to WmW wxA damage in 9 6nely mamwwig remult in
Hw1ndOn County. ftough Its own ftmes or contraftre, maidng odd repirs and Wing Pwmibee for al amb wW oWenm
rainiedtorsto, PomMossMil make payment to HonrvqAnCDu*VMnfflIe@n (IS) dwj&ofrocq�ptcfwddbli. pernefte
Mms#W Ifkf@ktcmOIW PRIM" Of mid wnmNftwtM ftqmft*m, to Hwffm* CouRV. I *a pay d coft
Ad 62 d8bt colection, biciuding, but not Imbed to. court onsia, mms. i , Aslandatiomeyeftes.
% NO ddft oft hViawy frorn Och or drMV an shouiders or War cuft where damage VA omr.
214
311=17 ROMMOU CDMWRVFbmk - UIDf I*/Pwmhi 201743H
15.1talmilbeftotwun' Inn that to Permlites, WX be responsible for mointenarm or ropefrof any and all fa&M due to
odlwmft arosion, hick of veptalfun growth, ruftV or other job mhad WGIMM for a podod of Uwas (3) yeam aw pmInd
compleffori and Nolice, ofViwkCo v � liflon lbrm ha baw nx*jsd by Hai. hCour*PwnVft99wRpwftrm@jSM
uWnionarm. Imn after 9 has been no#W of &M dololeM. Penittes " boym for all loosto and
Q%poriew MMM to aid rniunlengnoL Pamitteeft finilurn to porbrm mid mairdonsnoo ImMWM* Will mouft in NMVwpin
Count "h b own orb controdom pierilormirqw1d malift nesondbliftPormitionfbrallcoglognd@KWeag
161141011 tmwft Psmtfte OW MaM psymnit to I Im- n Courft wMIn Steen (15) day* of robvipt of sold Up. Pamfts
qPm. 20 If It hft b nvolw parMA of mM smounle YAMIn the specified *rw to HonewMin Counly, Parmitise shal pay &I
COW related to doM colloctlons. Including, but not Imiled to, court onew, ftsg4 Inim wWsUomgWb*L
% Emwpncy Vehicle Acceame must be signed ard closed to generel traft at d Miss, CmVnvod wwjtwrkM use of an
Emergency %ishicis sholl in the removal Of go SGuses iwt to clocndon of HNannopto County at the owneft
04onm
17. Unions steNd alsewhom In the Special Pawidons, all accow pomft expire I year fam &@ dab to ft pormft I&
Wound.
Sediment Contiol & Drainne
I. 9110010t =11100 MW Maftlde sMII be kept clean, neat and prowent6ble throuillmd coneftuction an dearmined by ft
Hennepin Cc" Transpoviation Departmant
2. OLM controf shah be pvM&d upon request of ew Hommon County Tmmpwhdm 0sprirnent
& Mw wdeling drainage peft I a shell not be Whwed union approved t� Hennepin Cow* Vftershed District aWmi ow
dminage cakuldws we required If pion aftre existing dn*mp pagerns.
4. Permenant rawtorallon plang must be aftnWhad to the PwMft OffMS for huPMW 009tomflonkinlor xMilizallon fbr walk
ocwft* babreen NDwmdw let and April 30th Prior to SWIng cmudruclion.
ft Confirdl
1 - Nft IndWiStIon of thb drbvwsy malms I necessary to wiwk an Me roadway. MM Inust be pwbodxd; proW tomporwy
trefficconiv Including %t* son wM propierbarricades must be In plow. Tompoirorytullic conlrol nx*cwhrm to aw
ounse vw*n of the Winnewle Mmmalof UnfformTNftCWM wftawomMMft Field Msmjal. Soiddwhas ghall to
am *am The job alts promptty uW ocimplellon of wodL
2. Saft vooke shell be wom by ANYONE ompong Cou* righmkway.
3. TM Parmides sholl use due ciftence in ft execution of ft work auth Undwtlds pormit In order not to wukgW or
unnecomerfly obetruct havol sic" Bw vold hWwjay. Operations sholl be so conduded at oil Oft@ SO to PWMR 80110 and
MBKWMW *60 tWOM OM the Main wilhin the Ilmft of the work herein ProsaftmoiL Ali as" wasoxn for the ftg
moverriont of troft shall be provided try to Pormiffee at ft own cwt
Payment method
Credit Cord
Special prw4plans:
Payment detallB
TompConstructlDnAccom
$100.00
Total: $IWM
* COMd MIM Okr*%W at (612) 221-7162 Orvie emed at MUM01-olmolseclOtenrl hus at h 24 hourn r to
construction. w we pro
* TOMPOMFY ftft control IsMft an County ioncla dwil cordorm to the mod reoW vemlon of the Nnneeds Manual
on UnMxm Tftft Control DeVA*L
* Appikent dial be reapanalbleto pis= a wbp gign, minimum aim of 385)W, pflorIlD oMkV #*new or*==.
No notes
3M
WIR017
Appnml
111 -1 Pon CwAft MiPwmh- LW#M/Pwndtt2Dl7AW
APPkard Dar's S. BnlrnlU - 020=17 12M PM
QfSft9*JLa33bl&5a643hlcl3ddWWWMd
72ff4dlcGs4lO2lbGemafB?038cmbjc
DIgRal Slundum
I" POmft SUPOMW Mlohlial D. OIRWWd - 0=1=17 7:34 AM
2d72blbfgbmdfd@Gltft265fd79737b*
4052 faMMMIUMS491CM0247
414
Sample IUP Ordinances
Medina
Faribault
Minnetonka
Plymouth
Shorewood
Brooklyn Park
South St. Paul
These examples are in no particular order, but have been annotated to indicate the similar
elements in each, as follows:
A. Definition
B. Purpose and intent
C. Application procedures
D. Standards and conditions
E. Termination
F. Revocation
G. Effect of permit
Medina City Code A4 CO'4 IAA 825. Zoning — Administration
ENMRIM USES
Section 8".73. bterim Uses- Purpose. The purpose of this ordimmee is to allow the
establishment or continuation of interim uses under specific and regulated conditions. hnerim
uses may be allowed by permit if the following conditions are met -
(a) the use conforms to the zoning regulations;
(b) the date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty;
(c) permission of the use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary
for the public to take the property in the fit=; and
(d) the user agrees to any conditions that the city council deems appropriate for
permission of the use.
Section 825.75. Application.
Subd. 1. The land owner or user shall submit an application for an interim use permit to the
zoning administrator. The application shall be accompanied by the following information
and docurniontedon:
(a) legal description of the property;
(b) identification of the owner and usa, if diffwent-,
(c) survey dowing property boundaries; emsting unprovements, including buildings,
parking areas, dorage areas, utilities, drainage tiles and wells-, topography of the site
and arca within 100 fed ofthe property boundaries with contours at 24bot intervals;
significant trees and existing vegetation; emements of reomd, including the
danensions fliereof, and wetlands;
(d) site plan of proposed i showing all buildings, parking arm, Storage 81`019�
driveways, a ss points, b=% easements, and adjacent public or private stwts;
(e) floor plams and building elevations, including list of building materials, showing a
sketch or computer-genersted image of proposed buildings as viewed ftom
suminding uses;
Q) site plan of existing uses on property in non-residential zones adjacertt to the site and on
property in residential zones within 720 feet of the site, measured at the, closest
poftA showing buildings, entrunces and other significant ftum and illustrating
,sight lines to dw proposed use,
(g) proposed grading plan with contours at 2 -foot intm-vals;
825. Zoning —Administradon Page 47 of 51
INV
Medina 'Lty Codt 825. Zoning — Administration
(h) soils map;
Q) tree prewvation plan,
0) landscaping plan, including species and sizes;
(k) drainage and storm water plan;
0) utility plan;
(m) sip plan;
(n) lighting plan, -
(o) table of a proposed uses by type and square footage, including estimated water and
sanitary sewer usaw,
(P) statement of the date or event terminating the use; and
(q) application fee.
Subd. 2. Upon receipt of an application for an interim use permit the zoning administrator
shall review the material submitted and determine whether the application is complete. If
the application is not compleft, the zoning administrator shall notify the applicant in
writing and shall specify the additiond documentation or ft&rmation that the applicant
will be required to submit before the application will be considered complete. When the
application is complete, the zoning admunstrator shall, refer the matter to the planning
commission fbr review and public hearing.
Section 921,77. Ph He
Anning CoMM*ft REjew., Pab Hearing.
Subd- I. The planning commission shall review the proposWd' interim use permit on the
basis of the information and documentation submitted by the applicant and any other
infxmmdon available to it The planning commission shall hold a public hearing on the
proposed interim use. Notice of the tirm, place and purpose of the hearing shall be
published in dw city's official wwapaper at least ton days prior to the date of the hearing.
For land located in the R& RR -1, RR -2 or RR -UR zoning districts, notice shall also be
mailed at least ten days prior to the hearing to each owner of affi%-ted property and
property situated, wholly or partly within 1000 feet of the property to which the interim
use relates. For land located in any other zoning distdct, notice must also be mailed at
lead 10 days prior to the hearing to each owner of property situated wbolly or partly
within 350 fixt of the property to which the fiftrim use permit relates.
Subd. 2. 71v planning commission shall review the proposed interim use to determine
whether it is consistent with the requirements of this ordinance. Following the public
hearing, the planning commission shall reconunend that the inUwim use be approved with
conditions or denied. The planning commission shall forward its recommendation to the
825. Zoning —Administration Page 48 of 51
Medina City Code 825. ZTing — Administration
city council along with a list of suggested conditions if it recommends approval of the
permit.
Section 325.79. City Council Review; Amendment
Subd. 1. The city councH "I consider the recormnendation of the pluming commission
after receipt of its report and may consider any additional information or conduct such
additional review, if any, as it determines would serve the public interest The city
council shaH approve with conditions or deny the interirn use permit. The city council
shall condition its approval in any man= it deems reasonably necessary in order to
promote public health, safety or welfare and to achieve compliance with this ordinance.
The city council may require the applicant to enter into an agreement including such
provisions as it deems reasonably required to ensure compliance wiffi this ordinance and
the terms and conditions of the city's approval.
SO& 2. An application to amend an approved site plan shall be reviewed under this
section in the same manner as an initial application fbr an interim use permit
Swdon 821AL - Me-runin-a—tim. An Interim use shall terminate upon the date or the occurrence
of the event established m the pernut or upon such other condition specified by the city.
Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, an interim use may be terminated by a change
in zoning regulations applicable to the use or land upon which it is located.
Amendment Rktory of this SCWOD
Febmwy 19, 1.985 — Ord 217-A — Amended 825-07 Subd 8 regarding the definidon of a boathouse.
Also amended 825.21, Subd 6 and 825.21 Subd. 8 regmiding setbacks in the Shoreland District.
Aune 16,198 7 — Ord 224 — Amended Subd. 12 o
.f Subsection 825.07 and Subsection 828.25 regarding
residential building height.
Jammy Z5,1986 — Ord 226 — Amended Subsecdon 825.19 regarding Accessory Buildings,
AWW 4, 1987 — Ord. 235 — Amended Subsection 825.19 regW%&i9 Accessory Buildings
February 4, IM — 00d 261 —Amended Subd. 29 ofSubsection 825.07 regarding accesso?y structures
to an eisenfial servim
Manh 9, 1992 — Ord. 262 — Added Subd, 49.1 to Subsection 825.0 7 and amen&d Subd. 29 of&bjection
825.0 7 regarding Home OL-cupattions.
MWTA 9, 1992 — Ord 263 —Amended Subsection 825.47 regarding the valid thne oftariances.
825. Zoning —AdmInimation Page 49 of 51
I
Faribault Unified Devetopment Ordinance C(TY Or rA&16&qLJ- P. 38
2-320. Revocation of con , tional use permit. Failure to comply with any conditi�?� set f1brth as
!S1 hall cl
part of conditional use permit ap] 0 � s onstitute a violation of this ordinance s ubject to the
enforcement process identified in Sectio -620. Continued non-compliance shall onstitute grounds
for revocation of the conditional use permit, d�etermined by the City Coun Kiowoinc;
on the matter. "�p lowing a public hearing
2-330. Expiration of conditional use p
r, -_r pi . If sub�Wlial development or construction has
not taken place within one (1) year of the date o ro 0 conditional use permit, such permit shall
be considered void unless a petition for a time extensio been granted by the City Council. Such
extension request shall be submitted in writing east tthi (30) days prior to expiration of the
conditional use permit and shall state facts show' a good faith e to complete work permitted under
the original approval.
2-340. Discontinuance conditional use permits. Where a c aditional use has been
established and is disconti for any reason for a period of one (1) year or longer, or where a
conditional use has bee anged to a permitted use or to any other conditional use, the conditional use
permit shall be dee to be abandoned.
ARTICLE 8. INTERIM USES
2-350. Purpose of interim uses. An interim use is a use not currently allowed by this ordinance,
which may be allowed as a temporary use of property until an established date, until the occurrence of a
particular event, or until the zoning regulations no longer allow it. hk
2-360. Authorization of interim use. The City Council may approve an interim use of property
as defined and authorized by Minnesota Statutes 462.3597.
2-370. Application for interim use. Any person having a legal or equitable interest in a property
may file an application to use such land for one or more interim uses. An application for interim use shall
be filed with the City Planner on an approved form, as specified in Section 2-90, and shall be
accompanied by such information as is requested by the City Planner to facilitate review.
2-380. Hearing on application for interim use. The Planning Commission shall hold a public
hearing on each valid and complete for an interim use as provided in Section 2-100. After the close of the
hearing on a proposed interim use, the Planning Commission shall make findings, pursuant to Section 2-
400, and shall submit the same together with its recommendations to the City Council.
2-390. Action by City Council on interim uses. The City Council shall make the final decision
regarding all applications for interim use. Approval shall require a majority vote of the City Council.
2-400. Interim use findings and conditions. (A) Requiredfindings. The City Council shall
make the following findings in order to approve an interim use:
(1) The proposed interim use will utilize property where it is not reasonable to utilize it in a
manner provided for in the city's Land Use Plan.
(2) The proposed interim use is presently acceptable but, given anticipated development will
not be acceptable in the future.
Chapter 2 — Administration and Enforcement
7-N,
V
W -
WA
Faribault Unified Development Ordinance P. 39
(B) Conditions and guarantees. Any City Council approval of an interim use shall be subject to
the following conditions:
(1) Except as otherwise authorized by this section, an interim use shall conform to this
ordinance as if it were established as a conditional use.
(2) The date or event that will terminate the interim use shall be identified with certainty.
(3) In the event of a public taking of property after the interim use is established, the property
owner shall not be entitled to compensation for any increase in value attributable to the
interim use.
(4) Such conditions and guarantees as the City Council deems reasonable and necessary to
protect the public interest and to ensure compliance with the standards of this ordinance
and policies of the Land Use Plan.
2-410. Termination of interim use. An approved interim use shall terminate upon the
occurrence of any of the following events:
(1) The termination date specified with approval of the interim use.
(2) Any violation of the conditions under which the interim use was approved.
(3) A change in this ordinance which would render the use non -conforming.
ARTICLE 9. VARIANCES
2-420. Purpose of variances. Variances are intended to provide a means of departure from the
literal requirements of this ordinance where strict adherence would cause undue hardship due to special
conditions or circumstances unique to a site. It is not the intent of this section to allow a variance for a
use that is not permitted within a particular zoning district.
2-430. Application for variance. Any person having a legal or equitable interest in a property
may file an application for one or more variances. An application for a variance shall be filed with the
City Planner on an approved form as specified in Section 2-90, and shall be accompanied by a site plan
and any other information deemed necessary by the City Planner to facilitate review.
2-440. Hearing on application for variance. The Planning Commission shall hold a public
hearing on each valid and complete application for a variance as provided in Section 2-100. After the
close of the hearing on a proposed variance, the Planning Commission shall make findings, pursuant to
Section 2-460, and shall submit the same together with its recommendations to the City Council.
2-450. Action by City Council on variances. The City Council shall make the final decision
regarding all applications for variance from the provisions of this ordinance. Approval shall require a
majority vote of the City Council.
Chapter 2 — Administration and Enforcement
CHAPTER 3: ZONING REGULATIONS
Print
MIAMMMA
Minnetonka Code of Ordinmm
SECTION 300.06 INTERIM USE PERMITS
1. Dermidon and Purposc
Page I of 3
a) An interim use is a temporary use of property until a particular date, until the occurrence of a
particular evard, or until Zoning VWL91M no longer PM=t It
b) The purposes fir allowmg interim uses am:
I?
1) To allow a use for a temporary period of time until a permanent location is obudned or
whde the petrmanent location a under construction,
2) To allow a use dW is presently judged acceptable by the City Council, but that with
anticipated development or redevelopment, will not be acceptable in ft future or will be
replaced in die ffiture by a permitted or conditional use allowed within the respective district,
3) To allow a use that is seasonal in nature; or
4) To ed low a use for a limited period. of time tbal reasonably uses the proPZ4 v6erc it is ]:lot
reasonable to useh in the manner otbcrwise provided in the zoning ordin=ce or comprebensive
plan.
2. Pernift Requkv&
It is unlawfid to use any structum or land for any purpose requiri% an interim use permit in ffie
district in which the property is located without fbat obtaming an interim use permit from
the city. Where applicable, a building permit mot also be obtained fium ffie city.
3. Appfimflom
An appliesdon for an mum use permit must comply with the provisions for a condifional use
permit application in section 300.06, subdivision 2, and in addition, must contain the following:
a) written docurnentatiori that includes a complete description of the use, sobedule for
commencement and temAnation of &e use, hours and dates of opmtion and anticipated
b) site plan drawn to scale showing parcel and wast1mg topograpby;
c) location of all buildings and the size of each, including squm footage;
d) curb cuts, driveways, access roads, parking spews, off-street loading arm, and sidawallai;
e) natural features such as woodlands, wetland[s, shorelines, etc,
http://hlmry.amlegal.com/alpscHpts/get-contentaspx 3/1612017
2
CMAYMR 3: ZONING REGULATIONS
Page 2 of 3
f) landscaping and screening plans, including species and size of trees and shrubs proposed; rj\
g) proposed finished grading and drainage plan sufficient to dTmn and di"se of all surface
water accumulated;
h) proposed floor plan and elevations of any building with use indicated;
i) proposed outdoor storage spaws (if applicable); and
j) any special studies requested by the city planner when there is evidence that the proposed use
may negatively impact public inftstructurc, the environment or adjacent land uses. These
studies may examme the impacts on such things as traffic environment, wetlands, and utilities.
4. Procedum
An interim use application win be processed in accordance with the procedure for conditional
we permits in section 300.06, subd. 3 and 4. No application for an interim use pum3it &at has
been denied wholly or in part may be resubmitted for a period of one year afteir the date of
denial, except on grounds of new evidence or proof of chmges of conditions found to be valid by
the city council.
5. General Standards.
No interim, use permit may be granted unless the city council determines that the use will comply
with the following:
a) the general performm= standards in section 300.16, subd. 2 will be met;
b) the use will not delay anticipated development or redevelopment of the site;
c) the use will not be in conflict with any provisions of the city code on an ongoing basis;
d) the use will not adversely affect the 4accnt property, dw surrounding neighborhood, or
o1her uses on ffie property where the use will be located-, 1P
e) the property on which the use will be located is currently in compliance with all. applicable
city code sUmdards;
f't) the use is allowed as an interim use in the applicable zoning district;
g) the date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with cvrttinty;
h) ffie use will not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public; and
i) the applicant agrees in writing to any conditions that the city council deems appropriate for
Lthe use, including a requirement for a financial security to ensure removal of all evidence of the
use upon termination.
6. Effect of Permit
a) An interim use permit is eff-ective only for the location specified in the applicatim
b) The issuame of an interim use permit does not confer on the: property any vested right
I—L
http://Iihwy-amlegal.com/alpscripts/gct-=tentaspx 3/16/2017
10 1, rAW95- 91"WO kWCJ :.4:[910jW16VOT4R1P
7. Termination.
a) An interim use permit expires and the interim use must terminate at the earlier of.
Page 3 of 3
1) the expiration date in the interim use permit,
2) the occurrence of any event identified in the interim use permit for the termination of the
use;
3) revocation of the interim use permit; or
4) an amendment of dw city code dw no longer allows the mtcritn use.
b) An interim use permit expires one year after approval if the proposed use has not
commenced or a building permit for a structure to support the interim use has not been issued.
6) An interim use permit expires if the hAerim use ceases operation for a continuous period of at
least one year.
8. Revocation or ModificadWn.
The city council may review an interim use permit periodically and may revoke a permit upon
violation of any condition of the permit, any law of the United States or the state of Minnesota,
or any city ordinance. If it is discovered after appmval of ffie interim use permit that the city's
decision was band at least in part on false, misleading, or fraudulent information, the city
council may revoke the permit, modiry the conditions or impose additional conditions to emure
oompfia= with this section. The procedure for revocation will be the same as that for licenses
specified in section 700.035 of the city code.
(New section 300.05 added by Ord. 2011-19, adopted August 22, 2011; former section 3 00.05
repealed by OnL 92-62 1, adopted April 16, 1992)
bttp://Iibrary.amlegal.com/alpseripts/get-content.aspx 3/1&2017
F/-Y$WaT-x
SECTION 21020 - ADMINISTRAMN - EVMRIM USES PC Exhibit C
21020.01. PURPOSE AND RMNT: The purpose and intent of allowing interim uses is:
Subd. 1. To allow a use for a brief period of time until a permanent location is
obtained or while the pemment location is under construction.
Subd. 2. To allow a use that is presently judged acceptable by the City Council, but
that with anticipated development or redevelopment, will not be acceptable in the fidure or will
be replaced in the future by a permitted or conditional use allowed within the respective district. 113
Subd. 3. To allow a use which is reflective of anticipated long range change to an
area and which is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan provided that said use maintidns
harmony and compatibility with surrounding uses and is in keeping with the architectural
character and design standards of existing uses and development.
21020.02. PROCEDURES:
Subd. 1. Interim uses shall be processed according to the procedures and standards
for a conditional use permit as established by Section 210 15 of this Chapter.
Subil. 2. Eff-ect. of Permit. An "interim use permit" fbr seasonal farmer's market
and produce sales may be issued for a period of up to eight months per calendar year. After the
City Council has issued such an interim use permit for the first terra, the Zoning Administrator
may reissue such permit for up to eight months per calendar year, provided the seasonal farmer's
market or produce sale is consistent with the original interim use permit approval, and is in
I compliance with Section 21460.09, Subd. 2 of this Chapter.
(Amended by Ord. No. 2005-01, 01111105) (Amended by Ord Aro. 2011-05, 02122111)
21020.03. GENERAL STANDARDS: An interim use shall comply with the following:
Subd. 1. Meet the standards of a conditional use permit set forth in Section
21015.02, Subd. 5 of this Chapter.
Subd. 2. Conform to the applicable gencral performance standards of Section
21015.04 of this Chapter.
Subd. 3. 7be use is allowed as an interim use in the respective zoning district.
Subd. 4. The date or event thd will terminate the use can be identified with
certainty.
Subd. 5. The use will not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public.
Y
21020-1
Subil. 6. The user agrees to any conditions did the City Council deem appropriate
q�K for permission of the use.
T�>
21020.04. TERNONA71TON: An interim use shall terminate on the happening of any of
the following events, whichever occurs fu-st:
Subd. 1. The date stated in the partnit.
Subd. 2. Upon violation of conditions under which the permit was issuedL
Subd. 3. Upon change in the City's zoning regulations which renders the use non-
conforming. I
Subd. 4. The redevelopment of the use and property upon which it is located, to a
permitted or conditional use as allowed within the respective zoning district.
21020.05. CERIMCATION OF TAXES PAID: Prior to approving an application for an
hrWrim use permit, the applicant shall provide certification to the City that them am no
delinquent property taus, special aamsmcnts, intUrest, or. City utilitY fees due upon the parcel of
land to which the interim use pernift application relates.
21020-2
,�514R-6LA)M-b
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
Subd. 4. Interim conditional use permit.
a. Purpose. The purpose and intent of an interim conditional use permit is:
(1) To allow a use for a brief period of time while permanent location is obtained or
constructed; or
(2) To allow a use that is presently judged acceptable by the City Council, but that with
anticipated development or redevelopment, will not be acceptable in the future; or
(3) To allow a use that is reflective of anticipated long range change to an area and that is
in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, provided that the use maintains harmony and
compatibility with surrounding uses and is in keeping with the performance standards of this
code; or
(4) To provide a mechanism for allowing changes to a nonconforming use of property
contingent upon a plan for cessation of the nonconforming use within a specified period of
time. I
b. Informational requirement and procedure. The information required and the proceZ
to be followed for all interim conditional use permit applications shall be the same as that
required for a conditional use permit as provided for in this section.
c. Termination. An interim conditional use shall terminate on the happening of any of the
following events, whichever occurs first:
(1) The date stated in the permit;
(2) Upon violation of conditions under which the permit was issued;
(3) Upon change in the city's zoning regulations that renders the use nonconforming;
(4) The redevelopment of the use and property upon which it is located to a permitted or
conditional use as allowed within the respective zoning district.
d. General standards. An interim conditional use permit shall comply with the following:
(1) Conform to the applicable general building and performance requirements of §
1201.03, Subd. 2 of this code;
(2) The use is allowed as an interim use in the respective zoning district;
(3) The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty;
(4) The use will not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public;
[Mei
T)
(5) The user agrees to any conditions that the City Council deems appropriate for
permission of the use. The conditions shall be set forth in a development agreement between
�p6L-the property owner and the city, which agreement shall be recorded with the Hennepin County
, iE
Recorder or Registrar of Deeds.
e. Conditions of approval. In permitting a new interim conditional use permit or amending
an existing interim conditional use permit, the Planning Commission may recommend and the
City Council may impose, in addition to the standards and requirements expressly specified by
this code, additional conditions that the Planning Commission or City Council consider
necessary to protect the best interest of the surrounding area or the community as a whole.
These conditions may include but are not limited to the following:
(1) Increasing the required lot size or yard dimension;
(2) Limiting the height, size or location of buildings;
(3) Controlling the location and number of vehicular access points;
(4) Increasing the street width;
(5) Increasing the number of required off-street parking spaces;
(6) Limiting the number, size, location and lighting of signs;
(7) Requiring fencin& screening, landscaping or other facilities to protect adjacent or
nearby property.
f. Violations. After two nuisance or code violation complaints have been made and verified
with written notice to the holder of the interim conditional use permit, a public hearing may be
called within 60 days of the last complaint to reconsider the interim conditional use permit.
g. Revocation. An interim use permit may be revoked if:
(1) The property is found to be in violation of the conditions listed in the interim
conditional use permit; or
(2) If access to the property for purpose of making and inspection is refused to the Zoning
Administrator or its designee. The same process established for granting the interim
conditional use permit shall be followed when considering revocation of an interim conditional
use permit.
he rvaA46
I/u wfftckt
/JO
911
?Ov"�J
CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK — INTERIM USE ORDINANCE
§ 152.193 PURPOSE.
The purpose of allowing interim uses is:
(A) To allow a use for a brief period of time until a permanent location is obtained or while the
permanent location is under construction.
(13) To allow a use that is presently judged acceptable by the City Council, but that with anticipated
development or redevelopment, will not be acceptable in the future or will be replaced in the future by
a permitted or conditional use allowed within the respective district. FD
(C) To allow a use which is reflective of anticipated long range change to an area and which is in
compliance with the comprehensive plan provided that said use maintains harmony and compatibility
with surrounding uses and is in keeping with the architectural character and design standards of existing
uses and development.
(Ord. 2005-1049, passed 9-26-05)
§ 152.194 PROCEDURE.
Uses defined as interim uses shall obtain an interim use permit and shall be processed according to the
standards and procedures for a conditional use permit as established in § 152,035.
(Ord. 2005-1049, passed 9-26-05)
§ 152.195 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.
An interim use shall comply with the following:
(A) Meet the standards of a conditional use permit set forth in § 152.035.
(13) State that certain date or event that will terminate the use.
(C) Shall not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public.
(D) Interim uses are waived from compliance with the Highway Overlay District standards
(E) All lots served by an individual/private sewer and water system must abandon the individual
system and be connected to the public sanitary sewer and water when there is a change in the use of
the property, or within one year of the date the public system becomes available to the lot, whichever
occurs first.
- (F) Meet any conditions that the City Council deems appropriate for permission of the use.
(G) Interim use permits shall be annually reviewed by the City Council.
(Ord. 2005-1049, passed 9-26-05)
§ 152.196 TERM I NATION.
An interim use permit shall terminate on the happening of any of the following events, whichever occurs
f i rst:
(A) The date stated in the interim use permit.
(B) Upon violation of conditions under which the permit was issued.
(C) Upon change in the city's zoning regulations, which render the use nonconforming.
(D) The redevelopment of the use and property.
(Ord. 2005-1049, passed 9-26-05)
�D
South St. Paul, MN Code of Ordinances Page I of 1
P
Sec. 118-41. - Interim use permits.
(a) Definition. As used in this section, the term "interim use" shall mean a temporary use of
property until a particular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning
regulations no longer permit it.
(b) Permit. The city council may grant an interim use permit for the interim use of property if-
, if.
(1) The use conforms to the zoning regulations;
(2) The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty;
(3) Permit of the use will not impose additional costs on the city if it is necessary for the city
to take the property in the future; and
(4) The user agrees in writing to any conditions that the city council deems appropriate for
permission of the use.
(c) Hearing. Upon receipt of an application for an interim use permit from the city engineer, the
planning commission shall hold a public hearing on the application following notice of the
time, place and purpose of the hearing published in the official newspaper of the city at least
ten days prior to the day of the hearing. Following the public hearing, the planning
commission shall forward its recommendation to the city council.
(d) Application. An application for an interim use permit shall be on such form as prescribed by
the city engineer, filed with the city engineer; and accompanied by payment of the applicable
fee.
(e) Permit termination. An interim use permit maybe terminated by a change in zoning
regulations that prohibits the interim use.
(Code 1992, § 1500.29, subd. 5)
State Law reference— Interim uses, Minn. Stat. § 462.3597�
about:blank 3/28/2017
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
There were no public
Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing
Leskinen noted this is almost an identical
Landgraver moved, Lemke seconded, to
Sheralyn Saddler, 2755 Ethel Avenue, gi
applicant adhering to the required s a
any additional structure an ardcovex
s L
this application.
55 p.m.
�kcation as the previous
PC Exhibit D
of Application No. 17-3909, Ken and
antimf of lot are� nd lot width variances, subject to the
I',- - a ,
.-ks and 30 perce t =11� c . �over limitation with regards to
proposed for the prope nd subject to the hot tub
being located off the �� of the house rather than the side. VOTE: Ay%,5, Nays 0.
5. 17-3911 LAKEWEST, LLC, 3245 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST, ZONING CODE
TEXT AMENDMENT, 6:56 P.M. — 8:02 P.M.
Curt Fretham, Lakewest, LLC, was present.
Gaff-ron stated the applicants are requesting a change to the City Code to allow for a new type of zone.
The applicants received final plat approval of a 27 -lot residential development of the property at 3245
Wayzata Boulevard in July of 2016. The property is currently zoned RR -113 and will be rezoned to PUD
following final plat approval. Pending more favorable market conditions, the applicants have chosen to
not proceed immediately with the residential development. The applicants are requesting, however, to be
able to allow temporary use of the site as a staging, storage and materials recycling yard for the upcoming
County Road 112 improvement project expected to begin in 20t7. This project is being done in phases
and could take up to four to five years for completion.
Because construction staging is not an allowed use in any Orono zoning district and is not a permanent
use, the only functional method for approving it is through an Interim Use Permit. The zoning code
currently does not contain provisions for Interim Uses. The applicants are requesting the City amend the
zoning code in order to allow Interim Uses.
Page 8 of 64
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMIKISSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Stow statutes parmit cities to allow interim uses. interim use is defined by statute as a temporary use of a
property until a particular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no
longer permit it. IMe statutes indicate "the governing body (City Council) may grant permission for an
inwrint use of property if
I . The use conforms to the zoning regulations;
2. The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty;
3. Permission of the use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the
public to talm the property in the future; and
4. The usa agrees to any conditions that the governing body deems appropriate for permission of
the use.
Any interim use may be terminated by a change in the zoning regulations."
Gaffron noted it is important to remember that a conditional use permit is permanent and rum with the
land. In contrast, an interim use permit provides the tools necessary to I sunseV a use fliat may be
appropriate for some temporary time period but is not generally appropriate on a permanent basis.
Staff has long felt that an interim use ordinance would be a very useffl tool for Orono because it provides
flexibility with a high level of city control. A past example of where that type of ordinance would have
been helpful was in the case of a dayeare facility located at the comer of Highways 6 and 12. It sat empty
for five yews because the City did not have an Interim Use Permit.
in order to allow the proposed staging use, the applicants are requesting the Code be amended. Staff
recommends that an Interim Use section be added to the zoning code and that the RR -113 District be
amended to include a list of allowed Interim Uses to include "Construction staging, materials and
equipment storage and materials recycling" under specific conditions.
Page 9 of 64
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANOUNG COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Comprehensive Plan technically should be amended to allow interim uses that are not conforming with
the guiding. Gaffiron noted there will be some text amendments that potentially will be added to the
Comprehensive Plan during its 2018 update but Staff does not believe that should stop the City's ability
to add interim uses to the zoning code at this time.
The Planning Commission should consider the issues for consideration outlined in Staffs report. If the
Planning Commission feels that interim uses is a tool the City should have in place, a recommendation of
approval would be appropriate.
Gaffron noted with the next application the Planning Commission will be looking at the exact use that is
being proposed by the applicant.
Schoenzeit asked whether the conditions should include language that the interim use or the specific use
requires some type of bond in the event the interim property owner does not clean the lot when they are
finished with the interim use.
Gaffiron indicated he does not disagree with that suggestion.
Leskinen noted City had considerable discussion on interim uses a number of years ago and that to her
recollection there were some pitfalls involved with interim uses. Leskinen indicated she cannot
remember what those pitfalls were but that she has always felt it would be a useful tool.
Gaffron stated it might have been in conjunction with the Emily Program or it could be possible that past
City Councils were simply not interested in making that change. A number of cities utilize it as a tool but
it could become a problem if the correct conditions are not placed on the applicant. Gaffron stated in his
view it gives the City excellent control over the duration of the interim use.
Leskinen commented it seems to be more secure than a conditional use permit.
Gaffron noted a conditional use permit is permanent and an interim use permit could be terminated by the
City Council at any point.
Page 11 of 64
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Landgraver asked if a date certain could be set for the interim use, and then if that date is not met, the date
could be extended.
Gaffron stated that is one option. Another option is that the interim use could be required to be renewed
on an annual basis. Gaff-ron stated one of the questions is what are the potential future uses or ancillary
uses of the site that might not have been predicted or expected. Gaffron stated it could also be a trigger
event rather than a trigger date.
Gaffron asked if the Planning Commission would like to review Item No. 6 in conjunction with this
application or separately.
Lemke stated he would like more time to review this item since there are three options from three
different cities they need to review.
Thiesse commented this weekend was the first time be has seen this request and that he would
recommend Staff prepare draft language for an ordinance so the Planning Commission and the public has
something firm to review.
Gaff-ron stated Staff did not prepare language because they were not sure whether the Planning
Commission would be interested in an interim use ordinance. Gaffron indicated it would not take very
long for Staff to draft language.
Thiesse asked if another public hearing would then be required,
Gaffron stated the Planning Commission has the option to hold a second public hearing or tabling the
application at this meeting for further review.
Landgraver asked if there is another work session scheduled for April.
Barnhart indicated it would be April 5.
Page 12 of 64
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Thiesse stated in his view the Planning Commission has an obligation to review and give a
recommendation on a draft ordinance. Thiesse stated he thinks it is a good idea but that he would like to
see some language regarding it.
Landgraver commented that would also give people something to respond to. Landgraver stated it might
also be useful to hear the next application.
Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:13 p.m.
Allan Engleman, 315 North Old Crystal Bay Road, stated he has questions regarding pollution and traffic.
Engleman stated if someone tries to turn in there, it is not possible with that guardrail. Engleman stated
he is not sure what the taxes currently are on this property, but when it is turned into a money making
deal, he has a question of how it will be taxed.
In addition, when �&. Eisinger put that fill in there, he did not compact anything. Engleman stated if they
start placing excess material in there and other items, the land will sink. When Hennepin County installed
the new road, the swamp was proposed to be dug out, but because of the pollution, they decided not to dig
it out. When the County 6 interchange was put in, a land bridge was constructed because they would not
dig it out and fill it back in. Engleman asked what is going to happen with the pollution when they start
doing this new activity.
Engleman asked if they are going to be able to crush concrete or whether the City will limit them to
daytime hours. Engleman stated there are a lot of questions that need to be answered before this can be
approved.
Thiesse noted the Planning Commission will be discussing some of that under Item No. 6.
Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 7:16 p.m.
It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to suspend discussion on this item and to open
Item No. 6.
(Discussion on this item was suspended from 7:16 p.m. to 7:56 p.m.)
Page 13 of 64
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Schoenzeit stated in his view there should be an annual review.
Thiesse stated an annual review is not very good if there are not very specific guidelines put in place first.
Thiesse noted the City has to have a reason to close the use down.
Schoenzeit suggested the interim use conditions should include sufficient bonding to restore the site to
pre -use condition at the applicant's expense so the taxpayers are not stuck with the bill.
Landgraver stated he has a much better understanding of what an interim use permit would be and that he
has a better visualization of what is going to happen on the site. Landgraver indicated he would like to
look at the proposed language at the work session and then put it out there for the public so there is
something concrete to work on.
Thiesse stated he is in agreement with that and that the public should have something specific to comment
on.
Leskinen asked if Commissioner Landgraver is suggesting that the interim use permit for this project
should be discussed at the work session or the general concept of interim use as well as this project.
Landgraver stated he would suggest both be discussed.
Thiesse asked if this item should be tabled.
Barnhart suggested tabling the application and continuing the public hearing until the April Planning
Commission meeting so public comment can be received.
Landgraver moved to table Application No. 17-3911, Lakewest, LLC, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard,
Text Amendment, and to continue the public hearing to the April 17 Planning Commission
meeting.
Page 14 of 64
AIINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMNUSSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Fretham stated the road contractor is hoping to start in April and May would be ideal to get approvals.
Fretham stated tabling it to April is fine but tabling it to May, June or July would be challenging.
Schoenzeit seconded the motion. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
6. 17-3910 LAKEWEST, LLC, 3245 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST, CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT, 7:17 P.M. — 8:02 P.M.
Curt Fretham, Lakewest, LLC, was present.
Gaffron stated for the last few months Staff has been receiving inquiries from contractors searching for a
staging area for the upcoming highway project. Currently there appear to be few suitable options and this
site is an option since it is open and relatively flat, has good accessibility to Wayzata Boulevard, is large
enough for the intended activities, and is relatively remote from nearby residential development. The
home located across Wayzata Boulevard is 700 feet away and the site is 1,000 feet from any homes across
the freeway.
The potential negative impacts, such as noise, vibration, glare, dust, should be minimal as compared to
most other locations within the Wayzata Boulevard corridor, which is one of the reasons this site was
proposed. The portion of the site proposed for construction staging is primarily over the landfill area that
has been closed for a number of years, which is the area depicted in blue. Layers of clean fill over the
landfill were added by the former owner in order to establish a suitable cap for the landfill and assure
appropriate runoff characteristics.
The current owners have had borings done in the landfill area in order to determine the stability and
extent of the landfill as well as what materials might be encountered if a future phase of residential
development is ever proposed. This information was obtained as part of the applicant's 2016 residential
development proposal. The information regarding what is contained within the landfill was also
contained within that application. The area that gained approval for residential development is not within
the landfill area.
Page 15 of 64
AGENDAITEM
Item No.: 14
Date: May 8, 2017
Item Description: #17-3910, Lake West Development, LLC, 3245 Wayzata Blvd.
- Interim Use Permit: Temporary Use for Construction Staging
Presenter: Mike Gaffron, Senior Planner Agenda Planning Department
Section: Report
1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to consider the applicant's request for approval
of an Interim Use Permit for the property at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard to allow temporary staging
of construction activities associated with Hennepin County's CSAH 112 (Wayzata Boulevard)
Improvement Project.
2. Application Deadline. Rcvd.: 2/21/17 Complete: 2/27/17 Initial 60 -Day Review Period: 4/28/17
Review Period Extended on 3/30/17 to: 6/27/17
3. Background. The applicants have submitted an application requesting an Interim Use
Permit for temporary use of the property at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard for staging of construction
activities associated with the Wayzata Blvd. Improvement Project which commenced in April.
Because construction staging is not an allowed use in any Orono zoning district and is not a
permanent use, the only functional method for approving it is via an Interim Use Permit. The
zoning code currently does not contain provisions for Interim Uses. This application should only
move forward if the Council approves the text amendments (Application # 17-3911) to allow for
interim uses.
Current Status. The contractor for the Hennepin County Wayzata Boulevard improvement
project has obtained a permit from MnDOT to use a site at 365 Old Crystal Bay Road for the
staging and recycling operation for Phase 1 (2017-2018) of the highway improvements. As the
project began, the contractor did obtain permission from Hennepin County to recycle materials
within the actual Wayzata Boulevard right-of-way, reducing the potential impacts of use of the
Old Crystal Bay Road site. However, the applicants have requested that their application for a
text amendment and lUP approval continue to be reviewed, as they would like to be prepared for
use of the Eisinger site for later Phases of the Improvement Project.
Please review the attached Planning Commission memos, exhibits and minutes.
4. Planning Commission Recommendation. The Planning Commission reviewed this item at
its March 20 meeting and again at its April 17 meeting. On April 17 the Planning Commission
voted 6-0 on a motion to recommend approval of the 1UP for 3245 Wayzata Boulevard subject to
staff recommended conditions with modifications, as follows:
a. End date of the use to be no later than completion of the Wayzata Boulevard improvements
or three years, whichever is sooner.
b. Use of the site is intended solely for activities related to the Wayzata Boulevard
improvement project and may not be used to support other projects.
17-3910 AGENDAITEM
May 8, 2017
Page 2
C. Use of the site shall be subject to Orono Code standards with regard to noise, lighting, dust
control, street maintenance, etc. Hours of operation to be limited as follows:
M -F: Normal construction hours, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Saturday: 8:00 a.m. to Noon only, and limited to low-volume in -out activity, no heavy
hauling
Sunday: No activity whatsoever on Sundays
d. Appropriate permits to be obtained from Hennepin County, Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District, MPCA, and any other agencies or governing authorities as may be required for
activities on the site. Must meet MPCA guidelines re: PAHs and provide dust control from
construction and recycling activities.
C, Construction of a proposed permanent screening berm along the south and southwesterly
boundaries of the site will require conditional use permit application and approval.
f. An ongoing 6 -month review of the interim use permit shall be conducted to determine
whether the use remains acceptable during the duration of the Wayzata Boulevard
improvement project.
5. Public Comments. At both the March and April meetings, public comments were received
from Alan Engleman of 315 North Old Crystal Bay Road, generally in opposition to the use of
residentially -zoned lands for what he sees as a commercial industrial use. See minutes from both
Planning Commission meetings. In addition, a letter was received from the Dumas family
objecting to the proposed use in general and specifically at the Eisinger site which abuts their
property — see letter in April 17 PC packet.
6. Review per 78-916. The Interim Use standards (if adopted) require that an 1UP request be
considered with respect to the CUP standards of Zoning Code Section 78-916. Following is an
analysis of the proposed ]UP in relation to those standards. Note that staff comments following
each criterion are shown in bold italics. Staff comments highlighted in yellow are intended to be
items for Council to discuss and determine 1) whether they reflect Council's position, and 2)
whether they support granting of an IUP for this property.
Conditional Use Permit Analysis
Conditional use permit approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met:
(1) The proposed Interim Use is consistent with the Community Management Plan (CMP).
The proposed temporary use is commerciallindustrial in nature and such use will be
consistent with the CMP guiding for this residential neighborhood if the Interim Use
text amendment allowing this use in the RR-lB zone is adopted.
