HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-00849 - land alteration CITY OF ORONO * 2015 - 00849 *
2750 KELLEY PARKWAY DATE ISSUED: 10/07/2015
ORONO, MN 55356-
952 249-4600 FAX: 952 249-4616
ADDRESS 3850 WATERTOWN RD
PIN 32-118-23-32-0005
LEGAL DESC HILLAWAY FARM
LOT 001 BLOCK 001
PERMIT TYPE ZONING PERMIT
PROPERTY TYPE : RESIDENTIAL
CONSTRUCTION TYPE : LAND ALTERATION(501+CU YDS)
NOTE: MAJOR LAND ALTERATION-3,000 TOTAL YARDS IMPORT
NOTE: HAULING ACTIVITIY ONLY MONDAY THROUGH FRIADY BETWEEN 7:00 A.M.AND 8:00 P.M. INITIAL:
NOTE: EQUIPMENT ACTIVITY MAY OCCUR ONLY MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY BETWEEN 8:00 A.M.AND 6:00 P.M. INITIAL:
NOTE: HAULING MUST BE COMPLETE BY NOVEMBER 22,2015. INITIAL: Jy"&Zuss
NOTE: AS-BUILT SURVEY REQUIRED PRIOR TO RELEASE OF ESCROW. INITIAL:
NOTE: HAUL HAUL ROUTES AND SOURCE SITES MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER. INITIAL:
APPLICANT MAJOR LAND ALTERATION 50.00
ANDERSON,MARK&KRISTEN TOTAL 50.00
Payment(s)
3850 WATERTOWN RD CASH 50.00
MAPLE PLAIN,MN 55359-
OWNER
ANDERSON,MARK&KRISTEN
3850 WATERTOWN RD
MAPLE PLAIN,MN 55359-
AGREEMENT AND SWORN STATEMENT
The work for which this permit is issued shall be performed according to
the approved plans and specifications,applicable City approvals,and the
State Building Code. This permit is for only the work described and does
not grant permission for additional or related work which requires separate
permits. All provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of work
shall be compied with whether or not specified herein.This permit will
expire and become null and void if construction authorized is not
commenced within 180 days of the date of issuance,or if construction is
suspended for a period of 180 days at any time after work has commenced.
The applicant is responsible for assuring all required inspections are
requested in conformance with the State Building Code.This permit may be
revoked at any time for due cause. `
7L-
/ /
p scant Permitee Signature Ditto Issued By Signature Date
City of Orono
Zoning Permit Application
Mailing Address: Permit number: `s -00
PO Box 66 p
Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Date received: 7 0 j S
Escrow#and
Street Address: amount:
2750 Kelley Parkway
y Orono, MN 55356 Permit Fee: ��
F G
�1 Q
kFSHO¢ Fax: 952-249-4616 Approved by:
Main: 952-249-4600 Notes:
www.ci.orono.mn.us
This application form must be completed in full and all required information must be submitted. (Please print.)
st
Job Site Address: U �6 j�{� ,,/� h-�+� ,�I /e' 4"
CONTRACTOR/APPLICANT INFORMATION:
Name: Ac,,
Phone: Fax:
Address: u -Cc r City: ZIP:
Contact Person. �,, Contact's phone number
Email Alco ks Applicant is: Contractor Circle One
PROPERTY OWNERPFORMATION:
Name:
Phone (day):
Mailing Address: Met, ZIP:
Email and/or Fax
Overall Project Description: f; mac.. cl e— 3
Check
TYPE OF PERMIT E
collected whenpermit is issued
Dock, Commercial $50+engineering review costs
Escrow for erosion control and engineering review costs $2,000
Dock, Residential - Permanent dock on any lake or initial seasonal dock not on Lake $50+engineering review costs
Minnetonka (permanent dock requires CUP
Hardcover Permit: Driveway, Patio,Sidewalk,etc. (New or Replacement) No charge
Also re uires is a Minor or Major Land Alteration Permit
Land Alteration, Major (grading, filling, or excavating) of more than 500 cubic yards $50
beyond the lakeshore setback OR more than 50 cubic yards within the lakeshore setback
(also requires Conditional Use Permit)
!Reference: City Code Sections 78-967. 78-1247 and 78-12861
Escrow for erosion control and engineering review costs As determined by CUP
Land Alteration, Minor (grading, filling or excavating)of 51 to 500 cubic yards beyond the $50+engineering review costs
lakeshore setback OR 50 cubic yards or less within the lakeshore setback
[Reference: City Code Sections 78-967. 78-1247 and 78-12861
Escrow for erosion control and engineering review costs $2,000
Retaining Walls which exceed two feet in height above existing grade; or result in more $50+engineering review costs
than 20 cubic yards of imported fill; or are located less than five feet from the property line.
Escrow for erosion control and engineering review costs $2,500
rReference: City Code Section 78-1405(5.1)1
Retaining Walls which measure more than four feet(from bottom of footings to top of wall)
require a building permit. Tiered retaining walls are considered one wall unless the walls
are se arated by twice the height of the lower wall.
