HomeMy WebLinkAboutRequest for Council Action 2014 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Date: 23 July 2014
Item No.
Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Agenda Section:
Name: Melanie u t'
Title:
Item Description: Joe Church—4440 Forest Lake Landing—Encroachment Agreement
List of Exhibits:
Exhibit A. Draft Encroachment Agreement- Revised
Exhibit B. Council Memo 07/10/14
Exhibit C. Draft City Council Minutes—07/14/14
Summary:
At the Council's July 14th meeting the Council heard from Joe Church who was requesting approval from the
City in order to reconstruct the driveway, stairs and sidewalk to his home which are located almost entirely
within the City's right-of-way (ROW); the replacements would be in-kind. He also requested approval to re-
grade the yard adjacent to his driveway and remove an existing tiered retaining wall to allow for parking two
vehicles in the driveway without widening it.
The encroachment agreement drafted for the July 14th meeting did not completely address all of the ROW
encroachments and has now been redrafted to include all of the ROW encroachments including the deck. The
revised encroachment is attached as Exhibit A.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval to allow the grading, removal of the east walls, the reconstruction of the sidewalk,
stairs and driveway subject to:
1. The property owner entering into an encroachment agreement addressing all other items located
within the City ROW; and
2. Submittal of an erosion control escrow.
All of the encroachments have been addressed with the revised encroachment agreement.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to sign the encroachment agreement for maintenance,
reconstruction and/or removal of the ROW encroachments with the staff recommendations. Also, Council
should authorize the project to commence according to the submitted plan upon staff receipt of the erosion
control escrow from Mr. Church.
(reserved for recording information)
ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT made this day of. ,2014,by and between the
CITY OF ORONO,a Minnesota municipal corporation("City"),and MICHELE L. GILMER,a
single person, and JOSEPH C. CHURCH,a single person("Owners").
1. BACKGROUND. Michele L. Gilmer and Joseph C. Church are the fee owners of
certain real property located in the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, legally
described as follows.
Parcel ID No.07-117-23-24-0017`
Lot 12, "Tonkaview Gardens, Hennepin County,Minnesota."
(Torrens Property—Certificate of Title No. 1366262)
having a street address of 4440 Forest Lake Landing, Orono, Minnesota("Subject Property"). The
City owns easements for drainage and utility purposes over portions of the Subject Property. The
Owners currently have a wood retaining wall, a sidewalk, and a deck in the City's easement and as
shown on the attached sketch. The Owners want to remove and eliminate the wood retaining wall
east of the driveway,re-grade land behind the retaining wall, and replace the failing sidewalk on the
Subject Property all which will encroach into the City's drainage and utility easement areas as
depicted on the attached survey sketch.
1 77 izzvz 1
2. ENCROACHMENT AUTHORIZATION. The City hereby approves the
encroachment in its easement area on the Subject Property subject to the conditions set forth in this
Agreement. The Owners agree that all work performed on the Subject Property shall be inspected
and approved by the City Engineer and in accordance with the City Codes. The Owners shall be
responsible for all costs associated with the removal of the retaining wall,the re-grading and the
replacement of the sidewalk. The Owners shall be responsible for the maintenance of the sidewalk.
3. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNITY. In consideration of being allowed to
encroach in the City's easement area,the Owners for themselves,their heirs and assigns,hereby
agree to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any damage caused to the Subject Property,
including the removal of the retaining wall,the re-grading and the replacement of the sidewalk in
the City's easement area, caused in whole or in part by the encroachment into the City's easement
area.
4. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT. The City may, at its sole discretion,
terminate this Agreement at any time by giving the then owner of the Subject Property thirty(30)
days advance written notice, except that no notice period will be required in the case of an
emergency condition as determined solely by the City and the Agreement may then be
terminated immediately. The property owner shall remove all existing encroachments depicted on
the attached sketch. If the owner fails to do so,the City may remove the encroachments and charge
the cost of removal back to the owner for reimbursement.
5. RECORDING. This Agreement shall run with the land and shall be recorded
against the title to the Subject Property.
177122v2 2
CITY OF ORONO
By:
(SEAL) Lili Tod McMillan,Mayor
AND
Jessica Loftus,City Administrator
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPlN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 2014, by Lili Tod McMillan and Jessica Loftus, respectively the Mayor
and City Administrator of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the
corporation and pursuant to the authoritygranted by its City Council.
Notary Public
1 77 122v2 3
PROPERTY OWNERS:
Michele L. Gilmer
Joseph C. Church
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
2014 by Michele L. Gilmer,a single person.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)SS.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
2014 by Joseph C. Church,a single person.
Notary Public
DRAFTED BY:
CAMPBELL KNUTSON
Professional Association
1380 Corporate Center Curve,Suite#317
Eagan,Minnesota 55121
Telephone:651-452-5000
SMM/jmo
17n22v2 4
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR 5,. ,.� 31 j
JOSEPH CHURCH o�\ Wes�
3 N F-4Wg
OF LOT 12, TONKAVIEW GARDENS rtl :511 x
Rig
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA a
T
l g
A
a
IX
O I Qj�o
k II
h~ �x1STtNG HOUSE '
III
it 4,440 i Y'y
L I
•'y 51 8
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES.