(2) The proposed use is compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed
on specific uses as required by Article V, Division 3 of the City Code. The proposed
temporary use will be required to be compliant with the zoning standards establishedfor
this interim use if the text amendments are adopted Article VDivision 3 does not address
the specific construction staging useproposed
(3) Adequately served by police, fire, roads, and stormwater management. The proposed
temporary use is anticipated to be adequately served by existing services andfacilities.
Prepared By: Mike Gaffron Reviewed By: Approved By: NZ
17-3910 AGENDAITEM
May 8, 2017
Page 3
(4) Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system. The needs for
water supply and sewage disposal for the proposed temporary use are not established,
but would have to be providedfor by the operators of the site, as municipal sewer and
water are not currently available.
(5) Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost. No
excessivepublic services orpublic costs are anticipated based on theproposed temporary
use. Any costs of monitoring the site for compliance would be charged back to the
applicant
(6) Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is
planned to be used in the future. Theproposed temporary use at this site ifoperated under
controlled conditions has potential to be compatible with the surrounding area. The site
is open and relatively flat, it has good accessibility to Wayzata Boulevard, it is large
enough for the intended activities; and it is relatively remote from nearby residential
development (700'to home to the NE across Wayzata Blvd., 1000'+ftom any homes to
the SWacross thefteeway, so that thepotential negative impacts such as noise, vibration,
glare, dust, etc. should be minimal as compared to most other locations within the
Wayzata Boulevard corridor. The proposed location of the temporary use does not
conflict with thefuture single-family residential use of theproperty.
(7) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is
called for in the community management plan. The proposed temporary use is bordered
on the south, west and north by arterial roadways. The property to the east contains an
apple orchardfarming operation, separatedfrom applicant's temporary use by a large
wetland, While the temporary use is not consistent with the character ofthe surrounding
area, its temporary nature is not anticipated to have any long-term effects on the
character of the area once the temporary use ceases.
(8) Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding
area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan. The
temporary use will not have permanent structures. The potential permanent change
which might impact the character of the neighborhood would be construction of a berm
along the southwesterly portion of the site, which would act as a visual barrier to views
into the site from US Hwy 12, while providing a sound barrier as a benefit for future
residential development of the site.
(9) Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area
or have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to
the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses. Neighboringproperty owners have
expressed concerns regarding thepotentialfor air, water and noisepollution associated
with the construction staging and materials storage and recycling temporary uses. THE
CO UNCIL SHO ULD RE VIE W THESE CONCERNS
(10) Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and
activities likely to disturb surrounding uses. The location of the proposed temporary use
is such thatfew if any neighboring homes will be subject to undesirable views or views
of the activity associated with the use. Therefore, no screening or buffering will be
required.
Prepared By: Mike Gaffron Reviewed By: Approved By: D5JZ
17-3910 AGENDAITEM
May 8, 2017
Page 4
(11) Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise, glare, vibration, odors, fumes,
dust, electrical interference, general unsightliness, or other means. The temporary use
proposed is likely to generate a variety of localized impacts in terms of noise, glare,
vibration, odors, fumes, dust, and general unsightliness. These impacts are anticipated
to be minimized and mitigated by the remote location of theproposed activity in relation
to inhabited neighboring residential properties.
(12) Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that
cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties, traffic congestion, or unsafe
access. The only access to the temporary use will be from a single entrance to County
Road 112. Hennepin County has issued a permitfor that accessfor the temporary use.
There are no local streets which would be impacted by traffic from the temporary use,
and no local streets would experience parking impacts as a result of the use. Truck
tra associated with the temporary use is anticipated to be almost entirely on Wayzata
FUTI C
Boulevard which is a Hennepin County arterial road.
(13) Designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area and
to minimize environmental impact. Based on the location and on the existing natural,
scenic and historic features present, the temporary nature of the use suggests that no
permanent negative impacts are anticipated. Potential long-term environmental impacts
relative to theproposed use are anticipated to be minimal if any. Short term effects such
as noise, vibration, glare and odor are expected to be relatively minor and due to the
remote location should have minimal impact on neighboring uses. The materials storage
an d recycling operation will b e s ubject to MC WD an d APDESperm its to in an age ru n off.
The use ofstate-of-the-art materials grinding and crushing equipment to minimize dust,
noise etc. has been proposed by the applicant. The potential impacts of PAH emissions
to the air or water as suggested by a neighboring property owner are beyond the scope
of City regulations. Such impacts, if any, are expected to be under the purview of MPCA
regulatory authority.
(14) All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the
public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts. This will be added to the
IUP as a condition of approval.
(15) Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. Potential
detrimental impacts to the public health, safety and welfare by the temporary use of the
property as proposed are not anticipated.
In the draft IUP ordinance text, three specific pieces of information are required to be submitted,
as follows:
(a) Written documentation that includes a complete description of the use, schedule for
commencement and termination of the use, hours and dates of operation and anticipated
employment.
(b) Any special studies requested by the City when there is evidence that the proposed use
may negatively impact public infrastructure, the environment or adjacent land uses. These
studies may examine the impacts on such things as traffic, environment, wetlands and
utilities.
(c) Evidence of approval or preliminary approval from all other agencies with jurisdiction
Prepared By: Mike Gaffron Reviewed By: Approved By: NZ
17-3910
May 8, 2017
Page 5
AGENDAITEM
over elements of the use.
Staff would note that Items (a) and (c) have been submitted (see PC packet information). The
City has not requested any special studies to date. Council should discuss whether any such
studies or further information should be requested.
7. Staff Recommendation. Council should review the information contained in the Planning
Commission packet and minutes, and discuss with the applicants items of note as well as any
additional concerns of the Council.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Review the proposed interim use as presented. If Council determines that an 1UP for this site
should be granted, direct staff to draft a resolution for consideration. If Council determines that
more information is required, table and provide staff and applicant with specific direction. If
Council determines that an IUP should not be issued for this site, then direct staff to draft a
resolution for denial.
Exhibits
A — Notice of PC Action dated 4/25/17
B — Draft PC Minutes of 4/17/17
C — Planning Commission Memo and Exhibits dated 4/17/17
Prepared By: Mike Gaffron Reviewed By: Approved By: NZ
CITY OF ORONO
2750 Kelley Parkway
PO Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
952.249.4620
TO: Curt Fretham
NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Council
Exhibit A
Lake West Development, LLC
14525 Highway 7, Suite 265
Minnetonka, MN 55345
curtf@lwestdev.com
ZONING FILE: 17-3910
DATEOFNOTICE: Apr!125,2017
COPIES: danaL@Iwestdev.com
TYPE OF REQUEST: Interim Use Permit for Construction Staging, Materials Storage & Recycling
DATE OF MEETING: April17,2017
The Orono Planning Commission voted 6-0 on a motion to recommend approval of the lUP for 3245
Wayzata Boulevard subject to staff recommended conditions with modifications, as follows:
I. End date of the use to be no later than completion of the Wayzata Boulevard improvements or
three years, whichever is sooner.
2. Use of the site is intended solely for activities related to the Wayzata Boulevard improvement
project and may not be used to support other projects.
3. Use of the site shall be subject to Orono Code standards with regard to noise, lighting, dust control,
street maintenance, etc. Hours of operation to be limited as follows:
M -F: Normal construction hours, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Saturday: 8:00 a.m. to Noon only, and limited to low-volume in -out activity, no heavy hauling
Sunday: No activity whatsoever on Sundays
4. Appropriate permits to be obtained from Hennepin County, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District,
MPCA, and any other agencies or governing authorities as may be required for activities on the site.
Must meet MPCA guidelines re: PAHs and provide dust control from construction and recycling
activities.
5, Construction of a proposed permanent screening berm along the south and southwesterly
boundaries of the site will require conditional use permit application and approval.
6. An ongoing 6 -month review of the interim use permit shall be conducted to determine whether the
use remains acceptable during the duration of the Wayzata Boulevard improvement project.
VOTE: 6 FOR 0 AGAINST
Applicant's next meeting is scheduled as: Monday, May 8, 2017
This is a City Council meeting. The meeting begins at 7:00 PM
If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City
Clerk after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please contact Mike
Gaffron at or 952.249.4622.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COM[MISSION MEETING Council
Monday, April 17,2017 Exhibit B
6:30 o'clock p.m. AIX
4. #17-3910 LAKE WEST DEVELOPMENT, LLC, 3245 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 8:13 P.M. — 8:43 P.M.
Curt Fretham, Lake West Development, Applicant, was present.
Gaffron stated the applicants are requesting the City approve a permit for interim use of the property at
3245 Wayzata Boulevard for staging of construction activity associated with the Highway 112
improvement project. There appear to be few suitable options for a staging area for that project and this
property scores high marks in terms of this type of use since the site is open and relatively flat, has good
accessibility, and is relatively remote from nearby residential properties. Potential negative impacts such
as noise, dust, vibration, etc., should be minimal as compared to most other locations within the Wayzata
Boulevard corridor.
Gaffron stated with the assumption that an interim use ordinance is adopted, a list of likely required
conditions for this use at any location would include minimum separation distance from nearby structures
or lot lines, minimum lot size, road maintenance, traffic control measures, and restricted to government
sponsored public improvement projects.
Additional site specific conditions should also be considered in approving the proposed construction
staging use.
The portion of the site proposed for construction staging is primarily over the closed landfill area of the
property. The landfill has been closed for many years and is relatively open and flat. Layers of clean fill
over the landfill were added by the former owner in order to establish a suitable cap for the landfill and
assure appropriate runoff characteristics. The current owners have had borings done in the landfill area in
order to determine the stability and extent of the landfill as well as what materials might be encountered if
a future phase of residential development is ever proposed. The area which gained preliminary approval
in 2016 for residential development is not within the proposed temporary staging area.
The proposed site use plan indicates the rock construction entrance to be located where the approved
future residential access would be located. This access point has been approved by Hennepin County as a
temporary construction access.
Page 23 of 72
NaNUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
-w4c
The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has approved an erosion control permit for the construction
staging activity.
The Long Lake Fire Chief has indicated no issues with use of the site for construction staging. The
Public Works Director has indicated this location is likely as good a location as the contractor will find
for construction staging.
The site plan suggests that temporary lighting will likely be utilized, and it is likely that to minimize
impact on traffic flow, some work on the highway improvements will be at night. It would be appropriate
to establish that any temporary lighting be downcast and directed away from residential areas.
The site plan also indicates a proposed visual and noise -screening berm along the west and south
boundaries of the site. The applicant is working with the MPCA to establish parameters and obtain
permits for this berm. The City will require a grading plan be approved for this and it potentially will
require a conditional use permit based on the volume of permanent fill material.
The applicants have suggested that this site might be used as a recycling yard for projects other than just
the Wayzata Boulevard improvements. The applicants should describe what is actually intended and how
the contractor or Hennepin County expects to operate this site. One question to be answered is whether it
is the City's expectation that this site is intended to be in use exclusively for the Wayzata Boulevard
project and not as a regional recycling yard.
Gaffron noted a letter from the Dumas family in opposition to the proposed use has been received. Some
of their concerns involved the level or type of activity associated with the use, the location of the site, and
the duration of the proposed use.
If the Planning Commission concludes that the site is appropriate for the proposed use, Staff would
recommend that an interim use permit be issued subject to at least the following conditions:
Establish an end date of the use to be no later than completion of the Wayzata Boulevard
improvements.
Page 24 of 72
NOINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COADUSSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m. 16�
2. Use of the site is intended solely for activities related to the Wayzata Boulevard improvement
project and may not be used to support other projects.
3. Use of the site shall be subject to Orono Code standards with regard to noise, lighting, dust
control, street maintenance, etc.
4. Appropriate permits to be obtained from Hennepin County, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District,
UTCA, and any other agencies or governing authorities as may be required for activities on the
site,
5. Construction of a proposed permanent screening berm along the south and southwesterly
boundaries of the site will require conditional use permit application and approval.
An annual review of the interim use permit shall be conducted to determine whether the use
remains acceptable during the duration of the Wayzata Boulevard improvement project.
7. Any other conditions the Planning Commission and City Council determine should be included.
The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff.
Curt Fretham, Lake West Development, stated in regards to what this operation will look like, the
property consists of 29 acres and is half wetland and half dry. To the east is the wetland area that abuts
the Dumas apple orchard. Fretham stated in his view it is kind of a private or isolated property with no
neighbors in close proximity.
Fretham indicated they have done a recent project in Golden Valley consisting of the demolition and
removal of a large commercial building within a residential zone on a 2 -acre site. Fretham stated that was
located in a residential neighborhood, with the homes being located approximately 500 feet away.
Fretharn indicated they did that project in an environment that did not cause the nearby residents' cars in
their driveways to get dusty or the furniture on their patios to get dusty. In addition, a similar project was
Page 25 of 72
M][NUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMUSSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
done in St. Louis Park off of Wooddale. In that situation a church located within a residential area was
removed.
Fretharn stated in his view they will be able to do a good job at this site without raising a lot of concerns.
Fretham noted there will be trucks coming and going but that currently there is a fair amount of traffic at
that location and this should not be that noticeable. Fretharn stated given the distance from the residential
homes, the noise should not be an issue.
Olson asked if they will be operating during the weekends.
Fretharn stated be does not know the answer to the question since he does not have that information
available tonight and that it is possible the contractor might have to work on a Saturday due to weather.
Thiesse stated the crushing activity does not need to occur on the weekends.
Fretham indicated he is willing to work with the neighbors' and address their concerns. Fretham stated he
is not trying to drive hard bargains and that in his view they can accommodate some of those concerns.
Thiesse stated the problem he sees occurring is if the contractor falls behind or wants to complete some
work prior to winter and the apple orchard is open.
Gaffron asked what type of control they will have over the contractor.
Fretham stated they can simply tell the contractor that the site is closed on Saturdays.
Gaffron asked what will happen if the City receives a request for the site to be open on Saturday.
Fretharn stated the contractor could stockpile on Saturday and haul on Monday and that in his view it is
not a critical element.
Thiesse asked what end date he is envisioning.
Page 26 of 72
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
- T41A
Fretharn indicated he is fine with having the end date coincide with the end of the project along with
annual review.
Lemke asked if it would be a deal breaker for him if this interim use would be for the highway
improvement project only.
Fretham stated part of the issue is about leverage. Fretham stated having an interim use permit and
having the right to bring in materials from other projects would help him negotiate with the contractor.
Lemke noted one of Staff s recommendations is to limit it to the Highway 112 improvement project only.
Fretham stated he does not know if it makes sense to do this without outside materials being brought in.
Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 8:29 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 8:29 p.m.
Thiesse stated as it relates to Item 1, the end date should be upon substantial completion or three years,
whichever is sooner.
Landgraver stated that sounds good.
Thiesse asked if that is substantial completion as stated in the subcontractor's contract.
Gaff'ron stated under the Phase I contract, the permit for the MnDOT site goes until the end of July, 2018.
Thiesse asked how the Planning Commission feels about allowing materials from other sites to be hauled
to the site.
Leskinen indicated she is not in favor of taking in any other material.
Page 27 of 72
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to not allow any other outside materiaJs besides tho!!P,%
'40��from the Highway 112 improvement project.
Thiesse noted No. 3 deals with hours of operation, noise, lighting, etc.
Fretham stated he does not anticipate lighting but that it was put in there in case the contractor wanted it
so they did not have to come back.
Thiesse stated downcast lighting would be no different than a parking lot.
Olson asked what the hours of operation would be.
Gaffron indicated Orono's normal construction hours are 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Friday and
8 a.m. to 8 p.m. on the weekends.
Thiesse and Olson indicated they would like Saturday and Sunday to be off.
Frethain stated he is fine with that condition as it relates to the crushing activity.
Olson commented traffic would be a concern on the weekends.
Fretham noted he would like to be able to use the site for storage and that if the contractor is laying pipe
on a Saturday and needs one more piece of pipe, it would be nice if he could retrieve it from the site.
Fretharn stated it could be limited to no hauling of materials, which would be heavy traffic.
Landgraver stated his recollection regarding the concern with the apple orchard is that fall is peak season
for them and that he had the understanding the applicant was amenable to restricting traffic on the
weekends.
Thiesse stated if the contractor is one pipe short of finishing, he cannot see stopping them from getting the
pipe.
Page 28 of 72
NY1NUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Lemke suggested the hours be restricted from 8 a.m. to noon on Saturday.
Fretharn stated that would probably be easier.
Tbiesse noted there would be nothing on Sunday and 8 a.m. to noon on Saturday for retrieving of
materials only. Thiesse asked how the Planning Commission feels about Item No. 4.
Leskinen asked if the public health concerns raised by the Dumases relating to the toxins is something
covered by the NIPCA.
Fretharn stated he is sure there is some guideline for it and some agency that would be in charge of it but
that he has not come across it in his prior projects. Fretham stated it is probably part of one of the permits
they have to apply for.
Lemke stated he would assume the MPCA would have control over that.
Leskinen asked what items are in place to keep the dust under control.
Fretham commented technology has come a long way and that the equipment has spray bars that spray
water onto the debris to control the dust.
Thiesse noted No. 5 deals with construction of the berm.
Fretharn stated the berm will be constructed but that he will need to come back for a separate conditional
use permit for it.
Thiesse stated Item No. 6 is the condition that an annual review of the interim use permit shall be
conducted.
Leskinen stated she would not mind seeing something more frequent, such as a 6 -month review.
Page 29 of 72
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m. 40A
Landgraver commented there might be seasonal issues that come up and that a 6 -month review seems
reasonable, especially since this is the first interim use permit the City will have issued.
Lemnke moved, Landgraver seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. 17-3910,
Lake West Development, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard West, granting of an interim use permit for
staging of construction activities associated with the Highway 112 improvement project, subject to
Staff's recommendations and the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission.
VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0.
5. #17-3918 RE LARSON ON BEHALF OF BILL TOLES, 10 FERNDALI
ROAD WEST, VARIANC AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, 8:43 M. — 9:02 P.M.
� C
Jean Rehkamp Larson, Applicant, Charles Fendlayer, Architect� we present.
Curtis stated the owner of the property is '�7 sting the follo ariances in order to construct a new
residence: r W�4
Lot area, lot width, lake setback, hardeove wi 1 75 feet of the OHWL, and average take
setback. In addition, conditional use permits e requested for site grading in excess of 500 cubic
yards for mitigation of areas of the prop bel the I percent annual chance floodplain and to
allow a full bathroom within the propo d detache garage.
t
Ib
i
sa
0
c
n
0 f
k
a
e p
h
u
e
r
s
p
e
0
d
r
p
c
p
0
0
0
pv
e
d
w
s
b
d
e
th
t
ar
h
rm
e
eta
e
ch
w
e
7
e
in re t
q
5
u
h
g
e
e
a
f
e
s
r
t
Ie
e
ag
t
pd
e
e
0
r
-f
f
t
0
cc
r
e w
Al
j t
The currently proposed footprint is depic d in orange and is si ted further back from the lake and
j
9
oriented on the property for improved e views by neighbors than as the previously approved plan.
j j
This property has had a number of iance approvals which are still v. id until November of 2017. The
�4
original plan is shown in /blueo e overhead.
The applicants' request for ardcover, lake setback, and average lakeshore setba variances results in the
'tJ
e
property's inability to c orm to the administrative approval provision in Section -72 regarding lots of
record. Therefore, the area and width variances are also required to develop this prop
Page 30 of 72
Date Application Received: 2/21/17
Date Application Considered as Complete: 2/27/17
60 -Day Review Period Expires: 4/28/17 (Extended to 6/27/17 an 3/30/17)
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members
Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator
From: Mike Gaffron, Senior Planner
Date: April 17,2017
Subject: # 17-3 9 10, Lake West Development, LLC, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard
Interim Use Permit: Temporary Use for Construction Staging
Continued Public Hearing
This item was tabled at your March 20 meeting for further consideration.
Note that the contractor for the Hennepin County Wayzata Boulevard improvement project has
obtained a permit from MnDOT to use a site at 365 Old Crystal Bay Road for the recycling
operation for Phase 1 (2017-2018) of the highway improvements. However, the applicants have
requested that their application for a text amendment and IUP approval continue to be reviewed,
as they would like to be prepared for use of the Eisinger site for later Phases.
Attachments
A — Notice of Planning Commission Action 3/30/17
B — Letter Received from Marilyn Gabert (Dumas Family) 4/5/17
C — Memo and Exhibits of March 20 PC Meeting
D — Draft PC Minutes of 3/20/17
Council
Exhibit C
NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
CITY OF ORONO
2750 Kelley Parkway ZONING FILE: 17-3910
PO Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
952.249.4620 DATEOFNOTICE: March30,2017
TO: Curt Fretham COPIES: dana@lwestdev.com
Lake West Development, LLC
14525 Highway 7, Suite 265
Minnetonka, MN 55345
TYPE OF REQUEST: Interim Use Permit for Construction Staging, Materials Storage & Recycling
DATE OF MEETING: March 20 2017
The Orono Planning Commission voted 5-0 on a motion to table the application for further consideration.
VOTE: 5 FOR 0 AGAINST
Applicant's next meeting is scheduled as: Monday, April 17, 2017
This is a Planning Commission meeting. The meeting begins at 6:30 PM
60 -Day Extension Notice. The current deadline for City action on your application based on the February
27 application completion date is April 28, 2017. Because the earliest possible date for final Council action
will not occur until after April 28, the City is extending the time period for City action on application #17-
3910 under Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 3(fl. Please note the time period for action on this application is
hereby extended an additional 60 days until June 27, 2017.
If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City
Clerk after review and approval by the Planning Commission. if you have questions, please contact Mike
Gaffron at or 952.249.4622.
April 5, 2017
Dear Mike Gaffron and the Orono Planning Commission members,
This letter is in regard to #17-3911, Lakewest, LLC, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard and Curt Fretham's request
for an Interim Use Permit to allow construction staging, materials and equipment storage and materials
recycling at that location (the old Eisinger property).
I am writing this letter to represent the concerns of my parents, Robert & Kathryn Dumas. They are the
owners of Dumas Apple House and are the immediate neighbors to the east.
We realize you are dealing with two separate issues. The Planning Commission and City Council have
discussed adding language to your ordinance to handle requests for an I nterim Use Permit as there is no
language now to address this request. The other issue is actually discussing whether an Interim Use
Permit should be issued to Mr. Fretham. We would like to address the second issue.
We have quite a few concerns with allowing Mr. Fretham to use his property for construction staging,
material and equipment storage and materials recycling — gravel crushing. Rather than list all the
storage and staging we will from here on in just say, "gravel crushing" to encompass everything but in
fewer words.
1) Allowing a gravel crushing site on that property is not consistent for the uses which the property
is guided in the comprehensive plan. Neither the current Orono zoning nor the Long Range
Land Use Plan allow for a gravel crushing facility on this parcel of land. Possibly some of you
and/or your predecessors worked very hard on these plans and the results were carefully
arrived at for a reason.
2) Some of you may feel that this is a less populated area than other potential gravel crushing sites,
but those of us that are on the neighboring properties are not any less important.
3) The Orono Preserve development (our neighbor to the east) has already sold four lots/houses
and I'm sure will sell several more this spring. We would think new home owners could be in
their houses possibly within the next year. The four current buyers and any potential buyers
may know nothing of the proposed gravel crushing site. We would think they would have
concerns about a gravel crushing site so close to their newly purchased home in a residential
neighborhood.
4) There is talk of other debris being brought in to this site, not just the asphalt from the Hwy 112
project. Would there really be a way to monitor, regulate or control what else is brought in?
5) Do you know if there would be any burning of any type of materials at this site?
6) Would there be any melting of any type of materials at this site?
7) Noise is an issue. Heavy machinery and gravel crushing makes quite a bit more noise than a
residential neighborhood. Also, Mr. Fretham has stated that some of their gravel crushing and
work will be done at night. Day time noise is bad enough, but night time noise of heavy
equipment and gravel crushing would definitely not be welcome.
From the Orono Code of Ordinances Section 58-119, (b)
Maximum noise levels by receiving land use districts. No person shall operate or cause or
permit to be operated any source of noise in such a manner as to create a noise level
outdoors exceeding the dB limit set in table 1 for the receiving land use district specified.
Your ordinance states, the maximum noise level for residential land use district is 65 dB(A) -
(which means, A -weighted decibels).
Sounds levels associated with heavy construction equipment range from 80 to 120 dB(A).
8) We also have concerns about lighting. There are three rather large looking proposed spots for
lighting on the preliminary site plan. The gravel crushing machine will also likely have lights on it
and any vehicles will have their headlights on at night. All these extra lights on at night, and
some lights on vehicles moving around, can be quite disturbing.
9) moving heavy equipment and running a gravel crushing site can cause unwanted vibrations to
neighbors. How far will the vibrations travel? We don't really know. it is a concern.
10) Dumas Apple House is open to the public every fall. The traffic safety on Wayzata Blvd is
something we are worried about. Mr. Fretham has said that the heavy truck traffic will be in
spurts. Some days there might be no trucks or traffic going in and out of his proposed gravel
crushing site. He said some days there may be 50 — 100 trips to the site a day! That means
double that number allowing for ingress and egress? So, it could be 100 — 200 trips back and
forth in front of the Dumas Apple House? With all of our Apple House customers pulling in and
out of our facility, that is quite a safety concern.
11) The Hwy 112 project is starting at the east end of town, and this proposed gravel crushing site is
at the west end of Hwy 112. Since we are right next to the proposed gravel crushing site, the
heavy truck traffic could be going past the Dumas Apple House for the duration of the entire
Hwy 112 project. We have read that the Hwy 112 project could last 3-5 years.
12) Recycling is a good thing, but we do not think this is a spot for a gravel crushing plant. it seems
like there are a lot of downsides and negative issues attached to this request in return for the
financial gain of one company.
13) Environmental and public health concerns regarding use of Recycled Asphalt Pavement (RAP)
"The bitumen binder used in asphalt paving applications contains a relatively large
concentration of a family of organic compounds which can have the potential to pose human
health and environmental concerns in certain circumstances especially when asphalt material is
ground into very small particles that easily blow off of or wash from the surface. These
compounds, known as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are specified as targeted
pollutants by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), and are present in asphalt at
relatively high levels for general use in a loose fashion on land.
Lead has been observed in RAP samples, with the greatest quantity in old RAP samples, likely as
a result of vehicle traffic and emissions.
Asphalt millings used alone without a paved top surface have the potential to significantly
migrate from the roadway through the actions of water, wind, and physical displacement and
possibly contaminate surrounding soils and/or surface water sediments. Traffic traveling on the
unpaved asphalt millings; would generate dust containing the compounds referenced above and
the dust would be a major migration route of the asphalt millings to the surround environment."
Reference: compiled by G.Keller 6/12/2013
14) Bitumen definition: a black viscous mixture of hydrocarbons obtained naturally or as a residue
from petroleum distillation. It is used for road surfacing and roofing.
1S) We have 30 acres of apple trees at the Dumas Apple House. Itisa hugeconcernto have PAI -Is
dirt & dust pollutants in the air next to a farm that produces food consumed by humans!
16) Public Health Statement for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) from the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).
"This Public Health Statement is the summary chapter from the Toxicological Profile fo
polygyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). It is one in a series of Public Health Statements
about hazardous substances and their health effects. This information is important because
this substance may harm you. The effects of exposure to any hazardous substance depend on
the dose, the duration, how you are exposed, personal traits and habits, and whether other
chemicals are present."
This statement was prepared to give you information about Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
(PAHs) and to emphasize the human health effects that may result from exposure to them.
This information is important because exposure to PAHs may cause harmful health effects and
because these sites are potential or actual sources of human exposure to PAHs.
When a substance is released from a large area, such as an industrial plant, or from a
container, such as a drum or bottle, it enters the environment. This release does not always
lead to exposure. You can be exposed to a substance only when you come in contact with it.
You may be exposed by breathing, eating, or drinking substances containing the substance or
by skin contact with it. -
If you are exposed to substances such as PAHs, many factors will determine whether harmful
health effects will occur and what the type and severity of those health effects will be. These
factors include the dose (how much), the duration (how long), the route or pathway by which
you are exposed (breathing, eating, drinking, or skin contact), the other chemicals to which
you are exposed, and your individual characteristics such as age, sex, nutritional status,
family traits, lifestyle, and state of health.
17) We are certainly concerned with the health risks to all our customers at Dumas Apple House and
concerned about any potential liability issues that could arise from this.
18) If you issue an Interim Use Permit for a gravel crushing plant at 324S Wayzata Blvd, please
remember that you setting a precedent. All future decisions on Interim Use Permits will be
based on what you allow at this time. It would be one thing to allow someone to have a place
to, for example, run a business for a political campaign in a residential district for one year. It is
completely another thing to allow someone to have construction staging, material and
equipment storage and materials recycling — gravel crushing and excavation in a residential
district for three to five years!
19) We ask that you seriously consider all of our concerns before you make a decision to issue an
Interim Use Permit for a gravel crushing facility at 3245 Wayzata Blvd.
Sincerely,
Marilyn Gabert, daughter of Robert & Kathryn Dumas, property owners of Dumas Apple House,
neighboring property to Lakewest, LLC, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard.
Marilyn Gabert
PO Box 323
Boulder Junction, WI 54512
mgabertC¢urytel.net
Date Application Received: 2/21/17
Date Application Considered as Complete: 2/27/27
60 -Day Review Period Expires: 4/28/17
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Chair Thiesse and Planning Conm-iission Members
Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator
Mike Gaff-ron, Senior Planner
March 20, 2017
# 17-3 9 10, Lakewest, LLC, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard
Interim Use Pen -nit: Temporary Site Use for Construction Staging
Public Hearing
Application Summary: The applicants are requesting that the City approve a permit for
interim use of the property at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard for staging of construction activities
associated with the County Road 112 (Wayzata Blvd.) Improvement Project expected to
begin in 2017. This application can only be approved if the companion application for
establishment of an Interim Use Ordinance is approved.
Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of an Interim
Use Permit for this site subject to specific conditions.
List of Exhibits
ExhibitA Application
Exhibit B. Preliminary Site Plan and Proposed Use Narrative
Exhibit C. Public Works Director Comments
Exhibit D.
Fire Chief Comments
Exhibit E.
MCWD Permit
Exhibit F.
Hennepin County DOT Permit
Exhibit G.
Plat Map
Exhibit H.
Property Owners List
Background
The applicants received preliminary plat approval for a 27 -lot residential development of the
property at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard in July 2016. Pending more favorable market conditions,
they have chosen to not proceed immediately with the residential development. However, they
have requested to be able to allow temporary use of the site as a staging, storage and materials
recycling yard for the upcoming CR 112 (Wayzata Blvd) improvement project. The highway
improvement project, under the auspices of Hennepin County, is being done in phases, and could
take up to 4-5 years for completion.
Staff for the last few months has been receiving inquiries from contractors searching for a staging
area for the highway project. There appear to be few suitable options. This site would appear to
score high marks in terms of such a use:
#17-3910 3245 Wayzata Blvd.
March 20, 2017
Page 2
It is open and relatively flat;
It has good accessibility to Wayzata Boulevard;
It is large enough for the intended activities;
It is relatively remote from nearby residential development (700' to home to the NE
across Wayzata Blvd., 1000'+ from any homes to the SW across the freeway, so that
the potential negative impacts such as noise, vibration, glare, dust, etc. should be
minimal as compared to most other locations within the Wayzata Boulevard corridor.
Interim Use Permit Conditions
Under the assumption that an Interim Use ordinance is adopted, and an Interim Uses listing is
added to the RR -IB District standards which includes the proposed use (potentially listed as
"Construction staging, materials and equipment storage and materials recycling"), it is anticipated
that a list of required conditions for the use at any location will also be listed, such as:
9 A minimum separation distance from nearby residential structures or lot lines
a Minimum lot size
a Requirements for site and adjacent road maintenance, and traffic control measures
a Allowed only for government sponsored public improvement projects
Additional site-specific conditions should also be considered in approving the proposed
construction staging use.
Planning Commission should review the applicants' narrative describing the intended activities to
be occurring on the site.
The portion of the site proposed for construction staging at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard is primarily
over the closed landfill area of the property. The landfill has been closed for many years and is
relatively open and flat. Layers of cican fill over the landfill were added by the former owner in
order to establish a suitable cap for the landfill and assure appropriate runoff characteristics. The
current owners have had borings done in the landfill area in order to determine the stability and
extent of the landfill as well as what materials might be encountered if a future phase of residential
development is ever proposed. This information was obtained as part of their 2016 residential
development proposal. It should be noted that the area which gained preliminary approval for
residential development is not within the proposed temporary staging area.
The proposed site use plan (Exhibit B) indicates the proposed rock construction entrance to be
located where the approved future residential access would be located. This access point has been
approved by Hennepin County as a temporary construction access (see Exhibit F).
The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has approved an Erosion Control Permit for the
construction staging activity (see Exhibit E).
The Long Lake Fire Chief has indicated no issues with use of the site for construction staging.
Orono Public Work Director Adam Edwards has indicated this location is likely as good a location
as the contractor will find for construction staging (see Exhibits C & D).
The site plan suggests that temporary lighting will likely be employed, and it is likely that to
minimize impact on traffic flow, some work on the highway improvements will be at night. It
would be appropriate to establish that any temporary lighting be downcast and directed away from
residential areas.
#17-3910 3245 Wayzata Blvd.
March 20,2017
Page 3
The site plan indicates a proposed visual and noise -screening berm along the west and south
boundaries of the site. Applicant is working with the MPCA to establish parameters and obtain
permits for this berm, which will become an amenity for future residential development. The City
will require a grading plan be approved for this, and it potentially will require a Conditional Use
Permit based on the volume of permanent fill material.
The applicants' narrative suggests that this site might be used as a recycling yard for projects other
than. just the Wayzata Boulevard improvements (see Narrative). This could put a different slant
on how the site is intended to be used. The applicants should describe what is actually intended,
and how the contractor or Hennepin County expect to operate this site. Will materials from other
projects outside Orono be brought onto the site and not used for Wayzata Blvd. purposes? Will
materials from the Wayzata Blvd. project be recycled and head out to other projects not in Orono?
Is it the City's expectation that this site is intended to be in use exclusively for the Wayzata Blvd.
project and not as a regional recycling yard for other projects? We do not want this industrial -
level use at this site to become a regional activity, and we want it to have a definite end date
commensurate with the end of the Wayzata Boulevard improvements.
Public Comments
No comments for or against the proposal have been received to date.
Issues for Consideration
Does Planning Commission have any specific concerns with the location of this site for
the proposed use?
Does Planning Commission have any specific concerns with the level or type of activity
that is likely to be associated with the proposed use? Is the use intended to be specific to
the Wayzata Boulevard improvements, or is it intended for other projects?
Does Planning Commission have any specific concerns with regard to the duration of the
proposed use — is 'the date of completion of the Wayzata Boulevard improvements' a
suitable termination date for the activity, or should it be further limited, such as requiring
an annual review and/or annual approval of an extension?
Are there any other issues or concerns with this application?
Staff Recommendation
If Planning Commission concludes that this site is appropriate for the proposed use, staff would
recommend that an Interim Use Permit be issued subject to at least the following conditions:
1 Establish an end date of the use to be no later than completion of the Wayzata Boulevard
improvements.
2. Use of the site is intended solely for activities related to the Wayzata Boulevard
improvement project and may not be used to support other projects.
3. Use of the site shall be subject to Orono Code standards with regard to noise, lighting, dust
control, street maintenance, etc.
4. Appropriate permits to be obtained from Hennepin County, Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District, NIPCA, and any other agencies or governing authorities as may be required for
activities on the site.
#17-3910 3245 Wayzata Blvd.
March 20, 2017
Page 4
5, Construction of a proposed permanent screening berm along the south and southwesterly
boundaries of the site will require conditional use permit application and approval.
6. An annual review of the interim use pera-lit shall be conducted to determine whether the use
remains acceptable during the duration of the Wayzata Boulevard improvement project.
7. Any other conditions that Planning Commission and Council determine should be included.
City of Orono
Conditional Use Permit Application PC Exhibit A
StreetAddress: Applicabon # /7-39/e
2750 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356 Date Received- 07-ao
staff
Main: 952-249-4600
mx: 952-249-4616 Fee- $700
Mailing Address: Escrow $700 / NA
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Notes
tslio
Please complete. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application.
Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas.
SITE LOCATION:
/?//p
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: %_ L^
Lo- //'xq al
(attached adeftionbi sheets aft necess-ary)
APPLICANT INFORMATION: Wc-heck here if Applicant address should be used for billing
Applicant: haep .5 1 -
Phone (Primary):
ZIP:
4m,
Mailing Address:
Email: Af_'fy-44-Xra fi, 4"I't
PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: U-c'heck here if Property Owner is same as applicant
Name: heck here if Property Owner address should be used for billing
Phone (Primary):
Mailing Address: City ZIP:
Email: fl) I III i "I'q V" -.1A I A e-1 I'V I i I m� i j,
APPLICANT AND/OR PROPERTY OWNER:
• Certify that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of hisiher knowledge. The applicant and property
owner recognize that they are solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon
failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for
denial of the request regardless of its potential merit.
• The Property Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the
property by City Staff, consultants, agents, Commission and Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification
of this request.
Property Owner and/or Applicant acknowledge they must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the
Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or property owner is unable to attend a scheduled meeting,
please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant/owner and advise the City
Planner assigned to your project.
Information will be distributed via,@mi
Applicant Signature:
Applicant Signature:
Property Owner Signature:
Property Owner Signature:
CUP Application - January 2017
Page 4
Date:
Date:
Date:
Date:
RECEIVED
FEB 2 12017
#3910 CVTY OF ORONO
L A K E W'E� �S!T'
DEVELOPMENT, LLE
Conditional Use Permit Application Narrative
3245 Wayzata Boulevard West, Orono, MN 55356
PID:3211823140002
February 21, 2017
Overview
Construction and demolition materials are recognized as one of the largest components
of the solid waste stream in the United States. Recycling this material not only makes
sense economically, but keeping this material out of landfills makes sense
environmentally, as it's a smarter use of resources, saves energy and provides a net
decrease in greenhouse gas emissions. In the case of on-site, or near -site recycling
operations, further savings are realized in efficient use of vehicles, fuel and manpower,
reduced wear on adjacent roadways, and better containment of construction impact from
surrounding areas.
County State Aid Highway 112 Project is scheduled to begin the spring Of 2017 and
continue through 2019. The property owned by Lakewest LLC, located at 3245 Wayzata
Boulevard West in Orono, offers an ideal near -site staging and recycling location for this
project. It is isolated between Wayzata Boulevard (Old Highway 12 or Highway 112)
and the new Highway 12 in an area with few neighbors. It provides easy access, ample
acreage and minimal preparation to become ready for the contractor. Over the past
several years Lakewest has successfully established and operated similar recycling sites
in the cities of Golden Valley, Minnetonka and St. Louis Park.
Lakewest LLC is seeking a Conditional Use Permit and an Ordinance Text Amendment
to allow the establishment of a staging and concrete/bituminous recycling site at this
location.
We appreciate the City of Orono's help in completing and submitting these Applications
and look forward to playing a part in this significant infrastructure improvement for the
cities of Orono and Lonci Lake.
Curt Fretham
CEO, Lake West Development, LLC
Office: 952-653-134
FEB 2 12017
CITY OF ORONO
Lake West Development 114525 Highway 7, Suite 265, Minnetonka, MN 55345 1 Phone 952-930-3000
# 3 9 10
Conditional Use Permit Application
A. Contact Information
OwnerotRecord Lakewest, LLC
14525 Highway 7, Minnetonka MN 55345
Phone 952-930-3000
AuthorizedAgent Curt Fretham, CEO
Lake West Development LLC,
14525 Highway 7, Suite 265 Minnetonka. MN 55345,
Phone 952-930-3000
S. Site Data
Address
3245 Wayzata Boulevard West
Orono, MN 55356
Zoning
RR -1 B One Family Rural Residential
Parcel Size
25.8 acres
1, 123,933 sq. ft,
PID
3211823140002
Description
That Part Of Government Lot 1 In Section 32 Township 118
Range 23 Described As Follows: Beginning At A Point In The
East Line Of Said Section 32;
Note: This Is A Partial Metes & Bounds Description.
C. Land Characteristics
The entire property consists of approximately 28.8 -acres of vacant land and a former
residence situated between Highway 12 and old Highway 12 (also called Wayzata Bluebeard
and Highway 112) just West of Long Lake. Access to the property is on the north from
Wayzata Boulevard
The parcel is made up of roughly 13.6 acres of wetland, 5.2 acres of currently developable,
non -wetland buffer area, and 10.2 acres of former landfill. Lakewest has been working with the
IVIPCA to determine cleanup requirements for the 10+ acres of former landfill — the area has
been tested extensively and is currently undergoing further environmental analysis.
In 2014 the site received preliminary plat approval for Eisinger Meadows, a 26 -lot detached
townhome development with an additional 24 -unit apartment building under consideration as a
second phase. Lakewest has decided to delay this development to allow other developments
in the area to become established.
D. Intent of the Project
In anticipation of the County State Aid Highway 112 Project #091101 the property owner
intends to establish a site for environmentally sound processing and recycling of recoverable
demolition and construction materials related to CSAH1 12 and other projects. A Conditional
Use Permit is sought to allow staging equipment, stockpiling materials, processing and
recycling aggregate and bituminous materials, along with associated construction activities.
RECEIVEL'i
FEB 2 1.1017
CrrY OF ORONO
CUP — Page 2 of 3
# 3 9 1
Conditional Use Permit Application
E. Zoning (For Ordinance Text Amendment)
The property is Zoned RR -1B, One Ramily Rural Residential, and guided for high-density
multi -family residential development. In order to allow the allow the site to be used for staging
equipment, stockpiling materials, processing and recycling aggregate and bituminous
materials, and other construction activities an Ordinance Text Amendment is requested.
F. Staging & Recyclin
The staging and recycling activities will occupy approximately 5 acres of the total property
(see site plan). Access to the site will be provided from Wayzata Boulevard (Highway 112 or
Old Highway 12) at the location established in the Eisinger Meadows Preliminary Plat. A
culvert per county specifications will be installed and a gravel access road at least 24'wide will
be constructed. A temporary rock stabilization pad of 4-6" of recycled 3" minus concrete will
be constructed to accommodate the recycling equipment. Two stockpiles, one for raw
materials and one for finished materials will be located at either end of the recycling
equipment, truck traffic flowing counterclockwise within the site. Lakewest is currently working
with the MPCA to obtain permission to fill an area that will support a large visual and noise -
screening berm along the western and southern borders as a buffer to Highway 12. The
proposed berm will later be seeded and landscaped as an amenity for the future development.
G. Recyclin & Processinq Operations
The contractor operating the site during the CSAH 112 project will be responsible for:
Installing and maintaining access to the site in accordance with local governing
authorities
Furnishing and maintaining erosion control devices as specified by local governing
authorities
Providing sweeping and dust control services as specified by local governing
authorities, County and/or land owner
Providing traffic control as directed by local municipality and/or County
Providing temporary and final turf establishment as required by local governing
authorities
Maintaining a safe and clean construction site as directed by contractor's in-place
safety program
Establishing hours of operation in conformance with local municipality
Establishing a lighting photometric plan as directed by local municipality and/or
County (if required)
H. Reclamation Plan
At the conclusion of the CSAH1 12 Project aridlor other recycling projects, the site will be
restored to the same, or better, condition as it is now. The temporary rock stabilization pad
and stockpiles will be removed and the (potential) large perimeter berm will be seeded and
landscaped. Eventually the site will be used to create Eisinger Meadows according to the
original vision.
RECEIVED
CUP — Page 3 of 3
FEB 2 12017
ov%
CITY, OF ORONO #391U
LEGENT) :1
FAN MONUMENT FOUND
VALITIF POLE
FIN HYDRANT
EXISTING COWMR
OVERHEpb on
WA7MAIN
SANTARY SENN
STURM SEWER
02FRING FDICE
EXIFW ELEVATIOK
sm Boom
&EMM wm�m
"S wmvm
ROWSINIS THE TAG= TREE
NUMBEIR FI1OM A TREE INVENTORY
SUPPLIED TO US FROM OLIR
CLIENT.