Stairway or Lifts to Lake(New or Replacement) rReference: City Code Sections 78-12821 $50+engineering review costs
Escrow for erosion control and engineering review costs $2,000
Structure Permit for other structures 200 sf or less not requiring a building permit but $50+engineering review costs
regulated by the zoning code[Reference: City Code Section 86-661
Escrow for erosion control and engineering review costs $2,500
Tree Removal or other vegetation removal within 75 feet of lakes No charge.
Reference: HE Code Section 78-1285 Pre-inspection required.
Tem orar Construction Of loelTrailer associated with building permit) $30
Updated: May 2015
APPLICANVOWNER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
• Applicant/Owner agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department;
• Owner agrees to pay the City of Orono for engineering consultant review costs where applicable;
• Applicant/Owner certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes
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;
• Applicant acknowledges the attached Escrow Agreement is completed and signed by Owner;
• Applicant/Owner understands their project may require an initial and/or as-built survey per City Code Section 86-68.
• Some or all of the information that you are asked to provide on this application is classified by State law as either private or
confidential. Private data is information which generally cannot be given to the public but can be given to the subject of the data.
Confidential data is information which generally cannot be given to either the public or the subject of the data. Our purpose and
intended use of this information is to annually update our records and records of other governmental agencies required by law. If
you refuse to supply the information,the application may not be issued.
The undersigned certify that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of their knowled e.
Applicant's Signature: /' Date:
Property Owner's Signature: Date:
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Except for tree removal permits, all permits require a completed
TYPE OF PERMIT: application form, escrow agreement (signed by the property owner) and escrow check from owner,
two copies of each,where applicable, plans, landscape plans,grading plans,surveys or site plans.
Dock, Commercial 1. Structural plans for the dock
2. Survey/site plan showing the proposed location of the dock
3. Copy of LMCD permit
Dock, Residential Seasonal Dock—survey showing proposed dock
Permanent Dock—plans as approved by CUP and copy of LMCD permit(if applicable)
Hardcover Permit 1. All Minor or Major Land Alteration Permit requirements apply as appropriate
2. Hardcover calculations,existing and proposed
3. Survey
Land Alteration, Major 1. Survey/grading plan including existing and proposed contours as approved by Conditional Use Permit
2. Erosion control plan.
3. A copy of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District(MCWD)permits or documentation from the MCWD stating the
proposed project does not trigger any of their permitting requirements. Please note,the City will not issue a
building permit without information from the MCWD.
Land Alteration, Minor 1. Survey/grading plan including existing and proposed contours
2. Amount of fill to be imported and/or exported and haul route
3. Amount of earth to be moved around on site
4. Erosion control plan.
5. A copy of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District(MCWD)permits or documentation from the MCWD stating the
proposed project does not trigger any of their permitting requirements. Please note,the City will not issue a
building permit without information from the MCWD.
Retaining Wall 1. Plans for wail(s)
2. Unless repair or exact replacement of existing wall,submit an updated survey with grading plan including existing and
proposed contours
3. Hardcover calculation worksheets if in shoreland district
4. Erosion control plan
5. A copy of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District(MCWD)permits or documentation from the MCWD stating the
proposed project does not trigger any of their permitting requirements. Please note,the City will not issue a
buildin permit without information from the MCWD.
Stairway or Lifts to 1. Construction plans for stairway or lift, including footings
Lake 2. Topographical survey of property with proposed stairs or lift shown
3. Erosion control plan
4. A copy of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District(MCWD)permits or documentation from the MCWD stating the
proposed project does not trigger any of their permitting requirements. Please note,the City will not Issue a
building permit without information from the MCWD.
Structure Permit 1. Construction plans.
2. Survey/site plan of property with proposed structure shown and with setbacks to property lines,other structures on
property and the septic system indicated.The general location of any sewer and water services should be shown if
applicable.
3. Grading plan if grading is proposed.
4. Hardcover calculation worksheets
5. Erosion control plan.
6. A copy of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District(MCWD)permits or documentation from the MCWD stating the
proposed project does not trigger any of their permitting requirements. Please note,the City will not Issue a
building permit without information from the MCWD.
Tree Removal Call: 952-249-4600 to schedule an inspection for removal of an individual tree(s). A re-planting plan/erosion control/
management plan may be required for clear cutting,buckthorn or other intensive vegetation removal.
Updated: May 2015
f
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PURSUANT TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTIONS 78-916 and 78-966
FILE NO. 15-3716
WHEREAS, Mark Anderson and Kristen D. Anderson, a married
couple (herein after the "Owners") are the owners of the property located at 3850
Watertown Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described
as Lot 1, Block 1, Hillaway Farm, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter the
"Property"); and
WHEREAS, in June 2014 the City granted conditional use permit
(hereinafter the "CUP") via Resolution No. 6411 for filling and grading activity in excess
of 500 cubic yards per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-916 and 78-966 to
incorporate a total of approximately 10,000 cubic yards of fill into the Property in order to
create a larger flat area west of the barn for the keeping of horses;
WHEREAS, the Owners imported a total of 17,000 cubic yards of material
to the Property and were issued a Stop Work notice by the City and were instructed to
seek after-the-fact approval of the additional 7,000 cubic yards of material;
WHEREAS, the Owners have made application to the City of Orono for
an after-the-fact and amended CUP per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-916
and 78-966 in order to import a total of approximately 10,000 cubic yards of additional fill
(7,000 cubic yards after-the-fact and 3,000 cubic yards new additional) brought into the
Property in order to complete the project to create a level slope for farming; and
WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance
with Minnesota Statutes and the Orono, Minnesota, City Code, a public hearing was held
by the Orono Planning Commission on June 15, 2015 at which times all persons desiring
to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono,
Minnesota:
FINDINGS
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 15-3716.