\\ Lul 12.TONKAVIEW GARDENS
This survey snows 9w counaanes one 7oDo9raDRr of IM shove
\�^ �,.•-`~ tleialeeE F9 M'H arido ocialoratoll
d be en [ -
10 snow evv o:n.i.awm.,spn wry ntlxspupa
a ex+oxhmprtx
,Q 20 40 • Iron m m.r hxrnn
Iron marker eet
�+ Exi91iv9 cmlaur Iine g
SCALE IN FEET
s
177122v2 5
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Date: 10 July 2014
Item No. O
Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Agenda Section:
Name: Melanie Curtis
Title:
Item Description: Joe Church—4440 Forest Lake Landing—Encroachment Agreement
List of Exhibits:
Exhibit A. Request from Property Owner
Exhibit B. Draft Encroachment Agreement
Exhibit C. Aerial Photos&Site Photos
Exhibit D. Survey
Exhibit E. Proposed Plan -Requested Improvements
Exhibit F. City Engineer Comments
Exhibit G. Council Memo 06/18/13
Exhibit H. City Council Minutes—06/24/13
Application Summary:
In June of 2013 the property owner,Joe Church, approached the City with a request for permission to conduct
some maintenance improvements and minor changes to the driveway and sidewalk access to his property
which are located entirely within the City right-of-way (ROW). Last year the Mr. Church was requesting
approval to expand the driveway and reconstruct the stairs and sidewalk which access the home. He
indicated that he would be agreeable to the future removal of the deck/patio and also entering into an
encroachment agreement. He was instructed to provide a plan for the desired improvements.
Update:
Mr. Church has provided a survey for the property and has revised his request. At this time he is not
requesting approval for any expansion of hardcover. He would like to re-build the stairs and sidewalk which
access the home in the same footprint as existing. Additionally, he intends to re-grade the side yard so that
the walls on the east side of the driveway can be removed. This would allow for two vehicles to park in the
driveway and accommodate the vehicle doors opening without actually enlarging the driveway footprint. The
driveway would be replaced in-kind. The stairs, deck and retaining walls under the deck would remain at this
time. He is amenable to re-evaluation and removal of the deck at a later date. However the driveway and
sidewalk projects have a higher priority as the failing driveway, sidewalk and stairs are causing water to enter
the home and need to be addressed first.
Planning Staff and the City's consulting engineer, Brian Simmons, visited the site to discuss Mr. Church's plans.
Technically a permit doesn't apply as the work will be conducted within the City ROW, however an
encroachment agreement, erosion control escrow and plan (Exhibit F)will be required.
Staff Recommendation
In an effort to clean up the City's ROW, staff is agreeable to allowing the grading, removal of the east walls,
the reconstruction of the sidewalk, stairs and driveway conditioned on the property owner entering into an
encroachment agreement addressing all other items located within the City ROW. All of the encroachments
will be addressed with the encroachment agreement. The encroachment agreement will need to be revised at
the time the property owner intends to address/remove the deck and retaining walls.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Council should provide direction to staff regarding entering into an encroachment agreement for
maintenance, reconstruction and/or removal of the ROW encroachments.
Council
Exhibit A
City of Orono
Zoning Permit Application
/�l Mailing Address: Permit number:
�O` V PO Box 66 Date received:
Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066
Escrow#and #''^�^,
Street Address: amount: GG/
> 2750 Kelley Parkway Permit Fee: "' A—
ytn I Orono, MN 55356
F,�' Approved by:
kFSHO� Fax: 952-249-4616 Notes:
Main: 952-249-4600 www.ci.orono.mn.us
This application form must be completed in full and all required information must be submitted. (Please print.)
Job Site Address: Lli{(lto Fp, e5+ te,.p.- (_e.,,,4,nc, (�rDr7� MaU 5536
CONTRACTOR/APPLICANT INFORMATION:
Name: TF_
Phone: 612_ s)ng Iti-EK7- Fax:
Address: /„I?S Sto c L't City: '� dt^c.e, ZIP: 55� rt
Contact Person: _Toe Contact's phone number (nIZ 3O$ W's
Email -,ae-Qh.i eco, Applicant is: Contractor omeown
>� (Circle One)
PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION:
Name: :306 CJ L_,,_-.
Phone(day): (--12 bQ1 -1Y9
Mailing Address: (a/-7 S 54-o„o at !Vg dr.&,�,,J-e_� ZIP.
Email and/or Fax ,op ft,eh6N,c pM
Overall Project Description: t2e4pJac, dr�V �„� 0014- sod-e,wc, (c Ce,1XrAk
Check
BoxTYPE OF PERMIT COST*
Dock, Residential-Permanent dock on any lake or initial seasonal dock not on $50+engineering review costs
Lake Minnetonka (permanent dock requires CUP
Dock, Commercial $50+engineering review costs
Escrow for erosion control and engineering review costs $2,000
Hardcover Permit: Driveway, Patio, Sidewalk, Etc.(New or Replacement) No charge
Also re uired is a Minor or Major Land Alteration Permit
Land Alteration, Major(grading,filling, or excavating)more 500 cubic yards or $50
more than 10 cubic yards in lakeshore setback(also requires CUP)
Escrow for erosion control and engineering review costs As determined by CUP
Land Alteration, Minor(grading,filling or excavating)-500 or less cubic yards $50+engineering review costs
outside of lakeshore setback or less than 10 yards in lakeshore setback
Escrow for erosion control and engineering review costs $2,000
Retaining Wall measuring under four feet require a zoning permit. $50+engineering review costs
Retaining walls measuring 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 separated by twice the height of the lower wall.)
Escrow for erosion control and engineering review costs $2,500
Stairway to Lake (New or Replacement) $50+engineering review costs
Escrow for erosion control and engineering review costs $2,000
Structure Permit for other structures not requiring a building permit but $50+ engineering review costs
regulated by the zoning code(including, but not limited to accessory building of
less than 120 square feet, detached deck or platform and sport court)
Escrow for erosion control and engineering review costs $2,500
Tree Removal or other vegetation removal in 0 to 75 foot zone No charge.
Temporary Construction Office/Trailer associated with building permit) $30
(over)
*Permit fee will be collected when the permit is issued.
Updated: November 30,2012
APPLICANT/OWNER 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 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 knowledge.