— — — — — — DRAINAGE a UTILITY DSDW
SEMCK LINES:
PROVIDED WEILAND BUFFER AREA
WFLAND MWU AREA
SOIL NORM
CATCH BASIN
SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
POWER POLE AND OVERHEAD WIRES
FENCE
GRAVEL
CONCRETE SURFACE
GRAVEL
EXISTING TREE LK
PROPM LK
SANITARY SEWER
STORM SEWER
WKRR MW
OW"A SINADE TREE
OMDUOUS SHRU11
PROPOSED CONTOUR
XIMLI PROPOSED SM ELEVATION.
SANTARY SEWER k-WATERMAIN N= -
I, ALL PC WATERMAIN SHALL BE AWWA C-900 OR C-905 DRIS UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED.
2. ALL PVC SANMARY SEWER SHALL BE SIDIR 35 UNLESS OTHERWISE
NOTED.
3 ' SANITARY SERVICES SHALL 13E 4" PVC SCHEDULE 40,
4 WATER sw&-Es SHALL BE i I TYPE v coppER WITH 1, CORP.
5: CONTRACTOR SHALL IWALL HYDRANT EXTENSIONS AS NMESSARY
WHERE WM HAS BEEN LOWERED TO AVOID CONFLICT WITH OTHER
UTILMES. EXTID61ONS SHALL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO HYDRANT
COST.
6- ALL SERVIICES SHALL 13E EXTENDED 10' BEYOND PROPERTY LINE
7. ALL HYDRANTS AND VALVES SHALL BE EOUIPPED WITH STAINLESS STEEL
BOLIS CORE BLUE OR EMJIV&W FLUOROCARBON COATED BOLTS SHALL
13C USED FOR ALL WALTERMOUN FITTINGS.
B. ALL DIP Wm SHALL 13E POLY WRAPPED WITH 8 MIL POLY MID POLY TAPED
AT ALL JOKM
S. ALL PVC & HOK WATERMAIN & ALL sEWMES SHA� BE L410 WITH
TRACER WIRE PER CITY STANDARD DETAIL PLATES.
WALL HYDRANTS 5 FEET BEHIND CURB,
12. 6" OR 12" HYDRANT OITMIONS ONLY. IF HYDRWr EXTENSIONS ARE
USED, ME VALVE NUT EXTENDERS WILL BE REQUIRED.
CONNEcT 70
E"
---- ------------------------------ ------ 7 ---- 1---
CAMPION
ENGINEERING
SERVICES, INC
'VVAYZA-1%)6, B't--Vb
4��04
I- - - - - - - - - - -
F
L >
>
L Ejt�-
F- 4--
\L MH 4
6, GV
W/ E
1+13
0 11.4
��oo
PLUG M(
NE Mflftw/
F
L6
"A
0 CIAlEngin—irg Gi-andplanniN
Im Pklww Crea cobr.
P.Ck Bia 249
ad
Pkfi% MN OLVIS
763-472-M72
I= 753-479--4242
IE -N* wasrokologralkinmm
or r4port bw b� pqm by me w
uRd- F137 Wdwt WPM Adm OW that
1 0" a P=r;jFAg11—
umdw 1hftr.Pot41,.
CONNELT TO EXISTING SANMUIY SM MH -
5 MM7L44
Z
41-
/77 -7
W
X.
0 C
N
'A'
oil, a
2�
qfUj��,K\ 2\\
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
PC Exhibit B
6+13
111L. X1 L ZrA C -r I Nck Is rrp-- -
aw-App: 2. ACCess - ie-imvaL z4,* v4 jf)F-,-rA4f T-jc_
� 3. CONSM O -TION jEtjTR4WX- - TOC14' (kew CUL,
grAr5w7-A-noti FAD- Tt-Rpmw�
-RAW
E -pr
-,5TOWILE-
7. :51 LT FFNee
e. 3cReuk i Kc-% rU FFOP,-
T-c-mmiFluzy We--1w(Nc-T
RECEIVED
FEB 2 12017
# 3 9 10 CITY OF ORONO
EISINGER MEADOWS
LAKE WEST, LLC
ORONO.MN
PRELIMINARY SANITARY SEWER & #ROJEcT —No'-
WATERMAIN PLAN 15-039
- rATr—
SHEET NO. 5 OF 12 SHEETS 03/23/2016
Mike Gaffron
From: Adam Edwards PC Exhibit C
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2017 10:33 AM
To: Mike Gaffron; David P. Martini
Cc: Robert Bean; Soren Mattick, Jeremy Barnhart; James Van Eyll; Correy Farniok
Subject: RE: Orono Zoning Applic #17-3910 & 3911 - Eisinger Site
Mike,
This lot seems to be as good a place as the contractor is likely to find in the corridor to stage for the CSAH 112 Project,
PROs
+ Access directly to a county road / the one they will be working on. Doses not require the use of city streets for
construction traffic.
+ The site is remote from any residential areas. Is sandwiched between a county road and the ha state
highway. Mitigates some of the noise dust... issues with such a site.
CON
-Adjacent to wetlands. Their erosion and sediment control will be critical but can be handled with the appropriate
permits and best practices.
I can give you more formal comments if you need.
Adam
From: Mike Gaffron
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2017 9:54 AM
To: David P. Martini <davidma@bolton-menk.com>; Adam Edwards <aedwards@ci.orono.mn.us>
Cc: Robert Bean <bobbe@bolton-menk.com>; Soren Mattick <smattick@ck-law,com>; Jeremy Barnhart
<jbarnhart@ci.orono.mn.us>; James Van Eyll <jvaneyll@longlakemn.gov>; Correy Farniok <CFarniok@ci.orono.mn.us>
Subject: Orono Zoning Applic #17-3910 & 3911 - Elsinger Site
Dave, Adam, et a I —
Lakewest has submitted two applications regarding the Eisinger site at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard: 1) for a code text
amendment to establish an interim or temporary conditional use option within the code; and 2) for a CUP to allow
temporary use of the site for construction staging for the Hennepin County Wayzata Blvd improvements.
I've attached their submitted information and am looking for your comments regarding whether this is a good idea, and
what pitfalls or concerns might be lurking out there, etc.
This goes to the Planning Commission on 3/20, so would appreciate your thoughts early next week. Thanks!
Mike
Fv"i+,-ke Gaf`ran
From: James Van Eyll <jvaneyl 1@ long lakemn.gov> PC Exhibit D
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2017 10:51 AM
To: Mike Gaffron
Subject: Re: Orono Zoning Applic #17-3910 & 3911 - Eisinger Site
Hi Mike,
I don't see any issues from a fire stand point.
James Van Eyll
Fire Chief
Long Lake Fire Department
jvaneY1I(a)IonR1akemn.gov
ko
On Mar 10, 2017, at 9:53 AM, Mike Gaffron <MQqffron@.ci-orono.1iiu.a6> wrote:
Dave, Adam, et al —
Lakewest has submitted two applications regarding the Elsinger site at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard: 1) for
a code text amendment to establish an interim or temporary conditional use option within the code;
and 2) for a CUP to allow temporary use of the site for construction staging for the Hennepin County
Wayzata Blvd improvements.
I've attached their submitted information and am looking for your comments regarding whether this is a
good idea, and what pitfalls or concerns might be lurking out there, etc.
This goes to the Planning Commission on 3/20, so I would appreciate your thoughts early next week.
Thanks!
Mike
MINNEHAHA CREEK ERSHED DISTRICT
QUALITY OF WA ER QUAL[TY OF LiFE
PC Exhibit E
March 1411, 2017
Lakewest Development LLC
Attn: Dana Brumitt
14525 Highway 7, Suite 265
Minnetonka, Minnesota 55356
RE: Notice of Conditional Approval for MCWD Permit Application No. 17-095: Erosion Control:
Other, 3245 Wayzata Boulevard West, Orono, Minnesota 55356
Dear Ms. Brumitt:
Thank you for applying for a Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) permit for Erosion Control
located at the above-mentioned address. The review of this application has concluded, and the MCWD
has determined the above-mentioned permit application to be complete. Therefore, the application is
approved with the following conditions:
1. Submission of financial assurance for erosion control
2. NPDES Permit Number and Coverage Card
Once the above-mentioned materials have been submitted and all permit conditions have been met,
staff will issue the permit. You are reminded that work on the project cannot begin until the permit has
been issued. The approval expires one year from the date of this letter. If final municipal approval of
the project results in changes to the project, you must submit revised plans to the MCWD for review.
Please contact me at rworkin@Rmail.con-, or (952) 641-4518 if you have any questions or concerns.
Respectfully,
Rachel Workin
Permitting Technician
CC:
City of Orono staff
Mike Gaffron
From: Rachel Workin <rworkin@minnehahacreek.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14,2017 238 PM
To: Dana S. Brumitt; Jack Distel
Cc: Mike Gaffron
Subject: RE: MCWD reqtcling center at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard West
Attachments: 17-095 Conditional Approval (signed).pdf
Hi Dana,
Great! This project has been conditionally approved pending receipt of the items outlined in the attached letter. I will
follow up with materials related to the attached items shortly.
Kind regards,
Rachel Workin
Permitting Technician
fm �' I - Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
so- 0*1611s"T Direct 952.641-4518
MINNEMAHA CREEK 15320 Minnetonka Blvd., Minnetonka, MN 55345
WATERSHED MMCI www.minnehahacreek.org
From: Dana S. Brumitt [mailto:dana@lwestdev.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 11:34 AM
To: Rachel Workin <rworkin@minnehahacreek.org>; Jack Distel <Jdistel@minnehahacreek.org>
Cc:'Mike Gaffron'<MGaffron@ci.orono.mn.us>
Subject: Re: MCWD recycling center at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard West
Thank you, Rachel.
The completed forms are attached. Our accountant will call today and make the payment by phone. I can
confin-n that the silt fence will remain up for the duration of the project.
I appreciate your help.
Dana
LAKE EPT
OEVELIFNENT, LLE
Dana S. Brumitt I Communications
+1.952.653.1359
dana@lwestdev.com
From: Rachel Workin <rworkin0minnehahacreek.arf>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 10:38:33 AM
To: Jack Distel; Dana S. Brumitt
Cc:'Mike Gaffron'
Subject: RE: MCWD recycling center at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard West
Hi Dana,
Thank you for sending along the calculations for the project at 3245 Wayzata Blvd. This project is exempt from MCWD's
Stormwater Management and Wetland Protection rules, since it's new development that creates less than 20% of
impervious surface across the parcel. You will need an erosion control permit from MCWD which is a fast-track permit.
The site plan that you previously submitted contains the required material, so if you complete and return the attached
forms, we can get your permit processed for you. There is a $10 application fee that can be paid by check as well as
Visa/MasterCard by calling our front desk at 952-471-0590. We did have one question- can you confirm that the silt
fence will remain up throughout active construction until the site is stabilized?
I also wanted to mention that this project is considered new development since there are currently no improvements on
the property. With this work, any future development will be considered redevelopment under our stormwater
management rule.
Please let me know if you have any questions,
Kind regards,
Rachel Workin
Permitting Technician
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
H" Direct 952.641.4518
MINNINANA CR19K 15320 Minnetonka Blvd., Minnetonka, MINI 55345
WAT62SHM OWNCT www.minnehahacreek.or
From: Dana S. Brumitt [mailto:dana@lwestdev.com]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 12:21 PM
To: Jack Distel < distel@minneh�haq[eek.org>
Subject: Re: MCWD recycling center at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard West
Jack,
I've done some calculations on the recycling site to determine the hardcover. The entire site is 25.8 acres. For
purposes of the recycling operation we will be constraining our activity to an area within the site of
approximately 8 acres.
All hardcover will be gravel. No solid concrete pads or impervious liners will be installed.
For the sake of calculations I've included both stockpiles as depicted in the sketch, although in reality these
will be quite variable and will fluctuate as raw materials are processed and reused on the County Road 112
project. I have also calculated the entire area between the stockpiles and the stabilization pad as vehicles will
be driving in and out of that area.
The total maximum hardcover for the area of activity is just over 2.0 acres. (-25% of the area of activity, or
.07% of the site)
The 24" wide gravel access road = 984 sf
Raw materials stockpile = 10,000 sf
Finished material stockpile = 15,00 sf
Stabilization pad = 27,000 sf
Traffic pattern area = 37,500 sf
Thanks so much for following up. We are going before the Orono Planning Commission next week, so it would
be helpful to have either a permit or a letter stating that no permit is necessary by the end of the week.
Dana
LAKE MST
OEVELIPMENT, LIC
7'
D2na S. Brumitt I Communications
+1.952.653.1359
dana@lwestdev.com
From: Jack Distel <Jdistel@minnehahacreek.org>
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2017 11:21 AM
To. Dana S. Brumitt
Subject: MCWD recycling center at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard West
Dana,
After carefully looking over the plans for the recycling center at 3245 Wayzata Boulevard West in Orono we have come
to understand more clearly what the watershed district needs. As the site is a temporary installation it quite unique but
our main concern is the storm water potential of the site and how this could impact the surrounding wetlands. Would
you be able to calculate the amount of impervious surface on the site and what percentage this is compared with the
site in total? MCWD considers compacted gravel surfaces as impervious, therefore we are looking for this calculation to
include the area of things like:
I. The access road
2. The stabilization pad
3. The stockpiles
4. Any other impervious surface to be installed on site.
Once we have this information we should be able make more informed decisions on permit requirements. Thank you
for being so patient with us.
Best,
Jack Distel
District Representative
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
15320 Minnetonka BLVD
Minnetonka, MN 55345
952-641-4581
NNNIHAHA CRIEK
WATERSHED MUM?
3/1/2017
Hennepin County RtfPermit - UJD# 2461 Permit# 2017-A304
Application for Temporary / Const Access
Permit
Hennepin County
Hennepin County Public Works
Transportation Department (Roads and Bridges) - Operations
1600 Prairie Drive
Medina, MN 55340-5421
PC Exhibit F
Permit#., 2017-A304
Road: 112
Maintenance District: Hennepin County
Permilt is for the construction of
Temporary (Temporary) - Construction, surfaced with Gravel
Applicant Property Owner
Name: Dana S Brumitt Name: Lakewest LLC
Address: Lake West Development Address: 14525 Highway 7, Sufte 265
Minnetonka, MN 55345-5534 Minnetonka. IVIN 55345
Phone: (612) 718-9213 Phone: (952) 653-1359
Pager:
Fax:
Email: dana@lwestdev.com
Dates
Entrance Needed By: 05101/2017
Contractor
Name: Lakewest LILC
Address. 14525 Highway 7, Suite 265
Minnetonka, MN 55345
Phone: (952) 653-1359
https://roadpermits.co.hennepin.mn.ustentmnee.view.php?entmcePermitld=246 . 1/4
3/112017 Hennepin County Rt/Pbrmit - UIDI 246 / Permit# 2017-A304
11-0caU00T
The proposed entrance is on the S side of county road no, 112, 0.8 miles W of Old Crystal Bay Road.
Street Addre= 3245 Wayzata Boulevard, Orono
Driveway
Width. 20 feet
Present number of driveways: 0
Sketch
* Orono CUP Site Plan.pdf
Descripition of Work
Provide vehicle access to staging/recyclIng site fbr CSAH 112 Project
General
1. No work shall be started until the application Is approved and the permit Issued,
2. Contact the Hennepin County Permit Office at 612-596-0339 a minimum of 2 business days prior to starting construction.
3. After driveway construction is completed, persons requesting the installation must notify the Permits Office that such work
has been completed and Is ready for final inspection and acceptance by Hennepin County.
4. No changes or alterations In entrances may be made at any time without written permission from the County Engineer or
designee.
5. Approval of this permit does not deny the County Engineer the future right to revise, relocate or dose any entrance to
expedite the movements of vehicular or pedestrian traffic. The County retains the right to close said entrance(s) at its
discretion, based upon the necessity for traffic regulation, control and safety.
6. Existing driveways are not automatically perpetuated, In the event of a change in land use or a major change in the traffic
pattern of the existing facility, new drTveway appilcations may be required by the County.
7. Inclement weather shaff be reason for delay of the project starl or suspension of the project as determined by Hennepin
County.
8. Perrnits or copies shall be kept on the work site, while work Is in progress, in the custody of the Individual in charge, and
shall be exhibited upon request by any county official.
9. These general permit requirements and specifications shall be considered as forming an integral part of each and every
permit issued fbr operations an courity roadways. The work authorized by this permit shall be done at such time and in such
manner as shall be consistent with the safety of the public and shall conlbrm to all requirements and standards of the County
of Hennepin as herein specified. If at any time. it shall be found by Hennepin County that the work is not being, or has not
been, properly performed, the Permittee, upon being notified, shall Immediately ta ' ke the necessary steps, at their own
expense, to place the work in conformance to said requirements or standards. In addition, no residential driveway may
exceed 22 feet in width and no commercial driveway shall exceed the width dictated by the Hennepin County Access
Management Guidelines.
10. In the event of failure or neglect will or not, by said Permittes or Permilltee's employees, to perlbrm and comply with the
prescribed conditions, reittrictions and regulations, the Transportation Department may revoke and annul this permit and
order said Permittee to immediately remove any and all structures or property belonging to said Permittee from the legal
limits of the roadway or county property.
11. The Installation shall be made in conformity with all applicable lam, regulations and codes coveeing said Installations. Ali
installations shall be made Inconformity with regulations of govemmental agencies for the protection of the public.
12. Americans with Disabilities Act - Any work in the County's rights-of-way that Impacts any pedestrian facilitles requires that
the restoration of the pedestrian facilities impacted be restored In cDnfbrm to current ADA requirements and standards.
13. If pavement, roadway or right -of way Is damaged; same shall be restored, in a tirnely manner to its original or a better
condition, at the sale expense of the Permftlee. Permittees failure to correct such damage in a timely manner will result in
Hennepin County, through its own forces or contractors, making said repailirs and billing Parrinittee far all costs and expenses
related thereto. Permittee shall make payment to Hennepin County within fifteen (15) days of receipt of said bill. Permittee
agrees that If it fails to make payment of said amounts within the specific time, to Hennepin County, it shall pay all costs
relating to debt collection, including, but not limited to, court costs, frees, interest and attorneys fees.
14. No driving onto highway from ditch or driving on shoulders or over curbs where damage will occur.
httpr//roadperiWts-CO-bgDnqin.mn.tlsfenlronm.view.php?cnimneeParmitici-246 . 2/4
3/14017
Hennepin County RVNrmit - UlD# 246 / PerWtO 2017-A304
1 6."It shall be further underillood that the Permitles will be responsible for maintenance or repair of any and all failures due to
60ttilement, erosion. lack of vegetation growth, rutting or otheT job related problems for a period of three (3) years after projed
completion and Notice of Wbrk Completion fbrm has been received by Hennepin County� Permittee shall perform al said
maintenance. Immediately after it has been notified of sold deficiency. Permiltee shall be responsible for all costs and
expenses related to said maintenance. Parmktee!s failure to perform sold maintenance immediately will result in Hennepin
Count through Its own fo=s or fts contractom, performing said maintenance and billing Parrrdttee for all costs and expanses
related thereto. Pemftttee shall make payment to Hennepin County within ftfleen (15) days of receipt of said bill. Parmittee
agrees, that If it falls to make payment of said amounts within the specified time, to Hennepin County, Parmittee shall pay all
costs related to debt collections, including, but not limited to, murt costs, fees, interest and attorneysfees.
16. Emergency Vehicle Accesses must be signed and closed to general traffic at all times. Continued unauthorized use of an
Emergency Vehicle Access shall result in the removal of the access at the discretion of Hennepin County at the owner's
expense.
17, Unless stated elsewhere In the Special Provisions, all access permits expire 1 year fmrn the date that the permit Is
Issued.
Sediment Control & Drainage
1. Stmet surface and roadifide shall be kept dean, neat and presentable throughout construction as determined try the
Hennepin County Transportation Department.
2. Dust control shall be provided upon request of the Hennepin County Transportation Department.
3. The e)deffng drainage pattems shall not be aftered unless approved by Hennepin County Watershed District approval and
drainage calculations are required If plan alters existing drainage patterns.
4. Permanent restoration plans must be submitted to the Perafits Office for temporary restorationtwinter stabilization for work
occurring between November 1 at and April 30th pdor to starring construction.
Traffic Control
1. If the installation of this driveway makes it necessary to work on the roadway, traffic must be protected; proper temporary
traffic control including lights, signs and prope r barricades must be In place, Temporary traffle contmi must conform to the
current version of the Minnesota Manuel of Unifbrm Traffic Control and/or accompanying Field Manual. Said devices shall be
rernoved from the job site promptly upon completion of work.
2. Safety vests shall be worn by ANYONE occupying County right-of-way.
3. The Permittee shall use due diligence in the eimcution of the work authorized under thils permit in order not to endanger or
unnecessadly obstruct travel along the said highway. Operations shall be so conducted at all times as to permit safe and
reasonably free travel over the roads within the limits of the work herein preselbed. Allsafety measures for the free
movement of traffic shall be provided by the Permittse at Its own cost.
Payment method Payment details
Cradft Card
5DSCiai r
Special provisions:
Temp/Construction Access
$100.00
Total: $100.00
Contact Mike Olmstead at (612) 221-7162 or via email at michael.oirnstead@henneplin.us at least 24 hours pdor to
construction.
Temporary traffic control layouts on County roads shall corrforrn to the most n3cent version of the Minnesota Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
Applicant shall be responsible to place a stop sign, minimum size of W'x36", prior to opening the new entranoe.
Notes:
No notes
httpaJImadpermils-COJ=RePin.mn.uskmmncc.view.php?cntmnceF%rndiad-246 3/4
31112017
Hennepin County Rt/Pennit - UIDN 246 / Pcrwdtf 20 17-A304
Approval Digital Signature
ApplIcant Dana S. Brumitt - 02/28/2017 12:53 PM
Of5db98la53ble5e643blcl36dabod66
72ff4dlc6e4lO28b6e&aafB7o38cabla
#1 Permits Supswisor Michael D. Olmstead - 03/01/2017 7.34 AM
2d7 Ib3b650&df48 6 10daL2 65 fd79737be
405cbcf&97b27bddlS39fd549lceo647
https:tfma*rmitaxa-hannopin.mn.uslentrancc.view,php?en"neepermitld=M 4/4
Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map RECEWED
Provided By: Resident and Real Estate Services Fr --B 2'. 2017
Uutterblze: 350 feet
Map Comments:
3245 Wayzata Boulevard West
Orono
MN 55356
3211823140002
RECEIVED
FEB 2 7 2017
CITY OF ORONO
0 245 490 980 ft
I I I I I I I j I
For more information contact:
Hennepin County GIS Office
300 6th Street South
Minneapolis, MN 55487
gis-info@hennepin.us
#3910
!bit C,-
AL
meno mong une to
We AveryO 7bmplate 51600 11 Feed Paper expose popup Edge- AVERYS!59W
38 32-118-23 11 om 38 33-119-23 32 0005
BARBARA LUPIENT CITY OF ORONO
C/O LU PIENT AUTOMOTIVE GRP P 0 BOX 66
7100 WAYZATA BLVD 4200 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323
GOLDEN VALLEY MN 55426
PC Exhibit H
38 32-118-23 13 0001
MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIRECTOR OF R/W OPERATIONS
395 JOHN IRELAND BLVD
STPAUL MN 55155
38 32-118-23 13 0003
ANNE MAHDAL BARAN
480 STUBBS BAY RD
LONG LAKE MN 55356
38 32-118-23 14 0001
LAKEWEST LLC
14525 HIGHWAY 7 #265
MINNEONKAMN 55345
38 32-118-23 14 0002
LAKEWEST LLC
14525 HIGHWAY 7 #265
MINNEONKA MN 55345
38 32-118-23 21 0006
B N & SANTA FE RR CO
PROPERTY TAX DEPT
PO BOX 961089
FORT WORTH TX 76161
38 32-118-23 41 0002
MARGARET A BUSCH
8588 CHESHIRE PKWY 42217
PLYMOUTH MN 55446
38 33-118-23 23 0002
ROBERT E. & KAT14RYN G DUMAS
3025 WAYZATA BLVD
BOX 607
LONG LAKE MN 55356
38 33-118-23 31 0010
B N & SANTA FE RR CO
PROPERTY TAX DEPT
PO BOX 961089
#3910
FORT WORTH TX 76161
38 33-118-23 32 0002
B N & SANTA FE RR CO
PROPERTY TAX DEPT 2 7 Zo 17
PO BOX 96 1 o8q
FORT WORTH TX 76161 CITY OF ORONO
lWquettes faciles A peler I A Repliez A la hachure efln do IF
Utillsez Is gabarit AVERYO 51600 11 Sons de wwvv.avery.coTn
4 chargement r6v6ler le rebord Pop-upml 1 -800 -GO -AVERY
MINUTES OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
' M nday, March 20,2017
� 6:30 o'clock p.m.
Fretham stated the road contractor is hoping to
Fretham stated tabling it to April is fine but tat
Schoenzeit seconded the-mdffou. VOTE:
0.
PC Exhibit D
ffff-May would be ideal to get approvals.
June or July would be challenging.
6. 17-3910 LAIKEWEST, LLC, 3245 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST, CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT, 7:17 P.M. — 8:02 P.M.
Curt Fretham, Lakewest, LLC, was present.
Gaffron stated for the last few months Staff has been receiving inquiries from contractors searching for a
staging area for the upcoming highway project. Currently there appear to be few suitable options and this
site is an option since it is open and relatively flat, has good accessibility to Wayzata Boulevard, is large
enough for the intended activities, and is relatively remote from nearby residential development. The
home located across Wayzata Boulevard is 700 feet away and the site is 1,000 feet from any homes across
the freeway.
The potential negative impacts, such as noise, vibration, glare, dust, should be minimal as compared to
most other locations within the Wayzata Boulevard corridor, which is one of the reasons this site was
proposed. The portion of the site proposed for construction staging is primarily over the landfill area that
has been closed for a number of years, which is the area depicted in blue. Layers of clean fill over the
landfill were added by the former owner in order to establish a suitable cap for the landfill and assure
appropriate runoff characteristics.
The current owners have had borings done in the landfill area in order to determine the stability and
extent of the landfill as well as what materials might be encountered if a future phase of residential
development is ever proposed. This information was obtained as part of the applicant's 2016. residential
development proposal. The information regarding what is contained within the landfill was also
contained within that application. The area that gained approval for residential development is not within
the landfill area.
Page 15 of 64
13 1 lall I wro7w-urp
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
The proposed site use plan indicates the proposed rock construction entrance will be located where the
approved future residential access would be located. This access point has been approved by Hennepin
County as a temporary construction access. Gaffron stated he is not sure whether Hennepin County will
require some sort of additional tum lanes, temporary or permanent., in the area, Since it is a county road,
Hennepin County will need to make that determination.
The Minnehaha. Creek Watershed District has approved an Erosion Control permit for the construction
staging activity.
The Long Lake Fire Chief has indicated no issues with use of the site for construction staging. The
Orono Public Works Director has indicated this location is likely as good a location as the contractor will
find for construction staging.
The site plan suggests that temporary lighting will likely be used, and it is likely that to minimize impact
on traffic flow, some work on the highway improvements will be at night. It would be appropriate to
establish that any temporary lighting be downcast and directed away from residential areas.
The site plan indicates a proposed visual and noise screening berm along the west and south boundaries of
the site. The applicant is working with the NOCA to establish parameters and obtain permits for this
berm which will become an amenity for future residential development. The City will require a grading
plan be approved for this and it potentially will require a Conditional Use Permit based on the volume of
permanent fill material.
The applicant's narrative suggests that this site might be used as a recycling yard for projects other than
just the Wayzata Boulevard improvements. This could put a different slant on how the site is intended to
be used. The applicants should describe what is actually intended and how the contractor or Hennepin
County expects to operate this site.
Questions to be answered include whether materials from the Wayzata Boulevard project will be recycled
and head out to other projects not in Orono and whether it is the City's expectation that this site is
intended to be in use exclusively for the Wayzata Boulevard project and not as a regional recycling yard
for other projects. Staff recommends that this industrial -level use at this site not become a regional
Page 16 of 64
MINUTES OF TBE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
activity and that a definite end date be established commensurate with the end of the Wayzata Boulevard
improvements.
The Planning Commission should consider the following:
Are there any specific concerns with the location of this site for the proposed use?
2. Are there any specific concerns with the level or type of activity that is likely to be associated
with the proposed use? Is the use intended to be specific to the Wayzata Boulevard
improvements or is it intended for other projects?
Are there any specific concerns with regard to the duration of the proposed use; i.e., is the date of
completion of the Wayzata Boulevard improvements a suitable termination date for the activity or
should it be further limited, such as requiring an annual review and/or annual approval of an
extension?
4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application?
If the Planning Commission concludes that this site is appropriate for the proposed use, Staff would
recommend that an Interim Use Permit be issued subject to at least the following conditions:
Establish an end date of the use to be no later than completion of the Wayzata Boulevard
improvements.
2. Use of the site is intended solely for activities related to the Wayzata Boulevard improvement
project and may not be used to support other projects.
3. Use of the site shall be subject to Orono Code standards with regard to noise, lighting, dust
control, street maintenance, etc.
4. Appropriate permits to be obtained from Hennepin County. Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District, MPCA, and any other agencies or governing authorities as may be required for activities
on the site.
Page 17 of 64
MIN'UTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
5. Construction of a proposed permanent screening berm along the south and southwesterly
boundaries of the site will require conditional use permit application and approval.
6. An annual review of the interim use permit shall be conducted to determine whether the use
remains acceptable during the duration of the Wayzata Boulevard improvement project.
Landgraver asked if Hennepin County has a site that they used during the project on Highway 12 on the
west side of Old Crystal Bay Road.
Gaffron indicated they vacated that property a number of years ago and Staff is not sure what the final
intent for the property is.
Curt Fretham, Lakewest Development, stated the entire site consists of approximately 30 acres and that
they will only be using a small portion of the site for this activity. Approximately half of the site is
wetlands and the other half is dry buildable land. Fretharn noted the green pasture area would be the
location of the majority of the activities. The area highlighted in blue depicts the lot.
Fretharn indicated the next slide illustrates the layout of how they envision things would work on the site.
Access would be on the left side of the property. The trucks would come in and dump on the left-hand
side. The material would then be processed in the blue highlighted area. Fretharn commented it seems
like there will be a lot going on but there is not that much to it. Fretharn stated they have done similar
activities on other sites previously.
In addition, a screening buffer would be created. Fretharn stated there will be a lot of excess clean fill
available from the job and that he was planning on using it to create a future buffering amenity but that it
could be created now. A formal landscape plan does not exist currently but some trees could be planted
along the berm to help further screen the site.
Fretharn stated he has done some of this before in other communities a lot closer to town. Fretharn
indicated they did a large demolition of a church in St. Louis Park where they crushed the materials,
recycled them, and then used some of the materials on site but then hauled some off site. Another project
Page 18 of 64
MENUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING C01NBUSSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
was done recently in Golden Valley behind Menard's where a large commercial building was demolished
in addition to a project in Minnetonka at Highway 101 and Minnetonka Boulevard.
Fretham stated he understands people have legitimate concerns about truck activity and the amount of
dust that could be generated, but new technology has been invented and the materials are now dampened
with water, which reduces the amount of dust that is created. Fretharn stated the equipment will make
some noise but noted that the site is right next to the freeway and that he cannot imagine that anyone will
know they are there. Fretham indicated the crushing will not occur at night.
Fretham stated some of the challenge here is tying the property up for a period of time and then being able
to balance it with the practicality of tying it up. Fretham stated one of the questions that he has to answer
prior to committing to this is whether there will be enough materials coming off the Wayzata Boulevard
job to make it worthwhile. Fretharn stated he does have some experience with this type of work and that
it really is a blend of being able to mix all of those components, being able to work with Hennepin
County, and being able to supplement it to make it a legitimate short-term operation.
Fretharn stated he would like to point out that there is an indication they might need a separate conditional
use permit for the berm and that he would like to process everything concurrently.
Lemke asked what the hours of operation would be.
Fretharn indicated they would like to work with the road construction project, which will occur mainly
during the day, but that there might be times where the road crews will work longer days.
Thiesse stated they do not necessarily be tied to Hennepin County's schedule and that they could limit
their work to the daytime.
Fretharn stated the crushing would not occur at night but the movement of trucks might occur during the
night. Fretham stated it is likely Hennepin County will store some pipe and other materials to be used on
the road project that might have to be loaded at night.
Page 219 of 64
AUNTJTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Thiesse stated one of his concerns is possible headlights from a pay loader that are bouncing around and
moving around since they can be a big distraction.
Fretharn stated he does not envision that being a problem but that he included everything in the
application that could possibly raise a concern. Fretham stated in his view there will be very little
evening or nighttime activity but that it would be nice to be able to do that occasionally.
Thiesse asked if recycling of offsite materials was done on his other sites.
Fretham indicated there was. Frethain stated as it relates to traffic, there would not be a parade of trucks
running through downtown Long Lake and that there will be occasional trucks coming off the bypass.
Fretham. noted this site offers easy access versus coming in through downtown.
Landgraver asked what type of other material they are contemplating bringing it.
Fretharn indicated it would be concrete and asphalt.
Lemke asked how many trips a day in and out are anticipated.
Fretham stated he would estimate approximately 2,000 loads over the course of a year, which would
amount to seven loads a day. Fretham noted those loads will not occur over the course of a year but will
be in spurts. Fretham stated some days there will be 50 to 100 loads and some days nothing.
Gaffron asked to what extent the contractor for the county project will be involved in the operation of the
site on a daily basis and to what extent the County will be involved in the site on a daily basis.
Fretharn indicated the County will not play a role in managing it and that Hennepin County would expect
them to abide by the permit conditions. Fretharn stated their expectation is that the contractor will
manage the site on a daily basis and they will be monitoring their activities.
Landgraver asked if they are looking at a three-year project,
Page 20 of 64
MESUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION AMETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Fretham stated they hope it is a three-year project, but that if it does not work after a year, they will
probably shut it down. Fretham stated he would like to try it for at least a year.
Lemke asked what will happen with the site after the process is done.
Fretham indicated they would need to restore the site to a similar condition as before.
Lemke asked whether a deal breaker would be if there is a restriction on bringing in other materials from
other sites.
Fretham stated it could be since at this time he has not gotten a commitment from the contractor on how
much material will be brought in. Fretham stated to his understanding the contractor is negotiating with
the County to do some of it onsite at the road project. If that happens, that will reduce the amount of
material being brought to the site. Fretharn noted he has to look at the costs of tying up the property for a
period of time versus the amount of materials to be brought in.
Lemke asked him to address the question of pollution.
Fretham indicated the contractor will be bringing in street materials, such as curb, concrete, asphalt,
manholes and pipe. Fretham stated the material is fairly clean from a pollution standpoint, and if they
were demoing a building, that would be a different process.
Landgraver noted people are concerned about the old dump. Landgraver asked what government agency
would look into the added weight and traffic to the site.
Gaffron asked N1r. Fretharn what discussions he has had with the NEPCA regarding the site. Gaff'ron
stated his understanding of what the gentleman questioning pollution was referring to is what happens if
the landfill material is pushed further out or changes the drainage characteristics of the area. Gaffron
stated there are a lot of things that go into a landfill and that he would like to know what the NUCA's
views are on the proposed use for the site.
Fretham. indicated they have spoken with the NIPCA but that they have not really spoken with them about
the recycling activities. Fretham noted he has dealt with them before on other sites and that he
Page 21 of 64
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING CONDIISSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
understands their process and concerns. Fretharn stated the MPCA's concern was more about the
screening buffer since that is a permanent thing and that they will want to sign off on that. Fretharn
indicated he has hired Wenck Engineering for that component and that he can add that point to his
discussions with them going into the future.
Gaffron asked if the WCA has a concern about the additional weight on the edges or the drainage being
impacted.
Fretharn stated their concern is adding a berm on top of the landfill area, which may make it more
difficult to clean the landfill up if that is found to be necessary.
Leskinen asked whether the applicant would restrict the materials to just road debris or whether there
would be materials from the demolition of a building if they were to be allowed to have other sites bring
in their debris.
Fretharn stated they would like to have discretion to bring in other materials. Fretham noted on a
demolition project they still have protocol they have to follow to make sure the materials that are going to
be recycled are clean. Fretham stated he could provide that paperwork and that he will retain it in the
event there is ever an audit performed.
Leskinen asked if it would be fair to say that it could be more than just road debris.
Fretharn stated potentially it could be.
Schoenzeit asked if he would agree to the stipulation that if other materials are brought in that it be
limited to concrete, asphalt, manholes, and not this other demolition material. Schoerizeit indicated he
would be very uninterested in recycling non -road material and non -authenticated stuff and taming this
site back into a dump.
Fretham stated they do not want to turn it back into a dump and that they consider it to be a valuable
property. Fretham stated if that was a stipulation, he would need to figure out whether they could live
with that.
Page 22 of 64
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COI�BHSSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Thiesse stated it sounds like a site is necessary for recycling of road materials in Orono but that there is
not a big need to be recycling other debris. Thiesse stated in his view the Planning Commission does not
have enough information on whether that is a required component for the applicant. Thiesse commented
he would love to see Orono take care of its own materials.
Fretham noted he does not have control of the entire equation.
Thiesse asked when that information would be available.
Fretham stated it would probably be available in the next 3 0 to 90 days.
Thiesse commented this site is probably the best site to do it, but in order to give exact information to the
public on the interim use, he would like more information on how the property will be used and whether
it could be viable without bringing in other materials from other towns.
Schoenzeit stated the City's obligation is to keep this site clean and that it starts with knowing what the
materials are and where they are coming from.
Thiesse stated it also has to be a viable operation.
Landgraver stated if there are limits on the amount of traffic and the type and amount of material, he
would not be incaed to be as restrictive on where it is coming from.
Frethain stated if the City of Mound has a road project going on and they would like to bring in 20 loads
of street materials, he is hearing that might be acceptable, but if a building is being torn down in
downtown Long Lake, they would like to see that go somewhere else.
Schoenzeit stated he could take the concrete foundation but not the rest.
Fretham stated that would be helpfiil since oftentimes that it what is recycled. Fretharn noted there are
strict specifications that they use for the recycled materials and that the finished product has to be
acceptable to their standards.
Page 23 of 64
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COADUSSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Leskinen asked if MN/DOT ran a similar type operation for the new Highway 12 project.
Gaffron indicated it was a staging area for materials and equipment but to his knowledge they did not
have a recycling operation. Gaffron stated vehicles were parked there now and then and there was a
construction office located there. Gaff-ron stated that site was handled by NW/DOT and the City had
limited say in it. Gaff:ron indicated he does not recall any conditional use permits being requested.
Lemke asked if there would be storage of trucks and equipment as well as the crushing equipment.
Fretharn indicated there would be. Fretham stated it is likely the crushing machine will be run less than
200 hours, which is basically two and a half weeks out of a year. Fretharn stated the machine might run
for a few days and then not for a while and that they will not be running a full-blown crushing operation
all summer long.
Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 7:53 p.m.
Allan Engleman, 315 Old Crystal Bay Road, stated it sounds like there will be a recycling operation on
the site and that the City does not need someone hauling stuff from Brooklyn Park or Wayzata in there.
Engleman questioned what will happen when they are done and the pile is still standing there. Engleman
commented it looks to him to be a business and that the City does not need that here. Engleman stated he
does not know if the borings showed any contaminated material from the bypass project.
Gaffron stated the boring logs primarily identified materials within the landfill and they attempted to
determine the boundary between the landfill and high land. Gaff-ron stated he has not seen borings from
in town but that any contaminated material would need to be hauled to different sites.
Thiesse stated he did see the soil borings from downtown out to Birch's and they were all good.
Engleman commented it looks to him like there will be a business operation over there and that they will
be taking in other cities' material from all over.
Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 7:55 p.m.
Page 24 of 64
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, March 20,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(The Planning Commission suspended discussion on this item in order to discuss Item No. 5)
Landgraver moved, Schoenzeit seconded, to table Application No. 17-3910, Lakewest, LLC, 3245
Wayzata Boulevard, Interim Use Permit, and to continue the public hearing to the April 17
Planning Commission meeting. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
7. 17-3912 BRUCE BULKELAND, PIID 07-117-23-31-0028 (Adjacent to 1298 Wildhurst
Trail), VARIANCES, 8:02 PAL — 8:38 P.M.
Bruce Birkeland, Applicant, was present.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting a variance to facilitate an administrative lot line adjustment,
which is a subdivision exemption, in order to create an additional one lakeshore lot where there is
currently one lakeshore lot and one non-lakeshore lot. The southern lot is not a lakeshore lot currently.
The applicant owns both lots and has presented two options:
Create two conforming lots, each meeting the minimum area and width at the 75 -foot
setback. This would require a side setback variance allowing the existing home on Lot 2 to be
located within three feet of the new dividing line. The side setback variance is needed in order to
certify the subdivision exemption.
2. Locate the dividing line so that the existing home meets the required I 0 -foot side setback.
However, this results in Lot 3 having 132 feet in width where , 40 feet is required. A lot width
variance would be required in order to process the subdivision exemption.
Curtis noted Option 2 is the applicant's preferred option.
The LR- 1 B requires 140 feet in width at the ordinary high water level and at the 75 -foot setback for Lake
Minnetonka. There should be at least 280 feet at these points for supporting two lakeshore lots. The
plans submitted for either option do not appear to reflect conforming measurement of lot widths. The
Page 25 of 64
AGENDAITEM
Item No.: 15
Date: May 8, 2017
Item Description: #17-3931, Lake West Development LLC —'3580' Ivy Place
Sketch Plan Review
Presenter: Mike Gaffron, Senior Planner Agenda Planning Department
Section: Report
1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to review a sketch plan for a 2 -lot subdivision
and provide comments to the applicant.
2. Application Deadline. Rcvd. & Complete: 3/22/17 60 -Day Review Period: NA (No action required)
3. Background. This is a sketch plan for a proposed two -lot subdivision of a vacant property
located at the northerly end of Ivy Place on Casco Point. The property consists of 3 existing tax
parcels, which the applicants propose to reconfigure to result in two residential building lots,
each exceeding the 1/2 -acre minimum lot size of the LR- I C district.
Please review the attached Planning Commission memo and exhibits.
4. Planning Commission Recommendation. The Planning Commission reviewed this sketch
plan at its April 17th meeting. No vote was taken. Planning Commission's comments are
contained within the attached draft Minutes.
5. Public Comments. The sketch plan review process does not require a public hearing, and
there is no published notice nor mailed notification to the neighbors; however, it is not unusual
for interested members of the public to attend the sketch plan review and it is at the discretion of
the Planning Commission or Council to accept public comments. At the April 17 th meeting, Tera
White, adjacent property owner at 3560 Ivy Place, noted that her property sometimes floods and
she has concerns regarding how filling of the applicants' property would impact drainage, an
issue that will have to be addressed during the preliminary plat review process. We are also in
receipt of a letter from an attorney representing Mr. & Mrs. White which describes a number of
issues that need to be addressed — see Exhibit A.
Fire Dgpt. Comments. Chief Van Eyll has reviewed the sketch plan and suggested that due to
the difficulty of access to this site, he would recommend:
- the residences be provided with fire suppression sprinkler systems;
- no contractor parking be allowed on Ivy Place during construction; and
- it would be beneficial for emergency and service vehicles to allow a driveway wider than 8
feet to serve the two homes (the distance from end of Ivy Place to the northerly proposed
home is approximately 250').
6. Staff Recommendation. Council should review the information contained in the Planning
Commission packet and minutes, and discuss with the applicants items of note as well as any
additional concerns of the Council.
Prepared By: Mike Gaffron
Reviewed By:
Approved By:
AGENDAITEM
17-3931 "3580 Ivy Place"
May 8, 2017
Page 2
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
While no formal action is required, this memo will serve as a foundation for the Council's
discussion with the applicants to bring to light potential issues for discussion and issues to be
addressed prior to submission of a formal Preliminary Plat application.
Exhibits
A — Letter dated 5/1/17 from Attorney David T. Johnson
B — Notice of PC Action dated 4/27/17
C — Draft PC Minutes of 4/17/17
D — Planning Commission Memo and Exhibits dated 4/17/17
Prepared By: Mike Gaffron Reviewed By: Approved By:
-AlMUN
DSON
HNSON, PA.