Page 1
2. The Property is located in the RR-1A, One Family Rural Zoning District
which requires a minimum lot area of 5.0 dry acres and a minimum lot
width of 300 feet.
3. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing
held on June 15, 2015 and voted 6 for and 0 against on a motion to
approve the CUP. The Planning Commission finds that the following
factors support the granting of the requested CUP:
a. The Property is 22.5 acres in area; has over 850 feet of width along
Watertown Road.
b. The request for fill in excess of 500 cubic yards will not significantly
impact the Property as viewed from Watertown Road. The grading on
the Property will have no impact on surrounding lands. The finished
grade will be vegetated with a pasture mix to blend into the pasture
acreage on the Property. The project, once completed, should not
result in undesirable views requiring mitigation.
c. The filling and re-grading of the Property, once completed, will have
no impact on surrounding lands. The grades, once vegetated, will
blend into the rest of the pasture acreage.
d. The proposed grading and improvements will 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.
e. 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 import of
fill. However, the prolonged activity of importing fill and actively
grading the property will have an adverse impact on neighbors,
surrounding properties, and users of Watertown Road. Trucks hauling
and equipment working on the site will likely 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.
Page 2
f. The haul routes shall be submitted to the City and will be monitored.
The Owner will be required to keep debris off of the public roadways.
The grading project has been evaluated by the City Engineer and
should not create a nuisance situation.
4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings
and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff,
comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the
proposed CUP on the health, safety and welfare of the community.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby
grants a CUP for filling and grading activity in excess of 500 cubic yards per Orono
Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-916 and 78-966 in order to incorporate
approximately 10,000 cubic yards of additional fill into the Property for a total import of
20,000 cubic yards; subject to the following conditions:
1. Council approval is based on the grading plan submitted by the Owner and
annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any
amendments to the grading plan may require further Planning Commission and
City Council review.
2. A double row of silt fencing shall be placed and maintained between the extent of
the grading activity and the wetlands on the Property.
3. Only clean fill is permitted. The City Engineer shall be allowed to inspect any fill
being imported to the site prior to deposition;
4. Owners shall provide certification documentation evidence that all fill brought to
the Property to date and all fill to be brought to the Property consists of only
clean fill material;
5. A haul route shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval and inspection
prior to commencement of hauling to the site. The Owners shall be responsible
for repair to roadways for any adverse impacts. Upon inspection, the City
Engineer shall establish an appropriate escrow amount to guarantee repair of
roadways;
6. Hauling activity may occur only Monday through Friday between the hours of
7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. as designated in Section 58-121;
Page 3
1
7. Equipment activity specifically relating to the grading project within the Property
may occur only Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00
p.m.;
8. The grading activity should ensure the surface overflow is maintained at existing
elevations on the south side of the wetland on the Property;
9. Upon completion of the project an as-built survey shall be submitted reflecting
conformance with the approved plan. The Property will be evaluated from an
erosion and sediment control risk perspective prior to release of escrow funds;
10. The Owners shall submit plans and a permit application to address the retaining
walls constructed on the site without proper City permits prior to the release of
the escrow funds;
11. The Owners shall comply with the ongoing recommendations of the City
Engineer and the requirements of the other involved regulatory agencies;
12. An administrative Zoning Permit for Land Alteration will be required and a pre-
Axeconstruction meeting involving all relevant parties shall be held at least 7 days
prior to commencement of grading work following any approvals granted by the
City Council;
13. Hauling activity shall be limited to a total of 60 days from the date of the pre-
construction meeting. A 10-day extension of the hauling activity timeline may be
granted by staff upon request 10 days prior to the 60th day;
14. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Owners,
but are permissive only and must be exercised by completing the project within
one year of the date of Council approval, or the CUP will expire on that date
(June 22, 2016).
15. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this
resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically
terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a
misdemeanor.
Page 4
16. The undersigned Owners have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms
of this resolution and on behalf of the Owners and the Owners' heirs, successors
and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title
of the Property.
Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 22na day of June, 2015.
Page 5
ATTEST:
Diane Tiegs, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor
Property Owner(s)
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPPIN
This instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,
2015 by Mark Anderson husband of Kristen D. Anderson.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPPIN
This instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,
2015 by Kristen D. Anderson, wife of Mark Anderson.