Applicant's Signature: QDate: S f l kuI Y
Property Owner's Signature: Date:
T
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Except for tree removal permits, all permits
TYPE OF PERMIT: require a completed application form, escrow agreement(signed by the property
owner) and escrow check from owner, two copies of all plans, and three copies
of all grading plans or surveys/site plans
Dock, Residential Seasonal Dock—survey showing proposed dock
Permanent Dock—plans as approved by CUP and copy of LMCD permit(if applicable)
Dock, Commercial 1. Structural plans for the dock
2. Survey showing the proposed location of the dock
3. Copy of LMCD permit
Hardcover Permit 1. All Minor or Major Land Alteration Permit requirements apply as appropriate
2. Hardcover calculations, existing and proposed
3. Plans
Land Alteration, Major 1. Plans as approved by Conditional Use Permit
2. Erosion control plan or copy of MCWD Erosion Control Permit
Land Alteration, Minor 1. Survey/grading plan including existing and proposed contours
(Less than 10 cu.yds.within 75' of 2. Amount of fill to be imported and/or exported and haul route
lake or less than 501 cu.yds 3. Amount of earth to be moved around on site
elsewhere.) 4. Erosion control plan or copy of MCWD Erosion Control Permit
Retaining Wall 1. Plans for wall(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 or copy of MCWD Erosion Control Permit
Stairway to Lake 1. Construction plans for stairway, including footings
2. Topographical survey of property with proposed stairs shown
3. Erosion control plan or copy of MCWD Erosion Control Permit
Structure Permit 1. Construction plans.
2. Survey 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 or copy of MCWD Erosion Control Permit
Tree Removal Call: 952-249-4600 to schedule a single tree removal inspection. A re-planting plan/
management plan required for clear cutting, buckthorn or other intensive vegetation removal.
Updated: November 30,2012
Melanie Curtis
From: JOSEPH CHURCH Uoechurch@msn.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 11:24 AM
To: Melanie Curtis; JOSEPH CHURCH
Subject: Encroachment Agreement
Attachments: survey with changesJpg
I would like to enter into an encroachment agreement with the city of Orono for the following.
To eliminate the retaining wall east of the driveway.
To regrade land behind retaining wall per attached diagram.
To replace failing sidewalk.
Or legal address description is:
Lot 12, "Tonkaview Gardens, Hennepin County, Minnesota"
Address reference 4440 Forest Lake Landing, Orono MN 5364
Melanie Curtis
From: JOSEPH CHURCH Ooechurch@msn.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 11:22 AM
To: Melanie Curtis; JOSEPH CHURCH
Subject: Narrative of plan
Attachments: survey with changes.jpg; survey without changes.jpg
1. Eliminate wood retaining wall east of driveway.
2. Regrade land behind retaining wall per attached diagram
3. Replace failing sidewalk.
i
Council
Exhibit B
(reserved for recording information)
ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT made this day of , 2014,by and between the
CITY OF ORONO, a Minnesota municipal corporation("City"), and MICHELE L. GILMER,a
single person, and JOSEPH C. CHURCH,a single person("Owners").
1. BACKGROUND. Michele L. Gilmer and Joseph C. Church are the fee owners of
certain real property located in the City of Orono,County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, legally
described as follows:
Parcel ID No.07-117-23-24-0017
Lot 12, "TonkAview hardens, Hennepin County, Minnesota."
(Torrens Properly—Certificate of Title No. 1366262)
having a street address of 4440 Forest Lake Landing, Orono, Minnesota ("Subject Property"). The
City owns easements for drainage and utility purposes over portions of the Subject Property. The
Owners want to remove and eliminate a wood retaining wall east of the driveway, re-grade land
behind the retaining wall, and replace the failing sidewalk and driveway on the Subject Property all
which will encroach into the City's drainage and utility easement areas as depicted on the attached
survey sketch.
i7nzzvi 1
2. ENCROACHMENT AUTHORIZATION. The City hereby approves the
encroachment in its easement area on the Subject Property subject to the conditions set forth in this
Agreement. The Owners agree that all work performed on the Subject Property shall be inspected
and approved by the City Engineer and in accordance with the City Codes. The Owners shall be
responsible for all costs associated with the removal of the retaining wall,the re-grading and the
replacement of the sidewalk and driveway. The Owners shall be responsible for the maintenance of
the sidewalk and driveway.
3. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNITY. In consideration of being allowed to
encroach in the City's easement area,the Owners for themselves,their heirs and assigns, hereby
agree to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any damage caused to the Subject Property,
including the removal of the retaining wall,the re-grading and the replacement of the sidewalk and
driveway in the City's easement area, caused in whole or in part by the encroachment into the City's
easement area.
4. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT. The City may, at its sole discretion,
terminate this Agreement at any time by giving the then owner of the Subject Property thirty(30)
days advance written notice, except that no notice period will be required in the case of an
emergency condition as determined solely by the City and the Agreement may then be
terminated immediately. The property owner shall remove the sidewalk and the driveway to the
effective date of the termination of this Agreement. If the owner fails to do so,the City may remove
the sidewalk and driveway and charge the cost of removal back to the owner for reimbursement.
5. RECORDING. This Agreement shall run with the land and shall be recorded
against the title to the Subject Property.
[Signatures contained on following pages.]
177122v1 2
CITY OF ORONO
By:
(SEAL) Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor
AND
Jessica Loftus, City Administrator
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
' 2014, by Lili Tod McMillan and Jessica Loftus, respectively the Mayor
and City Administrator of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the
corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council.
Notary Public
[Signatures continued on next page.]
177122v 3
PROPERTY OWNERS:
Michele L. Gilmer
Joseph C. Church
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 2014 by Michele L. Gilmer, a single person.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
,2014 by Joseph C. Church,a single person.