217 West James Street
P0. Box 241
Paynesville, Minnesota 56362
320-243-3878
320-243-4956 [Fax]
legaisry Cqamundsonl"� com
www.aniundsonlaw.com
Attorne�u:
Ross M. Amundson
David T Johnson
Paralegals:
Sheri L. Blonigen
Edith K Buermann
Debra K Stanger
May 1, 2017
Planning Commission
City of Orono
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
RE: Lots 1, 2, and 3 Casco Point Addition, PID 20117232000 1,
20117232002, and 201172320003
Dear Planning Commission:
MAY 0 2 2017
CITY OF ORONO
Council
Exhibit A
I am contacting you on behalf of Jay and Tera White regarding a
proposed two -lot subdivision involving the above described parcels,
Lake West Development, LLC is attempting to develop these lots on
behalf of Rick and Barbara Lapient, the owners of the properties. Jay
and Tera White own the home directly adjacent to and southwesterly of
the subject property, and object to the proposed development as set forth
in the sketch plan.
I have reviewed the Memo submitted to the Planning Commission
members by Mike Gaffron, senior planner for the City of Orono. Mr.
Gaffron identifies some of the practical issues that are concerning for
my clients. I would like to elaborate on the practical issues and set forth
the legal issues facing the developer in their attempt to gain approval of
this re -plat.
Mr. Gaffron indicates in his letter that the developer should address
his intentions for handling Mr. and Mrs. White's objections. It must be
noted that my clients have attempted to open communication with Curt
Frethem. of Lake West Development, LLC to notify him of their
concerns. There efforts have not been fruitful and Mr. Frethem has not
indicated a willingness to consider these concerns.
Below are. the legal and practical issues that are of concern for my
client and will need to be addressed by the developer:
1) Access. There is an easement crossing Mr. and Mrs. White's
property as set forth in document No. 922012. However, it is
quite likely that at the time of creation of the easement, it was
not contemplated that the property benefitting from the easement
was buildable. Nor may it have been contemplated that there
would be significant activity involving large construction
equipment creating a large nuisance for Mr. and Mrs. White (nor
the owners of White's property at the time the easement was
created). Mr. Gaffron does a nice job setting forth the impact a
two lot development would have on the neighborhood, and
-AlMUN
DSON
HNSON, PA.
217 West James Street
P.O. Box 241
Paynesville, Minnesota 56362
320-243-3878
320-243-4956 [Fax]
legalsrvgamundsonlaw. com
wwwamundsonlawcom
Attorneys:
Ross M. Amundson
David T Johnson
Paralegals:
Sheri L. Blonigen
Edith K. Buermann
Debra K, Stanger
particularly the disruption that such a project would have on Mr.
and Mrs. White. He also sets forth the. difficulty emergency
vehicles may encounter in attempting to respond to an
emergency at these locations. The sketch drawing shows that
tuming emergency vehicles around may not be possible on an 8
foot road with no specified turnaround.
Although Mr. Gaffron appears to identify the access area behind
White's residence as an easement in the Memo, he has referred
to this easement area as a public right of way orally. To VA-lite's
knowledge, this easement area has never been dedicated to the
public and remains private property.
Mr. Gaffron sets forth the obvious challenges in providing
access to these lots, but the Whites could also make a legal claim
that the scope of the easement is being enlarged.
"The language of the deed expresses the final, binding
agreement between the grantor and grantee. Hubachek v. Brown,
126 Minn. 359, 362-63, 148 N.W. 121, 122 (1914).. . The scope
of an easement created by express grant depends entirely upon
the construction of the terms of the grant. Highway 7 Embers,
Inc. v. Northwestern National Bank, 256 N.W.2d 271, 275
(Minn. 1977). The extent of an easement should not be enlarged
by legal construction beyond the objects originally contemplated
or expressly agreed upon by the parties. Minneapolis Athletic
Club v. Cohler, 287 Minn. 254, 258, 177 N.W.2d 786, 789-90
(1970)."
Additional discovery would need to be made concerning the
intent of the original easement, but the developer needs to know
that Whites are prepared to apply for an injunction against a two
lot development in the event a suitable compromise cannot be
reached. It should be noted in this regard that Wl-iite's lot is non-
conforming to the setback requiremenis. It niasi`be researche(Al,
but allowing White's home to be built so close to the boundary
line indicates that it was unforeseen that a neighbor would build
on the adjacent lot.
2) Encroachments. As set forth in the Memo prepared by Mr.
Gaffron, the Whites' deck, driveway, and septic system appear
to encroach onto the adjacent lot proposed for re -development.
There is also a gas line and a water main servicing White's home
that encroach onto the subject property. Again, Mr. and Mrs.
White have attempted to cornmunicatc. these issues with Mr.
Frethem but there has been very little response.
IMUNDSON
HNSON9 PA.
217 West James Street
R 0. Box 241
Paynesville, Minnesota 56362
320-243-3878
320-243-4956 [Far]
lega1.srv(q'amundson1mv.com
wwwamundsonlawcom
Attorneys:
Ross M Amundson
David T Johnson
Paralegals:
Sheri L. Blonigen
Edith K Buermann
Debra K. Stanger
In the event a compromise cannot be reached regarding these
issues, Mr. and Mrs. White are again prepared to initiate a legal
proceeding for adverse possession regarding the driveway and
deck encroachments, and a claim for a prescriptive or implied
easement regarding septic system, water main and gas line
encroachments. The legal elements necessary to prove these
claims are that Whites or their predecessors in interest occupied
the property in an actual, open, continuous, exclusive and hostile
manner for 15 years. The facts surrounding these
encroachments appear to indicate that Whites will be able to
prove these elements.
At the very least, a legal proceeding would delay final approval
of the re -plat because ownership of a portion of the subject
property is legally disputed. I don't expect that the City of
Orono Planning Commission would recommend approval of a
final re -plat for property with unsettled ownership.
3) Drainage and Proximity (Legal Nuisance). The submitted
sketch plan indicates that the developer intends to fill the lots to
an elevation of 933.5 feet. That is above the White's elevation
and could potentially create serious water drainage issues for
Whites. (Please see enclosed survey indicating Whites home
and garage are at 933 feet. White's lakeside yard is at 932 feet).
Building a residence so near White's residence (as the sketch
plan indicates) and at an elevation above that of Whites means
that water can only run toward White's residence. A home built
further away from Whites would allow for a more gradual slope
and room to divert water away from Whites. The developer
must address how this storm water runoff will not create a legal
nuisance for Wliites. In addition, building a home so close to
Whites will create dust and noise also to the extent of creating a
legal nuisance.
4) Utilities. Enclosed are two preliminary surveys created for the
Barbara Lupient Revocable Trust. You will notice a demarcation
for a "G" line servicing White's house which encroaches on the
subject property. The Legend of the survey indicates that this is
a buried gas line. The survey also indicates that a water main
"W" and sanitary sewer lines "S" servicing the White's home
encroach onto the subject property. These are some of the
encroachments referred to in paragraph 2 above. Mr. GafTron
referred to the septic encroachment in his Memo and suggested
that the system be moved, or an easement granted by the owners
of the subject property. He did not comment on the gas line
encroachment or the water main encroachment and these issues
IMUNDSON
HNSON, PA.
217 West James Street
R 0. Box 241
Paynesville, Minnesota 56362
320-243-3878
320-243-4956 [Fax]
legalsrvCa,amundsonlaw.com
www.amrindsonlaiv.com
Attorneys:
Ross M Amundson
David T Johnson
Paralegals:
Sheri L. Blonigen
Edith K. Buermann
Debra K. Stanger
must be addressed as well. To relocate these utilities so there is
no encroachment on the subject would be very burdensome on
Whites and perhaps not even feasible.
The Whites have a significant interest at stake which is severely
impacted by this proposed development. They love this home and area
and hope to remain living there for many years. They feel that they
have been represented well by Mr. Gaffron and the City of Orono and
appreciate the efforts of all involved. They hope that the replacement
for Mr. Gaffron, who I understand is soon retiring, will understand their
concerns and provide continuing support and assistance.
Whites are prepared to initiate litigation to protect their interest.
However it is not their preference to do so and ask that the city rejects
this re -plat as proposed. As previously stated, Whites initiated' contact
with the developer but their concerns were essentially ignored. Perhaps
the City of Orono ,A411 protect their interest and reject the
redevelopment, or delay action on the development until Whites'
concerns have been met. The proposed re -plat would significantly
affect Whites' use and enjoyment of their home if approved as
proposed. Thank you.
CC: Jay and Tera. White
CC: Lake West Development, LLC
ours VeryRrmu!y
ur
idT. J s Ton
AttornqyAtLaw
CITY OF ORONO
2750 Kelley Parkway
PO Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
952-249.4620
NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACrION Council
Exhibit B
ZONING FILE: 17-3931
DATEOFNOTICE: April27,2017
TO: Curt Fretham COPIES: dana@lwestdev.com
Lake West Development, LLC
14525 Highway 7, Suite 265
Minnetonka, MN 55345
curtfOlwestdev.com
TYPE OF REQUEST: Sketch Plan for 2 -Lot Subdivision at 3580 Ivy Place
DATE OF MEETING: April 17, 2017
The Orono Planning Commission reviewed the sketch plan and discussed a variety of issues with the
applicants. Draft minutes of the meeting are attached for your reference.
Applicant's next meeting is scheduled as: Monday, May 8, 2017
This is a City Council meeting at which the sketch plan will be reviewed. The meeting begins at 7:00 PM
If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City
Clerk after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please contact Mike
Gaffron at mqqffron@ci.orono.mn.us or 952.249.4622.
MINUTES OF TTIE
ORONO PLANNING COMM[ISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
#40 Council
,66 - Exhibit(
Landgraver asked if�ny kind of stormwater management will be done further down t
,Vslope.
Irvine stated the whole ageway across this property drains this site as ;w/eas the road and that in his
mia
view it is not practical to pl. a rain garden in that area. Irvine stated the might be an option for some
0
'a
age
a
w
r
a
a
Y
a
n g
cr
aoss'
den e /ta
r s Dea 'ne
h
stormwater management in the ca of the pool.
good poult an hat i. ppr rtate to p
lem s c t
1\ t m
Gaffron stated that is a good point an hat it might not be appr 'ate to place the burden on this
applicant to solve that problem since the dcover is really t being chaunged.
Irvine stated in his view the size of the rain
large.
Gaff-ron indicated he will ask the City
the situation.
would be needed at the bottom would be rather
whether Ikere is something that can be done to improve
Lemke asked whether a more hensive landscape plan will b�l�e prior to proceeding to the City
Council.
Irvine stated they can
Leskinen move emke seconded, to recommend approval of Application No 7-3929, Keenan &
k/inen 1��i
move
Sveiven on b alf of Antionette Beenders, 1669 North Farm Road, granting of a riance and
jt_ n
I
condition use permit based on Staff recommendations, with additional stormwate nd
I is ]m
andsc ing information being provided prior to the application going before the City uncil
a I t
lon with review of the City Engineer of the drainage plan. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0.
9. #17-3931 LAKE WEST DEVELOPMENT, LLC, ON BEHALF OF RICK AND
BARBARA LUPIENT, PIDS 20-117-2342-0001/0002/003 (LOTS 1, 2, AND 3 CASCO POINT
ADDITION), SKETCH PLAN, 9:38 P.M. — 10:20 P.M.
Curt Fretham, Lake West Development, was present.
Page 44 of 71
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m. 40',
-Irr,
Gaffiron stated this is a sketch plan for a proposed two -lot subdivision of a vacant property located at the 41>
north end of Ivy Place on Casco Point. The property consists of three existing tax parcels that the
applicants propose to reconfigure into two residential building lots, each exceeding the 1/2 -acre minimum
lot size of the LR- I C District.
Gaffron displayed the 1955 plat of the property. In 1955, the northerly edge of this area was a thin
peninsula, and the center of the peninsula was wetland.
Gaffron displayed some aerial photographs from 1945 through 1975 depicting the property and
surrounding area. Gaff-ron noted by 1960 the area had become filled in a little bit more, and by 1970, it
had been completely filled in. By 1971 some volunteer trees have started to grow on the property.
Gaffron stated this is a piece of property that has been vacant but has gone through a number of changes.
The property was replatted in 1971 from the initial two Registered Land Survey (RLS) tracts into three
lots but remained vacant. In 1975, an application to re -plat the property to convert the three lots into just
two lots was reviewed. Despite opposition from the neighborhood and allegations that the filling was
done illegally, the re -plat was approved with the understanding that the approval should not be construed
as building permit approval nor that the land was buildable. The re -plat into two lots was never filed and
the property currently remains as three separate vacant tax parcels.
The applicants have submitted a fairly detailed sketch plan for review tonight. A tree inventory has been
completed for the property. A majority of the trees are volunteer trees of poor quality. A line of huge
cottonwoods once stood along the Carman Bay shoreline but were girdled by beavers and eventually were
removed.
The applicants are proposing to construct two homes on the property. Gaffron noted there are a variety of
existing easements that will need to be eliminated. There is also a view easement in favor of the Powell
property at 2916 Casco Point Road which limits the number, location and height of the homes allowed.
In addition, there are portions of the property located within the floodplain that would need to be filled.
Page 45 of 71
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, Apiril 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
The applicants are also proposing an outlot with a driveway as far away from the wetland as possible but
still remain within the outlot. The driveway will require a hardcover variance. While eight feet of width
is minimal for a driveway serving two residences, that is the maximum width allowed by code within 75
feet of the lake. With the driveway located so close to the lake, it would be appropriate that stormwater
management facilities be established to mitigate impacts of runoff from the driveway.
Gaffron noted there was a City project completed approximately five years ago to enhance the shoreline
in the area adjacent to the lagoon to cover the City's sewer line. An easement was also created for a cul-
de-sac on the property many years ago but the cul-de-sac was never constructed. City sewer and water
are available to the property.
A very small wetland was delineated within existing Lot 3. If it is determined that filling of this wetland
is required, mitigation may or may not be necessary. The applicants are well aware that the majority of
the property is a filled wetland and likely will require extraordinary measures such as pilings in order to
support homes.
Each of the proposed two lots exceeds the minimum acreage requirements. Lot I consists of
approximately 0.6 acres in area and Lot 2, being platted as a back lot given the unusual property shape
and access limitations, more than meets the 150 percent lot area requirement at approximately 1.4 acres.
Each lot exceeds the 1 00 -foot width requirement.
The ftont/back lot configuration was recommended by Staff as the most conforming method of converting
these three lots into two. The existing driveway easement with cul-de-sac becomes a limiting factor for
development of the site and cannot be counted towards lot area. In order to convert the three lots into two
lots, a new, relocated access corridor to get past proposed Lot I is necessary.
The Planning Commission should consider the following issues:
Applicants should be asked to address how they plan to resolve the noted easement and/or
encroachment issues, including the Powell view easement; the potential sewer connection
encroachment from the adjacent home at 3560 Ivy; and the deck and driveway encroachments
from 3560 Ivy.
Page 46 of 72
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
2. Does the Planning Commission have any concerns regarding mitigation of the impacts to
floodplain, wetlands and trees that are likely with this proposed development?: Site re -grading
over much of the property is anticipated with the proposed plan.
Access to the property for development/home construction is likely to be very difficult and will
likely require heavy vehicles needing to access the property on a very narrow road and minimal
accessibility without impacting the immediate neighbor. Contractor parking is likely to be
difficult. The impacts to the neighborhood during the construction process, and especially to the
adjoining residence, will likely be extreme. Applicant should be asked to address how these
issues and impacts will be mitigated.
4. Does the Planning Commission have any concerns regarding the lot layouts and front-lotfback-lot
configuration? The proposed house location on Lot 2 will require re -designation of yards in order
to have a southerly setback less than 45 feet. As shown, the setback from that south line is ten
feet and Staff would suggest that 15 feet be required per the back lot code if that is considered as
a side yard.
5. Does the Planning Commission agree that the average lakeshore setback can be established at
seventy-five feet from the lake for both Lots I and 2 as part of the replatting approval??
6. Applicants should address possible stormwater management practices and facilities to be
employed both during construction and on a permanent basis.
7. As part of the preliminary plat review process, comments will be requested from the public
Works, Police and Fire Departments as to the impacts of development of this property over the
short term and long term.
Gaffron stated the goal of the sketch plan is to provide the developer with an overview of the pertinent
City ordinances and how they affect the proposal.
Thiesse asked if that is a nonconforming cul-de-sac as it relates to length.
Page 47 of 71
MINUTES OF TIIE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m. 44
Gaffron indicated he has not checked the length of the existing road to see if it meets City standards. It
has been in existence since before the standard existed.
Thiesse asked if a conditional use permit for fill is being requested.
Gaffron stated it is likely additional such approvals will be required when a preliminary plat application is
submitted.
Curt Fretham, Lake West Development, stated when they first started on this project Staff had requested
that he obtain a letter from the Watershed District explaining their position on whether this is buildable or
not buildable. Fretham indicated he does have that letter and it has been submitted. The second item that
Staff requested be addressed was the "mesic oak foresf' designation (shown in the Hennepin County
Natural Resources Inventory for Orono) which would not be buildable. Fretham stated a tree study has
been completed and the property is endowed primarily with box elders, and few if any oaks.
Fretham stated in his view they can enhance this property in a number of ways as well as address the
neighbors' concerns.
Thiesse asked if he is aware of all the easements and can handle them.
Fretham, stated he is aware of the easements and that they are aware of the view easement which restricts
the homes to one level. Fretham indicated he is considering negotiating a payment to the Powells that
would allow them some flexibility. Fretham stated he would like to have this move along a little ftirther
before addressing that.
Fretharn noted there are some encroachments from the neighboring property that they are aware of and he
is willing to work with them as well. In addition, there are some easements that are in the wrong location
and those can be fixed. Frethani stated he is very confident in their ability to sort those out.
Lemke asked if any borings have been done.
Page 48 of 71
MIN'UTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Fretham indicated soil borings have been done and they know that nonstandard footings will have to be
done. Fretham stated in today's world with recent technology it is not nearly as complicated as it used to
be. Fretharn stated they are not planning to drive pilings and can use a more economical method, such as
helical piers or screw pilings.
Lemke asked whether fill would need to be added.
Fretham stated they will need to have some fill and that they would like to raise the grade around the
homes one to two feet, with some areas as high as three feet.
Thiesse asked if the City has any restrictions on screw pilings.
Gaffron indicated they do not and that there was a project done six to eight years ago elsewhere in Orono
where they utilized screw pilings.
Thiesse asked if an eight -foot driveway is the widest it can go.
Gaffron stated it is, given its location, and that restrictions will have to be placed on it preventing a future
owner from widening it. Gaffron noted there is no way to access the property without a driveway
encroaching into the 0-75 setback.
Thiesse asked if he has spoken with any of the neighbors about the proposal.
Fretharn indicated he did speak with two of the neighbors and one of the neighbors had a lot of concerns
since it will no longer be a vacant space to run their dog and other things they have done in the past. At
the same time, Fretham noted the property has been platted as three lots and has been taxed for a long
period of time but the neighbors are aware that things could change.
Fretharn stated as it relates to the 8 -foot driveway, they could possibly do two four -foot sections with a
two foot spacing in between to provide a wider driveway.
Page 49 of 72
MINUTES OF TBE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m. it
Gaffron stated the City has not allowed strip driveways in the past and that the entire width is counted BNA.
hardcover.
Thiesse asked if most of the trees will be gone as a result of the fill.
Fretham indicated it is likely that most of the trees will be removed but they will be planting better trees
with higher sustainability. A tree quality study has been completed and a number of the trees are storm
damaged or of poor quality. Fretham indicated they have not created a landscape plan at this point but
that they do plan on planting additional trees with some longevity.
Thiesse asked if he has any concerns about the possible mitigation.
Frediam stated they will be doing some floodplain mitigation.
Gaffron stated the 93 1.5 contour is the I 00 -year floodplain elevation.
Landgraver asked if there is a small wetland on the property.
Gaff-ron pointed out the location of the wetland on the property. Gaffron stated it would be difficult to tell
that it is a wetland if you were standing on the property.
Fretham indicated they are proposing to relocate that wetland to the point.
Thiesse asked if they will be bringing any materials into the property across the lake.
Fretharn commented that might be one way to address some of the construction traffic concerns. Fretham.
noted the property is two acres and that they can create some onsite construction traffic parking as well to
alleviate concerns with neighborhood street parking. In addition, wood chips can be put down on a
temporary basis to avoid compacting the ground.
Thiesse asked if the footprints shown in the sketch plan drawings are their best guess.
Page 50 of 72
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMUSSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m. %A
Fretham stated in his view the footprints are fairly representative of what will be constructed unless they
are required to abide with the one-story level. Fretharn stated Staff would like to see a 15 -foot setback
instead of the 10 feet that is shown, which they are open to changing. Fretham stated it was laid out the
way it is because they were cognizant of the neighbor's concerns.
Thiesse asked if there is a 15 -foot setback required.
Gaffron indicated it is 15 feet. Gaffron stated with this type of a subdivision and this kind of an odd lot
configuration, the City may need to make some specific yard designations for this site since it will not fit
into a specific code. Gaffron stated in his view 15 feet is totally reasonable for that setback from
proposed Lot 1. Gaffron stated he is not sure whether there is any possibility of moving one of the lot
lines or putting it at an angle. Gaff-ron stated this is one of those situations where there needs to be
attention to details.
Thiesse asked if the average lakeshore setback would be established at the time of subdivision approval.
Gaffron indicated it would be,
Thiesse asked if the applicant knows what stormwater management will be done.
Fretham stated he has an idea of what needs to be done.
Thiesse commented the applicant should be aware that he is surrounded by a lake that Orono takes great
steps to protect.
Gaffron stated as part of a preliminary plat application, Staff will need to know where the fire and police
chiefs stand on things, especially as it relates to emergency access and turnaround. Gaffron stated this is
an opportunity to resolve some issues but they might not be able to accomplish everything on this
property. Gaff-ron stated if improvements need to be made to the cul-de-sac, the greater question becomes
where the land for road or turnaround expansion comes from.
Thiesse asked if there is a lift station in the area.
Page 51 of 71
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, April 17,2017
6:30 o'clock p.m.
WL
Gaffron stated there is a lift station as well as a sewer line that goes along the shore. The applicant will
have the ability to utilize that existing line.
Thiesse asked if there are any definitions for single -story or whether they would be allowed 14 or 16 -foot
ceilings with a pitched roof.
Fretham stated the language (of the casement) is vague.
Lemke commented it would be nice to go above the single story to lessen the footprint.
Fretharn stated they would like to do that as well.
Lemke stated the back to back driveways seem kind of clumsy.
Fretharn stated the challenge is limiting the hardcover. Fretham. stated they have the land mass but it is
quite restrictive to run the driveway that far. Fretharn indicated they will continue to look at that.
Thiesse asked if anyone from the public would like to comment on the sketch plan.
Tera. White, 3 5 60 Ivy Place, stated their property was developed in the 1940s and that it does flood.
White stated as more fill is brought in, that raises a concern about where the runoff will go since they are
located at the bottom of the hill.
Thiesse stated her concern has been noted.
The Planning Commission took no formal action on this item.
10. #17-3932 GORDON JAMES CONSTRUCTION ON BEHALF OF YMCA OF THE
GREATER TWIN CITIES, 135 ORONTO ORCHARD ROAD, SKETCH PLAN
This item was removed from the agenda at the request of the applicant.
Page 52 of 71
Date Application Received: Y22/17
Date Application Considered as Complete: 3/22/17
60 -Day Review Period Expires: NA
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members
From: Mike Gaff-ron, Senior Planner
Date: April 17, 2017
Subject: #17-393 1, Lake West Development LLC —'3580' Ivy Place
- Sketch Plan Review
Zoning District: LR- I C, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 acre/l 00' width)
Property Area: 94,080 s.f. (2.16 acres)
Application Summary: This is a sketch plan for a proposed two -lot subdivision of a vacant
property located at the northerly end of Ivy Place on Casco Point. The property consists of 3
existing tax parcels, which the applicants propose to reconfigure to result in two residential
building lots, each exceeding the 1/2 -acre minimum lot size of the LR -IC district.
Staff Recommendation: While no formal action is required, this memo will serve as a
foundation for the Planning Commission's discussion with the applicants to bring to light
potential issues for discussion and issues to be addressed prior to submission of a formal
Preliminary Plat application.
List of Exhibits
ExhibitA.
Application
ExhibitR
Applicants' Cover Letter / Narrative
Exhibit C.
Applicants' Submitted Exhibits:
1 .
Plan Set Title Sheet
2.
Tree Inventory Survey
3.
Preliminary Site Plan & Preliminary Plat
4.
Survey Depiction — Existing Drainage & Shore Stabilization Easement
5.
Survey Depiction — Existing Driveway Easement
6.
Survey Depiction — Existing Underground Utility Easement
7.
Preliminary Utility & Grading Plan
8.
Preliminary Tree Preservation Plan
9.
Conceptual Home Oblique Elevation View
10. Conceptual Home Floor Plan
11 . Half Section Plat Map
Exhibit D.
Historical and Current Airphotos
Exhibit E.
Overview of Property History
1 .
Depiction of RLS No. 461
2.
Re -plat: Casco Point Addition
3.
Documents re: 1975 Proposed/Approved Re -plat Into 2 Lots (Never Filed)
4.
2016 MnDNR Communications
Exhibit F.
Other Easements
council
Exhibit D
17-3931
April 17, 2017
Page 2 of 7
Background
The property under review is a group of three vacant tax parcels totaling just over 2 acres, located
on a peninsula at the northerly terminus of Ivy Place. The property is zoned LR- I C One Family
Lakeshore Residential, requiring a minimum lot size of 0 - 5 dry buildable acres and 100' lot width.
The property is guided in the Orono Community Management Plan (C.MP) for Low -Medium
Density Residential Use (2-3 units per acre). The property has remained vacant since it was created
by filling of lakeshore wetlands in the late 1950s - early1960s. The property is encumbered by a
number of easements and does not abut a dedicated public roadway except via easements across
the adjoining property at 3560 Ivy Place.
The applicants have obtained permission from the property owner (Lupient family) to make this
application.
Property History
The property was originally platted as Tracts W and X of Registered Land Survey No. 461 in 195 5.
Exhibit EA depicts the property as a thin peninsula with a later penciled notation "filled land".
The progression of airphotos (Exhibit D) suggests that filling of the wetland was begun in the late
1950s and completed by 1967. We believe that the spoils from dredging out the lagoon were placed
on the property to fill it.
In 1971 the property was re -platted as Lots 1-2-3 of Casco Point Addition (Exhibit E.2). The
property remained vacant.
In 1975 an application to replat the property to convert the three lots into just two lots was reviewed
by the Planning Commission and City Council — see Exhibits E.3. Despite opposition from the
neighborhood and allegations that the filling was done illegally, the re -plat was approved with the
understanding that the approval should not be construed as building permit approval. The re -plat
into two lots was never filed, and the property today remains as three separate vacant tax parcels.
Orono's 1975 Wetlands Inventory and Classification maps identified the entire property as
wetland, although by that time the wetlands had been filled and the property existed much as it
does today, but less vegetated.
When discussions began within the past year regarding plans to build on the site, staff contacted
the MnDNR (see Exhibits EA) which resulted in a response that they had insufficient information
in their records to pursue any enforcement action regarding the past filling. Also in 2016 the
current applicants had a wetland delineation done on the site and it was determined that other than
the typical shoreline wetlands, there is only one wetland on the property, a very small and relatively
inconsequential low spot within the northerly portion of the site.
Existing Easements and Encroachments
There are a number of existing easements on and adjacent to the property as well as potential
encroachments that need to be resolved:
Utility Easement, Document Nos. 855727 and 862192 (Exhibit C-6). This is the sanitary sewer
easement granted to the City when the sewer lines serving this area were installed in 1966. The
easement as described apparently does not match the actual location of the sewer lines. Applicants
indicate these easements will be vacated and new ones over the actual pipe location will be granted
staff agrees with this proposal.
17-3931
Apdl 17,2017
Page 3 of 7
Drainage and Shore Stabilization Easement, Document No.T5010662 (Exhibit C-4). This is an
easement granted to the City in 2012 to allow the restoration of shoreline over the existing sewer
lines where the shore had eroded over time. This easement will remain in place.
Private Drivp- 3
.!�Lay Easement Document No. 1023 8 91 (Exhibit C-5). This easement was created
in 1972 as part of the platting of the three lots to provide access to all three. The easement includes
a private cul-de-sac. The easement will be vacated.
PpMetual Roqdway Easement (over 3560 Ivy Place), Document No. 922012 (Exhibit F-1). This
is an easement granted in 1968 over the adjacent lot owned by the White's at 3560 Ivy Place. This
easement presumably remains in place.
Utilfty Easement (over 3560 Ivy Place), Document No. 855726 (Exhibit C.6). This is a perpetual
underground utility easement granted to the City over 3560 Ivy Place in August 1966. Unknown
at this time whether this easement remains in effect given the easement granted in 862191 (below).
Utili1y Easement (over 3560 IM Place), Document No. 862191. This is a perpetual underground
utility easement granted to the City in October 1966, believed to be a replacement or correction of
the easement granted in August 1966.
View Easement, Document No. 1160211. In addition to the defined easements within or adjacent
to the property, there is a view easement of record in favor of the Powell property at 2916 Casco
Point Road, which limits the number, location and height of the homes allowed within Lots 1-2-3
(no more than two homes total; no home may extend northwest of a line 25' NW of the line
between Lots 2 & 3; dwelling closest to the NW end of the three lots cannot be more than one
story in height).
Possible Sewer Connection Encroachment. Staff has been advised that the existing sewer
connection for the residence at 3560 Ivy Place crosses the applicants' property. This needs to be
confirmed and if it exists, the encroachment should be eliminated (relocate sewer connection) or
applicants must grant an easement for the encroachment.
Deck and Dfiyeway Encroachments. The survey work provided indicates that a sliver of the deck
for the house at 3560 Ivy Place may encroach into the applicants' property. Possible remedies
include a lot line rearrangement or possibly an easement. Also, a portion of the driveway serving
3560 Ivy encroaches into the applicants' property. Possible remedies include lot line
rearrangement, easement, or removal of encroachment. Applicants' proposed driveway parallels
this encroachment.
Sketch Plan Review
General Site Characteristics
The property is a peninsula created by filling of wetland adjacent to the shore of Carman Bay more
than 50 years ago. The property is wooded with mostly poor -quality volunteer trees that have
grown up over the past 30-50 years. A line of huge cottonwoods once stood along the Carman Bay
shoreline but in the 1980s -90s these were girdled by beavers and eventually became hazardous
and had to be removed.
The land is relatively flat, just a few feet above lake level, and portions of it are below the 931.5'
floodplain elevation. in areas where filling of flood plain is required in order to build homes,
mitigation measures would be necessary.
17-3931
Apdl 17, 2017
Page 4 af 7
A very small wetland was delineated within existing Lot 3. If it is determined that filling of this
wetland is required, mitigation may or may not be necessary dependent on whether it meet
deminimis criteria.
The applicants are well aware that the land is a filled wetland, and likely will require extraordinary
measures such as pilings in order to support homes.
Conformity witk tke Orono 2030 Community Manarement Plan
The proposed re -platting to create two residential lots from three existing tax parcels conforms to
the CMP guiding of the property for Low -Medium Density Residential Use.
Conformity with Zoninje District Lot Requirements
The property is zoned LR -IC, Lakeshore Residential District, which allows for single family
residential uses with a minimum lot size of 0.5 dry buildable acres and 100' width as measured at
the shoreline and at the 75' setback line.
Lot Area and Width. Each of the two lots exceeds the minimum acreage requirements. Lot I is
approximately 0.6 acre in area. Lot 2, being platted as a back lot given the unusual property shape
and access limitations, more than meets the 150% lot area requirement at approximately 1.4 acres.
Each lot exceeds the 100' width requirement.
Front/Back Lot Configpratio . The front/back lot configuration was recommended by staff as the
most conforming method of converting these three lots into two. Zoning Code Section 78-1369
states that "each lot shall face on a public street or appropriate private easement". The existing
driveway easement with cul-de-sac becomes a limiting factor for development of the site, cannot
be counted towards lot area, and its location conflicts with other easements. In order to convert the
3 lots into two lots, a new, relocated access corridor to get past proposed Lot I is necessary,
suggesting the need for a subdivision process that creates a 'front lot'; a 'back lot'; and an access
outlot (typically 30 feet in width per City code).
Setbacks. The Zoning Code back lot standards have a significant impact on potential locations of
a home on the back lot. By definition the line between proposed Lots I and 2 becomes the front
lot line, requiring a 45' setback (instead of 30') when the back lot "150% of standard setbacks"
rule is applied. The proposed house location on proposed Lot 2 is shown at a 10' setback. It could
be argued that the orientation of the homes on Lots land 2 will be such that the 'front' yard will
be either the easterly or westerly lake yard, and the line between the two lots will function as a
side lot line. This would only require a 15' side setback for Lot 2. Under this scenario, staff would
be comfortable with recommending the redefining of lot lines and yard designations, but not for
granting of a variance to allow a side setback of 10' instead of 15' for Lot 2. Note that proposed
Outlot A, the 30' wide driveway corridor, extends approximately 15 feet into Lot 2. This could
also be used as ajustification for the redesignation of yards.
Both lots show a conceptual house footprint encompassing a substantial portion of the area outside
the 0-75' zone, especially obvious on Lot 2. Both lots would still be required to adhere to the 75'
lakeshore setback and 25% hardcover limit, as well as the 20% structural coverage limit.
View Easement Building Limitations. Although not City -enforceable restrictions, the view
easement limiting the height and location of home development on the site has an impact on how
the lot is used. Applicants have indicated they hope to come to an agreement with the holder of
the easement in order to allow the proposed house on lot 2 to have a second story and avoid the
sprawling footprint currently depicted.
17-3931
Apdl 17, 2017
Page 5 of 7
Average Setback. Because this is a peninsula, and with both lots having shoreline on two sides,
the average lakeshore setback should be addressed as part of the replatting process. It would
appear that the location of the adjacent home at 3560 Ivy should be the defining property for
establishing average lakcshore setback. Because the survey indicates that 3560 Ivy does not abut
the lake on the lagoon side, its Carman Bay setback of approximately 40' would be considered as
defining the average setback line. Since any new homes on Lots I and 2 must be at least 75' from
the shore, staff would suggest that 75 feet become the required average setback regardless of which
of Lots 1 or 2 is built on first.
Relationship to Surroundine Develoi9ment
The neighborhoods surrounding the proposed development are all single-family residential in
nature, with lot sizes ranging from as small as 1/4acre to more than an acre. Other than the unique
orientation of the property, it is anticipated that the proposed homes would be consistent with other
lakeshore residential development on Casco Point.
Site
At this sketch plan stage only preliminary grading plans have been submitted. It is likely that
regrading of substantial portions of the site will be proposed, to account for home and driveway
construction, floodplain mitigation and yard establishment. The need for grading within the 0-75'
protected zone should be carefully reviewed at the time a preliminary plat application is proposed.
RoadlDriveway Layout and Standards
The proposed driveway extends from the end of traveled Ivy Place through the road easement
across 3560 Ivy, and is proposed to be constructed as an 8' wide paved driveway within Outlot A.
Outlot A is depicted as a 30' corridor skirting the edge of the shore stabilization easement. The
actual driving surface is proposed to be mostly 30' from the shore, while portions will be within
12-25' from the shoreline. Maximum driveway width allowed within 75 feet of the lake is 8 feet
per Zoning Code Section 78-1262(a). The driveway will require a hardcover variance. While 8
feet is minimal for a driveway serving two residences, that is the maximum width allowed by code
within 75 feet of the lake. With the driveway so close to the lake, it would be appropriate that
stormwater management facilities be established to mitigate impacts of runoff from the driveway.
Ivy Place ends in a mere widening of the road at the edge of the lagoon. It is not a functional cul-
de-sac by any means, making maintenance of City sewer facilities as well as the road itself less
than optimal. The addition of two more large homes and construction traffic to this mix has the
potential to be a nightmare for the neighborhood, in the opinion of staff.
Road ItWrovements andlor Easements Needed
While establishment of a cul-de-sac or more functional turnaround at the end of Ivy Place would
be desirable, there is not sufficient room to accomplish that within existing right-of-way.
Acquisition of additional right-of-way from the applicants' property would seem to be of marginal
value given the configuration of the property and the close proximity of the lakeshore. Whether
the addition of two new homes at the end of this street will cause future maintenance, service
vehicle or emergency services issues is a point for discussion, to be addressed by the pertinent
service providers (Public Works, Police, Fire).
17-3931
ApdI 17, 2017
Page 6 aF 7
Parks, Traits, Sidewalks & Park Dedication
No new parks or trails are planned for in the area of this property. Assuming the City Council
finds no need for a public park at this site, payment of the standard Park Dedication fee of $5,550
per each new building lot would be due at final plat approval, assuming that records will indicate
that no park fees were paid in the past (research required).
Storm wa ter a n d Drain aye Impro vem en ts & Fees
Given the proximity of the proposed building sites to the lake, the preliminary plat application
should propose stormwater management systems and/or practices to manage runoff quality.
Stormwater management will be subject to City and MCWD review and approval.
The property will be subject to the Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fee (SW&DT Fee) on a per -
lot basis at the rate of $3,025 per lot for this half -acre zoning district ($6,050 total) per the 2017
Fee Schedule.
Utility LocationslAvailabilitplAssessmentsIConnection Fees
The property is served by municipal water and sewer. Based on a review of the assessment history
for this property, it was Uly assessed for municipal sewer in 1965 and no sewer connection charge
would be due save for the Metropolitan Council SAC charge which is currently $2,485 per
dwelling unit. City water was installed in 1970 and the property was assessed for one unit; if more
thari one home is built, a water connection charge of $4,240 for the second unit would be due at
the time a building permit is issued.
Wetlands on Site andlor Impacted
The property contains a 168 s.f. (i.e. approximately 10'xl7') wetland within existing Lot 3, in
addition to linear wetlands along the shoreline. It is unclear from the survey work provided
whether the proposed driveway extension from Ivy Place will require filling of a portion of the
shoreline wetlands. This will have to be confirmed and addressed as part of a wetland mitigation
plan, subject to city and MCWD approvals. Under current code, no hardcover is allowed within
35' of a wetland, so a wetland setback variance for the driveway is likely to be required.
Tree Inwacts
Much of the property is covered by scrub trees, with most of that growth occurring in the past 50
years. A tree survey has been completed (Exhibit C.2). Applicants plan to have an arborist review
the site and establish a plan for removal of diseased or inappropriate trees and replacement with
higher quality trees. As noted above with regards to site grading associated with construction on
the property, a careful review of the impacts within the 0-75'zone will be required. Staff would
anticipate that if the proposed site layout goes forward, a significant portion of the 0-75' zone will
be disturbed prior to restoration.
Conservation Desien
The developer is advised that this subdivision will be subject to the City's Conservation Design
Ordinance. The preliminary plat application should include a complete conservation design
analysis of the entire site for review.
ArchaeokgLcal Site Proximity
Staff is unaware of any archaeological sites within the property; the applicant should contact the
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to confirm.
17-3931
April 17, 2017
Page 7 of 7
Summary of Issues for Consideration
Staff suggests that the primary focus for consideration and discussion by the Planning Commission
should include the following topics:
I Applicants should be asked to address how they plan to resolve the noted easement and/or
encroachments issues including the Powell View Easement; the potential sewer connection
encroachment from 3560 Ivy; and the deck and driveway encroachments from 3560 Ivy.
Is there a potential for a lot line adjustment between 3560 and applicants' property?
2. Does Planning Commission have any concerns regarding mitigation of the impacts to
floodplain, wetlands and trees that are likely with this proposed development? Site re-
grading over much of the property is anticipated with the proposed plan.
3. Access to the property for development/home construction is likely to be very difficult and
will likely require heavy vehicles needing to access the property on a verynarrow road and
minimal accessibility without impacting the immediate neighbor. Contractor parking is
likely to be difficult. The impacts to the neighborhood during the construction process,
and especially to the adjoining residence, will likely be extreme. Applicant should be asked
to address how these issues and impacts will be mitigated. Is there the ability access the
site via barge for certain aspects of the construction process?
4. Does Planning Commission have any concerns regarding the lot layouts and front -lot,
back -lot configuration? The proposed house location on Lot 2 will require re -designation
of yards in order to have a lesser southerly setback than 45'. As shown the setback from
that south line is 10' and staff would suggest that 15' (15 0% of 10' side yard standard) be
required.
5. Does Planning Commission agree that the average lakeshore setback can be established at
75' from the lake for both lots I and 2 as part of the replatting approval?
6. Applicants should address possible stormwater management practices and facilities to be
employed both during construction and on a permanent basis.
7. As part of the preliminary plat review process, comments will be requested from the Public
Works, Police and Fire departments as to the impacts of development of this property over
the short term and long term.
8. Planning Commission should bring up any additional issues of concern regarding
development of this property.
Sketch Plan Review Parameters
The goal of this review is to provide the developer with an overview of the pertinent City
ordinances and how they affect the proposal, and to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the
plan. The above Summary reveals a number of issues with the proposed plat and should provide
direction to the applicants regarding the proposal. Planning Commission should review each topic
and identify any issues to which the developer should pay special attention.
As a sketch plan review, any comments or suggestions to the applicants are non-binding but will
be extremely helpf1al as the applicants move forward. It is staff s intent to also bring this to the
City Council as a sketch plan. Note that staff has received a number of inquiries from neighbors,
and is aware that the adjacent property owners at 3560 Ivy Place, the White's, have great concerns
about how this development will impact them.
ESlIH40
PROPERTY1
Site Address:
City of Orono
Subdivision Application
Sbeet Address.,
2750 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356
Main: 952-249-46()0
%x 952-249-461 e
Malling Address,
P.O. Box 66
TION:
Application #
17 -
Date Received:
Staff
Application Fee:
Escrow:
Notes:
'I ,
Property Identification Number (PIN):&[723:�26601' 'zoll 7,23740coz
I ,
PC Exhibit A
Date Property Acquired (month/year): Af;� 13 Abstract lb-l'orrens (Please check one)
Present use of property: 13 Residential; number of Units
Sttther (specify)_&ffilf -
Zoning District. 4_F– le_�
APPLICANT INFORMATION:
Applicant: -Aa kp a)
Phone (Primary):
Mailing Address:
Email:
Ercheck here if Applicant address should be used for billing
PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: [3 check here if Property Owner is same as applicant
Name: 13 heck here if Property Owner address should be used for billing
I L up te 114—
Phone(Primary): 9 -
Mailing Address: So Wojq��f�rgp N�_' — Cit ZIP:
Email: 11A,AA
EXISTING LAND USE:
Number of Tax Parcels: W�'ee�
Development Size: 1,15 Acres D ry La n d 0 N.5,c a+6cm epp-kV r-)
/103 Acres Wet Land .1465,&Y5 -f below
PROPOSED LAND USE: Acres TOTAL, all Parcels
CI Division for Tax Purposes
[Wubdivision for New Building Sites
Number of Building Sites: Existing Units:
New Units:
Total Units:
Proposed Gross Density ;Z _ Units per Zf 4 acres
Minimum Lot Size: 22.57b Square feet dry b�ildable land
Proposed Use (cheek)M"ResidentiaT '
11 Other (specify)
RECEIVED
MAR 22. 201i
Subdiviabn Applicaffon —January -2"bl page 5 # 3931 CITY OF ORONO
ANDJOR PROPERTY
• Agree to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department
• Agree to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses Incurred in
review of this application, and
• Certify that the information supplied Is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant and owner recognize
that they are solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has
no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend t . he request for denial of the request regardless of its
potential merit.
• The Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this appl[caflon and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property
by City Staff, consultants, agents, Commission and Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this
request.
• Applicant and/or Owner acknowledge they must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission
and Council. If an applicant and/or owner is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an
authorized representative attend in place of the applicanVowner and advise the City Planner assigned to your project.
• Information will be distributed via emall.