Notary Public
Page 6
PLAN REVIEW CHECKLIST FOR ZONING PERMIT APPLICATIONS
Address: 3�5o Wad-leuuv� 120
Description of work: VWalar Land_Type of of permit:
Zoning review by: apueJ Date Approved: I
Grading review by: Date Approved:
Other Review, Reviewed by: Date Approved:
Zoning Information:
Zoning File#: Resolution : ` I Resolution Date:
Lot Area: SF/AC Width: I v Depth:
Survey Submitted? 0 Yes 0 No Date of Survey: Revision date:
Existing Setbacks:
Front(Lake) Rear(Street) ( N S E W ) ( N S E W ) Other Buildings Wetland
Side Side
Proposed Setbacks:
Front(Lake) Rear(Street) ( N S E W ) ( N S E W ) Other Buildings Wetland
Side Side
Shoreland District MCWD Permit Received Average Lakeshore Setback Met? Bluff
0 Yes 0 No 0 N/A 0 Yes 0 No
0 Yes 0 No 0 Yes 0 No 0 N/A
Permit Number: Setback:
Stormwater Quality Existing Proposed Variance Required CUP Required
Overlay District Tier Hardcover Hardcover
0 Yes 0 No 0 Yes 0 No
Type(s): Type(s):
File# File#
Updated:January 2013
z:\forms\old stuft\plan review checklist for zoning permit applications 2013.docx
Earth Movement-Cubic Yards
In Out Total
Haul Route? ? 0 Yes 0 No
Explain haul route in detail:
Fees to be Charged Amount Orono Inspections Required
Permit Fee Amount
0 Site
Escrow Amount 0 Hardcover Removal
0 Footing
Escrow Agreement received? 0 Poured Wall
0 As-Built Survey
0 Yes 0 No 0 Planting Plan
0 Wetland Buffer
Escrow Money received? 0 Final
0 Yes 0 No 0 Other(specify)
Engineering review needed?
0--yes,
REMARKS (in-house):
Other Review: Reviewed by: Date Approved:
REMARKS TO BE NOTED ON PERMIT AND INITIALLED BY PERSON PULLING PERMIT)
Updated:January 2013
z:\forms\old stuff\plan review checklist for zoning permit applications 2013.docx
MINNEHAHA CREEKWATERSHED DISTRICT
QUALITY OF WATIROO QUALITY OF LIFE
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103D, and on the basis of statements
The Minnehaha Creek and information contained in the permit application, correspondence, plans,
Watershed District is maps, and all other supporting data submitted by the applicant, and made a part
hereof by reference, PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED to the applicant
committed to a leadership named below for use and development of land in the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District.
role in protecting,
improving and managing
Issued to: Mark Anderson Permit No: 14-219
the surface waters and
affiliated groundwater Location: 3850 Watertown Road Orono
resources within the Purpose: Erosion Control, Landscapina
District,including their
relationships to the Date of Issuance: 9/22/2015 Date of Expiration: 9/22/2016
i
ecosystems of which By Order of the Board of Managers
they are an integral part. (y y
We achieve our mission Betfi-BrovVh
o
District Technician
through regulation,
This permit is not transferable without District approval, and is valid to the date of
capital projects, expiration. No activity is authorized beyond the expiration date. If the permittee
education,cooperative requires more time to complete the project, an application for renewal of the
permit must be received by the District at least 30 days before expiration.
endeavors,and other
The applicant is responsible for compliance with all District Rules and for the
programs based on action of their representatives, contractors, and employees.
sound science,
Conditions: Project to be completed as described in plans submitted to the
innovative thinking,an MCWD office on September 213t, 2015 according to the provisions
of this permit.
rnfonned and engaged • Properly install and maintain all required erosion control
constituency,and the measures until the disturbed areas are re-stabilized
• Notify MCWD in writing upon completing installation of
cost effective use of perimeter and sedimentation controls
public funds. • When the site is re-stabilized and the MCWD staff has
performed a final inspection, all silt fences must be removed
(Statement concerning fees for inspections, violations, etc... on following page)
15320 Minnetonka Boulevard,Minnetonka,MN 55345.Office: (952)471-0590 9 Fax: (952)471-0682•www.minnehahacreek.org
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
QUALITY OF WATER QUALITY OF LIFE
I
f
f
1
Inspection/Analysis/Monitorinst Fees
i
The Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District is
A site inspection and monitoring by District staff will be performed where the
committed to a leadership activity involves:
E
rote in protecting, . a commercial/industrial/multi-family residential development '
i
improving and managing • a single family residential development greater than 5 acres or of any size if
within the Minnehaha Creek subwatershed
the surface waters and . any alteration of a floodplain or wetland
affiliated groundwater • dredging within the beds, banks or shores of any protected water or wetland
• a violation
resources within the . any project which in the judgment of the District staff should be inspected
District,including their due to project location, scope, or construction techniques
relationships to the
In these cases, the applicant shall pay to the District a fee equal to the actual
ecosystems of which costs of field inspection of the work, including investigation of the area affected
t*are an integral part. by the work, analysis of the work, and any subsequent monitoring of the work,
which in the case of a violation shall be at least$35.
