Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06-15-2020 Planning Commission Packet
SLoN. Agenda Planning Commission Meeting June 15,2020,6:00 P.M. 1F G: Orono Council Chambers,2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono,MN 55356 �'kEsHO' 952-249-4600/www.ci.orono.mn.us The Meeting will be held at the City Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356. Additionally, because the Governor of the State of Minnesota has declared a health pandemic emergency per State Statutes Chapter 12, the Mayor of Orono has declared a local emergency as of March 18, 2020. Interested parties may also participate via telephone or electronically under Minn. Stat. 13D.021 because it may be impractical and imprudent to hold the meeting in person. Limited seating is available in the regular meeting location. To participate, watch, or provide comment, please register for the Orono Planning Commission Meeting— Monday,June 15,2020 which begins at 6:00PM at: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/8983089570936357643 You can register ahead of time. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. The non-interactive livestream of the meeting can be found by selecting the date of the meeting on the City's website: http://oronomn.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view id=1 The Planning Commission is an advisory body to the City Council. If action is taken on any items on this agenda,they will be scheduled for an upcoming City Council meeting. A quorum of the City Council may be in attendance of a Planning Commission meeting to hear comments made,though no action or deliberation of the Council will occur. Council Representative: Aaron Printup Oath of Office- Scott Kirchner Pledge of Allegiance Approval of Agenda Approval of Minutes May 18, 2020 Public Hearings 1. LA20-000037 Tim Hanson, 2645 Casco Point Road,Variance (Staff: Melanie Curtis) 2. LA20-000039 John & Sherry Gorman, 3585 Frederick Street,Variance (Staff: Laura Oakden) 3. LA19-000065 City of Orono, Text Amendment: Subdivisions (Staff: Jeremy Barnhart) 4. Update on June 8, 2020 Council meeting Adjourn Planning Commission Liaison to Monday, July 13, 2020 City Council meeting: Dennis Libby Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us—follow links for Stay Connected& Email Notification MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Chair Jon Ressler and the following members appearing remotely: Commissioners Chris Bollis, Bob Erickson,Matt Gettman, Dennis Libby, Mark McCutcheon, and Scott Kirchner. Representing Staff were Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart; City Planners Melanie Curtis and Laura Oakden. Mayor Dennis Walsh and Council representative Richard Crosby were also appearing remotely. Chair Ressler called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Erickson asked if the new Commissioner, Scott Kirchner,would be sworn in at the meeting or a later time. Barnhart stated he would be sworn in when the meeting could be at City Hall, hopefully in June. Gettman moved,Libby seconded,to approve the Agenda for the May 18,2020 Planning Commission meeting.Roll Call Vote: Ayes 7(Libby,Erickson,McCutcheon,Bollis, Gettman, Kirchner,Ressler),Nays 0. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 16,2020 Libby moved,McCutcheon seconded,to approve the March 16,2020 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes.Roll Call Vote: Ayes 7(Libby,Erickson,McCutcheon,Bollis,Gettman,Kirchner, Ressler),Nays 0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. LA20-000021 JEFF BRADY,350 NORTH SHORE DRIVE WEST,VARIANCE,6:05 P.M. -6:16 P.M. Jeff Brady,Applicant,was present. Staff presented a summary of packet information. McCutcheon asked if the height of the garage was less than the height of the house. Oakden said it is an addition to the house but believes they are maintaining the roofline. Bollis asked if the tent shed and shed on the survey were neighboring properties or if they were owned by the applicant. Oakden said she was not sure and that might be a question for the applicant. Mr. Jeff Brady,350 North Shore Drive West, said when the Wright-Hennepin Power Company came through and clear-cut a section for the power line, which feeds the people behind them, it was eroding away the driveway so they placed the tent shed and shed there. As far as the people who owned the Page 1 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. property beforehand,it was a spot that was washing out into what would now be considered a little grassy area. It is kind of swampy and holds some water. They will be moved if necessary. Kirchner stated it looks like to the east and west of those buildings there are markings of the survey that say "PP," which he is assuming are power poles,and the line between them are the overhead power lines that Wright-Hennepin would have clear-cut for. Mr. Brady said he was correct.They also maintain that to keep an accessible route for Wright-Hennepin, so they can get in and out of there if needed. It is a transformer pole. Ressler asked Mr. Brady to be available for any questions, which Mr. Brady agreed to do. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:11 p.m. There were no public comments relating to this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:12 p.m. Libby stated he was trying to log on to a second screen to view the full application but had reviewed the application earlier. He does not have any objections to the application. He is unable to reference what Staff determined on this, but he does not see any problems with the proposal. Ressler said the packet indicated Staff was in support;they identified enough practical difficulty. He read the language, "Staff finds that there are some practical difficulties due to the location of the septic, location of the existing home and substandard lot area for the district." He stated that the setbacks required for front and rear are 50 feet and the subject property are 42 and 168 feet,respectively. He noted 42 is almost 50 but not quite. The required north and south side setbacks are 30 and the existing is 136 and 16.8,which is part of the variance application. Erickson said he reviewed the Staff report and is in agreement with voting in favor of the approval of the request. McCutcheon said he would tend to agree, noting the garage is in line with the house,the driveway is right there, and it makes the most sense to put it in that location. He is in favor of approval. Bollis stated he agrees with Staff and it seems to be the most practical place to put the garage given the constraints of the property.He would like to see the other two sheds brought into conformity somehow. Ressler commented that this should be noted for the City Council. Gettman and Kirchner stated they agreed with the points brought forward and would support the application. Ressler said he also agrees with Staff's recommendation, a reasonable practical difficulty has been identified, and he would support the application as provided. Page 2 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Bollis moved,Gettman seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA20-000021 Jeff Brady,350 North Shore Drive West,variance. Roll Call Vote: Ayes 7(Libby,Erickson, McCutcheon,Bollis, Gettman,Kirchner,Ressler),Nays 0. 2. LA20-000024 JAY NYGARD, 1380 REST POINT ROAD,LOT AREA,LOT WIDTH, HARDCOVER,AND SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCES,6:16 P.M. - 7:04 P.M. Jay Nygard,Applicant,was present. Staff presented a summary of packet information. McCutcheon noted in the pictures there is a stake next to what he assumes to be the boathouse. He is assuming that is one foot away from it and assumed the wood stakes with the yellow are the proposed. He asked if the clump of trees pictured are considered to be on the east or west property. Barnhart said he would defer questions about the pictures to the applicant. Ressler stated,based on the City Attorney's comments that were provided, it sounds like ruling it on the basis that it was requested would require it to be awarded in Court only. He asked if that was something that the Planning Commission could provide in the Planning Commission setting, or was it only available through the legal process. Barnhart advised that the Commission should focus its analysis and review based on the standards for variance of the doctrine by practical location. He said he thought that was a decision that came from a Court system versus a City action. Jay Nygard, 1380 Rest Point Road,referenced the question regarding"boundary by practical location" and stated that is a legal doctrine, it is not a law. He said doctrines are developed in the legal culture in order to help guide proper decisions, which is why he brought it up, because he is basing the application on the legal doctrine to better help the Commission understand why he is trying to do this. He is trying to do this because the best practical location to put the boundary is at the crest of the hill from the street down. He knows it changes a little bit when it gets to the boathouse, but he tried to follow the crest of the line the best he could.As far as the root structures of the trees on the line,they are on both properties because root structures are as big as the tree umbrella. He said when he was on the Planning Commission and City Council,he visited every property when something came up and it was important for him to see the property personally, because pictures and Staff can't always tell someone the whole story. He asked if anybody got the chance to look at the property. Libby and Bollis indicated they did. Mr.Nygard said he was disappointed because he felt Barnhart misrepresented what is going on and it is a lot easier to see things in person. He indicated Barnhart is saying they are increasing hardcover on the property, and that is not the case.They removed an illegal driveway turnaround and an illegal fence on the property to bring the property into compliance, which totaled 270 square feet. Those were removed before he had the surveys done, so those are not included in the surveys. City Hall may have a survey which would include those things. On the last page he included a map showing they removed 270 feet of hardcover on the property,all of it being illegal hardcover. After removing that 270 feet, it reduced the hardcover from 29 percent to 28 percent overall to the property, even with the boundary shift. As a Page 3 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. lifelong resident of the area and being on the Planning Commission and City Council, it is very important to him that the area gets taken care of. With every project he has done to improve the property, it is always in the back of his mind as far as how he can bring it more compliant and still make the project work. He stated that several times in the write-up by City Staff, Barnhart claims that the slope is getting steeper at the property line,which is far from the truth. The intent is to bring the property line to the crest of the hill.The previous neighbors put a fence right at the crest of the hill because that is the most logical place for it to go. He was never able to maintain anything on his side of it without trespassing, so he always had invasive weeds and toxic,nauseous weeds coming through.He has been able to resolve that issue,but it does not resolve the issue of how to maintain a hill that goes just about straight down for the majority of the length of the property line. He stated it would be a lot easier to do so from his area up. He said if you look at the pictures,at the tree,it is 1 '/2 feet and it telescopes out. The reason it does is because that's where the crest of the hill goes. He said he went to a meeting the previous November, and many of the applications were approved with variances similar to what he is asking for: five-yard setback issue, lot width issue.At that time,Barnhart said the revised configuration of the lot would not impact the character of the neighborhood, and that was the reason Barnhart used for approval back in November. He said that is exactly what would happen in this case: no one would be able to tell from the street, lake, air,or anywhere else anyone is looking,any difference between the property. He is falling into the guideline that Barnhart stated last year.As he looks through the different applications,there are rear yard setbacks; a second rear yard setback; average lakeshore; average lakeshore,structure and hardcover; lake and rear yard hardcover in excess of 20 feet; lot width,rear yard,and hardcover. Those were variances granted to other people. He is asking for a similar type of consideration. He said sometimes City Code cannot match everything, especially in an area where he is,where all the lots are obviously substandard because they were zoned well after they were platted. He is trying to readjust it to where it would have been if someone had come out when the lots were platted and said that this is where the lot line should go. He noted a house is being built two houses away from him and the owner ended up getting two different rear yard setbacks. He feels precedence on this issue has been that setback variances are okay, especially given the lot sizes and when they were zoned versus when they were platted. He indicated there has been a lot of strife between the properties over the years. He inadvertently installed a waterfall over the line after the fence was installed because he assumed the other owner went along the property line.Although that caused a lot of strife,the Courts allowed that waterfall to stay there through two different litigations. He thinks the Courts allowing it to stay there means something. He will have an encroachment into one property that the City is not trying to help him resolve. If the Courts have allowed it to stay there for 18 years, he guessed they would get to keep it there because it is over the statute of limitations for adverse possession. He stated it is all about solving problems. He is a little frustrated because he wishes Barnhart would have gotten on the bandwagon and understood that that is the goal of the application,but Barnhart kind of cherry-picked a couple of things and only gave the Commissioners part of the story. Libby asked Mr.Nygard to summarize what he would consider to be the highest net benefit from being granted the variance, since he owns both properties and basically shares both lot lines, such as a bottom- line benefit in resale later on. He said it cannot inconvenience either property since he owns both of them. He appreciates the nuts and bolts and mechanics of it,but as a former independent fee appraiser,he would like to hear the net benefit if the Planning Commission suggests granting of the variance to the City. Mr.Nygard said the net benefit is resolving the issues from now until eternity.He has lived at the home 25 years and this is the location where it really belongs,which is why he brought up"boundary by practical location."He is considering selling the property. He is putting solar power on it and has put a new driveway in and reduced the illegal hardcover. If he sells the property, it is going to sell for less, so Page 4 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. there is no net financial benefit for him to do this. He is doing it because he thinks it is the right thing to do. It is a way to solve problems not only for him,but for the City as well. Ressler noted Mr.Nygard,having been on the Commission in the past, understands one of the issues is identifying enough practical difficulty to grant a variance to the rules that the City is required to abide by. One of the difficulties the Commission is having is understanding a worsening effect when you have the difficulties, and that is identifying the boathouse going from a six-foot setback to a 1-foot. Unless he misunderstood,the survey in the application does not reflect the removal of 270 feet of hardcover, nor is there a"subject to survey showing what it would look like once it is removed." When it comes to structure, whenever someone intensifies an existing problem,that is going in the wrong direction. He asked if Mr.Nygard tried to find a way to solve the issue without doing that. Mr.Nygard stated he is going off the character of the land, and that is the thing that he always respected when he looked at these applications. The character of the land says the property line should be the crest of the hill, and that is why they are going there. As far as the survey,the Commission is looking at the final survey with the new driveway,removed sidewalk,removed turnaround, and removed illegal fence. It is an after-the-fact survey. He was not privy to having a survey prior to the removal of those items,but because he is an engineer, he can do a general calculation to figure out that it is approximately 270 feet of hardcover removed that wasn't accounted for in the calculations. He is not looking for any kind of hardcover variance because he is decreasing that. He is looking at adjusting the lot width and side yard setback for the boathouse. The one side of the boathouse has never been usable land,that being the 1380 property,for the 25 years he has lived there. The owner before him would scrape up the milfoil and make a huge pile of milfoil there,which built up the ground, and that is how he used that. It's not so much that it is a practical difficulty,but that is why he gave the Commission the"boundary by practical location"legal doctrine,because it is out there for a reason. The doctrine says if there is a practical location for that boundary to be,then that's where that boundary should be. He is identifying the practical location, which is given by the nature and features of the land itself, with the reasoning that is needed in order to be granted a variance. Ressler clarified that the crest of the hill seems to be Mr.Nygard's answer to the practical difficulty issue and his opinion is that the more correct way to draw the line would include reducing the area from the property line from six feet to one foot. Mr.Nygard said to be really right he would put it all the way up to the boathouse, but there was a grounding rod over there. He is going to run the sprinkler pipe along there, so he left a foot so that there is enough area on the land by the boathouse.He could move it back to two feet and jog it behind the boathouse if necessary. He was considering writing in, if/when he sells the property, a 2-foot easement for the boathouse so they would always have a permanent ability to maintain the side of the boathouse if necessary. Kirchner indicated Mr.Nygard mentioned that the final survey, dated November 12,2019, was after the illegal hardcover was removed from 1380 and that he was reducing the hardcover. In looking at the hardcover calculation worksheet for 1380 Rest Point, also dated November 12, 2019, from Gronberg& Associates,it indicates the hardcover with the lot line rearrangement would increase it to 28.43 percent. If his understanding is correct, it is now at 27.39,so it would be increased a little over one percent. He asked Mr.Nygard to help him understand and clarify what he was referencing with the documents not being correct or from a prior application and referencing the survey as being the final from November. Page 5 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Mr.Nygard asked the Commissioners to look at the last page of the packet he submitted, noting that he has the site plan he submitted for the driveway permit which shows new driveway versus removed driveway. Referencing a picture from Google Earth, he indicated an area at the bottom of the driveway where he removed 240 square feet of an illegal turnaround, a retaining wall, and a sidewalk. He said on the other side of the driveway there was a small slip he pulled out and there were 20 square feet for fence posts.He stated they were not included in the Gronberg survey because they were removed after he purchased the property but before Gronberg surveyed it. He said if you add the 270 square feet of hardcover to the initial existing,you end up with 4,819 square feet,giving over 29 percent hardcover. He noted it was originally over 29 percent and it is being reduced to over 28 percent.He is asking for 610 square feet and removed 270 square feet,which is 44 percent. They removed a large amount of hardcover in order to accommodate this. He can foresee the hardcover issue being important,but he also knew they were illegal additions to the property that did not belong and he wanted to remove them. He noted the City never dealt with the fence. Even though the driveway was installed,the previous owner who went through and got a variance and upgraded the property in 2004 or 2006 was blindsided because he did not know that the driveway turnaround was illegal.The City ended up approving it even though it was illegal. Although he is saying it is illegal,the turnaround and sidewalk is still City-approved hardcover. He removed them, anyway. Ressler asked Mr.Nygard to be available for any questions that may arise and he could do so by raising his hand so Ressler knew he was willing to participate, and Mr.Nygard agreed to do so. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:44 p.m. There were no public comments relating to this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:45 p.m. Ressler stated the Planning Commission generally does not like to intensify lot line setbacks to structure, which is the difficulty he is having with the rearrangement. Kirchner said he has concern regarding the 1-foot setback that would be created at the boathouse.He also has concern with the hardcover that would end up at 1380 Rest Point Road. He appreciates the applicant's desire and the efforts taken to remove the hardcover that was over the allowance and get the property closer to compliance; however,with the lot line rearrangement, a percentage of that is being added back and he feels like it is going two steps forward and one step back. He has concerns over the proximity of the lot line to the boathouse for maintenance of the boathouse for future owners as well as the hardcover that would be added to 1380. Erickson stated in order for the Planning Commission to determine the existence of a practical difficulty, they first need to determine that the proposed use is a reasonable use,which is where he has a problem with the proposal as it relates to the 1-foot setback. He understands the applicant has an explanation,but he has been trying to conjure up in his mind some circumstance where he might support a 1-foot setback anywhere for anyone,and he has been unable to do so.His conclusion is that a 1-foot setback is an unreasonable use and,therefore,there is no practical difficulty as required by state law. Libby said he agrees with Erickson but has a couple of additional points.He has substantial familiarity with the property from a terrestrial, aerial,and lakeside standpoint because that is a common visiting point for him as a boater. An inference of hardship does not follow through with any credence because he Page 6 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. knows what the pitches are from having been there often. He cannot find that any change in the lot line is going to change any sort of hardship from the pitch and grade from the street to the lakeshore. He cannot see a large net benefit either economically or as an access or as a drainage benefit and that this is a change worth going through for a variance. McCutcheon said he agrees with the previous comments. He noted that in looking at it without the boathouse and putting the property line back in play, it's the top of the hill or bottom of the hill, it's a horse apiece, and difficult both ways. The applicant is saying, even when the fence was there,they had to trespass to maintain the fence. Here is a situation where, if they want to maintain the boathouse,they will have to trespass. He does not see replacing one problem with another as beneficial. They might as well leave well enough alone and keep the six-foot setback, which is better than a 1-foot setback. He also does not see the practical difficulty. Gettman noted he disagrees with only one point in that it sounds like the applicant is willing to potentially have an easement but work on that side of the actual boundary line. While the crest is one issue and the boathouse the other issue, it sounded like the applicant might be willing to adjust the line closer to the boathouse to address that issue. He sees this as a practical difficulty in that the landowner had to literally buy the other house to try to resolve the issue. If the Commission can address it now, it will prevent another issue down the road. Ressler noted the Commission can't modify it because it does not have the"subject to"drawing. He suggested finding a way to rearrange the lot where it is not intensifying the setback to the boathouse.He noted that was the biggest issue for him. Changing the width of the lot has an impact, and the hardcover survey being correctly reflected is another. What he is hearing from fellow Commissioners is that the boathouse setback is creating a problem that is not as big of a problem as it is today. McCutcheon indicated the existing lot line is close to the shed, and a devil's advocate could say that they are moving the lot line for the boathouse closer but actually helping the shed. The tiebreaker in his view is the boathouse is closer to the lake, and the only reason it can be there is because it has been there a long time and is probably grandfathered in. He referenced the comment about years of strife because of the property line and doubted it was as simple as that,because if it was as simple as moving a property line, that would have been the solution a long time ago. A lot of work is being done just to move a lot line and he is trying to see a value,but he sees a problem going closer to the boathouse. Ressler agreed that drawing a line between the shed on one side and the boathouse on the other seems like the reasonable place that it already is. It is up for debate whether it's the crest of the hill,the middle of the hill,or the bottom of the hill. He personally does not see that a practical difficulty has been demonstrated enough to change what it is. He understands the hill part,but it did not solve the problem with the two structures lakeward. Erickson moved,Libby seconded,to deny Application No. LA20-000024 Jay Nygard, 1380 Rest Point Road,lot area, lot width,hardcover,and side yard setback variances. Mr.Nygard stated the reason he put the line one foot from the boathouse is because that was the straightest line he could draw down from the crest of the hill. He would be willing to adjust the line to two feet so they would have room to maintain it. He noted the problem with all of the properties is that no matter what you do, something is going to be out of compliance. There was no easement before when they had the issues and the fence was put up. He stated that if someone puts a fence up and they are Page 7 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. hostile and then they want to come to your property,traipse through a garden in order to maintain the fence, it becomes an issue.He wanted to give an easement to ensure the property owners could maintain the boathouse. He is trying to solve all of the problems at the same time. He understands that the Planning Commission is struggling with the boathouse,but it is already subpar, and making it a few more feet subpar does not upset that property in any manner, considering that it was never usable space and was filled with noxious weeds the whole time. He is trying to put the boundary where it really belongs. The land is what created the crest of the hill.He did not do that and the neighbor did not do that. The land did it and it's done it for a long time. He noted that his neighbor two houses up got a variance in order to have the house located closer to the street. He asked how the land caused that person a problem so that his house could be located closer to the street. He said one big practical difficulty the Commissioners have not considered is the waterfall that's been over the property line for 18 years and, in two different litigations,two different judges left it there. He has not heard any discussion about it. It is really important because when those people sued him the last time, he had to buy the house to solve the problem. He is trying now to solve the problem forever and make it clear and obvious so there are not any more problems and lawsuits. He indicated he could go through a legal action and try to get it solved that way,but he thought it would be easier working with his City and having people understand that all of these properties are unique, it is a unique hill between a couple of properties,and the Commission could understand how that might cause an issue. He suggested resolving the issue by moving the property line over. It would solve the waterfall issue, solve the weed issue, solve the maintenance issue, and solve everything else so there aren't issues in the future. He said the City lets fencing go right on property lines now which creates issues. That is not what he is suggesting. He is trying to set it up so the people on that property will be able to maintain that boathouse and will have legal access through an easement in order to do that. He is getting all of the compromising done ahead of time to try to improve the situation. Ressler said that the Planning Commission has to rule on what they can see,what they have, and what they have in front of them.He can understand giving legal access to maintain a shed, but right now the variance is not necessary based on the lot line that has been placed in front of the Commission, and that clearly poses a problem. Providing an easement is certainly a solution. He suggested that Staff could give the applicant options as far as where he can go from here. He stated removing the waterfall may be something that could be brought up or done another more conforming way. Bollis noted the boathouse is his hangup and he knows they are supposed to vote on what they see,but the simplest solution may be to create an easement that runs along the property line for maintenance and it would run on both sides so each neighbor can maintain each side of the property line as they need to. That would possibly forego a lot line rearrangement and other nonconformities. Roll Call Vote: Ayes 7(Kirchner, Gettman,Bollis,McCutcheon,Erickson,Libby,Ressler),Nays 0. 3. LA20-000028 BAY CLIFF HOMES,2440 OLD BEACH ROAD,VARIANCE,7:04 P.M. - 7:29 P.M. Bill Worms, o/b/o Bay Cliff Homes, Applicant, and David Jacobsen-Gretsch, Property Owner,were present. Staff presented a summary of packet information. There were no questions for Staff. Page 8 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Mr. Bill Worms, 18281 Minnetonka Blvd Ste E, Wayzata MN, said if the Planning Commission has read all of the material,he does not want to go into all of the nuances other than the basic idea with the views and property to the north. The property to the north is being moved back so they could do a pool, which ultimately is the hardship,because now it has brought the existing home into nonconformity. A bold line was pointed out on the displayed site plan, and he stated that was from the existing property to the south and the line that would have occurred if the property to the north built up to their setback line, which they chose not to do because of the pool and the pool's encroachment to the sewer. Mr. David Jacobsen-Gretsch, 2440 Old Beach Road,said the reason they are asking for the variance is they found this was in somewhat disrepair. Also,their family consists of seven people and they want to add a screen porch which doesn't seem to be an unreasonable use. The biggest issue he has is the fact that if somebody moves their property backwards, it doesn't seem to be aligned with the regulation or law in place. Rather, it was designed for lots where, if you move forward,you will be in somebody's view. He indicated they have a letter of support from each of their neighbors to do this,and if the neighbor moved their lot back 100 feet, his entire house would be nonconforming. He feels this is reasonable,there is no harm,he is improving the value and property in the neighborhood, and they have support. He has heard the Commission say before that it can be built elsewhere,but he really can't. There's an egress issue with where the rest of the house is with bedrooms. He said it is the family living area, and from a health perspective a screen porch is something he wanted to do in that location. Ressler thanked them and asked them to be available for any questions, which was agreed to. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 7:12 p.m. There were no public comments relating to this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 7:13 p.m. Barnhart asked the applicants to lower their hands and, if new information was to be presented,they could re-raise their hands so the Planning Commission knows they have not called on them yet, which they complied with. Bollis asked Staff why the City is measuring the average lakeshore setback with regard to how it pertains to the house to the north at the porch and not at the edge of the pool. Curtis stated the pool is not a massing improvement, it is not part of the principal building. The principal building is what determines the average lakeshore setback. She noted that even if it is on a patio,the patio is not part of the principal building, it is not part of the building footprint, so it does not count towards the measurement of the average setback. Ressler,referencing the next property over, asked if the City knew where the structure is located for that property on an aerial view. Curtis said the City does. Referencing the survey,she indicated the house to the south. Ressler noted it was the house that the applicant was saying there was a structure previously where the pool currently is and they are trying to make the position that if that was not done,they would not be Page 9 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. encumbering on the average lakeshore setback. Knowing the Commission has seen that in other places,he was curious where the structure is located at the property farther over from that neighbor. Curtis said she does not have an aerial photo that shows it,but said the applicant's survey shows the line from the previous house and pointed that area out on the drawing. She also pointed out the home to the north of the new home next to them. Ressler,referencing the drawing,asked, if the neighbor's house where the pool is would be gone, whether the average lakeshore setback would carry over to that and it would carry a straight line. Curtis stated Ressler was incorrect and that it would be determined by the home to the south and pointed it out on the document. She added if there was a vacant lot on either side,they use the direct measurement of the house on the built-up side. Ressler referenced where Staffs pointer was and asked, if the line was drawn to the left and the property on the left where the pool is did not exist,where that average lakeshore setback would generally be. Curtis stated it would be 116 feet, so it would not help the applicant's difficulty because they are proposing to be situated 107 feet from the lake,where they are currently 118.6 feet. If the lot was vacant, it would not help them. Ressler clarified whether the discussion was about lake yard setback or average lakeshore setback. Curtis indicated it was the average lakeshore setback. She said if there is a vacant lot on your left,the setback is determined by the actual distance from the lake of the house on your right. She noted the same rule would apply if there was a street on the left. McCutcheon noted the Planning Commission gets one of these requests every meeting and he realizes it is frustrating for homeowners because it is not straightforward, and it is frustrating when you look at a pool or building structure.He noted with the previous applicant they were fighting over six feet to one foot,and now it's 10 feet. The Planning Commission has to draw the line somewhere and there are rules and a lot of precedence set.Even though it may be frustrating and people wonder why they do not just allow this,the Planning Commission cannot do that. He would be in favor of denying the application. Libby noted he likes to contribute an alternative if he can. He said architecturally it is a lovely home and thanked the applicant for a very nice and articulate explanation about their life-style, needs,and why they want to do a screen porch.He is thinking about a practical solution for them so they can satisfy their need and desire for a screen porch and suggested that the applicant go back to their architect and take a look at positioning a screen porch off the existing library to the right of the library where it looks as if there's some hard surface there. He does not think there would be as much of a battle.They are going to build something new, anyway;there's cost in design, engineering, and construction. It would solve the average lakeshore setback issue if they were to design and build something to the right of the library. He has not been out to the house,but he can tell from the aerials that it looks feasible. Erickson said any government agency should try to be as even-handed in their application of the law as possible and avoid any kind of precedent that might be considered arbitrary which could result from an uneven application. He noted there was an application in the Walters Port area where there was an existing building with a foundation and part of a basement that were stuck into the average lakeshore Page 10 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. setback,just about the same amount as in this case. The Planning Commission voted at that time not to permit it, and that was an existing structure. This is a proposal which has not yet been built, and Staff has advised the Commissioners the house could be made bigger if they had located the addition in a different part of the property. That tells him that the reason for it being proposed where it is, is for the applicant's convenience because there are viable alternatives. If it is a convenience to the applicant,they should not try to make a practical difficulty out of it, because it is not there in his view. Kirchner noted he does not have any further feedback beyond what has been provided. In reviewing the practical difficulties report from City Staff,he does not believe that a practical difficulty can be established in this case.As Erickson pointed out,this may be more so a matter of convenience. Gettman said he does not see the overcoming practical difficulty in the request and noted the previous Commissioners have already stated his position. Ressler noted that Erickson did a nice job of summarizing. He stated there are alternatives available,they have denied applicants of similar characteristics in the past,and the code that the Commission has to follow does not allow any sort of grandfathering in of previous structure once structure is replaced. Unless there is a motion that carries and changes the by-laws to allow grandfathering for a previous structure to redraw potential average setbacks, the Commissioners have to go by the rules and guidelines and grant variances to practical difficulties.He said he tends to agree with the rest of the Commissioners. Kirchner commented that there has been a lot of discussion about the property that's under construction that was pushed back in regard to accommodating a swimming pool. He said he zoomed out a little bit on the survey and sees the approximate existing dwelling one more to the left of it, and he is trying to figure out if the house was moved back to accommodate that average lakeshore setback, although he could not determine where that line would be. Curtis noted the applicant provided that line on the survey. She indicated the line and noted that it cuts through the applicant's proposed addition slightly. McCutcheon moved, Gettman seconded,to deny Application No. LA20-000028 Bay Cliff Homes, 2440 Old Beach Road,variance. Roll Call Vote: Ayes 7(Gettman, Kirchner,Bollis,McCutcheon, Erickson,Libby,Ressler),Nays 0. 4. LA20-000029 MICHAEL LOUWERSE,4731 NORTH SHORE DRIVE,VARIANCES, 7:29 P.M. -8:17 P.M. Michael Louwerse and Elise Kottraba,Applicants,were present. Staff presented a summary of packet information. McCutcheon stated it looks like the property east has a garage closer to the road than the applicant's house,and asked if they are in violation of the setback. Curtis said she did not have their survey information. She stated they show the nearest part of the house on their survey which was provided,but she does not have it. She did not believe it was in the setback. It is not much if it is.Using the survey, she stated it was 21.7 feet;the setback is 30 feet. Page 11 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Mr. Michael Louwerse and Ms. Elise Kottraba, Applicants,were present but not able to be heard. Ressler asked Staff how they should handle the application since respondents were not able to be heard. Barnhart suggested the Planning Commission have some internal conversation with the hopes, before they make any motion or recommendation,the applicants would come back to the meeting. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. There were no public comments relating to this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. Michael Louwerse and Elise Kottraba,4731 North Shore Drive, said they would be happy to answer any specific questions that anybody has. He stated he was running around trying to get his computer to work so he did not hear all of the Commissioners'comments. As far as the shared driveway,they are not able to use their driveway because they cannot park cars there in order to allow their neighbors to get out. He believed Staff has an aerial view from Google Maps that shows the situation. He and his wife purchased the house in September, she's pregnant with their first child, and with the items you acquire living on a lake and for yard work and then with their family expanding, it would be really nice to have additional storage and keep the cars in the garage as well. It would also help them to be able to stay in the house long-term as their family grows,as opposed to having to move and find a place where they have more storage. He noted Curtis discussed what she called the deck down by the lake and pavers. They were there when they bought the house;they didn't put that in. He said the deck is a dock. It is dock material and built over the riprap, and it was also there when they bought the house. Ressler asked the applicants if there was anything further,or he could open it up for questions from the Commissioners. Mr. Louwerse indicated any questions were great. McCutcheon stated he sees what looks like a shoulder where people could park on the side of the road. He asked if there was a safety issue coming in and out of the driveway. Mr. Louwerse said the topography in the driveway is pretty sloped. Their neighbors pull in and turn left and park their car forward into their garage,which is a three-car garage. They back up all the way against the applicants'garage and then pull out forward up the driveway. It is a fairly busy road,and it would be dangerous to back out of their driveway. He said they back out of their driveway into the neighbors' space and then pull up.The neighbors have a driveway that is quite a bit bigger than the applicants'driveway, and they can park a car over to the left side of their driveway. McCutcheon stated he was glad to hear the explanation because as he looks at the area,potentially the applicant could lessen the chance of having a car in front of the garage to make coming in and out of the driveway easier. Mr. Louwerse agreed. He said the neighbor has a Yukon XL/Denali-sized car, and if the applicants have just one car in the driveway,the neighbor has a hard time backing her car in there and getting out.The neighbors have asked the applicants if they could be parked in their garage at all times. As they live in the Page 12 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. house longer and accumulate more things for yard work and lake supplies,it's getting a bit cramped and is only going to get worse as their family grows. Ressler asked the applicants to be available during their discussion if they called for them to answer any questions, which they agreed to do. McCutcheon said he looked at the aerial photo of the neighborhood and saw there were some houses with garages that are closer to the road than the applicants',although they may be grandfathered in. He stated safety is a huge concern and he is glad Staff recognized that and was willing to meet the applicants halfway in allowing the hardcover to extend. He said the applicants'point is valid. They just bought the house and knew the situation, although they didn't know the nuances of extending the garage and the complications that arise.He understands why the applicant is before the Planning Commission, especially with a baby on the way. It is a busy road, and he would like to do anything to help improve safety. Bollis said he agrees with McCutcheon. In looking at it, he can see the practical difficulty, and some sort of reconfiguration needs to happen in order for them to utilize the driveway in a safe manner. He is in favor of it. In a perfect world he would like to see the 18.1-foot setback be no less than the 21.7 the neighbor has, but he does not know if that is possible. He is generally in favor of the proposed addition of the garage and driveway section. Libby said he tends to concur with Bollis and McCutcheon. Shared driveways seem to be very difficult to work out.Regardless of how they are configured,they pose some type of deficiency versus private, unshared driveways. The applicants knew that was the existing condition when they bought the property. He does not have a problem with the proposed addition or the request. He noted the adjoining property seems to have a further encroachment into the setback and asked if that set any sort of precedent on a street side average setback. He asked if that gives any net benefit to this applicants' request for a variance. Curtis said she thinks each lot is looked at individually. The two properties used to be three. They lost the one lot to make two lots larger. 4725 was developed first. The 4725 lot has less of a constriction on the lake side due to the bluff because the subject lot pulls up into the lot. The drainageway on the west side is quite steep, so the bluff does wrap around, causing further setback concerns for the development of the lot,which is why the house is built the way it is. She would not say that someone else's variance approval would give a precedent to approve a variance on either lot unless it's an identical situation. She suggested to look at each lot on its own merits. Libby said he is looking at some way/method the Commission can temper this in a manner that would allow the applicants to have what they need without abusing or violating City Code. The safety issues enter into the equation.The idea of having to back out on a thoroughfare like North Shore Drive is tough and risky. If they have another method of doing that from a new garage, it may not change the safety issues. He does not have a solution but suggested discussing it further and taking it to a vote. Erickson stated that when the time comes to vote on a motion,this particular case might lend itself to two separate motions.He brought it up in part because Staff recommendation is to approve one set of variances and deny another set of variances, and one way to deal with that would be to have separate motions and separate votes. The variance Staff is recommending is the one involving hardcover,and that would give the applicants more driveway room to maneuver and get on and off of the busy road safely, which he is in favor of. He would see a clear hardship if that was not approved.As far as the setback variance for the three-car garage,the applicant pointed out he wasn't sure how much of a hardship that Page 13 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. was; he mentioned that it's nice to have more storage space. Perhaps that fact leads Staff to conclude that part may be a convenience,which may preclude a hardship. Although it goes outside the boundaries of the application in front of the Commission,there may be some other ways to improve the storage without going closer to the county road. He suggested if the two-car garage were extended in depth, it would get closer to the unimproved road and there would be no neighbors there. If there were a variance in that direction, it might be something to look at. An accessory building in the backyard for lawn mowers,et cetera, would be something else that could be considered. He is very much in favor of the hardcover variance because it creates an opportunity to require the applicants to remove the unpermitted hardcover very close to the lakeshore. When the applicant mentioned this is really dock material,his memory immediately went back to another recent case the Planning Commission had of a contractor who expanded a boathouse without a permit but then said those were dock sections that were added next to the boathouse. At that time the Commission's vote was against the interpretation of the dock section being permitted hardcover. If the hardcover variance is a vehicle to require that unpermitted hardcover to be moved, it is definitely worthwhile. He does not even know how he would vote. It may be something that could be subject to a later discussion. Kirchner said he drove past the subject property and it is a unique area. He drove by twice to look at it based on the topography of it and how it slopes down towards the lake. Although it is not immediately next door to the applicants' residence,in the 4400 block of North Shore Drive,to the east of the applicants,there are homes that have sheds which have full single garage doors on them that are essentially on the property line. They were closer to the road, it seemed. He noted another home almost directly across and a little to the west of the applicant that is situated pretty much on the road and believes it is an old home constructed many years ago and might be abandoned. He said that the neighboring property that they share the driveway with does extend some into that 30-foot setback as well. He is thinking along the lines of Erickson in that it is a challenging application to determine between the practical difficulty versus convenience,but he also struggles with the fact that the neighboring property is encroaching into that 30-foot setback where the applicant is saying that that's part of what they're trying to accomplish as well with a single garage stall. Gettman stated the way Staff laid out the hardcover question made a lot of sense,but he thinks the Planning Commission is missing the fact it is a slippery slope. The 21 feet of the neighbor is not the new norm, it's not what the Commission is dealing with. 30 feet is 30 feet.There is no practical difficulty to go inside that,which is the issue Erickson was bringing up,because how do you potentially split it out to give them the safety,the practical difficulty of turning around, and not fall down the slippery slope of now saying the new norm is 21 or 18 feet, etc. He is definitely for the safety concerns if that means the Commission has to do something they otherwise wouldn't do. He'd like to try to split the variance out to allow the applicants the safety measure of trying to have the hardcover without actually eating into that 30-foot setback requirement. Ressler stated he does not know that there is enough practical difficulty for encroaching on the setback. He noted they just had a very long deliberation over another application with the same premise; if there's not enough of a justification, it's difficult. The real estate terminology he thinks of is "functional obsolescence," where you have a difficulty of a property that affects the value. An unjust enrichment, where hopefully there is probably a financial concession for that obsolescence,generates the difficulty for use and, unfortunately,that is affecting the applicants. Structure is something that the Planning Commission takes seriously and is very difficult to overcome. His personal feedback is they cannot try to redesign an application on the fly. He recommended the Commissioners vote based on the application in front of them with feedback on perhaps something that would be agreeable. He is not sure how he feels Page 14 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. about the hardcover structure lakeward from the building of the house. It's difficult that it was in existence prior to taking possession, it is meaningful to know, so he is not wanting to weigh in on that. He is willing to consider,in lieu of added structure, a parking pad next to the house,where it doesn't add structure but the hardcover gives an additional place for parking and turnaround. That might give the applicants a better ability to park safely without adding structure and further encroaching upon the road,and eliminates the need for a rear setback variance. He noted it is adding hardcover so it is not a slam dunk, and maybe removal of the deck or dock and the riprap that the Commission generally frowns upon might be one of the concessions that would be agreed upon in that application. He noted that is not what is in front of the Commission.He is not in support of adding additional structure. It makes sense,but the Commission does not grant variances based on what makes sense. Erickson moved,McCutcheon seconded,to approve the hardcover variance as submitted by Staff recommendation to enhance safety so that both neighbors can gain safe access to the busy road. Part of that variance would require the removal of the illegal hardcover near the lake. Ressler asked Erickson if the motion was for a partial approval of the application. Erickson clarified that he is voting in favor of the part of the application which the Staff is recommending for approval, and his motion does not say anything about that portion which recommends denial. Ressler asked Erickson if his motion includes allowing the structure,the dock or deck over the riprap lakeward,which was shaded in pink on the map being displayed, and the walkway that goes up to it. Erickson stated that was part of his motion. He is following Staff recommendation to require removal of that material,as it is illegally placed. He stated that would be an appropriate condition of the hardcover variance for the other portion of the property. He is not saying anything about the garage addition. He is leaving that door open for further discussion of a second motion. Ressler stated he is not in favor of supporting the motion because that is not the application but more Staffs feedback. His position is that instead of redesigning what is approvable,the Commission provides the feedback of denial based on the current application. That would allow the applicant to go forward to the City Council and perhaps they could amend their application by that point. He pointed out there is a motion and a second and asked if there was any further discussion. Erickson stated at the end of the Planning Staff report it said, "Planning Staff recommends denial of the setback variance for the garage addition. However, Staff recommends approval of the hardcover variance to permit 504 square feet of hardcover for new driveway and parking pad conditioned upon the removal of the unpermitted deck and flat paver walkway at the lake and the walkway converted to be a non- hardcover surface."He said he believes his motion parallels the Staff recommendation as far as that portion which Staff recommends approval of, and it leaves the door open for further discussion on the other part which the Planning Staff recommends denial of. Ressler asked Barnhart to weigh in on the issue,noting his understanding is that is not the application in front of the Commission, it is more the feedback of what would be agreeable to Staff and perhaps the City. He asked Barnhart to clarify Staffs recommendation. Page 15 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Barnhart said he thought it was appropriate to break up the application as proposed. They can respond to the hardcover variance in terms of the increase and also respond to the building addition. He had no issue with what has been done so far. Ressler asked if the Staff feedback included that the hardcover would be where the proposed addition is, or is it just where the proposed drive is along with removal of the unpermitted hardcover. He asked both Barnhart and Erickson to clarify. Barnhart said he would defer the hardcover location question to Curtis. Curtis stated the Staff recommendation for the hardcover would basically be what they have proposed for the driveway and garage but no building. They could park next to the existing garage or store something next to the existing garage on a paved surface but not have a building there. Ressler,referring to a drawing, asked if the proposed addition would be replaced from structure to proposed drive as an extension for that same platting. Curtis said if that configuration works for the applicants. She reiterated Staff has not reached back out to them but that is Staffs recommendation,to allow for an additional drive and parking area in conjunction with removal of the illegal hardcover. Ressler noted they would probably have to turn it back to the applicant to comment on that. He asked Staff to clarify that if the applicants would like to continue on with their application as applied as well, that it doesn't impact their agreement. Curtis said she believed the Commission could make a recommendation and the applicant can continue on to the City Council with their request as-is and with the Commission's recommendation. The City Council can vet the rest of it themselves. Ressler clarified that it was whether one,both,or none were approved. Curtis agreed with Ressler. She stated she thinks the Commissioners'comments and recommendations are important. Ressler stated he would agree that it would be reasonable to add as a hardcover where the proposed addition is, as he mentioned in his previous comments. He asked Erickson to clarify if that was what he was proposing as well. Erickson said that Ressler was correct. He noted his motion is intended to mirror what Curtis described as the Staff recommendation. Ressler asked if McCutcheon's second remained. McCutcheon stated when Erickson first said he was in line with Staff recommendations,that is what he was thinking,too. Libby stated he agrees with McCutcheon and Erickson and the motion seemed to mirror Staff's recommendation. Page 16 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Mr. Louwerse said the process is new to him, but if he is going to have a driveway where it says "proposed driveway," as well as proposed addition,which is going to be the same width, it's going to be just as close to the road as an addition would be. To him, an addition would look better and more professional, not to mention just getting that much more functionality out of it. It seems odd to him that they can build a driveway that is"X"amount of feet away from the county road but yet can't have a wall that's "X" amount of feet to the county road. Ressler indicated the applicant would be surprised at how many rules and regulations the Commission has to adhere to. It would probably have to be another time as far as getting into the why's, but generally, structure is harder to pass than hardcover. McCutcheon pointed out the matter goes to the City Council next and the Council can ignore everything the Commission has to say and make their own determination,which the Council has done in the past. Ressler told the applicants the Planning Commission is looking to approve a portion of their application and it goes to the City Council. The applicants can move forward with just what the Commission has approved, or they can move forward on the entire application as it stands if that is all right with them. Mr. Louwerse said that works for him. Roll Call Vote: Ayes 7(Libby,Erickson,McCutcheon,Bollis,Kirchner, Gettman,Ressler),Nays 0. Ressler asked Staff for clarification as to whether part of the motion was to deny the rest of the application. Curtis stated she would defer to Barnhart but she heard the Staff recommendation even though the word "deny" was not used. Barnhart said since he heard the motion as an approval of the hardcover,he would recommend a motion to deny structure setback variance. Erickson moved,Libby seconded, to deny the setback variance for the structure portion of Application No. LA20-000029 Michael Louwerse,4731 North Shore Drive. Roll call vote: Ayes 6 (Libby,Erickson,McCutcheon,Kirchner,Gettman,Ressler),Nays 1 (Bollis). 5. LA20-000030 SAMBATEK ON BEHALF OF YMCA OF GREATER TWIN CITIES, 135 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD NORTH,PRELIMINARY PLAT,8:17 P.M.-9:02 P.M. John Quinlivan, o/b/o Gordon James Construction, was present. Staff presented a summary of packet information. There were no questions for Staff. Mr.John Quinlivan,Gordan James,Inc. said the plan is straightforward and pretty much what they brought in the sketch plan review;the two issues that were brought up then are the two issues that will be Page 17 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. discussed today. He stated they could make the small triangle on Orono Orchard Road a small outlot if needed and put a monument there to come into compliance. Ressler asked Mr. Quinlivan if he could be available for follow-up questions,which was agreed to. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 8:26 p.m. Mr.Mark Sponsler, 169 Meadow Lane,said their property backs up to the creek and the current driveway that will become Outlot A.He noted the driveway runs adjacent to Long Lake Creek, and they are concerned about the impact of having a hard-surface road 6-10 feet away from the creek. He asked if the existing house on the property is included in the four lots that are being proposed to build. Mr. Quinlivan said their engineer will be required to take drainage to holding ponds so it would not impact the creek. That will be done in compliance with the Watershed District and feedback from their engineer.The existing house is included as part of the four lots. The house would either stay or the people that bought the lot would take it down. Mr. Sponsler stated they have lived adjacent to the property for 25 years. It is one of the few remaining wildlife/natural areas in western Hennepin County and Orono.They see 8-10 deer on the property any afternoon year-round. He asked the Commissioners to give some consideration as to whether every last square foot of land in Hennepin County/Long Lane/Orono will be built out. He stated that it is a sentimental observation as someone who has looked at the property for 25 years. He asked the Commission to respectfully consider what they have offered as their point of view. Jamie Lowe, 105 Orono Orchard Road,said he lives in the house that directly borders Lot 1. Part of their house faces Orono Orchard Road and the back side of the house mirrors the YMCA lot. Their house is wedged into that space. His concern is they have not heard any word from the developer.They will be significantly impacted by this development, and he understands it will be developed,but he wanted it noted there has been zero communication. He said as he read through the packet prepared by Staff, it was ambiguous around the details. For example, Barnhart noted it is a beautiful plot of land with significant conservation design supporting the property. He stated the north side of his house sort of backs into the new road on the corner. He asked Barnhart to identify on the site plan the area he was speaking about, which Barnhart complied with, and then asked how that space would be addressed.After asking if anyone had walked the property, Bollis raised his hand. Mr. Lowe stated there is lots of vegetation.He asked exactly what that will look like and how that will impact his home. He also asked what the detailed landscape budget is, because often there are cost overruns and the budget can be diminished,and he wants to ensure that does not happen. He also asked the applicant if he was building spec homes or if the land will be sold and then homes are built. He would like to know exactly where the home on Lot 1 will be positioned,noting it looks like it would be behind the carriage house that was built 6-7 years ago. He wanted to know how many trees and how much dirt will be removed and what the height of the homes in Lot 1 and 2 will be. He appreciates it is a sketch plan,but it seems appropriate that detailed questions are answered and specifics provided. Mr. Quinlivan said all of the houses will be custom built. The house locations as shown on the lots are placeholders and are dependent if they build a rambler or a two-story, 90-degree angle garage vs. a front- loading garage.As they build,they will have to be in compliance with the ordinances for setbacks. He imagines the people moving into the lots,due to the cost,are going to want as much screening as the Page 18 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. homeowners on the Orono Orchard Road side will want so there is privacy for both properties. They will do landscape plans per lot as they do design-builds on each lot. Kelly Lowe, 105 Orono Orchard Road, said she would like to reiterate that considering they had a relationship with Mr. Quinlivan and he built the three-car garage/carriage house they have, she is incredibly disappointed that she found out about the four lots by pulling up the agenda today. She knows Barnhart is probably sick to death of her and her husband checking in with him every month to see what is going on behind them. She knows they have been a thorn in his side,but there should be proactive communication to who will be the most visible neighbor. She is heartsick that after 16 years, she is not going to see the beautiful Orono Preserve behind them. She has concerns about the amount of hardcover on the road so close to the creek. She is not smart enough to understand,when Mr. Quinlivan says something about wells/drainage, what it means. She is not a builder; she does not pretend to be one. She wants to make sure the hardcover does not impact the creek or any drainage to their property. When Mr. Quinlivan says"placeholder,"right behind their house may be the most buildable spot,and she is concerned about the value of their home. She reminded everyone that first they had a motorcycle shack and they poured over$1.2 million into their property and continue to do landscaping and keep it as lovely as they can based on their budget. They will lose significant value if they get somebody dropped into their backyard and would be disappointed. She asked when the conversation happens about where all of the cars park, because she does not want to see a row of construction/service vehicles lined up in front of her beautiful trees. There is a lot of land for people to park who are doing the work, and she wants to make sure it is done in the right way. She stated the septic person was out and mentioned to her husband that septic placement is going to be quite difficult based on the water. She may be saying it wrong, but there is water about 12 feet down in a lot of areas so it is a fairly wet space, and she wants to make sure those things are being looked at as the lot divisions and placement decisions are made. She wanted the safety of the Watershed District,the beauty/pristinity of the area, and the deer taken into consideration. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 8:41 p.m. Ressler said the public comments made good points. This is a preliminary plat,but it is still subject to conditions that are afforded and required by the City, including Engineering and Planning comments. That has to do with screening and replacing in-kind trees that get removed. As much as everyone likes to see things remain rural, improvements for a buildable lot or what could be a buildable lot have to be given the ability to be made. Barnhart stated public comment raised good points. Before the project can be final, septic reports are required for each of the lots,which is the research the septic designer did to identify the prospective sites. The City has not gotten that report. It is a lot of technical writing that does not interest most people but is something the City looks at. Staff expects the report soon,before the City Council reviews it. If the Planning Commission would like to see it,the action could be tabled until then.As far as stormwater management and how it relates to the creek and new road,the City Engineers are reviewing that. The City does not normally give final approval as part of a permanent plan at this stage,but Staff has not really gotten anything from the Watershed District. He again noted the Commission could table the action if they wanted to see the Watershed District's response. Staff is moving things along because they anticipate what they are going to say,but the Planning Commission has the ability to see the response. The City is not necessarily proposing screening for this property, as it is adjacent to other parcels,because the land use types are the same: rural residential to rural residential.The City does not usually require screening in those situations. There are some trees along the new road that are to be planted, and usually there is some sort of entrance feature expected. They have not seen anything yet,and if the Commission wants to see Page 19 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. that,the matter could be tabled. Currently Staff does not know the house location or design that will be constructed;that is not something that is known at the time of a plat frame. Staff has an idea and the applicant has provided schematics of what they are envisioning and marketing the property for,but ultimately it will be designed by the end-user,which is not abnormal for Orono. Staff can say definitively that waivers and variances from the setbacks have not been asked for.The properties themselves provide adequate space for a home of the character Staff would expect. He can say with confidence that the home would be consistent with the zoning district standards for each lot. Staff tries to manage construction traffic and construction activity during a project like this. It is somewhat hampered because there is about a 50-foot space that this property touches Orono Orchard Road and they know where the traffic will come from,but they will manage traffic as best they can internal to the site with the exception, perhaps, of when they are pouring the asphalt for the road. He restated that if the Planning Commission would like to see the final stormwater management plan,the final landscaping plan,and septic reports,they do not need to act on the application.The applicant is expecting the Commission to do so and the expectation is it would carry forward to the City Council, but the Commission has the right and ability to wait for that information if they so desire. Bollis said that when he looks at the plan, it is very consistent with the sketch plan. He noted there is one less lot and felt that would impact the neighborhood less. He would like to see the triangle on Lot 1 be turned into an outlot so Lot 1 can be conforming,because he thinks it is important when the ability is there,which he feels is the case. He agreed with Staff that the other issues are typically approved in these types of developments,where it is a technical piece on where the property line is measured from,which happens all the time on pie-shaped lots. In general, it looks very good and he would be voting for this. McCutcheon said he generally agrees with Bollis. After looking at the contours,he felt it might be a good idea to look at the septic report,because it is pretty flat and swampy. Looking at the contours,there is raw acreage and buildable, and the numbers are pretty close together.He asked if the area is relatively flat, because as he drove by,the trees blocked a lot of the view and he did not go into it. Barnhart stated it is a unique property and it gets that way by having the undulation. The outside of the property is dominated by wetland,and that establishes the low area. The middle of the property rises up and the current house is situated on top of the hill, and that is where one building site will be. As the road slopes up to meet the existing home is where the other homes will be. The property undulates and provides some character,and part of the benefit of doing by-design homes for each of the lots is you don't lose the character by masquerading and creating housepads. He thinks the applicant is striving to fit a home that fits with each given lot rather than make the lot fit with a proposed home. McCutcheon said you can tell by looking at the plat that a lot of care and thought has been put into it.He is glad the number of houses was reduced by one. Without looking at each individual lot and the septic tank and drain field, it is hard to understand.As Barnhart said,the Planning Commission has to go forward assuming everything will be approved; if it doesn't for whatever reason, it could be re-evaluated. Libby stated,while listening to the Lowes' comments,he can be sensitive from both sides of the fence because historically and currently he is involved in land development and new construction building but has also been an ombudsman for his neighborhood,where the intensity of new construction both as in-fill and development has almost been deafening. He suggested to the Lowes that they develop as much dialogue/conversation with the developer as they can because it is a very constructive way to keep themselves informed about the progress.He looks at what came back to the Planning Commission, and he is pleased at not seeing so much crowding and not seeing what developers often do,which is to squeeze Page 20 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. out another lot,because it is about land development and making money with the dirt available. Builders don't have anything to build on unless they have dirt,and developers play a key role in bringing housing to market. He thinks it is a very much improved plan from the first time. He deals with subsurface treatments and the engineers that design it, and it is pretty remarkable what they can do with subsurface treatment. The use of tanking and pumping is closely regulated by the State,just like all the other elements of the conservation district,DNR, etc. There are so many eyes,ears, and scrutiny in a development that it takes a long time to put it together to a point where, all of a sudden, construction traffic shows up and the contractors/subcontractors are there in large numbers. You don't build 5-10,000 square foot houses in a couple of months; it takes quite a while to do that. It is an adjustment for neighbors, and what better way than to know the developer and builders, have a dialogue with them so they are respectful about their private property rights and quiet enjoyment.He stated he would tend to favor the sketch plan, because he is very hands-on about how long it takes to move a project along and the builders/developers are very seasonally timed. The amount of progress one can make in moving something forward is going to be predicated on how short the season is. Holes can be dug and concrete poured well into October and November. The sketch plan is greatly improved from the first time,and he would be in favor of approving it as a sketch plan. Barnhart pointed out it is a preliminary plat and not a sketch plan. Libby stated he stands corrected. Erickson said his view of the plan mirrors Bollis'. It could be improved slightly with a small outlot in the corner of the one lot. He was reasonably comfortable with the five-lot plan and now it is less dense with the four-lot plan. Kirchner noted he was not a member of the Planning Commission when it was presented the first time. Referencing the preliminary plat map,he indicated in the top left portion where the road comes in off of Orono Orchard Road is a black circle,and he asked if the triangle is what could become an outlot. Barnhart stated Kirchner was correct. Kirchner said if the ability is there to make Lot 1 conforming,he would like to see that occur by making that triangle an outlot and making Lot 1 wider where it needs to be.With the exception of that,he thinks it is a good plan and the Commission should continue to rely on Staff to review and follow through on things that may be over the Commissioners' heads in technical terms as far as the sewage, septic tanks and drainage fields, and how they apply to the land. Ressler noted that it was good feedback. His opinion lies in agreement with the Staff recommendation and making it subject to the conditions, including Engineering and Planning comments. He said it does not appear that the Planning Commission is voting to approve any substandard lots;he would not be onboard with approving any substandard lots.The Commission does not need to create any more problems,but they need to allow people to develop property that they own. He thinks it is prudent to recommend approval subject to conditions that include Engineering and Planning comments,but he does not think it is necessary to table the matter until they can see it because he does not know of a circumstance based on the feedback that is going to change his opinion. His opinion is going to rely upon the experts to provide the insight on whether or not it is sufficient. Gettman stated he had nothing to add to the comments the other Commissioners made. Page 21 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Kirchner moved,Bollis seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. LA20-000030 Sambatek on behalf of YMCA of Greater Twin Cities, 135 Orono Orchard Road North, preliminary plat,subject to conditions including Engineering and Planning comments,remaining in place for the continuation of the project.Roll Call Vote: Ayes 7(Libby,Erickson, McCutcheon, Bollis,Kirchner, Gettman,Ressler),Nays 0. 6. LA19-000031 DALE GUSTAFSON,2927 CASCO POINT ROAD,VARIANCES, 9:02 P.M.-9:34 P.M. Dale Gustafson,Applicant,and Don Adams, Property Owner,were present. Staff presented a summary of packet information. Ressler asked, in lieu of the applicant not asking for a side yard setback for relocating the building that is in the lake yard setback currently, does Staff still recommend denial even though they have the ability to rebuild where it stands currently in-kind. Oakden stated they are currently allowed to rebuild in-kind as it sits today. Moving the building in any way would be a new encroachment, as it creates new massing and volume where currently no building is permitted within the lake yard and average lakeshore. Even though the applicant is willing to move it over to meet the side yard setback,they will need variances for the lake yard and average lakeshore,and Staff would not support moving the structure. Ressler clarified that the reason Staff recommends denial even though they can rebuild as it currently sits is because anytime there is a relocation,it is no longer in-kind even though it is alike. Oakden said Ressler was correct,that it is no longer in-kind when you move the location of it. Mr. Don Adams,2927 Casco Point Road, said their goal is to provide stairs down to the lake in a safe manner. The north side of the lot has a very severe pitch,and by putting it to the south side,they are trying their best to put it in an area that has the least amount of pitch. Their other concern is the steepness of the shoreline and making sure the shoreline does not collapse.There is very little root system: one bush and one major tree are holding up the shoreline.Their goal is to use the stairs as support for the shoreline to make sure there is not a slide.They have one of the steepest shorelines on the point. He understands a house in the area had a major collapse of their shoreline a couple years ago, so he is concerned. He is hopeful,through the stairline and bushes they are planting,that will be avoided.He noted where the stairline comes down it goes into the shed,which is the reason he has proposed moving the shed.Another goal is to remove and eliminate hardcover;the whole shoreline is hardcover in addition to the steppers in the shed area. Their goal is to also build non-visible stairs; with the bushes that will be planted,no one will see the stairs. Libby asked Mr.Adams to describe the condition of the existing shed near the water. Mr.Adams stated the inside is not very nice. He thought it was used for a pump for the sprinkler system. The wood inside has water damage to it. He does not know if the former owner rebuilt the outside and kept the structure inside,but it is not a very appealing area to store anything because of the wood quality. His hope is to build something more conforming to the style of their house. He noted the picture shows it Page 22 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. currently has a dome roof and looks more like a planetarium than a shed. They would like to upgrade that in addition to the beauty of their shoreline. Libby asked Mr.Adams whether building something like-kind but in better condition and conforming with the architectural design of the house is not satisfactory to him. Mr. Adams said he was not sure he understood Libby's question. Libby asked Mr.Adams if his needs would not be satisfied if he was able to rebuild at the exact position but something that would be more architecturally conducive to the style of his house and in a fit-and- finish condition that would work well for storage, etc. Mr.Adams said it would be adequate but the position of the shed is right at the base of his stairs. His hope is, since there is already existing hardcover on the north side of the land,that he can move it and have a better flow and not be in the way of the stairs. Libby noted, as guided by Staff recommendations,the Planning Commission is dealing with two different things. Erickson stated he understands there is no building generally permitted in the lakeshore setback. He has a vague recollection of some kind of a provision for a storage box next to a dock or something similar if it is closely related to a dock. Oakden said the City still allows something like that; it is very minimal and has a small footprint. There is a height restriction as well.It is meant to be low-level so as to not block sight lines. It is a chest-box size for life jackets and water-oriented youth type of things. Erickson asked whether that would be within the City's ordinance if the applicant proposed something along those lines. Oakden agreed that if the applicant was proposing something like that, it would be a permit. Currently it is a whole building. They permit a storage chest, not a building. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 9:21 p.m. There were no public comments relating to this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 9:21 p.m. Kirchner said he struggles with relocating the shed. His understanding is the current shed is grandfathered in, and the City has a strong history of remaining true to leaving grandfathered structures and allowing them to be built like-kind in their location. He does not see an issue with relocating the stairs. He appreciates that there has been a lot of thought about how natural landscaping can be used to reinforce the soil conditions and slope and grade of the property while keeping it natural in appearance. He would vote to deny relocating the shed because he does not believe it is in accordance with the history of what has been approved/allowed in the past and within the City's ordinances. Gettman stated Kirchner explained it very well and he had no further comments. Page 23 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Erickson said Staff has done a good job of reporting the facts.He supports the variance for the retaining wall with conditions as mentioned in the Staff report. McCutcheon commented the Planning Commission always denies these things,but at Camp Teko there was an incident where they wanted to update a storage shed and the Commission thought they would let it go because kids were trying to lift up gear from the lake and it would make it easier for them, and the City Council denied it. He said it is impossible to get any structure moved within the lake setback. Knowing the history, it is what it is.The existing staircase is closer to the north and the applicant said that was steep, but he may have to re-evaluate the plan if he wants to keep the shed. His opinion is in line with the rest of the Commissioners. Bollis stated he is in line with Staff and had no additional comments. Ressler said he recalled the application McCutcheon referenced. He stated if someone feels a certain way, their feedback could be given and to not be discouraged. He said this is one of the few circumstances where he is a little more open-minded. If they are not further worsening their position from the setback, not further raising the height from the current roof to the proposed structure,and not further increasing the massing of the current structure,he is okay with it being relocated to the side setback, especially since the Commission has letters of encouragement from neighbors. He said the topography puts it on a bluff which has less of an impact, if any, for sight lines to the lakeshore. He would be opposed if they were trying to relocate it within the side setback requirements,but he is in favor of it as long as it does not further encroach toward the lake,does not increase massing by height or square footage, and is not within any sort of side setback variance requirement. Erickson said this situation could also lend itself to the same type of approach that the Planning Commission had earlier,perhaps having two motions based on the Staff report which is supportive of one set of variances and denial on another type of variance. He suggested doing a split to give a clear message to the City Council. Ressler asked if Erickson wanted to make a motion on Application No. LA19-000031 based upon the Staff recommendation which included all of the language. Erickson moved to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000031 Dale Gustafson,2927 Casco Point Road,variances,based upon Staff recommendations for the proposed retaining walls and steps,with conditions as stated. Erickson suggested somebody may want to make a second motion regarding the Commissioners' opinion as far as the old structure being moved,etc. Ressler asked Staff if the applicant should be asked if they would like the Planning Commission to split the application into two different parts or if they would like a vote on the application at hand. Oakden stated the applicant could be asked.However, it is the Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council, and if they follow Staff's recommendation in the Memo, it can be done with one motion. If the Planning Commission chooses to go in a different direction, Staff would probably ask for clearer verbiage. Page 24 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Ressler noted it would be cleaner and there would not have to be two separate motions. Erickson said if the motion is split,there might be different results. Hypothetically,there might be unanimous approval for the retaining wall and some kind of a split vote as far as the shed. He suggested using two motions to reflect that rather than having a split vote on the whole thing. Libby seconded.Roll Call Vote: Ayes 7(Libby,Erickson,McCutcheon,Bollis,Gettman,Kirchner, Ressler),Nays 0. Kirchner moved, Gettman seconded,to deny Application No. LA19-000031 Dale Gustafson,2927 Casco Point Road,for the side yard average lakeshore and lake yard setback for the relocated shed. Roll Call Vote: Ayes 6(Gettman,Kirchner,Bollis,McCutcheon,Erickson,Libby),Nays 1 (Ressler). OTHER BUSINESS 7. LA20-000027 BOB ERICKSON,365 WESTLAKE STREET, SKETCH PLAN,9:34 P.M.- 10:08 P.M. Bob Erickson, Property Owner, was present. Ressler noted that since Commissioner Bob Erickson was an applicant, he would be treated as such and muted when he was not doing his application. He assumed Erickson would abstain from voting due to conflict of interest. Erickson agreed with Ressler and said he understood the sketch plan would not call for a vote but seeks feedback and comments. Staff presented a summary of packet information. She noted Staff is looking for feedback and comments from the Planning Commission. McCutcheon said he thinks the City of Orono would benefit more from the cul-de-sac, but the access to the lake is kind of swampy. He asked if there was any history of how the public uses the access, if at all. Oakden stated it is identified in the Comp Plan as a pedestrian access.The City Engineer commented that, prior to vacation,the Park Commission should be consulted for how the lake access is used or potentially could be used,as that is part of the Park's chapter of the Comp Plan. Though not currently improved for recreation, it could be used in the future for winter access or for provisions of a small fishing dock and other action items that way. Libby said he visited the property and also read the narrative. He noticed there are somewhat interesting drainage accoutrements.There is some stormwater drainage that runs parallel to the right-of-way. It is odd because some are, in parts, subsurface, and then they become surface drainage and go directly into the lake. Historically,that has not been a popular method of stormwater drainage for the DNR and other conservation entities. He noted it would be interesting to see how the Park Commission would look at it. It sounds like, from the DNR's opinion, it would better serve not being there, draining off surface effluents and out into the lake. He asked Staff if there were any elevations or depths of the portion that would be part of the right-of-way that would be considered to be lakeshore. Page 25 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Oakden stated she did not have an idea of the depths. Referring to the survey,she said they did call out the 929, which is the ordinary high water. She did not have the actual depth of the lake but displayed an image submitted by Mr. Erickson which showed it is relatively shallow due to the vegetation shown. Libby said he agreed with Oakden and that is how he perceived it.He has owned property similar to this; with the vegetation that is there, it is pretty swampy. If you could float a kayak or canoe in there,you would be lucky. Oakden said it does go north of the road. Libby indicated that is where it is the most shallow and thought Staff had some numbers on the depths. Since currently there is a fairly high watermark for the season,he thought it might not be more than two feet at the most. Oakden commented that she is not sure of the depth of the lake at that location. Robert Erickson, 365 Westlake Street,said his goal is to combine the land at 365 Westlake Street with the south 127 feet or so of Westlake Street while dedicating land for a new cul-de-sac. He believes this could be accomplished by the approval of a single lot replat resulting from a Class 3 subdivision. The new cul- de-sac would be centered at the same point that was used in 1999 when he received a lot line rearrangement on the east side of Westlake Street for his house at 372 and another lot at 364. At that time the City agreed to a 40-foot radius on the east side of the street.The new additional cul-de-sac area shows a 50-foot radius. The new portion will be big enough to provide on-street parking. Since the area is larger than the amount dedicated,the new 1.16-acre lot will be slightly less nonconforming in the two-acre zone. In addition, he is offering to pay a$100,000 park dedication fee and remove 2,286 square feet of pavement hardcover from the south end of the street; 59%of this hardcover is within the 75-foot setback area.The reduction in hardcover close to the lake will reduce the amount and rate of stormwater runoff and reduce the amounts of unburned hydrocarbons, salt, and sediment entering the lake. The existing "lake access" does not actually provide any access to the lake because the lakeshore has been completely overgrown with aquatic vegetation for a number of years. It is never used because it is not possible to do so. He said two separate portions of the east-west alley on the east side of Westlake were vacated years ago,the most recent in the 1990s. Almost every house on the street has their own lakeshore,so neighbors would not have a use for public access even if it was usable. Easements can be provided for drainage and sanitary sewer maintenance. At the same time,having a dead-end street of substandard width with no cul- de-sac causes frequent problems for delivery trucks,garbage haulers,and lawn services. Fortunately, there have not been any fires or medical emergencies,because Westlake Street is not prepared for them. These problems intensify when anyone parks in the street,which is barely wide enough for two-way traffic. He noted the City maintains a fishing dock at the south end of Stubbs Bay Road which is also used for launching canoes and kayaks. In the winter it is used by snowmobilers and cross-country skiers who also use the nearby Luce Line Trail and improved parking area for Bederwood Park. These existing recreational facilities are within walking distance of Westlake Street. Also on Stubbs Bay is the Eastlake Street access,which adjoins a larger neighborhood of homes without lakeshore. With an underused lake access, it would probably see more use if it were improved. The DNR lake access facility is two miles away on Maxwell Bay with boat ramps, fishing docks, and toilet facilities. It is perhaps the most complete access on Lake Minnetonka. The Hennepin County boat ramp and trailer parking on North Arm is nearby as well. He said he would be glad to answer any questions. Page 26 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. McCutcheon said he lives close to the area and thinks when he looked at the area it was the first time,he has been down that road. He cannot imagine there is a lot of activity. He asked Mr. Erickson if he talked to any of the neighbors and got their opinion. Mr. Erickson said he talked to several of his neighbors, although not all of them. A neighbor he has not talked to is at the extreme north end of the street; he is the only neighbor that does not have his own lakeshore or dock rights. He said at one time the neighbor had an access easement across the lot from where his house was built and that was the only place he could put the house. When Mr. Erickson tried to buy the land, it created a title problem, so between the seller and himself as the buyer,they contributed $25,000 and bought out the easement. Everybody else on that street owns their own lakeshore. Every other parcel on Westlake Street is less than two acres. The house he had was a lot line rearrangement, approved by the City Council in 1999, and has 1.2 acres in a two-acre zone. The lot next to it,which he sold and has a house now, is 1.4 acres. Both lots are relatively generous compared to many of the other lots, including one north of that which is .6 or .7 of an acre. If the variance is approved at 1.19 acres, that's just above average for Westlake Street and would follow the precedent that was set in 1999. McCutcheon agreed that one lot is more preferable than three. Mr. Erickson said when he bought the property it had three houses on it. He removed two of them the past summer, and his proposal is to create one new lot for one new house. When he received approval in 1999 for the two lots,there were four residential units on the property. He removed two rental cabins and two older houses,and now they have been replaced with two relatively new houses. Libby noted Staff mentioned the cul-de-sac would aid in the service of some of the facilities,but he wanted to mention there is a lift station in the northwest corner where the cul-de-sac would come and curve into the west. Since that needs maintenance from the City,the cul-de-sac would serve a highest and best use,because the City maintenance vehicles that service the lift stations are fairly substantial in size and it would be much easier for a City maintenance vehicle to turn around with a cul-de-sac and then back out again, so he sees the practical aspects of it. When looking at old plats and seeing 50-foot lots, putting the lots together to make an actual real lot is the highest and best use in the area. He likes the change and thinks it makes sense. Oakden noted she was displaying an infrastructure map showing the lift station in yellow and the green line indicating sanitary sewer. Ressler told Mr. Erickson that he would be muted while the Planning Commission had their discussion. McCutcheon said right now the water dumps into the lake, so building the cul-de-sac and keeping the hardcover away from the lake helps the lake. He said if you look at the area, it makes sense. There is not a big public use of it,probably because of the vegetation, although it may be used in the wintertime. If the public has comments,the Commission can go from there. Bollis stated he agrees with McCutcheon's comments;the cul-de-sac is a public benefit. He can see the lake access is a benefit for the public,but he does not feel it is being utilized and would take some major infrastructure to make it something the public could utilize, based on vegetation growth and where it sits. He does not see any issue with the lots being combined into one large lot. Without a public hearing,he does not know what the public interest is in the access point. Page 27 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Ressler said one of things he heard from Staff was the Commission would need DNR feedback as far as vacating the access. There would probably need to be a contingency. Libby stated the idea of removing the hard surface blacktop is a benefit, because he was there after heavy rainfall. It is a narrow thoroughfare, and if it were salted or traffic were coming in and out of the extension beyond the cul-de-sac, it is inevitable that effluents and surface contamination will run straight into Lake Minnetonka. He felt everyone was in favor of minimizing or eliminating that. The offer to remediate the blacktop and take it out is commensurate to somebody who is willing to put their money where their mouth is. He is in favor of the proposal as a sketch plan. Gettman said he had nothing further to add. Kirchner noted he drove by the area and,having an SUV,understands the interest in having a cul-de-sac in the location, because it took him a while to get turned around once he had driven down the street past driveways. He agreed with the previous comments that it seems to be a public benefit to have a cul-de-sac to allow for vehicles turning around. Although there is lake access/a public right-of-way,unless someone lived there or were making a delivery,he did not know how someone would end up on that street. He does not think it attracts people and does not think he would have ever been on the street except for the agenda item. He is supportive of the sketch plan, and they can continue to follow through on the DNR side of things as well as seek public feedback. Ressler said DNR feedback is going to be a pivoting factor for him, among other things. There are a lot of these types of things scattered around the City. There are rules in favor of granting situations like this, and there have been times the City has approved and times the City has denied. He noted it is hard to make heads or tails as to what the citizens' opinions are. In one case the citizens were staunchly opposed because they alleged they used the public access. In this case it is not developed for access and he did not know if it would even be considered access in the winter because of the wetlands, etc.,in the area. He suggested there could be use of the access by the neighbors if it was made available to them like it is right now. He reiterated DNR feedback would be important because the area could not be used for access without changing stuff and getting approval.There is a total of five other accesses on the bay,with one of them just down the street.He is trying to gauge what the City Council's opinions are. The Commissioners represent the City's citizens in that if there is usage for it,that's one thing; if there is also a potential future need for emergency vehicles,that's another; if there's maintenance on it,that's a third. If the first two are not happening, it is a burden for the City more than anything else. He said it would be prudent to ask for DNR feedback,but it generally makes sense to him based on the points noted. Libby added the Park Commission would need to also give feedback. Mr. Erickson commented that when the lot line got rearranged in 1999,the City Council voted to forbid motorized traffic south of the cul-de-sac. In one other lake access situation that was on the agenda for a bit,there were a number of snowmobilers in the neighborhood who wanted to use it; however, not only is that not possible with this access because of vegetation,but snowmobilers have already been banned. 8. UPDATE ON APRIL 27,2020 COUNCIL MEETING Barnhart noted he left his notes in his office so he could not provide an update but would do so at the next meeting. Page 28 of 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,May 18,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. ADJOURNMENT Libby moved,Gettman seconded,to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 10:09 p.m.VOTE: Ayes 7(Libby,Erickson,McCutcheon,Bollis, Gettman,Kirchner,Ressler),Nays 0. ATTEST: Jon Ressler, Chair Page 29 of 29 Date Application Received: 05/20/2020 Date Application Considered as Complete:05/26/2020 "/ LOO 60-Day Review Period Extension Expires: 07/25/2020 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief, City Administrator ,c G• From: Melanie Curtis, Planner I'Y1GG `�kESHG4� Date: 15 June 2020 Subject: #LA120-000037,Tim Hanson, 2645 Casco Point Road Variances/Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting lot width, lot area, and hardcover variances in order to redevelop the property. Staff Recommendation: The Planning Commission should determine if the hardcover variance is supported by practical difficulty and make a recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the lot area and lot width variances. Background The applicant is requesting variances in order to construct a new home on a property with substandard area and width.Additionally requested is a hardcover variance to permit 27% hardcover where 25% is permitted. 942.1 f F 5 J .A\ 9 3 > 63 i.■i� .__,t/951.1 // .. 33. _} (,� 94A9x J JP 'N.40 9504 .....11 4, 941.E $4' x919.2 / x!(9E 930.E / t.,N 947.0 5'ti ` '3. 0'i 4.0 / M' ry. 950.9 / ! 934.7 5P 6 n 1 ^ ` ,4+..v. 91.. aj` :.B°, aen�® o, +a / 1 `, 6 �. i" 411 4:%%/4 c'' P' 3>�a� c a 6,, ,,, 6 irlSkr oy / __.„a..a 942 0.7 i60 30 6 R- 411 9503 3 ; ,,..G»n R9426 ..3 'Cl ,1 F,7,' Ob y / ��� 9'''4^ ,rails _ �,.4 = ry rails 944.1 ,_. c 9., 1 40 Na.2649 --� 95035-.__ l / F� ,,,,, \� Practical Difficulties Analysis Applicant Submittal Information:The applicant has stated that the variance is necessary to allow the driveway configuration 'straight out from the garage'. Additionally,they have provided supporting documentation regarding Practical Difficulties attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Planning Staff Practical Difficulty Analysis: The City has adopted ordinances over the past few years to address inadequacies in the small, FILE#LA20-000037 15 June 2020 Page 2 of 5 and/or narrow existing properties, and disproportionate distribution of lot area within the 75- foot setback for hardcover on Tier 1 lots. The applicant has designed a house that fits within the required (adjusted)setbacks, and has moved the home back 6-feet further from the lake than the average lakeshore setback requires to limit the driveway but still exceeds the hardcover. In this neighborhood, Staff finds practical difficulties inherent to the size and shape of the lot affecting the property which justify the variances allowing development and redevelopment. While the applicant has not fully demonstrated standards necessary to support the hardcover variance they have made site plan decisions to limit or offset their impact. The plans could be modified to conform in hardcover. For example,the driveway could be tapered to 8 feet in width as it nears the road to limit the hardcover. The ability to pull straight into the garage off of the road is a convenience, rather than a hardship. The proposed home development on this property is at a scale which is consistent with the neighborhood. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-350-Setbacks: LR-1C Required Proposed Rear/Street 30' 30.5' East Side* 7.5' 7.5' West Side* 7.5' 7.5' Lakeshore 75' 97' Average Lakeshore The average lakeshore setback will be met. * 78-350(b)(1)Side yard setback. For lots that are non-conforming as to their width, the interior side yard setback for the principal building... shall be the lessor of ten feet or equal to ten percent of the lot width as defined. However, in no case shall the side yard setback be less than 7.5 feet. Section 78-350-Lot Area/Width: LR-1C Lot Area Lot Width Required 21,780 s.f. (0.5 acres) 100' Actual 11,488 s.f. (0.26 acre) 60' @ 75'/60' @ OHWL Section 78-1403-Structural Building Coverage: Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 11,488 s.f. (0.26 acre) Allowed: 2,297 s.f. (20%) Proposed: 2,269 s.f. (19.7%) Section 78-1700-Hardcover Calculations: Stormwater Overlay District Total Area in Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Zone Tier 2,872 s.f. 3,136 s.f. Tier 1 11,488 s.f. (25%) (27%) 0 w/in 75' FILE#LA20-000037 15 June 2020 Page 3 of 5 Applicable Regulations: Lot Area and Lot Width Variances (Section 78-350) Zoning Code Section 78-72 provides options for the redevelopment of lots which do not meet the minimum area or width requirements for the respective zoning district. Substandard properties within the Shoreland Overlay District, like the subject lot, are able to be redeveloped without variances if specific standards are met; such as: 1. All setback requirements can be met; 2. A Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, can be installed or the lot is connected to a public sewer;and 3. The impervious surface coverage meets all hardcover location and square footage restrictions of this chapter and the total square footage of hardcover does not exceed 25 percent of the entire lot area. 4. All other zoning district standards can be met. The applicant's request for a hardcover variance results in the property's inability to conform to all of the standards above.Therefore, lot area and lot width variances are also required in order to redevelop the property.The ability to develop the property consistent with other existing developed properties in the neighborhood would be limited if the area and width variances are not granted. Hardcover Variance (Section 78-1700) The applicant is proposing 27%total site hardcover(3,136 square feet)where 25% is permitted; 264 square feet greater than the limit. The driveway width at the road is a pre-existing condition.The proposed hardcover level is the result of the 26-foot wide (3 stall)garage door, and the applicant's use of the existing driveway width.The applicant has proposed reduction in the curb cut to reduce the hardcover 950.9 although within the road ROW. ssP#; " - • • /Zr The house has been moved away from the lake in an attempt to limit 9� ° ° � 3 ey,a.k I RRo m the additional hardcover. Keeping the same garage door width, and a„ O meeting the City's driveway dimensional minimums,the driveway ��iiiiiax9 .3 3® 9 0� 1 0 could be reduced by±50 square feet by tapering as it joins with the ' 30 property line/roadway(see Staff sketch).This would still result in a ' 's ti, hardcover variance for±26.8% and appears to be functional. a 3 c 9507 Qo S 95'.3 u Governing Regulation:Variance (Section 78-123) .0 In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the FILE#LA20-000037 15 June 2020 Page 4 of 5 affected person's land is located.The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.357 Subd. 6(2)variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The proposed variances are in harmony with the purpose of the Ordinance.The substandard lot have difficulties in its small size and depth, and proximity to the lake to permit redevelopment.The house is set back approximately 6 feet further from the lake than is required by the average lakeshore setback, protecting views of the lake for adjacent properties and limiting driveway hardcover. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The number and type of variances proposed to develop this nonconforming lot of record are consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; the request to permit construction of the home on the substandard lot is reasonable. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The substandard size is an existing condition and there is no available land with which to make the property conforming. There should be consideration for variance approvals from the lot width and area requirements. The house has been moved away from the lake in an attempt to limit the additional hardcover; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variances are requested in order to permit construction of a home,which is reasonable. Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn.Stat. §216C.06,subd. 2,when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78.This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is not applicable, as a residential home is an allowed use in the LR-1C District. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling.This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.The property's substandard size creates difficulties which also apply to many of the properties in the same neighborhood.The proposed hardcover level is not out of character. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located.The property's substandard size creates difficulties which also apply to many of the properties in the same neighborhood. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Granting lot area and lot width variances are necessary for the preservation of the property right of the applicant.The FILE#LA20-000037 15 June 2020 Page 5of5 hardcover variance is requested to support the proposed home on the property which is in a conforming location. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the variances for hardcover, lot width and lot area in this unique situation is not contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty.The variances for lot area,lot width are necessary, and do not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant.The proposed hardcover is a convenience. The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Public Comments No public comments have been submitted to date. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation The Planning Commission should determine if the hardcover variance is supported by practical difficulty and make a recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the lot area and lot width variances. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Existing& Proposed Survey/Site Plan Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit E. Hardcover Calculations (Staff Edit) Exhibit F. Aerial &Street View Photos Exhibit G. Property Owners List Exhibit H. Plat Map Land Use Application Summary Application Date: 05/20/2020 Address: 2645 Casco Point RD Orono, MN 55391 Parcel Number: 2011723240030 Land Use Number: LA20-000037 Application Submitted By: Property Owner Owner: Name: Tim Hanson Address: 1270 Arbor St Wayzata, MN 55391 Applicant: Name: Tim Hanson Company: Address: 1270 Arbor St Wayzata, MN 55391 carrietim14@gmail.com Contact Information: Associated Contact: Carrie Noble-O'keefe tim.hanson@catalystmutuals.com Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Project Description: New Home build/Variance Land Use Application Type: Amendmend Application !--� Appeal of Admin Decision Li Concept Application (i Conditional Use Permit —1 Site Plan Application Subdivision Application --1 Subdivision Exception -1 Vacation Application Li Variance Application Applicant Signature: PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM LA20-000037 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Chapter. Response: The owners purpose of the land will be their permanent residence and intentions to stay within the city ordinances and zoning to protect the property and surrounding property. The requested variance will be to extend the driveway straight out from the garage. This variance is proposing an extension of hardcover in the driveway in order to be able to pull into their garage. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. Response: Because of the size and width of the lot, structural to hardcover ordinances, setback restrictions, and location of neighbor's houses are all factors. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Response: The home design and amount of structure variance requested will be in line and will not alter the essential character of the locality, the request is based on keeping the houses in line with the newer homes that have been recently build 30 ft. from the street and 75 foot from the lake with with 7.5 ft from the neighbors on either side. The structure to be built being slightly less than the required 20% structural limit. 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter. Response: N/A 5. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 1163.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter. Response: N/A 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not allowed under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. Response: To the best of our knowledge this variance does not apply to "a variance that is not allowed under this property in the zone where the affected persons land is located". 7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Response: N/A 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. Response: NA 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. Response: N/A 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Response: Yes, By extending the driveway (hardcover) will allow the owners to be able to utilize their driveway and pull straight into their garage. Adding the permeable pavers and the current apron will add value with a proper drainage and being able to pull cars into their garage and driveway rather than keeping them on the road. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. Response: The proposed variances will not impair any of the listed concerns contrary to the intent of the zoning code. Hopefully this will improve the safety and moral value of the neighborhood with respect to not having a vehicle parked outside driveway during the night time hours. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Response: Yes-The granting of such variance will alleviate demonstrable difficulty of not being able to pull into the driveway straight off of the road. • Denotes Found Iron Monument O Denotes Iron Monument Structural Hardcover=2,269/11,488=19.75% Proposed Hardcover Lot Area l 1,485 sq ft EI Denotes Wood Hub Set for excavation only x 93o e Rear Porch/ l 72 sq ft _ Denotes Existing Contours // /' Deck �i Denotes Proposed Contours i i Budding 2,048 sq ft 000,0 Denotes Existing Elevation ' 1 Pront Porch 49 sq ft �ioo.o� Denotes Proposed Elevation tiF411/ • RetalnmgWallsl8 sq ft Denotes Surface Drainage �- 93/.6 Drvveway 809 5q ft Basis for X / ���°!,! Tota/ 3,095 s ft bearin sis �r�� /' iG�F�/,' Percentage 26.95% assumed Benchmark:Nail in Northerly face of power pole OIL 9 `' / near the most easterly lot corner /� / x935.A Elevation=951.82 feet(NGVD 1929) i,-, 9" • , //0 .� vu 9.2 951.7 954.4/ Proposed First Floor <I , %Iill / 0 952.3 Proposed Top of FoundationLake Min �;netonka ,� 9• .Q3 No. 2635 GF 952.0 Proposed Garage Floor l/' j • 942.l 952.0 • 0 0p 7 _ X 943.6 Proposed Basement Floor //' /.5' , /i/de 0 S .0 Pergola Type of Building ,//4<° / Ai m`)f 6??4'70 )t. I--5/.7 Fullbasement Walkout 929,4 Ordnary • High Water Line /%/u ,1,' // M° F S ti / // 4- .,(o 1, '942./ -97 948 ��' / q '7-0/0",' 933.3 1�/c - r 0, • I s /ill.' / 'Border X /` pip 948.3 1f �'95/.l' v3 Lot Area to0HW=11,485sgn // a`./A ti x". -----.----•-\„,,,..../I/ // /� 9351.3 p 948r �. \'`/ // '910.3 , ,(00 x • - y ?X v..` / NOTE The only easements shown are from plats of // X �°/,' m A -r.� 950.4 record or information provided by<tent i// - k)// /q . Op /94/ x , I •A SBC `Xry' 94&2. l Legal Description // / b / '4 x549. 0 6 ;/ i 107, 950./ / //1°f)j '/ 0 �4- ,� 947 0 •N-S.ep' X / r '333/ °eq� p •5� 4 Lot 139,SPRING PARK iii i / m c 7q7^ ..... ° / / Hennepin County,Minnesota //,/ 30,47/. / /` a � 9509 // -1 934.7 1 = 7^ ^'+ ? x l Benchmark j�/9:0.2 • / 0 . o - „to, 4i 0 S• / l / sg, rop0 0) ikAs / - R@ Se P89'8," A r p eq6�i0 • Pole D E M //�- R C x 94/ , proposed 0 m X V//)) QnC ../',/,..3°.3 . 3p ,Ibo. LAN760173rd ARvenEe North 6 ENGINEERING653 x938.5 935.4 �� y wa// 'Q 'Oo f�f Opr<005 jro ,,,,.f.,: !7-0k, Portion of Minneapolis,Minnesota 55428 Demardnacom S g.. - 3 0 •� P/ rot?)m ~ , 3S.o aJ' AC' Road to be Property Zoned Lakeshore 0 935.4 6j 714,947 'BW94 ® removed Project No. 88975 Scale:1"=20' (One Family Lakeshore Residential-12 Acre) 4,70„ BW 943.0 b stoop 72b^ p� Overhead F.B.NO. 1112-33 Drawn By 9. A4,es. x942. F 760 946 St ,,,:3' Wres Address:2645 Casco Point Road Setbacks / 0 B'30 3 a, sT �� x950.3 3 o catch Bas,n Front-30 944.1�„ �' - I�� �C/ m 9i°.7° Orono,MN Side-7.5 944.5 946.7 948 O z 48.I c �' '50 \ rev 5-22-20 lake setback OHWL-Average of adjacent lots 942.6 --- --X948-1-9 7 9-94�-45,5 / 3p 4'3 so.7 0� x • /1 5-20-20 pervious paver walk and setback line X34c . ^' 93' A' 61, `CururTurs (�rrtifirttir944.4 0 p1' X949.• ` �\50.4Q95a7 I certify that this survey,gen,or report was prepared by me or under my Proposed Site Plan Survey For: 9527 ee 95/.3 Xdirect supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under thelaws of the State of Minnesota. xSurveyed this 21st day of May 2020. kro No. 2049 95°.3 . _TIM HANSON x944.6 GP' 953.1 // 0' Property located in Section •�.. n 20,Township 117,Range 23, -52.9 North of corner / /CJ Hennepin County,Minnesota / / LP.Found am Signed �,elaw / Gregory Prase.,Minn.Reg.No.24992 / 3 F:\surveylspring park-hennepin\139101 Surveying-88975101 CAD\01 Source\01 Survey Base.dwg • Denotes Found Iron Monument O Denotes Iron Monument I] Denotes Wood Hub Set for excavation only // x 930.8, 1,, " , // bearings is 4r/ 1 ryur/ /, / assumed Benchmark:Nail in Northerly face of power pole /It �I ,�.e I I �// / 935. near the most easterly lot corner // I / / /c , I Elevation=951.82 feet(NGVD 1929) ,, '�9 I / , / 1,4 l0 i I 9,e eu 92 2 . 95/.7 Lake Minnetonka /ttbP 9 , 3 // c / / ~ i No. 2635 6F /I / / / I - �l 952.0 i III -:1.5/ MP / l I i / l I I Pergola II / / / l / •.5 . I I c i .0 I, , / / �M / 26� ' °51.7 929.4 Ordinary // / I q,, / ne J 1 I / Mg!,Water Line 1/ d I / / I b l / 00/ m k 61 948. '` li/ Lmber 933. /co / O / 942./ „ 1 , v /I l Borger x I / / / OP / I 11 943.3x( ,951./ s,3 / Lot Area=11,485 sq ft // / /,P�/ 93.j 3 / p� 94&9 -----------------------,‘"// /I 9/0.3 / /o�>e x , I 0 X / NOTE The only easements shown are from plats of /// / 4)/' / / 94 j/1 950.4 / record or information provided by diem. It / ,�/,rl//y I / x / Sel. �/ x 9• / Legal Description 1/ O.6 / 1'/ / / // -' �\ x9" 950.1 /�`/ - / 33.3Y i / / � X SBC �� 4' / Lot 139,SPRING PARK /IO''' � .o / Hennepin County,Minnesota //'/ 30� / // / / / s �i x950.9 / 11 /' / ot. x934. I / / / 0/ o4 / Benchmark // 9:02 1 \ I / / y • / 9P / DEMnRC m • Power I i / 94l/i / 946.9 / 7 O Pole x / h LANG SURVEYING B ENGINEERING 938.5 x,9Or / x / / / °j /nu.nba. 7601 73rd Avenue North (763)560-3093 x 7 935.4/ ' Minneapolis,Minnesota 55428 Demarclnc.com / / Property Zoned LR-1C x9/5.4 // /;96jo, / >es / Overhead Project No. 88975 Scale:1"=20' (One Family Lakeshore Residential-12 Acre / / / '07. 'rr' / �O tyres F.B.No. 1112-33 Drawn By 9. .1.4........ / x 42"' / 160 �\> ; 950.3 00' 3 catch Basin Setbacks / / / •2g 8g x .m=950.70 Address:2645 Casco Point Road Front-30 / 944.l\--. 948.0 ,'94 . U Orono,MN Side-10 / 944.5 -46.7 x ....j ^ 'et, rev OHWL-Average of adjacent lots 'x942.6 --- 40' .4 .9- '/ -43.5 78S .30 I :So.7 n y 2348. -,-,-,7a. '49.252,•-- ryN uruPgurs (�rrtifirttiP :49.4 = 3 944.4 �j49.0 n6 950.7 I certify that this survey,flan,or report was prepared by me or under my Existing Conditions Survey For: 952.7 ��'� 95/.3 x direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the x laws of the State of Minnesota. o Surveyed this 7th day of May 2020. "'o No. 2649 _ X250.3 (J TIM HANSON x 944.6 6F 9 (l) 953.1 4) / (,'11 I Property located in Section `\f / V / 20,Township 117,Range 23, /52.9 II Hennepin County,Minnesota / I / Signed _-��___ 1 Grego.Pra.h,Minn.Reg.No.24992 I, / .• F:lsurvey\spring park-hennepin\1 39101 Surveying-88975/01 CAD\01 Source\01 Survey Base.dwg r �d sn tlSOSSAINDt 'ONOtIO � -1,-our iz.,c --4-- QYO2I J.NIOd OOSYII 9P9 6 g:4 N�JIS30 R�JNINNYId III rei� bso a a1 >; �I- I - HONHaISH21 adaa IO/NOSMVH ii hs 'i' Et -p,;d ttrfig Z E r VP m / I` ,,,. f a.,.f br 10,f a.+ 1 W9oiolg U A-. 1 1 [ W« oio = I te : } t.z.--I pem 1 I -c E m L •1• i<� .I d�° 1 Ips, 1 WWI ■ 1 1•I ---- F u�' -7#.1. l --= , r/J ' I•I lI=_:- u�■� 1� oZFcIgt g ciahillZ1;.;I• 1 I p'"•:%•';•••!':::!: r.:•.:•.:•.:•.:•.: x K 11 pz p=_ } blr i i ■I_■ ,,-,1,-„t : li I �i.a■:1 I — 1 S' :�: 1.0141 ! BEI IP Al ■�■ I•a;'ilk�' in [� I 1 a �;0ii1'� I�1 wil 2 „0 . ,=1. 111 1 . �: Qy_ 1.4_lii�i II.1_ e 9 p 1 ,./:;L ,. .: ;•; I : 1 a/ -- ,. ... ..... v® =®= ,VI :: lili _ Atiati.m..:..:..1.:. .....,:-..:.•:.-0 i :!=-= laWay u Mill 110m NbIS30 R vNINNVId �a"°�"�"`uai�;: n ; 'd•d•a 1-- -���,----� HONaQISa2I HARRNO/NOSNVH all i3 PiN1 --r I g 5 i • p py 1• =Sli1 5i S I ^ !'•k� tl3 C5 Y 1.1 6 El lR 2 1 _4 01 ; .= 5 41 ; ibri 1 - w11 t iii 1 ire 1 l� ie e1 P lid ' Fi Wi u_ 5@ ill§ ill 1 hllPP5iy$yl a i1 €1 ' it Ila `I 'IP 141 1 'Y Z 1Y q � 22 -.� Y Ygg¢ �I!:i,alii"lig illi1I Pll li !E02 /OMI Olin" !Hi' itli w` IP iiiii 11 11 1 1� i @ 11111 �itl iili l'.fie i ! iil er a Z'€�=a axo W 5 &' do retggio 'DWI; iigIi I L r i --p (cam---- tji--s 0 r 1 .) , ik I 91-: 1 a 4 E---I r f M__._- ==--_ d 1 e �. IIS f Ni'IN 0E3 Y _I 1 11 1 g _ j; V� 11„11 i „m.,�.m....m., �„�,�...my. ......................_.. vsossxxn� oxoao ..”"' '"gym. ....o..,,..o� �r 7,Nce t� avox Iuoa oosvo sysz a a.a NiJIS30 4 JNINNVIdc"°rn�o�:"i "" i •d•d•a ...,a.�.,„.....* aaismaiSa2I HaHDI0/NOSNvH S7,1 a3 I�im 40 n- , RAE'. 49 1 r t! 11 4�9 1; ki1 .PJi oI111 1 mg C) i till a #1 li III !P =iii tl °I51 ' li 1 �g'li 1g 31. igii PI 1 gyp! -11510118 €M � 5 Z.,--. Z2 o aas az.;m_ -1-'-52E-;`,.' W 0 3 - u i;L:.- ti-.,?, Qre o -� ''o 11;12 +.0 y 9 0 ,. hn .M hs i 1. F i I� V gl; a 9� *ail 3 1 iii awn roma al I , 'lb _1 I log i 0 r,1 r ..,. -.' [ _ ,r----% Lilt' g (--4 , ,. ._!.___. , i____-/ - , — . I dhM ) 1 Mr /q. O J , L fit-.1no ,.m ,.. - IR /I.m .J. .,a,<., ,..,=-1111;X:1, VIOSsxn>� •0x0110 ,,XO+SZCzn.a ^.Wi ... Ma J.NIoa ODSY3 092 ` 22,2__,p .. .N91S30 V NINNVId �;nn�ziuwa aaisai adaaxo/NosNvH a ai s3!3I •d•j•Q ,-,----.,,,,,..=. E N Z R 615 9 @ 2 1 1 ib1 ¢ 1 5 1 ;qJH CL a5 IN Nan i 11 R o f i 1 411 a = ESI 11 i; iIPI ili 1 0EtZil v- 6a6 rose Y € $'giP. a '-e1a� lNI °aio E Q$ a a —GL>io;x2; wraaa3§ a9yo tiiq 'r-o9:▪11N�A ? i F m,=="# --- a \ Si 1 j1 II----I j i El - t -r: / 1 j Ya f! ,`v� "I' 0 �- ..-M .w \ 2�K - ..M� M C ll / ,ji --1---...- „,....!,......... \ -- _ �,:IO Y } R � �L © it tY s 3 J` — ,, A2- » x .W 3 }� ..m_ 0 F prz . 1Z-:::„ .M _ �,_ 'no 5 k g/g \ ae e e� _z • a. \�� } \ ) ` © HONHU SMI ]Iaa o/NoSNVH |] i §!` \ ■ kr,,,,,„,9 a !�i-I I�� N§ §[ gli ;iliii. . , a�. . t–\ ■ �, �.¥ ri a22&!!4 ,!1 .,, 2221e §#! || % | | \- � | ) ' § | 2 \ yTl | - ; | § : . / l'/ 3 .k d \ _ �■ r t _ __ \\ j - _ cc1111. ill - / \ o ! �� � � i.!. � � i ( I —1 �. h _ _ M C��i --- . 11 4 VLOS NIN '0140110 ,O roVroA V L .d• " avox SKIM oosdo Q ez gr.N`JIS30 R`JNINNtlId �o an aaroLz m dd0 GIII� ���, b�^^ Ma �3��I0/1�i0S1�i�H A 13 PiCI 0 N i 3 WWC Z 2 WW N illg • Y m -Q33 = _E W€ _cfY Q g r a n mEY N` w?7,aa;§ ~ Ct;rm8�WmYc - En m,C u r 7,2.'s —_ 1. I 0 to z 7 $ O , ir fi V I lS7 . ./ , ;I F J F j Ili tS)` s a o_ 1 0 11 � � ~ i___V" \ // 411 =L lc11Ut:VVCI idII►UIdLIVII VVUIR,IICCL �1� Property Address: 2645 Casco Point Road F`''k7SHoa`` Prepared by: Date: Demarc Land Surveying & Engineering 5-22-2020 Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Step 2: PROPOSED HARDCOVER In the following table, identify all items of proposed hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to site plan or survey (must accompany this form). Include all existing hardcover items that are intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion. Key to Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Total Survey (Square Feet) (Example) (Garage) (24'x 30') (720 S.F.) A Walkway irregular, see survey 140 S.F. B Rear Porch&Deck 9'6"x 18' +- 172 S.F. C Residence irregular, see survey 2,048 S.F. D Front Stoop 6'10"x 6'+- 49 S.F. E Retaining Walls 1'x18' 18 S.F. F Driveway 25 x 32'+- 809 S.F. G S.F. H S.F. S.F. J S.F. K S.F. L S.F. M S.F. N S.F. O S.F. P S.F. Q S.F. R S.F. S S.F. T S.F. U S.F. ✓ S.F. W S.F. y .F. only 100 sf can be S.F. Z excluded S.F. (1) Total Proposed Hardcover 3236 S.F. Excludable Hardcover(See City Code Sec 78-1684): Walkway built with pervious pavers 449 100 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. (2) Total Excludable Hardcover 3996 100 S.F. (3) Net Proposed Hardcover [Subtract line(2)from line(1)] 3096 3136 S.F. (4) Total Lot Area 11488 S.F. Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3)_(4)] 26.95 % 27.2% Edited by Planning Staff 06/09/2020 Last Updated: January 2020 Note: This is an information sheet only, every effort has been made to insure the accuracy of the information contained herein;however,if any information is not consistent with provisions of the City Code, the Code provisions will prevail. , .4. .„,.., .L ,. ..... „, . , . , - 4111011111!!IIII-:. ilittik. P4,,1c;,a :' .t dol A _ _ ' ,. . ': - 3„„t„,..44e. - fa..4 ... „„.. ,. . , .., _ .-,.,„ -0. .„........ . „. . . ,--, . ,- ....-.. ...,... ,,,, _ . . 4 . _ . a Afek.,„-- :, .,. . .. ......,..., ‘ ---___._ . ., . s.„..„„‘. .„i „..., „...„.._ ,_„... __,, #�r4rf s t'X_ .•,..., 1. - . ,, •„....„, .„,. .,.,, ,.. ... . _ __ 1,7 / Atk c Ln i ` ' O ` ,, in 0 •} C +rL. . ID te +, ' °3'.*.cr;� ,iii (' • 1. 4. : ''? 2 �� '. 3 ,Y fie i taSt x #}" p{ iii '{pc 71 ' l4. O :kirte•. iii ifd .` x 4 ¥ 1s p t � {: '� a£ • 4 : ..mac �MMf Sh a ...I.,,','..',1,tiSt.-,..-.1;:illiZ.lti.' ' <,. i 1 1 r" 4 t`,...,, ..--,'-i'-'; ' t i - '. ..;',;;Nrie#,Z7!.c!kiY''''''.:;:-',7;-,,,, ,':,-',.• ',. • . t -.1,, .",_.: i .: {t r y9ttie 3"if fi• V 1.i I i ta,,, _ ` a, • r .': - :!A:II.,,',' 1.::',41-111', ; i A tel' x _: t 41i:11 i 4' APS.. S 5 , . xt.,: Y €< A j S .11, f ly,t?t ji 2 '1.1,:t11[111,1:,'' }i t/- ;1Aay. r=3 g-' Y* A / . r�..: IS I -� / ..",-,,, ,i.":: ,,;('.,f?. .... '..i. ' 0, q O ..--,4 .,-...r.:,.',.=/ ' ., , .:,,!:i4,:i ..i.ij.,ire$:,: 1 S { I R57 '' { l ik hrt ,. ! � t VE �. t r, ',,::';,., ti m- R }11, i,,,,.,.1-,,,,,,,,s.,:-....,:k 4 , . '"' {j i i 4s� f RUN DATE:05/21/2020 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) PAGE:1 38 20-117-23 21 0030 38 20-117-23 23 0022 38 20-117-23 24 0035 E M NORDLIE&T V NORDLIE KARL S FREIENMUTH G L MARQUARDT/J M MARQUARDT 2545 DUNWOODY AVE 2659 CASCO POINT RD 2617 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ELIZABETH M NORDLIE KARL S FREIENMUTH GARY L&JOAN M MARQUARDT 3040 NORTHVIEW RD 2659 CASCO POINT RD 2617 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0031 38 20-117-23 24 0001 38 20-117-23 24 0036 M J RUSINKO&MARY L RUSINKO D L RUNKLE&L F RUNKLE BRUCE J HEDBLOM ET AL 2565 DUNWOODY AVE 2684 CASCO POINT RD 2601 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 MICHAEL J RUSINKO DAVID L RUNKLE BRUCE J HEDBLOM AND MARY L RUSINKO 2684 CASCO POINT RD CAROL J CLINE-HEDBLOM 2565 DUNWOODY AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 2601 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0032 38 20-117-23 24 0002 38 20-117-23 24 0038 WENDY W DANKEY TRUSTEE TODD M KIMMES MATTHEW G THORSON 2599 CASCO POINT RD 2660 CASCO POINT RD 2618 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 WENDY W DANKEY TODD M KIMMES MATTHEW G THORSON 2599 CASCO POINT RD 2660 CASCO PT RD 2618 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 210035 38 20-117-23 24 0003 38 20-117-23 24 0039 PD&P Z FITZGERALD D L RUNKLE&L F RUNKLE J W&B J ESSEN 2598 CASCO POINT RD 2684 CASCO POINT RD 2648 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 PATRICK FITZGERALD DAVID L RUNKLE JEFFREY&BARBARA ESSEN 2598 CASCO POINT RD 2684 CASCO POINT RD 2648 CASCO PT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0001 38 20-117-23 24 0004 38 20-117-23 24 0042 G ERICKSON/S ERICKSON TRUSTS D L RUNKLE&L F RUNKLE PAUL J&MARY E KASTER 2683 CASCO POINT RD 2686 CASCO POINT RD 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 00000 GERALD ERICKSON DAVID L RUNKLE PAUL J RASTER SANDRA ERICKSON 2684 CASCO POINT RD 2600 CASCO POINT RD PO BOX 584 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0002 38 20-117-23 24 0022 38 20-117-23 24 0043 ROBERT BREON/JULIE BRANDSMA D P BUESING&L R RUNNING PAUL J&MARY E RASTER 2691 CASCO POINT RD 2700 CASCO POINT RD 2600 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ROBERT E BREON DANIEL BUESING/LINDA RUNNING PAUL J&MARY E RASTER JULIE C BRANDSMA 2700 CASCO POINT RD 2600 CASCO POINT RD 2691 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0003 38 20-117-23 24 0029 38.20-117-23 24 0046 B SLOSS&K NGUYEN SLOSS DUSTIN KINDL&CASIE L KINDL MICHAEL D REVIER 2695 CASCO POINT RD 2649 CASCO POINT RD 2691 ETHEL AVE ORONO MN 55391 Returned ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 BRYANT SLOSS DUSTIN J KINDL MICHAEL D REVIER KIMLOAN NGUYEN SLOSS CASIE L KINDL 2691 ETHEL AVE 2695 CASCO POINT RD 2649 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 23 0004 38 20-117-23 24 0030 MARY C ENGER&MARK M ENGER TIM HANSON 2697 CASCO POINT RD 2645 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 MARY C ENGER&MARK M ENGER TIM HANSON 2875 GULF SHORE BLVD N 1270 ARBOR ST B-302 WAYZATA MN 55391 NAPLES FL 34103 38 20-117-23 23 0020 38 20-117-23 24 0031 ZHIHUA LIU&YING LIU PATRICIA REDMOND WEBBER 2677 CASCO POINT RD 2635 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ZHIHUA LIU&YING LIU PATRICIA REDMOND WEBBER 2677 CASCO POINT RD 15159 TECHNOLOGY DR. WAYZATA MN 55391 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 38 20-117-23 23 0021 38 20-117-23 24 0032 D D GUTERMUTH/L J GUTERMUTH T P KUBALAK&P M KUBALAK 2665 CASCO POINT RD 2623 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 DAVID D GUTERMUTH THOMAS&PATRICIA KUBALAK LYNN J GUTERMUTH 2623 CASCO POINT RD 2665 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 Hennepin Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map Date: 5/21/2020 r . ' z 2505 2540 :._�. 'ti ', st� '>,.- 2525 tf� e � a;,-4.1-161.„4-.0 2560 WI k �'� rr 1,;' ,, 2545 W1 2500 WI IV 4V*.144114.-P-1--7!:;:7;4 i,''e .:,,-,-41.-tr6,..1:"..,!'':iii h565 Caw) N 2500 ' eu 17'x' is x two- i .:sem L'Ss ilk2b° -"�Yks-.. ��� " � r _ � 3 r �; ua 26i7pet e. fi* 2623,pij x 2610psi INN 1111111 YY 2648 ON P., '; N l I 'ts"' / 2650 2865 -21 tj ';11.- ! g 2 677 n 2660 ? n t 11. 2683 p� p` , { t. _- f. 1 2604 60 , s4 27i5pL.., . Yy rr (uf.... 2696 2745 (El 2697.11 all ,,,,*:-..,....:352755 2710 ria. 2691 -VJ _, {� 2705 asp ra, ifs 2765 �i� 2750 2725 6 < ,� t 2773 nil Al‘'. I 051 0 2700 rim • ■ • •,0 �t 3806 2745 - 269 Buffer Size: 500 0 50 100 200 Feet Map Comments: I I I I I I I I I 2645 Casco Point Rd This data (i) s furnshed 'AS IS' with no rep esentationasto completeness or accuracy; (i)isfumshedwithnowarranty of any khd; and (ii) is notsuitable for legal,engineering or surveying purposes.HennepinCounty shal not be liable for any damage,injury or loss res lung from this data. For mare inf ormotion,co ntact Hennepi n County GIS Off ce 300 6th S treet So uth,M nn ea pd s,M N 55487/g i sinfo@hennep n.us Date Application Received:05/22/2020 Date Application Considered as Complete:05/22/2020 AZLOAt O 60-Day Review Period Expires: 07/21/2020 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Ay t, ts Dustin Rief, City Administrator G1 4kESHOO" From: Laura Oakden Planner Date: June 15, 2020 Subject: LA20-000039, Sherry and John Gorman, 3585 Frederick Street,Variance, Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a hardcover variance to allow for an addition to the home over an existing driveway. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. Background The applicants are proposing to build an addition to home for garage and storage space. The property is currently over in hardcover(33.84%). The applicant has designed the addition for most of the garage to be located over existing driveway. The applicant is also proposing to remove the current turn-around lowering the overall hardcover to (29.62%). The applicant is required a hardcover variance due to the change in nature of the hardcover from driveway to building and for a small new portion of hardcover on the property. Practical Difficulties Analysis Applicant Submittal Information:The applicant has identified the existing home and the substandard area and width as practical difficulties supporting the requested variance. Additionally,they have provided supporting documentation regarding Practical Difficulties attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Planning Staff Practical Difficulty Analysis: Regarding practical difficulty,Staff finds the applicant is working with the existing home on a substandard lot.The applicant is has works to place the addition over the existing hardcover and is proposing to remove excess driveway bringing the overall hardcover closer to conformance for the property. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-350-Setbacks:All Setbacks are met DISTRICT LR-1C Required Existing Home Proposed Addition Front 75 125' No Change Rear 30 99' 68' Side (N) 7.5 10.7' (No Change 19' Side (S) 7.5 9.9' No Change Average Lakeshore Met FILE#LA20-000039 June 15,2020 Page 2 of 4 Section 78-350 Lot Area/Width: DISTRICT LR-1C Lot Area Lot Width Required 21.780 s.f. (0.5 acres) 100' Actual 21,183 s.f. (0.48 acre) 49' @ 75'/ 19' @ OHWL Section 78-1403-Structural Building Coverage: Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 21,183 s.f. (0.48 acre) Allowed: 4,236.6 s.f. (20%) Proposed: 2,821 s.f. (13.3 %) Section 78-1680 and 78-1700-Hardcover Calculations: Stormwater Total Area Allowed Overlay District in Zone Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Tier 23 s.f. 5,295.75 s.f. 7,268 s.f. 6,375 s.f. 23 s.f. Tier 1 21,183 s.f. w/in (25%) (34.31%) 75, (29.62%) w/in 75' Applicable Regulations: Variance(78-1700) Hardcover shall not exceed 25%of the gross lot area. The current parcel is over the allowed limit. The applicant is proposing an addition over an existing driveway. A small portion of the addition will create a new footprint of hardcover for the property. The proposed project will also remove excess driveway lowering the overall hardcover level and bring the site closer to conformance with the city requirements. Governing Regulation:Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. §216C.06, subd. 2,when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.357 Subd. 6(2)variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The proposed variance is in harmony with the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The FILE#LA20-000039 June 15,2020 Page 3 of 4 goal of the ordinance is to reduce improvements and bring the property closer to the allowed regulations. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed project to remodel an existing home on a substandard lot and bring the lot closer to conformance with city regulations is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls;The request to permit an addition to the home on a substandard lot meeting all setback requirements and lowering the existing hardcover totals appears to be reasonable as the property's reduced size and existing improvements. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; the existing home and substandard lot are unique and not created by the property owner. and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance is requested in order to permit an addition to the home designed to fit the character of the neighborhood according to the submitted information. Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn.Stat. §216C.06,subd. 2,when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78.This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.This condition is not applicable, as single family home is an allowed use in the LR-1C District. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling.This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.The property's substandard width and area as well as the existing home create difficulties and are peculiar. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The applicant is working to keep the existing home which currently exceeds city hardcover requirements. The existing conditions are unique to this property and the proposed project would bring the overall hardcover for the property closer to conforming to the City regulations. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Granting the hardcover variance s necessary for the preservation of the property. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter Granting the requested variances in this unique situation is not contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The variance does not merely serve as FILE#LA20-000039 June 15,2020 Page 4 of 4 a convenience to the applicant. The variances are necessary as the property has practical difficulties affecting development. The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval of the requested hardcover variance List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Existing& Proposed Survey/Site Plan Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations/Hardcover Exhibit E. Narrative/Existing Pictures Exhibit F. Property Owners List and Map Letter View Land Use Application Summary plication Date: 05/22/2020 Address: 3585 Frederick Street Orono, MN 55391 Parcel Number: 2011723120025 Land Use Number: LA20-000039 Application Submitted By: Property Owner Owner: Name: JOHN T GORMAN Address: 3585 FREDERICK ST WAYZATA, MN 55391 Name: Sherry Gorman Applicant: Company: Address: 3585 Frederick Street Orono, Mn 55392 sgorman37@gmail.com Contact Information: Associated Contact: Sherry Gorman sgorman37@gmail.com Associated Contact: John Daly john@revisionmn.com Associated Contact: Kathryn Alexander kathryn@alexanderdesigngroup.com Associated Contact: Ken Faucher kfaucher@efnsurvey.com Project Description: 3-car garage/storage Land Use Application Type: Amendmend Application D Appeal of Admin Decision D Concept Application D Conditional Use Permit D Site Plan Application Subdivision Application 0 Subdivision Exception 0 Vacation Application 0 Variance Application 0 Applicant Signature: lkiliviV file:///C/Users/loakden/Downloads/Land%20Use%20Application%20Summary%20(6).htm[6/11/2020 8:15:29 AM] Letter View PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM LA20-000039 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Chapter. Response: We have lived in this home since purchasing it in December 2008. The house was built in the 60s, has a 2-car garage and a wrap around driveway. It is our intent to build a three car garage over a portion of the existing driveway and eliminate the balance of one of the two legs of the driveway. This results in a net reduction of hard cover on the lot. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. Response: The lot is a triangle. We realize now that the shape of the lot is going to be a hindrance to adhere to the proper hard cover specifications required by the city of Orono. We believe that if the lot were a normal rectangular shape we would not have a need to be applying for this variance. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Response: Contrary, the variance will allow us to not only overcome our currently hardship of lack of storage but will significantly enhance the curb appeal of the property. Both adjacent houses are multi-million homes. We believe that with the addition of the garage along with mindful landscaping, the curb appeal of our home will increase dramatically. 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter. Response: We rent a storage unit from Metro Storage in Mound for $200/month for a 10' X 15' unit. It is not a hardship to pay for this annually. John and I are getting older and it is becoming more difficult for us to load summer furniture and gear into a truck twice per year and take it to a rented storage unit in Mound. Your approval of this request would allow us to create necessary storage space and eliminate the need to rent a monthly storage space. 5. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 1163.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter. Response: N/A 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not allowed under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. Response: N/A 7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Response: N/A 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. Response: N/A file:///C/Users/loakden/Downloads/Practical%20Difficulties%20Documentation%20Form%20(2).htm[6/11/2020 8:15:30 AM] Letter View 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. sponse: N/A 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Response: Once again, John and I are getting older and it is becoming more difficult for us to load summer furniture and gear into a truck twice per year and take it to a rented storage unit in Mound. Your approval of this request would allow us to create necessary storage space and eliminate the need to rent a monthly storage space. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. Response: Correct 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Response: John and I are getting older and it is becoming more difficult for us to load summer furniture and gear into a truck twice per year and take it to a rented storage unit in Mound. Your approval of this request would allow us to create necessary storage space and eliminate the need to rent a monthly storage space. file:///C/Users/loakden/Downloads/Practical%20Difficulties%20Documentation%20Form%20(2).htm[6/11/2020 8:15:30 AM] _ ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY FOR: '� P. �RDPOST" JOHN T. GORMAN LOEFA. -me Mk ANEWR.Oa a N4PA+RE LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 0 20 40 60 Parc•'1. 1 = MINN ABNmcR r •Villa Carman.Hennepin County.Mlnnesdta. - yL�-;-1-- , SCALE IN FEET thaol t part o Lot tat B'«2 2,'xawrr:.Henn twnty.M'nnrota N'1 -, • FOUND 0050DE5ON MONUMENT IRON th�p'wing ererRM'nr mn lying wrbHY and.weh.HY of - v r` D RE-BAR 5E7!MARKED 9$ Commencing at the northeast comer o1 Lot 13.sem Rocr 2.Navarre",thence South 59 Mg..3`h 6' 33 rmnde w'..1.Nen9 the north Ins of Lob 13 an;1.A..ymetonce of 1E0.10 M b 1M1 H LICENSE N0. 6,MA Let,A ens Ne point o1 beginning r1.0 '` R r 3. -...__]-._�.d -- Minne01 tonka 3.5 minutes 3�hr won.„rt a N an .�»t m w'e m the N we. La. �.,-xw n an m n. ere tern 9 aD9 1�" ,r:J r 3' G N Aa ... R :. °� .G Na.,2 e �sus ;r'{. ,1 LAKE MINNETONKA �� =it. xrx°. \w ♦Aaan3 vas • M Aro URr- ,1,,!101.':, ::,--11.214,.Rmower yea w"rzR=POUR 0. 1 NOTES:mann a1 to.e« a'{ -F1R+ro:ora ram PARCEL 2- w"R•R nr1r\tAth'' ,1\t \nVO�°OG �� nnbond an m.Nm.p Carty °wenn° a Mho I _ 50138'00 E r 169.81 - r'., t Atll)xena�� .,.ben 4 g+•a1 Lrt.Minn.. '_".7II "� /.\/,� �/�//�/jam/i�/i�/i�/ }j T /1\ 1.1 \\` r Go 2 m•b coma Ordinary HI or m F .a(220.4 i, n n�.'Lp�N+:\4 :n 58922 J7'M'�� \1.\ \�.r'1::, can owl is t` Mt a aimn:ren n was I+ 1 22.92-C_ S ' m•.50 e u w. .r.bo e. ;!1.r ,'\%`Ir�r bra.ram �x •u` \ .s\N an the commitment`alanN.z "";�:t NHorne aa°��.r,°�w ma,w W ��- ® 1'f` `1t 4' ss'. u�" .\`1'3 --- ^u swP n�;:o.,°'��.neuron.c'`;m,""ci°a�r,'nNmm ]sBx,.naNn,a�Inc.:i,:ax ab Old (Rn I I` //� �5 EOERILM1S 1. tVs- �' - ;\��. 1.' 4. E`IMIng uNw<otl`.`en and underground u�End...tune Mown testimony,or locations I..olUn OY ewnwlY bCO 3 3Da 7:::.'".".' i'�s\\/\\j\�\ ,.,,l>/•.,,,,,,,b. \j/\\ \\ r,Fisting rm...m dNo.:o'�'Bous."oro'iw,to moray,e'°epkile.at`ms�.provided by ///.-% AN3 %�� ' /\//\ // / Bw a rwair.d.the anent a dooms ince..aawoen mar n•nr.rwr.lou /�i .,m2"' +4'/\ \\ \ \ 'e services) y w present and.•nnaatcn and{mat.o1 all alarms and...Nees Mould a oeiarla ....-:::,131:::.I.;5::', tt;;:gOf'• I/// //v moowtmn /\/\/j from u.am..a1 u.r.q.aH..°talo..prior m err°.mien.p'mny�g w N Y.,NN \ •dot•or the scow ml oar.mod. work building y@ 2 ? _•-s ding [ . �~ P' ✓ - -e, cone nuc w lf.g oae'lbne m the Is property.rec g A / n 'y}. T T".'').;. s•'/epi / e m.More nrefrencw toe crnmi «M MicnaN T.Wryer and NMI.L R..r,as pint \r ;1` 1... - Pp9 x � B v le h..fee ownership o1 Parcel 2 as re w!M or Certihcvb o1 Tito N.1322122 Bare on �hy1�9", .4'‘‘‘:.'r p1. ,-0,t ,. a1liwn4 Informal.pro..by CustomHame a,dye nnw.LLC 1.•un.b Cru Parcel z hos a..rr 1.111 C CO- ,N l� r,,,YM1e"J:ic .�y •j, ,,,,,„,;0,,,,,.,,, p�'✓ ia5wwd to.wen A.Cram:one Jern E. ram, as prat tmmtw r...need By cwtMcae of nu.No. 6. 8�!N P P 1 . Z9 -.y'1 --'0y w mite pc°nweerments bpr p 7p1�MaNF•location were token horn m rblin9 Egan.Reid 5 Nowak. J F'0{ _.,r5 �,plwa �; W. �vl.3p°-."GN' )• SURVEY ITEMS PER SCHEDULE B: \ 11131"' a+rJ `µms'rr /N77''�'°�p4i c0 `M 0\ COX 12 Term.wen con..,.N wane.wee.cowry a 2230.oe Doo mrt Nr.]051193.vane 11 I F •�yBr , �d J`�53i' ® z 3, Reba°!^,B In ae me slab al Mnn.ob F and to mal port.or me na.pr.mar rya. % - mer']° J;° B LN'"'tl, 11314 nen war env.N tae YMrwww I R t �, �\ CERTIFICATION' +� m6� � PROPOSED HARDCOVER DETAIL . / R _ \ t '`xfn • P..OPVER PEPPIER 2 0,42,VW rN.v_ •-_.1-_lbo3) th�fn cop Man,m iwir gi thneurun u`31e Trvet or JMn T.Gorman:custom Horns BuSdm 111 e, .N. 4 r / 1"=40 LLC m spook NotMtl 4. ae Company. /AN a «HI.2 thb mop r pmt dna the yummy an Mt.It Is band were mase n accordance Instal Reguirmrmb for ALTAM Lone n0e N . Jointly -ren \ ehed al.p.Standard.ALTA and NSPS.a includes lt•ms t,x,4.,t,13.aM to of TM,A ♦-} ` y • we .mple m r 30. . - -L - ani 2 3a.of Plat w Map October 30 2017. J V_ 1�v ��` M1 r f Hew mar to p /)_ CASCO;POINT ROAD •'‘".S. -Cr at.rg �r a�> ,erre.r.r ren ✓,.,- YlnnJiwta Um.N -�: d.22033 _1_ - _ •n n \, LEGEND con',...-", ..'''4•4,..).„'. v EXISTING HARDCOVER DETAIL ®w yiD' '' 61 0 ROOF AYAM= =n 1•-� 'ID' �PiR ® 550,ROM r 0 wr EXISTING HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS WITHIN 75 FEET T POST 7 xe. ®sre-- :'�� uu rd.SW/ v =PRE FEET D i ((�� ^^J �.,- „�"" \ PROPOSED HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS a 151151T5 rots a • S.. ^ f. EXISTING HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS22 RESEINCE•GARAGE Rw 11 2.024 q4 I J- + AP REs3EN¢!GARAGE zrr ok PAWNS VES R POP MOUSE OF MOUIV SQUARE ONE SE El 1305110911.11011 roR r ts MARE FEET A i ®^ /` r ,..r.4.7,7---7; 9k RNMNWS 3.w:E CF X111 4'Sa srvs m AWARE sen smx[ , SOUP.PEET O�= \\\ ..- ♦ c1..SM. ROC roe Aro POE OF xcvsr IP PROP lc OMR RA O =PPE FE, v a0naww as WOO �; k RAPS w mar a MwsE 3k Mur/IN LOOT tor.Rwp m CpROE srwmm ;5 SPAM(firr �ro°"Fmv3®c:a AO =DARE MET -5- SNOWY 5rIlER FCp E NO al SQUARE Fr, ;,r''''''''}��. MIA ,.,<MAR9,3.05 YIRO 5,5 40 SPARE FUT>a. .Eco FEL, wARJr NA+xv TA PRCPOSE0 � ren =DARE FE, ....... __ 1...tn3.ar 5T i bb 1 se i ®�M �� •'059 C mDEROENT CP AROrn T. sae r1.,SO �.r63 SPUME FEET 3.,r+wiAOr.,,iE,e a..L AR.�A>RLw3,TrFRR�3A HARMONY 4.,S. SPARE PEEI ^r!r Ra,ARE FEET A RRRFAa rw•rDar+ arty col r.2SE a/n. Ery - .0.,7.: ...AP .en RrOFMAROC..(WSSOIT./21.1.1 SO -ISMXMAROC. j � Leman. VICINITY MAP 1 NOM LANDSCAPED AREAS ARO RIPPAR SHORELINE NOT INCLUDED IN HARDCOVER CALCULATIONSTE:LNCcu3E3OARROroNREAS DRIPRAPSHORELINE RCUCUu^OUs A NOT TO SCALE NOT IFIELD BOOK PAGE FIELDWORK REVISIONS SURVEY FOR: PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2759 AR CIEF: NE. L..5_No. oArE aDESCRIPTIONeastth 1229 Tyler Street nes Sults 100 DRAWN BY:01 11/8/17 CNmgetl own.name cost a the w3 Not property. ALTA/N S P S Minneapolis.Minnesota 55473 DRAWING NAME: LS 021,/20/1)ADD PLAT BEARINGS/PLAT ANGLES/DISTANCES JOHN T. GORMAN 3585 FREDERICK STREET NIEFN PHONE:(612)466-3300 DRAWING ALTA ME: 05/19/20 500 HARDCOVER CALCULATIONS PER CLIENT REOUESI LAND TITLE SURVEY ORONO,MINNESOTA 55391 FAX:(612)466-3383 JOB NO.3)536 CHECKED Egan.Field&Nowak,Inc. W\oW.EFNSURVEY.COM INC FILE NO. 191 I JN . 1010 sur..32rs since 1272 mPVMMO 22i Y KDmlx3wAR SHEET 1 OF 1 - .' i §p 16E55 N-I OIJ7dl0 (C____)- 1111110Vittligla FPS1391131n31 "19>1JRJ343eki 999E Y� +omva3noora�°d ®LmLL.lV1iBlwurn.v___ aoM3dIS3�J �1NO�( C ." - 3 Mj314 1119dQNPI Zi _ I�IIEiI 9h1� gIllllllllll ' ° :lu:::lll9a 'UI ii 9 1 Hi I l+nnuuumim9�i VIII 11111le 11111111111 IR M I►I�III�I N , 3 1 high, a i '•0i1�► N . CD IIhO"is Q d mill Nib �,IIIIIIIIIII1'�Ipl pill I liaill'' 010 4 IEI IEI aIIIII e��uum Lei �1��In► i�i _ IIIA1111N inuu:mnnm alel 16i, .oil . 1 . . __= [1111111 Ei�i6 1111is 1 ! ill Aim.,, I,� IIIIIHIIIII 114 ® ��� II 1.1 E a II, � I III I�SII:011'h1:01�11sl1I1�9.II:_01�I ...mummy= w I �r .....EMU � U = _ IIIIIIIIII (IIIIIIIIIII '1 °+I III i Ill...( 1II111,,i`I1I��l1I'jj IIO�ll11,L.II[,II�I'� a 1 11110101111 I;�i Ilati �i�l�; itniiqI.aiP 1119,��ulEl�,,I hi ,,pi h ,, W ��C_f� 111111 i I 11 III_( il►h ; tom)I� , 111 1711111NA 11� ��I I��I I. II�;I ..+ue lai � n n n qr iI n n n Nie g it�kite Flak IEI:Id�itil�Be, II1vIei�Ellllwle�Il.lwlai�lll�L01�I�1 H I Ildli 1 i. e IIIIIIIIIIII1IhIll,' 111P111111F1i�ai9'► IE���9e,I,1In . . IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�Ih IIIIIIIIIIIII11111►►I ►ghi_ . I�I l" >uIIII�IIII li N II I :�� ,1 111111111111!1110 III -!la�lo'' to ,! HOHHUOH111� IY"11 141 IIIIIIIIIIII.1II`;.. hdllllllllllllllllllllll1 li N i �I�II_I_II_I� . N i illi II iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 1 i IIIIIIIIIIIIm E 1 yC 16E55 N-I.OIYO EN ]is q nrL a ai r 13S M.11,3,, "16)401243(132,61565E 3 mame 3ON3CI9 NV'L�O9 0_ IL IL n a ®II �1 u q1! & hi i _ ® Q) 1 um _ I limmile i1I ■■■N■m# ' 4a ; •/ it L-- j / / / 1 f '- �, �i 4 -- :�� y �..,. i II Ful iE w -•., ) 1 Ft ;, • N� Awa u`.lU // / ti YN V // =u / y / _ // 1 1' 1 q �, i - �,:t 16E55 N.!'ON C = a v.......-,....b.,......,46AB IA3N3d '19 E55 NW''ON ei0 1 U _ � m�m a 30N3QI932:I NVI-INOV '^ 1 i12 r--- I i- J , 1— I I L--- lr'jl9plO ; •+oot r• I,.a .I�� Wil El 1 II 181 L, _____mun n�!Igl6a; Vitatillitis .11111111'1111111151111:11111 � r�IE�IO� i�iiis us ��+iis' ��e I!1�i9�,II�i��9��pp11!i��B�,pp11!le�h; .�,,;� iii IIII /11il,finI lIf AINIfl1 �IIA�� Ilillilliiillill'ill 1! ��o1�,IIII � IIIIIIIIII i) I i� ice'' I W ® W ®� L I III�Oh�,SEI'11:01��,�EL.IIILII IL IIIIaII2 r. 0 ;I. 1II 03 ® N ���� ���� H iA m W 1 1 4! 1 1 .1! W )1, IIV � EI! '7 1 111 _qr. IE ,.._ash.. .,I'!�ii'r1�1 " Ong 11 1��1I.!Iu An City of Orono f�oN\ Hardcover Calculation Worksheet Property Address: 3585 Frederick Street, Orono, Minnesota `''kEs�{OF`` Prepared by: Egan, Field&Nowak, Inc. Date: May 20, 2020 Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Tier 1) Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Step 1: EXISTING HARDCOVER In the following table identify all items of existing hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to Certificate of Survey (survey must accompany this form). Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict existing hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion. Key to Total Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Survey (Square Feet) (Example) (Garage) (24'x 30') (720 S.F.) A RESIDENCE&ATTACHED GARAGE IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY_ 2,131 S.F. B BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY) 3,621 S.F. C PAVERS AROUND POOL&SIDE OF HOUSE IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY) 852 S.F. D PAVERS IN FRONT OF HOUSE IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY) 157 S.F. E SIDE STEPS IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY) 15 S.F. F SWIMMING POOL IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY) 391 S.F. G HOT TUB IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY) 61 S.F. H BACKYARD STEPS 11.1 x 3.6 40 S.F. S.F. S.F. K S.F. L S.F. M S.F. N S.F. O S.F. p S.F. Q S.F. R S.F. S S.F. T S.F. S.F. ✓ S.F. VV S.F. X S.F. y S.F. (1) Total Existing Hardcover 7,268 S.F. Excludable Hardcover,(See City Code Sec 78-1684): PAVERS 100 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. (2) Total Excludable Hardcover 100 S.F. (3) Net Existing Hardcover [Subtract line(2)from line(1)] 7,168 S.F. (4) Total Lot Area 21,183 S.F. Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3)_(4)] 33.84 (Proposed Hardcover next page) This is an information packet regarding Hardcover. Every effort has been made to insure the accuracy of the information contained herein; however,if any information is not consistent with provisions of the City Code,the Code provisions will prevail. Page 8 of 9 City of Orono Hardcover Calculation Worksheet Property Address: 3585 Frederick Street,Orono,Minnesota 1441sF{()p Prepared by: Date: Egan,Field&Nowak, Inc. May 20,2020 Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Clier I) Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Step 2: PROPOSED HARDCOVER In the following table, identify all items of proposed hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to Certificate of Survey (survey must accompany this form). Include all existing hardcover items that are intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion. Key to Total Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Survey (Square Feet) (Example) (Garage) (24`x 30') (720 S.F.) A RESIDENCE&ATTACHED GARAGE IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY) 2,131 S.F. B BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY) 2,038 S.F. C PAVERS AROUND POOL&SIDE OF HOUSE IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY) 852 S.F. D PAVERS IN FRONT OF HOUSE IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY) 157 _ S.F. E SIDE STEPS IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY) 1,9 S.F. F SWIMMING POOL IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY) 391 S.F. G HOT TUB IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY) 61 S.F. H BACK YARD STEPS 11.1 x 3.6 40 S.F. PROPOSED GARAGE IRREGULAR(SEE SURVEY) 690 S.F. J S.F. K S.F. L S.F. M S.F. N S.F. O S.F. P S.F. Q S.F. R S.F. S S.F. T S.F. U S.F. ✓ S.F. W S.F. X S.F. Y S.F. Z S.F. (1) Total Proposed Hardcover 6,375 S.F. Excludable Hardcover(See City Code Sec 78-1684): PAVERS 100 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. (2) Total Excludable Hardcover 100 S.F. (3) Net Proposed Hardcover [Subtract line(2)from line(1)] (4) Total Lot Area 21 183 S.F. Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3)_(4)] 29.62 % This is an information packet regarding Hardcover. Every effort has been made to insure the accuracy of the information contained herein;however,if any information is not consistent with provisions of the City Code, the Code provisions will prevail. Page 9 of 9 May 20, 2020 Dear Planning Commission and City Council Members, Thank you for considering our request to improve our property located at 3585 Frederick Street in Orono.We have lived in this home since purchasing it in December 2008. The house was built in the 60's, has a 2-car garage and a wrap around driveway. It is our intent to build a three car garage over a portion of the existing driveway and eliminate the balance of one of the two legs of the driveway. This results in a net reduction of hard cover on the lot. John and I are getting older and it is becoming more difficult for us to load summer furniture and gear into a truck twice per year and take it to a rented storage unit in Mound.Your approval of this request would allow us to create necessary storage space and eliminate the need to rent a monthly storage space. Again thank you for your consideration in this matter. We love being part of the community and thoroughly enjoy the quality of life here in Orono. Sincerely, i 1/46/ze z 0 Sherry Gorman Y r ,. t. • Je ii,' Y r� ° p r' t � t` `err -Y-'-''''',•' - ..f:.,-:-•','•.,', ''. •''•',. '' ••••,'• '.'. r, '':4, ,,-•,, ;.:•••••,., ; -:.,', ••,. '• ' .• ' " ••. • ••:;•--.•:::.„'!,'-:•1;,S„,:-1' '' ':.'1.,' .‘ • .: .;:•'•'•:--c1"-.:24:-Sci,iicc,t's-," J' 'r t { ''..-•,-,„J":414,- ,fi5/.; ,, h J r .mss 3--' • C Y 'prp( � 1 r st '•,:;.1!•414-:---.."':'''y .�, :.�: +;,. fit . x. r + -,.,,:p....".,4.7 €4, i '�^. `p'S7#/7,r., ,. + t. ly.JY1 vai • J fit. �. f , X(1�+ 7. � P s n� 5 t s, t -'..:-:.-',..-.;,... .,..?!...',.....'..-;:..,",e; �`iidf�.; "; �i 9T Jp } f + 2, fit:' .{ -*� • 11 n .;•lt F J�.ft'+e� E+ '3 x a •s.'. _ T' r fi J. y+r ktJd "�m� i; +✓ .- t �?",J i. '`.}, s > it s x r '1 r-.'"' ‘.*:04,:, * ,..,-,........,....,:.-,....:-..-........,.."-..::,,,,-.,..7.,.....::::,', .;• .f c JS R' Yl.. 4- ♦ Si Nf 1 ,,;.`,,..'.,•:•%,••4;4;;,' :•�(;, .I t .• 4r:.4413A;'4',"•;1,::,",-•,• . .4.€': i•-M NFI o-°� ( i af +•' � lVi -a, dr] S 'I MJ 7 t 1 t b , } t 4`j (.l „I y k ,r'' ' d ,2 w s ri,n.,:r*: 1.....:,,,',.......:r n,,...„, ..,of.., .',n,n.. .... ......:7....1.. m �r d .1 F--'#♦♦ „re. i I Ar X9 1 Aai d s gg 1 � dd q ( S d a r it", ,_,„,. ,. . i } r S ,+ r .i eft ^- • ' ' ' F� Y �� h i r"-:,;;".:,*"...,"::::::::*,"': .4",141'!%;:t:;;;,i,,..:7;;,,:_:: ::::;:!,,l,,,I,1:.",,,::.C,"*.i.,,,,...ti4E.",::::::c.'","..":",i':*-', :,,,' , , , . , , ; e t 3 I¢ st+ a . ...,, Lei,'"'- . a 4 .. ✓ �I ,. tsP x , Sat , { . Via- r a �• � a�, 9 C! 4b` r •: ..a�s..c.,,va....�.+_.: -.:.. ***444 V • , �. 1 Pr;1 - ! ir '' . 'c I. ' P ;A r '4�-j 2 0 ' i ;y . ".....11,.' - ' *to...4i,,,,,.,: , i.,,, .., �.... I ,i , zee '.ti IP • �_' ped r'# { . r. ; 11:',1.;t, h-''' tr' ?eJ: s, 'a As f cw.a tf a .-,. • P yy � .W. n.a�0 ---''''."17 rw'.• ..Mti r =1 ${^ F1 y"r. 1f P ' it d = Fr - •f'i sf» -, t i F,_ � - .- k+.• r4 ya a .. • 7 i L '{J 3 ,fit 4ti 1 t sr� y��_` t PPeh aP.. ,tY�t 3" fir;-t 'Tti 4.;:.;.:.r1 f/: ' - , RUN DATE:05/26/2020 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) PAGE:1 38 20-117-23 12 0011 38 20-117-23 12 0022 38 20-117-23 12 0066 PETER M BLUTH STEPHEN J SKORO LIV TRUST J K JARNES&J M JARNES • 2413 CARMAN ST 2428 CASCO POINT RD 2470 CARMAN ST ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 PETER M BLUTH STEPHEN J SKORO JEFFREY&JACQUELINE JARNES 2413 CARMAN ST 2428 CASCO POINT RD 2470 CARMAN ST WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0012 38 20-117-23 12 0023 38 20-117-23 12 0067 NATHAN W BOUTANG JAMES M GASCH JOHN T GORMAN TRUST 2431 CARMAN ST 2408 CASCO POINT RD 3585 FREDERICK ST ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 NATHAN W BOUTANG JAMES M GASCH JOHN T GORMAN 2431 CARMAN ST 2408 CASCO POINT RD 3585 FREDERICK ST WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0013 38 20-117-23 12 0027 38 20-117-23 12 0068 JULIE A GATEHOUSE W E EDWARDS&D M EDWARDS TR JOHN DRAWZ AND JEAN DRAWZ 2443 CARMAN ST 2474 CARMAN ST 3565 FREDERICK ST ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 JULIE A GATEHOUSE WARD E EDWARDS JOHN DRAWZ AND JEAN DRAWZ 2443 CARMAN ST DONNA M EDWARDS 3565 FREDERICK ST WAYZATA MN 55391 2474 CARMAN ST WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0014 38 20-117-23 12 0050 38 20-117-23 210010 J P BLUTH&JOANN M BLUTH RICHARD EDWARDS REV TR ET AL R L VANACORA&S VANACORA 2447 CARMAN ST 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 2500 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 00000 ORONO MN 55391 JOSEPH P BLUTH KIM EDWARDS TRUSTEE RONALD L VANACORA JOANN M BLUTH 2450 WOODHAVEN DR SUZANNE VANACORA 2201 DREAM DR W LONG LAKE MN 55356 2500 CASCO POINT RD NORTH MANKATO MN 56003 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0015 38 20-117-23 12 0058 38 20-117-23 21 0014 SHERRI STRELOW-LUNDBLAD REEP FAMILY TRUST ET AL T CHALUPSKY&D Y CHALUPSKY 2455 CARMAN ST 2440 CARMAN ST 2530 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 SHERRI STRELOW-LUNDBLAD SALLY J REEP/AMY L WARTICK T CHALUPSKY&D Y CHALUPSKY 2455 CARMAN ST DAVID V REEP 2530 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 2440 CARMAN ST WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0016 38 20-117-23 12 0059 38 20-117-23 21 0015 M P MALIK&J D MALIK NANCY B PALMER TRUST MARIE A SVANG 2469 CARMAN ST 2450 CARMAN ST 2528 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 MICHAEL P&JANET D MALIK MARK T PALMER MARIE A SVANG 2469 CARMAN ST NANCY B PALMER 4140 1 ITH AVE S WAYZATA MN 55391 2450 CARMAN ST MINNEAPOLIS MN 55407 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0017 38 20-117-23 12 0061 38 20-117-23 21 0016 DAVID BAYER&FRAN BAYER CITY OF ORONO M G&K J HART JOINT LIV TR 3555 FREDERICK ST 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 2510 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 00000 ORONO MN 55391 DAVID BAYER&FRAN BAYER CITY OF ORONO MICHAEL G HART 3555 FREDERICK ST P O BOX 66 KRISTIN J HART WAYZATA MN 55391 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 2510 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0019 38 20-117-23 12 0062 38 20-117-23 210017 DENISE OLSZEWSKI GREGORY REEP TRUST ET AL R D ROCCA&H S ROCCA 3580 FREDERICK ST 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 2520 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 00000 ORONO MN 55391 DENISE OLSZEWSKI REEP FAMILY TRUST RONALD D&HOLLY S ROCCA 3580 FREDERICK ST 853 WIGET LANE 2520 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WALNUT CREEK CA 94598 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0020 38 20-117-23 12 0064 38 20-117-23 21 0025 JEREMY A STEWART/M L STEWART MARCUS A&CONSTANCE M MERZ NW ENG LUTH SYNOD 2474 CASCO POINT RD 2414 CARMAN ST 3745 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 JEREMY A STEWART MARCUS A&CONSTANCE M MERZ GOOD SHEPHERD LUTH CHURCH MAGGIE L STEWART 2414 CARMAN ST 3745 SHORELINE DRIVE 2474 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 12 0021 38 20-117-23 12 0065 38 20-117-23 210028 1110 JANET E ROBERTS TRUST E J MERCER&I D MERCER N W BELL TELEPHONE CO 2454 CASCO POINT RD 2490 CARMAN ST 3605 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 JANET E ROBERTS ERIC J MERCER CENTURY LINK 2454 CASCO POINT RD JEREMIE D MERCER ATTN PROPERTY TAX WAYZATA MN 55391 2490 CARMAN ST PO BOX 2599 ORONO MN 55391 OLATHE KS 66063 RUN DATE:05/26/2020 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) PAGE:2 38 20-117-23 21 0029 STEVAN J&DEBRA J WAGNER 3607 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 STEVAN J&DEBRA J WAGNER 5440 MORNINGVIEW CT MOUND MN 55364 38 20-117-23 21 0033 MERZ PROPERTIES LLC 3701 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 MERZ PROPERTIES LLC PO BOX 163 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 20-117-23 21 0036 N CHERNEVSKAYA&I YURCHENKO 2490 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 IGOR YURCHENKO NATALYA CHERNEVSKAYA 2490 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 21 0037 STEPHEN J&SUSAN RUDOLPH 2480 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 STEPHEN J RUDOLPH SUSAN RUDOLPH 2480 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 Hennepin County has developed electronic forms of certain property information databases.Hennepin County makes reasonable efforts to produce and publish the most current property information available.The viewer should understand,however,that Hennepin County makes no representation or warranties,either express or implied,or as to merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose regarding the accuracy and/or completeness of the information contained herein. Hennepin Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map Date: 5/26/2020 ,htirs' irri D.r . 15 1 G;' 2400....., 24013 , 3607 4141 3605 -411 4;4 2443 illi 2440tga)701 at) i024742450 r 2480Mb ON OA 24t 580(ml 46 VtIP3 745 .Nr • Di i.,j 2470 ilie) 2440 1'5 rtz '6,,, pi) 171 ''til3 565 /�a c 5 V.,' 2480 '; „-- f „.- s`�.+ • it .,,,,_.-t.'::':'-`..,,... -:„,::t.',,,-','.4C,f.,;,,=A4,144",:54,:,:,feilli%VW% 2510 500 2520 " ." 2� ., ;Ii, '� ."`;:i--' 528 k . .i 2530 . ttS! ,.e'`d + i r ''ate"Z -•';.--'''' "t 2540 fele A.te /?.e, 9 sA ki. :.:. 1 €, # Y a 1sI. } 25$0 a „t{ . i '° .,, Y s 600 ttillliiir),_ t tr ya '.. � '-_ 4 a " a :, kit �, a�s,.:- l N `. } $4:1;,:-.4 ,t, 4 sa,!r Fy e .C% k e Buffer Size: 500 0 50 100 200 Feet Map Comments: 111111111 3585 Frederick Street This data (i) 's furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy;(i)is furnished with no warranty of any knd, and (ii) is notstitable for legal,engineering or surveying purposes.Hennepin County shal not be liable for any damage,injury or loss resulting from this data. For more information,contact Hennepin CountyGIS Office 300 6th Street South,Minneapolis,MN 55487/g is.info@hennepin.us :OVo To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief, City Administrator From: Jeremy Barnhart,AICPti Community Development Director kE3H0� Date: June 15, 2020 Subject: #LA19-65, City of Orono Text Amendment Subdivision Ordinance Application Summary: The City is developing revisions to the subdivision ordinance. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the ordinance as drafted. Background In order to clarify,streamline, and adjust the subdivision process to be consistent with state law, subdivision patterns and Council goals;staff, including the city attorney, have reviewed the subdivision code and proposed deletions and additions as appropriate. All changes are shown. Also, commentary by the city attorney and staff is included,to aid in understanding of the changes. Main areas of focus include: • Coordinate definitions between the zoning ordinance and the subdivision code • Remove unnecessarily unique terms (Flexible Zoning) • Consolidate references to Comprehensive Plan (Community Management Plan) • Remove unnecessary or redundant regulations • Remove unnecessary Classifications of subdivision,they all have essentially the same process. • Clarify the issuance of building permits post subdivision • Clarified the review process • Clarify the distinction between a subdivision and a plat. A subdivision is the act of splitting a parcel into 2 or more parcels. A plat is the document that illustrates those changes. • Establish a time period in which to record a final plat, 1 year. • Requires all subdivisions to be platted. (Section 82-111) • Limit boundary line adjustments to one per year,to allow the County to keep up with the changes. (Section 82-200) • Revise security requirements, removed references to bond in favor of other security. Usually this is a letter of credit. (Section 82-213) • Lowered the security to be more in-line with industry standards (Section 82-213) • Removed the different requirements for non-residential subdivisions. (Section 82-217) • Clarified required lot area (Section 82-254). This represents no change to how we apply the regulation. • Define flag lots (Section 82-256)which have been prohibited but not defined. • Added design criteria for cul de sacs. This is in addition to existing ROW width and FILE#LA19-65 June 15,2020 Page 2 of 2 length. (Section 82-281) • Removed the block design standards. • Adjusted Conservation design triggers: o Urban density developments greater than 5 acres, and rural density developments greater than 7 acres. (Section 82-300) For discussion 1. Does the Council want to have a 'minor' (lot splits and subdivisions creating less than 3 new lots)subdivision process that could skip the Planning Commission. (Line 424) Some cities do,though staff is not recommending one for Orono at this time, many of our subdivisions fall under these categories. 2. The draft establishes the Planning Commission as the appeal board. Does the Council want a different appeal board? (Line 548) 3. Does the Council wish to define appropriate street tree types?(Line 1618) 4. Defer review of the park dedication formula Planning Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval of the draft as presented,subject to any changes identified by the Commission. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Draft Ordinance 1 2 Chapter 82-SUBDIVISION REGULATIONSm 3 State Law reference—Subdivision regulations,Minn.Stat.§462.358. 4 ARTICLE I.-IN GENERAL 5 Sec.82-1.-Rules. 6 (a) For the purpose of this chapter,certain numbers,abbreviations,terms and words used shall be used, 7 interpreted,and defined as set forth in this article. 8 (b) The word"used"or"occupied"as applied to any land or building shall be construed to include the 9 words"intended,arranged,or designed to be used or occupied." 10 Sec.82-2.-Definitions. 11 The following words,terms and phrases,when used in this article,shall have the meanings ascribed 12 to them in this section,except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: 13 b• b. _ 14 -. • • •. _ . 15 Applicant means any subdivider or their{13is-gent. _ Commented[JB1]:Ordinance reviewed for gender 16 Block means a tract of land bounded by streets,or by a combination of streets and public parks, neutrality 17 cemeteries,rights-of-way,exterior boundaries of the subdivision,shorelines of waterways,outlots or 18 boundary lines of municipalities. 19 Bluffs 20 Bond means any form of security,including surety bond,warranty bond,penalty bond,collateral, 21 property,or instrument of credit acceptable to the city. 22 ;Building means any structure having a roof which may provide shelter or enclosure of persons, 23 animals or chattel:and when the structure is divided by party walls without opening,each portion 24 of such building so separated shall be deemed a separate building.. .. 25 ._ . . .... . 26 ark-kith-L ........... '" Commented[JB2]:Changing definition to incorporate 27 Building site line means a line on the preliminary plat which delineates the dry buildable land of any zoning def.Zoning:Building means any structure having 28 lot upon which a structure maybe constructed,which land meets all of the setback requirements of proof which may provide shelter: nor enclosure thetr of P 9 .persons,animals or chattel;and when the structure is 29 chapter 78. divided by party walls without opening,each portion of 30 Capital improvement program means an itemized program settingforth the schedule and details of such building so separated shall be deemed a separate P P P 8�' P g building. 31 specific contemplated public improvements by fiscal year,including public improvements in or related to 32 air space and subsurface areas necessary for mined underground development pursuant to Minn.Stats.§§ 33 469.135-469.141,together with their estimated cost,the justification for each improvement,the impact 34 that such improvements will have on the current operating expense of the city,and such other information 35 on capital improvements as may be pertinent. 36 State Law reference—Similar provisions,Minn.Stat.§462.352,subd.9. 37 Community facilities plan means a compilation of policy statements,goals,standards,maps and 38 action programs for guiding the future development of the public or semipublic facilities of the city,such 39 as recreational,educational and cultural facilities. 40 State Law reference—Similar provisions,Minn.Stat.§426.352,subd.8. June 15,2020 page 1 I 41 •' • •: : :• ommunitv Management Plan means a compilation of policy Commented[JB3]:The Orono Comprehensive Plan is 42 statements,goals and standards,and maps and recommendations for their execution,prepared and called the Community Management Plan 43 adopted by the city for guiding the physical,social and economic development,both private and public, 44 of the city and its environs and to protect the public health,safety and welfare,and may include but is not 45 limited to statements of policies,goals and standards,a land use plan,a transportation plan,a community 46 facilities plan,a capital improvement program,an official map,a surface water management plan and a 47 comprehensive sewer plan.The Community Management Plan is the City of Orono's Comprehensive 48 Municipal Plan. 49 State Law reference—Similar provisions,Minn.Stat.§462.352,subd.5. 50 Comprehensive sewer plan means a compilation of policy statements,goals,standards,maps and 51 action programs for the preservation and best use of waters and other natural resources of the city,for the 52 prevention,control and abatement of water pollution in the city,and for the efficient and economic 53 collection,treatment and disposal of sewage in the city. 54 Construction plan means the maps or drawings,accompanying a subdivision,showing the specific 55 location and design of required public or private improvements to be installed as part of the subdivision in 56 accordance with the requirements of the city or this chapter as a condition of the approval of the 57 subdivision. 58 Cul-de-sac means a local street with only one outlet and having an circular turnaround-appropriate 59 terminal-for the safe and convenient reversal of traffic movement. 60 Density means the number of building sites per acre. 61 Design standards means the specifications to the subdivider for preparation of preliminary and final 62 plats,including but not limited to the optimum,minimum or maximum dimensions of such items as 63 rights-of-way,blocks,easements and lots,public and private improvements. 64 !pry buildable land means that portion of the lot not encumbered by the waters of a duly 65 recorded lake or river,Wetlands,Bluffs,or slopes greater than 18 percent.land area occu^ing within 66 ': - , 67 ••: • :•: :: : :: -: : _:- : . Commented[JB4]:Zoning:Dry buildable means that 68 Easement means authorization by a property owner for the use by another,and for a specified portion of the lot not encumbered etla by theblwaters of a duly recorded lake or river,wetlands,bluffs,or slopes 69 purpose,of any designated part of his-their property. greater than 18 percent. 70 Escrow means a deposit of cash with the city. 71 :' = Commented[SM5]:I have never seen this definition. Commented[JB6]:Probably don't need it at it triggers a 73 Grade means the slope of a road,street or other public way,site or topography specified in classification,which we are doing away with. 74 percentage terms. 75 Improvements means any building,structure,drainage ditch,dam,roadway,parkway,sidewalk, 76 pedestrian way,trees,shrubs,lawn,off-street parking area,sewer and water utilities,or other facility. 77 Improvements,lot,means any improvement on the lot. 78 Improvements,private,means any improvement required by this chapter,which improvement the 79 city or subdivider shall construct at the subdivider's expense and for which the city will not assume any 80 responsibility for its maintenance and operation and which shall not be dedicated to the city. 81 Improvements,public,means any improvement required by this chapter,which improvement the city 82 or subdivider shall construct at the subdivider's expense and for which the city will ultimately assume the June 15,2020 page 2 83 responsibility for its maintenance and operation upon issuance of the certificate of satisfactory 84 completion. 85 Land use plan is a chapter of the Community Management Plan and means a combination of policy 86 statements,goals,standards,maps and action programs for guiding the future development of private and 87 public property.The term includes a plan designating types of uses for the entire city as well as a 88 specialized plan showing specific areas or specific types of land uses,such as residential,commercial, 89 industrial,public or semipublic uses or any combination of such uses.A land use plan may also include 90 the proposed densities for development. 91 State Law reference—Similar provisions,Minn.Stat.§462.352,subd.6. 92 Lot means a tract,plot or portion of a subdivision or other parcel of land intended as a unit for the 93 purpose,whether immediate or future,of transfer of ownership or for building development.Every 94 platted lot shall be a Bbuildable Llot or an outlot. 95 (Lot area means the area of a lot in a horizontal plane bounded by the lot lines,but not including 96 any area occupied by the waters of a duly recorded lake or river or wetland or area which has been 97 dedicated as public right-of-way. --I Commented[JB7]:Uses zoning chapter definition 98 .. . 102 a:::. , • . . . : . . ._ . _ .: _ • . ..• 03 - _ 14 .. ._ ._ . _ _ - - .. 105 _ b• 106 . _ • - . . ••• - . ::: . . . .._. 107 : - •°' " a:::: . Commented[JB81:Contains regulation,relocated to 82- 108 Lot,back,means a lot typically separated from a public or private road by another lot and which xxx 109 gains access to the public or private road via a narrow corridor.Such a separated lot is considered to be a 110 back lot when the corridor is platted as an outlot.A separated lot is considered to be a flag lot when the 111 corridor is platted as part of the lot.When the corridor is merely an easement over another lot,the 112 separated lot is considered to be an easement back lot. 113 Lot, buildable,means a lot or combination of lots or outlots which meet all of the requirements of 114 chapter 78 and this chapter for the intended purpose. 115 Lot,corner,means lot situated at the iunction of,and abutting on,two or more intersecting 116 streets.or a lot at the point of deflection in alignment of a continuous street,the interior angle of which 117 does not exceed 135 degrees : •_ • - • - • '• •• • 118 intersection not exceeding 135 degrees. Commented[JB9I:Use Zoning definition. 119 Lot,front,means a lot abutting a public or private road across which an outlot has been platted for 120 access to a back lot. 121 Lot,outlot,gleans a lot depicted on a final plat which intended for open space preservation,access 122 future development or other use. • - • :.-. . 124 . . . .. •. , ' • - . 125 :. '. a • : c. ,- ( Commented[ ] Regulations C d J610:Re ulati oto 82-254 June 15,2020 page 3 126 Lot width means the horizontal distance between side lot lines measured at the following locations: 127 (1) For lots which do not abut a lake or tributary,at the rear of the required front yard,measured 128 parallel to the front lot line. 129 (2) For lots which abut a lake or tributary,at the shoreline measured in a straight line between the 130 points at which the side lot lines intersect the OHWL,and at the required structure setback from 131 the OHWL,measured in a straight line between the points of intersection of the side lot lines with 132 the structure setback line. 133 Natural feature means any naturally occurring physical phenomenon,including lakes,streams, 134 flowage areas,marshland,wetlands,floodplains,slopes,unusual soil pockets,and rock outcroppings. 135 Nonresidential subdivision means a subdivision for which the intended use is other than residential, 136 such as commercial or industrial. 137 Official controls and controls mean all provisions of this Code,ordinances and regulations which 138 control the physical development of a city,county or town or any part or any detail,and implement the 139 general objectives of the comprehensive plan.Official controls may include ordinances establishing 140 zoning and subdivision controls,site plan regulations,sanitary codes,building codes and official maps. 141 State Law reference—Similar provisions,Minn.Stat.§462.352,subd. 15. 142 Official map means a map adopted in accordance with Minn.Stat. §462.359 which may show 143 existing and proposed future streets,roads and highways of the city and county;the area needed for 144 widening of existing streets,roads and highways of the city and county;and existing and future county 1145 stateState aid highways and stateState trunk highway rights-of-way.An official map may also show the 146 location of existing and future public land and facilities within the city.In counties in the metropolitan 147 area as defined in Minn.Stat.§473.121,official maps may for a period of up to five years designate the 148 boundaries of areas reserved for purposes of soil conservation,water supply construction,flood control 149 and surface water drainage and removal,including appropriate regulations protecting such areas against 150 encroachment by buildings,other physical structures or facilities. 151 State Law reference—Similar provisions,Minn.Stat.§462.352,subd. 10. 152 Off-site premises means any premises not located within the area of the property to be subdivided, 153 whether or not in the same ownership of the subdivider. 154 On-site septic manager means the person designated to administer and enforce chapter 58,article II. 155 Outlot means the same as Lot,outlot. 156 Owner means any person,partnership,corporation or any other legal entity having legal title to or 157 sufficient proprietary interest in land sought to be subdivided under this chapter. 158 Park commission means a body appointed by the council to study and consider the continuing needs 159 of the city for parks and recreation areas.The commission shall report direct to the council,may hold 160 joint meetings with the council,and may hold public hearings to determine public sentiment and make 161 recommendations to the council. 162 Park fund means a special fund established by the city to retain monies contributed by a subdivider 163 in lieu of land in accordance with provisions of this chapter. 164 Plat means the map or plan of a subdivision showing the property boundaries,layout,dimensions 165 and legal descriptions of all lots,blocks and rights-of-way. June 15,2020 page 4 166 Plat,final,means the plat of the subdivision which includes all information required by statute and 167 this chapter,which plat will be recorded with the office of the county recorder. 168 Plat,preliminary,means the proposed plat showing all information required by this chapter. 169 Platting authority means the city council pursuant to Minn.Stat.§462.358. 170 Property line means the boundary lines enclosing a lot,parcel or tract of land.Regardless of the legal 171 description,the property line to be used for purposes of compliance with chapter 78 and this chapter shall 172 be the ordinary high water mark of any lakeshore,the edge of the right-of-way,the edge of any public or 173 private roadway,or the edge of an adjacent lot or outlot. 174 Public hearing means a hearing to be held by the planning commission to allow for public review 175 and input relating to the proposed subdivision pursuant to Minn.Stat. §462.358 and pub-fie-hearing 176 requirements in section 78-48. 177 b _ •• 178 s. . .-. _ . . .. •• . . . 179 Registered engineer means an engineer properly licensed and registered in the ntateState. 180 Registered land surveyor means a land surveyor properly licensed and registered in the stateState. 181 _ :r 182 such plat ai an l t lmli Commented[SM11]:Sounds likes replat. Not a 183 Right-of-way means a strip of land occupied or intended to be occupied by an alley,street,crosswalk, subdivision. 184 railroad,public or private roadway or easement,electric transmission line,oil or gas pipeline,water main, 185 sanitary or storm sewer main,or for another special use. 86 Roadway means any street,highway,road,lane,way,trail or any other area used for vehicular 87 traffic. 188 Roadways classification means one or more of the following: 189 (1) Principal arterial means a roadway intended to connect urban subregions with one another, 190 connect urban and rural service areas with metro centers,or connect outstate cities. 191 (2) Intermediate arterial means a roadway intended to connect two or more subregions,provide 192 secondary connections outstate and complements principal arterials in high-volume corridors. 193 (3) Minor arterial means a roadway intended to connect adjacent subregions and activity centers 194 within subregions. 195 (4) Collector means a roadway intended to connect neighborhoods within and between subregions. 196 (5) Local means a roadway intended to connect blocks within neighborhoods and specific activities 197 within homogeneous land use areas. 198 (6) Parkway means a roadway intended to provide low-speed and low-volume vehicular or bicycle 199 access to or through recreational areas,parks and lakeshore. 200 (7) Dead end means a roadway with only one vehicular-traffic outlet. 201 (8) Private means a roadway for which the city or other political subdivision shall not be responsible 202 for its maintenance and operation. 203 (9) Public means any roadway for which the city or other political subdivision is or expects to be 204 responsible for its maintenance and operation. 205 Roadway right-of-way width means the distance between property lines measured at right angles to 206 the centerline of the roadway. June 15,2020 page 5 • • 207 Commented[SM121:When does a lease come into play 208 - for subdividing? 211 - . . .. •� ' - _ .. 212 Setback means the minimum horizontal distance between a structure,system or facility and a natural 213 feature,property line,right-of-way line,ordinary high water level,structure,system or other facility. 214 Sewage treatment system,on-site,means a device or series of interconnected components designed, 215 installed and maintained for the purpose of safely treating and disposing of sewage and domestic waste, 216 whenever such system is not part of a municipal sewerage system. 217 (1) Individual system means a system serving an individual building, typically a single-family 218 residence. 219 (2) Collective system means a system serving two or more buildings,typically including individual 220 septic tanks connected to a common soil treatment and absorption area. 221 (3) Commercial system means a system serving any nonresidential building. 1222 Screening means a manmade or natural visual barrier of a type that will form a year-round dense 223 screen. 224 Shade tree means a tree of approved species and size. 225 Shoreline means a line denoting the ordinary high water elevation of any lake,stream or other body 226 of water,which ordinary high water elevation shall be as established by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed 227 District,department of natural resources,or any other agency,whichever elevation is the highest. 228 Single ownership means ownership by the same person,corporation,firm,entity,partnership or 229 unincorporated association;or ownership by different corporations,firms,partnerships,entities or 1230 unincorporated associations,in which a stockholder,partner,or associate,or a member of his-their family 231 owns an interest in each corporation,firm,partnership,entity or unincorporated association. 232 Slope means vertical distance in feet per 100 feet of horizontal distance. 1233 State means the State of Minnesota 234 Street means the same as Roadways. 235 Structure means anything which is built,constructed or erected,an edifice or building of any kind,or 236 any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner, 237 which requires a location on,below or above the ground,land or water,or attached to something having a 238 location on the ground,land or water. 239 Subdivider means any person who: 240 (1) Has an interest in land,who causes it,directly or indirectly to be divided into a subdivision; 241 (2) Directly or indirectly sells,leases or develops,or advertises for sale,lease or development,any 242 interest,lot,parcel,site,unit or plot in a subdivision; 243 (3) Engages directly or through an agent in the business of selling,leasing,developing or offering 244 for sale, lease or development a subdivision or any interest, lot, parcel, site, unit or plot in a 245 subdivision;or 246 (4) Is directly or indirectly controlled by or under direct or indirect common control with any of the 247 foregoing. June 15,2020 page 6 248 Subdivider's agent means any person who represents or acts for or on behalf of a subdivider in 249 selling,leasing or developing,or offering to sell,lease or develop,any interest,lot,parcel,unit,site or 250 plot in a subdivision. 251 Subdivision means the separation of an area,parcel or tract of land under single ownership into two 252 or more parcels,tracts,lots or long-term leasehold interests,where the creation of the leasehold interest 253 necessitates the creation of streets,roads or alleys,for residential,commercial,industrial or other use or 254 any combination of such uses,except those separations: 255 (1) In which all the resulting parcels,tracts,lots or interests will be 20 acres or larger in size and 256 500 feet in width for residential uses and five acres or larger in size for commercial and industrial 257 uses. 258 (2) Creating cemetery lots. 259 (3) Resulting from court orders, or the adjustment of a lot line by the relocation of a common 1260 boundary-as long as each of the two-resulting lots meets the requirements of chapter 781_ Commented[SM13]:This goes beyond the statutory definition. 261 State Law reference—Similar provisions,Minn.Stat.§462.352,subd. 13. Commented[1614]:An adjustment to a boundary line that does not meet the requirements will require variances. 262 Surface water management plan means a compilation of policy statements,goals,standards,maps 263 and action programs for guiding the future hydrological and hydraulic development of the watersheds and 264 subwatersheds,water storage areas,drainageways,floodways and filtration systems of the city to control 265 surface water runoff,flood hazards,flood damage and general water quality within the city and its 266 environs,including lakes,streams,wetlands,marshes,natural watercourses and storm sewer systems or 267 facilities. 68 Temporary improvement means improvements built and maintained by a subdivider during 69 construction of the subdivision. 270 Tract and subject tract mean the parcel of land comprising all the contiguous land owned or 271 controlled by the subdivider and included in whole or in part in the kubdivision. Commented[SM15]:Can we combine this definition 272 Transportation plan means a compilation of policy statements,goals,standards,maps and action with lots? 273 programs for guiding the future development of the various modes of transportation of the city and its Commented[JB161:Tract is used 25 times through the 274 environs,such as streets and highways,public transit,railroads,air transportation,trucking and water document. 275 transportation;and includes a major thoroughfare plan. 276 State Law reference—Similar provisions,Minn.Stat.§462.352,subd.7. 277 1Wetlands as defined in circular 39,"Wetlands of the United States", 1971 edition United States 278 Department of the Interior as amended from time to time -- Commented[JB17]:Uses the definition in the Wetland 279 Water system, individual,means a water system which may include supply,treatment and preservation chapter. 280 distribution which serves only one lot(e.g.,private well). 281 Water system,private community,means a water system which may include supply,treatment and 282 distribution facilities,established by a subdivider to serve two or more lots,which system is independent 283 from the public water system. 284 Water system,public, means a water system which may include supply,treatment and distribution 285 facilities owned and maintained by the city. 286 Cross reference—Definitions generally,§ 1-2. June 15,2020 page 7 287 Sec.82-3.-Scope. 288 Subdivision and platting of land in the city shall be regulated by this chapter. 289 Sec.82-4.-Policy. 290 (a) It is the policy of the city to consider the subdivision of land and the subsequent development of 291 subdivided land as subject to the control of the city pursuant to the official 292 plaeCommunity Management?lanl of the city and this chapter for the orderly,planned,efficient and i(Commented[SM18]:See previous comment. 293 economical development of the city. Commented[JB19]:Adjusted the definition. 294 (b) Land to be subdivided shall be of such character that it can be used safely for building purposes 295 without danger to health or peril from fire,flood or other menace.Land shall not be subdivided until 1296 available-adequate public and private facilities and improvements exist and proper provision has been 297 made for drainage, water, sewerage and capital improvements, such as schools, parks, recreation 298 facilities,transportation facilities and other public improvements. 299 (c) The existing and proposed public and private improvements shall conform to and be properly related 1300 to the proposals shown in the - • • • .• - .. . .• ommunity Management Plan of the city, 301 and it is intended that this chapter shall supplement and facilitate the enforcement of the provisions 302 and standards contained in the official controls and -: • .• - .• .•Community 303 Management Plan of the city. 304 Sec.82-5.-Purposes. 305 This chapter is adopted for the following purposes: 306 (1) To protect and provide for the public health,safety and general welfare of the city and to prevent 307 harm to the public health,safety and general welfare. 308 (2) To guide the future growth and development of the city in accordance with the sampreheasiv€ 309 municipal-planCommunity Management Plan. 310 (3) To provide for adequate light,air and privacy;to secure safety from fire,flood and other danger; 311 and to prevent overcrowding of the land and undue congestion of population. 312 (4) To protect the character of the land to be divided as well as the surrounding lands and the social 313 and economic stability of all parts of the city and to encourage the orderly and beneficial 314 development of all parts of the city. 315 (5) To protect and conserve the value of land throughout the city and the value of structures and 316 other improvements upon the land,and to minimize the conflicts among the uses of land. 317 (6) To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide adequate and efficient 318 transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, playgrounds, recreation and other public 319 requirements and facilities. 320 (7) To provide the most beneficial relationship between the uses of land and buildings and the 321 circulation of traffic throughout the city,having particular regard to the avoidance of congestion 322 in the streets and highways,and the pedestrian traffic movements appropriate to the various uses 323 of land and buildings, and to provide for the proper location and width of streets and building 324 lines. 1325 (8) To establish reasonable standards of design and procedures for subdivisions Commented[JB20]:Find and delete 326 in order to further the orderly layout and use of land;and to ensure proper legal descriptions and 327 monumenting of subdivided land. 328 (9) To ensure that public and private facilities are available and will have a sufficient capacity to 329 serve the proposed subdivision. June 15,2020 page 8 330 (10) To prevent the pollution of air,streams,ponds,wetlands,Lake Minnetonka and other bodies 331 of water; to provide reasonable access to public waters; to assure the adequacy of drainage 332 facilities;to safeguard the water table;and to encourage the wise use and management of natural 333 resources throughout the city to prevent their misuse,abuse and overuse and in order to preserve 334 the integrity,stability and beauty of the community and the value of the land. 335 Sec.82-6.-Authority. 336 (a) Pursuant to the powers and jurisdictions vested through Minn. Stat. chs. 412 and 462 and other 1337 applicable laws,statutes,ordinances and regulations of the stateState,the city exercises the power of 338 authority to review, approve and disapprove subdivisions of land within the corporate limits of the 339 city. 341 • . .. . . ._ . 342 :1 Commented[SM21]: 343 Sec.82-7.-Minimum standards. 344 In their interpretation and application,the provisions of this chapter shall be held to be the minimum 345 requirements for the promotion of the public health,safety and general welfare and prevention of harm to 346 the public health,safety and general welfare. 347 Sec.82-8.-Conflict with public provisions. 348 This chapter is not intended to interfere with,abrogate,or armaalannul any other provision of this 349 Code,rule or regulations,statute,or other provision of law.Where any provision of this chapter imposes 350 restrictions different from those imposed by any other provision of this chapter or any other provision of 351 this Code,rule or regulation,statute or other provision of law,whichever provisions are more restrictive 352 or impose higher standards shall control. 354 355 - - •' - . . . . ' . .. _ 356 0 ': :..-••-• . : :.•a 357 �.. .. . _ • - 359 _ - 360 • ' ' •L �Commented[SM22]c None of this is necessary ) 363 Sec.82-10.-Saving provision. 364 This chapter shall not be construed as abating any action pending under or by virtue of prior existing 365 subdivision regulations,or as discontinuing,abating,modifying or altering any penalty accruing or about 366 to accrue,or as affecting the liability of any person,or as waiving any right of the city under any section 367 or provision existing at the time of adoption of this chapter,or as vacating or annulling any rights 368 obtained by any person,or as waiving any right of the city under any section or provision existing at the 369 time of adoption of this chapter,or as vacating or annulling any rights obtained by any person,by lawful 370 action of the city except as shall be expressly provided for in this chapter. 371 Sec.82-11.-Amendments of other provisions of this Code and regulations. 372 (a) Whenever the provisions of this chapter refer to the : .• _ .. •Community 373 Management Plan, official controls, or other provisions of this Code,codes,regulations or laws, it 374 shall be deemed to refer to those official controls,plans,codes,provisions of this Code,and regulations 375 as amended as of that point in time. In the event of an amendment during the application for a 376 subdivision,that subdivision must meet the requirements of the amendment. June 15,2020 page 9 377 (b) For the purpose of providing for the public health,safety and general welfare,the city may from time 378 to time amend the provisions imposed by this chapter. 379 Sec.82-12.-Jurisdiction. 380 This chapter shall apply to all subdivisions of land located within the corporate limits of the city. 381 Sec.82-13.-Compliance. 382 _ - .•. . . 383 _ .. .. . . 384 - ... . . . ' " .. ' • _-• .. - 385 ... • ._ ... • __ .b.• . .• . • .. -- - . • • . . ... .•. 386 387 . - . , - • _ _. _ .. 388 (as) The subdivision of any lot or any parcel of land for the purpose of sale,transfer or lease by use of 389 metes and bounds description,deed,contract for deed,purchase agreement,registered land survey or 390 easement shall not be permitted except after full compliance with this chapter. 391 b) All subdivisions shall be plated in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Chapter. 392 _ .b. • • . , .b •_ 393 394 b 395 396 397 • . - .. . .•b.' 398 (b4) No building permit or certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any parcel or lot of land which 399 was created by subdivision and not in conformity with the provisions of this chapter,and no excavation 400 of land or construction of any public or private improvements shall take place or be commenced except 401 in conformity with this chapter. 1402 (pg) No subdivision shall be entitled to be recorded in the county recorder's office or have any validity 403 until the subdivision has been prepared,approved and acknowledged in the manner prescribed by this 404 chapter.The office of the county recorder shall not file or accept for filing any subdivision of land 405 unless it is accompanied by a certified copy of the resolution of the city approving the subdivision. 1406 (d#) Every person who violates any provision of this chapter when-he performings an act thereby 407 prohibited or declared unlawful,or fails to act when such failure is thereby prohibited or declared 408 unlawful,and upon conviction thereof,shall be punished as for a misdemeanor except as otherwise 409 stated in specific provisions this chapter. 410 (e) Appropriate actions and proceedings may be taken by law or in equity to prevent any violation of this 411 chapter to prevent unlawful construction, to recover damages, including attorney's fees,to restrain 412 correct or abate a violation,or to prevent illegal occupancy of a building,structure or premises,and 413 these remedies shall be in addition to the penalties describe above and provided in State statutes. 414 415 State Law reference—Authority to require platting,Minn.Stat.§462.358,subd.3a;restrictions on 416 conveyances,Minn.Stat.§462.358,subd.4b. 417 cc, 82 1 Civil enf reenient- June 15,2020 page 10 418 • ... : .: :. _ ..•.: _ . 419 :1-. I. !! !! • .._• . - _.. 420 . . . - .. . . 421 422 • 423 •' • '• •' •= 467 Sec.82-46.-Enforcement. 1468 It shall be the duty of the City Administrator or designee to enforce this chapter 469 and to bring to the attention of the city attorney any violations or lack of compliance with this chapter. 470 Sec.82-47.-Fees for subdivision applications. 471 (a) The fees to be paid for each application for subdivision shall be in the amount prescribed by the 472 current city fee schedule provisions.Fees shall be payable at the time applications are filed with the 473 zoning administrator.There shall be no fee in the case of applications filed in the public interest by the 474 council or by the planning commission. 475 (b) No person shall be issued a permit pursuant to chapter 82 by the city until each applicant shall have 476 paid to the city clerk the fixed and additional costs incurred by the city in reviewing the application as 477 provided in this chapter. 478 (c) Each applicant shall be charged the fixed fee specifically provided in this chapter or other provisions 479 of this Code including the current fee schedule adopted by the city council as required to cover the 480 costs incurred by the city in administratively processing and reviewing the subdivision. 481 (d) Application fees are not refundable unless the application is withdrawn prior to referral to the planning 482 commission.In the case of such timely withdrawal,the amount of refund shall be reduced by the costs 483 incurred by the city prior to withdrawal,including but not limited to staff time,notification publication 484 expenses,and consultant costs. 485 (e) Each applicant shall comply with the provisions of chapter 75, reimbursement of development 486 expenses,escrows. 487 Sec.82-48.-Variances. 488 (a) Standards.Where the cityfinds that unusual hardship = . t . .-. / Commented[SM27]:Unusual hardship is the legal 489 may result from strict compliance with the provisions of this chapter, other than the procedural standard.462.358 subd.6. 490 provisions, and the purposes of this chapter may be served to a greater extent by an alternative 491 proposal,the city may approve variances to this chapter so that substantial justice may be done and 492 the public interest secured,provided that such a variance shall not have the effect of nullifying the 493 intent and purpose of this chapter;and further provided the city shall not approve variances unless it 494 shall make findings based upon the evidence presented to it in each specific case that: 495 (1) An unusual hardship on the land exists,including but not limited to inadequate access to direct 496 sunlight for solar energy systems; 497 (2) The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public safety,health or welfare or 498 injurious to other property; 499 (3) The conditions upon which the request for a variance is based are unique to the property for 500 which the variance is sought and are not applicable generally to other property; 501 (4) Because of the particular physical surroundings,shape or topographical conditions of the specific 502 land involved, an unusual hardship to the land would result, as distinguished from an 503 inconvenience or hardship to the subdivider, and it is found that the strict enforcement of this 504 chapter would result in an environmentally unsound development of the land; 505 (5) The variance will not in any manner vary the provisions of the .• 506 planCommunity Management Plan; 507 L : 508 :: : . .:: :: : • ' - -: ":• •I Commented[JB28]:Council:This clause currently does 509 (7) The variances will not in any manner vary the procedural requirements of this chapter. not give the Council flexibility from any standard in the zoning ordinance. June 15,2020 page 12 510 (b) Conditions. In approving the variance, the city shall may require such conditions as will, in its 511 judgment, secure substantially the objectives of this chapter,; 512 i Commented[SM29]:We used to have the developer sign 513 (c) Procedure. An application for any such variance shall be submitted in writing by the subdivider at the variance resolution. I don't think we can make the 514 the time when the preliminary plat is filed.The application shall state fully the grounds and all of the developer agree-either they comply with the variance or they don't. 1515 facts to justify the granting of a variance and will be approved or disapproved denied at the time the 516 council reviews the preliminary plat. Commented[JB30]:Added words 517 State Law reference—Variances,Minn.Stat.§462.358,subd.6. 518 Sec.82-49.-Issuance of building permits and certificates of occupancy. 519 (a) When public and/or private improvements are required for a subdivision, building permits and 520 certificates of occupancy may be issued only subject to the approval of the council and shall be 521 provided for in to the evelo meat contract. Commented[SM31]:Do we always have a development 522 contract?Is there something out there called a 'development contract"? 523 _... 524 _ Commented[JB32]:Where would we put in the requirement of a development contract. I only think we 525 (be) In no case will a certificate of occupancy be issued to any building on any lot in the subdivision need them if there are public or provide roads or utilities 526 which lot has access only on a new public or private street until a certificate of satisfactory completion involved. 527 has been issued for that public or private street. 5281 .. . s•. • '" • Commented[SM33]:I haven't seen this before. 529 • : :.' :'•_ :- _ . -_. _ . _... _ . . ... • F ... b �r Commented[JB34]:Removed 30 31 532 533 jer-isdietien: 534 (b) With respect to such lot or parcel of land,if a building-permit or certificate of occupancy has been 535 536 538 ': . . • e, . . .. .. • •, . • . . .. 539 540 .. . - . - . _ 541 . . 542 art-iete: 543 State Law reference—Required disclosures by sellers,Minn.Stat.§462.358,subd.4a. 544 Sec.82-51.-Appeals. 545 The zoning board of appeals and adjustments established in section 78-96 shall also serve as the 546 subdivision board of appeals and adjustments.The board has the following powers with respect to the 547 subdivision regulations: 548 kl) To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order,requirement, 549 decision or determination made by an administrative officer in the enforcement of chapter 82.An 550 appeal under this section shall be filed no later than ten days following the order,requirement, June 15,2020 page 13 551 decision or determination.Appeals to the board of appeals and adjustments may be taken by any 552 affected person upon compliance with any reasonable conditions imposed by the subdivision 553 regulations.Failure to file an appeal within ten days of the decision shall constitute a waiver of 554 the person's right to a hearing.I. — __.....___ _ ,-- Commented[JB35]:Council:Who do you want hearing 555 _ appeals? b• • 556 557 558 to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. 559 The procedures set forth in Chapter 78,Division 3 sections 78 97 through 78 99 apply to 560 determinations of the subdivision board of appeals and adjustments. 561 Secs.82-52-82-80.-Reserved. 562 563 ARTICLE III.-PLAT APPROVAL PROCESSm 564 State Law reference—Plat review procedures,Minn.Stat.§462.358,subd.3b. 565 566 DIVISION 1.-GENERALLY 567 568 Sec.82-81.-Restrictions on development prior to final plat approval. 1569 Once a preliminary plat has been submitted to the city,whether a subdivision is occurring or not,no 570 building permits will be issued by the city for the construction of any building,structure or improvement 571 to the land or to any lot in the proposed subdivision until all requirements of this chapter have been fully 572 completed,including the official recording of the final plat,or until the application is formally withdrawn 573 by the subdivider.When specifically authorized by this chapter and specifically approved by the council, 574 permits may be issued for the construction of certain improvements such as roads,utilities and drainage 575 structures. 1576 Sec.82-82.-Coordination of flexible zoning application w•ith subdivision approval. 577 (a) Intent. It is the intent of this chapter that subdivision review be carried out simultaneously with the 578 review of accessory zoning applications,(variances,zone changes or other similar prerequisites)to the 579 subdivision. - • :•' e.:: •.. •:• .L --" Commented[JB36]:We removed'flexible zoning 580 (b) Fees.Whenever a proposed subdivision requires accessory zoning applications,includes a use of land applications in favor of calling it what they are. 581 . • ° -• •D ::: : . ,the subdivider shall file the separate flexible zoning applications 582 and pay all required fees concurrent with the filing of the preliminary plat application. 584 , •b •b- 585 Nae-molal-plat- 586 Sec.82-83.-Official submission dates. 587 (a) (a)The City shall establish and publish submittal deadlines for land use applications annually. 588 Subdivision applications shall be submitted based on this schedule. 589 _ .. . : •: -_ . - • . 590 .• .-- . _ . ' •- ..• ... _. .. 591 592 :• 5. • '• _ •^::: _: i Commented[JB37]:Subdivisions had their own,different 593 (b) When a division or subdivision to which the regulations of the city do not apply is presented to the deadlines,causing problems for staff. 1594 city, the city clerk-administrator or designee shall within ten days certify that the subdivision 595 regulations of the city do not apply to the particular division. June 15,2020 page 14 596 (c) If the city or the responsible agency of the city fails to preliminarily approve or disapprove an 597 application within the review period,the application shall be deemed preliminarily approved;and upon 598 demand the city shall execute a certificate to that effect.Following preliminary approval,the applicant 599 may request final approval by the city; and upon such request, the city shall certify final approval 600 within 60 days if the applicant has complied with all conditions and requirements of applicable 601 regulations and all conditions and requirements upon which the preliminary approval is expressly 602 conditioned either through performance or the execution of appropriate agreements assuring 603 performance.If the city fails to certify final approval as so required,and if the applicant has complied 604 with all conditions and requirements, the application shall be deemed finally approved; and upon 605 demand the city shall execute a certificate to that effect.After final approval a subdivision may be 606 filed or recorded. 607 b : ••• • • • . • •. .•• • • 608 609 shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or dedication or platting 610 611 : e.....�,., : Commented[SM38]:This is the statute. 612 613 _. Commented[.11339]:Also stated in 82-86 614 615 -; •:: — CommentedDo we need thissection?• ° '' [JB401: se . 616 : . 617 . Commented[JB41]:Comment intended:do we need to restate state statute. 618 State Law reference—Similar provisions,Minn.Stat.§462.358,subd.3c. 19 Sec.82-84.-Initial staff review. 620 Any person proposing subdivision of land within the city shall meet with the City Administrator or 621 designee zoning a`ministrator to review briefly the proposed subdivision, : . . _•• • • .•.. • 622 and receive advice conceming subdivision requirements,required submittals,fees and schedules.The 1623 zonin_administrator City Administrator or designee shall classify the proposed subdivision in accordance 624 with section 82-15. 625 Sec.82-85.-Sketch plan. 626 (a) Purpose.The sketch plan is an initial presentation of the subdivider's intention and serves as the basis 627 for conceptual discussion between the city and the subdivider and provides beneficial savings for the 628 subdivider. 629 (b) Requirements.A sketch plan review may be completed for all subdivision applications. 630 (c) Sketch plan application. 631 (1) All subdivisions. The planning commission shall review all sketch plans based upon the 632 subdivider's formal application. Incomplete applications will not be reviewed. Complete 633 applications shall include the following: 634 a. Completion of all items on the sketch plan application form; 635 b. Map-I-aA location map; 636 c. Map 2:a half section map; June 15,2020 page 15 637 d. Map 3: aA map in a form acceptable to the City Administrator or 638 designee which adequately describes the proposed subdivision in such a way as to show 639 compliance with this chapter; 640 e. Any additional information requested by the City Administrator or designeezonin_ 641 administrator;and 642 f. Payment of the sketch plan review fee. 643 644 645 646 _ 647 (d) Sketch plan review and recommendations. 648 (1) Recommendations to the subdivider. After reviewing and discussing the sketch plan, City 649 Administrator or designee will advise in a general manner the subdivider of the changes or 650 additions,if any,which will be required in the layout,and the character and extent of required 651 improvements and dedications which will be required as a prerequisite to the approval of the final 652 plat. 653 (2) Sketch plan review. The planning commission shall study the sketch plan, taking into 654 consideration the requirements of this chapter and the best use of the land being subdivided. 1655 Particular attention will be given to the location, arrangement, shape and size of lots, access 656 parkland dedication, the further development of adjoining lands as yet unsubdivided, and the 657 requirements of chapter 78 and the-:••: =• • . •- .. . .• ommunity Management Plan. 658 (2) Recommendations to the subdivider. After reviewing and discussing the sketch plan, the 659 planning commission and/or zoning administrator will advise in a general manner the subdivider 660 of the changes or additions, if any,which will be required in the layout,and the character and 661 extent of required improvements and dedications which will be required as a prerequisite to the 662 approval of the preliminary plat. • . -•• • :. .•^ •: ••_ •- . 663 664 (3) The applicant may request review by the City Council. Upon such request, the Planning 665 Commission's comments shall be forwarded to the City Council for study and comment. 666 [Reserved.] 667 b 668 . .. _ .... 669 670 construed as formal withdrawal of the proposed subdivision. Renewal of any proposed 671 b... 672 673 Sec.82-86.-Vested rights. 674 No vested rights shall accrue to any subdivision by reason of preliminary or final subdivision 675 approval except as stated in this article.For one year following preliminary approval and for two years 676 following final approval,unless the subdivider and the city agree otherwise,no amendment to a 677 comprehensive plan or official control shall apply to or affect the use,development density,lot size,lot 678 layout,or dedication or platting required or permitted by the approved application.Thereafter,pursuant to 679 its regulations,the city may extend the period by agreement with the subdivider and subject to all 680 applicable performance conditions and requirements,or it may require submission of a new application 681 unless substantial physical activity and investment has occurred in reasonable reliance on the approved 682 application,and the subdivider will suffer substantial financial damage as a consequence of a requirement June 15,2020 page 16 683 to submit a new application.In connection with a subdivision involving planned and staged development, 684 the city may by resolution or agreement grant the rights referred to in this section for such period of time 685 longer than two years which it determines to be reasonable and appropriate. 686 Secs.82-87-82-110.-Reserved. 687 1688 DIVISION 2.-PRELIMINARY PLAT Commented[SM42]:We should talk about this process. 689 We interchange platting and subdivision. 690 Sec.82-111.-Purpose and requirements. Commented[JB431:Subdivision is the activity,plat is the 691 (a) Purposes. During this stage, the subdivider details his their proposals and the city details the document. 692 subdivision requirements,in the form of a preliminary plat. • - ,._ 693 Commented[1644]:Idont know what this means. 694 (b) Requirements. The subdivider is required to furnish detailed surveying, engineering and legal 695 information sufficient to ensure compliance with the city's -:• : •• ,. , .-Community 696 Management Plan and chapter 78, and other local, stateState, federal, watershed or conservation 697 district regulations.A preliminary plat review shall be completed for each class II and III subdivision 698 proposed prior to the city's accepting any final plat application. 700 701 702 703 J645]:Sketch plans should be encouraged, 704 Sec.82-112.- +vision-Plat applicationbut not required. 705 (a) Class I sPlat . All _preliminary plat applications shall provide the following to be deemed Commented[JB46]:Removed the classes of subdivision, 06 complete - . . ,.• • • .,. • . • •• .• •• . •,: most fell under the Class 2 and 3 designation whose review process was the same.The city could introduce a minor 07 (1) Completion of all items required by the City:• . - . .,. _ , subdivision,for plats that create 3 or less lots;the only benefit to this would be to have a lighter review process. 708 _(2) A location map; 709 (3) A half section map; 710 (4) A certificate of survey of the property 711 (5) Class I subdivisions that were required to have a sketch plan review may use all required maps 712 ., 713 714 715 .. 716 (2) Provision of the utilities map,if applicable 717 (3) A soil survey and report(to be requested by the city if the City Administrator or designee feels 718 such information is necessary for the subdivision review)' 719 (4) A soil erosion and sedimentation control plan; 720 (5) A vegetation preservation and protection plan 721 L67) Any additional information requested by the : ' d •: . ; ity Administrator or 722 designee or planning commission; 723 a. Proposed protective covenants; June 15,2020 page 17 724 b. Statement of the proposed use of lots stating type of residential buildings with number of 725 proposed dwelling units and type of business or industry, so as to reveal the effect of the 726 development on traffic,fire hazards and congestions of population;or 727 c. Where the subdivider is the owner or intends to attempt to acquire the property adjacent to 728 that property which is being proposed for the subdivision, the planning commission may 729 require that the subdivider submit a sketch plan of the remainder of the property so as to 730 show the possible relationships between the proposed subdivision and any future 731 subdivision; in any event, all subdivisions shall be shown to relate well with existing or 732 potential adjacent subdivisions 733 734 (8) Payment of the preliminary subdivisionplat review fee;and 735 736 737 Certification does not mean all information is correct,just that apparently all issues identified in the 738 subdivisionplat have been addressed by the subdivider. 739 _ • _ a• . . _ • . .. . . . ... . . • .. 740 741 (2) All maps and other information submitted for the sketch plan review shall be considered 742 b 743 744 (3) A property owner's list per public li wing requirements of section 78 18 745 (1) Provision of copies of the preliminary plat in a form required by the city; 746 (5) In areas served by public sewer and/or water,a plan showing the existing service ties and the 747 748 D. 749 6 750 6 751 (8) Payment of the preliminary plat review fee;and 752 753 been completed in compliance with chapter 78 and this chapter. 754 • . .. - - ,' . . a. 755 .._ • . . •• ... . 756 (c) Class 111 subdivisions.Complete class Ill preliminary plat application shall include the following: 757 (1) Completion of all items on the preliminary plat application form: 758 . 759 •• - • ..�. . .. _ . 760 .. . . . • 761 (3) A property owner's list per public hearing requirements of section 78'18 762 ' , June 15,2020 page 18 763 (5) Provision of the utilities map; 764 (6) A soil survey and report by the Hennepin Soils and Water Conservation District(to be requested by 765 _ . . .. • . • ' • _ ... 766 • . . • ..• . . , 767 (8) A vegetation preservation and protection plan; 768 ' ... • . . _ • . .. .� • .. ._ 769 a. Proposed protective covenants; 770 _ . .• _ . 5:: . . - • • . •b ` •. • ..• . •. •b 771 •o . • •. ••• • .. •• 772 fire hazards and congestions of population;or 773 .. • • . _ 774 . . _ • .. _ 775 subdivider submit a sketch plan of the remainder of the property so as to show the possible relationships 776 -- .• . . ... • • .. - 778 (10) Payment of the preliminary plat review fee;and 779 . . -. b.. . . • .. .. 780 been completed in compliance with chapter 78 and this chapter.Certification does not mean all 81 . • . • , . ..• . . 82 addressed by the subdivider. 783 (b4) Application deadlines.The subdivider shall file a complete preliminary subdivision-plat application 784 with the b ity Administrator or designee at the deadline established by the city 785 annually. 786 Sec.82-113.-Staff and agency review of the preliminary hex la / Commented[1647]•Search for plat versus subdivision. 787 (a) General coordination.On behalf of the city,the . itv Administrator or designee Plat is the document. 788 shall coordinate the review of preliminary s4bil-ivisienplats by all appropriate city staff persons and 789 governmental agencies. The subdivider is responsible for filing all applications and obtaining all 790 appropriate approvals from other agencies and to keep the b City Administrator or 791 designee fully informed of the status of the review by the appropriate agency. The subdivider shall 792 submit to the city copies of all applications filed with other governmental agencies. 793 (b) Referral to planning commission.Upon receipt of a complete preliminary subdivisienplat application, 794 the . : City Administrator or designee shall place the application on the agenda of 795 the regularly scheduled planning commission meeting for which the public hearing has been 796 scheduled.The planning commission shall then begin reviewing the proposal. 797 (c) Public hearing meeting notice.Notice of the hearing shall be consistent with section 78-48. 798 _(d) Referral to city staff.The zoning administrator shall refer the application to all appropriate city staff 799 800 by the public service director,chief of police, fire chief,building official, on site septic manager or 801 other city personnel. June 15,2020 page 19 802 (e) Referral to park commission. Where the proposed plat includes provisions for the dedication of land 803 for public park purposes,trails or jointly used recreational facilities,the zoning administrator City 804 Administrator or designee shall refer the application to the park commission,which shall review the 805 proposal and provide recommendations to the ity Council. 807 b_ _ 808 809 �. \:.. ... .. 810 . •. .. _ _.. _ .. .•:: b•.. 'o 811 812 813 (g) Public notice signs. In class II and Ill subdivisions,the subdivider, pursuant to the direction of the 814 b _ 815 b .. ... . ... . . _ .. ' 816 817 shall not be refunded if the signs are lost or damaged. The subdivider shall place the signs on the 818 819 820 Sec.82-114.-Planning commission review of the preliminary sonplat. 821 (a) Generally. The planning commission shall study and review all preliminary di4isiett I�at 822 applications.Particular attention will be given to the location,arrangement and size of lots and blocks; 823 the location,width,length and continuity of streets;the topography and ecology of the land;sewage 824 disposal; traffic; drainage; public services; the further development of adjoining lands as yet 825 unsubdivided; the requirements of chapter 78 and . _•_• ' _ . _ .. . .•Community 826 Management Plan;and the recommendations of the city staff and other governmental agencies. 827 (b) Planning commission public hearing.At the advertised time and place,the planning commission shall 828 hold a public hearing as required by Minn.Stat.§462.358. m•_ : ...• •: -: -:• ••: =: •. - Commented[SM481:No. Public hearing includes the 829 -.••••:•_ •:-- .•_ '_ :: •.• '•:• :-••.The recommendations of city staff and governmental ability to speak. •• :.: •_ •-. • ;record.At the discretion of the planning 830 agencies shall be entered in the • p g Commented[JB49]:Is this legal? 831 commission,the public hearing may be closed or may be held open for additional information. 832 (c) Planning commission recommendations.After the planning commission has reviewed the preliminary 1833 subdivision-plat and the testimony and exhibits submitted at the public hearing, including citizen 834 comments and the recommendations of the city staff and other govemmental agencies,the subdivider 835 shall be advised of any required changes and/or additions.The planning commission shall recommend 836 approval, conditionally approve or disapprove-deny of the preliminary subdiv-isionplat. 837 p.. 838 •- •- - •.. . .__• .6•.: : : •• •b. If the planning 839 commission fails to act within the 1020-day period,the • • • . : ity Administrator or 840 designee shall refer the application to the council for action within 120 days of the date of certification. 841 842 .. .. .. b 843 . ... . . .•. . . . 844 (d) Class 1 subdivisions. Upon receiving the recommendations of the planning commission, the 845 846 847 _ 848 ^'^gad '^' trator Commented[JB50]:Again,removing the different classes for subdivisions. June 15,2020 page 20 849 • . . . • a . _.• . 6 850 i .. 851 . _ • • • .:: •• • • •. 852 .. b• ... ... .. 853 ! .. 854 and at least ten days prior to review of the preliminary plat by the council. 855 (2) If the subdivider refuses to incorporate any required changes and/or additions,the subdivider 856 'o 857 858 859 6 860 861 Sec.82-115.-Council review of the preliminary&u{)•div+siaealat. 862 (a) Required. The council shall review all class Il and class III preliminary plat applications.Particular 863 attention will be given to the record developed by the planning commission's study of the proposal 864 and to the recommendations of the planning commission and the city staff. 865 (b) Council action.The council should approve,conditionally approve or disapprove the preliminary plat 866 within 120 days following the date of certification by the • • . • ity Administrator or 867 designee of the completed application unless an extension of the review period has been agreed to by 868 the subdivider in writing. 869 (c) Recommendations to the subdivider. The action of the council shall be in the form of a resolution 870 setting forth the conditions of approval,including any changes,additions and/or other requirements to 71 be met by the subdivider prior to final plat approval.In addition to the specific conditions stated,the 72 subdivider must fulfill all other requirements and performance standards of this Code. The zoning 873 6 874 875 (d) Failure to act by the city.If the city or the responsible agency of the city fails to preliminarily approve 876 or disapprove an application within the review period,the application shall be deemed preliminarily 877 approved;and upon demand the city shall execute a certificate to that effect. Following preliminary 878 approval the applicant may request final approval by the city, and upon such request the city shall 879 certify final approval within 60 days if the applicant has complied with all conditions and requirements 880 of applicable regulations and all conditions and requirements upon which the preliminary approval is 881 expressly conditioned either through performance or the execution of appropriate agreements assuring 882 performance.If the city fails to certify final approval as so required,and if the applicant has complied 883 with all conditions and requirements, the application shall be deemed finally approved; and upon 1884 demand the city shall execute a certificate to that effect.After final approval,a stibdiicisionplat may be 885 filed or recorded. 886 '` :- : .:•••: .:.' •• •• : : : .1 „----•__.._.......—____._ Commented 1)8511:All subdivisions result in a plat. Coeste 887 (a) Zoning regulations. Every plat shall conform to existing zoning regulations and subdivision 888 e. 889 6 890 district and this chapter. 891 (b) Public improvements. The planning commission may recommend that all public improvements be 892 _ 6 893 894 June 15,2020 page 21 895 896 _ 897 . . 898 0 899 900 1(c) Grading of site prior to final approval. Subsequent to preliminary plat approval by the council,the 901 subdivider may apply for a land alteration permit from the city and upon receipt of such permit may 902 commence construction to the grades and elevations required by plans approved by the city.) _- Commented[JB52]:This allows grading to commence 903 (d) Referral to other government agencies or jurisdictions. Followinb action by the council on the prior to final plat. 904 Commented[JB53I:We don't usually do this. I can 905 - . . imagine situation where the city may allow grading work to 906 council action on the final plat. commence after PP,but before FP. 907 Sec.82-117.-Effective period of preliminary siththvisithiIJ�at review. 908 ' _ _ Csouncil 909 resolution concerning any class II and class Ill preliminary plat shall remain effective for one year. 910 Failure to file a complete final subilWisiwriplat application within this time period shall be construed as 911 formal withdrawal of the proposed subdivisienplat. 912 - •• • - -- • . .•- - - 913 .. . :. : _ - ::••• 914 ._ , - . , _ -..• -. • _. •_: .. . 915 - ...• , . _ _ . . - 916 ... . .. _ . . .. .. . • _ . •• 917 .. _ ... -. • ._. _ ... ._ .. • ... _. _ -• -.. .L_(Commented[JB54]:Also in 82-83 and 82-86 918 Secs.82-118-82-140.-Reserved. 919 1920 DIVISION 3.-FINAL PLATS 921 922 Sec.82-141.-Generally. 923 (a) Purpose. Final sablivisionplat review is the final third stage of the sithclivisithiplat review process. 924 The legal documents, including suibdivisienplat drawings, are reviewed for completeness and 925 conformity with the intent and requirements of the preliminary plat approval. 926 (b) Requirements.The subdivider applicant is required to furnish completed surveying,engineering,and 927 legal documents suitable for recording in the county recorder's office,incorporating all the information 928 and/or changes required as part of the preliminary subcli isienplat review and resolution of preliminary 929 subddivisienplat approval. All documents and requirements shall be completed by the subdivider, 930 reviewed by the city staff and the council,and approved by the council prior to the mayor's and city 931 clerk's certifying approval of the final sithilivi.sthnplat. 932 933 (c) Prerequisite. A preliminary subdivisionplat of substantially the same proposal shall have been 934 approved by the council within one year of the filing of any final subdivisionplat application. The 935 zoning administrator City Administrator or designee shall review each final subdivisionplat 936 application to ensure substantial conformity to the requirements and representations on the preliminary 937 sithilivisieriplat. 938 (d) (Substantial change from preliminary•.::' ' ilat.The :• Vis.::..;.,.,..:., Commented MASS]:I'm not convinced we can reject the 939 for fro. ilingandier the council may refuse to review-approve any final ski on plat application which application-rather than simply deny the application 940 is substantially different from the approved preliminary subilivisiennlat,or which discloses possible June 15,2020 page 22 941 misrepresentations on the preliminary plat.In the case of such denial refusa' the 942 administrator- council may require the applicants' ., der.A ler to'resubmit jthe proposal for planning i Commented[JB56]:Isn't this where the cc can treat the 943 commission reconsideration,and may require the subdivider applicant to submit or resubmit any and final plat as a preliminary plat and start over? 944 all documents or information required for preliminary st.+hdivisionplat review.Planning commission 945 reconsideration may include a new public hearing'• _:.' •: : '•6_:••• • ':• : :•'•_• 946 administrator. The subdivider applicant shall pay applicable •. --... . • 947 preliminary sitkliN4sionplat review fee_ . ..• . _. . ... .... 948 _ Commented(B57]:Does this need to be spelled out in the code?Revise and reword. 949 Sec.82-142.-Final subdivisionplat application. 950 (a) All subdivisionplats. Complete final subdivisionplat applications shall include one or all of the 951 following to be determined by the zoning administrator: 952 (1) Completion of all items required by city staff:• 953 required for class I subdivisions)., 954 (2) All information submitted for the preliminary sithdik4sioriplat review shall be in the record and 955 shall be considered submitted for final subdivisienplat review purposes. 956 (3) One original and two copies signed by the grantor,of any required drainage,utility,road,access, 957 open space,conservation or other easement in the standard form as provided by the city. Any 958 other form or changes to the standard form must be approved by the city attorney prior to filing 1959 the final subdivisieuplat application. 960 (4) One original and two copies, signed by the grantor, of any quitclaim deed or warranty deed 961 dedicating required land to the city or other governmental jurisdiction. 962 (5) One original and two copies of any private covenant, homeowners'association agreement or 63 other private restriction intended to be filed in the chain of title of the property at the time the 64 final subdivisienplat is recorded. 965 (6) A developer's agreementcontracti„including_the complete construction plans,specifications and i Commented[JB58]:Check to make sure all are caught 966 performance security ,shall be submitted by the subdivider for all required 967 public or private improvements which are to be installed and/or completed after final 1968 subdivisieaplat approval. 969 (7) A certificate of satisfactory completion signed by the city engineer shall be submitted by the 970 subdivider for all required public and private improvements which have been or were required to 971 be completed prior to final subdivision-plat approval. 972 (8) Any additional information requested by the ••'•�, City Administrator or 973 designee or the council. 974 (9) _—Payment of applicable fees and payments identified in the development agreement, or 975 preliminary plat resolution. • • ... ' • _ - _..• _. - . .. Commented[SM59]:It seems like we could combine 9. 976 (10) A certified check made payable to the city for the park dedication fee. lo,u. 977 _ 978 979 the city.]((10)Confirmation that all county taxes are paid. Commented[JB60]:This is when we record. 980 981 (1 1)Title commitment or acceptable evidence of title. 982 983 _(12) Written and dated certification by the zoning administrator confirming that the final 984 985 June 15,2020 page 23 986 987 - ._ 988 . 989 : • : ::: .. -. 990 b' b - b• 991 b . 992 . . .. - 993 included. 994 (2) One copy of the certificate of survey drawn to a scale of one inch equals 200 feet. 995 996 a: 997 (12) The final plat. Record plat drawings shall be prepared by a registered land surveyor in 998 accordance with applicable statute and county regulations and shall be submitted in the form of 999 at least two plastic film reproducible copies,three copies for Torrens property.Original signatures 1000 and certifications shall be provided on the mounted and reproducible copies for the owners,those 1001 possessing any other property interest,the professional engineer(if applicable),and the registered 1002 surveyor. Spaces for certification by the city(signature lines for the mayor and clerk)shall be 1003 provided. 1004 (132) One copy of the final plat reduced to a scale of one inch equals 200 feet. 1005 (d) Application deadlines.The subdivider shall file a complete final semen plat application with the 1006 g administrator City Administrator or designee within one year of preliminary subdivision-plat 1 007 1008 . 1009 • . ..•.. .... ..• . . . .. .:: . 1010 1011 - . .. . •_. . 1012 . .. - , b.. -• . . . 1013 . .. - -- _.. •• _ .. . . . ... . . . . 1014 - . •6 . • - 1015 Sec.82-1434.-Staff review of the final whilivisionplat. 1016 1017 (a) Coordination. The .-_ .:• .•' . - ity Administrator or designee shall coordinate the review 018 of final subd visionplat applications. 1019 (b) Referral to city staff. 31020 (1) The .: .. . . itv Administrator or designee shall refer the application to all 1021 appropriate city staff personnel for review and certification. 1022 (2) The _ . . . ity Administrator or designee shall review the final subdiv-isien 1023 application for conformity with chapter 78 and this chapter and with the conditions and 1024 requirements of the preliminary subdivisionplat approval, and shall certify their status to the 1025 council. 1026 (3) The a ; 027 = •:city attorney shall review the record plat drawing, 1028 metes and bounds descriptions,easements,deeds,covenants,agreements and other documents 1029 for proper legal form,proper representation and complete execution by all required parties,all to 1030 uphold the interests of the city,and shall certify the approval to the council. June 15,2020 page 24 1031 (4) The city engineer shall: 1032 a. Review the record plat drawing,metes and bounds description,easements,deeds,agreements 1033 and other documents for proper and complete legal property descriptions; 034 b. Review and approve all construction plans . • • • •_; • ' • 'C° _-----'"�Commented[JB61]:Confirm with Adam. 035 c. Approve all construction estimates-bend-amounts-for work required to be completed after 036 final subdivisienplat approval; 1037 d. Issue,when completed,certificates of satisfactory completion for all work required to be 1038 completed prior to final subsivisi^-•plat approval;and 1039 e. Certify the approval and/or status of the above to the council. 1040 (5) The city finance director shall review all final sabdivisienplat applications as to tax status of the 1041 property; the original, outstanding and proposed special assessment amounts levied; and the 042 payment, bonding and status of all fees or charges imposed on the property 043 . . 2- ' ... ; shall prepare all special assessment 1044 reapportionments;and shall certify the above to the council. 1045 (6) Additional comments by other city staff personnel shall be submitted in writing to the zoning 046 administrator-City Administrator or designee for inclusion in the record. 1047 (c) Requirements of other agencies. The subdivider shall submit to the city all written confirmation of 1048 official action taken by governmental agencies or jurisdictions subsequent to the approval of the 049 preliminary sienplat. Such confirmation, including all necessary permits or authorizations, 050 shall be submitted at the meeting at which the council will act on the final sivtsienplat. 051 (d) Final sithalivisienplat resolution. After review and certification of the final subdtvisionplat 52 application,the ity Administrator or designee, .::• •- • . •-• ., 053 :• : .;: • :: •• • ;: : . . •, shall prepare a resolution of final 1054 s anplat approval or disapproval-denial to be presented to the council. 1055 1056 Sec.82-145.-Council review of the final plat. 057 (a) Powers.The council is the,acting as the platting authority pursuant to Minn.Stat. §462.358,shall 058 modify,approve or disapprove-deny all final plat applications_ 059 (b) Council determination.The council shall,within 60 days of the date of the filing of a completed final 060 061 062 . . 063 -. • : . . • • ... .. .o - . 064 .. . 065 066 :. 067 .. 068 ,• .. , • • .. . e• . 069 .. `.. . 070 . . 071 Sec.82-146.-Effective period of final sabdivisionpj approval. 072 (a) The intent of the snbdw-isienplat approval process is that final approval will be granted only upon 073 satisfactory completion of all requirements by the subdivider, in which case sebdivisienplat 074 certification and recording will follow without delay.The Final Plat shall be recorded within 1 year of 075 approval date. • •. _ _ . .,. ' ... .•. _. June 15,2020 page 25 076 077 078 . .. _ 079 or-disapproval- 1080 (b) Failure of the subdivider to complete any or all requirements within this time period shall constitute 081 a formal withdrawal of the proposed plat. •:•- : ::: :: ... - • 082 :! .. ... . 083 .:: '_. 'i :'•b.:: '.. ': 084 085 b _ 086 1087 Secs.82-147-82-170.-Reserved. 1088 089 ! . !• . . . ! _ .. .. . . . _ '. ' ! . _ 090 091 Se^ 82 ,7, Ccncrolly 092 • _. ... ... - :: • :.: : - 093 .:: : ' . ••• • ._. . _ :. .. . . _ .. _ . 094 095 _ .. _ • . . . . . . •b, .. . ... . 096 :••:• .••: ••:• : 097 098 099 :: ...-. .-: .:: _: :. :: : _:••: : _. .._. _ . _ . -• . . • 100 .. . . .. -- _ . . . .... 102 _ . _ . . . 103 104 : : : :: :: : : - ------ Commented[JB62]:Im not sure this is needed.We 1105 Sec.82-172.-Documents, approve final plats by resolution.We don't prepare a separate form. 106 (a) Required.The documents provided by the subdivider for final plat certification 107 divisions-shall be the same documents certified by the city staff unless changes,alterations or additions 108 are required by the resolution of final sabdivisiersplat approval, in which case corrected documents 1109 shall be supplied by the subdivider. 1110 (b) Documents to be certified by the city.The following documents shall be certified by the city: 1111 .. _ 1112 (2f Two plastic film reproducible copies(in the case of Torrens property,three copies)of the-r®serd 1113 plat: . •,. . . . . . 1114 (32) Resolution of final subdivisionplat approval;three one copyies provided by the city. 1115 (c) Additional documents. The following additional documents shall be recorded with the 1116 plat: 1117 (1) One original signed by the grantor of any required drainage,utility,road,access,open space, 1118 conservation or other easement in the standard form as provided by the city. 1119 (2) One original signed by the grantor of any quitclaim deed or warranty deed dedicating required 1120 land to the city or other govemmental jurisdiction. June 15,2020 page 26 1121 (3) One original copy of any private covenant,homeowners'association agreement or other private 1122 restriction intended to be filed in the chain of title of the property at the time the final plat or 123 survey is recorded. 124 (4) One original copy of any required development contract in the standard form as provided by 125 the city. 1126 1127 Sec.82-173.-Staff certification. 128 The City-zoninggAdministrator,zoning administrator,city attorney,city engineer and city finance 129 director or their designees shall each review the final legal documents and status of each sutiii-ii4s-ionplat 130 proposal as provided by section 82 111(a)and(b).Whenever the resolution of final subdrvistenplat 131 approval requires changes,alterations or additions prior to final sulAiwis4einplat certification,upon receipt 132 of all corrected documents,the City Administrator or designee shall refer the revised 1133 documents to the affected staff for their review and recertification. 1134 Sec.82-174.-Official semen IJ g certification. 1135 Upon receipt of the final staff certifications,the city clerk shall determine that there has been final 1136 staff approval and shall thereafter present the final subdivisionplat drawings and resolution of final 137 subdivisienplat or survey approval for the endorsement of the signature of the mayor,or the acting mayor 1138 presiding in the absence of the mayor.Upon endorsement of the mayor,the city clerk shall attest to the 1139 mayor's signature and the final city approval of the subdiwisionplat by endorsin_his signature and 1140 affixing the seal of the city on ach drawing and the resolution of final subdivisienplat approval. 1141 . . .. • . •• . 1142 (a) Completion of procedure. The subdivision procedure shall be completed by the city within 30 day, 1143 ... ... ... . . •_ . . 45 :•I . " Commented[JB63]:Do we want to add something that 1146 e•c : •_ . -:: : . __ .._ _ _ the city can release to the applicant. 1147 - . . . . . . ' . :i.--: . .. , : . . 1148 1149 _ ... 1150 •••- :•••:'.. . 5 :. . . . _ , , :.:,:.—• • . _ _ . 1151 easement. 1152 •_..-. .. .:: .. 1153 1154 - e-: :-.:...•: _ .. . _ _. _ . _ - - • • 1155 — Commented[JB64]:Cant we just say the subdivision 1156 (c) Copies to be returned to subdivider.The city shall return the following documents to the subdivider: needs to be filed,and leave it at that,without relisting all of the required documents? 1157 (1) One original copy of a certificate of survey. 1158 (2) The record plat drawing;one hardshell mounted copy if the applicant has asked the surveyor for 1159 an extra copy.Copies required by the city are set forth in section 82 112(c). 1160 (3) The resolution of final plat or survey approval;one certified copy. 1161 (1) One copy of all other easements,deeds, covenants or agreements filed by the city concurrent 1162 with the filing of the final plat or survey. June 15,2020 page 27 • • 163 • ... - - .• . - - - :.- 164b ^ ! .. 165 = = . •' : : : , '•- : =: : :: ' • • _ Commented[SM65]:We should look at the timing.Are 166 • • :! :• • • we doing this?Is it always feasible? 1167 Sec.82-176.-Final acceptance of mprovementsl. Commented[1666]:Why do we have this? 168 Final acceptance of all improvements and release of 13en4Securitvs shall be as and when set forth in Commented[SM67]:Do we do this? 169 the ..: _ --•• r evelopment contract and section 82-171.Final acceptance of all public 170 improvements for which the city will thereafter be responsible shall be by separate resolution motio n of -- Commented[JB68]:Acceptance requires resolution.We 171 the city.The approval and certification by the city of a subdivisienplat and/or the acceptance and don't do this.We accept by motion. 1172 recording of any easement or deed shall not be deemed to constitute or imply acceptance by the city of 173 any street,road,easement or parts shown on the subdienplat or identified by easement or deed. 174 175 176 •. : : . ': : : . .:: . . . .. _ • • • 177 .•: :• .: -. •:• . .. •• _ . . _ • •. :. e-•._ . . 178 : •• — 179 . - . .•• . .. ... •.• :.• • . • . .•_ •• b.. .• _ 180 _ -. - - • . ' 181 b ... . _ .. 182 _ . .. - . . .•b• .. . . •• • _ . . - - . ' • . 183 184 185 : . 1186 Secs.82-178-82-199.-Reserved. 1187 1188 `,DIVISION 5.-EXCEPTION 1189 1190 Sec.82-200.-Exception. ;(191 (a) Upon request,the -:•-••.•• : : ::-5 :- : ity Administrator or designee shall,within ten 1192 days,certify that the following are excepted from chapter 82 of the City Code: 4193 (1) A division of property where Aall the resulting parcels,tracts,lots or interests will be 20 acres 1194 or larger lin size and 500 feet in width for residential uses and five acres or larger in size for Commented[SM69]:This comes from the definition of a 1195 commercial and industrial uses,or subdivision. Has this occurred. 1196 (2) Will create cemetery lots,or Commented[1870]:The exception just says that what is proposed is not a subdivision. 1197 (3) Is court ordered,or Commented[1671]:Also referenced in Sec 82-83 1198 (4) Is an adjustment of a lot line by the relocation of a common boundary and no new non- 1199 conformities are created or an existing non-conformity is increased. 200 (b) Procedure for exempted subdivisions.The owners of such lots to be certified shall file with the zoning 201 admi^tstfaterCity Administrator or designee a certificate of survey of the lots to be divided,and pay 1202 the required fee.Such certificate of survey shall show the dimensions of the lots,as measured upon 1203 the recorded plan, the area of the lots, all corner elevations, all existing structures, including 1204 dimensions to existing and proposed property lines,all visible encroachments,all easements of record, 1205 and their proposed division.A written description of the separately described tracts which will result 1206 from the proposed division shall be included on the survey.If the proposed certification complies with 1207 all of the requirements of this section,it will be approved by the-:-•.•• - • - ::. --• :• :. :- ity 208 Administrator or Designee and forwarded to the county for filing. June 15,2020 page 28 209 I (c)Limitations. The City Administrator or designee shall not certify an adjustment of the lot line 210 involving the same lot or parcel more than one time per year. l — Commented[JB72]:I want to limit these. Multiple 1211 changes in a short period of time do not allow the county to 1212 Secs.82-201-82-210.-Reserved. keep up. Causing confusion by adjustments of adjustments. 1213 ARTICLE IV.-DESIGN STANDARDS AND REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTSu Commented[JB73]:Move to Article I,last section 1214 State Law reference—Authority to require improvements,Minn.Stat.§462.358,subd.la,2a. 1215 DIVISION 1.-GENERALLY 1216 1217 . .- - . .• . . ••• . .. . . • . •. . . 1218 - 1219 • . _ . , . . . 1220 3221 _ -. - • ... .. . 1222 jurisdictions. 1223 _ 1224 1225 • 1226 1227 .... .. 1228 1229 .m.',.:.-•••:• : • - . . .. ..• :.•:. :.. : :: . _ • : . . . - .. '230 land:-l ,---- Commented[JB74]:Shouldn't this be somewhere else? 31 Sec.82-212.-Special requirements for ass-ll-andIl-l-subdivisions involving public or private Is this stated elsewhere? Bl - 232 improvements. 233 The following provisions apply to class II and class Ill subdivisions: 234 (1) Improvements. • - -• • • • • . -• . .: : _. . . - 235 236 237 city. All public and/or private improvements required by the city to be completed by the 238 subdivider after final plat approval shall be fully set forth in a ... .• --••-• development 239 contract to be executed prior to final subdivisiouplat approval.All local streets in plats 1240 where sewer and water are not available shall be private unless otherwise approved by the city at 1241 preliminary plat approval.The city reserves the right to determine whether a road is 1242 to be public or private in all areas of the city. 1243 (2) Public roads.Public streets and roads will be required to be platted,constructed and dedicated 1244 to the city when required by the council consistent with the recommendations of the planning 1245 commission and the city staff and the established city practices and design standards.Public roads 246 shall .. 247 final plat approval or, when specifically authorized by the council, shall be subject to the 248 conditions of a ... ._ •--• .evelopment contract to be executed prior to final plat 1249 approval. 1250 (3) Private roads.When the preliminary plat has been approved on the basis of a private access road 1251 providing the only access to three or more lots,the private road shall be identified on the final 1252 plat as a separate outlot.The private road shall be identified by name if the road serves four or 1253 more lots.Whenever a private road outlot is proposed,the subdivider shall be required to provide June 15,2020 page 29 1254 for a permanent homeowners'association or road maintenance agreement acceptable to the city 1255 in order to ensure ownership and maintenance of the road outlot. 256 (4) Road and utilities easements. The council may, • : • • :. •257 _require the subdivider to convey to the city certain road and 258 utilityies easements permitting public ingress,egress and access over private roads as a condition 259 of final subdivi ionplat.approval. 1260 a. Whenever a private access road is authorized,the requird outlot hall be included on and Commented[SM751:Are we doing an outlot? 1261 conveyed in a road and utilities easement in the standard city form. Commented[JB76]:Yes,for a private road.A private 1262 b. Whenever areas of the plat are to be set aside for public or private utility construction and drive is handled with an easement 1263 use,such areas shall be described and dedicated for public use on the plat.This shall include 1264 areas shown on record plat drawings as drainage and utilities easements. 1265 c. Whenever a road and utilities easement is required,the easement shall be fully executed prior 1266 to final plat approval, using the legal descriptions of the final plat,and shall thereafter be 1267 filed in the chain of title of the property concurrent with the filing of the final plat. 1268 (5) Flowage and conservation easements.The council may, .:s• __: : :. • : •- : '• 269 commission and/or city staff, _require the subdivider to convey to the city a flowage and 1270 conservation easement restricting the use,improvement and development of certain portions of 1271 the land to be subdivided.Flowage and conservation easements will be made a condition of final 1272 plat approval as follows: 1273 a. Whenever any open water,creek,stream or natural drainageway occurs in any portion of the 1274 subject tract,the floodplain or floodway of the lake, pond, stream, creek or drainageway 1275 shall be described as a drainage easement subject to a flowage and conservation easement to 1276 the city. 1277 b. Whenever any wetlands,marshlands or lowland acting as a stormwater retention area occurs 1278 within any portion of the subject tract,that area shall be described consistent with established 1279 flood or water retention elevations,soil type characteristics and vegetation characteristics as 1280 a drainage easement subject to a flowage and conservation easement to the city. 1281 c. Flowage and conservation easements may be described and conveyed by metes and bounds 1282 with the ownership and maintenance responsibilities remaining with the individual parcels 283 1284 d. Whenever a flowage and conservation easement is required, the easement shall be fully 1285 executed prior to final plat approval,using the legal descriptions of the final plat,and shall 1286 thereafter be filed in the chain of title of the property concurrent with the filing of the final 1287 plat. 288 (6) Homeowners'association agreements.The council may, 289 ,require the subdivider to create a viable homeowners'association, 1290 acceptable to the city,which will be responsible for the ownership and maintenance of,among 1291 other things, common facilities, private roads, private sewer and water lines, open space, 1292 pathways,drainageways,and drainage ponds,and any improvements which are not to be accepted 1293 by the city for public ownership and maintenance. _._• . _ _ Commented[JB77]:Examine 1294 1295 of trash and debris, mosquito control, odor control, silt removal from drainage ponds and 1296 1297 _ 1298 1299 b." June 15,2020 page 30 300 corrective action will not change the status of a private improvement. Such a homeowners' 301 302 303 304 305 city attorney for review. 306 (7) ..a•' • ' • - -•Development contracts The council may, ::• ' - :••• •-:. • :- - Commented[SM78]:The Statute calls it a development 307 the planning commission and/or city staff, _require the subdivider to execute a subdivider's contract 308 agreementdevelopment contract prior to final plat approval. The • s•"�'.nr ivide•'s 309 agreementdevelopment contract shall set forth in the standard city form those improvements 310 required to be completed as a condition of plat approval,the party responsible for the 1311 installation and maintenance of the improvements,and the method of payment of the installation 1312 and maintenance costs. 1313 Sec.82-213.-Assurance for completion and maintenance of required public or private 314 improvement •• : : ••••• : •. :. : ' .:•. • : • •: , ; Commented[SM79]:We don't want bonds. 315 The following provisions apply to class II and class III subdivisions: 1316 (1) Completion of required public or private improvements.Before the mayor and city clerk sign a 1317 final plat,the subdivider shall complete or agree to complete at their his cost all of the required 1318 public or private improvements as required in this chapter and as specified in the resolution 1319 approving the final plat and in the ..- 6 • :• development contract,and in the case 1320 of public improvements,to dedicate them to the city,free and clear of all liens and encumbrances 1321 on the property and public improvements thus dedicated. -1322 (2) Performance Herd-Security 23 a. The city may require the developer furnish security,in the amount of 1125°4 of the cost of the -- Commented[JB80]:Used to be 150%,most cities use 324 improvements,to guarantee their completion.The city may waive the requirement that the 125%or less 325 326 _ . . 327 .. 328 by the city engineer as sufficient to secure to the city the satisfactory construction, 329 330 5 • ' • • ,. , . •••_• . •• ••- • ,, - _-- . Commented[5M81]:This is high. 1.25 is the average and 331 - - some communities are lowering it. 332 b. Such performance security bends shall comply with all statutory requirements and be 1333 satisfactory to the city attorney as to form and manner of execution.The period within which 1334 the required public and private improvements must be completed shall be specified by the 1335 city in the resolution approving the final subdivision plat or in the subdivider's 9336 agreementdevelopment contract.•: •. • : -- . . •• ,.•.. and shall not exceed 1337 two years from date of final plat approval. -. . ::• : :: - . •.. ,• _ _ 1338 1339 .. _ . 1340 the bona 1341 1(3) Temporary improvement. The subdivider shall build and pay for all costs of temporary 1342 improvements required by the city and shall maintain them for the period specified by the city. 1343 Prior to construction of any temporary facility or improvement,the subdivider shall file with the 1344 city a separate suitable performance bendsecurity for temporary facilities,which bendsecurity L_----{Commented[JB82]:Check bond versus security 345 shall ensure that the temporary facilities will be properly constructed,maintained and removed. June 15,2020 page 31 1346 (4) Cost of improvements. All required public and private improvements shall be made by the 347 subdivider,at his-their expense,without reimbursement by the city. 348 (5) Governmental units. Governmental units to which these beedsecuritys and contract provisions 1349 apply may file in lieu of a contract or bond a certified resolution or ordinance of that governmental 1350 unit's agreeing to comply with the provisions of this chapter. 1351 (6) Failure to complete required improvements. For subd visienplats for which no performance 352 13eadsecurity has been posted,if the improvements are not completed within the period specified 1353 by the city in the resolution approving the final plat,the approval shall be deemed to have expired. 354 In those cases where a performance hendsecurity has been posted and required improvements 355 have not been installed within the term of such performance bewdsecurity and resolution 356 approving the final plat,the city may thereupon declare the bendsecurity in default and require 1357 that all improvements be installed regardless of the extent of the building development at the time 1358 the bewdsecurity is declared to be in default.Moreover,the city may withhold building permits 359 and certificates of occupancy for lots in the subdivisietnplat until the required improvements have 1360 been installed. If the city undertakes the installation of the required private improvements,the 1361 city,by doing so,will not undertake the subsequent maintenance of those private improvements. 362 363 _ . . 364 365 .. _ .. 366 _ 367 368Commented[JB83]:Wedon'treallydothis. 369 — 370 Commented[JB84]:Does this allow us to not acc street because the work was poor? 1371 Sec.82-214.-Inspection of required public and private improvements.I ---- Commented[1885]:Is this whole area 213-214 too 1372 (a) General procedure and fees. The city Inlay inspect required_public and private improvements during wordy.Cant we say the subdivider is responsible for the 1373 construction.The applicant shall pay to the city an inspection fee based on the city engineers estimate improvements at their expense.The developer shall pay 374 fees estimated by the engineer and outlined in the DA for 375 approvalenunierated in the Development Contract. If the city finds upon inspection that any of the the inspection of these improvements,the developer shall 1376 required improvements have not been constructed in accordance with the city's construction standards correct defective work,and the city will not issue a building 1377 and specifications, the subdivider shall be responsible for completing the improvements; and no permit until the work is accepted. 1378 building permits or certificates of occupancy shall be issued until the required improvements have Commented[JB861:Shall? 379 been completed by the subdivider. • •- • • •• -. ••. . -•-• • . . . . • 380 _ 381 382 (b) Release or reduction of performance,ien?security. 1383 (1) Certificate of satisfactory completion. The city will not accept dedication of required 1384 improvements, nor release nor reduce securitya-performmance-bend, until the city engineer has 1385 submitted a certificate stating that all required improvements have been satisfactorily completed 1386 and until the subdivider's engineer or surveyor has certified to the city engineer, through 1387 submission of a detailed as-built construction drawing and survey plat of the subdivision, 1388 indicating location, dimensions, materials and other information required by the city, that the 1389 layout of the line and grade of all required improvements is in accordance with construction plans 1390 for the subdivision.The city may require that a title insurance policy be furnished to and approved 1391 by the city attorney, indicating that the required public improvements are free and clear of any 1392 and all liens and encumbrances. Upon such approval and recommendations, the city may June 15,2020 page 32 1393 thereafter accept the public improvements for dedication in accordance with the established 1394 procedure. 7395 (2) Reduction of security-pe+fef+r er t. A performance bond Security may be reduced upon 1396 actual dedication of public improvements or upon satisfactory completion of the private 1397 improvement and then only to the ratio that the improvement bears to the total required 7398 improvements for the plat.In no event shall security a-perfornanse-hond-be reduced below 15 10 1399 percent of the principal amount until satisfactory completion of all required improvements. 1400 Sec.82-215.-Maintenance of required public and private improvements. 401 (a) The subdivider shall be required to maintain all private improvements and individual lot 402 Viand provide for snow removal on streets and sidewalks until acceptance of such private 1403 improvements by a subsequent lot owner or homeowners'association.The subdivider shall be required 1404 to maintain all public improvements and provide for snow removal on streets and sidewalks until 405 acceptance of such public improvements by resolution of the city. •_ _ .._ • - - _ . 406 • . . ...• . . . ... -• -• _ , •- .. ' 407 408 409 410 beud,I Commented[JB871:Do we do this?Does anybody? 411 (b) The subdivider shall be required to file a warranty bon-4Bond with the city,prior to the issuance of Commented[JB88]:The language would be in the DA. 1412 the certificate of satisfactory completion,in an amount considered adequate by the city engineer and We wouldn't grant a CO for a new home,so this would only 1413 in a form satisfactory to the city attorney in order to ensure the satisfactory condition of the required apply to existing homes with access elsewhere. (690 Brown 7414 public and/or private improvements,• - .. • . . on the individual subdivided lots eg) 1415 for a period of one year after the date of the issuance of the certificate of satisfactory completion. 16 Sec.82-216.-Deferral of required public or private improvements. 417 (a) The city may defer at the time of the approval of the final subdivisienplat, subject to appropriate 1418 conditions,the installation of any or all such public or private improvements as,in its judgment,are 1419 not requisite in the interest of the public health,safety and general welfare,or which are inappropriate 1420 because of the inadequacy or lack of connecting public or private improvements. 1421 (b) Whenever it is deemed necessary by the city to defer the construction of any public or private 1422 improvements required in this section because of incompatible grades,future planning,inadequate or 1423 lack of connecting public or private improvements, or for other reasons, the subdivider shall pay 1424 histheir estimated share of the cost of the future improvements to the city prior to the signing of the 425 final subilivisienplat; or the subdivider may post a ber}d—security insuring completion of such 1426 improvements upon demand of the city. 427 •- 428 . _ . . ... _. ... ' . . . . .. . _:••••• - . .. .. .. , 429 430 431 ... . - - - .. _ .. .• _ : .• ... . . . •. . .. . ... . . 432 433 434 __. .. .... 435 and chapter 78. 436 . . •.. • ... . •- . • .... •• • . •_ ... .. •.• . 437 438 439 June 15,2020 page 33 440 ' .. :. . 441 . 442 ..._ 443 444 , ..;. .. . 445 esig nd 446 .. 447 448 _ 449 450 451 452 453 " Commented[JB89]:We don't need two playbooks. 1454 Sec.82-218.-Subdivisions straddling municipal and school district boundaries. 1455 1456 request as.,urance from the city attorney that access is legally established,and from the city engineer that 1457 - ... s.: • .._. : •. . ._ .. •. .- .. . .•. • 1458 - .• .. . . •• .• .• . . . .... • , Lot lines shall be laid out 1459 so as not to cross municipal and school district boundary lines. 1460 Sec.82-219.-Monuments. 1461 The applicant shall place permanent reference monuments in the subdiv-isienplat as required by 1462 statute. 1463 Sec.82-220.-Character of the land. 1464 Land which the council finds to be unsuitable for subdivision or development due to flooding, 1465 improper drainage,steep slopes,soil conditions,rock formations,adverse earth formations or topography, 1466 utility easements,or other features which will reasonably be harmful to the safety,health and general 11467 welfare of the present or future inhabitants of the subdivisionplat and/or its surrounding areas shall not be 1468 subdivided or developed unless adequate methods are formulated by the developer and approved by the 1469 council,upon recommendation of the city engineer,to solve the problems created by the unsuitable land 1470 conditions.Such land shall be set aside for uses as shall not involve such a danger. 1471 Sec.82-221.-SubdivisionPlat name. 3472 The proposed name of the subdivisionplat shall not duplicate,or too closely approximate 1473 phonetically,the name of any other subdivisionplat in the area covered by this chapter.The council shall 1474 have final authority to designate the name of the siiklivisionplat,which shall be determined at 1475 preliminary subdivisionplat approval. 1476 Sec.82-222.-Drainage and storm sewers. 11477 (a) General requirements.The city shall not approve any sulatlivisioriplat which does not make adequate 1478 provision for stormwater or floodwater runoff.Surface water drainage patterns shall be shown for each 1479 lot and block.The stormwater drainage system shall be separate and independent of any sanitary sewer 1480 system.Storm sewers,where required,shall be designed by the method as approved by the city,and a 1481 copy of design computations shall be submitted along with plans. Inlets shall be provided so that 1482 surface water is not carried across or around any intersection,nor for a distance of more than 600 feet 1483 in the gutter in urban areas.When calculations indicate that curb capacities are exceeded at a point,no 1484 further allowance shall be made for flow beyond that point;and basins shall be used to intercept flow 1485 at that point. June 15,2020 page 34 1486 (b) Nature of stormwater facilities. 1487 (I) Location.The subdivision shall be required by the city to carry away by pipe or open ditch any 1488 spring or surface water that may exist either previously to or as a result of the sulaelivisionplat. 1489 Such drainage facilities shall be located in the road right-of-way where feasible,or in perpetual 1490 unobstructed easements of appropriate width, and shall be constructed in accordance with the 1491 city's construction standards and specifications. 1492 (2) Accessibility to public storm sewers. 1493 a. Where a public storm sewer is accessible,the subdivider shall install storm sewer facilities; 1494 or,if no outlets are within a reasonable distance,adequate provision shall be made for the 495 disposal of stormwaters,subject to the specifications of the city.However,in subdivisions 496 containing lots les than 22,000 square feet in area and in business and industrial districts, 497 .. 498 . . ... . 1499 b. If a connection to a public storm sewer will be provided eventually,as determined by the 1500 city, the subdivider shall make arrangements for future stormwater disposal by a public 1501 utility system at the time the subdivision receives final approval. Provision for such 1502 connection shall be incorporated by inclusion in the performance bendBond required for the 1503 final subdivision. 1504 (3) Accommodation of upstream drainage areas. A culvert or other drainage facility shall in each 1505 case be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, 1506 whether inside or outside the subdivision. The city shall determine the necessary size of the 1507 facility, based on the provisions of the construction standards and specifications assuming 08 conditions of maximum potential watershed development permitted by chapter 78 and 09 ••• . .• ommunity Management Plan. 1510 (4) Effect on downstream drainage areas.The city shall also study the effect of each subdivisienplat 511 on existing downstream drainage facilities outside the area of the subiliiLisionplat.City drainage 1512 studies,together with such other studies as shall be appropriate,shall serve as a guide to needed 1513 improvements.Where it is anticipated that the additional runoff incident to the development of 514 the subdivisionplat will overload an existing downstream drainage facility,the city may withhold 515 approval of the ss+I div sianplat until provision has been made for the improvement of the potential 1516 condition at the subdivider's expense and in such sum as the city shall determine. No 1517 st*bdivisie+}plat shall be approved unless adequate drainage will be provided to an adequate 1518 drainage watercourse or facility. 1519 (5) Floodplain areas. The city may,when it deems it necessary for the health,safety or welfare of 1520 the population of the area and necessary to the conservation of water, drainage and sanitary 1521 facilities,prohibit the subdivision of any portion of the property which lies within the floodplain 1522 of any stream,lake or drainage course. These floodplain areas shall be preserved from any and 1523 all destruction or damage resulting from clearing,grading or dumping of earth,waste material or 1524 stumps by the appropriate conservation easement. 1525 (c) Dedication of drainage easements. 1526 (1) General requirements.Where a subclivisienplat is traversed by a wetlands,swamp,watercourse, 1527 drainageway,channel or stream,there shall be provided a stormwater easement,conservation and 1528 flowage easement, or drainage right-of-way conforming substantially to the lines of such 1529 watercourse, and of such width and construction or both as will be adequate for the purpose. 1530 Wherever possible, it is desirable that the drainage be maintained by an open channel with 1531 landscaped banks and adequate width for maximum potential volume of flow. June 15,2020 page 35 1532 (2) Drainage easements. 1533 a. Where topography or other conditions are such as to make impractical the inclusion of 1534 drainage facilities within road rights-of-way, perpetual unobstructed easements of an 535 appropriate width at least 15 feet in width for such drainage facilities shall be provided across 1536 property outside the road lines and with satisfactory access to a public roadway.Easements 1537 shall be indicated on the plate if.ubdivision is a pint.Drainage easements shall be carried 1538 from the road to a natural watercourse or to other drainage facilities. 1539 b. When a proposed drainage system will carry water across private land outside the 1540 stibilikLisiectplat,appropriate drainage rights must be secured and indicated on the plan if the 541s-a-plat. 1542 c. The subdivider shall dedicate,by drainage or conservation easement of land on both sides of 1543 existing watercourses,to a distance to be determined by the city. 544 d. Wetlands, swamps and low lying lands along watercourses subject to flooding or 545 . • ,s _ , • . ..-. •• .. . -. •. . .. 546 . - - -- - _. . . . . _ . ..• •- .. . ': 547 548 549 ;:. - c '- ••-• -•••- - '• - /' Commented[1690]:We already define lot area. Can this 1550 Sec.82-223.-Water facilities. be removed? 1551 (a) Public water systems. 1552 (1) Where a public water main is accessible,the subdivider shall install adequate water facilities, 1553 including fire hydrants,subject to the specifications of the stateState or city. 1554 (2) Water main extensions shall be approved by the city. 1555 (3) To facilitate the provisions of subsections(a)(1)and(2)of this section,the location of all fire 1556 hydrants and all water supply improvements and all improvements proposed to be served shall be 1557 shown on the preliminary subdiv-isionplat,and the cost of installing such improvements shall be 558 included in the performance bendBond to be furnished by the subdivider. 1559 (b) Individual wells. 1560 (1) In the discretion of the city,if a public water system is not available,individual wells may be 1561 used.Water samples shall be submitted to the stateState health department for its approval. 1562 (2) If the city requires that a connection to a public water main be eventually provided as a condition 1563 to approval of an individual well,the subdivider shall make arrangements for future water service 1564 at the time the subdivisionplat receives final approval. 1565 Sec.82-224.-Sewerage facilities. 1566 (a) General requirements. Where public sanitary sewer is available,the subdivider shall install sanitary 1567 sewer facilities in a manner prescribed by the city's construction standards, specifications and 1568 provisions of this Code. All plans shall be designed in accordance with the rules, regulations and 569 standards of the city, stateState health department, and other appropriate agencies. Plans shall be 570 , 1571 (b) Connection. Where a public sanitary sewerage system is reasonably accessible,the applicant shall 1572 connect the system and provide sewers accessible to each lot in the subdivisionplat. 573 (c) Central system.In the Metropolitan Urban Service Area(MUSA),wWhere public sanitary sewerage 1574 systems are not reasonably accessible but will become available within a reasonable time (not to 1575 exceed 15 years),the applicant may choose a central sewerage system.The maintenance cost shall be June 15,2020 page 36 1576 assessed against each property benefited. Where plans for future public sanitary sewerage systems 1577 exist,the applicant shall install the sewer lines,laterals and mains to be in permanent conformance 1578 with such plans and ready for connection to such public sewer mains. 11579 (d) Septic system.In the MUSA,Where sanitary sewerage systems are not reasonably accessible and will 1580 not become available for a period in excess of 15 years,the applicant may install a sewerage system 1581 in accordance with chapter 58,article II. 1582 (e) Design criteria for sanitary sewers. 1583 (1) Generally. These design criteria are not intended to cover extraordinary situations.Deviations 1584 will be allowed and may be required in those instances where considered justified by the city. 1585 (2) Design factors. Sanitary sewerage systems should be designed for the ultimate tributary 1586 population. Due consideration should be given to the Community Management Plancurrent 587 ••b.•: _.Sewer capacities 1588 should be adequate to handle the anticipated maximum hourly quantity of sewage and industrial 1589 waste together with an adequate allowance for infiltration and other extraneous flow.Sewers shall 1590 be designed in accordance with standards and specifications approved by the city. 1591 Sec.82-225.-Utilities. 1592 (a) Location.All utility facilities,including but not limited to gas,electric power,telephone and CATV 11593 cables,shall be located underground throughout a subdivisienplat.Wherever existing utility facilities 1594 are located above ground, except where existing on public roads and rights-of-way,they shall be 1595 removed and placed underground. All utility facilities existing and proposed throughout the 71596 subd+wsionplat shall be shown on the preliminary su'� ivisionplat plan. Underground service 1597 connections to the street property line of each platted lot shall be installed at the subdivider's expense. 98 At the discretion of the city,the requirements for service connections to each lot may be waived in the 99 case of adjoining lots to be retained in single ownership and intended to be developed for the same _600 primary use. 1601 (b) Easements. Easements centered on rear and side lot lines shall be provided for utilities(private and 1602 municipal), and such easement shall be at least ten feet wide and have satisfactory access to the 1603 publicly dedicated and opened road.Easements shall be indicated on the plat.Proper coordination shall 1604 be established between the subdivider and the applicable utility companies for the establishment of 1605 utility easements established in adjoining properties. 1606 Sec.82-226.-Preservation of natural features and amenities. 11607 (a) (a) Generally.Existing features which would add value to residential development or to the city 1608 as a whole,such as trees,watercourses and falls,beaches,historic spots,and similar irreplaceable 1609 assets,shall be preserved in the design of the senplat. ]610 1. No trees shall be removed from any snbilivisieriplat nor any change of grade of the land ]611 effected until approval of the preliminary&ulmlivisienplat has been granted.All trees on the 1 612 plat required to be retained shall be preserved,and all trees where required 1613 shall be welled and protected against change of grade.The vegetation map shall show the 1614 number and location of existing trees,as required by this chapter,and shall further indicate 1615 all those marked for retention,and the location of all proposed shade trees required along 1616 the street side of each lot as required by this chapter. 1617 (b) S'hade trees planted by subdivider. Commented[JB91]:Council: Do you want additional 1618 (1) As a requirement of subdivision approval,the city may require that the subdivider plant shade trees,or to prescribe certain tree types? 1619 trees on the property of the subdivision.Such trees are to be planted within five feet of the right- 1620 of-way of the roads within and abutting the subdivision,or,at the discretion of the city,within June 15,2020 page 37 1621 the right-of-way of such roads.One tree shall be planted for every 40 feet of frontage along each 1622 road unless the council,upon recommendation of city staff,shall grant a waiver. 1623 (2) New trees to be provided pursuant to this chapter shall be approved by the city and shall be 1624 planted in accordance with the specifications of the city.Such trees shall have a minimum trunk 1625 diameter,measured 12 inches above ground level,of not less than two inches.Only oak,honey $26 locust, hard maples, ginkgo,ash-or other long-lived shade trees acceptable to the city shall be 1627 planted. 628 Sec.82-227.-Parks and playgrounds,class II and III subdivisions. 629 1630 (1) Lands for public use.The city finds that when land is subdivided,including a planned residential 1631 development or a planned unit development, the resulting additional housing units or 1632 commercial/industrial buildings have an impact on the city's park system.Therefore,pursuant to 1633 Minn.Stat. §462.358,subd.2b,the city requires all persons,corporations or other legal entities 1634 that subdivide land within the city, as a prerequisite to approval of a lot division, final plat, 1635 planned residential development or planned unit development,to convey to the city or dedicate 1636 to the public,for use as parks,playgrounds,trails or open space,a given percentage of the land 1637 being platted or developed as specified in this section,such portions to be approved by the city. 1638 In lieu thereof, the subdivider shall, at the option of the city, pay to the city, for use in the 1639 acquisition,development or improvement of public parks,playgrounds,trails,wetlands or open 1640 spaces and debt retirement in connection with the foregoing,an equivalent amount in cash based 1641 upon the fair market value of the land to be developed.The form of contribution(cash,land,or 1642 any combination)shall be decided by the city council based upon the need and conformance with 1643 the comprehensive plan.The amount of the dedication requirement shall be roughly proportional 1644 to the impact of the subdivision on the city's park system. • 1645 (2) Dedicated land requirements.Any land to be dedicated as a requirement of this section shall be 1646 reasonably adaptable for the public purposes listed in subsection(1)of this section.Factors used 1647 in evaluating the adequacy of proposed dedicated areas shall include size, shape,topography, 1648 drainage,geology,tree cover,access and location. 1649 (3) Land dedication minimum area. Subdividers shall be required to dedicate to the city for parks, 1650 playgrounds,trails,open spaces and other public purposes as a minimum that percentage ofross 1651 land area,or other such amount as may be determined by the city council,as set forth below_ _—f Commented[SM92]:We should analyze the formula. 1652 ja. In residential/agricultural/multiple residential zoned land, dedication requirement of eight 1653 percent of the land being platted or subdivided. The dedication required shall be roughly 1654 proportional to the projected impact of the proposed development on the city's park system. 1655 Because of the vastly differing land values in the city, the eight percent park dedication 1656 requirement could result in park dedication requirements that are either significantly greater 1657 than or significantly less than the amount which is roughly proportional to the impact of the 1658 proposed development on the city's park system. Periodically, therefore, the city will 1659 establish both a maximum and minimum park dedication amount per dwelling unit based on 1660 an updated projection of the cost of the city's park system and the proportionate share of this 1661 projected cost to be borne by new dwelling units in the city.This will be done by a resolution 1662 of the city council. 1663 b. In commercial/industrial zoned land, dedication requirement of eight percent of the land 1664 being platted or subdivided. The dedication required shall be roughly proportional to the 1665 projected impact of the proposed development on the city's park system.The city finds that 1666 the employees of commercial/industrial developments in the city make use of the city's park 1667 system,particularly trails and natural areas. Because the city's park system is focused on June 15,2020 page 38 1668 trails and natural areas versus active community parks and bailfields,commercial/industrial 1669 employees use the city's park system in ways similar to city residents. Therefore, the 1670 commercial/industrial dedication requirement will be tied to the residential dedication 1671 requirement by determining the number of employees that is equivalent to a residential 1672 dwelling unit in terms of impact on the city's park system.Periodically the city will establish 1673 both a maximum and minimum park dedication amount per employee based on this 1674 determination and the determination of the residential dedication requirement as set out in 1675 subsection(3)a of this section.This will be done by resolution of the city council. 1676 c. Because the city's park system is focused on trails and natural open space areas,the city does 1677 not have a broad system of neighborhood parks.If a subdivision is planned to be served by 1678 a neighborhood park, this subdivision will receive a greater benefit from the city's park 1679 system than that received by the general population. Therefore, the maximum park 1680 dedication amount as determined in subsection(3)a of this section may be exceeded up to 1681 the full eight percent dedication requirement in the case of a subdivision that is planned to 1682 be served by a neighborhood park Commented[JB931:There are better ways to determine 1683 (4) Cash contribution in lieu of lands.In those instances where a cash contribution is to be made by park dedication. Needs to be reviewed,but as a separate 1684 the subdivider, in lieu of a conveyance or dedication of land, the cash contribution to be study. Plymouth has a good way. 1685 contributed shall be equivalent to the fair market value of the equivalent undeveloped land that 1686 would otherwise have been conveyed or dedicated. The city shall account for such funds in a 1687 special fund named park dedication funds.These funds are to be used only for the acquisition, 1688 development and improvement of public parks,playgrounds,trails,wetlands or open spaces,and 1689 debt retirement in connection with the foregoing. 1690 (5) Fair market value of lands. Fair market value for purposes of this section shall be the land 91 predevelopment value to be determined by the city council as of the time of preliminary plat 92 application in accordance with the following: 1693 a. The city assessor shall recommend to the city council as to the fair market value of the land 1694 after consultation with the subdivider. 1695 b. If agreement is not reached between the city assessor and subdivider,the fair market value 1696 shall be determined in accordance with the following: 1697 1. Fair market value as determined by the city council based upon a current appraisal 11698 submitted to the city by the subdivider,at his-their expense.The appraisal shall be made 1699 by appraisers who are approved members of SREA or MAI,or equivalent real estate 1700 societies. 1701 2. If the city disputes such appraisal amounts,it may obtain an appraisal of the property 1702 by a qualified real estate appraiser which the city council selects and which appraisal 1703 may be accepted by the city as being an accurate appraisal at fair market value.The cost 1704 of the appraisal shall be paid by the subdivider. 1705 c. The determination of fair market value of the undeveloped land by the city assessor,city 1706 council or designated appraisers shall be determined at the time of preliminary subdivision 1707 approval,provided that there is final plat approval within the time limits as set forth in this 1708 chapter. The time of preliminary plat approval is utilized because the nature of the 1709 subdivision,its probable population,lot size and value,and other relevant factors are known. 1710 If an extension of the time limits in this chapter is approved by the city council, the fair 1711 market value shall be determined as of the time of the approval of that extension. In 1712 determining the fair market value as of time of preliminary plat application,or its extension, 1713 the factors to be included in the analysis shall include any and all factors which are generally June 15,2020 page 39 1714 accepted and used by approved members of SREA or MAI or equivalent real estate appraisal 1715 societies. 1716 (6) Future subdivision. Any land which is further subdivided, divided or replotted or applied for 717 such subdivision, division or replatting subsequent to May 1, 1990, shall be subject to the 1718 requirements of the ordinance then in effect concerning dedication of land for public purposes; 1719 and credit shall be given for any charges previously imposed upon that land if the subdivider can 1720 prove that fees were previously paid.In no event shall the city be liable for any payment which 1721 may be due because of a subsequent reduction in the application percentage of land or equivalent 1722 market value in cash to be dedicated. 1723 Secs.82-228-82-250.-Reserved. 1724 1725 DIVISION 2.-LOTS 1726 727 Sec.82-251.—Security ' to include lot improvement. 728 The security performance bend-required shall include an amount to guarantee completion of all 729 requirements contained in this division,including but not limited to erosion control,soil preservation, 730 final grading,lot drainage,land stabilization,lawn grass seeding,removal of debris and waste,fencing, 1731 and all other lot improvements required by the city. 1732 Sec.82-252.-Lot arrangement. 1733 The lot arrangement shall be such that there will be no foreseeable difficulties,for reasons of 1734 topography or other conditions,in securing building permits to build on all lots in compliance with 1735 chapter 78 and in providing driveway access to buildings on such lots from an approved street. 1736 Sec.82-253.-Lot dimensions. 1737 Lot dimensions shall comply with the minimum standards of chapter 78.Where lots are more than 1738 double the minimum required area for the zoning district,the city may require that such lots be arranged 1739 so as to allow further subdivision and the opening of future streets where they would be necessary to 1740 serve such potential lots,all in compliance with chapter 78.In general,side lot lines shall be at right 1741 angles to street lines(or radial to curving street lines)unless a variation from this rule will give a better 1742 street or lot plan.Dimensions of corner lots shall be large enough to allow for erection of buildings, 1743 observing the minimum€Fent yard setback from both streets.Depth and width of properties reserved or 1744 laid out for business,commercial or industrial purposes shall be adequate to provide for the off-street 1745 parking and loading facilities required for the type of use and development contemplated,as established 746 in chapter 78.Notwithstanding the required width of each lot,each lot shall maintain a minimum frontage 747 of 18 feet on a public or private street,or access outlot: ( — Commented[JB94I:This is a new minimum,and provides 1748 Sec.82-254.-Lot area,m[nimUm, for a minimum width of driveway and drive setbacks for snow storage,etc. 749 750 A. In areas not served by sanitary sewer,each lot must contain a minimum of two acres of 751 contiguous Dry Buildable Land exclusive of public rights-of-way,vehicular easements,or areas 752 at or below the floodplain elevation for a specific property. 753 B.In areas served by sanitary sewer,each lot must contain contiguous Dry Buildable Land equal to 754 the minimum areas as prescribed in chapter 78 or half-acre,whichever is less(exclusive of public rights- Commented[JB951:Zoning:Lot area means the area 755 of-way,vehicular easements,or areas at or below the floodplain elevation for a specific pro erty),and / of a lot in a horizontal plane bounded by the lot lines, 756 have legal access to the building site without encroachment of a wetland or floodplain area. but not including any area occupied by the waters of a duly recorded lake or flyer or wetland or area which 757 C Outlots. Outlots are npt intended for development except for the purpose in which they are has been dedicated as public right-of-way. 758 created,which may include streets,stormwater management,monument signs,etc.putlots intended for ...... 759 future development shall not be subject to development fees until they are platted as buildableelots. Formatted:Font(Default)Times New Roman J Formatted:Font:(Default)Times New Roman June 15,2020 page 40 ]760 1761 1762 '.. . .. . . _ 1763 -. - - . . : . .. . ... . . . . . 1764 :::: .•• •• •• -• •• ••e o .._. .- '• - L__.._........._• - -• ` Commente [JB96]:Necessary?We already define lot 1765 Sec.82-255.-Lakeshore lots. area. 1766 The granting of easements which purport to grant access to the lake to any person for any uses, 1767 including but not limited to docking,mooring,swimming and launching of boats,is prohibited and shall 1768 be deemed a violation of this chapter and subject to all of the penalties and proceedings as set forth in this 11769 chapter. 1770 'Exception. An owner of a riparian lot within the Seasonal Recreational(RS)zoning 1771 district may grant an easement over their riparian,RS zoned property to benefit a non-riparian,RS 1772 zoned property for lake access purposes.' ._ -{Commented[JB97]:Added in 2020. ) 1773 1774 Sec.82-256.-Double-frontage lots,access to lots,and front/back lot divisions. 1775 (a) —Double-frontage lots. Double-frontage and reversed-frontage lots shall be avoided except where 1776 necessary to provide separation of residential development from traffic arterials or to overcome 1777 specific disadvantages of topography and orientation. 1778 (b) Access from any arterial roadway.Lots shall not,in general,derive access exclusively from an arterial 1779 roadway.Where driveway access from any arterial roadway may be necessary for several adjoining 1780 lots,the council may require that such lots be served by a combined access drive in order to limit 81 possible traffic hazard on such roadway.Where possible,driveways shall be designed and arranged so 82 as to avoid requiring vehicles to back into traffic on any arterial roadway. 783 (c) Front/back lot subdivisions. Flag lots shall not be created. For the purposes 784 785 of this chapter,a flaglot shall be defined as a lot so shaped such that the main building site is set back from the street on which it fronts and includes an access strip connecting the main building site with 786 the fronting street. Front/back lot divisions shall be allowed only in conjunction with the creation of 787 a separate rw-outlot to provide access from the back lot to the public or private road.Such outlot shall 1788 not be allowed as creditable lot area for either the back or front lots.Front/back lot subdivisions shall 1789 adhere to the following standards: 1790 (1) Applicability. 1791 a. Front/back lot divisions may be used when existing property dimensions are narrow and 1792 deep,such that lot width does not allow for a side-by-side lot split,but acreage is adequate 1793 to provide a front lot and a back lot without requiring an area variance when the area of the 1794 outlot access corridor is excluded. 1795 b. Front/back lot divisions may be used for individual lot splits but may not be used when 1796 subdividing a large parcel into numerous lots if creation of a back lot is merely a convenience 1797 to the developer rather than supported by unique site factors. 1798 c. A front/back lot division shall not be allowed when any existing residence on a neighboring 1799 property abutting the proposed access outlot is located nearer its affected side lot line than a 1800 distance equivalent to the zoning district required front yard depth. 1801 0) Dimensional standards.Dimensional standards for back lots shall be as follows: 1802 a. Lot area shall be 150 percent of the zoning district requirement.Wetlands may be allowed 1803 as area credit for meeting the 150 percent back lot area requirement,as long as the back lot June 15,2020 page 41 1804 contains sufficient contiguous dry buildable land to satisfy the minimum acreage 1805 requirement of the underlying zoning district. 1806 b. Lot width measured parallel to the front or street lot line at the street yard setback line of a 1807 lakeshore back lot,or at the rear of the front yard setback line of a non-lakeshore back lot, 1808 shall meet the zoning district width requirement.The street yard or front yard for any back 1809 lot will be a yard starting where the narrow access outlot corridor ends and the lot begins. 1810 Lakeshore back lots shall meet the lot width standard at the shoreline, at the lakeshore 1811 setback line and at the street yard setback line. 1812 c. The depth of the required street yard or front yard shall be 150 percent of the zoning district 1813 front yard requirement. 1814 d. The required side yard and rear yard depths for back lots shall be 150 percent of the zoning 1815 district yard requirements.The required lakeshore yard of a lakeshore back lot shall meet the 1816 zoning district lakeshore yard requirements. Commented[JB98]:Also stated in zoning code section. 1817 1(3) Dimensional standards for front lots.A front lot created as part of a front/back lot division shall Delete the copy in in 78-1370(1) 1818 meet all zoning district area,width and setback standards;except that the required side yard of 1819 the front lot adjacent to the access outlot shall be equivalent to the side street yard requirement 1820 for that zoning district.I Commented[JB99]:Also in zoning code section.78-1370 1821 4) Access requirements. (2) 822 a. Access outlots.•. := ! - r . :.•, ., : shall be wide enough to accommodate 823 drainage,snow removal and screening without encroaching on neighboring properties. In 824 no case shall an outlot be narrower than 30 feet in width. 1825 b. In approving front/back lot divisions,the city may require that both front lot and back lot 1826 share a driveway access within the access outlot if the council determines that creating an 1827 additional access to the existing street will be a potential safety hazard. 1828 c. Driveways within a back lot shall be located at least ten feet from the side or rear lot lines of 1829 adjacent lots. 1830 d. No more than two residences may be served by a driveway located within an access outlot. 1831 e. - No access outlot may be platted abutting an adjacent outlot except when the intent is to 1832 combine the two access outlots for creation of a public or private road meeting city standards.1„---- Commented[JB100]•Also in zoning code section. 1833 (5) Screening requirements and accessory structure standards.Front/back lot subdivisions shall be This is in 78-1370(3) 1834 designed in a manner such that the screening requirements and accessory structure standards of 1835 section 78-1370 can be met. 31836 (36) Effective date. The requirements and standards of this section shall apply only to those 1837 front/back lot divisions which received preliminary plat approval after January 1,1994. 1838 Sec.82-257.-Soil preservation,grading and seeding. 1839 (a) Soil preservation and final grading.No certificate of occupancy shall be issued until final grading 1840 has been completed in accordance with the approved final subdivision and the lot precovered with soil 1841 with an average depth of at least six inches,which shall contain no particles over two inches in diameter 1842 over the entire area of the lot,except that portion covered by buildings or included in streets,or where 31843 the grade has not been changed: . . . - s. .•••, :.Topsoil shall not be removed 1844 from residential lots or used as spoil but shall be redistributed so as to provide at least three inches of 1845 cover on the lots and boulevards. 1846 (b) V,awn-grass seed and sod All disturbed areas shall he stabilized with a vegetative mix approved by 847 the cit en L ineer. . : .: :• 22••: • ,!e! • Commented[JB101]:Function of erosion control June 15,2020 page 42 848 feet of land area. The seed shall consist of a maximum of ten percent rye grass by weight and a 849 . b b 850 b 851 852 .a• • . ... . . . - . _ . • - •. - •- • .No certificate of 853 occupancy shall be issued until the disturbed areas meet the standard of Final Stabilization,as defined 854 in Section 79-5 - . ..• 6 : :• ..•: -::.-6 : . • •. :_-• .:••: - a:;except that during the 1855 period of the year when seed cannot be sown,the property owner and/or developer shall submit an 1856 agreement in writing to assure that respreading of soil and seeding of lawn will be done during the 1857 immediate following planting season,and shall leave a security in a form acceptable to the city for 1858 performance in such an amount as shall be determined by the city. The developer may choose to 859 include final lot grading and required lawn grass seeding improvements in a subdivider') 860 agreementdevelopment contract and shall leave a security in a form acceptable to the city for 1861 performance in such an amount as shall be determined by the city. Sod may be used to comply with 1862 any requirements of seeding set forth in this section. 1863 (c) Lot drainage. Lots shall be graded so as to provide positive drainage away from all buildings,and 1864 individual lot drainage shall be coordinated with the general storm drainage pattern for the area. 1865 Drainage shall be designed so as to avoid concentration of storm drainage water from each lot to 1866 adjacent lots. 1867 Sec.82-258.-Debris and waste. 1868 No cut trees,timber,debris,earth,rocks,stones,soil,junk,rubbish or other waste materials of any 1869 kind shall be buried in any land,or left or deposited on any lot or street at the time of the issuance of a 1870 certificate of occupancy on a subdivision,nor shall any be left or deposited in any area of the subdivision ''871 at the time of expiration of the performance bendsecurity or dedication of public improvements, 72 whichever is sooner. _873 •.- - ' . • • . 1874 _ 1875 • . •. • • 1876 ._ • - -.. _ . . . •: :: - '•• • ..•: _ .. 1878 1879 ••.`` ° • . ° -• : . . = : : - •.•• :, : • = - ••• : • : 1 _- Commented[JB102]:What is the point of this? 1880 Secs.82-260-82-280.-Reserved. 1881 1882 DIVISION 3.-ROADS AND PUBLIC WAYS 1883 1884 Sec.82-281.-Design standards. 1885 (a) Generally.In order to provide for roads of suitable location,width and improvement to accommodate 1886 prospective traffic and afford satisfactory access to police,firefighting,snow removal,sanitation and 1887 road maintenance equipment,and to coordinate roads so as to compose a convenient system and avoid 1888 undue hardships to adjoining properties,the following design standards for roads are required: 1889 (1) Road surfacing and improvements.After the sewer and water utilities have been installed by the 1890 subdivider,the subdivider shall construct all road pavement,shoulders,drainage improvements 1891 and structures,curbs,culs-de-sac,and sidewalks in conformance with all construction standards 1892 and specifications adopted by the city and shall be incorporated into the construction plans 1893 required to be submitted to the subdivider for final subdivision approval. 1894 (2) Rights-of-way.Rights-of-way shall be in accordance with the following performance standard: June 15,2020 page 43 1895 a. Minimum right-of-way widths. Principal arterial,intermediate arterial As recommended by the State Department of Transportation Minor arterial 80 feet Collector 70 feet Local 50 feet Parkway 100 feet Culs-de-sac 50 feet radius 1896 1897 b. Rights-of-way are needed for future roadways in the opinion of the city. 1898 c. Right-of-way widths or additional widths in existing rights-of-way in excess of the standards 1899 designated in this chapter when,due to topography,additional width is necessary to provide 1900 adequate earth slopes.Such slopes shall not be in excess of 3:1. 1901 (b) Railroads and limited-access roadways. Railroad rights-of-way and limited-access roadways where 1902 so located as to affect the subdivision of adjoining lands shall be treated as follows: 903 (1) In residential districts,a buffer strip at least 25 feet in depth • .:: • 904 - . •.. _. • • • shall be provided adjacent to the railroad right-of-way or limited- 1905 access roadway. 1906 (2) In districts zoned for business,commercial or industrial uses,the nearest street extending parallel 1907 or approximately parallel to the railroad shall be at a sufficient distance to ensure suitable depth 1908 for commercial or industrial sites. 1909 (3) Streets parallel to the railroad when intersecting a street which crosses the railroad at grade shall 1910 be at a distance of at least 150 feet from the railroad right-of-way. Such distance shall be 1911 determined with due consideration of the minimum distance required for future separation of 1912 grades by means of appropriate approach gradients. 1913 (4) Streets Roadways crossing the railroads shall be avoided. 1914 (c) Intersections. 1915 (1) StreetsRoadways shall be laid out so as to intersect as nearly as possible at right angles. A 1916 proposed intersection of two new streets at an angle or less than 75 degrees shall not be acceptable. 1917 An oblique street should be curved approaching an intersection and should be approximately at 1918 right angles for at least 100 feet from the intersection.Not more than two streets shall intersect at 1919 any one point unless specifically approved by the city. 1920 (2) Proposed new intersections along one side of an existing street shall coincide with any existing 1921 intersections on the opposite side of such street.Intersection jogs with centerline offsets of less 1922 than 150 feet shall not be permitted,except where the intersected street has separated dual drives 1923 without median breaks at either intersection.Where streets intersect collectors or arterials,-maje* 924 streets,their alignment shall be continuous.Intersections of arterial roadways shall be at least 800 1925 feet apart. 1926 (3) Minimum curb radius at the intersection of two local streets shall be at least 15 feet, and 1927 minimum curb radius at an intersection involving a collector street or local streets in a commercial 1928 or industrial area shall be at least 25 feet. Alley intersections and abrupt changes in alignment June 15,2020 page 44 1929 within a block shall have the comers cut off in accordance with standard engineering practice to 1930 permit safe vehicular movement. 1931 (4) Intersections shall be designed with a flat stopping area of at least 30 feet in a residential area 1932 and 60 feet in a commercial or industrial area.The stopping area shall be designed to provide a 1933 maximum grade of two percent. 1934 (5) Where any street intersection will involve earth banks or existing vegetation inside any lot comer 1935 that would create a traffic hazard by limiting visibility,the subdivider shall cut such ground and/or 1936 vegetation (including trees) in connection with the grading of the right-of-way to the extent 1937 deemed necessary by the city to provide an adequate sight distance. 1938 (6) The crown of all streets,including intersections,shall be three percent or less. 1939 (d) Typical section.The typical section indicated in this subsection is as determined for a clay subgrade 1940 (A-6 soil classification)and may be subject to change.Soil borings may be required to be determined 1941 by the city. 1942 (1) Private street,residential R.O.W.* M.P.W.** Units (feet) (feet) Section 3-6 50 24 8-inch class 5 100%crushed 3-inch 2341 bituminous surface 8-inch class 5 100%crushed Over 7 50 28 3-inch 2341 bituminous surface Cul de sac 50 radii 45 radii 8-inch class 5 100%crushed 3-inch 2341 bituminous surface 1943 1944 (2) Public street,residential Units R.O.W.* M.P.W.** Section (feet) (feet) 3-10 50 28 8-inch class 5 100%crushed 3-inch 2341 bituminous surface Over 10 50 32 8-inch class 5 100%crushed 3-inch 2341 bituminous surface Cul de sac 50 45 radii 8-inch class 5 100%crushed 3-inch 2341 bituminous surface 1945 1946 Maximum cul-de-sac length=1,000 feet 1947 Maximum number of units on cul-de-sac=10 1948 (3) Public street,commercial or industrial June 15,2020 page 45 Units R.O.W.* M.P.W.** Section (feet) (feet) 8-inch class 4 1+ 70 32 8-inch class 5 100%crushed 4-inch 2341 bituminous surface 8-inch class 4 Cul de sac 50 45 8-inch class 5 100%crushed 4-inch 2341 bituminous surface 1949 1950 *Right-of-Way Width 1951 **Minimum Paved Width 1952 (e) Horizontal and vertical control.Horizontal and vertical control shall be as follows: Vertical Horizontal Functional Design Control Control Class Speed Maximum Minimum (mph) Gradient Radius (percent) (feet) Private street 30 12 275 (residential) Public street 30 10 275 (residential) Public street (commercial and 40 8 400 industrial) 1953 1954 Sec.82-282.-Off-site premises;roadways. 1955 (a) Access to improved public or private roadways.No subdivision shall be approved unless the area to 1956 be subdivided shall have adequate access from an existing publicly dedicated and opened roadway or 1957 on a private roadway open to travel or vehicular use pursuant to an easement between persons or 1958 between persons and the city. Such roadway must be suitably improved as required by the city,the 1959 stateState or the county.If the public roadway,including but not limited to existing bridges,drainage 1960 structures,lighting,shoulders,base,pavement,alignment or sight distance,is not suitable to handle 1961 the proposed additional vehicular traffic from the subdivision,the subdivider at theirl}is expense will 1962 be responsible for first improving the public roadway to a standard acceptable to the city,to ensure 1963 that the health,safety and welfare of the citizens presently using the roadway and in the future will be 1964 protected and will not be adversely affected by the increased use of the roadway caused by the 1965 subdivision. This improvement shall be accomplished prior to final subdivision approval unless the 1966 city agrees and the subdivider provides a suitable performance ben4Bond to complete the 967 improvements in the subdivider's agreementdevelopment contract. June 15,2020 page 46 1968 (b) Access to improved public roadways over existing private roadways. Wherever the area to be 1969 subdivided is to utilize an existing private roadway in order to gain access to the public roadway,such 1970 private roadway shall be suitably improved as provided in this section for public roadways. 1971 Sec.82-283.-On-site roadways. 1972 (a) Grading and improvement plan. Roadways shall be graded and improved to conform to the city's 1973 construction standards and specifications and shall be approved as to design and specifications by the 1974 city engineer, in accordance with the construction plans required to be submitted prior to final 1975 subdivision approval. 1976 (b) Topography and arrangement. 1977 (1) Roadways shall be related appropriately to the topography.Roadways shall be curved wherever 1978 possible to avoid conformity of lot appearance.All roadways shall be arranged so as to obtain as 1979 many as possible of the building sites at or above the grades of the street.Grades of streets shall 1980 conform as closely as possible to the original topography. A combination of steep grades and 1981 curves shall be avoided. 1982 (2) All streets shall be properly integrated with the existing and proposed system of thoroughfares 983 and dedicated rights-of-way as established in the -: . • •• _ .. . . ommunity 984 Management Plan. 1985 (3) All thoroughfares shall be properly related to specific traffic generators, such as industries, 1986 business districts, schools, churches, and shopping centers;to population densities; and to the 1987 pattern of existing and proposed land uses. 1988 (4) Roadways shall be laid out to conform as much as possible to the topography,to discourage use "989 by through traffic,to permit efficient drainage and utility systems,and to require the minimum 90 number of roadways necessary to provide convenient and safe access to property. _991 (5) The gridiron roadway pattern need not necessarily be adhered to, and the use of curvilinear 1992 roadways or U-shaped roadways shall be encouraged where such use will result in a more 1993 desirable layout. 1994 (6) Cul&-de-sacs shall be discouraged;proposed roadways shall be extended to the boundary lines 1995 of the tract to be subdivided unless prevented by topography or other physical conditions or unless 1996 in the opinion of the city such extension is not necessary or desirable for the coordination of the 1997 layout of the subdivision with the existing layout or the most advantageous future development 1998 of adjacent tracts. 1999 (7) In business and industrial developments,the roadways and other accessways shall be planned in 2000 connection with the grouping of buildings,location of rail facilities,and the provisions of alleys, 2001 truck loading and maneuvering areas,and walks and parking areas so as to minimize conflict of 2002 movement between the various types of traffic,including pedestrian. 2003 (c) Blocks. 1004 (1) Blocks shall should have sufficient width to provide for two tiers of lots of appropriate depths. 2005 Exceptions to this prescribed block width shall be permitted in blocks adjacent to arterial 2006 roadways,railroads or waterways. 007 . . _ ... .. . . 008 • 009 010 -• 011 s. :.: !!! ` ------{Commented[JB103]:Not how Orono has or developed. June 15,2020 page 47 2012 (3) In all blocks, the city shall require the reservation of an easement through the block to 2013 accommodate utilities,drainage facilities or pedestrian traffic.Pedestrian ways or crosswalks,not 2014 less than ten feet wide,may be required by the city through the center of blocks more than 800 2015 feet long where deemed essential to provide circulation of access to schools, playgrounds, 2016 shopping centers,transportation or other community facilities.Blocks designed for industrial uses 2017 shall be of such length and width as may be determined suitable by the city for prospective use. 2018 (d) Access to primary arterials. Where a subdivision borders on or contains an existing or proposed 2019 arterial,the city may require that access to such roadways be limited by one of the following means: 2020 (1) The subdivision of lots so as to back onto the arterials and front onto a parallel local or collector 2021 roadway;no access shall be provided from the arterial,and screening shall be provided in a strip 2022 of land along the rear property line of such lots. 4023 (2) A series of culs-de-sacs,U-shaped streets,or short loops entered from and designed generally at 2024 right angles to such a parallel street,with the rear lines of their terminal lots backing onto the 2025 arterial. 2026 (3) A marginal-access or service road separated from the arterial by a planting or grass strip and 2027 having access to the arterial at suitable points. 2028 (e) Road names and street addresses. •- - -• . .• . •• . . • .• .. • ...• 2029 proposed streets.The city shall name all roads at the time of preliminary subdivision approval and 2030 assign street addresses. •- ... .. . . •. . _. _ . : .Names 2031 shall be sufficiently different in sound and in spelling from other road names in the area so as not to 2032 cause confusion.A road which is or is planned as a continuation of an existing road shall bear the same 2033 name. 2034 (f) Road regulatory signs. • ... •. •• . • • . •. ... • 2035 2036 city shall install Aall road signs shall be installed prior to before issuance of • • - .- ...• 2037 building permits for any residence on the streets approved. The city shall place all signs at the 2038 developer's expense at all intersections within or abutting the subdivision,the type and location of 2039 which shall be approved by the city. 2040 (g) Reserve strips. The creation of reserve strips shall not be permitted adjacent to a proposed street in 2041 such a manner as to deny access from adjacent property to such street. 2042 (h) Construction of roads and dead-end roads. 2043 (1) Construction of roads. The arrangement of streets shall provide for the continuation of streets 2044 between adjacent properties when such continuation is necessary for convenient movement of 2045 traffic,effective fire protection,for efficient provision of utilities,and where such continuation is 4046 in accordance with the city -••• - • . - .. . .•Community Management Plan.If the 2047 adjacent property is undeveloped and the street must be a dead-end street temporarily,the right- 4048 of-way shall be extended to the property line and a temporary cul de sac provided.The city may 2049 limit the length of temporary dead-end streets in accordance with this chapter. 2050 (2) Dead-end roads(permanent).Where a road does not extend to the boundary of the subdivision 2051 and its continuation is not required by the city for access to adjoining property,its terminus shall 4052 normally not be nearer to such boundary than 50 feet. However, the city may require the 2053 reservation of an appropriate easement to accommodate drainage facilities,pedestrian traffic or 2054 utilities.A cul-de-sac shall be provided at the end of a permanent dead-end street in accordance 2055 with the city's construction standards and specifications. For greater convenience to traffic and 1056 more effective police and fire protection,permanent dead-end streets shall not be approved-in 057 June 15,2020 page 48 2058 Sec.82-284.-Road dedication and reservations. 2059 (a) New perimeter streets.Street systems in new subdivisions shall be laid out so as to eliminate or avoid 2060 new perimeter half-streets.Where an existing half-street is adjacent to a new subdivision,the other 2061 half of the street shall be improved and dedicated by the subdivider. The city may authorize a new 2062 perimeter street where the subdivider improves and dedicates the entire required street right-of-way 2063 width within his own subdivision boundaries. 2064 (b) Widening and realignment of existing roads.Where a subdivision borders an existing narrow road or 4065 when the : • -• . - .. . .•Community Management Plan or some other agency indicates 2066 plans for realignment or widening a road that would require use of some of the land in the subdivision, 1067 the subdivider shall be required to improve and dedicate at their his-expense such areas for widening 2068 or realignment of such roads.Such frontage roads and streets shall be improved and dedicated by the 1069 subdivider at histheir own expense to the full width as required by this chapter. 2070 (c) Use of reserved land. Land reserved for any road purposes may not be counted in satisfying yard or 2071 area requirements of chapter 78,whether the land is to be dedicated to the city in fee simple or an 2072 easement is granted to the city. 2073 Sec.82-285.-Pedestrian access. 2074 The council may require sidewalks or other pedestrian pathways-trails in order to facilitate pedestrian 2075 access from the roads to schools,parks,playgrounds or other nearby roads . . _ • . 2076 Sidewalks shall be five feet in width and trails no more than eight feet in width. 2077 Secs.82-28082-299.-Reserved. 2078 2079 DIVISION 4.-CONSERVATION DESIGN 080 181 Sec.82-300.-Conservation design required. 082 The following residential subdivisions shall be subject to the provisions of chapter 78,article XII .083 with regards to conservation design. .084 a. All proposed residential subdivisions or multi-unit residential developments greater than -- -- Formatted:Numbered+Level:2+Numbering Style: .085 five acres in total area or-and guided for Urban medium or higherurb-� n2ity-densities a,b,c,...+Start at 1 +Alignment:Left+Aligned at .086 (greater than one unit per two acres3 units per acre) •. .. I •• • 0.75"+Indent at 1" 087 chapter 78,article XII with regards to conservation design. .088 b. All proposed residential subdivisions greater than 7 acres and guided for rural densities(2 089 acre minimum lot size) .090 c. The City Council may waive this requirement due to the nature of the proposed .091 subdivision. I -' Commented[JB104]:Council:acceptable? June 15,2020 page 49