Applicant Signature:
Applicant Signature:
Property Owner Signature:
Property Owner Signature -
Subdivision APPfication — January. -2 -01i -
Page 6
Date:
Date:
Date:
Date:
# 3-931
RECEIVED
i7mm
CITY OF 0 f�,, �—� �-
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROFERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LOT; Lots 1, Land 3, -hock -t Casco Point Addition
PARCEL ID:201172�3420001,2011723420(,02,2011 2.1420003
STREET ADDRESS. 3580, Ivy Place, Orono MN 55391
PROPERTY OWNER:
The undersigned ri-gistered property owner of the above noted property do hereby authorize
Curt Fratham of fake West DevelRoment, LLC
to act on my behalf and take all actions ri-�ires,;sry lar ft- submission, processing, -suance and
acceptance of this application, permit or certification and any or all standardane. Special
conditions attached. They sh ill he the principle wntact in the processing of this application.
Smerely,
Rick Lupient
20 Second Street NE #2801
WrineapnIls, MN 55413
RECEIVED
MAR 2,2 20V
# 3931 rJTY OF ORONO
LAKE WEST
OEVELOPMENT, LLC
Class 11 Subdivision Application — Sketch Plan Narrative
Lots 1, 2 and 3 Block 1, Casco Point Addition
PID:2011723420001,2011723420002,2011723420003
March 22, 2017
Overview
Lake West Development, LLC is seeking approval of a Class 11 Subdivision in order to
consolidate three vacant lots of record located at approximately '3580' Ivy Place, Orono
(addresses unassigned) into two lots for the purpose of constructing two new single-
family homes.
The property is situated on a peninsula in Carman Bay and enjoys magnificent lake
views on all sides. Jim Lupient purchased the property years ago with the intent of
building three homes - for himself and for family members. Sadly, his intention was
never realized. After a number of years and much deliberation, Mr. Lupient's family
decided to sell the property.
PC Exhibit B
Languishing for years without being tended, the property has become less beautiful than
it could be. Most of the trees are low -quality box elders and many have become
damaged by storms and the work of beavers. The property is also encumbered with a
variety of easements for access, utilities, and shore stabilization purposes.
We are pleased to have the opportunity to pick up Mr. Lupient's vision and design a
variation of it that we can bring into reality today. Our plans call for two appropriate -sized
homes ' instead of three, and significant re -landscaping of the property, replacing
undesirable and unhealthy trees with high-quality plantings that will provide long-term
benefits. Our plans also involve cleaning up and reconfiguring areas of overlap among
the various easements.
We are looking forward to this opportunity to realize the vision for this unique property
and appreciate the City of Orono's help in completing and submitting this Application.
Curt Fretham
CEO, Lake West Development, LLC
Office: 952-653-134
RECEIVED
Lake West Development 114525 Highway 7 Suite 265, Minnetonka, MN 55345 1 Phone 952-930-30RAR 2 2 Z017
# 3931 CITY OF ORONO
Class 11 Subdivision — Sketch Plan Application
A. Contact Information
Owner of Record Rick Luplent (Barbara Lupient Et Al Trustees)
20 Second Street NE
Minneapolis, MN 55413
Phone: 612-790-1800
Applicant Curt Fretham, CEO
Lake West Development LLC,
14525 Highway 7, Suite 265 Minnetonka, MN 55345,
Phone 952-930-3000
B. Site Data
Address '3580' Ivy Place and unassigned addresses
Orono, MN 55391
Zoning
LRAC One Family Lakeshore Residential
Parcel Size
2.16 acres
94,080 sq. ft.
Lot 1 = 35,071 sq. ft.
Lot 2 = 30,579 sq. ft.
Lot 3 = 33,122 sq. ft.
PID
2011723420001,2011723420002,2011723420003
Description
Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, Casco Point Addition
C. Land Characteristics
The property is located on a peninsula on Carman Bay surrounded by lakeshore on three
sides, platted as three lots. The property was formerly wetland and lakebed but was filled
sometime during the late 1950's - early 60's. The proposed grades in the area of the proposed
home sites are at or above the 100 -yr flood elevation of Lake Minnetonka (931.5) The
proposed homes will have a low floor elevation of 933.5 per requirements of the City and the
Watershed. Any floodplain filling will be mitigated on site at a 1.1 ratio as required by the City
and the Watershed.
The parcel also contains an incidental wetland (-168 sf) near the center of the northernmost
lot. Potential filling of this wetland will be mitigated on site per City and Watershed
requirements. A final delineation and determination of the existing wetland will be completed
once weather permits.
Currently the property is improved with sewer and water but remains undeveloped. It is
moderately covered with low quality trees (boxelder and elm), many of which are storm and
beaver damaged. Tree preservation will be determined based on the results of a Tree Health
Analysis by a Certified ISA Arborist.
# 3931
RECEIVED
MAR 22
CUP— Page 2 of 3
CITY OF oRoNo
Class 11 Subdivision — Sketch Plan Application
D. Description of the Project
Our intent is to consolidate the three lots into two lots and build two homes that fully take
advantage of the lakeshore on all sides Although beautiful, the surrounding lakeshore creates
a practical difficulty for development in that it requires a 75' setback on all sides.
We propose to move the property line between Lots 1 and 2 five feet to the west. Lot 3 will be
vacated and combined with Lot 2. The resulting Lot I will be 28,875 square feet; Lot 2 will be
59,715 square feet.
The existing driveway easement will be vacated and a new, smaller outlot (Outiot A) with
driveway easement will be created to serve both lots. The new outlot will have less crossover
with other easements. A shared 8 ft. wide driveway situated at the northernmost edge of the
outlot will provide access to both properties from Ivy Place. We are seeking a hardcover
variance for the driveway within 75 ft. of the lake. This is the only option to access the lots.
The underground utility easement will also be vacated and a new one created that Covers the
pipe it was actually intended to cover.
The drainage and shoreline stabilization easement will remain as is.
E. Tree Preservation
Currently the property is moderately covered with low quality trees (boxelder and elm), many
of which are storm and beaver damaged. Our initial plan shows preserving 55% of the existing
trees but we anticipate removing more than shown on the plan.
Because of observable damage to many of the trees, we have ordered a Tree Health Analysis
by a Certified ISA Arborist to be conducted on the property. The final tree preservation and
landscaping plan will be determined based on the results of the analysis. It is our intention to
remove all damaged and unhealthy trees and replace them with plantings of high-quality trees
and shrubs appropriate to the soils on the site. Our goal for the landscape is to create a
sustainable ecosystem that provides habitat and food for birds and provides long-term
enjoyment for the residents and neighbors.
F. Home Design
In the early 1970s the peninsula was nearly devoid of trees. During this time a resident to the
southwest of the point placed a deed restriction on the property constraining any future
structures to one story in order to preserve the view of the bay beyond the peninsula- Even
though the current tree cover obscures the view today, this deed restriction is still in effect.
For this reason the proposed home design for the lots have an expansive footprint The design
is meant to harmonize with the natural topography of the land and provide timeless beauty for
residents and neighbors. (See Concept Sketch)
?017
Z
J
I'VY PLACE
ORONO, MINNESOTA
ISSUED FOR: SKETCH PLAN SUBMITTAL
t*
SITE LOCATION MAP 4(�k
SITE LOCATION
DEVELOPER / PROPERTY OWNER:
MASTER LEGEND:
PC Exhibit C
LJL JuWtle
RECEIVEL
LAKE WEST DEVELOPMENT. LLC
EX PCONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL
MAR 4 -2 2017
11450 HIGHWAY 7, SLATE 285
LAKE WE MT
ui
0
m
Ln
L0
z
PROPOSED 1ANNHOLESTORM
MINNETONKA, MN 553,15
EXISTING SPOT GRADE ELEVATION
15
PROPOSED
G52453,1359
CL
�.V CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVAL
w
CATCH BANN OR CATCH BASIN MANHOLE STORM
04
PROPOSED OATS VALVE
SPOT ORME I—' EVAnON (MfrrER*IOW LINE
L
Lei
UNLESS OTHERWiSE NOTED)
c%j
LO
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
ENGINEER / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:
T
CIVIL SITE GROUP
SSLOO G
SPOT GRADEELEVAnON TOP OF CIJRS�GUTTERTOP)
PROPOSED MANHOLE SAN!TARY
4031 W 3STHI STREET
891.00 TC
SPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF WALL
PROPOSEDSIGN
SUITE 200
ST LOUIS PARK ' MN 55416
M.00 BS/TS
SPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF WALL
PRGPOSEDLIG�Fr
612-515-ODSO
DRAINAGEARROW
>—
PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER
—00�
PROPOSED STORM SEWER
SURVEYOR:
EMERGENCY OVERFLOW
EOF--1135.52
PROPOSED WATER MAIN
REHDER AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
3440 FEDERAL DRIVE. SUITE 110
....................
SILT FENCE IBIOROLL - GRADING LIMIT
EXEnNGSANITARYSIEWER
EAGAN. MN 55122
ILET PROTECTION
EXISTING STORM SEWER
6511-452-51151
a..m
EYIST�NG WATER MAN
STABILVED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
EXIST NG GAS MAIN
EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC
SOIL BORING LOCATION
EXISTING UNDERGROUND rABLE
CURB AND GUrrER. (T.0 = TIP OUT)
EXISTING MANHOLE
" EXISTING STOPBOX EXISnNG LIGHT
EXISTING CATCH BASIN
I—I EXISTINGGATIEVALVL EXISTING GAS METER
EXISTING FrYDRANT
M EXISTING ELECTPJC BOX EXISTING QAS VALVE
I "T—
SITEN
L2.1
C2.2
kN - DRNG & SHORE �
AN - ROADWAY EASE
kN - UNDGRND JTIL F
& GRADING PLAN
DEVELOPMENT. LLE
PC Exhibit C
LJL JuWtle
RECEIVEL
It c, u lw
.31 W. $7. U,TEm
ST. �15 PARK. MN HMIS
M.ft
MAR 4 -2 2017
CrrY OF ORONO
LAKE WE MT
kN - DRNG & SHORE �
AN - ROADWAY EASE
kN - UNDGRND JTIL F
& GRADING PLAN
DEVELOPMENT. LLE
I HERERY cERTIFY THAT fFna PLAN
SftcmcAnoN,oRREpo ma
PREPARED ErY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY
LICENSED PROFEs IONAL ENCINEER
SIC
UNDER THE LAWS OFTHE STATE OF
D*TL0_3=7 U�E 44203
ISSU&SUBMITTAL SUMMARY
REVISION SUMMARY
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
VVVVVV GOPHERSTATEONECALLORG
(800) 252-1165 TOLL FREE
(651) 4544002 LOCAL
!I -
PROUMT NO.: 17M
TITLE SHEET
co.0
z
N
Z
ui
0
m
Ln
L0
z
Lu
r2L z
0 z
j 2
15
LL, '6
CL
LLF
CL
w
> ;9
Lu
a
uj
LU
Lei
c%j
LO
T
I HERERY cERTIFY THAT fFna PLAN
SftcmcAnoN,oRREpo ma
PREPARED ErY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY
LICENSED PROFEs IONAL ENCINEER
SIC
UNDER THE LAWS OFTHE STATE OF
D*TL0_3=7 U�E 44203
ISSU&SUBMITTAL SUMMARY
REVISION SUMMARY
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
VVVVVV GOPHERSTATEONECALLORG
(800) 252-1165 TOLL FREE
(651) 4544002 LOCAL
!I -
PROUMT NO.: 17M
TITLE SHEET
co.0
dd
44 %a A -1
0
ls�zs,'
a.
!bw
F
1 x
11tot .at" torner of Usk
'85, TA�S SUBDIVISkLAN VH
OP SWIM MRK LOTS
tHS. TAII-OlUS SU ]ON ..... ..
or �raraoi PAPjl
Tree Inventory Survey for. -
E WEST DEVELOPMENT
LEGEND
" Im Kanument Found
—s -Sanitary 9�r
—w- watermi.
vil 6- Hydmnt
w - Gate Valve
940 Manhole
CO. Cloanoult
I.. Invert Elevation
PP -O, P~ Palo
17-7-10progrete surface
= Biturallinon St`rfrw�q
9M Boulder Wall
—G—Burled qw
N
i
.31) w 510
il
Scvle in Feet
# 3931
7-9 1
REVISION SUMMARY
OATE 0103MI-71014
SITE SURVEY
Coal
C.2�
RECEIVED
MAR 2 2 2017
CITY OF ORONO
NOTES:
Bearings ah -n am based an the Hwnepin County Coordinate System,
Contact Gopher Stabs 3 for utility locations before any construmon shall begin.
Phone 651-454-GOD2.
�Amas� Total 94,00* Square feet 12.16* ar�res).
Lot 1 33,170* "'1" :re feet 10 7 A :cre)
Lot 2 29,960* s4" re fed (0:6:. m).
Lot 3 30,950.* square feet JO,71:k rg;,a),
PROPEW DES1l
Lots 1, 2 and 3, Blo& 1. Casto PaInt Addition,
Ow sil
:w
r a-lara,
Jac:
r 8 -Ah,
d2
r if..U.
6' fikoadda,
ar a -.kw
NJ
fir so~
I I'M' 7
al al-wa,
Ir Saaafar
W4
C 6-0.
too
elar M -N,,
Ir Banaw
ma
r ffaaaar
to"
$4`4
Lr a .. V.,
form
9- Boavar
S.Ma,
957
ra-0,
10,
21-�
a -w-
988
2-re-wa,
1;
1.1/1",
a' Sanonfar
M
r Elm
;a.
Or
as,.we,
970
ar/ara-.W�
f0t4
B, 2 -
III,
Cr S.."L,
'7f
Ir Baaa.,Id�
I=
ar Ektootta,
Jr Bl
'72
7' llaoande�
0
Iola
r
7" 0'aam,
973
&-1w
1 17
d'
'74
Iola
'r
1'
7- a..kw
1019
jr
'r Bwd.
s7b
d' Eim
low
7' G. -Ida,
9 ' Bbhda,
975
fir 9.0d,,
'a2l
r 9.
W Hoa�r
977
-
a.
'022
7" B.Wdar
aotana,
279
jazi
or ll�
8-qd.
Aw
1024
7' R -all
21" B -.Nr
lei
2r soorfaw
IS, S.W.
AB2
a- ft.Ad,,,
I=
w- rf-w�
I. e 6.wda,
aw
7" ff..hf�
IG2
02
B,
Ty, B..U.
984
6' ft -war
1027
;�;
r So-ina,
am
aaaNkw
102:
3-r 0 -Ada,
le" ada.
am
r ff..dd.
raja
Ill Boofidor
I T Sarntida,
987
6�� B..M'
fair
B�dar
poaniaa,
wa
?'IC 5-Wor
1032
fir 0.
sonwala,
go
9, Ba;na,
1(133
9* an,
00
19 aow'Aar
704
:r' oraaki.,
oil
For u...kw
irtm
aanllalr
Bwd.
902
A" B..hi&
too
IT
6.06.
03
76" atannot,
;1,
e ton
Ir ff-wda,
04
71 fio-fda,
tom
Ifir at�
M
I V 0-1d.,
toy
al
Ir
906
to' B -kw
1040
7' B -Id.
IS' ao�nldl
997
r a..*,
ID41
r a.
14, 9_11d,
M
el I or ol
D.*dar
Saaaftlar,
PH
Sr &..a*,
71 WPM
:Go,
ar aama,'
Ix Ek"
If.
.1
7, istanaw.
%a
B-Idt,
a.
w 9.~
7 'Bl
7- B-Idar
;w?
Do
Ir �
;&"
047
a 'B-�
9" aaanta:w
1004
arlar A-ka,
7 hereby cartify that this survey "a prepared by me Or under my chreel and that
I am a duly Licemed Land Surwyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
Gated this Ist day Of L)-.bw, 2015
REHDER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Gary C. Huber, LAnd surveyor
M[nm-t- Ucame No. Z2036
Rehder and Associates, Inc.
CIVIL ENC414CERS AND LAND SURVEYORS
34,40 Fatfaal OrM - Suite I IQ - Eagan, mimanota, - Phone (gai) 4U-5051
.108., 164-2950,070
DELINEATED WETLAND %
DELINEATED WETLAND
N,
% %
0. 19
�P9
PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE
kA %
0
%
%
PROPOSED DRIVEWAY. TYP.
%
%
'7
N,
/ rl
P HOME. SEE
MrF.;7ECTURAL
<
9 WIDE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY
A
-13
C-1
SITE AREA CALCULATIONS
--
SITE LAYOUT NOTES: C-.3
-v` "'d
��JL luoll[(!
EXISTING
I. CONTRACTOR 8HALLVENIFY LOCATIONS AND LAYOUT OF ALL SITE ELEIwENTS PRIOR TO
43 re 00 u p
BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION. INCLUDING BUT NOT UIMITED TO, LOCATIONS OF DUSTING
M W,35THST.SUITEM
AND PROPOSED PROPERTY LINES, EASEMENTS. SETBACKS, UTILITIES, BUILONM AND
ST. LOUI: PARK MN W416
PAVEMENM CONTRACTOR 15 FIESPONSIBLE FOR FINAL LOCA71ONS OFALL ELEMENTS
Ctd bOr�w—
FOR THE SITE ANY REVISIONS REQUIRED AFTER COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION,
mat P."k pa ll�
DUE 70 LGOATIONAL ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE CDRRECTED AT NO ADDMONAL COST M
76&213-3W 9SZ25011003
ONNEFIL ADJUSTMENTS TO THE LAYOUT SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE
HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE PLAN
ENC4NEERLMDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF MATERIAL& STAKE
EXISTINGCONDITION
LAVCUT FOR APPROVAL
DID%
2. THE CONTRACTOR SFIALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITrS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION
ltL4SI SP
INCLUDING A RIGHT-OWAY AND STREET OPENING PERMIT.
LAKE WMST
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY RECOMMENDATIONS NOTED N THE BED TECHNICAL
11.5%
REPORT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF SITE IMIRROVEMENT MATERIALS,
DEVELOPMENT. LLC
4, CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY COORDINATES AND LOCATION DIMENS)CVB OF THE
BUILDING AND STAKE FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE OWNERS REPRESBCAIM
od i
PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF FOOTING MATERUld 9,
& LOCATIONS OF STRUCTURES, ROADWAY PAVEMENTS. CURBS AND GUTTERS, SOLLARDS,
AND WALKS ARE APPRC)DMATE AND SHALL BE STAKED IN THE FIELD, PRIOR TO
aATLB3r0JI7 jcBNsENq 44293
INSTALLATION, FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL ElY THE ENGINEERRMDSCAPE ARCHITECT.
6, CURB DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO FACE OF CURB. SUIUDNG ONENSIONS ARE -0 FACE
OF CONCRETE FOUNDATION. LOCATION OF BUILDING IS TO BUILDING FOUNDATION AND
SHALL BE AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.
7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMITSHOP DRAWINGS OR SAMPLES AS SPECIFIED FOR
REVIFWANDAPPRDVAL BYTHE ENGINEERA.ANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR To
FABRICATION FORALL PREFABRICATED SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS SUCH ASL BUT
NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING, FURNISHINGS, PAVEMENTS, WALLS, RAILINGS.
Be4CHES. F�AGPOLES, LANDIIJG PADS FOR CURB RAMPS, AND LIGHT AND POLES, THE
OWNER RESERVES THE RIIGHT TO REJECT INSTALLED MATERMS NOT PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED.
PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS SHALL BE CONMUCTED WITH TRUNCAtW DOME LANDING
ARM IN ACCORDANCE WITH A DA REQUIREMENT34SEE DETAIL,
9. CROSSWALK SMPiNG SHALL SE 24'WIDE WHITE PAINTED LINE SPACED 4Ir ON CENTER
PERPENDICULAR TO THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC WIDTH OF CROSSWALK SHALL BE 9 WIDE.
ALL OTHER PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE WHrrE IN COLOR UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
OR REQUIRED BY ADA OR LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES.
M CURB AND GUTTER TYPE SHALL BE 8812 UNLESS OTHERMSE; NOTED ON THE
DRAWINGS -TAPER BETWEEN CURB TYPES -SEE DE TAIL.
0
'I. ALL CURB RADI ARE MINIMUM S UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
Lo
z
2 CONTRACTOR SHALL REFERTO FINAL FLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, NUMBERS, AREAS
AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO SITE IMPROVEMENTS.
Z
11 FIELD VERIFY ALL EXIISTINGSTE CONDITIONS. DIMENSIONS.
uj
K PARKING IS TO BE SET PARALLEL OR PERPENDICULAR TO EMSTING BULDING UNLESS
z
NOTED OTHERWISE.
US!
Lu
15. ALL PARKING LOT PAINT STRIPPING To BE WFITF, 4- W40E TYP.
z
0 z
,15. BITUMINOUS PAYING TO BE'LIGIfT DUTr UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SM DETAIL
0
SHEETS FOR PAVEMENT SECTIONS.
w
UJ
17. ALL TREES THAT ARE TO REMAIN ARE TO BE PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE WITH A
c�
0-
>
COW.TRUCTION FENCE AT THE DRIP LINE. SEE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTS.
LU
LLI
CITY OF ORONO SITE
SPECIFIC NOTES:
1. RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC NOTES.
:I -
LU <
cr)
S2
SITE AREA TABLE:
Lu x
SITE AREA CALCULATIONS
SITE PLAN LEGEND:
EXISTING
RUP-DINGCOVERAGE
0 SP
0.016
ALL PAVEMENTS
0 SP
010%
ALLNON-PAVEMENTS
KORn SP
101010%
TOTALSITEAREA
94,090 SF
IM.MG
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE PLAN
EXISTINGCONDITION
0 SF
DID%
PROPOSED CONDITION
ltL4SI SP
11.5%
DIFFERENCE (EX. VS PRCIPJ
16,451 SP
11.5%
REVISION SUMMARY
DATE �ICRIPTION
IROJECT NO, 1709D
PRELIMINARY
SITE PLAN &
PRELIMINARY PLAT
C2.0
SITE PLAN LEGEND:
PROPOSED
CONCRETE PAVEMENT AS SPECIFIED (PAD OR WALK)
c"
11,966 SF
12-7%
4,48S SF
*AM
77,629 SF
82.5%
HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE PLAN
SPEC;MCATION.ORREPORTWAS
94,080 SF
100.0%
PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER my DIRECT
SUPERYMON AND THAT I AM A DULY
% GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
LICENSED PRCFMIONAL ENGINEER
CITY OF ORONO
�.G��ATMNEGALLQW
(VM21� ISSMUMEE
_&-;�'
.
UNDER THE LAMPS OF THE STATE OF
od i
ZA��TA-
MdM— R. PMk
aATLB3r0JI7 jcBNsENq 44293
ISSUEMUSMITTALSIUMMARY
REVISION SUMMARY
DATE �ICRIPTION
IROJECT NO, 1709D
PRELIMINARY
SITE PLAN &
PRELIMINARY PLAT
C2.0
SITE PLAN LEGEND:
CONCRETE PAVEMENT AS SPECIFIED (PAD OR WALK)
PROPERTY LINE
SETBACKLINE
RECIE"IVED
— EASEMENT LINE
0 M M CONSTRUCTIO41-IMITS
# 3931
IAR2 2 2017
% GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
CITY OF ORONO
�.G��ATMNEGALLQW
(VM21� ISSMUMEE
_&-;�'
.
AOL
od i
REVISION SUMMARY
DATE �ICRIPTION
IROJECT NO, 1709D
PRELIMINARY
SITE PLAN &
PRELIMINARY PLAT
C2.0
I
PER
70*
clq
SITE PLAN LEGEND:
CONCRETE PAVEMENT AS SPECIFIED (PAD OR WALK)
PROPERTY LINE
Sr� LINE
EASEMENT LINE
CONSTRUCTION LIMITS
4A.Avix I
Cm R 40 U p
4931 W. 'M ST 8MM 2DO
37. LoWs PARK MN �ja
pml, PtS—r
78&2i3.m4 02,29DOM
LAKE WMST
DEVELOPMENT, LLC
RLEVISION SUMMARY
-3 MAR 2 2 2017 MOJ�WL� IMPRELIMINARY
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL SITE PLAN - DRNG &
W�JlOPHB�ATIEONE�LOM
Olq�11WTOLL� SHORE STBL EASE
0 # 3931 CITY OF ORONO 061)45�LdOeAl. A&
I C2.1
Ln
tn
z
LU z
In
LLI ZE
z
z
z
0
c�L6
CL
E
W
Lu LU
CL
0)
W
w
cl)
Q)
w m
04
I MEREBY cERnFYTHAT THIS PLAN
SPECIFIcATioRk OR REPORTWAS
PREPARED BY ME OR L OER My D"ErT
SUPERVISION ANI)THAT IAMA LY
LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER
UNDER THE LAM OF THE STATE OF
MI
Mighm R, P..k
�Tq 03raM7 Um. m. 44263
ISSUEfSUBMiT-rAL sUMMARy
RLEVISION SUMMARY
-3 MAR 2 2 2017 MOJ�WL� IMPRELIMINARY
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL SITE PLAN - DRNG &
W�JlOPHB�ATIEONE�LOM
Olq�11WTOLL� SHORE STBL EASE
0 # 3931 CITY OF ORONO 061)45�LdOeAl. A&
I C2.1
3931
R a u p
�l W. 55TH ST. SUITE 20U
s7.LOMPARK,NN 55416
LAKE WMST
DEVELOPMENT, LLE
W,
z
z
ce)
z
z 0
w IL
z
C5 0 z
z
0 _j
0 Lu
0. Ld >
"i w Lu
D
co)
Lu
W
C"
I HEREBY cERTIFY THATTHIS PLAN.
SPECIFICATIM OR REPORTWkS
PREPARED By ME OR UNDER MY CIREOT
SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A OULY
UGENSED PROFESSIONAL ENQNKR
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF
MOhoW R. P;;�
Wk_03=7 L�ENCL_44283
rSSUEJSUBMlrrAL sLA*AARy
SITE PLAN LEGEND7
-7
CONCRETE PAVEMENT AS SPECIFIED ?AD �-RWA;.K) =
PROPERTY LINE REVISION SUMMARY
SETBACK LING DATE DESCRIPTION
EASEMENT. L114F
RECEIVED ComsTRUCTM I!Mrrs
PRELIMINARY
MAR 2 2 2017 GOPHER S-rATE ONE CALL SITE PLAN -
WOM,00SHEftTATEONECA1�01W
-3,
MM=111W�FREE ROADWAY EASE
CITY OF ORONO
C2.2
"v: cite
-77 . 7
4&3 W, SM ST. SUITE 2
ST. LOUIS PAFOC, MN 55416
oajmEATEDWETLAND-,r NO P—k CMISbo—p— P.1 5-
70&2134M 852,19DM
1:<
LAKE WEST
U LITV DELINEATED WETLAND
"UTI
pAshm NT
DEVELOPMENT, LLC
Z. -
IQ
VACA-E EASTIING 021
EASEMENT
X Lo
ol Lr)
z
z
�o
Al z
02� CL z
0 IC) z
z _j
LLI
c� >
CL LU
Lu UJI
F -
\L 0 Lu
(D
w
A
�HE EBY CERTIFY THATTHIS PLAN,
SPECIRCAnON,CRREPORTW%S
PREPARED BY ME Oft UNDER MY DIRECT
SUPERVISION AND THAT I AMA ULY
LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER
UNDER THE LAV4 OF TI -E STATE OF
TA.
Malffiav R. Pa"k
D -TE OWMIL UOBN!HE.�L 44203
ISSUEJSUBMITTAL SUMMARY
DATE DESCRIPTION
-Qxmn WETCH PLAN SUBh9rrAL
932to
gzzm
SITE PLAN LEGEND:
CONCRETE PAVEMENT AS SPECIFIED (PAD OR WALK) I
PROPER7Y LINE
IH REVISION SUMMARY
DATE DESCRIPTION
SETBACK LINE
M,
EMEMEWr LINE
RECEIVEDM M 0 CONSTRUCTION LIMITS
Z�- P.EQT N 0, 1�
PRELIMINARY
-3 MAR �k igli GOPHER STATE ONE GALL SITE PLAN -
<1 17 NECAU-Cm UNDGRNO UTIL EASE
ICITY OF ORONO 'o 1- w4r
3931 N526iiiiiiiia
W -W C2.3
I Q—..TWLSITZQ—.
a
DEUNEATEDWETIAND
PROPOSED 100 -YR FLOOD
ELEVATION CONTOUR
(931.6)
'N
% ��("
DELINEATED WEILAND
4
zi-
1.7 MIA
Zl�
A�, 921.2�
n,
J" EXlSTINGlOO-YRFLooD p
EUEVA'IQN CONTOUR �pv
(931.5)
To EXISTING
CONN9CT
SANITARY STUB
CONTRACTOR TO VERI
LOrATIQN.81ZE,AND V
EUNATHDISIOPEXISTINP
vN
SANITARY ar; CE. R&ORT
DINOSTO INEER
FPF--833.50
STUB 1.5"VIIATER �vt
114H SEffCE TO WITHIN 5' 0�'
4 FROM HOUSE
f. 926.M 7. '3
�70
STUB 1.5WATER
SERVICE TO V41TFIN 6
FROM HOUSE
FFE-933,50
lip
v
ECT TO EX) NG'
ty
SANFTAF STUB
0ONITRACTOR. TO V6RIrY
gom
.10 LOrA-,EON SIZE AND
EUEVATHD�OFK�SMNG
v 4 SANITARV SERVICE. REPORT
FIN0rNGSTOENmNEER
IAETTAP(2)SERMr-Es 11
T WATER
TO EXISTING
STUB.COORDINATEW
CITY
rap 93zla
" %RTovERrFY
',l,,,S'zE,ANb
EMEVI. oFE)usnNG
INATER SER�`VIQE. REPORT
FINDINGS TO ENGINEER
0.
GENERAL UTILITY NOTES. e !7
I. SEE SITE RAN FOR HORIZONTAL DIMENSIONS AND LAYOUT, %WMP,'& I
'1---
`Illllt�i JUL
v". Ove
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING vniurra AND
c- R 40 u p
TOPOGRAPH!C FEATURES PRIOR TO CC`NSTKCTJON- 1 HE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY
4991 M 25MH M SUITE M
NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM THE pLANk
sT. Lous PARK MN 55410
3. ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPRO)IMATE. CoWrACT-GO.FHER STATE ONE
.P -k P.IS.-r
CA�V (65145`14DI12 OR 81(1(1�252-1106) FOR UTILJTY LOCATION% 48 HOURS PRIOR TO
7WQ13aD" 952-25D-=
CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILTIES THAT ARE
DAMAGED DURING CONSTRILMON AT NO COST TO THE OMER.
4. UTILITY INSTALLATION SHALt CONFORM TOTHE CURRENT EDITION OF -8TANCWD
SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER MAIN AND SERUM LINE INSTALLATION` AND %AUTARY SEWER AND
STORM SEWER INSTALLATION' AS PREPARED BY THE CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF
LAKE KEST
MINNESOTA (CFAM). AND SHALL CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE aTY ME) THE
PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS,
S. CASTINGS SHALL BE SALVAGED FROM SrRUCTURE REMCVALS AND RE -USED (19 PLACED ATTRE
DRECT10N OF THE OMER.
DEVELOPMENT. LLC
(L ALL WATER PIPE SHALL RE CLASS 62 DUCTILE IRQNI PIPE 101P) UNLESS OTHERNSE NOTED.
7� ALL SANITARY SEWER SHALL I E SDR 26 POLYVjN% CHLORIDE (pvcl UNLESS CTHSW&% NOTED.
B. ALL STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE HDPE LMUS OTHERWISE NOTED.
IF
9� P PELENST-IS SHOWN ARE FROM CENTER TO CENTER OF STRUCTURE OR TO EN D OF FLARED
END SECTION.
UTILTIES ON THE PLAN ARE SHOWN TOWITHIN 9 OF THE BUILDING FOOTPR;NT. THE
CON-RACTCR IS ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINAL CONNECTION TO BJILDING UNES.
COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND MECHMIcAL PLANS.
I!- COLTCHMSINSAND MANHOLES IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE SIJMPEDDD4FEEr.ALLcATcH
SASIN$ IN GUTTERS SHALL BE BUMPED 0.15 FEET PER DETAILS, RIM ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THIS
PLAN DO NOT REFLECT BUMPED ELEVATIONS,
12. ALL FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL B15 LOCATED 5 FEIFF BEHIND BACK OF CURB UN -ESS OTHERWISE
NOTED.
13. HYDRANT TYPE, VALVE, AND CDNNECTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE MTN CITY REQUIREMENTS.
HYDRANT EIITENSIONS ARE INCIDENTAL
14. A MINIMUM OF 8 FEET OF COVER IS REQUIRED OVER ALL WATEWIN, UNLESS D`711ERMSF
NOTED, EXTRA DEPTH MAY BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 18' VEMICAL
SEPARATION TO SANITARY OR STORM SEWER LINES. EXTRA DEPTH WATERMAIN IS INCIDENTAL
0
A MINIMUM OF 18 INCHES OF M!RFIr
15. IALSEPARATIONAND 10 FEET OF HOR20NTAL SEPARATION
LED
-j A
;S REQUIRED FOR ALL UTILITIES. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
j Lf)
ill. ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ejr� STANDARDS AND
w
COORDIRATED WITH THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
17. CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING SMUCUTRES SHALL BE CORE-DRJLLED.
Z
Ilk COORDINATE LOCATIONS AND 812ES OF 8ERVIU CONNECTIONS WITH THE MECHANICAL
if)
LU z
ORAWNGS.
LO
19- COORDINATE NSTALLATION AN13 SCHEDULING OF THE INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES WITH
ADIACENT
z
Lu 2
LU
CONTRACTORS AND CITY STAFF.
z
20. ALL STREET REPAIRS AND PATCHING SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
0 z
CITY. ALL PAVEMENTOMNECTIONSBRALL SESAWCUT. ALL TRAFFIC CONTFICLS SHALL BE
2
PROVIDED BY THE COMIRACTORAND SHAJ-L BE ESTABLISHED PERTHE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
Ld
MINNESOTA MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MrMUTCD) A-40 THE CATY. THIS
SHALL INCLUDE BUT NOT BE
0
co
9
LIMITED TO SIGNASE, BARRICADES. FLASHERS. AND FLAMERS AS
uff
AIEEDM ALL PLBUr STREETS SHALL BE OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES. NO ROAD CLOSURES
Lu ULI
SlikIL BE PERMITTED WITHOUT APPROVAL BY THE CITY.
21. ALL STRUCTURES, PUBILIC AND PRIVATE, SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO PROPOSED GRADES IAHERE
RMUIRED. THE REWREMENTS OF ALL OWNERS MUST BE COMPLIED WITH. STRUCTURES BEING
RESET
TO PAVED AREAS MUST MEET OWNERS REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAFFIC LOADING.
CONTRACTOR SHALL CORDINAM ALL WORK WITH PRIVATE UTILITY COMPAN IES.
w
M CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE CONNECTION OF IRRr.AnON SERVICE To UTILITIES.
CID
COORDINATE THE INSTALLATION OF IRRIGATION SLEEVES NECESSARY AS TO NOT IMPACT
INSTALLATION OF UTILITIE&
uj
24. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAJNTAIN AS -BUILT PLANS THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION AND SO BMIT
. HESE PLANS -0 ENGINEER UPON COMPLETION OF WORK
25. ALL JOINTS AND CCNNECTICNS IN STORM SEAER SYSTEM SHALL BE GASTIGHT OR WATERTIGHT.
APPROVED RESILIENT RUBBER JOINTS MUST BE USED TO MAKE WATER7IC4iT CONN5CTIDNS TO
MANHOLES, CATCHBASINS� OR OTHER STRUMFIE&
ALL PCRTEONS OF THE Sl ORM SEWER SYSTEM LOCATED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE BJILDING OR
WATER SERVICE LINE MOST BE TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN RUM, CHAPTER 4714,
1 HERESY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN
SECTICK1109J),
SPECIFICA71ohL OR REPORTV�a
PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY
CITY OF ORONO UTILITY NOTES:
UCENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER
UNDER THE LAAW OF THE STATE OF
1. RESERVED FOR CnYSPECIRC UTILITY NOTES.
11 A-
GRADING FLOODPLAIN NOTES (CITY & WATERSHED):
_Za
MiElhw R. FZ;W-
I . FILL NO IN THE FLODDPLAIN WILL BE MrrIGATED ON SFE AT A 1:1 VOLUME
-w 03WA7 L��mo 44283
RATIO.
Z PER CITY OF ORONO RULES, THE LOW FLOOR ELEVATION (LFE) OF RROP06ED
I SSUEJSUBMrrTAL SUMMARY
CATE TE-SCRIP71ON
STRUCTURES M JME 132.5 OR HIGHER,
RAM7 SKM'0jPLMaU8MIrrAL
3. PER M!NNEHAHACREEKWATEMED DISTRICTRULES, THE LOWOPENINGOF
PROPOSED STRILICTURFS MUST BE 93&5 OR HIGHER.
UTILITY LEGEND:
CATC�! BASIN
MANHCY-E
GATE VALVE AND VALVE BOX
.1.
4- PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
REVISIONSUMMARY
WATER MAIN
DATE DESCRIPTION
SANITARY SEWER
RECEIVED
STORM SEWER
FES AND RIP RAP
wr
PROJECTNC:17M
MAR '22 Z017
3931
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
PRELIMINARY
UTILITY & GRADING
emmilmTOLFREE I(P)L
PLAN
CITY OF ORONO
V = 30'-0"
1
C4.0
wo���
r
DELINEATED WETLAND
r
"'X
If DEIJNEATEDWETLAND
"o
11-0
19
;P9
%
7W7
�N
0 A
'C4:
Z, 70
7
0
co
k 7002GRARY
aQAXA�r
3931
NO
DBH SPECIES
REMOVED
m
10 BOXELDER
RECEIVEDx
IV lkz5ifle
919
8 BOULDER
YES
992
8 BOXELDER
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
itl
920
6 BDXELDER
YES
993
16 SOXELDER
YES
1"=,V4r
R UP W P
921
8 IIOXELDER
YES
994
7 ROXELDER
YES
WSI W. ISTH ST. SUITE 200
ST.LOUrS PAW MN �ffi
922
7 aOXELDER
YES
995
10 BOXELDER
YES
�o
CMEL -W.-
E123
S BOXELDE:
996
10 ROXELDER
YES
MmU ft�k P93-
703-213-3944 DS21tilamm
92A
7 BOXELDE
997
9 ROXEL OF 4
YES
925 6 BOXELDER YES 998 IV10 BOXELDEa YES
925
9 BOXELDE:
YES
999
BOXELDER
927
BOKELDE
YES
Iwo
8OXnDE:
8 BOULDER
YES
1001
7 BOXELDE
LAKE WMST
EQ9
7 OOKELDER
YES
8 BOXELDER
-1.
7 OOKELDER
YES
1003
8 BOXELDER
931 It BOXELDER lox 616 BOXELDE:
SS2
14 ROXELDER
MOS
6 BOXELDE
DEVELOPMENT. LLC
933
9 ER)XELDER
MIX
6 BOXEIDER
934
10 BOXELDER
YES
10137
8/18 BOULDER
935
10 ROXELDER
YES
loos
SIR BOXELDER
936
10 ROXELDER
YES
1009
6 BOULDER
YES
937
21 BOXELDI:
YES
im
3-: BOXELDE:
YES
93S
19 DOXELDE
YES
1011
BOXELDE
YES
939
19 BOXELMR
YES
1012
9/10 BOXRDER
YES
wo
15 EOXELDER
YES
Im
SOXELDE:
YES
941
8 BOXELDER
YES
1014
BOXELDE
YES
942
W BOXELDEq
YES
im
8 BOXELDER
YES
943
IS BOXELDER
YES
IJIE
0 BOULDER
YES
944
16 BOXELDER
YES
2017
6 BOXE'LDER
YES
N5
12 BOXELOER
YES
7 BOULDER
YES
946
, SOX�Lo.
YES
12 BOXELDE R
YES
997
11 BOXELOER
YES
1020
7 BOXEiDER
YES
ou
15 BOXELCIER
YES
1021
6 BOULDER
YES
949
16 8OX5LOER
YES
1022
7 BOXELDER
YES
950
11 BOXELDER
1023
9
YES
951
952
16 BOXELDE
12 BOXELDE:
1024
im
:DXEtDE:
7 0 ELDE
22 BOULDER
YES
YES
953
15 BOXEWER
IMIS
9 BOXELDER
YES
gm
14 BOXELOER
1027
710 RDXRDER
Lo
z
955
21 BOXELDE:
1028
718 :DKELDE:
2
956
8 DOXELOE
1029
" OXELDE
z
957
BOXELDE
1030
60 IOX I
uJ
am
XELo,:
1031
�:LLD
6 BID D: R
YES
U)
z
959
7 BOXELDER
1032
8 ELM
YES
z
930
9 BOXELDER
1013
9 ELM
w
CL Lu
z
961
7 BOXELDER
lm
10 SASSWOOD
0 z
SIS2
9 BOXELDER
mS
11 BOULDER
953
10 ROXELDER
IMR
11 ELM
_j
UJ
954
6 BOXELDER
1037
10 ELM
>
955
7 BOXELOtil
1.11k
9 ROXFLDER
LLi
SISS
9 :OXELDER
1:,",
'040
IS 1OKELDER
uJ Lli
957
2-8 OXELDER
7 DOXE DER
968
2-8 BOXELD:R
1041
7 ELM
YES
959
7 ELNI
11342
1 BOXELDER
YES
M
0, XEL. R
W43
I hWLE
YES
972
7 BOXELDER
10"
1045
13 ELM
7 BOXELDER
YES
YES
ui
973
W8 DOXELDER
1046
7 BOXELDER
YES
974
Gt7 BOXELDER
1047
9 BOXELDER
YES
ui
975
7 3OXELDEFL
Lo
976
I ELM
Tn
. EIDXELDER
978
9 SOXELDER
979
SA BOXELDER
99D
0 ELM
i HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN.
982 6 3OXELDER
982
6 BOULDER
SPEWICA'nON.OR REPO V"
PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
993
7 SOXILDER
SUPERLqUONANDTKATI AMA DULY
LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENCINEER
994
6 SOXELDER
UNDER THE LAY0 OF THE STATE OF
BE
11111 90XILDER
NIS
6 NOXELDER
997
W7 SOXELDER
99
7/9 BOXELDER
9m
3 SOXELDER
1%.WraM7 U— m 44283
m
12 BOXELDER
ISSUIE(SUBMIMALIBL)MMARY
REVISION SUMMARY
PRELIMINARY TREE
PRESERVATION PLAN
C6.0
REMOVALSLEGEND:
C.-
TREE PROlMCnDN
RECEIVEDx
TREE REMOVAL - INCLUDING R007S AND STUMPS
MAR 2 Z 2017
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL
CITY OF ORONO
(861) � LOCAL
1"=,V4r
REVISION SUMMARY
PRELIMINARY TREE
PRESERVATION PLAN
C6.0
C19
li r U. -
Ll
.4
14
AI
!R,
10�
4- N,
61
. . ..... - ---- -
5, clk.6v-
0 rZ- D r S rLj T
4ee>
....... ... ..... ...
RECEIVED
............. .. .......... ...
MAR 2 2 2017
. .......... ................. ... . ........... ... .... ..... ... 3931 CITY OF ORONO
shoo
. . . . . . . . . .
SJ2 — —
10 C6
.01 Ll
L6
Al
1:4 LLJJ
i m
Ewer, 04
n--7�.77
SIP, IV. 4
001.1� . . .....
Ni�
LA
'Z:z
'bw ,
wrw's
Wrd
nde
i JOT: -;fm= s8'v66r- 6;7,7jr,4fL "Ity am"W. 10
per
SITZ C.V�AAd
--ZG% SM �`IPM40A 7alqF
PffirUA. IAAlu7r&4wrz. 92,
zaw WN
to
Cb
LPIPOIL WT..�WL(T V
&—P.( ep.
OFF (�y
t CS6a Fp or'ONO
a6z?