We achieve our mission
i
F
through regulation,
3
capital projects Standard Fee Schedule
education,cooperative District professional staff $ 65.51* j
District interns $ 40.35*
endeavors,and other District clerical staff $ 46.69*
programs based on Consulting Senior Engineer $contracted rate
Consulting Engineer/Technician $contracted rate
sound science, District Counsel $contracted rate
Application fee $ 10.00
innovative thinking,an Copy costs $ .25 + actual staff time
informed and engaged Color copy costs $ 1.00 + actual staff time I
i
constituency,and the s
cost effective use of * Hourly
public funds.
i
I
i
i
15320 Minnetonka Boulevard,Minnetonka,MN 55345 Office:(952)471-0590• Fax:(952)471-0682•www.minnehahacreek.org
i
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,June 22,2015
7:00 o'clock p.m.
develop some lots on the lake,two lots in the woods,and two lots on the upper portion of the preserve.
Gronholz stated they viewed an initial plat that not only met every code and ordinance; it actually
exceeded the City's requirements. Gronholz indicated this piece of property could really hold up to 30
lots and still meet every City requirement but that the property owner and developer chose to only
propose 11 lots to again meet their vision of preserving the prairie and not have the development become
an eyesore in the community.
Gronholz stated as a result of sharing the same vision as the property owner and developer,they signed a
purchase agreement for one of the wooded lots in the proposed development. Shortly after signing the
purchase agreement for the lot,they listed their current home for sale in early April and were very
fortunate to come to terms with a buyer toward the end of May. On May 18,the Planning Commission
discussed this plat for preapproval. There was a good discussion on some items to be tweaked and the
Planning Commission then tabled the application.
On or about June 4, Gronholz indicated he and his wife heard that a revision of the development was
being made that included removal of the lot on which they had a purchase agreement and an additional lot
had been added to the southern part of the development in the prairie. Gronholz stated since this was not
consistent with the property owner's desire or vision,he was curious to know why the change was made,
especially since the initial plat met every City requirement.
Gronholz stated his understanding of the change was that the Mayor of Orono had provided guidance to
the property owner and developer on how the plat should look to obtain approval from the Planning
Commission and eventually the City Council and that it appears the Mayor placed a higher value on
preserving the woods and less value on preserving the prairie,which was the exact opposite of the
property owner's vision.
Gronholz stated the nature of how this change in the plat has occurred has raised a few questions and
concerns for him personally. Number one, why was a plat that conformed to City requirements changed
when it met the vision and desire of a private property owner and developer? Two, why is the Mayor of
Orono unilaterally changing a development plat prior to a public hearing or the City Council'3 review of
the application and final plat approval? Three,why does the Mayor have the authority to impose her
personal preference in changes to a plat prior to final approval by the City Council?
As a result of this unusual change in plat design,Gronholz stated he would recommend the following two
steps be taken: The City Council should review both the initial plat design as well as the final plat design
for final plat approval; and if the initial plat meets all City requirements, it shall supersede the revised
plat. Secondly, as a judicial agency,Gronholz stated he believes at a minimum the Mayor should recuze
herself from the final plat vote as well as any other Council Member who has influenced changes from
that initial plat.
Gronholz stated in closing,he and his wife have retained counsel in an effort to resolve this matter and
protect their rights and it is their hope and desire that the issue be resolved without filing any motions or
complaints against the City of Orono.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
5. #15-3716 DALE GUSTAFSON OB/O MARK AND KRISTEN ANDERSON—3850
WATERTOWN ROAD,CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT—RESOLUTION NO. 6516
Page 5 of 19
F
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,June 22,2015
7:00 o'clock p.m.
Mark Anderson,Applicant,was present.
Curtis stated last June the City Council granted approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the
import of approximately 10,000 cubic yards of fill to the site. This grading was to correct an erosion
issue,to create both a level paddock for their horses west of the barn, and create a more gradual slope
from the barn to the wetland to east in planting a crop.
During the course of the project,the amount of material imported to the site exceeded the approved
amount by 7,000 cubic yards. The property owner has provided a revised plan,which addresses the
additional fill brought to the site and further requests approval to import approximately 3,000 cubic yards
more to complete the project.
On June 15,the Planning Commission held a public hearing where they heard from the applicant and
members of the public. The Planning Commission voted 6 to 0 on a motion to approve the CUP to allow
the importing of 10,000 cubic yards of material, with 7,000 cubic yards being after the fact, subject to a
number of conditions that are outlined in Staff's memo.
Staff recommends approval of the CUP subject to the conditions as recommended by the Planning
Commission. An approval resolution has been drafted for Council consideration. Curtis noted the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District still has a requirement for a restoration plan to be submitted and
approved before work can begin on the property. Tonight the Council should consider adopting or
amending the approval resolution. The property owner is present this evening
Levang noted Item No. 6 on Page 2 of the Planning Commission recommendations refers to a 60-day
limit on the hauling activity. Levang stated she understands the hauling will not begin until Staff receives
the right documentation and a preconstruction meeting is held. Levang asked what the process will be if
the project takes more than 60 days and whether the applicant will have to apply for an extension.