Notary Public
DRAFTED BY:
CAMPBELL KNUTSON
Professional Association
1380 Corporate Center Curve, Suite#317
Eagan,Minnesota 55121
Telephone:651-452-5000
SMM/jmo
177122v1 4
9£PT£LtZ96:Xvxl &VWCLV-Z96:3N0Nd
99£99 NN'334tll ONOI 3NM0 NI011INI'N Ori
SUBNNVId°NVl'SNOAamns GNn'Stl33Nl'JN9 lW°
FOREs'
°
alk @�F E
,�.° y 1.6
y ��g
Nig
A IK
-
Q i
��
O
Z C7
- _ s
fir- c
gE
......
ORCH ��
/ m o
EK o
C
LULU o \ <
OC Z a
O �. ' O °
L OU) I& ' 2 i \
LU0 0
a a F- L)
WN Z - 1
CL
W � -jz
V LL IU S I I
e°
W
/ J
/ Q
o U
• y
/ o
T
. .� orM .b
r
r'+
f Y 1 4 ,�- „ 's
i
a ■- •' a .4,e r „ �.,• ;.
,; 71 e - yy J ry,• -
Ap
LJ
Jl
ir
qL
_
a
41fil WL
x n
� o
rt n
'? Facing West n =
h'
A.gyp+
c
r
.�. , ' *• , � . � ar. � "!Ire _ "ice,_ � � �_
+ c
•��
a�
fk
IL
V 4L
IL
i_
c ,
'' �` ;� •�' �}� � F". �' mss' "'� f ' �� �.'
i
s r !
°
Facing East
I ~t 4
,AL w
t Tlow
- �' 1 °`fit ♦ �t� a `v� r. '!
yg �1, aotvi t
�e "f` 1�� k a ✓� y g +rst ��( yyti ti x,'15 jj\ l \ RV 4' .
I 4 ! {
ft
i
� r
-
raw r �R ,�`; !►.. _•,,�
� _ f
� 4
1 111111
. _ _��
- _..
- --
-. _ ._ � _
_ _.
_ _ ., -- -
�. ___ - - - f� _
-
f _
� ,y;.. _
_ ,� �� -
.� �"
,ur.,� - _ - -: -
__. - t
..
_, _
�( -.....
_�.
_. �, `
c
��ai -'-
_� � a
_. _ �� `_
,� Nr*
,--, __..
`.
H.
— .. e .��,
e1
• �. __
_ - 111111) _
._
_ -- - -
,�r � � ,.
-�, � -
- t- _— � ®e a■ � - _
�� w
-.� --
�::
_____=_
_ _ -
1 1 • 1
_-
.` ,- :�,�
- _ - - _ _ ,
__.
- _ _ �.� :"
_ -
,. � � - -
��-_� ;,
_. - - -
_ �- --
:�-Jl - --—_�_. .. .. -
'_
�. � t
.� � � �,
3
'1
u,,
4f
',
.y U , ,
��r
�.0.
�� `,
� rt n��
4 W i � `r
� .r n ;r � � •�`�r�tarl
a��°' � .. � —.
,..
,.
�' :--
= i
.__
1
cIOZ/OZ/90
a
70
As
a
EIOZ/0z 90
z.
c L OZ/0z/9.0rF
, ,
ry
Y
AV
E LOVOZ/90
ti t S S.
ti
_ -s
� d
.. f
L
�i�fsl•�?' Ft i
r k r\j
s
h
t
!,ty
T MM—
rev
.-. hip' �7K'i o- lK�.; '�� -� �� T • t� Rf �,
£ 1OZ/OZ/90
v
k
s,
Q _
f � I iil ti mar.
�, E `o,`` ti'�-� 'mak �►i�5� �i .`1-- -_ --•, �...� r.- �"_"-"___
,
Oil
tj
A 1• it raw. � �.rFi '��� ��. Nye. �� t T
FLIP".)
fi
ar
L 19
o�
y 71� 0,, \ n�;a� �,,.y�tY. � � , �• �i�s'F=�a,V��`' a t,.:z ,{�\ y of
Aa
,�� �, �� � * ;� ��Y P ,�j, - •E,, art r�ri .'ri
b
' ELOZ/OZ/90
'0000ot-
• .�''' Ems. , „ � �` ,� / .- 1.��-
vs
�r
cIOZ/OZ/90
MI :r �II���i� � _
ray x
£ lOZ/'OZ/90
•t I kk ��� � ��t�,'� ���4,� � ` � i 1 e s7 `` �a��5 �t y s y6. �����.
I MOWN
t
}
.� � :� 4 ��� 'tea ��+•
c.
__ '� ;;q• >'. � ( � I lig V {A`V ll � _ ,� ..(F' may+
• ' yyyy
£ lOZ/OZ/90 '
m*
J
��
_ �_
� � • 1 ---�----� �---�--�---f-_, j---
�_
1_�._� .... � - _
.-- :.__
-_�
-= — - - _:�
-- _
s _ ,�- -_, _—, �
-~-�� --'mss� �� ��I�#"T--r�� —1=
-. ,
� - __ - _ 1�
;.-
.r, y
•-
F<
♦ _
r� / Cys+ �"�ns.
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR 5„ ,n zm
JOSEPH CHURCH �� 0
FY y6 W w
OF LOT 12,TONKAVIEW GARDENS
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA \ l a N 0
O��r
W
133.15 \\ 11 1 1 m 1 111
„ I
\ m Z1==
0.90.. \ 1
�CISTING HpUSE
�.� #4440
0 F
F� -- , ,, 4 �1`1G vv
- o 0 a
O
' PAVER ORNEWA
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES:
\ Lot 12,TONKAVIEW GARDENS
This survey shows the boundaries and topography of the above
described Property.and the 1 cation of 0 visible Improvements on
said property end the adjoining road r
i
b'
of way.R does not purport
to show any other knprovenlems or eror0achrrm s.