F"wA
v
# 3931
c 0 10
RECEIVED
MAR 9 2 2017
CITY OF ORONO
HPmpamd by:
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Ruident WW Roal Eatelo Senim
&rmyDiwWw
302
vff-1.1111;1�
tie)
4)
2)
I L
"AW
6 -oil
7
. Ks map is a owoollon of date from various wum:es and Is ftrishaWAS 160 with No 4ee
no rspre�sardafion or waran"xprow or hood, includilg ftwes for W perWair
purpow, m"WWRy, or the accuracy and camplatensom of the infDrmation sh�
S1/2 SEC.20 T.117 R.23
ORONO-38 'f I (�
4
(16)
COVE-
-------------
RECEIVED
MAR 2'2 2017
CITY OF oRONC
— — — — STORM SEWER DISTRICT BOUNDARY
.-:7:7:.7-'7 SCHOOL DISTRICT BOUNDARY
LEGEND WATERSHED DIMICT BOUNDARY
CQ"Rl(;HTO HENNEPIN COUNTY 2Dt6 TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARY
0 MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY
PC Exhi
OL
40 0 qvAk
4b
teI4
4F
NN
eA
It I
4T
Lp
jw
k Al
no p I Ij
A
i YO
f
U
4
Or
2A
.0 ,
rA
4
06
-trio
i%
AN
4v.
X
Jr.
(3
ULJ
J�w
j -C
40 Leo,
C",c
C4*Apj4f Oil �tllr
All Jell
#4
p
H
.n. m
LZ:5 r6c) 10
cl NEW CA3CO Covrl
0 ADDITION
PC Exhibit E
CA3CO 'COvE 'DiVELOPMENT CC
NAVARRE 10 MINN.
0,0 JOP(m K. ANDCR&ON
BarACH
M. Ex D^Rftrr GZACH
3CALE
DAME MAIr 9, ip"
Kollmy Kmlk�& Kingmewo
Lcinj LoW J;mn.
ot C,
vo, 4�.
-71
,ol GARMM& BAY
LAM MINNCTot4r.A
0
ql�- z
P3 ;
-fk
T
Lf. Id
Z
r r
-; 13
0 ell.
.5- %L%4
:,q
oil
u
I
ar
1A I
T.
p
H
.n. m
LZ:5 r6c) 10
cl NEW CA3CO Covrl
0 ADDITION
PC Exhibit E
CA3CO 'COvE 'DiVELOPMENT CC
NAVARRE 10 MINN.
0,0 JOP(m K. ANDCR&ON
BarACH
M. Ex D^Rftrr GZACH
3CALE
DAME MAIr 9, ip"
Kollmy Kmlk�& Kingmewo
Lcinj LoW J;mn.
ot C,
vo, 4�.
-71
,ol GARMM& BAY
LAM MINNCTot4r.A
0
ql�- z
P3 ;
-fk
T
Lf. Id
Z
r r
-; 13
0 ell.
.5- %L%4
:,q
oil
u
I
1A I
T.
m APLe
A It.' jr
JL Cl
I
Pit r -
Y-.
L)
Al A iyo- - P. %I
ood
dt
47
AC
.. `49i- 10L
%I
is
-led V
in
At %
AT
;gAl
SAO....
A@
_77
IRM V.
Ag,
4W 96,
SM
Air
.146
v
AR F
z f
h
PRO
PC Exhibit E,2..
0
1
� 8
44
fill
-41 2'r
I -It
N
0
1
� 8
z
V1,
#
CL N
0
PC Exhibit E,3
15 Re fl -Pa 3, 1 Al 7-V
A) &'N 6?-- Ff J_E�7N)
L)
Z
z
0.
d5
w
0
'�6 L
IMS
o
9
oca
d
ell
U,
IND
ro
Rtz
z
V1,
#
CL N
0
PC Exhibit E,3
15 Re fl -Pa 3, 1 Al 7-V
A) &'N 6?-- Ff J_E�7N)
L)
Z
z
0.
d5
w
0
'�6 L
/q te- It6F qAA-
4',
'ev )md :0py
. . V- 6. 1 1 . ` I A
.A
is b0inf'
A..
Contacted by sam of the no I":
have
lu6UM tho
to the southeast, concerning the I sonjht. ito
ncernine the I
' 6WJPA�,, Lft . John Chell, from the Xinnesota De0artzmat of
'Iktar&a R*-*UrCes Conducted a git* inapeCtionrof the point and
.Vorif.1:49�- chat a'substant.ial portion of the lot Was filled withmt
.-the' PMPOW state permits. The Stat* of Minnesota twk th(D enclosed
.41", Others prior to any filling so as to be &ble to
—&% -t Of a low areja'of Lake d- A -
PMUOI the dwslo�-Ww"
Pwmft Ims granted for minor lake shore, alteration so ag to gjlcm
the dOCIU90 Of boats on the lagoon side of the land. '(Ww plat.
C=&"&tCjNd:red) Evidently this pexuLt wag used to obtain Q.Ad
ftoelt ZUX an the entire point. It is my understanding tha�, no
Wmii was"Obtained for the Village of Orono with respect to
this
4C" Anderson and Marion D. Barrett, thedevelopezg Of'thjS
Of the opinion that these lots (ftaot= W and Z) W&M
and'should be preserved in natural C*=Utjon''fCw the
benallft 'Of the other developed lots. icarjon D. Urrett,continues
to'lvside'in the:platted area, and can Dpe contacted. for hictorica
InfOCKRUOR - ib haS personally inforg" me ..that the legal - maneuver
j"L tt
le to the filled Poition of LW
"Acqu A was beyond -rhis
ft felt thQ land was so low it was. not: worth. t"
14qU;.*XP=".0f,,RttdUPtinq to defend VATi=t.the take
47-40SUItIF ba-loat tbm title to the j;Ljy,0d pft-ti=.
be dwVQ10P0d Ift zea.126 that - t&"- � djapute le
pwi*- a ei'vIl"': mttoW beftN= th,&'"rties: aNA I" ft, Uot
C4tY:'WG0t=Q4- AnY private rights.,; Hotreverit.'
hist6rie4aly been taat t"s;
and wwamp OW it in fact.0ontaing cat. taiia
*ther -SMSp at thla tIM '-ZbMd42:b& baoUgLt :to. the
14
OWN
00 P*I'
r m
��Ml V. - - -` - ' " P�
�D4
,
1-3
14
. V7
1,V 9
Aii
AIR
MMWVIXFAI�
Woo 07
goomp
OAK
jr
JL -7
IL
OK
V
OU a
14
W
.4 '41
� 7
VC
Ak
OPP-/ �ve
Z.
M11 114 )p , - 'ftiftlak
ot
ftw, tit ft OritilidAnoluttift.l.
(3 ley of' Otlm� -.24
Cased'Polat 2nd ABOVITIM P1
:A&ftistrator City of Oram,
j .�i,!
Sep be
MUd this 13 &Y of _:�PW
1976.
(Soul)
LA. 't`k�
Am"
k7io
AkL
J
""t00%
ANA&&,"
4"' 1
14
lj� P,
-VISWF,
,
-7 .. xf
INC
wr,
4�4
14f
ON11v
Pill
viiisto Jii
Re it Cost* fegt1ftt
and drw;jnS Of
t across lot 2. 1 V111 get the park deoneatift too to: v4bj� U I"
vM rear futu2* * I f t3mv* is go*& paracuUr dg" by w"Oh
PaIds 01*04% 'lot w know.
Tbmki for
hap
Wry tnay lows
Q�� 0, &4
Charles Ai Oax
CACtIja
A., id
4,4
Cit
MPTM ''the Y COM11 has tons
0.4
Casco hint 2M AMU*,
divisim plat fbr
that the clit
4w,'.THMFOM, BE IT 2MVM _y
of Omio hereby approves the.plat f*r Casco Point 2nd AMOick, Owa.. b,��
amkmb�.,t6 wtl �IWOI
Camty, Mimesotc, subJect to grantift'an wof
the Park DmUcaticu Fee being
Lot 2 mg:to id J�
19% If tM ak"Said
-rks roolution will amin in Decabo.,
t '' ftimv,
-riot
Am*& —M
m6divislak Plat has bm filed with 9w. r. Y_4w
1h tMt Gmt j it will be
of �Dgeds* to..
YN
with 'th3 City of 0imol6r abdivistan
Datod'this 24 day of M&Y
46,
Robert L. Searles, �kyor
ATMST:
4F
Walter R. B;ijz*`
b0i
7z I
SzWT_111 UA 1p:
"a
"A
ham 'M
k,
7;y�,Arp' _w
AL "al Ana
this.. wokA4. bb,
-ndt
nor. In -such A manner ad
the lake. fta applicafit,
Me t obtRJA spipr6VAIL of aJl'*t:hOt a'Jeneii4f
Plawdnq CmuLOdiOn Meting MAY l7e 3.076
a mmaing Ccomission anda approval
a ocaditional.use-peraft and variance to grade
a lmerzw approach to the lako'becaute Of the
stoop cliff -like no Approach
would include a suirway:te be constructed of
unt"atod tAcs and grav*JL# so as not to add to
the hardower prablext, The applicant was also:
instructed to replace tha 11 tress which were
xommd,frw the ahc"line,with ll.new-trees.
at 1%" L to 2%0. diamter md restore some 6* the
Ofteg ftligge tewmmd with evexyzeens an shown
an t3�& afte PJ#M',
Walsh mo butler secondodt to approve the*
canditiona-Aft "Mit f4w &VO Vicke3m VMJO
679. nlawds Lanep subject to the
plMning -cmaisarm minutes, of My: 17 197do
Motiono A"S (5) says (0)6�
Iteary Mahicho building &-zoning Administrator, VIM MAT , I -
stati%d.that Mr. Charles Coxt 3500.�Zvy:Plaos# has 35901.2W Plage:-
Submittad the Mlylare and Mrdsholle for approval
of�'sjnal plat* our 1976:tax records indicaU
the 3raw, land value of the property -to be 014 $00
of which 184k would be assessed an a park deaZion.
f"s "M Plazining comission aww%��4'448 approval
of the final plot an condition an access easer"t
be granted loot 2 across Lot land paylaant of the
appropriate:park dedication foe.
4�-
ML
ist
Mv 241 is T 6 ftfs
;'At
IC -*&,-MWVJAhk;.
14,
.-Oct-,
2
14
pN -
e, JI
I P.MPWAW�WWWW
A4 X.
"k,
ftv, a 4009ftim
Stew
Am
A.,
ic 160"tiim- 'WOO&
AV,
"tic of 'leas, than - thO. *460
Soft dedicatlim -n
i#
minftmt --Uiwef=O a. total. Put aoiftoation
v
t" of
-*mld, bo tOrthemint
W4,
j
appxo Pal
P
Vj# ".tojtft to pmt. of t -be,
I
Park ;eZrOMOS, Ofth an,
Colulty Ilem: In the lftftv:
of Awil 29s. 1974�; vftlab Analvdat dodItAtion
3�
of - W*dditiftal ]LO 4f right. -of MY &UMO
Tbfb PUMiftir CaMission agreed this existing
m"-umde rift& presented problem in xmintnining
tho Gala" 1mm - area and. rec�W id apprml
1*10
*f graidbkq ftlo.-Vifte. : fte PImmin1w
ri I I I Ied
milso -0-i I I i rewml of tho. hanardova pw*
house a" rXv top of the "tift showeline mr,
Mgms aazo re4twatod amoLderation of ;t;z
Zilling amd gradbig In one narrm area to
facnitato aameas to the lake. The Plaming.
CCOMLSSIM felt pg"rly degi rip rap
could reo4v*. the- cbr.", (CmUnued)
s- M-0 —aw,
#695v: A MOM111tift Approving M* tavistered &"a
WA 148,
0 b* ~odi, Sbtlon A"S
Sonry M*Ldh� building a xOning.Administratort
=a milki
ftated Mat. 6ftAg - iftftMing Dwald P. Ragen
2 130 SHOWN00d. am
2130 shedyvood awds thatAbo previous proposal'..
to rip rap hie� sherelimo vue a"roved dnly..to.
the, efteht.of r4.rap# Me NagiA. fippeared
baton thoVam"elon to requent reconsideratift
of his r*"ivt-9*r Uqb - lie Mow". alidem
of the ftle 'Wait am drovotfil along
the Muslim at ating rifte. left from
an - sban&med a located ahout 4S -tuft
the shorelinso
Tbfb PUMiftir CaMission agreed this existing
m"-umde rift& presented problem in xmintnining
tho Gala" 1mm - area and. rec�W id apprml
1*10
*f graidbkq ftlo.-Vifte. : fte PImmin1w
ri I I I Ied
milso -0-i I I i rewml of tho. hanardova pw*
house a" rXv top of the "tift showeline mr,
Mgms aazo re4twatod amoLderation of ;t;z
Zilling amd gradbig In one narrm area to
facnitato aameas to the lake. The Plaming.
CCOMLSSIM felt pg"rly degi rip rap
could reo4v*. the- cbr.", (CmUnued)
4
�CMM 8SM'KNU T80- N- tA$SO(
7, -.7
V1,
4 1197
L IS
--4
44,
wtor
In
T -r 'FIT
crystal u��-4-.MK 55321--`
lSoA
4,
W.
OP.
.Subjectt Casco Point Addition ?V/fV
Dear Al -
In accordance with your requilost of Aprillt I havw
reviewed the soil borings and Proposed platoflthe Casco
Point Addition to make recommendation as to the buildabilitt.,:-,,V�'i
of the site. MY Comments in this regard follofo
.As noted in the Itoil boring report dated March 1,6,
x
for Mr. Charles Co by Braun Engineering Testingg the site.,.
in question has 3 to 10 feet of dredged fill material overlayinq':�7
theLprevious land surface or lake bottom. Due to the nature.
of the placement of this fill Ue, backcast dredge spoil), the
Compactlon in this fill material in not sufficient to support.
normal building loads. The soil borings also indicat
presence of peat deposits in 3 of the 4 boringal these a 41ts
ranging from 4 to 6 feet in depth. I would concur with'.tro
soil engineer's recommandaxion that the peat and insUffl,01antly
compacted fill materials be removed and replaced with caimp;�ctea:.
granular materials.
If development is to occur on this site, properly
and compacted granular material (as reconwAded - by the so
engineer) would create a buildable @ite as long as the lowest
floor elevation of any structure built on the sit& ig not
1036 than 933.5 (for reasons of flood protection). r
The question of the Oxcavation and bockfilling of
12803 OLSON MEMORIAL HIGMWAY, MINNEAPOLIS. MINNISOTA SB40 ffttpNoNt (fil) SS$41"
36 NORTH MAIN STRICT. HUMMINSON, MINNESOTA 55360 'ftL#pNONj ($I j) &76.4010
SOUTHWEST INOINIERING MVISION, MARSHALL. MtNNEBOTA Sole@ tgL2p"*Nj (807) all."to
W
Y 7
--77,T,
1-11,11 'A
LAS
440
Ilk
VO
th*
Far",, -
YOU harvi�403i 16thor.
dame ;..,I
this iatter' P16"S Ido
I
Yf:' P o�N
We
uil
Sathre
R"
IqW
Enclosure
A!, V,
I
NP
V
.:,TAA** 44406i' 016-
I .. . " a
."AafW44m, Ostba
pc'-� , M.3. ...Us �
r L W
t
ftt' ''it �,:Iltill
ty WA
vuxro".
storti sever; *nd subv"ue
I _77
- A ��"
Y5%,
VAR
F
A
LL
VA
7-7� ,
OVA
r"UAL.
t
Ao
Eirm
It
should be constructed prior to, thv* V140MMOnt. X
William H. 110comber :P.R.
earles moved, Welsh seconded, to instruct staff'
to.draft a resolution for Council approval at
-ing a
meeting 9 ant
the November 10# 1975 Council r
subject to the following conditions
variance to the 26 foot marshland setback ordinancel'
1. All fill to be placed above 930 contour elevations
2. Basement for utility and drainage furnished by
14r. Remedy.
3. Storm sewer shall be constructed by the City
prior to placement of fill'
4. The project -will be monitor"ed by the City
L'Agineer.
5, All work whall be completed within 10 days
of initial start of project.
1-iotionr Ayes (4) - Nays (0).
R Paurus movedr Welsh secondedr to approve the lot PIMPANGSHM G DIVISION
"01
rearrangement and division of 14r. Charles Coxr 3580 Ivy Place
3580 Ivy Placer Casco Point Division# subject
J t02
1. Lots meeting all zoning requirements,
2. Submitting park dedication fees an amended.
Motion, Ayes (4) - Nays (0),
:1 Menry 11uhicht Building & Zoning Administratorp REZONING
submitted the following report to the City Council Cheyanne.Land Company
I, which stated thats 100 Orono Orchard Ad.
*X bave reviewed the records and reports of the
Cheyenne Land Company's proposal and after
numerous sit* inspections have reached the
following conclunionst
(continued)
Avg
Ar
MOW no
i4
IOU* I te
Jit .. L. -
Alm Im'
milia. ad U* d$wft Wft.
AtMm AN
a Ail* .*A 34ft: Sbijon'Afte
thft INNOW *A It f9waftubms I ft x6rospin
mmml 04- Pau" to am Omm a Imot dwo timew a "a.
W lb"Womfload *Aft sm"atle Ift WOW. wmaw mt "ft
fUlbo wxdd dJm3 mot or"at ymaUAyt ifft his am
yv.-A. ft Sam ftt tvp=Uy tw ma was vw Um a m
tIM Wd bM %*tW filled b* eMft to fin WN nft Ido
an**. ftow ftlt thft vk= 9M w&Ad be =w" if ft
&ft. to be b"dAm b* be ImIld bat ftXW90 thM la
wtuNft wtox w sqw. as only mmm I= ftt the usba
WWd n* ddft to hU ftm ad flood it **. VM Mat
WWW'MW 1*6, Ow privow &M vemictAm ba
I.W.A 46,.6 --
MIUMCS WGROW &Vd%*ft mcomov, ft
OR "It I I Oft Move fsba 2 3A aftas wom ft lad. VO
aft ftt ft W&M ba $1 � thwo to ambdw US 0=0 wiftft
llllPbft :bft An at 011 tft b I I 1 1 11' it wMd be Ih a M 9 to
rftv dwA tba,pnetbUity at two boom " a IV aft thm.
GkOhda ftlt A Pa* Dedication rft do" be wd%vd bmWM
the rardt madd puOuco IaZr. r ftaft. AfbW OU
0 Ir 11 L lob, VIM 9bin en q4aftmitV to be board 00
me alcom..
"a MUM 12amt* OMOAssion =ft on thq am doft vift
the tagumov mom 9m em 1- 1 main= Win P, m"t
*00081do 02awler Fessike vlan not WA unmoh.
QMIM AQdnlNhWbWv DOW Md". AhMfts H%dx=
adwri awds ad AdI&A"O
@AWL -Ab sm"Idl Refthl mal-dwis that ths 4--ml—my andamm
SMOINSMI to: UO cbuwn that ths
ammift coot 2ft a Ift ---
.40M and diVY" at ZOU
=a so alow Rdat Aution lift to late be � P, m
lbe.,06 rm* mumalft rm be MAW An lift
Coft UKAM" to do r4* adhaulft ft ftheftu,
-.a" (0)
Gottmim m,rd# Krogh 6 that the Anat" of the
Oftow
�M�Lft aud"ka MMUM hdd ftbobW 13* 10",p be
Awmad in emew. PbLione Apo (7)
vhn Illot Im"Oldt Imachm I Out the Nimdm ul
the Maw" ammagalm japtim hold. 7a 1973t I*
Un# JOU (7)
#WWfts. ML — _np (0)fk
MWASM - WS M
MIM110 %Ona%a *a
a� =
a to
mm�
AWIVM a i 02 Ing
I#VRM is %4"
W= (v mmm
NMI" at 110/7m
,tc
'T2 fll"r VA usiv 4ia
'
'-- -~---
A.:j57,
tie
JIM.,
d lils.
ow
''d
W ist a. 4A
441
1,7,77� ,
I
Mike Gaffron
PC Exhibit E. -q
From: Drewry, Kate (DNR) <kate.drewry@state.mn.us>
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 1:41 PM
To: Mike Gaffron
Cc: Spiegel, Jason (DNR); KSylvia@minnehahacreek.org
Subject: RE: Orono - Casco Point - Building on Filled Wetiand
Hello Mike:
We have searched our records and find no information about historic illegal fill on this site and specifically, no
information on the John Chell site inspection referenced in the 1975 letter that you sent. Given the lack of
documentation, difficulty of reconstructing events that occurred so long ago, and the fact that the current survey
shows the area proposed for building site(s) is above the Ordinary High Water elevation of 929.4 feet, DNIR would not
oppose this development provided that it meets all of the provisions of the City's Shoreland and Floodplain ordinances.
You also may want to require that a wetland delineation be completed as some of the site may still meet the parameters
to be considered jurisdictional wetland as regulated under the Wetland Conservation Act.
Regards,
Kate Drewry
Metro Area Hydrologist
DNR Division of Ecological
1200 Warner Road St. Paul,
Phone: 651-259-5753
Fax: 651-772-7977
kate.drewrv0state.mn.us
www.mndnr.1Zo
and Water Resources
MN 55106
From: Mike Gaffron [maiIto:MGaffron@cI-orono.mn.usJ
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 11:49 AM
To: Strauss, Ceil C (DNR); Drewry, Kate (DNR)
Subject: Orono - Casco Point - Building on Filled Wetland
Ceil & Kate —
There is a vacant property on Casco Point in Orono (PINS 17-117-23-42-0001/0002/0003) that is being proposed as a
building site. This property consists of wetland that was filled in the late 1950s/early 1960s, and according to the
attached letter received by the City during a proposed re -platting of the site in 1975, the fill was not approved by the
DNR.
Attached are various documents including:
October 20 1975 letter from Richard Haefele, attorney representing himself and the neighborhood, indicating
that John Chell (whom I worked for as a Laborer in the DNR Rochester Office in 1977) had visited the site and
indicated the fill was illegal;
Airphotos from 1937-1971 that help to pinpoint the time the majority of filling occurred, sometime between
1956 and 1967;
Plat drawing when the property was subdivided as Tracts W and X of the Casco Cove Addition in 1955, and a
copy of current plat map and plat/airphoto overlay;
Copy of the 1971 re -plat of W and X into Lots 1-2-3 of Casco Point Addition;
Current survey of the property; and
- Conceptually proposed construction of two homes on the property.
In 1974 the City approved a re -plat of Lots 1-2-3 into just two lots, with the caveat that subdivision approval did not
guarantee they were buildable. That subdivision was never filed. Around that same time the City mapped wetlands and
showed the entire property as wetland, although by then it had been filled and existed much as it does today.
I am requesting your review of this site to determine whether DNR formally considers this as a documented illegal
wetland fill for which building permits should not be issued, or whether the DNR would not oppose it being built on.
I have a meeting next week with a realtor who apparently is marketing this property for the Lupient family who have
owned it for many years. Any light you can shed on this would be helpful. Please feel free to call or email if you have
anyquestions. Thankyoul
Mike
Michael P. Gaffron
Senior Planner
City of Orono
(Street Address) 2750 Kelley Parkway
(Mailing Address) P.O. Box 66, Crystal Bay, MN 55323
Phone: (932) 249-4622
Fax: (952) 249-4616
. . 4 ... I
I C-4 " -
K
I & �--- - F-ft-
6A�4K&VT
Certificate of Title No. Yung
8621gt
Parcel 60 Revised
Sol
This Indenture, made this—ZZ_-Atday L96.L, batweeti
Edward A. Nicolay, unnarrLed,
her6inafter referred to AM ftantorW who has-4wpw an i tereffi ad to land doocril3gd
I
below as (Aj grantors' 7veaftes and the ViljAZ% of 0 n I
organUed and exUtift under the laws of rono P W��Qambration
Grantee; the state of Ximseacta, hereinafter called the
-dribed. WREMS, the Grantee is desiVous of obtaining an B&SOMient on land hereinafter dos.
MCO, MMIMORE, this indenturn witnesseth, in comideVntiori of One Dollar and ctUr
good and valuable consideration, paid by the Grantee to the Grgator(a), the roacipt and
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged. the arector(jt) hereby grant(s) unto the
Grantee. its xuftessars and assigns forever, a perpetual underground utility caffieftnt Over.
under and across land ddwcrlbed below and designated an M Land Subject to perpetual
Und4r8ccund Utility EnaftWat. Itmludlug, but not by way of limitation, a full And Evas righi
and authority to enter upon said lAmd to construct, Install, maintain, operate and repair
a Beftir lipl V - b. "t'Me Senit"Y sewer LTLt0r@6PtQr, sanitary sever ra4u. ok line, and
sty and All APPUTCOURMes incidental mid related thereto* (such are hersafkar collectively
xafarred to AD the Improvement), And co�jairt connections to said lopvovemant, and tho , ,
-.0rantes shall have the ri&l%t'tD make BAch use of said land as is reasonably neaessalir alld
advisable to the construction, i=tallation, maintenance. operation and repair of the is-
ocovement.
-BY acc: we
itself cud itaptmca of the flove ealsommt and " consideration thl -for the Grants, for
sucedeson and. asgig" covonants and agrees to restore the a face a t a
ground -where such is physically possible, and practical, to approXimtely t ur f *4
ditlan that existed prior to any construction. justallat a an he same con
.jon, m inten to or repair of the,
IMPrcv4iMMt Within a reasonable time thaveafter unLeas weather ar aircumstancon beyond
ftan�aaffl itantral. do not pamit.
-T and a The Grant:=Cft) hereby, covenantsfor' hjTmatp -and )iim - skuwasscri W2�a
affighc to retrain fran performing any
structigs or Greatins any fixfura'
on the Land Subje4t to thoOl".01morground Utility Basomanj that would.
interfere with Grintecel riot of constrmtjon
repair of the Zqrroftwnt. and
The latift referred to above are situated in tha,aalmty of Hennepin and State of
�Klul�escta, and desitribed, as followm, to wit;
A. Graotm!a
.I. All that Pwt Of Lot 185 lying Ifortheasterly of h Zito �Uwciibed as follows 1
'01 "Comencing at a point in tbG 10uhtw9stOMPLY 1146 of alld Lot, 185 distant 45 feet Nmft_
easterly flxm the Northweart c0ruar Of said lot; theme It it -straight lime to a point
14 in the Southeasterly 3160 of said Ifts which polat In distant 4s feat Mortheagtarly
fr4n the meet BOwthoxdY cofter Df said let, In Toylw1B SVbdLViXjAM of SpVjA& park
V Lot's
B. Land Subject to P"otual Undsvpauud, Utility Jummaelmt
c,�- 0 � �NbM-describsd
Thatlirplor Gvmrtwtg pM@MIgg9/2dg8 within 10 toot cm each side of the fallm-
ift-deziM aenterlIpat Cm9naing at tFM most Vqaterly @craer of said Lat 185, henea
XovfteastoW�y 52.4 feat along the Norwth"eatmay line of- said jot to the point of begu.
10C)'ALAS of the contwilue being descrIbed, thancit deflecting rLabt l4oagoo to the South_
i fw V&ztsr1Y line of said above-dasorlbad part of Lot ja5l and theve "ding,
A,;
\ le-
- de, P0
9
191
0
and that part of (tbs Grantor, a Premiscs)abow Ogi"ed) lying within 10 feet on each
side of the following-degar1bga cjM%qrjfn%j Comancing at the Most westerly comer
vald'Lot :L85; thOUCS Northeasterly 66 fact along the MCW%hweptarly
liue OE said
lot to the point of beginning of the catiterlius being described-, themes. def I
loot U
Ut' right 200 to ths SauthefttQrly line of said lot, and them ending.
IN TISTIMOMY WHEREOF, the nald Grantor has. caused these 13rea4mts +ei 1kn
f.; ml lCaD Gay and yew r1rat written abwm.
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
( Ss.
COUNTY OF "PNEPrx
Mrjr
�jw
77 F7 -'� z�'- W -M M-1
OVA
On thiz/.L2 day of October, 1966, before me, a Not . ary Public within and for
said C?31UU�Yi PaVisonally appeamd Edward A. Ni,wy.
uUmarriedip to me known to -he the
person described in and who exwuted the. foregoing i4vtrumnt, and.-acknow3jadged that
he-sxR.cutfid. the same as his frija act and deed,
andas
Kota" FU Inn.,
MWE MANN
MY expjr&M=,W
Monimpift owly, tax.
I
191
8621,91
A. AL/L.
armol! OF HPAISTRAR OF TITLES
.147 OF MINNESOTA
f.*,-;vtlrt OF IJRHNCPlpl
'thin IndrunwAt
I ho,* ciatily that the wl
Was Illod in INS offift an ffic
9 day sr Nbv A. A .1966 at
eclaoc -CL.Ak
TITLES
NOY
ROOM" firAMMOR; AMUM
NT'V MIN
HMNEMN 00
DEPUTY
1 y4yo, � ed�
f
9220is
7� .4 - MW4 i
MmAmsm.
... .............. . .... ...........
I 011t . . ......
of ti- ca"I� Of__-._Ajlv . .....
090 AiNt PON gm DoW 54.-
PnQ-bIVA&awtd phmjt"�of ibe ia�� part'
am wi4v_-
06d fnedpa, j
In
-the:
h*tw
!A. POUSIV 0
".7.7
NA
..V
0.
U� pow, -
Ait Vf- Lot Tt -lurl
WZGrN $uhd:Lvlmd*.nj .1.5prills. ftikj- Ani%imot(2
I'd
-WzPV
-a RP v
at. - It
�aii
:i�30: Rlme -.�4jd k*14*NR tivii 31" - 3W
s-& D V Y /4j 0
siniiax dii�i h
109 a Jrvd�uf". of. i3b f4i�-.Itq the:;Lnt4hftl
ohm 'Northw
ttf6"jjR�a;LmtAjk .45:4"at
Bt
/*I r a7c"98' t*'and CMOs. qw:aip for. -the behai".0'
cj� RTr"y 461.. aftd:miT&- i0rus.19 t lftnAr,
7 'imbjAct -, tm,: ..-:J-,
fa)! to,
*#"Fmi ai"�84 .1w thla IUD *.rty
1: 'for, a '(1j)
for'pubUe -in tlii,701wrt�'dvqedt,
t1hlo 1
-.7
M,
-, wl, Al
W,
Via
14 *t 9MMe. Tagollmriplir& caU tho hop
Dow
theilymnAu bilwfigring ap tu unra4m ffpjwkl�llig, 90 LAO Wil Par&_t-:vj Md' Ai6and '...-P! rul
xWorminmv uAbunt. YAd Haiti plort—lawl Lisa Aral ka.-V'Whora"g,
tond usarjArml, alioutt mwilm.
1416 Jln*ll&Dck fir
Charlie
Ic
CX_
........... ry 1161
.. . .. .....
............. .......
.77
0- Oa-. AL
mu
for a�* Camiair, parmwff
HaVY Holes Cox, humban4 -so
0 be Me P004A;..* ... . .. ckauributUn'. and wita axont4ma ghj.fO&jj
-----------
ig
...... jric �Ot and iz
lk
............
AW4,
9RAW .
t Mi
AX
t!,
cii�
lif
W IV
bL
-'S
`V4
5E
40
Wd
195
AI lef AQ.A-- -
of Col--rnan�5
Dolon-2 !9o3
a,',se7, lov'oy' 7cozv7 z
i:o, n
L4
v
1160211
F-.3
e0U-)f,--U---rVtC�J 45TA 59FA
AGREEMEST
THIS AGREZI�MT, entered Into this Aeday of August, 1975,
by and between Charles A, Cox, single, hereinafter referred to as first:
party* and Robert Powell and Emme Lou Powell, husband and wife, hereinafter
referred to as second parties-,.
WITHESSUR, that
WHIREAS, first Party Is the owner of land in Hennepin County,
legally described as Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, Casco Point Addition; and
WHERMI second parties are Wners of land -in Hennepin County
legally 468cribad as Tract L, Registered Land Survey No. 461; and
MMASs land of first party Is subject to restrictions in
paragraph 121 Of Document No. 572912, which restrictions may be enforced
by second parties who awn the dominate estat'es being said Tract L.
NOW TIIMUWM, for and In consideratiot, qf the covenants herein
contained. and for other good and vsLuabla consideration,
IT 15 HERBST MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the parties as follow..
le That the restrictions contained in ))Ocumant No. 572912 ave
hereby terminated and annulled and of no further force and effect,
2. That in-11au thereof, said�Lcta 1, 2 and 39 Block is.
CdMcO Point Additioup shall be subject to the following restrictions:
(a) That no U0rQ than two single family dWallinge and one
garage structure with each dwelling shall be constructed on
said Block 1.
(b) That no Part of Eny dwellina or garage structure
shall lia to the northwest of a line 25 feet to tile ucrtbRogt
Of and parallel to the line dividing said Lots 2 and 3.
(c) That the dwelling e-loseac to the nortiwast end
of said Block I shall not be rm" than one story In height.
1160211
3. That this aRrcement shall inur6 to the benefit of the
owners and encumbranca*rs of said Tract L, Registered Land Survey No. 461,
and of Late 1. 2 and 3, block 1, Casco Point Addition,
IN WITNESS Wormy, this apeement is executed t1le date first
above wtitten.
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)
COUNTY OF HMiNEPXN)
On thle day Of August, 1975, before. oft, a notary public,
within and Eor said county, PerxOnfilly appeared Charles A. Cox, single,
to roe known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing
instrument and acknowledged that he executed the game as his free act and
dead.
ta
a
SCHICL
PUBUC
MY C0MMWf0jj&Pj' C-qu;4ty
asms. Sol
1160211
-J.
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)as
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
On this ctle
,.&&Y of Ael 1975, before r4e. a- Notary Public within
and for Said Coun by, par sona.Uy appeared R o b a r t 23 0 W a 11 and E rn rn a
L o u P o w a 11 , hu sband and wife, to me known to be the Pe x 0 on a do a cribed
in and who executed the foregoing instrument wW acknowledged that they axe
ciited the sarne as tbair free act and dead.
&&4ALwAAm&,%A-tAA6AMMjAL*A ac -'161..
juErf J. SWIL I - / I,
NoTid tv ljuaw. '0441414MOT6 J,
my uodmrow I -A -FRO sap- a. IN,
ASSENT:
The Farmers and MOch&nicz Savings Bank of Minneap-
13 Its, m0rkgRgec in Doc- NO- 1060199. filea of Registrar of Tibles, Hennepin
county, Minnesota, covering said Tract L, Registered Land Survay
does hereby assent to this agreement as ouch Inortgegee.
I)ated. NoVember 4. 1975 THE FARM M -S
SAVINGS BANK
STATE OF MrNNICSOTA )
)89
COU14T Y OF HENNEPIN )
On this Ngvember
Ath day, of AXWMX 1975, before me, -, Notary Public with-
in and for said County personally appeared, Howard Ngrovqu
LO Me pGrOOMILY known, who. being by me duly sworn he did bay that he in the
Secretary Of The Farmers and Mechanics savings
Bank of Minneapolis. the corporation named in the foregoing instrument,
and that said instrument 9 ad and sealed in behalf Of said corporation by
authority of its Board of �mmand said Howard N. Groven
awltnowledged said instrurnent to be the free act and 4sed of said corporation.
..I IF
""""4AJ
"t" LQ
JfLZ�YA:19 ft:
IV
EPIN OUNTY
.3- J'W_ C'.Pk;�M
WI,VVVV V
AGENDAITEM
Item No.: 16 Date: May 8, 2017
Item Description: 17-3922 City of Orono Text Amendment: Wetland Regulations
Presenter: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Agenda Planning Department
Development Director Section: Report
1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to amend the city code pertaining to wetland regulations.
2. Minnesota Statutes 15.99 Deadline. Not applicable
3. Background/ Summary. The review of wetland setbacks was the 6' highest priority item identified
by the Planning Commission and City Council last fall. The Development Process Review Committee
recommended that the wetland regulations be reviewed to be more consistent with the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District, recognized experts in water quality and preservation. It is important to note that
Minnehaha Creek's focus is region -wide, and it looks to community partners for the lot by lot application
of objectives.
Wetland delineation. The edge of a wetland is important to apply setbacks. There are two types of
wetland delineations, a "desk review" and a formal delineation. The city requires a formal delineation on
any property where a project is within 150 feet of a wetland, regardless of the type of wetland. The
watershed district only requires a wetland delineation when specific wetland rules are triggered,
commonly when a new home is built, or the property is subdivided. Since formal delineations may only
occur when vegetation is actively growing, May through mid-October, this often impacts the approval
timeline. The proposed ordinance allows the city to accept information for a desk review, in lieu of a
formal delineation for projects not likely to impact the wetland due to project scope, distance, and/
or topography, similar to methods employed by the watershed district.
Wetland Buffer/ Setback. A wetland buffer is established by the Watershed District as a "No -Touch"
area when the Watershed requires a delineation. No activity may occur in the buffer, including mowing,
fertilizing, grading, etc. This buffer distance ranges from 12.5 to 75 feet, depending on the type of
wetland. The Watershed allows buffer averaging, an increase of the buffer depth in one area of the lot, to
reduce it in another area. If the watershed does not require a wetland delineation, they do not require a
buffer. A wetland setback is established by the city. No structure may be built within the setback. Our
setbacks vary between 35 feet and 85 feet (35 feet or 10 more than the applicable buffer). Currently, city
code requires a 35 setback minimum and is often employed with no buffer has been established by the
watershed district.
4. Planning Commission comment. The Planning Commission, on April 17', reviewed a draft
ordinance that altered when a wetland delineation is required, and discussed options related to wetland
buffers. The Commission considered three options, including not changing the setback requirement,
reducing the setback (reducing the minimum from 35 to 22), and eliminating the setback altogether.
Ultimately, the Commission recommended no changes to the setback, keeping it at 3 5 feet or 10 feet
greater than the established buffer.
5. Public Comment. The City has received comments for and against the buffer/ setback changes. Draft
minutes are provided as Exhibit C and written comments are provided as Exhibit D. Those in support of
removing or reducing the setback feel the use of their land is being compromised unnecessarily. Those in
support of retaining the setback rules favor preservation of Orono character and long standing values. One
resident questioned how the watershed treats old delineations for new projects. The Watershed has
Prepared By: J. Bamhart Reviewed By: J. Bamhart Approved By: DR
AGENDAITEM
responded, stating that if a buffer has been declared, they would use that delineation and buffer. If a buffer
had not been declared, they would require a new delineation.
6. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends adoption of the ordinance as drafted.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to adopt the ordinance as drafted.
Exhibits
Exhibit A.
Draft Ordinance
Exhibit B.
PC report dated 4-17-17
Exhibit C.
Draft PC Minutes
Exhibit D.
Public comment received
Exhibit E.
Ordinance presented to the Planning Commission
References
History of wetland regulation in Orono
Prepared By: J. Bamhart Reviewed By: J. Bamhart Approved By: D5R
Council
Exhibit A
17-3922
ORDINANCE NO. THIRD SERIES May 8, 2017
2
3 CITY OF ORONO
4 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
5
6 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES
7 PERTAINING TO WETLAND REGULATIONS
8
9
10 THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS:
11
12 SECTION 1. Section 78-1603 shall be amended by adding and deleting text to read as
13 follows:
14
15 Sec. 78-1603. - Boundaries of the wetland overlay districts and designation of official city wetland
16 map.
17 This section establishes wetland overlay districts. These districts are subject to additional
18 requirements beyond those required by the WCA. The boundaries of the wetland overlay districts
19 are identified graphically on the official city wetland map (CWM) which is hereby adopted by
20 reference, a copy of which shall be kept on file in the office of the city clerk and shall be available
21 for public review during all normal office hours. Wetlands in addition to those shown on the city
22 wetland map may exist, and may be identified by wetland delineations under WCA rules. If a
23 specific wetland delineation has been done under WCA rules, then the boundaries of the wetland
24 overlay district for that location will be as shown in the delineation. The city may require wetland
25 delineations to determine compliance with WCA rules and to determine administrative wetland
26 boundaries; however, property owners may have wetland delineations done for their properties on
27 their own initiative. The delineation must be done by a qualified professional according to WCA
28 rules and be acceptable to the planning dir-eete ci1y administrator, who may require review by city
29 consultants or a technical evaluation panel if necessary. Approved WCA wetland delineations must
30 be provided to the city in a hard copy format and a CAD or GIS format in Hennepin County
31 coordinates. The planning dir-eete city administrator will have the approved WCA wetland
32 delineations shown on the official city wetland map. Public waters are not included in the overlay
33 district, unless a wetland is part of a public water.
34
35 SECTION 2. Section 78-1604 shall be amended by adding and deleting text to read as
36 follows:
37
38 Sec. 78-1604. - Interpretation of wetlands boundaries.
39 Whenever a wetland boundary is disputed or uncertain, the pla+ming dir-eete city administrator
40 may require the submission of a registered survey of the property and field staking showing the city -
41 designated wetland contour or a delineation of the wetland, and such other information as the
42 director may require in order to resolve the dispute or uncertainty. The planning dir-eeter.- �jfty
43 administrator may require review by city consultants or a technical evaluation panel if necessary.
44 No boundary change may be authorized on the basis of fill that was placed on the site after the city
45 designated the area as part of the wetland overlay district. Persons aggrieved by a decision of the
46 planning directo city administrator may appeal such decision in accordance with the provisions of
47 section 78-99 of this chapter and the WCA rules.
48 a. Delineation types.
49 A Tier 1 Boundary determination is a review of known information to determine an
50 understood boundary, and may be used when the proposed project is located on a lot where a wetland
51 is believed to exist, but the project is not likely to iMpact the wetland due to project scope, distance,
52 and/ or topogrgphy. Known information may include aerial photogrgphy, third party studies, and/
53 or site visits. A tier I BoundM determination is not a delineation.
54 A Tier 2 Delineation is a delineation is conducted by a certified wetland delineator and
55 verified by the Local Government Unit. Tier 2 delineation information shall be provided on a
56 certified certificate of survey.
57 b. Delineation required. The type of delineation shall be determined by the City
58 Administrator or their designee.
59 Tier I Boundary determinations may be required for accessory structures, accessory buildings,
60 and other projects primarily outside the wetland or wetland buffer area.
61 Tier 2 Delineations shall be required for projects that include a new residential principal
62 structure, a project that impacts the wetland, a subdivision, or a project that otherwise is regglated
63 by the Waterbody Crossings and Structures Rule or Storrawater Management Rule of the Minnehaha
64 Creek Watershed District, unless waived by the Watershed District. A Tier 2 Delineation mgy also
65 be required for a project proposed at or within 5' of the buffer/ setback line.
66 A Tier I boundary adjustment mgy be substituted for the Tier 2 delineation when the qpplicant
67 can demonstrate the wetland boundary location to the satisfaction of the city and the watershed
68 district, due to topogrgphy, distance of the project to the wetland, site specific features, and known
69 information.
70
71 SECTION 3. Section 78-1605 shall be amended by adding and deleting text to read as
72 follows:
73
74 Sec. 78-1605. - Wetland buffer areas and setbacks.
75
76 (a) This subsection establishes authority for wetland buffer areas around protected wetlands. Buffer
77 areas are necessary and beneficial to maintain the health of wetlands. Buffer areas protect the
78 edge of wetlands from erosion while filtering sediment, chemicals and other nutrients from
79 runoff that drains into wetlands. Buffer areas can improve the biological diversity and health of
80 a wetland environment while reducing the adverse impacts of human activities.
81 (b) All wetlands within the City of Orono are within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
82 (MCWD), which has rules and regulations for the establishment and maintenance of wetland
83 buffers. In an effort to avoid overlapping or conflicting regulations, the city defers jurisdiction
84 for the establishment and maintenance of wetland buffers to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
85 District. If application of MCWD buffer regulations is in conflict with city regulations, the -me -Fe
86 restrieti Watershed District requirements shall apply.
87 (c) In order to provide for a minimum level of wetland protection where Minnehaha Creek
88 Watershed District buffer rules do not provide for adequate separation between wetlands and
89 buildings or other structures or surfaces, the city shall require setbacks from the delineated edge
90 of a protected wetland as follows:
Minimum distance setback from delineated edge of wetland to
any building (principal or accessory) or other structure,
91 Areas within the required setback area subject to filling, grading or excavation as part of a
92 construction project shall be revegetated immediately upon completion of such earthwork.
93 Setbaeks must be veiroed with wetiand delineation infet:fnation. The determination of whether- a
94 Level 1 deliaea4ien er- Level 2 delineation is r-e"ir-ed shall be at the diser-etion of the planning
95 dir-eeter-. Level 2 delinea4ion infet=mation shall be pr-ovided on a eet4ified eet4ifieate of sufvey.