Curtis indicated the applicant should notify the City ahead of the 60 days expiration and then Council will
consider an extension or allow Staff to extend it. Curtis stated the Planning Commission was clear about
wanting an end date for the neighborhood,which is why it was incorporated into the conditions.
Levang stated it seems that the 60 days is more than reasonable given the length of the project, but that
she had a concern that a process be in place in the event the project exceeds the 60 days. Levang asked if
that should be included in the resolution.
Mattick stated the resolution could spell out what the process is. Mattick stated the applicant could
provide a 10 to 15 day notice if the project is going to exceed the 60 days. Mattick stated Staff could
extend it by another 10 to 15 days if the Council determines that is appropriate.
Levang asked whether Item No. 9 regarding the retaining walls is a second violation.
Curtis stated to her understanding the walls were constructed during this process and permits were not
obtained. Curtis indicated the retaining walls were not included in the original plan. The applicant has
now resolved that and has submitted the required information to obtain an after-the-fact permit.
Levang asked if there is a double fine associated with the after-the-fact variance.
Curtis indicated there is.
Page 6 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,June 22,2015
7:00 o'clock p.m.
Levang commented she was a little dismayed there was another violation and that it feels like this
property owner seems to not keep to the City ordinances.
Curtis stated Staff hopes to, at the preconstruction meeting,have a conversation about any anticipated
next projects so that everyone can be on the same page with the property owner and work with him to
obtain the proper approvals and permits.
Levang asked if they will also be talking about Item No. 12 at the preconstruction meeting,which is
communicating with adjacent property owners.
Curtis indicated they will be.
Levang asked if Staff is amenable to adding some language to Item No. 6, such as notify Staff at least 10
days in advance of the 60 days expiring,with Staff being allowed to extend the project for X amount of
time.
Barnhart stated he would be comfortable with that amount of discretion but that anything more than 10 or
15 days would likely impact the neighbors and that he would bring it to the Council.
Walsh commented that makes sense.
Levang noted one concern that was raised at the Planning Commission was locating clean fill and that the
Planning Commission strongly suggested that be lined up. Levang asked whether the applicant has been
able to secure the fill yet.
Anderson stated there are a couple of items he would like to discuss. In regards to Items 4,5,and 6,those
all deal with length of time and that he has been very eager to complete this project. Anderson stated
starting in November of last year,they pleaded with Staff to get the topsoil laid down and since then they
have been addressing every concern the City and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has had.
Anderson stated in their view they have addressed every single obligation that has been raised and that
they would like to complete the project as quickly as possible.
Anderson stated as it relates to the time restrictions that are set for hauling and the time restrictions that
have been set for equipment on site,he would like to make a note that this is a working farm. Anderson
stated a corn crop and vegetables have been planted in the front and that there will be tractors operating
periodically. Anderson stated he is not sure how someone would distinguish a tractor that is cultivating
corn with a tractor that is moving fill.
Anderson indicated he looked at the City ordinance and it says that power equipment is allowed to be
used from 7 a.m.to 10 p.m. during the week and 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. on weekends. Anderson stated if it
makes sense,he would like to comply with the City ordinances as they are written since that way the
project would be finished a lot quicker. Anderson stated the hauling and site equipment should coincide,
because if the hauling happens and there is no equipment to move it,that will delay the project. Anderson
stated there is only so much room in that area and the fill has to be spread when it is delivered.
Anderson stated as far as lining up fill, it is a process because the fill has to be obtained within a certain
distance from the site because otherwise it will not work. Anderson indicated he did not know until
Page 7 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,June 22,2015
7:00 o'clock p.m.
recently if this project was going to continue and that once he has a start date,he can start seeking the
clean fill. Anderson stated in his view 60 days is a really tight schedule,especially if there are restrictions
on the time from 9:00 to 5:00 during the day and that regular operating hours as set in the ordinance
would be more appropriate. Anderson indicated it may take two to three weeks from when he has an
agreement to get the fill and the equipment lined up.
Anderson stated to address the retaining walls; it was his understanding that a retaining wall less than four
feet did not need a permit. Anderson indicated the retaining walls were constructed by Brian Butterfield,
who is one of the neighbors,and that it was an oversight. Anderson stated there were two items that may
not have been met but that they were an oversight.
Levang asked if the work hours were for the neighbors because the hauling up to that point had been
bothersome and excessive.
Curtis stated that is accurate. Curtis noted the power equipment time allowance that Mr. Anderson quoted
is for lawn mowing and that type of equipment and that construction activity is permitted Monday
through Friday from 7 a.m.to 8 p.m. and weekends and holidays is 8 a.m.to 8 p.m.
Levang asked if the Planning Commission was willing to allow hauling on the weekends.
Anderson asked what the City is going to do if they are doing field cultivation and somebody calls
because they hear a tractor at 6 a.m.
Curtis stated she will be able to visually tell the difference between field cultivation and equipment
operating in the project area. Curtis stated it may take some additional Staff oversight in order to ensure
the schedule is met. Curtis stated the City typically will receive calls regardless in situations like this.
Curtis stated she would suggest the applicant source his materials and that Staff'can be flexible with the
preconstruction meeting and when the hauling will start but that there just needs to be a mutual
understanding. Curtis stated the preconstruction meeting could be held the day before he is ready to start.
Anderson stated given the hour restrictions,he would say 120 days is more realistic because there will be
rain delays and clearing the mud off the record. Anderson stated if the City would like him to stay with
the 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.,he would request 120 days. Anderson indicated six out of the seven neighbors have
come over and spoke highly of the project and that everyone wants it done. Anderson noted there is one
neighbor that has voiced concern about equipment and he reached out to the City but not him personally.
Anderson indicated they will go as quickly as they can,but to put a 9:00 to 5:00 and a 60-day limit on it is
not realistic.
Christopher McGrann,Planning Commissioner, stated the restrictions were placed in order to handle
some of the complaints of the neighbors. McGrann asked if it could be 8:00 to 6:00. McGrann stated in
his view 7 a.m.to 7 p.m. is unrealistic for the neighbors. McGrann indicated he would be willing to allow
hauling from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. McGrann asked if that would help.
Anderson stated he is attempting to deal with everyone's expectations and being realistic on the project.
Anderson stated if the City restricts the hours from 8:00 to 6:00,they will work as quickly as possible.
Page 8 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,June 22,2015
7:00 o'clock p.m.
McGrann stated if it goes to 120 days,the City will likely hear more questions from the neighbors,which
is why the 60 days was selected. McGrann stated he would prefer to go longer hours with the shorter
time period.
Anderson stated when the fill becomes available,they will move the fill. Anderson noted the contractor
for Watertown Road approached him about fill,but because the project was not yet approved,he was not
able to accept it.
McGrann stated he would rather have expanded hours than an extended time period.
Walsh noted at the Planning Commission meeting the applicant did not express any concern with the 60-
day time frame.
Anderson indicated that was the first time he heard about that. Anderson asked if they could make the
hours consistent during the week and on the weekends and have it from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.,which is what is
allowed in the ordinance.
Curtis stated at this point it is up to the City Council to decide what they feel is appropriate.
David Martini,Consulting City Engineer, stated in his view the 60 days seems more than adequate to
move 3,000 cubic yards. Martini stated the issue is that the timing is more related to obtaining the fill
when it is available from a single source. Martini stated the reality of when this can be done is related to
when and where the material is available. Martini stated if the material is available, 60 days should be
enough time to move the material,but that what could happen is that 100 yards of material might become
available from one place, it is moved to the site, but then it might be another 20 days before they are able
to get more material.
Levang stated the City is trying to avoid the starting and stopping of the hauling, but that she is hearing
that is not possible at this point.
Anderson stated he is not sure when he can start,and once that is determined,he can start picking up the
phone and finding fill.
Walsh stated he would rather have expanded hours than an expanded time frame.
Printup stated he is okay with the expanded hours. Printup questioned what the City should do to avoid
the stopping and starting of the hauling.
Walsh stated everyone will need to move as quickly as they can and that the City Council can include the
language suggested by City Attorney Mattick.
McMillan asked if he has any identified sources for the fill at this time.
Anderson stated he does not at this time outside of Watertown Road,which may no longer be available.
Levang suggested changing Point No. 4 to read, hauling will be allowed between the hours of 7 a.m.to 8
p.m.,but equipment will be allowed from 8 a.m.to 6 p.m.
Page 9 of 19
J
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,June 22,2015
7:00 o'clock p.m.
McMillan noted it would be Page 4 of the resolution.
Walsh stated in his view Mr. Anderson was asking to make the hours consistent during the week and on
the weekends.
Levang stated the neighbors also have to be taken into consideration and that they have already put up
with over 1,000 truckloads.
McMillan stated her inclination would be to not allow equipment on the weekends and then add two
hours each day for hauling and equipment.
Mattick suggested the applicant provide Staff with 10 days' notice if they will not be able to complete the
project within 60 days and that Staff can authorize an additional 10 to 20 days depending on what the City
Council is comfortable with. Anything over that would require the matter to come back before the
Council.
Levang stated Point No. 7 would be changed from 8 a.m.to 6 p.m. and Point No. 13 would be limited to a
total of 60 days.
Mattick stated as it relates to Point No. 13,the applicant could provide Staff with 10 days notice and Staff
can extend it another 10 days or whatever number the Council is comfortable with,with any additional
extensions requiring Council approval.
Levang moved,Walsh seconded,to adopt RESOLUTION NO.6516,a Resolution Granting a
Conditional Use Permit Pursuant to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-916 and 78-966,for the
property located at 3850 Watertown Road,with Point No.6 being revised to allow equipment
activity between the hours of 8 a.m.to 6 p.m. during the week,subject to Staff being notified ten
days prior to the 60 days expiring if the project is not going to be completed within the required
time frame,with Staff having the ability to extend the project time frame by another ten days.
VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0.
6. #15-3723 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL—LAKEVIEW PROERTY—405 NORTH ARM
DRIVE—FINAL PLAT APPROVAL—RESOLUTION NO.6517
Gaffron stated the applicants are here tonight seeking final plat approval. This is a 46 lot plat for the
Lakeview Golf Course property. Gaffron noted the Planning Commission and City Council have actually
been reviewing this application for the past year through a variety of different processes,which also
included a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and rezoning.
Gaffron stated the Council looked at this application in March and May of this year,with a few minor
changes being made to some of the documents, including a draft development agreement that was
reviewed last month. The parameters for ownership and maintenance of the private park have been
outlined in the development agreement. In addition,the requirement to use the new drain site on Lot 17
has been added to the development agreement.
Gaffron pointed out the location of the new drain sites.
Page 10 of 19
�°moo
CITY OF ORONO
Street Address: I Mailing Address: Telephone(952)249-4600
G~ 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O.Box 66 I Fax (952)249-4616
lq F
ESHOR Orono,MN 55356 Crystal Bay,MN 55323 www.ci.orono.mn.us
k
24 September 2015
Mark Anderson
3850 Watertown Road
Maple Plain, MN 55359
Grading CUP #15-3716
Grading Permit#2015-00849
Mark:
At our pre-construction meeting on Monday, September 21"you indicated that you planned to grade
material on site and plant a cover crop for the winter; however at that time you were still unsure whether
you planned to commence hauling material to your site yet this Fall. You agreed to contact Bob Bean
(Bolton &Menk) with the possible source sites for his approval and to provide Bob with an affirmative
start date this Fall or in the Spring.
This morning I was notified that hauling to your property began yesterday thus starting the 60-day clock.
This 60-day hauling window will close on Sunday, November 22, 2015. No hauling will be permitted after
that date unless a request is made by you on or before Thursday, November 12, 2015 that an additional
10 days will be needed. No hauling will be permitted after November 12"'.
Please be advised that because the City did not have prior notification of the hauling commencement and
haul route approval, the administrative zoning permit for grading was not issued. Issuance of this permit
requires that you pay the $50 administrative permit fee for the grading permit authorizing the hauling
and grading work on site. Prior to hauling material, the Haul Route must be approved by the City
Engineer,Adam Edwards. Additionally, your acceptance of material from properties other than sites
previously approved (i.e. Baldur Park Road and 601 Carlson Pkwy) must be approved by Bob before
hauling. You should provide at least a 24 hour notice for Bob's review.
This letter will serve as your notice to discontinue hauling activity until you have received the
administrative permit and the Haul Route has been approved. Additionally please be aware, the City will
inspect the property during the 60-day period. If you have questions on this matter please contact me at
952.249.4627 or mcur&s@ciomno.mn.us.
Sincerely,
City of Orono
Melanie Curtis
Planner
Copies via email: Adam Edwards, Orono City Engineer
Mark&Kristen Anderson, Property Owners
4 �
Melanie Curtis
From: Melanie Curtis
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 3:57 PM
To: Mark Anderson (mark@captdrake.com)
Cc: 'Mar An'; Kristen Anderson; Adam Edwards; David P. Martini; Jeremy Barnhart
Subject: #2015-00849 Permit-Thank You
Mark
Thank you for stopping in to pay for the grading permit. I see that you made a note on the permit indicating that you'd
like to discuss the hauling timeline.
According to Resolution 6516 condition 13, page 4: "Hauling activity shall be limited to a total of 60 days from the date of
the pre-construction meeting. A 10-day extension of the hauling activity timeline may be granted by staff upon request
10 days prior to the 60th day'. At the pre-construction meeting we allowed for the 60-day window to begin on Day 1 of
hauling activity, which began on September 231d by you accepting material from the Baldur Park Road project. You were
reminded of this in the September 24th letter which documented your hauling start date of September 23rd. Your 60-day
hauling window ends on November 22, 2015. If additional time is needed you may request an additional 10 days of
hauling by no later than November 12tH
If you have questions or want to discuss please contact me as soon as possible.
Thank you - Melanie
Melanie Curtis, Planner
Direct 952.249.4627
Planning &Zoning Office 952.249.4620
2750 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356
Email: mcurtis0_ci.orono.mn.us
Website: www.ci.orono.mn.us
1
CITY OF ORONO
Street Address: I Mailing Address: Telephone(952)249-4600
2750 Kelley Parkway P.O.Box 66 Fax (952)249-4616
Orono,MN 55356 Crystal Bay,MN 55323 www.ci.orono.mn.us
kESHO�
17 May 2016
Mark Anderson
3850 Watertown Road
Maple Plain, MN 55359
Grading CUP#15-3716
Grading Permit#2015-00849
Mark:
Thank you for your phone call regarding the as-built survey. In your message to me you stated that the
as-built survey is due in October(2016). According to Resolution 6516 the project must be complete
and an as-built survey submitted by June 22, 2016 or the CUP will be considered to be expired.
Resolution 6516 is enclosed for your reference.
Please provide a timeline for completion of the project and as-built survey submittal to me by
Wednesday, May 25th.
If you have questions on this matter please contact me at 952.249.4627 or mcufVs@ci.orono.mn.us.
Sincerely,
z
Oron
�e
Melanie Curtis
Planner
Copies via email: Soren M. Mattick, City Attorney
Adam Edwards, City Engineer
Mark&Kristen Anderson, Property Owners