0 10 20 40 • :Iron marker found
raw o :Iron marker set
Existing contour lim
SCALE IN FEET
m
n
0. C
rr C1
v =
r} r'
i
as
+taF
r,
t -
a
e w t'i
{
3 l!q!uxg
a !!ounoo
Council
Exhibit F
Melanie Curtis
From: Brian Simmons [briansi@bolton-menk.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 1:46 PM
To: Melanie Curtis
Cc: Robert Bean
Subject: Narrative -4440 Forest Lake Landing
Melane—Please see my summary of our site visit below.
Joseph Church, applicant, is proposing the removal of a wood retaining wall, and minor grading adjacent to his driveway
and the street right of way, to improve vehicle access and improve his un-maintainable/un-mowable slope. Brian
Simmons(Bolton & Menk) and MC met with Joe on site to discuss his proposed improvements. The grading changes he
has proposed were sketched onto a copy of the lot survey and submitted. Grading changes, as submitted, are minimal
and do not significantly impact drainage or other adjacent features including the roadway. No additional review will be
necessary, however a grading escrow may be required to ensure completion and stabilization of the graded areas. Joe
also discussed replacement of other retaining walls that exist in the right-of-way and was informed that those changes
will need to be submitted separately, and replacement retaining walls would need to be designed by an engineer.
Applicant indicated that those improvements would be submitted for at a later date.
Respectfully Submitted,
Brian D. Simmons, P.E.
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
M: 612.756.3441
briansi@bolton-menk.com
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit littp://www.symanteccloud.com
1
Council
Exhibit G
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Date: 18 June 2013
Item No. 9
Department Approval Administrator Approval: Agenda Section:
Name: Jesse Struve JS
Title: Public Works Director/City Engineer
Item Description: Joe Church—4440 Forest Lake Landing—Encroachment Agreement
List of Exhibits:
Exhibit A. Request from Property Owner
Exhibit B. Draft Encroachment Agreement
Exhibit C. Aerial Photos
Exhibit D. Site Photos
Exhibit E. Partial Survey
Application Summary:
The subject property is situated at an angle on the south, side street lot line. Most of the driveway serving the
home is located entirely within the City's right-of-way (ROW); the sidewalk; water supply well; retaining walls;
and a deck and patio are entirely within the ROW. The property owner is requesting permission to widen the
driveway; move and rebuild retaining walls; and fix sidewalk and stairs which access his property. Additionally
the property owner would like to repair the existing patio area adjacent to a lakeside deck.
Discussion
According to the City's Community Management Plan, the City has a responsibility to retain Lake Minnetonka
access points permanently for the public's use. By allowing a deck and patio within the ROW, it gives the
perception this area is private land. When property undergoes major changes and upgrades, staff will
recommend all impacts within the ROW to be removed. There will be times when not all of the impacts can
be feasibly removed, but any impacts which cannot be feasibly removed will be included in an encroachment
agreement. The encroachment agreement will allow the City to require the property owner to remove the
encroachments if the encroachments become an issue in the future.
Staff Recommendation
In an effort to clean up the City's ROW, staff is agreeable to allowing the widened driveway and repairs to the
sidewalk conditioned on the property owner removing the deck and patio area within the ROW. The property
owner should be required to enter into an encroachment agreement addressing all other items located within
the City ROW. Staff recommends they remove the deck and patio and determine if it is possible to realign the
door so the steps can also be removed. All other items would be allowed to remain in place, but should be
incorporated into an encroachment agreement.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Council should provide direction to staff regarding the following:
1. Is Council agreeable to entering into an encroachment agreement for the ROW encroachments?
2. Which of the improvements within the ROW should be included within the encroachment agreement?
Which, if any, of the encroachments should be removed?
Council
Exhibit H
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,June 24,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
9. 4440 FOREST LAKE LANDING—ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT
Struve stated the City has been requested by the owner of 4440 Forest Lake Landing for approval to
widen his driveway,which would have an additional impact to the right-of-way in that area. Under the
City's Community Management Plan,the City has a responsibility to retain Lake Minnetonka access
points permanently for the public's use. By allowing a deck and patio within the right-of-way, it gives
the perception this area is private land.
Struve stated in the past, when a property undergoes major changes and upgrades, Staff will recommend
all impacts within the right-of-way be removed. There will be times when not all of the impacts can be
feasibly removed,but any impacts which cannot be feasibly removed will be included in an encroachment
agreement. The encroachment agreement would allow the City to require the property owner to remove
the encroachments if the encroachments become an issue in the future.
In an effort to clean up the City's right-of-way, Staff is agreeable to allowing the widened driveway and
repairs to the sidewalk conditioned on the property owner removing the deck and patio area within the
right-of-way. The property owner should be required to enter into an encroachment agreement addressing
all other items located within the City right-of-way. Staff recommends they remove the deck and patio
and determine if it is possible to realign the door so the steps can also be removed. All other items would
be allowed to remain in place but should be incorporated into an encroachment agreement.
McMillan asked if the new hardcover for the driveway would be included in the overall hardcover for the
property.
Curtis stated the hardcover in the right-of-way would be separated out.
McMillan asked if a new survey would be required.
Struve indicated they have not seen a building permit request at the present time.
Curtis stated the property owner has not submitted a plan or requested a building permit but is merely
requesting preapproval of the work. The project would also require the moving of some retaining walls.
Struve stated there are numerous encroachments in the right-of-way and the question is what items should
be removed out of the right-of-way.
Levang asked if there will be a formal request for a building permit; and if so, if Staff has any idea when
that might be submitted.
Struve indicated the applicant is in the audience and he would be able to address those questions.
Levang asked if Staff would like the encroachment cleaned up prior to the application.
Struve stated the applicant requested to widen the driveway; and if that request is denied,that would
change what he wants to do with the property and a survey may or may not be required at that point. The
property owner is attempting to save some money by not doing the survey at this point until he gets some
idea of what the Council will approve.