96 The requirement for- delineation shall be applied in eases whefe the wedand exists within 150
97 feet of the proposed pr-ojeet-.
98 (d) The City of Orono has established wetland protection strategies in the Orono Surface Water
99 Management Plan (SWMP) (January 2011). A protection classification has been assigned to
100 each wetland in Orono based on the stormwater susceptibility and functional assessment for
101 each wetland. The city has also established additional protection requirements for each
102 classification. The four protection classifications for all properties excgpt those zoned as
103 "residential" are described as follows:
hardcover, septic systems or wells:
Where no formal buffer exists
Additional
and where MCWD does not
3 5 feet
require a buffer
Protection
Where a formal buffer exists or
3 5 feet or established buffer width plus 10 feet, whichever is
where MCWD buffer is required
greater
91 Areas within the required setback area subject to filling, grading or excavation as part of a
92 construction project shall be revegetated immediately upon completion of such earthwork.
93 Setbaeks must be veiroed with wetiand delineation infet:fnation. The determination of whether- a
94 Level 1 deliaea4ien er- Level 2 delineation is r-e"ir-ed shall be at the diser-etion of the planning
95 dir-eeter-. Level 2 delinea4ion infet=mation shall be pr-ovided on a eet4ified eet4ifieate of sufvey.
96 The requirement for- delineation shall be applied in eases whefe the wedand exists within 150
97 feet of the proposed pr-ojeet-.
98 (d) The City of Orono has established wetland protection strategies in the Orono Surface Water
99 Management Plan (SWMP) (January 2011). A protection classification has been assigned to
100 each wetland in Orono based on the stormwater susceptibility and functional assessment for
101 each wetland. The city has also established additional protection requirements for each
102 classification. The four protection classifications for all properties excgpt those zoned as
103 "residential" are described as follows:
Additional
Protection
Requirements
Protection
Susceptibility
Description
(B = Bounce
Changem
Classification
Rating
water level due
to runoff event)
(P =
Phosphorus)
B: Maintain
Highly susceptible to
bounce at or
both quantity and
below existing
quality impacts from
conditions
"Preserve"
Highly Susceptible
runoff, have the
P: Limit
highest degree of
loadings to
predevelopment
protection
loading (0. 14
Lbs/Ac/Yr)
Moderately
B: Maintain
susceptible to
bounce at or
"Manage V
Moderately
quantity and quality
below existing
Susceptible
impacts; protection is
conditions plus
less stringent than
0.5 foot
Preserve, provides
P: Limit
"Manage 2"
"Manage 3"
104
Slightly Susceptible
Least Susceptible
protection to
maintain their
characteristics
Less stringent
protection than
Manage I wetlands;
maintenance of
characteristics is
desirable
Wetlands are
significantly
degraded (e.g.,
cultivated or canary
grass monotype) or
lack of wetland
characteristics; not
typically impacted
by runoff; no
quantity and only
limited quality
treatment of runoff is
required
loadings to
predevelopment
loadings times
2(0.28
Lbs/Ae/Yr)
B: Maintain
bounce at or
below existing
conditions plus
1.0 foot
P: Limit
concentration
to
predevelopment
concentrations
(200 ppb)
B: No quantity
requirement
P: Limit
concentration
to 225 ppb
105 The protection classification for each wetland will be found on the "Wetland Management
106 Classification Map & List" which is hereby adopted by reference, a copy of which shall be kept on
107 file in the office of the city clerk and shall be available for public review during all normal office
108 hours. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District required buffer area widths are based on the four
109 protection classifications.
110
III SECTION4. Section 78-1608 shall be amended by adding and deleting text to read as
112 follows:
113
114 Sec. 78-1608. - Standards.
115 The following standards apply to all land within the wetland overlay districts, existing and
116 MCWD-required wetland buffer areas, and to neighboring lands:
117 (1) Proteetion of wetlands.
118 a. Except as modified or regulated by the standards of this subsection, all requirements
119 of the underlying zoning district apply.
4
120 b. No structures are allowed in the wetland overlay districts except those allowed as of
121 right or by conditional use permit by sections 78-1606 or 78-1607 of this article.
122 c. Activities including, but not limited to, building (other than a boardwalk or dock),
123 paving, mowing, vegetation removal, filling, dumping, yard waste disposal or fertilizer
124 application are prohibited. Invasive non-native vegetation, such as European
125 buckthorn and noxious weeds, may be removed by obtaining a vegetation removal
126 permit from the city.
127 d. Before grading or construction near a wetland over -lay dis4 , the owner or contractor
128 must place erosion control fencing on the upland side of the perimeter of the wetland
129 ever -lay dis , or as required by the city. This fencing must remain in place until all
130 development activities that may affect the wetland have been finished and adequate
131 vegetative cover has been established at which time the fencing must be removed.
132 e. All structures must have a minimum basement floor elevation not less than one foot
133 above the 100 -year flood elevation.
134 f. All hard -surface runoff must be treated in accordance with the requirements of the city
135 and the appropriate watershed district. Treatment may include site retention
136 skimmers, weirs or sedimentation ponds of appropriate scale. Structures and ponds
137 serving this purpose must be properly maintained and serviced by the property owner.
138 g. Discharge into the wetlands must occur at a rate no greater than allowed by the city
139 engineer in accordance with the city's surface water management plan and the
140 appropriate MCWD requirements.
141 (2) Protection ofwetland buffer areas. Existing and MCWD-required wetland buffers shall be
142 maintained and protected per the requirements of existing covenants as well as MCWD
143 regulations as administered by MCWD.
144 (3) Nonconformities.
145
a. Effect ofwetland boundary expansion. An existing structure, driveway or parking area
146
meeting the required setback from a city -designated wetland boundary or existing
147
established buffer area is considered a legal nonconforming development if a later
148
wetland delineation or implementation of a wetland buffer shows that the wetland or
149
its buffer is closer than the required setback.
150
b. Existing nonconformities. An existing structure, driveway or parking area that does
151
not meet the required setback from a city -designated wetland boundary or buffer area,
152
is considered a legal nonconforming development.
153
154 SECTION 5. Section 78-1614 shall be amended by adding and deleting text to read as
155 follows:
156
157 Sec. 78-1614. - Authority/enforcement actions.
158 Nothing herein contained shall prevent the city from taking such other lawful action as is
159 necessary to prevent or remedy any violation. Such actions may include but are not limited to:
160 (1) In responding to a suspected article violation, the planning dir-eete city administrator and
161 the city may utilize the full array of enforcement actions available to it including but not
162 limited to prosecution and fines, injunctions, after -the -fact permits, and/or orders for
163 corrective measures to the guilty party.
5
164 (2) When an article violation is either discovered by or brought to the attention of the planning
165 dir-eete city administrator, the planning dir-eete city administrator shall immediately
166 investigate the situation and document the nature and extent of the violation of the official
167 control. As soon as is reasonably possible, this information will be submitted to the MCWD
168 along with the community's plan of action to correct the violation to the degree possible.
169 (3) The planning dir-eete cijy administrator shall notify the suspected party of the requirements
170 of this article and all other official controls and the nature and extent of the suspected
171 violation of these controls. If the structure and/or use is under construction or development,
172 the planning dir-eeto city administrator may order the construction or development
173 immediately halted until a proper permit or approval is granted by the community. If the
174 construction or development is already completed, then the plafming dir-eeto �qLty
175 administrator may either: (1) issue an order identifying the corrective actions that must be
176 made within a specified time period to bring the use or structure into compliance with the
177 official controls; or (2) notify the responsible party to apply for an after -the -fact
178 permit/development approval within a specified period of time not to exceed 30 -days.
179 (4) If the responsible party does not appropriately respond to the planning dir-eete Kfty
180 administrator within the specified period of time, each additional day that lapses shall
181 constitute an additional violation of this article and shall be prosecuted accordingly. The
182 plaFming dir-eeto cijy administrator shall also upon the lapse of the specified response
183 period notify the landowner to restore the land to the condition which existed prior to the
184 violation of this article.
185
186
I I,
1 0191
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its
passage and publication.
ADOPTED this day of _, 2017 on a vote of — ayes and _ nays by the
City Council of Orono, Minnesota.
ATTEST:
Anna Carlson, City Clerk
Dennis Walsh, Mayor
Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of 2017.
To: Chair Thiesse and Planning Commission Members
Doug Reeder, Interim City Administrator
From: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Development Director
Date: April 17, 2017
Council
Exhibit B
17-3922
Subject: #17-3922, City of Orono Text Amendment: Wetland Regulations
Public Hearing
Application Summary: The city is considering an ordinance that would alter the wetland
delineation and wetland buffer requirements.
Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the wetland
delineation changes, and seeks direction as to buffering and setback regulation.
Background
The Mayor's Development Process Review Committee has recommended that the wetland rules
be reviewed and revised as necessary to be consistent with the Watershed District's (District)
regulations as they administer the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). The perception is the costs
(time and financial) associated with the city's approach to wetland protection outweigh the
benefit over the Districts.
The two main areas identified by staff where the City and the District differ:
When wetlands are required to be delineated, and the type of delineation.
The requirement of a setback beyond required buffer or when no buffer is required, city
setbacks.
The District's core responsibility is the regional management and protection of water quality of
the Minnehaha Creek watershed, including Lake Minnetonka. The entire city of Orono is within
this watershed district. It is important to note that the District's view is regional in scale, and the
District looks to its community partners to respond to water quality protection goals at a lot -by -
lot scale.
Wetland Delineation. Wetland delineation is necessary to implement many wetland rules,
including an understanding of impact, and the application of buffers and setbacks. The City and
the District require a wetland delineation as part of a subdivision, a new principal residential
structure, a project that proposes impacts to a wetland, or when other rules, related to
stormwater management or waterbody crossings are triggered.
Generally, there are two types of wetland delineations. Formal review involves a licensed
delineator performing a field inspection to observe soils, vegetation, and other features. The
vegetation must be growing, so formal delineation can occur only May through October. A
"desk" review is sometimes employed, and is a review of known information from the County,
DNR, District or others regarding water levels, soils, topography. The District occasionally allows
for desk reviews when the project is not anticipated to impact the wetland.
FILE # 17-3922
April 17, 2017
Page 2 of 3
The city currently requires a wetland delineation when hardcover or grading is proposed within
150 feet of a wetland. The City allows a 'desk delineation' for projects that are clearly not
impacting the wetland, usually when the improvement is below the wetland and/or separated
by extreme distances. Historically, this desk delineation is rarely employed.
To bring city regulations closer to the District's, the draft ordinance proposes two different types
of wetland delineation. A full delineation (tier 2, licensed professional, site visits, growing
season, 15 day comment period, etc.) is required for new principal residential structures,
subdivisions, and other projects triggering Watershed requirements. A tier 1 (desk review)
delineation may be accepted by the city for all other projects, regardless of distance from the
project area. If the Applicant disagrees with the city's interpretation of the wetland boundary, a
full delineation may be provided.
Buffers. The District establishes a buffer when a wetland is impacted or when a wetland is
clowngradient of work triggering the Wetland Protection rule, i.e. when new principal residential
structure, subdivision, or other projects triggering watershed rules are proposed. A buffer is a
no -touch area surrounding the delineated wetland, long, native grasses and plants serve to
protect the wetland from encroaching soil compaction, fertilizers, and grass clippings.
Additions to existing homes, accessory structures and buildings, etc., do not trigger the Wetland
Protection rule and therefore, the watershed does not require a buffer if one wasn't already
established. The City has established a setback, 10 feet from the buffer, or 35 feet from the
wetland edge, which ever is greater. This setback is intended to protect water quality and to
separate man-made improvements from the natural features of the land. The 10 feet is
intended to prevent structures placed in such a way that impacts the no -touch characteristics of
the buffer. 10 feet allows property owners to walk or move equipment between a structure and
the buffer, for example.
With respect to buffers, there are three primary options.
Option 1: Recognizing that the watershed district's focus is regional, and the city's is smaller,
retain the existing setback requirements. Make no changes to buffers.
Option 2: Recognizing the city's role in water quality protection, yet balance the need for use of
land, reduce the setback to 22 feet (or another dimension) where no buffer is required or has
been established. 22 feet is 9 and one half feet more than the shortest possible buffer required
by the watershed district for residential properties. Plus, 22 feet is a memorable setback, less
likely to be lost in the minds of the applicant, to the benefit of protecting the wetland.
Option 3. Completely defer buffer requirements to the District, and remove the requirement of
a setback from undeclared buffers and the additional 10 feet from declared buffers.
Staff does not recommend eliminating setbacks from wetland edges, Option 3 as this would
allow an improvement at the wetland boundary, offering no protection to the wetland, or the
improvement due to wetland bounce and poor soil conditions. . Staff can support a reduction in
the setback, balancing the goals of water quality and use of property, Option 2.
Public Comments
FILE # 17-3922
April 17, 2017
Page 3 of 3
To date, no public comments have been received.
Issues for Consideration
1. With respect to buffers, does the Planning Commission and Council find value in some
level of wetland buffer control?
2. With respect to delineations, does the Planning Commission and Council feel desk
analysis of wetland edges acceptable?
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A. Draft Ordinance
Exhibit B. History of wetland regulation in Orono
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
11. #17-3922 CITY OF ORONO TEXT AMENDMENT: WETLANDS PROTECTION, 10:20
P.M. — 11:40 P.M.
Barnhart stated the wetland regulation was the sixth highest priority identified by the Planning
Commission and City Council last year. The Development Process Review Committee has provided
some guidance and suggestions for amendments to those regulations. It has been noted by people over
the years that the City's regulations are stricter than the Watershed District and that some possible
modifications might be in order. The first main area identified by Staff where the City and the Watershed
District differ is when wetlands are required to be delineated and the type of delineation. The second
main area is the requirement of a setback beyond required buffer or when no buffer is required. Barnhart
noted the City has an additional setback in addition to the Watershed District in some situations.
The goal behind the buffer/setback is to establish ground features to help filter the water prior to entering
the wetlands. The City also has an additional setback so there is some additional separation. For
example, if there is a 25 -foot buffer requirement imposed by the Watershed District, the City requires that
an extra 10 feet in order to provide people some room to move around their house.
From a wetland delineation standpoint, the Watershed District makes it clear that a wetland delineation is
only required when someone is constructing a new principal residential structure or are doing a project
that proposes impacts to a wetland. A true wetland delineation requires field work and a licensed
delineator visiting the site. Normally that delineation cannot be done until May when the vegetation starts
growing, which provides someone only six months to obtain a delineation. There is also a 15 -day waiting
or comment period on the delineation.
The City will require a wetland delineation for most projects, including when hardcover or grading is
proposed within 150 feet of a wetland. The City allows a desk delineation for projects that are clearly not
impacting the wetland, which is usually when the improvement is below the wetland and/or separated by
extreme distances.
Banrihart stated the direction thus far was to make the City's rules more consistent with the Watershed
District's. A full delineation is required for new principal residential structures, subdivisions, and other
Page 1 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
projects triggering Watershed requirements. A Tier 1 or desk review delineation may be accepted by the
City for all other projects regardless of distance from the project area. If the applicant disagrees with the
City's interpretation of the wetland boundary, a full delineation may be provided. Other smaller projects,
such as decks or patios, require a verification through a desk review or a Tier 1 review.
The second issue that was to be addressed relates to the buffers. The Watershed District establishes a
buffer when a wetland is impacted or when a wetland is downgradient of work triggering the Wetland
Protection Rule. A buffer is a no -touch area surrounding the delineated wetland. Additions to existing
homes, accessory structures and buildings, etc., do not trigger the Wetland Protection Rule and therefore
the Watershed District does not require a buffer if one was not already established.
The City has established a I 0 -foot setback from the buffer or 3 5 feet from the wetland edge, whichever is
greater. This setback is intended to protect water quality and to separate manmade improvements from
the natural features of the land. The ten feet is intended to prevent structures placed in such a way that
impacts the no -touch characteristics of the buffer and allows property owners to walk or move equipment
between a structure and the buffer.
With respect to buffers, there are three primary options:
Option 1: Recognizing that the Watershed District's focus is regional and the City's is smaller, retain the
existing setback requirements. Make no changes to buffers.
Option 2: Recognizing the City's role in water quality protection, yet balance the need for use of land,
reduce the setback to 22 feet where no buffer is required or has been established. 22 feet is
nine and one half feet more than the shortest possible buffer required by the Watershed District
for residential properties. Plus, 22 feet is a memorable setback, less likely to be lost in the
mind of the applicant, to the benefit of protecting the wetland.
Option 3: Completely defer buffer requirements to the Watershed District and remove the requirement of
a setback from undeclared buffers and the additional ten feet from declared buffers.
Page 2 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Staff does not recommend eliminating setbacks from wetland edges as this would allow an improvement
at the wetland boundary, offering no protection to the wetland, or the improvement due to wetland bounce
and poor soil conditions. Staff can support a reduction in the setback, which balances the goals of water
quality and use of the property.
Written comments have been received and are included in the Commission's packet.
Barnhart noted the majority of the changes can be found on Page 3, Lines 90 through 99, which talks
about Tier I versus Tier 2 delineations and when those type of delineations would be required. The chart
incorporates Option 2 and provides some idea of the impact of the changes. Staff is looking for feedback
tonight from the Planning Commission on this item.
Lemke asked what constitutes a wetland.
Barnhart stated there are several criteria that establish the presence of a wetland, such as the presence of
water, soils, and certain vegetation. Those characteristics help establish the type of wetland.
Lemke asked whether they could look at the dead vegetation to establish a welland.
Barnhart indicated the vegetation needs to be actively growing. Barnhart stated currently the City has a
Type I and a Type 11 wetland delineation process. Barnhart indicated he did not utilize that language
since the Bureau of Soil and Water has a Type I and a Type 11 wetland and he did not want to confuse the
two. Currently the ordinance allows for a desk review, when those would be used, as well as provide
some direction to Staff on how those are employed. Barnhart stated a Tier 2 wetland delineation would
be as required by the Watershed District, and as with any decision Staff makes, the applicant can appeal
that decision.
Thiesse stated it was always his understanding there was a 25 -foot buffer and the additional 10 feet was
considered a setback. Thiesse stated by going to what is being proposed, the City will need to be more
diligent about keeping people out of the buffer.
Page 3 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Barnhart stated what is being proposed, starting on Line 115, is changing the distance from 35 to 22.
Barnhart indicated there would still be the buffer established by the Watershed District and then adding
ten feet of setback. Currently the minimum setback to any building, principal or accessory, is 35 feet and
the draft ordinance reduces that to 22 feet where no formal buffer is required. Where a formal buffer
exists or is required, it would be 22 feet or established buffer width plus ten feet, whichever is greater.
Barnhart stated the effect of the chart on Line 115 is to show the changes from 35 feet to 22 feet.
Olson asked if the net loss would be 13 feet.
Barnhart indicated the net difference would be 13 feet in both circumstances.
Schwingler asked why he decided on 13 feet.
Barnhart stated the minimum buffer established by the Watershed District is 12.5 feet. Barnhart indicated
he took that 12.5 feet, plus a 1 0 -foot setback, and arrived at 22.5 feet, which was then rounded down to 22
feet. Barnhart stated it is important to note that wetland buffer averaging would require approval by the
Watershed District and would likely require a formal wetland delineation, so it may not be applicable for
a small shed in the back yard.
Landgraver stated to his recollection the City had one variance application to the buffer in the past year
and that it does not happen very frequently.
Barnhart stated if the Planning Commission does not feel there is an issue, it can be left at 35 feet and that
the biggest impact would be related to the wetland delineations.
Landgraver asked what situations would be exist where the City would impose a former buffer.
Landgraver stated his understanding was the MCWD imposed all the buffers.
Barnhart stated they do, but that there might be a situation where a property owner constructed a home in
2005 and at that time there was a buffer of 65 feet required. Then in 2017 the property owner would like
Page 4 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
to construct a shed in their back yard. The City would add ten feet to that buffer from a setback
standpoint.
Landgraver asked if there is a situation where the City has imposed a formal buffer.
Barnhart stated he does not want to say the City has not done that but that he is not aware of any.
Landgraver asked if there is any type of quantitative feedback on the current buffer the City has.
Barnhart stated there probably is a way to equate lake quality and lake frontage and then compare it to
other communities but that he does not have that information at the present time.
Landgraver stated the City does not have a lot of requests for buffer setbacks and that he is not sure
whether Orono should go back to a lower number.
Barnhart stated Orono's stance on protecting the water quality does not just impact the wetlands but it
also includes the lake yard, the lake, the wetlands, and all of those things that come into consideration.
The main impact of the regulation will be for people who would like to do improvements that do not
trigger a full wetland delineation by the Watershed District. This ordinance would give them 13 feet of
their yard back where improvements can be done, which will benefit the smaller lots more. Barnhart
stated the Planning Commission will need to decide whether 13 feet is appropriate.
Landgraver commented the desk review is a way to serve the citizens better.
Gaffron stated from a practical standpoint, when there is no formal delineation, Staff does not know
where the edge of the wetland is and that they are unsure where to start measuring that setback. Gaffron
stated that then becomes a functional issue in trying to implement an ordinance.
Lemke stated he likes the delineation improvement and that he would prefer to leave the buffer and
setback as is.
Page 5 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Leskinen noted she has received emails and letters from people encouraging her to vote in favor of
Option 1. Leskinen stated the City does not receive very many variance requests to the buffer and that
one of the main goals of the City is to protect the water quality.
Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 10:49 p.m.
Justin Kinve, 950 Willow View Drive, stated his neighborhood is greatly impacted by the wetlands and
that the draft amendment goes a long way to address a lot of concerns. Kinve indicated he would be
against Option 2 and be more in favor of Option 3.
Kinve stated when a neighborhood like his is platted and built, the Watershed District comes in and they
do the determinations on the wetlands. The Willow View neighborhood was given wetland buffers,
which the City has on file. Kinve indicated he is not looking to change any of that.
Kinve noted four years ago he ran into major problems attempting to place a small structure in his back
yard. One of the issues was that Willow Road was widened, which resulted in more flooding and high
water levels in the neighborhood. Kinve stated if he had a delineation done now, he likely would lose
more use of his property. Kinve stated since there is already that buffer, he is not sure going back another
10 feet would do anything for people. Kinve stated he would also not be in favor of the house being right
up to the buffer setback but that patios, fire pits, or sports courts could be closer to the wetland since there
is already that buffer.
Kinve stated in general the draft ordinance is a major step forward. Kinve stated his neighborhood has
had a ton of problems relating to the wetland issues, and the lack of hearing about it might not necessarily
mean it is not an issue simply because people have given up. Kinve stated people have had to spend
thousands of dollars obtaining a delineation and six of his neighbors have expressed concerns about the
additional setback. Kinve stated protecting the water quality is great and the buffers do that. Kinve stated
in his view other structures could be constructed closer to the buffer, especially since the Watershed
District allows structures right up against the buffer.
Thiesse asked if some of those wetlands were created.
Page 6 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Kinve indicated they were and some of them were a result of mitigation. Kinve stated the bigger issue is
the current drainage system, which is not working right.
Thiesse asked if there is a reason why a platted development with platted wetlands would not govern over
everything.
Curtis stated that is how the Watershed District treats it but it is not how WACA treats the wetlands.
Barnhart noted the Watershed District does not require the setback but it does require a buffer in certain
situations. Staff is proposing Option 2, which is kind of in the middle.
Kinve stated it should depend on the type of structure that is being constructed on how far away from the
buffer it should be. Kinve indicated there are water permeable materials that could be used if the
structure is being constructed to the buffer. Kinve stated he would like it to be very transparent, and if
there are delineations, a person should be able to rely on them for the purposes of planning without
having to worry about an additional setback since it erodes a person's use of their property even more.
Landgraver asked what he would prefer if he had a choice between having a fixed delineation when the
properties are platted plus a buffer or whether it should be more of a dynamic one that can be changed
periodically.
Kinve stated the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District treats it more as a permanent delineation unless
there is a significant change. Kinve stated in his view Option 3 completely aligns Orono with the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Kinve stated he is not for incrementalism simply for
incrementalism's sake, which is what Option 2 is about. Kinve stated he would not be in favor of having
the principal structure right up to the buffer but that other accessory structures could be built right up to
the buffer.
Thiesse commented the intent of the setback was to allow people some additional space in their back yard
but then the setback prohibits them from doing much of anything in that area.
Page 7 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Gaffron stated accessory structures could be right up to the edge of the buffer since people probably do
not care that they cannot walk around the back of their shed or sports court. Gaffron stated the setback
prohibits people from constructing anything in that area.
Kinve stated if the principal structure is built right up to the buffer, it is likely people will incrementally
move into the buffer.
Gaffron noted the City had a 26 -foot setback from the edge of the wetland from 1975 until 2005. From
2005 to 2013, there was a buffer requirement plus a setback and the City would determine the location of
the buffer. In 2013, the City decided to go with the Watershed District's buffer along with a setback.
Gaffron asked whether the Watershed District follows WACA rules.
Barnhart stated to his knowledge they do but that he will verify that.
Kinve indicated he would be in support of an ordinance that gives the residents guidance on where the
lines are so then they do not have to worry about the water level changing periodically.
Barnhart stated that is part of the challenge and the reason why delineations are only valid for five years.
Thiesse noted the delineation and the amount of wetland were developed for this specific property.
Barnhart commented he is not sure what the WACA rules states regarding that.
Christopher Jones, 2320 Longview Circle, noted he did submit some written comments regarding this
issue. Jones stated he would like to commend Staff for their excellent recitation of Orono's history in
protecting the water quality of the area lakes and streams. Jones stated what that points to is the fact that
Orono really does care about water quality and has taken very proactive steps to protect that so it does
continue to preserve the quality of water that flows down the creek.
Earlier this evening there were comments made about abdicating the rights, responsibilities, and the
power of the City Council and the Planning Commission. Jones stated the ability to control things at the
Page 8 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
local level, especially as more and more developments take place, is important. Jones noted the purpose
of the buffer is to keep large amounts of water from reaching the watershed too quickly and that the City
needs to look carefully at any structures that shed water into the wetland regardless if it is a shed or a
sports court. If a case by case basis is needed, that option should be made available.
Jones stated when it comes to lakeshore property, those property owners should be required to do
something to mitigate runoff from going into the lake directly, such as an additional buffer zone or
plantings.
Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 11: 13 p.m.
Schwingler commented he appreciates Mr. Kinve's experience with this and that he has had several
people call and say they wanted the opportunity to have input but they just found out about it. Schwingler
noted the Watershed District looks out for the interests of the District and not necessarily the City.
Schwingler noted Long Lake has Grade D water quality and Lake Minnetonka is worse than it ever has
been. Schwingler stated in his view the City should get more public input.
Barnhart stated the Planning Commission could table this item to allow for more discussion.
Schwingler commented the discussion should also include Big Island.
Landgraver stated his inclination would be to not make a change on the buffers until there is a robust
discussion on it and to go with Option 1 at this time.
Olson asked what a desk delineation would look like for someone who is doing a major remodel of the
house. Olson asked whether a desk delineation could miss some things.
Barnhart indicated a full delineation is the gold standard and hopefully will catch everything in terms of
the wetland boundaries. A desk review would be a review of the currently available information
regarding what the wetland delineation is or the boundaries are in order to measure setbacks. Barnhart
stated from a remodel standpoint or a large addition to a home, a full delineation would not be required in
all situations and a desk review would be utilized to verify setbacks. If it appears that the building
Page 9 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
addition is encroaching into the setback, then the resident may have to modify their plans or submit
additional information, such as a wetland delineation.
Barnhart stated if the concern is that not enough people were aware about the buffer question, that would
be a moot point if no changes are going to be recommended. Barnhart stated if the Planning Commission
wants to consider changes to the buffer, then it might make sense to split this up into two ordinances and
allow for additional input.
Dennis Walsh, 1354 Rest Point Circle, noted wetland delineations can only be done from May through
October during the growing season, which is part of the issue. If someone wants to do something on their
property, they may be delayed as a result of the need for a wetland delineation, which is part of the reason
for the proposed change.
Walsh stated as it relates to the wetland buffers, there are not a lot of variances requested or approved
since a practical difficulty needs to be demonstrated. Walsh stated it is similar to the 0-75 foot zone in
that you cannot build in that zone but you can still walk in that area, but with a buffer, there is also a
I 0 -foot setback added on to that buffer prohibiting structures, which limits a person's ability to use their
property. Walsh stated the Development Process Review Committee felt the City should follow the
Watershed District's direction on this.
Kinve asked whether someone can skate on a pond located in the buffer area.
Thiesse commented that is a good question and that he does not know the answer to it. Thiesse stated as
far as the I 0 -foot setback is concerned, it is not a buffer but a piece of land that allows someone to access
their back yard.
Thiesse asked whether it would alleviate any of Mayor Walsh's concerns if the City opens that setback
area up a little to allow more usage in that.
Walsh stated he is trying to give more flexibility, which does not mean that he wants people to build right
up to the buffer. From a delineation standpoint, the ordinance is attempting to make it a little easier with
Page 10 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
the desk review for the residents. Walsh stated the Planning Commission should look at whether a
setback is needed, and if so, what that setback should be.
Kinve commented his position is that the LGU should not rule in this town and that the City should do
something to provide that flexibility and allow different structures in the setback. Kinve stated the
principal structure should not go up to the buffer.
Christopher Jones stated the Minnehaha CreekWatershed District has a regional view and Orono has a
local view. Jones stated in his view Orono probably owes it to itself to retain control of its local
environinent to some extent, particularly in situations where it occurs on a frequent basis or where it
might be more appropriate to weigh in at the local level rather than abdicating it to a regional authority.
Jones stated if the City does not have the information or the data to suggest why this is a good idea to
change, then why change it. Jones stated there could be a lot of unknowns and that there may have been
other influences that changed the wetland that had nothing to do with buffers and watershed issues. If
there is nothing that suggests that this is a good idea to do other than simply changing it, perhaps opening
it up for more discussion is more appropriate than approving it at 11:30 at night.
Thiesse closed the public hearing at 11:30 p.m.
Olson stated in his view the potential impact is too great to change it and that it might not be worth it to
change the buffer. Olson commented Orono has a very local decision making capacity here and they
should utilize that. Olson stated in his view there is some way to streamline things and that a fire pit or a
sports court could be a variance situation since there could be some practical difficulty associated with
those situations. Olson stated he does not feel it is worth changing the buffers due to the potential
enviromnental impacts and that it could be taking a step back.
Leskinen and Lemke indicated they are in agreement with Commissioner Olson.
Olson asked what the Planning Commission can do if it wants to do something with delineations.
Page 11 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Barnhart stated wetland delineations are an issue and that Options 2 and 3 only relate to the buffers.
Barnhart stated he is hearing from the Planning Commission that they should move the draft ordinance
forward with the recommended changes on the wetland delineations as proposed by Staff and to utilize
Option 1 relative to the buffers.
Thiesse stated he is not sure if Option I is exactly what they want. Thiesse indicated he likes Option I
but in his view there could be some leniency put in there.
Barnhart stated what he would recommend is that the Planning Commission put forth a recommendation
on the wetland delineation as proposed and make no changes to the wetland buffer but that if the City
Council would like to make changes to the buffer, they could recommend that the Council remand it back
to the Planning Commission for farther public input.
Thiesse commented he would like to have further discussion on the buffers and get some more
background information on why the buffers are the way they are.
Landgraver asked if the Council could vote on the buffers if the Planning Commission tables that portion
of it.
Barnhart stated the Council can change any portion of the ordinance they want regardless if there is a
recommendation from the Planning Commission or not. Barnhart stated the only way the Planning
Commission could discuss it further is if they table it.
Thiesse recommended the Planning Commission choose Option I with the recommendation that the
Planning Commission be given the ability to make some modifications to allow for some flexibility on
the buffer and setback.
Landgraver and Lemke stated they do not want to make any changes at this point to the buffer or setback.
Landgraver moved, Lemke seconded, Application No. 17-3922, City of Orono, Text Amendment:
Wetlands Protections, to recommend the City Council approve the desk delineation process
Page 12 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
outlined in Staff's memo and to recommend Option I as it relates to the buffers. VOTE: Ayes 6,
Nays 0.
(Recess taken from 11:38 p.m. to 11:40 p.m.)
12. #17-3925 CITY OF ORONO, TEXT AMENDMENT: SMALL LOTS/SETBACKS, 11:40
p.m. — 12:12 P.M.
Barnhart stated the issue of setbacks for small lots within the City has been on the ordinance review list
for several years. Last fall the Planning Commission identified this as the fifth highest priority.
Barnhart stated included in the Commissioners' packets are three maps. Throughout the City there are
lots that have been developed inconsistent with the zoning district. Map A shows all lots that are less
than a quarter area in blue. A number of them are located in the Navarre area. Barnhart stated in those
areas the zoning is between 1/2 acre, I acre, or two acres. The result is a number of nonconforming lots.
The effect on lot owners with nonconforming lots is that a new or expansion of a portion of the structure
within the required setback, including an expansion going up, requires a variance.
To address the issue, some adjustment of the setback is necessary. The Planning Commission should
consider the following options:
Option 1. Create a new zoning district for these neighborhoods, establishing unique lot sizes,
widths, and setbacks. A new zoning district should be introduced cautiously, as the
opportunity for unintended consequences is higher because many sections of the code
unrelated to lot size and width speak specifically to a particular zoning district. Staff
does not recommend establishing new zoning districts at this time.
Option 2. Amend the size, width, and setback requirements for existing zoning districts. This
would apply to all lots within that zoning district and could conceivable yield additional
density through lot splits.
Page 13 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Option 3. Amend yard setbacks in selected districts based on the lot size or width.
Barnhart stated in developing a proposed ordinance, Staff examined 36 different lots chosen at random in
"hot spot" neighborhoods throughout the City The area and lot width were noted and the side yard
setbacks were calculated, either through the survey or by measuring from an aerial photo.
Of the 36 lots, 23 exhibited non -conforming setbacks on at least one side, and of these, nine had
nonconforming setbacks on both sides. Of the 32 nonconforining setbacks, 19 had setbacks less than ten
feet.
Staff supports an amendment that prescribes side yard setbacks for nonconforming lots due to width as a
function of the lot width, proposed to be measured at the applicable lot width.
Barnhart noted the chart contained within Staff s report provides some examples of the various lot sizes
and the minimum setbacks based on the draft ordinance. In addition, the proposed language defining how
the side yard setbacks will be measured has been included in Staff s report.
The draft ordinance allows for a nonconforming lot to use 10 percent of their lot width as the setback to a
minimum of eight feet but it could be whatever number the Planning Commission feels appropriate. Of
the 32 nonconforming setbacks, four had setbacks between eight and ten feet. Staff does not recommend
establishing a minimum setback less than seven feet since construction of homes from setback to setback
is an expected consequence.
The proposed minimum will not eliminate variances since some existing homes are less than the
minimum called for in the ordinance. Barnhart stated the challenge is to provide the City with a little
more flexibility with a minimum level of open space preservation.
The Planning Corm-nission should discuss whether a minimum side setback of eight feet in the LR -113 and
LR- 1 C districts is appropriate given open space and massing control goals and whether the proposed
ordinance adequately addresses the goals of the Planning Commission and City Council.
Page 14 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Barnhart stated relative to the side street setback issue, Staff encounters situations where the side street is
unimproved but still requires a large setback. This often results in the vacation of that segment of the
right-of-way. Staff proposes language that prescribes an alternative setback if the right-of-way is
unimproved to be consistent with the interior side yard setback applicable for that lot.
Thiesse asked if the actuals were existing nonconformities originally or whether they were approved
through the years.
Barnhart indicated he does not know why they built where they did but that some lots are situations where
they were nonconforming, the property owner removed the home, and then met the setbacks a little more
than what they had originally.
Landgraver asked how many of those lots obtained variances.
Barnhart indicated he did not compile that infonnation.
Chair Thiesse opened the public hearing at 11:58 p.m.
Amy Nelson, 1180 Arbor Street, stated her lot is actually a conforming lot at 3.4 acres but that it is
located in a small lot neighborhood. Nelson stated she is here tonight as a point of clarification as to how
this amendment would affect her parcel. Nelson stated what she is hearing is the inequity that is
screaming to her. Nelson indicated her neighbor will be able to build within ten feet of the property line
but she will never be able to subdivide or build a house that close to the property line even though her
property is the only conforming parcel in the neighborhood.
Nelson stated in her view this is called spot zoning and everything that she has read says that spot zoning
is not very good due to the inequity. Basically the City is granting something to one homeowner by
creating and allowing a use that is not allowed by surrounding properties in the area.
Nelson commented it is quite ironic that the City is going to take the property that conforms and limit its
potential value and is instead taking every nonconforming property and allowing them to basically
Page 15 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
rezone. Nelson stated it is rezoning even though the City is still calling it the same since they are making
it different from any other area in the City.
Barnhart noted the City is not rezoning the area and that she would still be allowed to use her property
and not go through the variance process as her neighbors have to. Barnhart stated the draft ordinance
provides some flexibility for her neighbors to use their property.
Nelson indicated she has lived in this neighborhood for 35 years and that she has seen a number of
situations where they could not remodel that was aesthetically pleasing. Nelson commented it still seems
to her that there is a more reasonable and simple solution, such as rezoning the whole neighborhood to an
appropriate designation that is fair to everyone. Nelson stated by doing that, it would also probably
address the setbacks to some extent. Nelson stated if they rezone the neighborhood to an acre, she would
be able to also share in the fruition of the neighborhood.
Nelson noted she spoke with the Council about it this year as well as Staff in years past and that 'in her
view the City is missing the opportunity to address this with the Comprehensive Plan Update. Nelson
stated it was suggested to her to wait until the Comprehensive Plan Update but nobody seems to want to
address rezoning anything in the Comprehensive Plan because people think it will change the character of
the neighborhood. Nelson commented the proposed ordinance will do the same thing.
Nelson stated in her view massing will be an issue and is a far greater threat to the character of the
neighborhood. Nelson stated she is asking that consideration be given to rezoning her neighborhood.
Nelson noted no other house in her neighborhood could subdivide if it is rezoned to one acre. Nelson
commented it is likely all of these small neighborhoods have a lot or two that contain a property similar to
hers and they would feel like they were not given their full due by creating a situation like this.
Nelson requested the Planning Commission reject Option 3 and to create a solution that will be more
equitable to everybody.
Barnhart noted Option 3 would be changing the setbacks applicable to specific zoning districts and that
the ordinance tries to provide some flexibility based on nonconforming lots.
Page 16 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Landgraver asked if Option 2 would allow a larger lot to be subdivided.
Barnhart stated if the size requirement was changed, the property could be subdivided assuming they have
the appropriate frontage.
Landgraver commented there are probably only a handful of large lots located in a si-nall lot
neighborhood.
Gaffron stated the boundaries of the neighborhood should probably be defined before making this type of
decision.
Chair Thiesse closed the public hearing at 12: 10 p.m.
Barnhart stated in 2016, the City processed 41 variances and setback variances related to street or side
setbacks were included in 19 of them. Barnhart stated surveys for those properties were looked at to
apply the new zoning ordinances. One of the properties had a 1 -foot setback but most of the setbacks
were in the 11 to 25 feet range. Barnhart stated if the new setbacks are applied based on the draft
ordinance, the number of nonconformities is reduced from five to two, so there is some benefit to the new
setbacks.
Landgraver stated in the past 10 feet has been a fairly firm number. Landgraver asked if the changes
would be giving everybody two feet on each side.
Barnhart stated the minimum setback would be eight feet on each side. Barnhart stated ten feet is
appropriate and does not really create a hardship for most property owners.
Thiesse stated in his view 10 feet is reasonable.
Amy Nelson asked if this would set a precedent so other people in the same zoning district somewhere
else in the City would wonder why they do not fall within under the same jurisdiction.
Page 17 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Gaffron stated any 50 -foot lots would get the same setback. Gaffron stated if the City is routinely giving
people variances to a particular setback, it might as well be put into the code.
Barnhart stated what he has heard is that the Planning Commission does not want to go less than ten. The
draft ordinance is proposing in four different zoning districts some flexibility from the setback
requirements if the lot is nonconforming in width.
Landgraver stated in his view the discussion by the Planning Commission would be more vigorous if this
had been discussed earlier in the evening.
Lemke moved, Leskinen seconded to table Application No. 17-3925, City of Orono, Text
Amendment: Small Lots/Setbacks. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0.
13. UPDATE ON CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS HELD ON MARCH 22,2017, AND
APRIL 10, 2017
Barnhart reported on the following actions by the City Council:
• Approved a conditional use permit for a dock for Alex Ugorets
• Approved variances for lot area and lot width in Navarre
• Approved lot area and lot width variances for 2755 Ethel
• Approved the Birkeland application for side street and lot width variances. The Planning
Commission recommended denial.
0 Approved the Burke application
Approved the survey and site plan requirements ordinance, the ordinance relating to the escrow
language, and repeal of CUPs.
0 The City Council had no concerns or comments on the exemption for the public safety signs.
14. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
Page 18 of 19
MINUTES OF THE Council
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Exhibit C
Monday, April 17,2017 17-3922
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Barnhart stated Staff has been looking at moving toward paperless copies for the Planning Commission
and that they likely will go paperless next month. Barnhart stated the Commissioners will be receiving a
computer similar to the one he has.
Landgraver asked if there will be a work session in May
Barnhart stated at this point no. Barnhart stated given the fact that Mike Gaffron will be retiring in May,
he will likely not be introducing any more ordinance amendments.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
None
ADJOURNMENT
Olson moved, Thiesse seconded, to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 12:17 p.m.
VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0.
ATTEST:
Chair Thiesse, Chair
Page 19 of 19
From:
Meredith Olson
To:
Jeremy Barnha
Subject:
Preserve Orono"s natural areas
Date:
Sunday, April 30, 2017 10:28:51 PM
Mr. Barnhart,
As residents of Orono, we have concerns about Orono's Development Process
Review Committee's proposal to the Planning Commission to roll back the
wetland buffers and setback requirements in Orono. These thoughtfully
conceived ordinances were created to preserve quality of life in Orono and our
city's natural resources including water quality and wildlife habitats. We
understand that city government may at times see a need to streamline codes
and ordinances that are onerous and unnecessary, but rolling back this
ordinance which was created to preserve Orono's natural habitat and quality of
life would be a detrimental and very unpopular decision.
We urge you as Community Development Director of Orono to encourage the
mayor and council members to do the right thing and listen to the Planning
Commission's request to leave the protections as they currently exist.
Regards,
Meredith and Tom Olson
From:
Gary Demel
To:
Jeremy Barnha
Cc:
Denny Walsh; Richard Crosb ; wdankgy(d)cJ.rnn.us; Aaron H. Printup; Victoria Seals
Subject:
Wetland buffers and setbacks
Date:
Monday, May 01, 2017 7:47:42 AM
Director Barnhart and Council —
Buffers and setbacks are an important zoning and development tool to maintain the environmental
balance of our lakes and streams with future development.
If you reduce or roll back these buffers just to "streamline" our codes, you will have created a big
disservice to those that live here in Orono.
We have watched Stubbs Bay degrade into a sub "C" rating for water quality in the latest report on
Lake Minnetonka. We used to go out on the lake weekly and swim.
I hesitate to get in the water now.
This is even more important as I watch new neighbors move in and impact the water by creating
large green lawns with large amounts of chemicals to keep the grass looking artificially "green" .
Where will those chemicals go, if they are not filtered by a buffer / setback ?
Please think carefully about this. We have, and we vote no.
Gary Demele / Maureen Bellows
3400 Watertown Road
Orono, MN 55356
From: Rebecca Field
To: Jeremy Barnha
Subject: Fwd: Orono Wetlands - Tonight"s Meeting
Date: Monday, April 17, 2017 1:49:43 PM
Dear Jeremy -
Below is an email I sent today to two people on the Orono Planning Commission
whom we personally know regarding tonight's meeting. I thought you should also
see it before the meeting.
Please consider the high degree of pollution in Long Lake that the residents'
association is challenged with mitigating before wetland restrictions become looser
in Orono. Cassy Ordway, Samantha Muldoon, El and Fred Winston, and many
others can more fully inform you if you are not aware of our efforts in concert with
several environmental/conservation agencies.