Page 9 of 15
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,June 24,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(9. 4440 FOREST LAKE LANDING—ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT, Continued)
Joe Church, 6175 Stone Court, Independence, stated the driveway is currently 17 feet wide. Due to the
retaining walls located at the edge of the driveway, it is impossible to get two cars in there and open the
doors on the vehicle. Church indicated they are also unable to back up without running over the
neighbor's flower garden.
Church stated he is proposing moving the retaining wall back five feet to allow for more room to open the
doors of the vehicle if you are parked in the driveway. Church indicated he has not put together the exact
dimensions at this time.
Anderson asked if the driveway could be relocated. Anderson stated if they remove the steps and patio,
she is assuming the property owner will come back with a variance request to relocate them somewhere
on the property.
Church stated he is requesting they be allowed to keep the patio and widen the driveway. The driveway is
a concern because they do not want to cause any damage to vehicles and they do not want to park on the
fire lane. The relocation of the retaining wall would make the whole situation much more conducive to
allowing two cars in the driveway.
As it relates to the existing patio, Church stated in his view,he does not feel it is in the way and it was
pre-existing prior to their purchase. Church noted there have already been a number of improvements
made by the neighbors in the area of the fire lane and that he understands if the City requires use of the
fire lane,the patio and well would need to go away, but that he is requesting permission to keep them at
this time.
Printup asked if this is the same fire lane that came into question a few years back.
Mattick indicated it is.
Struve noted the other side of the fire lane also had significant improvements made to it by another
property owner and that Staff would be requesting that they also sign an encroachment agreement to make
everyone fully aware of the situation.
Mattick stated if there are concerns about requiring the removal of certain items, since the applicant is
going to submit a plan for the driveway,that perhaps the applicant could suggest what he would want to
remain under the encroachment agreement. Mattick asked if the driveway application would come before
the City Council.
Gaffron stated the difficulty is granting a variance on property that is dedicated right-of-way and not
expansion of hardcover within the actual building site or lot. Gaffron indicated he is not sure how the
Council could grant a variance to something located in a right-of-way or how the application should be
brought before the Council. Gaffron noted expansion of the hardcover is not being done on the property,
which is why Staff is proposing an encroachment agreement.
Page 10 of 15
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,June 24,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(9. 4440 FOREST LAKE LANDING—ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT, Continued)
Mattick stated it might be helpful to see exactly what the applicant is proposing before allowing a further
encroachment of the driveway and determining what needs to be removed. Mattick noted he has dealt
with other properties like this and the ultimate goal is to decrease the amount of encroachment in the
right-of-way. Mattick stated this situation is less than ideal given the location of the house but the
question is how much of an encroachment will be allowed.
McMillan noted the other adjoining neighbor has a significant driveway and that Mr. Church is asking for
a reasonable driveway. McMillan commented intensifying the use of a fire lane is a difficult thing to
approve and that the City has allowed some encroachment for something essential, such as a driveway,
but the question is how much is essential.
Levang asked if there is any other option for a driveway.
Curtis stated no matter what direction the applicant plans to accesses his garage it would still require
utilizing a significant portion of the fire lane.
Gaffron stated due to the topography, it would be difficult to change the orientation of the garage.
McMillan stated she certainly does not see the deck area as being essential but that the well could stay
until it needs to be redrilled.
Curtis pointed out a retaining wall is located underneath the deck. Staff would need to evaluate that a
little bit closer to see what could be removed without requiring extensive grading.
Levang asked if the City Engineer has reviewed that.
Struve indicated he has not and that he would need to know how high the retaining wall is. The property
owner would also need to remove some of the lattice work on the deck. Struve stated in his opinion the
property owner would be able to easily re-grade the area to match the surrounding topography but that it
is likely within the 0-75 foot zone.
Curtis pointed out the location of the 0-75 foot zone and stated that the re-grading work would be entirely
within the 75-foot setback.
Struve stated he knows the well is located on the back side of the deck and that he would have to review
the grading that would be required but in his view it would be feasible.
McMillan asked if the neighborhood was upset when this fire lane became developed.
Gaffron stated that would be a good characterization of the discussion that occurred 10 to 12 years ago
and that development of this property initially happened 15 years ago. The property owner did have
discussions with the public works director at that time about creating a driveway that accesses the garage
based on the orientation of the house. Gaffron stated the landscaping and driveway in the fire lane caused
the majority of the issues in the neighborhood.
McMillan stated it was rather a big issue at that time and it was a lesson to the City about allowing
nonessential items in the right-of-way.
Page 11 of 15
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,June 24,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(9. 4440 FOREST LAKE LANDING—ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT, Continued)
Bremer stated she would be amenable to cleaning up and improving the access point to the garage as well
as the stairs provided that the Council does not feel the problem is being made worse. Bremer stated she
does not want the solution to be worse than what the problem was. Bremer commented the deck will not
be there forever since its useful life will eventually come to an end.
Levang stated she would like to see as many encroachments go away as possible since it is a fire lane and
should be marked as a fire lane. Levang stated she would like the public to be able to use the fire lane and
that she is in favor of removing as many of the encroachments as possible.
Mattick asked if the Council would like to see the applicant's plans first or whether Staff should draft an
encroachment agreement that requires the removal of the deck. Typically an encroachment agreement
would specify what is allowed to remain in the fire lane and that it would likely be the driveway and the
steps at this point.
Levang commented it seems like the Council is flying half-blind in this situation since there is not a
formal plan being proposed.
Mattick stated it is not uncommon to do an encroachment agreement that says the property owner has
already installed these items and then those items are described and allowed to remain until the City
determines they have to be removed.
Church noted the adjacent land to the south is a very steep incline and that they share responsibility with
the neighbor to mow and maintain that area. Church indicated he has a concern that if there is an
elevation change,the well will be exposed. Church stated they have a difficult time mowing that area
now and that he is not sure how to do an elevation change without exposing the well and requiring a
retaining wall.
Anderson stated that is one of the reasons why the Council needs more information at this time.
Curtis displayed a picture of the area and noted it is not a good picture of the angle.
Church indicated he is not sure when that was graded that way.
McMillan asked if someone would need to walk through the landscaping to access the lake.
Church stated they would not since there is a small grassy area they can walk through but that the terrain
is somewhat steep down to the lake.
Levang asked who owns that strip of land.
Curtis indicated the City owns that.
Mattick commented it is hard to visualize but all of the paver is within the City's right-of-way.
Printup stated the question in his mind is whether the patio and deck should go away and relocated within
the property lines. Printup asked whether that would impact the hardcover.
Page 12 of 15
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,June 24,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(9. 4440 FOREST LAKE LANDING—ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT, Continued)
Church stated it would have given the small size of the lot.
McMillan asked what the hardcover is on the property.
Church indicated he is not aware of the exact percentage.
Struve stated it appears the Council is open to allowing an expansion of the driveway but that they would
like additional information on the patio and deck.
McMillan stated it appears the majority of the Council is open to the expansion of the driveway but that
the applicant will need to look at removing nonessential items in the right-of-way.
Mattick stated the average person who looks at this area would not realize it is an access point to the lake
and that there are a fair number of items encroaching in the fire lane.
The City Council took no formal action on this item.
YOR/COUNCIL REPORT
Ander encouraged the residents to contribute their opinions on the new streetlights in Nav y
completin he City's survey accessible on the City's website.
Struve noted the vey deadline is July 9.
McMillan asked whethe e deadline for the survey should be extende
Struve indicated the City starte e survey June 9 and that it w d cost the City an additional fee for
another month if the time period w extended.
McMillan asked how many surveys the has re ed.
Struve indicated he has received three or fo s 11 as a few that were handed in at the last meeting on
Navarre but that he has not checked wit e City recently.
Loftus stated the City Clerk indic d she has received 12 s eys online.
Printup commented he is py to see the brush site was opened an at he would encourage the Council
to consider having a ye -round City brush pile.
Loftus noted sh id discuss that with the Public Works Department today an only available spot on
the City Hal mpus is near a wetland and the ground is too wet. At this time the ' does not have
another s' to locate it on and the issues associated with it would be whether it would left open and
unma d and how much debris would be accepted. Loftus stated if the City chose a site is not
loc d on the City's campus,they would probably end up with residents from other areas as 1 as
ntractors dumping at the site.
Page 13 of 15
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,July 14,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(7. #14-3674 LORI GHER
ARDI ON BEHALF OF WOLVER TON PI,ACE,LLC—4570
WOLVE ONPLACE—CONSERVATION EASEMENT VACATIONontinued)
Curtis indicated sh ould forward the draft resolution to Mr. Stephenson so he can review it prior to the
next City Council mee
Gaffron stated he would also beh4Tpy to sit down with the applicant and work through the numbers.
Printup asked if he is okay with the vacation request.
Stephenson stated he is and that he just has a pro em with the fee reimbursement.
Mattick stated the approval of the-vacation should be 6i tioned upon the fee reimbursement.
Levang moved,Anderson seconded,Application No. 14-3 6i�Iqori Gherardi on behalf of Waterton
Place,LLC,4570 Wolverton Place,to direct Staff to draft a reso on approving the vacation of
the conservation easement located at 4570 Wolverton Place,subject t 4,820 being reimbursed to
the City. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0.
8. JOSEPH CHURCH—4440 FOREST LAKE LANDING—ENCROACHMENT
AGREEMENT
Curtis stated the applicant approached the City in June of 2013 with a request for permission to conduct
some maintenance improvements and minor changes to the driveway and sidewalk access to his property
which are located entirely within the City right-of-way. At that time the applicant was requesting
approval to expand the driveway and reconstruct the stairs and sidewalk that access the home. The
applicant indicated that he would be agreeable to the future removal of the deck/patio and also entering
into an encroachment agreement. The apoljnt was instructed to provide a plan for the desired
improvements.
Curtis stated since that time,the applicant has provided a survey for the property and has revised his
request. At the present time the applicant isnot requesting approval for any expansion of hardcover but is
proposing to rebuild the stairs and sidewalk and driveway in the same footprint as existing. In addition,
he intends to re-grade the side yard so that the retaining walls on the east side of the driveway can be
removed. The lower grading would allow for two vehicles to park in the driveway and accommodate the
vehicle doors opening without actually enlarging the driveway footprint. The driveway would be
replaced in-kind.
Curtis noted the stairs, deck and retaining walls under the deck would remain at this time. The applicant
is amenable to re-evaluation and removal of the deck at a later date. However,the driveway and sidewalk
projects have a higher priority as the failing driveway, sidewalk and stairs are causing water to enter the
home.
Curtis noted that Planning Staff and the City's Consulting Engineer, Brian Simmons,have visited the site
to review the proposed work. Technically a permit does not apply as the work will be conducted within
the City right-of-way,but an encroachment agreement, erosion control escrow and plan will be required.
Page 14 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,July 14,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(8. JOSEPH CHURCH—4440 FOREST LAKE LANDING—ENCROACHMENT
AGREEMENT, Continued)
Curtis noted that Staff is agreeable to allowing the grading, removal of the east retaining walls,the
reconstruction of the sidewalk, stairs and driveway subject to the property owner entering into an
encroachment agreement addressing all other items located within the right-of-way. The encroachment
agreement will need to be revised at the time the property owner intends to address/remove the deck and
retaining walls.
Curtis indicated that the City Council should provide direction to Staff regarding entering into an
encroachment agreement for maintenance,reconstruction and/or removal of the right-of-way
encroachments.
Curtis noted Mr. Church has removed the sidewalk to stop the water from entering his home. Curtis
displayed photos of the property. Curtis stated by removing the walls,two cars would be able to park in
the driveway and open their doors.
Anderson asked if this is an unmarked fire lane.
Curtis indicated the area is somewhat steep and would be slippery if the grass is wet. Curtis pointed out
the area in the landscaping that is open and allows pedestrian access down to the lake.
Printup asked if the flag is in the right-of-way.
Curtis pointed out the edge of the wall that surrounds the flag and that based on the survey,the flag pole
itself is not within the fire lane.
Levang asked if the area is marked at all as a fire lane.
Curtis stated there are some monuments located near the property lines.
Anderson stated the area looks very residential and that she personally would like to make the area more
accessible to the general public by,marking it. Anderson stated she would be very hesitant to walk down
on what appears to be someone's private property in order to access the fire lane.
Bremer stated this is pretty consistent with a number of the City's other fire lanes.
Anderson stated she remembers sitting on the Park Commission when they were discussing marking
some of the fire lanes and that the discussion revolved around how marking the fire lanes could create a
problem in some situations. Anderson stated the City Council has an opportunity with this request to
more clearly mark the fire lane.
Bremer stated the City always has the right to do what they want with the fire lane and that this might be
something for the Park Commission to look at.
Printup stated removal of the wood retaining wall is a fantastic idea.
Page 15 of 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,July 14,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(8. JOSEPH CHURCH—4440 FOREST LAKE LANDING—ENCROACHMENT
AGREEMENT, Continued)
Mattick stated one item left out of the resolution inadvertently was the existing deck and that he would
recommend that be added to the encroachment agreement. Mattick stated he reviewed the proposed work
and not the survey.
Levang noted there are two decks.
Curtis stated the deck on the back of the house is located on their property.
Mattick stated it would be the bigger deck which is off to the left and should be included in the
encroachment agreement. Mattick stated if the City needs to ever access that area,the deck would need to
be removed.
Levang noted Staff's report says that all of the encroachments should be addressed with the encroachment
agreement and that she would like all the encroachments clearly stated.
Curtis stated based on the survey,they could label and add the individual wall areas.
Mattick stated the survey perhaps should be referenced rather than the work plans since the work plans do
not address all of the encroaching items.
Levang asked as far as Council Member Anderson's thoughts regarding the flag pole,whether that would
be a different issue.
Mattick stated he does not believe the pole itself is in the fire lane but that the retaining wall probably is.
Mattick noted Mr. Church could not sign off on the flag pole and retaining wall since they are located on
a different property.
Joseph Church had nothing to add to Staff's report.
Mattick stated the resolution will come before the City Council at its next meeting
9. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT AGREEMENT—RESOLUTION NO.
6422
Mack stated Hennepin County has requested the City of Orono enter into a three year joint Cooperation
Agreement as a partner with Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program.
Mack noted the City has not been an active partner as a recipient of funding for housing programs over
the past three year contract term.
It is Staff's recommendation the City enter into the agreement in order to preserve the City's options in
the event a need arises in the future. Mack stated future redevelopment planning efforts for the Navarre
area may be a potential consideration.
Page 16 of 19
Item Description: Joe Church—4440 Forest Lake Landing—Encroachment Agreement
Application Summary:
Joe Church initially requested permission to conduct some maintenance improvements and minor changes to
the driveway and sidewalk access to his property at 4440 Forest Lake Landing which are located entirely
within the City right-of-way in June last year. At that time Mr. Church was requesting approval to expand the
driveway to accommodate two vehicles and reconstruct the stairs and sidewalk which access the home.
Mr. Church had the property and adjacent right of way surveyed and is before you with a revised request. He
is not requesting approval for any expansion of hardcover; he would like to re-build the stairs and sidewalk
which access the home and reconstruct the driveway in the same footprint as existing. He would like to re-
grade the side yard so that the walls on the east side of the driveway can be removed allowing for two
vehicles to park in the driveway and accommodate the vehicle doors opening without actually enlarging the
driveway footprint. The deck and retaining walls under the deck would remain at this time. He is agreeable to
removal of the deck at a later date. However the driveway and sidewalk projects have a higher priority as the
failing driveway, sidewalk and stairs are causing water to enter the home and need to be addressed first.
Planning Staff and the City's consulting engineer, Brian Simmons,visited the site to discuss Mr. Church's plans.
Technically a permit doesn't apply as the work will be conducted within the City ROW, however an
encroachment agreement, erosion control escrow and plan (Exhibit F)will be required.
Staff Recommendation
Staff is agreeable to allowing the grading, removal of the east walls, the reconstruction of the sidewalk, stairs
and driveway conditioned on the property owner entering into an encroachment agreement addressing all
other items located within the City ROW.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
er was unexpectedly unavailable to attend tonig s mee in ever Council should
provide direction to staff regarding t e encroachment agreement or maintenance, reconstruction and/or
removal o the RO encroachments.
rco �C CCC-
G( ►' V t C `�l I F V1, r 1
N 71"09'Uu ,
133.25 � 1 �
BRICK
BORDER
D2.
\ \ CHIMNEY
24.7 I
10 I I I
BRICK
BORDER I I I
W M I
24.0
oEXITING 5.9
\ 24,.M 2 MAPtE A HOUSE
II
\ # 4440
1po
\\ \� EL
GAR GE EV-944.500R
.1. I
� BR/ ` � 54.7 OLD
gxlqEL
CFE -g48.7� ORDR 22"A4,4
I I
CONCRETE STOOP I
I
\ N 71055147" E 1 0.00 � 1
I
O I O WOOD WALL
yc D I I O 11
IT)" e I i O m I
A 6 R,C m o X I
0 O O \ �
�4 2p' APtE l D D CO "4RAD O O G) \� I
1 1
0 1
�— --------- \ ' ` o
� R
` _ --- � sx qa Jnr �
L ON ,
FtE�O OOB I q vE
R�RDE f R DR,���
R / Ay I
-944------- ------------- --------- _ � 1q„t� � I
� D I