Once you go down the road of lightening the level of restrictions, it will begin the
erosion of our quality of life in Orono, which has always been considered a "gem"
in the Twin Cities.
Becky Field
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rebecca Field <rebeccafieldl6&gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 12: 01 PM
Subject: Orono Wetlands - Tonight's Meeting
To: olsonc I 16&9mail.com, -jonschwing&aol.co
Dear Jon, Chad, & Other Members of the Orono Planning Commission,
WE STRONGLY SUPPORT OPTION 1 to retain the existing setback requirements making no changes
to buffers. I do not think we should make any changes as they will forever serve to denigrate the
qualiity of life in Orono that has been maintained for many years through proper restrictions.
We need to protect our wetlands and, specifically, the water quality in Long Lake and other lakes and
ponds in Orono. Changing the existing requirements will only make current, significant and ongoing
efforts to address water pollution more difficult.
Ben and Becky Field
1729 N Farm Rd
Long Lake, MN 55356
Becky
htip://www.RebeccaFieldPhoto,graphy.com
1729 North Farm Road
Long Lake, NIN 55356
(952) 473-2244
From: Samantha Capen Muldoon
To: tthiesse(ftotmail.com
Cc: Jeremy Barnha ; Doug Reece ; Mike Gaffron; Melanie Curti ; Christine Mattson
Subject: Wetland Buffer - Pls maintain our existing buffer regulations
Date: Monday, April 17, 2017 7:11:17 AM
Dear John Thiesse, Chair, Planning Commission -
Regarding wetland delineation and buffering, and setback requirements, it appears there are
3 options under consideration regarding the buffering by the planning commission on
Monday, April 17, 2017.
Of the options outlined by the City Staff, I strongly support Option One — make no changes to
existing buffers — for three reasons.
--[if !supportLists]-->* LLOCAL CONTROL First, in America, we traditionally cherish local control
— of our towns (through the town council and government), of our schools (through the local
school body), and of our environment (through local development standards and
restrictions). Local standards allow us to define the character of our town as we see fit, and
maintain the protections we desire. Differing to a regional body (whose job is to establish
lowest common denominator standards) instead of retaining that local control appears to be
voluntarily giving up our local rights to the regional government, for no other reason than
expediency.
--[if !supportListsl-->* BRAND DISTINCTION Second, the wetlands of Orono are an essential
part of the character and brand of our town, and as such should be prioritized. They are the
visual feature of our logo, and the regional nature of our lakeshore is one of the most defining
qualities of our environment. Many Orono citizens are avid fishermen, birders, and nature
lovers — our wetland support these activities, as well as the overall health of our lakes. They
establish Orono as distinctive from other communities around Lake Minnetonka. Healthy,
thriving wetlands (as a result of our strong buffer regulations) are an essential part of the
Orono experience. Losing this natural resource will make Orono less distinctive, and therefore
less attractive.
--[if !supportListsl-->* WATER QUALITY Finally, strong wetland buffers heavily contribute to
the quality of our lakes, rivers and streams, providing clear water and helping establish
floral/fauna that drive many residents to move here. Buffers help protect these wetlands, by
reducing run-off that causes water quality issues. Once compromised, that water quality is
very expensive to remediate, and can be impossible to fully correct. We are already seeing
water quality issues that negatively impact our use of our lakes (for example, Nelson Beach in
Long Lake was closed several times last summer due to water quality issues mainly driven by
run-off). Until we know the effects of this decision, we need to err on the side of caution.
Protecting the quality of our lakes is a long-term investment in our future, and our lakeshore
lifestyle.
It is my understanding that we re-examined and refined our wetland protections only 4 years
ago, and that the existing setbacks were agreed upon by the town, the town council, and its
staff. I would argue that revising them at this time is unnecessary, and the potential
ramifications (both environmental and financial) of this proposal are unknown.
In recognition of our town's special character, and the stated desires of the population to
maintain the unique natural feel, and in the interest of maintaining our local control over
our environment, I would strongly urge the Planning Commission to recommend keeping
the established, (and not too excessive) existing protections.
Letting our lake quality fall to the lowest common denominator, losing local controls and
giving up our discretion over the defining character of our town are not things to strive for.
Thanks for your support.
Please enter my comments into the permanent record, for use going forward on this issue.
Samantha Capen Muldoon
1801 West Farm Road
Orono, MN 55356
312-560-7952
scapen@hotmail.com
sammuldoon@gmail.com
From: Cassandra Ordway
To: Denise Leskinen (deniseleskinen(ftmail.com); Kevin Landgraver (klandaraver(Ebamail.corn); Bruce Lemke
(bruce(a)plantscal2einc.corn); olsonc116(&arnai1.corn; Loren Schoenzeit (lorens(@3d1ake.coMJ; Jon Schwinaler
(ionschwina(cbaol.corn); ibthiesse(d)hotmail.corn; Christonher McGrann (c mcqrann(&hotrnail.com)
Cc: Jeremy Barnhart
Subject: Wetland Regulations Public Hearing
Date: Monday, April 17, 2017 2:55:59 PM
Dear Members of the Orono Planning Commission,
I am writing to encourage the Orono Planning Commission to vote for Option I of the three options being
considered for Wetlands Management in our community. It is important that we maintain the existing
setback requirements making no changes to the buffers.
We need to protect our wetlands for water quality, animal habitat and our town's unique beauty. Changing
the buffer and setback regulations that have been important to our community for many years will have
dramatic long-lasting consequences. Currently, Long Lake and the surrounding sub -watershed have very
poor water quality (state grade of D). Orono and Long Lake need to take a proactive partnership approach to
do everything they can to improve the water quality and reduce the total maximum daily loads (TMDL's)
through best land management practices. We need develop strategies to reduce the storm water and the
nutrient loads flowing into the lake and waterways - and one important step is to maintain the current
wetlands and buffers regulations.
Thank you for your support.
Cassandra S Ordway
1145 County Road 6
Orono, MN 55356
612-581-5651
casl2er&ohcads.net
LLWA
LONG I-AKE WMERS ASSM=0N
April 17,2017
To the Orono Planning Commission
The Long Lake Waters Association feels very strongly that the Planning Commission should not alter
the current regulations for wetland setbacks and buffers.
We would like to recommend that the current regulations be maintained, and thought it would be very
helpful if the Planning Commission read the two attached articles.
The first article, from The US Fish and Wildlife Service, highlights the importance of maintaining
wetland buffers greater than 35 feet surrounding wetlands. With that reference, we can see that the
existing standard of 35 feet is in fact the bare minimum recommended for maintaining water quality.
The proposed reductions would therefore materially reduce the quality of water in Orono lakes,
including the Long Lake sub -watershed and our iconic Lake Minnetonka.
The second article, from the Star Tribune, highlights the impact of the increasingly poor water quality in
our area, and specifically notes the role of local government in either protecting or degrading the water
quality. It highlights that the costs of correcting mismanagement far exceed the benefits of reducing
buffers and setbacks.
We would urge the Planning Commission to recognize that the standards set by the MCWD are in fact
the lowest possible standards to apply, not a recommended standard. They are regional in approach, and
designed to provide a minimum for an area that is not as rural or diverse as Orono. We would ask the
Planning Commission to recognize the special environment surrounding Orono, and how critical it is to
our property values and lakeshore lifestyle. We must continue to preserve the environment that makes
Orono unique.
Therefore, LLWA recommends the Planning Commission supports Option #1, to retain existing
standards and buffers, in order to protect and preserve our wetlands.
Thank you for your time and consideration. If you have any questions, please contact Long Lake
Waters Association at LongLakeWaters&gmail.com.
our mission is to provide collaborative leadership in improving and
protecting the water quality of Long Lake and its watershed for the
enjoyment for present and future generations.
Buffers: An Efficient Tool for Watershed Protection
What Are Buffers?
A buffer is a strip of naturally vegetated land along a lake, stream, or wetland that provides numerous
benefits. Preserving a buffer zone protects water resources from neighboring land uses. Nutrient inputs
are of great concern because of their abundant sources (fertilizer, septic tank drain fields, leaking sewage
lines, animal waste). Excess nutrients in lakes and estuaries cause toxic algal blooms and depleted
oxygen. Natural chemical and biological processes within buffers alter or uptake nutrients and pollutants
before they enter a water body, thus providing a cost-effective treatment system. Buffers preserve native
habitat for wildlife and enhance aquatic habitat. The range of benefits provided by buffers includes:
Water quality protection 4
Erosion control Riparian refers to
Storage of floodwaters and flood damage reduction the land adjoining a
Aquatic habitat enhancement qevc body of water,
usually a river or
Habitat for terrestrial riparian wildlife stream.
Maintenance of base flow in streams
Improved aesthetic appearance of stream corridors
Recreational and educational opportunities
Buffer Width: Bigger is Better
Choosing a buffer width depends on your planning goals. As buffer width increases, the buffer provides
greater benefits. As seen in the table below, a 30 -foot buffer provides minimal service. At 50 feet, the
buffer meets minimum water quality protection recommendations and gives some aquatic habitat benefits.
For effective water quality and aquatic habitat protection, a buffer width of 100 feet is needed. Buffers to
enhance riparian wildlife should be 300 feet or greater. Special buffer zones may be required to protect
vulnerable species.r4-Width should be increased where slope, impervious surface, and soil type reduce
buffer effectiveness. The consequences of an inadequate buffer may be an increased need for stormwater
ponds, increased flooding, decreased abundance of sportfish, and/or loss of certain species such as some
salamanders or crayfish.
Benefit Provided:
Sediment Removal -Minimum
30 It
50 It
Buffer Width:
100 It 300 ft
1,000 Ill
1,500 It
4 4 4 4 4
4
Maintain Stream Temperature
qe�'t
qV'k
"rZ'4
"qemt
401C
Nitrogen Removal -Minimum
Contaminant Removal
Large Woody Debris for Stream Habitat
Effective Sediment Removal
Short -Term Phosphorus Control
Effective Nitrogen Removal
Maintain Diverse Stream Invertebrates
q*4
4019
Bird Corridors
Reptile and Amphibian Habitat
Habitat for Interior Forest Species
Flatwoods Salamander Habitat -
Protected Species
Sources
Burke, VJ. and J.W. Gibbons, 1995, Terrestrial Buffer Zones and Wetland Conservation: A Case Study
of Freshwater Turtles in a Carolina Bay, Conservation Biology 9 (6), pp. 1365-1369.
Desbonnet, A., V. Lee, P. Pogue, D. Reis, J. Boyd, J. Willis, and M. Imperial, 1995, Development of
Coastal Vegetated Buffer Programs, Coastal Management 23, pp. 91-109.
Mitsch, WJ. and J.G. Gosselink, 1993, Wetlands, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, New York.
Semlitsch, R.D., 1998, Biological Delineation of Terrestrial Buffer Zones for Pond -Breeding
Salamanders, Conservation Biology 12 (5), pp. 1113-1119.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, April 1, 1999, Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Final
Rule to List the Flatwoods Salamander as a Threatened Species, Federal Register 62(241): 15691-15704.
Wenger, S., 1999, A Review of the Scientific Literature on Riparian Buffer Width, Extent and Vegetation,
Office of Public Service and Outreach, Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia.
Wenger, S. and L. Fowler, 2000, Protecting Stream and River Corridors: Creating Effective Local
Riparian Buffer Ordinances, Carl Vinson Institute of Government, University of Georgia, Athens,
Georgia.
For Further Information Contact:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Panama City Field Office
1601 Balboa Avenue
Panama City, Florida 32405
Tel: (850) 769-0552
Fax: (850) 763-2177
E-mail: FW4—ES_YR.Panama.City@fws.gov
9/13/01 MM/kh/C:/ ... /buffer fact1doc
Water quality: A Minnesota maelstrom
The mone3�s not enough. The response is either too little or too confused. And
we're further down the spiral than most realize. We must save what we can.
ByRonWay NOVEMBER 26,2016 --7:20PM
AARON LAVINSKY, STAR TRIBLINE"Danger Downstream": A recent Star Tribune
series detailed how the state's rivers are spiraling toward an "ecological
precipice." In this photo, the Coon Rapids Dam.
When it comes to protecting water, Minnesota voters have
stepped up twice, by amending the state Constitution to raise
funds through the State Lottery and by expanding the sales tax.
The result is tens of millions of dollars spent annually on the
state's storied lakes and rivers.
So, with all that spending, water quality must be improving,
right?
No, say multiple state reports. In fact, things are getting worse.
Last year Gov. Mark Dayton declared that water quality decline is
"serious." He assembled a daylong water summit in February,
and he's now embarked on a campaign to explain to a tuned -out
public that the problem really is as bad as reports say.
But despite all the spending, planning and persuading — and
faux cooing about "success" — the quality of lakes, rivers and
groundwater continues to slide.
A must -read series by the Star Tribune's Josephine Marcotty
("Danger Downstream," Oct. 2-4) detailed how rivers like the
Mississippi are spiraling toward an "ecological precipice." The
north -flowing Red River is so sullied when it leaves the U.S. that
it's enlarging an oxygen -depleted "dead zone" in Lake Winnipeg.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency lists 4,600 lakes and
stream segments as "impaired," some no longer "fishable or
swimmable." Nitrates in groundwater from excessive fertilizer
use exceed safe -drinking standards.
It's true that 1970s -era laws brought cleaner water and air than
we had in the "good old days," when the rivers and sky were,
literally, smelly waste dumps.
But those laws excluded pollutants like farm and lawn chemicals,
and local zoning has promoted conversion of forests to cropping
and other development that brings ever-increasing runoff of bad
stuff. There's worry over spreading invasive species and even
over residue of medicines carelessly flushed down toilets.
It's a classic "tragedy of the commons," in which folks acting
46rationally" in their own individual self-interest damage a
common resource in a way that harms everyone, including
themselves.
No one's to blame. Everyone is.
Even the lakes deceive: their shimmering sky-blue reflections
mask their degraded condition, the way Botox props up a sagging
face. The delusion breeds public indifference, regulatory under -
reach, and political timidity.
Dayton's administration is stocked with impressive
environmental talent who understand what needs doing. But
they're checked by contrary legislators.
For example, in 2015 Dayton signed into law his bill requiring
grassy "buffers" around all streams and ditches to soak up
contaminants. But before the signing ink dried, farm groups
teamed with legislative allies to neuter a laudable law by
excluding private ditches.
Regrettably, agriculture's distended influence increased with the
last election, bringing to the Capitol more lawmakers with an
anti -environmental bent and an elevated distaste for spending,
especially in amounts needed to give lakes any chance at
recovery.
Already, close to half of Minnesota's lakes and rivers are
damaged, and the number grows with each new survey. That's
"hair on fire" territory, and lays bare a need to seriously review
things.
It starts by facing an uncomfortable truth:
Current efforts to clean lakes and rivers don't even maintain
present degraded levels. The damage is so pervasive that
restoration of all but a few select lakes would cost far more than
the state's treasury could ever cover.
Some even doubt whether restoration is possible. Nutrients that
trigger biological actions that suck life -supporting oxygen from
lakes are still freely washing into waterways where they do
instant harm and, worse, settle into bottom sediments and slowly
release, causing continuing damage for years.
The state has vast stores of data on water conditions through a
massive — and expensive — network of monitoring stations and
surveys. And while some of that's necessary, it seems that a
whole lot less needs to be spent on measuring and a whole lot
more on fixing.
A profoundly different approach is needed if there's to be any
realistic hope of protecting the state's $13 billion tourism
industry and billions more in lakeshore-property values that are
tied to quality water.
One priority is to safeguard the northern tier of good -quality
lakes and those that yield huge sport fish that anglers annually
spend $2 billion to catch.
University of Minnesota fisheries expert Peter Sorensen
advocates "fresh water preserves" for high-quality lakes, similar
to ocean protected areas. It makes sense, if for no other reason
than that it costs much less to prevent than to reverse damage.
Another priority is "triage" — to identify lakes that can and
should be protected so that limited resources may be directed to
where they can best work. It's a fool's errand to pursue a policy of
trying to restore all damaged lakes and watersheds.
Water planners caution: "It took decades for lakes to become
impaired, and it's going to take a while to restore them." They
put the timeline at 20tO 30 years, and the State Water Council
thinks watershed issues can be addressed by 2034.
This is high-sounding diversion from the urgency to act.
There's simply not time, and here's why:
Experts list key water -quality challenges as nutrient overload,
land -use change, spreading invasive species, and — the biggie —
climate change.
Lakes are warming faster than previously understood. Basins are
ice -free longer, with more heating days accelerating growth of
short-lived algae whose decay consumes life -supporting oxygen.
Combined with removal of lakeshore vegetation by property
owners who prefer rock riprap, warming destroys deep -water
habitat for fatty feeder fish that grow large sport fish like walleye
and muskie.
As cold -water lakes warm, walleye habitat gives way to
conditions better suited for largemouth bass, says a recent report
by the U.S. Geological Survey. By mideentury, the number of
"walleye lakes" in Wisconsin, the studied state, will drop
noticeably.
Indeed, climate warming is seen as serious enough for the
Minnesota DNR to join with the Leech Lake Area Watershed
Foundation to save large, deep -water lakes that support tullibee,
those fatty feeders. The plan is to protect forests and other
natural cover to maintain 65o high-quality fishing lakes, some
already stressed.
The idea of "triage" to concentrate resources on savable lakes is
conceptually supported by Minnesota's Clean Water Roadmap. It
says:" A -lying resources together in a prioritized, targeted ...
�FP
manner [will increase] the likelihood of success."
But the half-dozen state agencies endorsing the report each have
different notions of prioritizing. What's needed is a single state
ranking of waterways by such metrics as biological health,
recreational popularity and willingness of lakeshore owners to
financially participate.
Political minefields are inevitable when hard choices must be
made, and so it is here.
Lakeshore folks will see their lake as priority. Nutrient
reduction will continue to be opposed by chemical
suppliers and farm interests, which have effectively
derailed needed rules for decades and pushed the
massive cost of nitrate removal to dozens of small
towns.
Another challenge is the local -level mind -set that favors
tax -yielding development over all else. The very feature
that drives property values — water quality — is
compromised for short-term financial expediency.
Effectively protecting prized lakes in the land of lakes would
enjoy broad support, especially by recreationists and those in the
central -lakes region who benefit hugely from quality water.
It's time to stop fiddling.
-ARTICLE XI. - WETLANDS PROTECTION
DIVISION 1. - GENERALLY
Sec. 78-1601. - Purpose and intent.
Council
Exhibit E
17-3922
Originally
presented to PC
April 17, 2017
4 (a) The purpose of this section is to recognize, preserve and protect the environmental, aesthetic and
5 hydrologic functions of the city's wetlands by regulating the use of wetlands and their adjacent
6 properties in conjunction with the goals of the environmental protection plan within the community
7 management plan. These functions include, but are not limited to, sediment control, pollution control,
8 filtration, fish and wildlife habitat and aquifer recharge. The surface water management plan will
9 provide guidance for stormwater treatment requirements and wetland restoration opportunities in order
10 to protect the integrity of wetlands.
11 (b) The intent of this section is to protect wetlands to the maximum extent possible while allowing a
12 reasonable use of the property. This section adopts the regulations and standards of the Wetland
13 Conservation Act of 1991 (WCA), Laws of Minnesota 1991, Chapter 354, as amended, and the rules
14 adopted pursuant to the WCA. It also establishes a wetland overlay district. This overlay district further
15 regulates the underlying land use as allowed by other districts or the WCA.
16
17 DIVISION 2. - DESIGNATION OF PROTECTED WETLANDS
W.*
19 Sec. 78-1602. - Wetland types.
20 The wetlands protected and regulated by this section are types 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 wetlands, as
21 defined in circular 39, "Wetlands of the United States", 1971 edition, United States Department of the
22 Interior, unless the wetland is within a shoreland district in which case the more restrictive rules regarding
23 setbacks would apply. Protected wetlands are further defined as follows:
24 (1) Type I—Seasonally flooded basins or floodplains: Type 1 wetlands are seasonally flooded basins
25 or flats in which soil is covered with water or is waterlogged during variable seasonal periods but usually is
26 well -drained during much of the growing season. Type 1 wetlands are located in depressions and in
27 overflow bottom lands along water courses. Vegetation varies greatly according to the season and duration
28 of the flooding, and includes bottom land hardwoods, as well as herbaceous plants.
29 (2) Type 2—Inland fresh meadow: Occurs along the shallow edges of lakes, marshes and floodplains,
30 or in perched depressions. The soil is usually without standing water during much of the growing season,
31 but is waterlogged within at least a few inches of the surface. Vegetation includes grasses, sedges, rushes
32 and various herbaceous plants.
33 (3) Type 3—Inland shallow fresh marsh: Soil is usually water logged during the growing season, often
34 covered with as much as six inches or more of water. Vegetation includes grasses, bulrushes, cattails,
35 arrowheads, smartweeds and other emergent aquatic vegetation.
36 (4) Type 4—Iniand deep fresh marsh: Soil covered with six inches to three feet or more of water during
37 growing season. Vegetation includes cattails, reeds, bulrushes and wild rice. Open water areas may contain
38 pondweeds, naiads, coontail, water milfoils and other submergent aquatic vegetation.
39 (5) Type 5—Inland open fresh water Water is usually less than ten feet deep and is fringed by a border
40 of emergent vegetation. Vegetation includes pondweeds, naiads, coontail, water milfoils and other
41 submergent aquatic vegetation.
Page 1
42 (6) Type 6—Shrub swamp: Occurs along sluggish streams or on floodplains. The soil is usually
43 waterlogged during the growing season, and is often covered with as much as six inches of water.
44 Vegetation includes alder, willow and dogwood.
45 (7) Type 7—Wooded swamp: Occurs along sluggish streams, on floodplains, on flat perched
46 depressions and in shallow lake basins. The soil is waterlogged to within a few inches of its surface during
47 the growing season and is often covered with as much as one foot of water. Vegetation typical to this
48 wetland includes tamarack, white cedar, black spruce, balsam fir, red maple and black ash.
49 (8) Type 8—Bog: Occurs along sluggish streams, on flat perched depressions and shallow lake basins.
50 The soil is waterlogged and supports a spongy covering of mosses. Vegetation typical to this wetland type
51 includes sphagnum moss, heath shrubs and sedges. Minnesota bogs contain leatherleaf, Labrador tea,
52 cranberries and pitcher plants. Scattered stunted black spruce and tamarack also are common features of
53 bogs.
54 Sec. 78-1603. - Boundaries of the wetland overlay districts and designation of official city wetland map.
55 This section establishes wetland overlay districts. These districts are subject to additional requirements
56 beyond those required by the WCA. The boundaries of the wetland overlay districts are identified graphically
57 on the official city wetland map (CWM) which is hereby adopted by reference, a copy of which shall be kept
58 on file in the office of the city clerk and shall be available for public review during all normal office hours.
59 Wetlands in addition to those shown on the city wetland map may exist, and may be identified by wetland
60 delineations under WCA rules. If a specific wetland delineation has been done under WCA rules, then the
61 boundaries of the wetland overlay district for that location will be as shown in the delineation. The city may
62 require wetland delineations to determine compliance with WCA rules and to determine administrative
63 wetland boundaries; however, property owners may have wetland delineations done for their properties on
64 their own initiative. The delineation must be done by a qualified professional according to WCA rules and
65 be acceptable to the P'aRR'Rg doFeGtGf , who may require review by city consultants or a
66 technical evaluation panel if necessary. Approved WCA wetland delineations must be provided to the city
67 in a hard copy format and a CAD or GIS format in Hennepin County coordinates. The P'aRR'Rg dope cit
68 administrator will have the approved WCA wetland delineations shown on the official city wetland map.
69 Public waters are not included in the overlay district, unless a wetland is part of a public water.
70 Sec. 78-1604. - Interpretation of wetlands boundaries.
71 Whenever a wetland boundary is disputed or uncertain, the planning dire citV administrator may
72 require the submission of a registered survey of the property and field staking showing the city -designated
73 wetland contour or a delineation of the wetland, and such other information as the director may require in
74 order to resolve the dispute or uncertainty. The PIaRRiRg diFe citV administrator may require review by
75 city consultants or a technical evaluation panel if necessary. No boundary change may be authorized on
76 the basis of fill that was placed on the site after the city designated the area as part of the wetland overlay
77 district. Persons aggrieved by a decision of the p!aRR'Rg diFe citV administrator may appeal such decision
78 in accordance with the provisions of section 78-99 of this chapter and the WCA rules.
79 a. Delineation tVpes.
80 A Tier 1 BounclarV determination is a review of known information to determine an understood
81 boundarV, and maV be used when the proposed promect is located on a lot where a wetland is believed to
82 exist, but the promect is not likelV to impact the wetland due to proiect scope, distance, and/ or topographV.
83 Known information maV include aerial photographV, third partV studies, and/ or site visits. A tier 1 BounclarV
84 determination is not a delineation.
8S A Tier 2 Delineation is a delineation is conducted bV a certified wetland delineator and verified b
86 the Local Government Unit. Tier 2 delineation information shall be provided on a certified certificate of
87 surveV.
88 b. Delineation reauired. The tVDe of delineation shall be determined bv the Citv Administrator or their
89 designee.
Page 2
90 Tier 1 BoundarV determinations maV be required for accessorV structures, accessorV buildings, and
91 other pro'ects primarilV outside the wetland or wetland buffer area.
92 Tier 2 Delineations shall be required for promects that include a new residential principal structure, a
93 prowect that impacts the wetland, a subdivision, or a pro'ect that otherwise is regulated bV the WaterbodV
94 Crossings and Structures Rule or Stormwater Management Rule of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
95 District, unless waived bV the Watershed District. A Tier 2 Delineation maV also be required for a proiect
96 proposed at or within 5' of the buffer/ setback line.
97 A Tier 1 boundarV ad2ustment maV be substituted for the Tier 2 delineation when the applicant can
98 demonstrate the wetland boundarV location to the satisfaction of the citV and the watershed district, due to
99 topography, distance of the promect to the wetland, site specific features, and known information. SetbaGks
100 must be vermfoed- i.qmth vVelland deloReation KAfA-1`MatJA-Q. The deterrn'nat0A-.n A -f vVhetheF a Level 1 del'Reatie
101 or Level 2 deloneatmOR 06 reauOred shall be at the dosr.retin-in nof the iqlaRn'na d' eGtGr. Level 2-de4neatkN4
102 0nfa-.rrA-At0A-.n shall be i)revided on a Gertified r-aertifie—Ate of s-wtay. The requiren4ent fler delineation shall be
103 amnlip-d- in ruases ;.yhere the �.A.fetland- emosts; y.onthon 150- feet A -f the -nre-nes;ed- -Rreie.
104 DIVISION 3. - BUFFER AREAS
105 Sec. 78-1605. - Wetland buffer areas and setbacks.
106 (a) This subsection establishes authority for wetland buffer areas around protected wetlands. Buffer areas
107 are necessary and beneficial to maintain the health of wetlands. Buffer areas protect the edge of
108 wetlands from erosion while filtering sediment, chemicals and other nutrients from runoff that drains
109 into wetlands. Buffer areas can improve the biological diversity and health of a wetland environment
110 while reducing the adverse impacts of human activities.
111 (b) All wetlands within the City of Orono are within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD),
112 which has rules and regulations for the establishment and maintenance of wetland buffers. In an effort
113 to avoid overlapping or conflicting regulations, the city defers jurisdiction for the establishment and
114 maintenance of wetland buffers to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. If application of MCWID
1115 buffer regulations is in conflict with city regulations, the Watershed District More restriGt
116 requirements shall apply.
117 (c) In order to provide for a minimum level of wetland protection where Minnehaha Creek Watershed
118 District buffer rules do not provide for adequate separation between wetlands and buildings or other
119 structures or surfaces, the city shall require setbacks from the delineated edge of a protected wetland
120 as follows:
- F. --
Minimum distance setback from delineated edge of wetland to any
building (principal or accessory) or other structure, hardcover,
Where no formal buffer exists and
where MCWD does not require a
buffer
septic systems or wells:
3-5-22 feet
Where a formal buffer exists or � 322-5 feet or established buffer width plus 10 feet, whichever is
where MCWD buffer is required greater
121 Areas within the required setback area subject to filling, grading or excavation as part of a
122 construction project shall be revegetated immediately upon completion of such earthwork.
Page 3
123
124
125
126
127
1128
129
130
131
1132
133
(cd) The City of Orono has established wetland protection strategies in the Orono Surface Water
Management Plan (SWMP) (January 2011). A protection classification has been assigned to each
wetland in Orono based on the stormwater susceptibility and functional assessment for each wetland.
The city has also established additional protection requirements for each classification. The four
protection classifications for all properties except those zoned as "residential" are described as
f0ll0WS[J1311:
Protection Susceptibility
:lassification Rating
"Preserve"
"Manage I"
"Manage 2"
Highly
Susceptible
Moderate y
Susceptible
Slightly
Susceptible
Description
Highly susceptible to
both quantity and
quality impacts from
runoff; have the
highest degree of
protection
Additional Protection
Requirements
(B= Bounce= Changein
water level due to
runoff event)
(P = Phosphorus)
B: Maintain bounce at or
below existing
conditions
P: Limit loadings to
preclevelopment loading
(0.14 Lbs/Ac/Yr)
Moderately susceptible
B: Maintain bounce at or
to quantity and quality
below existing
impacts; protection is
conditions plus 0.1 foot
less stringent than
P: Limit loadings to
Preserve, provides
preclevelopment
protection to maintain
loadings times 2 (0.28
their characteristics
Lbs/Ac/Yr)
Less stringent
protection than
Manage I wetlands;
maintenance of
characteristics is
desirable
B: Maintain bounce at or
below existing
conditions plus 1.0 foot
P: Limit concentration to
preclevelopment
concentrations (200
ppb)
Page 4
Wetlands are
significantly degraded
(e.g., cultivated or
canary grass monotype) B: No quantity
or lack of wetland
"Manage 3" Least characteristics; not requirement
Susceptible typically impacted by P: Limit concentration to
runoff; no quantity and 225 ppb
only limited quality
treatment of runoff is
required
134
135 The protection classification for each wetland will be found on the "Wetland Management Classification
136 Map & List" which is hereby adopted by reference, a copy of which shall be kept on file in the office of the
137 city clerk and shall be available for public review during all normal office hours. The Minnehaha Creek
138 Watershed District required buffer area widths are based on the four protection classifications.
139
140 DIVISION 4. - USES
141 Sec. 78-1606. - Permitted uses.
142 (a) Within the wetland overlay districts no land may be used except for one or more of the following uses:
143 (1) Native wetland vegetation, provided that no change is made to the ground elevation;
144 (2) Wildlife and nature preserves;
145 (3) Overhead utility lines and poles that are less than two feet in diameter;
146 (4) Docks which provide reasonable access to the lakeshore and do not exceed eight feet in width;
147 (5) Public and private flood control structures, poncling and drainage facilities and associated
148 accessory appurtenances as approved by the city; or
149 (6) Environmental monitoring or control facilities, including those related to water quality and wildlife
150 regulation.
151 Sec. 78-1607. - Conditional uses.
152 (a) Within the wetland overlay districts no land may be used for the following except by conditional use
153 permit and except in conformance with the standards specified in section 78-1608 of this article:
154 (1) Private and public recreational uses, including golf courses, impervious trails, picnic grounds and
155 boat ramps;
156 (2) Public utilities, including necessary structures;
157 (3) Other non-structural facilities similar to those permitted by this section which also meet the intent
158 of this section, as determined by the city; or
Page 5
159 (4) Public structures associated with recreational uses permitted by this section or by section 78-
160 1606 of this section that are designed in an environmentally sensitive manner and will withstand
161 periodic flooding, except for structures designed or used for habitation or the storage of
162 equipment;
163 (5) Unpaved hiking, skiing and horseback riding trails which comply with WCA standards.
164 (b) No conditional use permit will be granted unless its approval will not adversely impact wetlands,
165 wetland buffer areas where they exist or are required, and surrounding properties, the intent of this
166 article or the goals and policies of the community management plan. If applicable, granting of a
167 conditional use permit will be conditioned upon approval of the request by all other appropriate
168 regulatory governmental agencies, including but not limited to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
169 (MCWD), the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD), or the Minnesota Department of Natural
170 Resources.
171 DIVISION 5. - STANDARDS FOR THE WETLAND OVERLAY DISTRICT, BUFFER AREAS AND NEIGHBORING
172 LAN DS
173 Sec. 78-1608. - Standards.
174 The following standards apply to all land within the wetland overlay districts, existing and MCWD-
175 required wetland buffer areas, and to neighboring lands:
176 (1) Protection of wetlands.
177 a. Except as modified or regulated by the standards of this subsection, all requirements of the
178 underlying zoning district apply.
179 b. No structures are allowed in the wetland overlay districts except those allowed as of right or
180 by conditional use permit by sections 78-1606 or 78-1607 of this article.
181 c. Activities including, but not limited to, building (other than a boardwalk or dock), paving,
182 mowing, vegetation removal, filling, dumping, yard waste disposal or fertilizer application are
183 prohibited. Invasive non-native vegetation, such as European buckthorn and noxious weeds,
184 may be removed by obtaining a vegetation removal permit from the city.
185 d. Before grading or construction near a wetland everlay distric-t, the owner or contractor must
186 place erosion control fencing on the upland side of the perimeter of the wetland everia
187 diGtFiG , or as required by the city. This fencing must remain in place until all development
188 activities that may affect the wetland have been finished and adequate vegetative cover has
189 been established at which time the fencing must be removed.
190 e. All structures must have a minimum basement floor elevation not less than one foot above
191 the 1 00 -year flood elevation.
192 f. All hard -surface runoff must be treated in accordance with the requirements of the city and
193 the appropriate watershed district. Treatment may include site retention, skimmers, weirs or
194 sedimentation ponds of appropriate scale. Structures and ponds serving this purpose must
195 be properly maintained and serviced by the property owner.
196 g. Discharge into the wetlands must occur at a rate no greater than allowed by the city engineer
197 in accordance with the city's surface water management plan and the appropriate MCWD
198 requirements.
199 (2) Protection of wetland buffer areas. Existing and MCWD-required wetland buffers shall be
200 maintained and protected per the requirements of existing covenants as well as MCWD
201 regulations as administered by MCWD.
202 (3) Nonconformities.
Page 6
203 a. Effect of wetland boundary expansion. An existing structure, driveway or parking area
204 meeting the required setback from a city -designated wetland boundary or existing
205 established buffer area is considered a legal nonconforming development if a later wetland
206 delineation or implementation of a wetland buffer shows that the wetland or its buffer is closer
207 than the required setback.
208 b. Existing nonconformities. An existing structure, driveway or parking area that does not meet
209 the required setback from a city -designated wetland boundary or buffer area, is considered
210 a legal nonconforming development.
211 Sec. 78-1609. - Removal of lands from the wetlands overlay district.
212 (a) Removal of wetlands from a wetland overlay district (i.e. by filling, etc.) requires a zoning amendment
213 and an amendment of the official city wetland map. The amendments must be made pursuant to the
214 provisions of section 78-43 of this chapter and WCA replacement rules. These amendments must be
215 consistent with the purpose of this article, the city's surface water management plan and the goals and
216 policies of the community management plan. In determining the appropriateness of a rezoning request,
217 the city council will consider the size of the wetland overlay district, the magnitude of the area proposed
218 for removal, hydrological and ecological effects and the type and function of wetlands involved in order
219 to provide the maximum feasible protection.
220 (b) Wetlands within an overlay district may only be removed according to WCA rules and if at least an
221 equal area of wetland replacement is created to compensate for the wetland being filled. Unless
222 otherwise approved by the city council, compensatory wetland area must be provided within Orono
223 and within the same subwatershed (Painter's Creek, Long Lake Creek, Classen Creek, Lake
224 Minnetonka) as the wetland being altered, if available.
225 (c) In addition to application requirements, the city may require submission and approval of the following
226 information:
227 (1) A copy of the wetland replacement plan application submitted to the MCWD;
228 (2) A concept plan showing the ultimate use of the property;
229 (3) A grading plan, in hard copy format and a CAD or GIS format in Hennepin County coordinates,
230 with appropriate drainage calculations and erosion controls prepared by a registered engineer;
231 (4) A landscaping or revegetation plan;
232 (5) Such other information as may be necessary or convenient to evaluate the proposed permit; and
233 (6) A MnRAM assessment approved by the MCWD.
234 Sec. 78-1610. - Alteration of wetlands.
235 (a) No alteration of land within a wetland overlay district or an existing established wetland buffer is
236 allowed without a wetlands alteration permit, subject to recommendation by the planning commission
237 and approval of the city council. The planning commission must hold a public hearing after notifying
238 the property owners within 350 feet of the property on which the proposed alteration will occur.
239 Activities that constitute an alteration regulated by this section include changes to the size, depth or
240 contour of the wetlands or its existing established buffer, dredging, or alterations of wetlands or buffer
241 vegetation. Alterations do not include wetland planting or the selective clearing or pruning of trees or
242 vegetation that are dead, diseased, noxious weeds or similar hazards. A wetland alteration permit is
243 not required when a wetland district is rezoned to another zoning classification.
244 (b) Alteration of land within a wetland overlay district will only be allowed if water storage is provided in an
245 amount compensatory to that removed. Unless otherwise approved by the city council, compensatory
246 wetland area must be provided within the same subwatershed district as the wetland being altered. In
247 determining the appropriateness of an alteration request, the city council will consider the size of the
248 total wetland district, the magnitude of the area proposed for alteration, the aesthetic, hydrological and
249 ecological effect, the type and function of wetlands involved, and such other factors as may be
Page 7
250
appropriate in order to provide the maximum feasible protection to the wetlands. Application for a
251
wetlands
alteration permit must be accompanied by such information as required by the city, including:
252
(1)
A copy of the wetland replacement plan application submitted to the MCWD;
253
(2)
A concept plan showing the ultimate use of the property;
254
(3)
A grading plan, in hard copy format and a CAD or GIS format in Hennepin County coordinates,
255
with appropriate drainage calculations and erosion controls prepared by a registered engineer;
256
(4)
A landscaping or revegetation plan;
257
(5)
Such other information as may be necessary or convenient to evaluate the proposed permit; and
258
(6)
A MnRAM assessment approved by the IMCWD.
259
Sec. 78-1611. - Public control of wetlands.
260 (a) The city council may require that the owner of any property affected by this article must establish
261 wetland easements or restrictive covenants to be recorded within the property's chain of title. These
262 easements or covenants must describe the boundaries of the wetland; and prohibit any building,
263 paving, mowing, cutting, filling, dumping, yard waste disposal orfertilizer application within the wetland.
264 The owner or developer must record these easements or covenants with the final plat, with deeds from
265 a lot division or, if no subdivision is involved, before the city issues a grading permit or building permit
266 for an affected property. The applicant must submit evidence that the easement or covenant has been
267 submitted to the county for recording.
268 (b) If the city council does not require an easement or covenant, the city may record a notice of the wetland
269 requirements against the property. The property owner must still comply with the requirements of this
270 section.
271 Sec. 78-1612. - Reserved.
272 Editor's note— Ord. No. 103 3rd series, § 8, adopted May 28, 2013, repealed § 78-1612, which
273 pertained to wetland buffer markers and derived from Ord. No. 28 3rd series, § 1, 8-22-2005.
274 Sec. 78-1613. - Violations.
275 Violation of the provisions of this article or failure to comply with any of its requirements (including
276 violations of conditions and safeguards established in connection with grants of variances or conditional
277 uses) shall constitute a misdemeanor and shall be punishable as defined by law.
278 Sec. 78-1614. - Authority/enforcement actions.
279 Nothing herein contained shall prevent the city from taking such other lawful action as is necessary to
280 prevent or remedy any violation. Such actions may include but are not limited to:
1281 (1) In responding to a suspected article violation, the planning director and the city
282 may utilize the full array of enforcement actions available to it including but not limited to
283 prosecution and fines, injunctions, after -the -fact permits, and/or orders for corrective measures
284 to the guilty party.
285 (2) When an article violation is either discovered by or brought to the attention of the planning
286 diFeGt ocitV administrato , the plaRRORg diF8GtGF shall immediately investigate the
287 situation and document the nature and extent of the violation of the official control. As soon as is
288 reasonably possible, this information will be submitted to the MCWD along with the community's
289 plan of action to correct the violation to the degree possible.
1290 (3) The plaRRORg direGtef shall notify the suspected party of the requirements of this
291 article and all other official controls and the nature and extent of the suspected violation of these
Page 8
292 controls. If the structure and/or use is under construction or development, the planRing direGtE)FgLty
293 administrator may order the construction or development immediately halted until a proper permit
294 or approval is granted by the community. If the construction or development is already completed,
1295 then the planning direGtof may either: (1) issue an order identifying the corrective
296 actions that must be made within a specified time period to bring the use or structure into
297 compliance with the official controls; or (2) notify the responsible party to apply for an after -the -
298 fact permit/development approval within a specified period of time not to exceed 30 -days.
1299 (4) If the responsible party does not appropriately respond to the plaRRiRg direGtG�r
300 within the specified period of time, each additional day that lapses shall constitute an additional
1301 violation of this article and shall be prosecuted accordingly. The plaRRiRg direGtef
302 shall also upon the lapse of the specified response period notify the landowner to restore the land
303 to the condition which existed prior to the violation of this article.
304 Secs. 78-1615-78-1630. - Reserved.
Page 9
AGENDAITEM
Item No.: 17 Date: May 8, 2017
Item Description: Authorize to hire City Planner
Presenter: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Agenda Planning Department
Development Director Section: Report
1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to gain approval to hire a City Planner.
2. Background. The City Council has authorized the recruitment of a City Planner to replace retiring
Senior Planner Mike Gaffron. Staff has advertised the position, and has received 8 applicants. The City
Administrator and Community Development Director interviewed the top 3 candidates that meet the
minimum requirements of the position, narrowing that down to the top 2. Community Development staff
interviewed these and recommended one candidate best fitting into the needs of the position, department,
and community.
Through this process, Staff believes Laura Oakden best addresses the needs of the City of Orono and will
be a fine addition to our team. She brings energy and a strong customer centric mentality to city hall and
looks forward to working with staff, the planning commission, and City Council as a team. Laura has
spent the last three years in Jordan Minnesota, and has received her masters degree from the Humphrey
Institute.
3. Funding. This position is funded in the 2017 budget. The hiring range authorized was $60,650-
$68,512.
Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends hiring Laura (Holey) Oakden to the position of city planner
at the Grade 11, step 2, ($64,461).
4.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to hire Laura (Holey) Oakden to the position of City Planner at Grade 11, Step 2.
Prepared By: J. Bamhart
Reviewed By:J.Bamhart
Approved By: D5R
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING STATUS QUO IN THE ACCESS TO COUNTY ROAD
1129 2160 Wayzata Boulevard FOR ORONO STATION WEST
WHEREAS, Hennepin County is reconstructing County Road 112 from Highway 12 to
County Road 6; and
WHEREAS, the reconstruction will take place over the next four years; and
WHEREAS, as part of the reconstruction, the County is planning to realign access
Orono Station West (2160 Wayzata Blvd; PIN 34-118-23-21-0002) has to County Road 12; and
WHEREAS, Orono Station West has two accesses to County Road 112; and
WHEREAS, the western access point has historically been and is currently
approximately 80 feet wide and Hennepin County's plan currently proposes to reduce the
western access to 36 feet wide; and,
WHEREAS, the owner of Orono Station West desires to keep the access at least 72 feet
wide consistent with other access points in Hennepin County's plan for County Road 112; and,
WHEREAS, the owner of Orono Station West has expressed concerns that the reduction
in access will likely have a negative impact on customers' ability and desire to frequent Orono
Station West by impeding access from County Road 112, having a negative impact on the
business; and
WHEREAS, the City of Orono fully supports property owners and our business
community and wishes to see all of our businesses thrive; and
WHEREAS, the City of Orono recognizes the importance of this critical corridor and
shares the goal of creating an efficient and safe environment for all road and trail users for
County Road 112 project; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orono City Council does hereby
support maintenance of the west access point to Orono Station West at its historic and current
width of approximately 80 feet subject to any change by mutual agreement of the owners of
Orono Station West and Hennepin county.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held
May 8, 2017.
ATTEST:
Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor