Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-19-2021 Planning Commission Packet the applicant has extended the review period to February 23,2021. To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members SOl VO Ron Olson,Interim City Administrator From: Jeremy Barnhart,AICP Community Development Director �G� 4kEsH04 Date: January 19,2021 Subject: #LA20-48, Timothy Whitten, Whitten Associates o/b/o I Jacobs/A Jacobs Revocable Trust, 1700 Shoreline Drive, Preliminary Plat Application Summary: The applicant requests approval of a preliminary plat for a 6 lot single family residential development on the 20.14 acre property at 1700 Shoreline Drive. StaffRecommendation: Staff recommends approval, subject to the conditions outlined below. Background The sketch plan for this project was reviewed by the Planning Commission on March 16, 2020 as LA20-000014. The preliminary plat was reviewed by the Planning Commission in August 2020, and the City Council in September and October of that year. The Council received comments related to the Average Lakeshore setback line,the length of the road, and other concerns and ultimately tabled action. In response to these comments, the applicant reconfigured the plan, removing one lot and adjusting the street design. To address concerns that the plan has changed such that public notice wasn't sufficiently given,the project is being re-presented to the Commission, and a second public hearing is scheduled. Proposal This preliminary plat(Exhibit B) subdivides the 20.14 acres into 6 buildable lots and 4 outlots. All buildable lots will be served by municipal sewer and individual wells. The property currently includes one principal structure and several accessory buildings, including a guest house, a well house, and a guard house. It is understood that these structures will be removed. The parcel has frontage on both Tanager Lake (to the north) and Smith Bay(to the south, across Shoreline Drive). The site includes a large wetland on the south third of the lot, and a smaller wetland on the north side of the lot. The northern third of the lot, in addition to the wetland, includes steep slopes and well established vegetation. The middle third of the lot is dominated by grass lawn with sporadic trees. The project includes the extension of a private road that terminates in a cul de sac. The cul de sac bulb and the right of way appear to conform to city standards, and the road plan (Exhibit D) shows the road length to be 1000 feet long, including the portion of the cul de sac island. Access to the site is proposed via Shoreline Drive, in the location of the FILE#LA20-48 January 19,2021 Page 2 of 5 existing driveway along the east side of the property. The presence of the large wetland west of the driveway limits alternative locations for a road. Hennepin County is suggesting turn lanes off of Shoreline. Their comments are provided as Exhibit G. The property is in the Municipal Urban Service Area(MUSA) and eligible to be connected to sanitary sewer. The developer proposes serving all lots with municipal sanitary sewer via an extension of the main off of Heritage Lane. The sewer plan is provided as Exhibit E. Stormwater management is shown on the grading plan (Exhibit C) and proposes rain gardens between the homes on lots 2 and 3 and the wetland. Stormwater on the road will be collected at various points and diverted to the rain gardens for treatment before entering the wetland. It is recommended that the approval of the preliminary plat be subject to the approval of the watershed district and the city engineer. Analysis Lot area and width. The lots appear to meet the minimum standards for lot area and width: LR-1A Required Area Provided Area (acres) (acres) Required Width (feet) Conforming Buildable Gross Buildable Gross @BSL @OHWL/75 Lot 1* 0.5 2.0 1.08 3.25 200 225/225 Yes Lot 2* 0.5 2.0 1.06 3.67 200 213/213 Yes Lot 3* 0.5 2.0 2.20 4.69 200 216/222 Yes Lot 4 0.5 2.0 2.04 2.07 200 200 Yes Lot 5 (Lake) 0.5 2.0 2.78 3.09 200 257.16 200 Yes Lot 6 0.5 2.0 2.12 2.12 200 216 Yes *Lots 1, 2, and 3 are not shown with frontage on Lake Minnetonka,but due to County platting rules, outlots A, B, and C will be combined with the adjacent building lot after platting, establishing lake frontage. Lot area and lot width measurements above are based on this combination. The developer has not provided final house design,though house pads are illustrated. It is expected that each home would be individually designed to accommodate particular lot. Conservation design. A conservation design plan has been prepared, and is attached as Exhibit J. This plan supplements the original conservation design plan prepared for the Tanager Estates Plat, Exhibit K. The grading plan also shows proposed tree removal due to grading, utility, or home construction. This should not be considered as the final tree removal plan, but was FILE#LA20-48 January 19,2021 Page 3 of 5 requested to get a sense of tree removal impacts expected. Staff has requested a list of the trees to be removed. No trees are shown to be removed within the 0-75 lake yard. Most of the environmentally sensitive areas of the property are located on the north side of the parcel. The plans show no activity in these areas that would impact the bluff and heavy Shoreland vegetation. The sanitary sewer line is shown outside of the bluff and buffers. Shoreland and bluff regulations, including additional setbacks and restrictions, will apply in these areas, further protecting these areas. The objectives of the Conservation design process are: (1) Protection and enhancement of drainage-ways and water quality; The project will conform to water protection regulations and policies. (2) Protection and enhancement of ecological communities; The large wetland and the sensitive bluffs will be preserved. (3) Reinforcement and establishment of ecological connections throughout the city; The development is based on Orono's rural development principals. (4) Augmentation and preservation of view sheds including corridor enclosure and buffering; The site is not a designated view corridor. The addition of the homes is not likely to negatively impact the views into the area. (5) Preservation and improvement of views; and The location of the homes and the plat improvements are not expected to negatively impact the view into or out of the property. (6) Preservation or reinterpretation of local landmarks. None have been identified The design plan comments on the control of invasive species, including Buckthorn, Reed Canary Grass and Garlic Mustard. It is suggested that the control methods be included in the development contract. Average Lake Shore setback(ALS). Average Lake Shore Setback was a major discussion topic during the original review. Once the plat is approved,the ALS for the lake lots will be applied as written in the city code. The configuration of the homes on lots 1, 2, and 3 reflect the current configuration of the ALS for 1700 Shoreline. The home locations may be different depending on the timing of construction on these lots. It is impossible to predict the ALS for the lake lots because the timing of home construction is not known. No "artificial"ALS is proposed with this plat. There was some question as to the average lake shore setback for lot 5. Until construction occurs on lot 3 of Tanager Estates,the ALS for lot 5 is the distance from the lake to the principal structure of 1100 Millston. Staff has requested an exhibit. Stormwater Quality Overlay District prescribes stormwater quality standards, a maximum amount of hardcover on a given lot. The subject parcel is in Tier 1, due to its proximity to Tanager and Lake Minnetonka. Upon subdivision, each lot will be assigned a Tier. These assignments have not been completed. It is anticipated that lots 1-3, and 5 will be Tier 1 (25%) and lot 4 and 6 may be Tier 2 (30%). Tier assignments will be made as part FILE#LA20-48 January 19,2021 Page 4 of 5 of the final plat. All lots proposed are greater than 2.0 acres and are exempt from the structural coverage limitation. Parks. The plan does not include any park area. Park dedication will be satisfied by a cash donation for the 5 new lots. Landscaping. The applicant has not yet provided a landscaping plan. The subdivision code does require one shade tree per 40 feet of right of way. Staff recommends the trees be planted in clumps, a more natural effect rather than the traditional linear pattern found in suburban subdivisions. Fees. The following fees are anticipated for this proposed subdivision,to be due at the time of Final Plat approval, subject to the fee schedule applicable at that time. Number of New Per Lot fee x lots = Total fee Stormwater Truck Fee $ 8,060.00 5 $ 40,300.00 Sanitary sewer Connection $ 5,380.00 5 $ 26,900.00 SAC fees also due at time of Permit Park dedication $ 5,550.00 5 $ 27,750.00 Total Fees $ 94,950.00 Engineer Comments The city engineer is completing his review and his comments will be added to the record once received. Staff recommends any approval be subject to City Engineer comments. Public Comments During its review of the proposal,the City Council received a number of comments related to the project. The City Council minutes from September 14, 2020 are attached as Exhibit J. The City Council minutes from October 26, 2020 are attached as Exhibit K. Then applicant has provided some feedback attached as Exhibit L, and the neighboring property owner to the east, Barbara Burwell has provided comments via her representative Aaron Dean. Those comments dated December 7, 2020 and October 26, 2020 are provided, combined in Exhibit M. These comments were based on the original design and changes made in September and October. The applicant also solicited comments on the new plans via email, attached as Exhibit H. The results of that inquiry are not know to staff. FILE#LA20-48 January 19,2021 Page 5 of 5 Issues for Consideration 1. Are there any issues or concerns with this application? 2. Does the Planning Commission feel the project meets the standards of the Conservation Design Plan? Planning Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat, subject to the following conditions. 1. All City Engineer comments addressed to their satisfaction. 2. Watershed District(MCWD) approval. 3. Hennepin County approval of the road access/intersection. 4. City Staff comments, attached as Exhibit F. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application summary Exhibit B. Preliminary Plat Exhibit C. Grading Plan Exhibit D. Road Plan Exhibit E. Sewer Plan Exhibit F. Comment letter dated January 12, 2021 Exhibit G. County Comments dated August 17, 2020 Exhibit H. Email to neighbors Exhibit I. Extension to February 23, 2021 Exhibit J. Council minutes 9-14-20 Exhibit K Council minutes 10-26-2020 Exhibit L. Letter from applicant Exhibit M. Comments from Burwell representative Exhibit N. Conservation plan supplement Exhibit O. Original Conservation Design Plan Exhibit P. Mailing Information PC Exhibit A Land Use Application Summary Application Date: 07/22/2020 Address: 1700 Shoreline Drive Orono, MN 55391 Parcel Number: 1011723140022 Land Use Number: LA20-000048 Application Submitted Agent on behalf of property owner By: Owner: Name: IRWIN L JACOBS Address: ALEXANDRA JACOBS 1700 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA, MN 55391 Applicant: Name: Timothy Whitten Company: Whitten Associates. inc. Address: 4159 Heatherton P1 Minnetonka, MN 55345 tim@whittenassociates.com Contact Information: Associated Contact: Timothy Whitten tim@whittenassociates.com Associated Contact: Mark Gronberg markg@gronbergassoc.com Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Project Description: Preliminary Plat Land Use Application Amendmend Application Type: Appeal of Admin Decision Concept Application Conditional Use Permit Site Plan Application Subdivision Application Subdivision Exception Vacation Application Variance Application Applicant Signature: b SHORELINE ESTATES c) m PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR IRWIN L.JACOBS 2018 IRREVOCABLE TRUST OF LOT 4,BLOCK 1 AND OUTLOT A,TANAGER ESTATES • ttl HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA TANAGER '\ LAKE *-1.(''':.I N';, ".-,';','"-1 - —*-----"f;te'-`---"±----tis,,,-; ____,, Iti! EA1 ,1, � ,,,_ yn Iti!., ,T��;'�,�, DDNE wEn.AN6 - 1 r _; .,„ ' ,- ,40 „:;E:.17,, >1,;,-,__N, :;;.4 _;etc:__:_ta'S_=____- - -1' S.'-‘‘ , G `,,`"J. ,#.ti � r re`_�e aveoc . "` �� (LIBBY) i ` #1000 r ,r ,,/, 4 _ 1' `€ 4 m 7- = __. I \___, , .... r- — -.-----7-'---fle';`-til-411t,-ii`:-,,e+---_,A, '',11,> 1‘._ • cf) METING \ ,1!1 ' 7,/ '7---- '!:,At-,----------t---- --", ,/: - .ft— 1 - NOUSE . 1 L` s. . tk \+ 4.-- Y; o i -ss��.._„ -_----- ,`. 54.i* ;4 'p . 3 mo, ,t.],' E J „DR2m A0 2 g ' �1 DEA ; IOWNER `it'^ m AND SUBDIVIDER 2018 IMEVa'Aw R TRUST DELINEATED(MANAGE 1) CIO 1.181 ACOeS MANAGEMENT CORP. �qND BON HDPaHrvs MCOiSBLVD W 1 �,,ppp/((( Z. • AREA: ISN,. i. � t 160L8 CI11.041 AC(12001,AC.DRY) ' i .o,.. ADDRESS: ~ - � • -1 1700 SHORELINE DRIVE! 0, , LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: H 'P.,e Lot 4,Bloch 1 AND OUTLOT A,TANAGER ESTATES <'" r • -- __.,es_ :Denotes notes existing topography,from field looaUon m `• �� e City of Orono maps sps. _ Denotes Iron marker found --El------ _a,t.g c. :Denotes Iron marker set -�---= - • :Denotes Judicial Landmark found •��7_s�-_. __ �____., Bearings shown are Based upon an assumed datum. 7v^ ..mob =r-'�"`----_ -SHOREt(IJED' - 71 146 5 PIAT 51 -- ..%'-- O 3,eN'' LAKE 929.4 CONTOUR LINE VIII.'''' MINNETONKA _ REVISIONS TERIGNET here./„m,nnni,PIsn,. ew,,,,.p.,, E REVISEDRER M NB 1,88 0.0•880 02 rns 88 une88�alma„�under GRONBERG&ASSOCIATES, INC. 8-7-20 �iVu7' CIVIL ENGINEERS,LAND SURVEYORS,LAND PLANNERS ..-z1 RENSED ROS 0075 rRrr,-cr ��`eS I 445 N.WILLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE,MN 55356 MIL e.-12.4 /MS PHONE:952-4731141 FAX:9521731435 Ii GRADING PLAN SHORELINE ESTATES n OF LOT 4,BLOCK 1 AND OUTLOT A,TANAGER ESTATES h1 HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA g-' \ yti°°,,� ,.. n � ` ��� °P� 4////////////://// t. ` '`'"`=�_===_ -"`5- == __ _ --- _ s� o ,fi , � _ . #1000 -_1,-, ,r, e•@ ry„_�; lit,'(f NNE • '‘,1\)' ? '":- --- ' ' ','"--------------, - ----.' i,iiiiiirr4 '',:- /..*:,", -----,„ -:,,..-.---__ ,, i ,a:. I a� p i it— uLOMIE AREA Ilii • 1 = DUSTING b ;-- 1 � 'l y' y' `✓/ *ME a` �y f •� _ II^__ HOUe 1 (/') ® "r lJ1141411114411111111_ :b._--...ms.7111,A......ap....:.1 ® j�jiy `‘, ':."'''\ --- / _.:__J r.aaE _ ` *-Y meq. ► _____:T.,;tinf_....4.2titimitp7,42:atligel--=e-----____,_,__:: ,: i.ii,.__:.._,__,_,:e.." .-.":),...:!%P.1,,,,,-----,-1,_::;,----:.-_-_-_...."-_:_=__-_-•,41-,,0"..„,s4::..s.sc.;;:::.„.:MIVI-4111::: ii ii.T.N.: 1 ''''' 1 :, \, ``v I int io.a _.. io aur S----------- ------- --- �!' r - �y " m s = R - :- ems, o NauNENiRYP.ltrm.: °u"n`Rfi�ydt ' "B i !� kIII:o e.o„w , ,,.1� EEN 2 3 2 , 0 i' `3 AREA g3Y�.3o�.AC AREA DM•t.or•M. e, �opiIC ,1 ' Die b m DELINEATED ATED(MANAGE 1) '0e M' ' -W / CF9aZ. . . , v0r ,,, , Ia ., ,I ���I fy, I .r.....,,_- ------- ___ye____:Denotes existing topography. �- — "-i3't"_ a31 -- •. wmnrulr�ean. .nt• .--------"` s�----_-------------- --o-- ---------SHORELINE-DRIVE - endCity otOrono mops G T-J�- - - — -- _--_ dOenrba prt,poaetl mnLrw —�� '}J r - eo=verne�d*Zn.ea --:-..;.1*-- " ...117:1,-:_- NQ es< -- i .y _ }{',. _----- - 6p«'N%1 OUTLOT D - �'-.S --25U �YvnIS °Loan (M.AC) oe5co 2D ' 705 0 - ' ----'I.--- - O oi,,: 'l LAKE 929.4 CONTOUR LINE 0 50 100 200 ,° MINNETONKA **moo* —1—. •-•-• SCALE IN FEET REVISIONS IOESIGNEr 'nena.wo e,.tmaw•O..x*5or.or,rwn ]iim DATE RFNAMS F1r„„„m ^mm^-�^ a^ GRONBERG LAND ASSOCIATES, INC. REVISED PER CRY COMMENTS -�� tlb ara of the 6amL��VMSu,ugauMx ,'�50 V tut REXUVO TO a LOTS of N'� an CIVIL ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS,LAND PLANNERS mecc���-_Z,/Ge lye„ rota. 445 N.WILLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE,MN 55356 0.4]El-r-3/ .o,,.,,a„:E,.Aom/SIrr ...„ PHONE:9524734141 FAX:9524734435 9E449[4 Z96 XVA 1434'EL1,-Z96 3NOHd 99£S9 NW'3)14-1 ONO1 3N210 MO11JM"N 941, 22 VOL �'O7'��'f'/' "'Y""'' ,ire Si13NNYld ONtllStl0/.3M1Nf18 UNYl'SN33NIDN3lWO a '•••°m"um ^u I. �p w3wwmxuOOu]dO3S3e oZ-[s vs•wnw.v.vn 11,7 ::: 9NI 'S31tJIOOSS11'9 J2139NOd ,:a a„ i ,3o,o, 8 9NO SIn3L1 �w o '8 9E; RE !sii!'1111 ®i w b')IN013NNIW j - Im_ 1 3N11 anolNOO 4 6Z6 3N� 1 I 9I I N co ON moil I ' S�nu y sot ror»rod o+�10T g1 I [ l 11 a LolLno . �x-�=T o " ----- • - 11 I 111111 'g 69 1� 3AI?�q 3NI 132iOHS .,..:,...,.........40® 1 9 I ; El 6 E'l� li 1 11, ji / i '11 s.. 1 . irlo / I _ sI �, • voi . • uea.fle I m' OII� g ONtll13M o' rnlmrn +ova vTcern T ieo 0 so � O � O d0, f� . ..Am v (l 30VNVW)031d3NI130 -- � �Ir»ci .110 e oC;N Z. Z vnn itilt o 1 �3 :i l3� ' s1$1 ' ,ate N � 1 8�L uMoiwaxs- n. Ini 11 -- 1 P < fzi ,, ,,,;,.. Aim A ,.......„ _ __ ! • I Niat CC 0 o i_ t10fir 410 `te a E 8 1 y . I *I if.''';''' /../ lk ,, e",,,41111ft al, --c' __ , ____ _ - 1 1 I ' ,, u" - s im, ,,; . "",'" — - -- — ' •• / i f ► to I i Ca I■Ij! I I _ I U a .4 k F b SHORELINE ESTATES n SANITARY FORCEMAIN PLAN tr tr1 v. AGE LANE BLUFF F '• eaR 0(LIBBY) \`„ '- '' 3 #1000Si• Y w , a.� $ :: : yDRY :; �ev�` oE SE �.EXISTING 1 . . SE ROu. s!V ha 1 Iii,,-:, .„, `�Emcux �s , 87 , , , $ > Ali 1 t V44.4.7,4 '''''' I Z PROP CUTLET , . I 2 '''s41 D* N ., -- _ - - --, SEI m , .. BUFFER K i 1's 1.1 O MONUMENT((EYEE.) 8 Z n 0 0 50 100 200 -•1. SCALE IN FEET REVISIONS .... 'DESIGNEE' '^^eby mmneW .,.r ...... ]-i8-2o .>w.d�.,a.�,d�d /"� GRONBERG &ASSOCIATES, INC. DATE REMARKS x M.eury (v' & D.."� nes N..dn.M.M ux. )-`� ]-20 REVISED PER CITY COMMENTS I CML ENGINEERS,LAND SURVEYORS,LAND PLANNERS L+21 REVISED TO a LOTS CFEDIILD___,ALL./.&.,4.444,------ 26182 445 N.WILLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE,MN 55356 [ATEA.2/ Mxx.LICENSE MUM.r:]rs ...,, PHONE 952-473-4141 FAX:952-473-4435 PC Exhibit F VOf VQ CITY OF ORONO Street Address: Mailing Address: I Telephone(952)249-4600 ,/ ass2750 Kelley Parkway P.O.Box 66 Fax (952,249-4616 Orono,MN 55356 Crystal Bay,MN 55323 www.d.orono.mn.us 4 - SHOS', January 12, 2021 Whitten Associates, Inc. Attn:Timothy Whitten VIA EMAIL 4159 Heatherton Place tim@whittenassociates.com Minnetonka, MN 55345 Re: Shoreline Estates File#LA20-000048 Mr. Whitten, The City has reviewed your revised,6 lot plan received January 6,2021. After careful review,we have the following comments. Lots/Setbacks 1. I note that the bluff setback is shown for lot 5. Please show this same 30 foot setback for the bluff adjacent to Lot 4. 2. The notation for lot area and dry-buildable area for lot 5 is difficult to read. Please clarify. 3. I note no entrance monument is proposed. Future monuments will conform to city regulations. 4. It appears that all lots meet the size and width requirements of the zoning district. Average Lakeshore Setback 5. Please provide an exhibit showing the principal structure at 1100 Millston, and the distance of that structure from Tanager Lake. This will be the ALS for lot 5 until the home at 990 Heritage Lane is built. 6. Wherever Average Lakeshore Setback is labeled, please re-label as"existing Average Lake Shore Setback". The future Average Lake Shore setback line will be applied as homes come in for permit. Streets 7. Hennepin County has provided comments in a letter dated August 17, 2020, attached as Exhibit A. Their comments include the need for a westbound right turn lane. 8. I note the label for the cul de sac length showing the length at 997 feet. Utilities 9. The City engineering is completing his review of the engineering plans, any approval of the preliminary plat will be subject to those comments. Those comments will be forwarded as soon as received. 10. Any preliminary plat approval will be conditioned on Watershed District Approval. Please verify submission to the Watershed district. Grading/Landscaping 11. Please list all trees that will be removed due to grading and those that are anticipated to be removed due to house pad preparation. 12. A landscaping plan must be provided. Street trees are required. One tree is required per 40 feet of street frontage. The City Council has recently preferred trees to be installed in natural clumps,in lieu of 40'on center placement. 13. During the public comment last fall, the neighbor to the west commented on the preservation of trees along the west property line. Are any tree preservation practices proposed? Other/Miscellaneous 14. As part of the final plat,the following legal documents will be required: a. Home Owners Association (HOA)documents to guarantee the maintenance of any community private improvements and the private street; b. Private Covenants to guide use and house design (if desired); c. Drainage and flowage easements(over wetlands); d. Conservation easements (over bluff areas, at minimum); e. Buffer documents (as required by watershed district); f. Drainage and Utility Easements as appropriate. It is helpful to provide a point by point response when submitting new plans,to facilitate more efficient review by the City. Further, we think it is advantageous to hold a new public hearing at the Planning Commission to ensure all interested parties can comment on these revisions. Please feel free to contact me at 952.249.4626 or by email at jbarnhart@ci.orono.mn.us if you have any questions on the above requirements. Sincerely, CITY OF ORONO C4-7 Jeremy Barnhart,AICP Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart From: Jason D Gottfried <Jason.Gottfried@hennepin.us> Sent: Monday,August 17,2020 4:46 PM To: Jeremy Barnhart Subject: Final comment letter-Shoreline Estates,CSAH 15 Attachments: Plat 3458B-Orono-Shoreline Estates.pdf Hello Jeremy, Attached is our final comment letter for Shoreline Estates.There will be some obvious changes from our initial comments.After further discussion between county transportation leadership,we determined to drop both the requirement for an eastbound left turn lane as well as the request for right-of-way on the north side of Shoreline Dr.. While there remains some concerns for left turning vehicles finding gaps in peak hours,we determined the very limited demand (trip gen)for this movement did not justify the significant cost to be borne out by the developer.Of course city engineering is welcomed to come to a different conclusion if they were so inclined,which we would support. Additionally,while right-of-way will still be needed to cover the necessary westbound right turn lane,we are not seeking ROW beyond that at this time.Generally speaking,we would not want to set a precedent that may obligate future land purchases along the corridor. When ready to apply for county access and right-of-way permits,the developer will want to submit a detailed plan set for the westbound right turn lane to Mike Olmstead(county permits) 612-596-0336 Michael.Olmstead@hennepin.us I hope that helps clarify, please let me know if I can further elaborate. Jason Jason Gottfried Transportation Planner Transportation Planning Office:612-596-0394 Cell: 612-719-8073 jason.gottfried©hennepin.us Hennepin County Public Works 1600 Prairie Drive Medina, MN 55340 (working remotely) Disclaimer: If you are not the intended recipient of this message,please immediately notify the sender of the transmission error and then promptly delete this message from your computer system. 1 PC Exhibit G HENNEPIN COUNTY MINNESOTA August 17, 2020 Jeremy Barnhart,AICP Community Development Director City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55323 Re: Preliminary Plat Review—Shoreline Estates (Received 07/23/20) County State Aid Highway(CSAH) 15 Hennepin County Plat Review ID#3458B (Reviewed 07/28/20) Dear Mr. Barnhart: Please consider the following county staff comments in your review of this preliminary plat to subdivide the Jacobs' estate into seven single family lots: Access: Our preference remains that these homes connect to Heritage Lane. However,we understand this is not supported by the city or neighboring residents.Therefore,we will accept the continued use of the current driveway on Shoreline Drive with the addition of a westbound right- turn lane to support the increased trips and to proactively mitigate safety concerns. Right-of-Way: Sufficient right-of-way is needed to accommodate a right-turn lane at this location. Storm Water/Drainage: Please ensure discharge rates remain less than existing flow rates. The county storm water system will not take water from new drainage areas.Additional treatments may be needed if flow rates cannot match existing. Contact:Drew McGovern:612-596-0208, drew.mcgovern@henneoin.us Permits: Please inform the developer that all construction within county right-of-way requires an approved Hennepin County permit prior to beginning construction.This includes, but is not limited to, driveway and street access, drainage and utility construction,sidewalk and trail development, and landscaping. Contact:Michael Olmstead:672-596-0336, michael.olmstead@henneoin.us More information: Please contact Jason Gottfried:612-596-0394,Jason.aottfried@henneoin.us for further discussion on these items. Sincerely, Carla Stueve, PE, PTOE County Highway Engineer Hennepin County Transportation Project Delivery Public Works Facility, 1600 Prairie Drive, Medina, MN 55340 Hennepin 612-596-0300 I hennepin.us PC Exhibit I From: Tim Whitten To: Jeremy Barnhart Cc: "Patrick B.Steinhoff' Subject: RE:Shoreline Estates extension Date: Tuesday,November 24,2020 10:36:03 AM Jeremy, We agree to an extension of our Shoreline Estates Preliminary Plat application to February 23, 2021. Thank you TIM WHITTEN AIA WHITTEN ASSOCIATES, INC. 4159 HEATHERTON PLACE MINNETONKA MN 55345 612 747 0771 From:Jeremy Barnhart<jbarnhart@ci.orono.mn.us> Sent:Tuesday, November 24, 2020 10:29 AM To:tim@whittenassociates.com Subject:Shoreline Estates extension Tim, On October 26th,you extended the time period for review of the Shoreline Estates preliminary plat to January 18, 2021. As we are moving toward a Planning Commission public hearing on January 19, 2021, it is necessary for you to extend this time period to accommodate the public hearing and the Council review of the project, anticipated to be complete by February 22nd, 2021. Please respond to this email with an extension to at least February 23, 2021. With no extension,City staff will recommend denial at the Council meeting on January 11, 2021. Please call with any questions. Jeremy Barnhart, AICP Community Development Director City of Orono 952-249-4626 PC Exhibit J MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 14,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. now it's part of a development. He said the Council tries to treat everyone fairly and do what makes sense for the City as a whole. Mayor Walsh agreed and added they think about what's best for the community as a whole,regarding the lake and all of those things. Crosby noted the party who wrote the letter is not at the meeting tonight. Johnson said he thinks it goes without saying that the approval ties the Council's support for the MUSA expansion into a 5-acre development. If the developer sells the property off,the Council is not setting aside a MUSA expansion for this parcel as a whole in the future, instead it is tied in to this specific density and asked if that is correct. Mayor Walsh replied yes. Barnhart noted the Comp Plan Amendment process has two steps,the first is tonight where Council directs Staff to submit an application to the Met Council,who will approve the application with the condition of the Council approving the final version. He said the Council will approve the final version at the same time that they approve the final plat. Mayor Walsh said even if the property was sold off and a different developer came in and wanted to increase density beyond what is supposed to be on the books,they would still need to come back to the Council. Johnson asked if the MUSA is still reopened then once it changes. Walsh replied yes. Johnson said with that clarification he continues to second the motion. Printup said to further clarify,the zoning is pretty firm. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. 15. LA19-000048—TIMOTHY WHITTEN O/B/0 IRWIN JACOBS 2018 REV TRUST, 1700 SHORELINE DRIVE PRLIMINARY PLAT—RESOLUTION Timothy Whitten O/B/O Irwin Jacobs 2018 Rev Trust,Applicant,was present as well as Mark Gronberg of Gronberg and Associates,the Civil Engineer. Staff presented a summary packet of information. Crosby asked if the lots are considered lake lots. Barnhart replied right now the lots are not considered lake lots as platted because they do not have frontage on the lake. The intention is that Lot 3 will combine with Lot A with a corresponding out-lot on the South side of Shoreline,those lots would then be lake lots. Walsh noted the developer can't do that until they are platted. Page 6 of 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,September 14,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Johnson said the shoreline is not an easement over the property at this point and asked if there is a way to tie the conditions of those out-lots,or how they could tie that in versus using those as out-lots. Lake Minnetonka Conservation District(LMCD)has jurisdiction over the water and they don't tie those in, they could potentially petition to the LMCD to get a multiple dock license for those other properties. He noted the rigid ordinance that states if there isn't a primary structure on a lot there cannot be an accessory structure(the dock)and that is why they have to combine them. What Johnson would not want to see happen is that the Council approves it,the developer uses those as out-lots,they attempt to get multiple dock license from the LMCD and put multiple docks over there versus the three. He said the three land owners could put a singular dock together. Walsh said he doesn't think they could because there isn't a structure on those lots and if they don't combine them they have no structure. Barnhart anticipated that as a concern and noted in the resolution they put in that lots would be combined after platting and before any building permit would be issued on lots 1,2,and 3. Johnson said that is a good job because the LMCD doesn't have a concern about a structure being on the property as that is a municipal concern. The LMCD just deals with the docks. He said he'd wait to hear more about the average lakeshore setback,noting the neighbors brought up an interesting question about average lakeshore setback when they're developing because all of the properties there are set back very far. Barnhart noted Johnson is jumping way ahead of him. The public comment received to date has to do with the West property line and noted there is not a plan to remove vegetation on Lot 3 and 4,and recognizing the concern they could work with the developer to put that in as a requirement in the final plat documents. Another issue raised from the public had to do with serving the plat with City Water, noting City Water is not near this property and there are no plans to extend water to the property, instead all the lots will be served by wells. There was also a question about burying the electrical and telephone lines,and said final plans haven't been developed at this stage but it is expected that the electric lines will be buried as it City standard,but overhead lines above Shoreline Drive are not proposed to be buried. It is common to bury the lines within the subdivision. At the Planning Commission level,there was quite a lot of discussion regarding the impacts on the average lakeshore setback. Barnhart said it's very difficult to describe during a public meeting,as there are so many moving parts,depending on when a house was built,where the other house is,and he tried to document what he was as a reasonable expectation of lakeshore setback. He met with a neighboring property owner who had many questions during the Planning Commission meeting and tried to identify those issues. Walsh noted in the past they've seen houses going around a round body of water and depending on who built first,it could mess up all the average lakeshore setbacks. The Council felt it was important then and at other times to identify that minimum they can always build at,regardless of who builds first. In the future,if someone tears down a house that could change,but at least in the beginning everyone gets the same shot at getting the average lakeshore setback they think they're going to get. Barnhart said Johnson identified part of the uniqueness of the property as there are two lakefront edges. He showed a map on screen and walked through the average lakeshore setbacks based on neighboring properties. He said this would provide a buildable site for Lot 6 that is outside of the average lakeshore setback and outside the bluff area. lie noted there is no average lakeshore setback for Lot 5 as it is not a lake lot,and the bluff and vegetation will impact location of the house. Page 7 of 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,September 14,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Johnson asked if Lot 4 is a lake lot. Barnhart replied it is not,and Lots 1,2 and 3 are lake lots and that is where it gets really interesting. lie noted the red line at the top of the screen is the average lakeshore setback. Seals asked where the house is as it sits right now. Barnhart pointed out a spot on the on screen map. Johnson asked to pull up the property on the County map. Barnhart pointed out the gray structure to the North on the aerial map and said that is the existing principal structure and the average lakeshore setback for this lot as it impacts Smith Bay are the properties on either side,which are the house to the West(1760 Shoreline)and the house to the East(1 125 Millston). He said that is where the red line on the previous exhibit comes from and cuts through the property. That line makes it impossible to build on Lots 2 and 3 in particular because everything would be in front of that line. What impacts the average lakeshore setback is what is next door,giving the example that if the lot next door to you is vacant,you'd use the lot on the other side and use that distance from the lake. He asked,what happens if both lots are vacant, and said to keep in mind that the new road accessing the new subdivision is now a road rather than a driveway and is part of the right-of-way question. If a lot is adjacent to the right-of-way,they must use the distance of the next door neighbor from the lake,so they wouldn't even consider 1125 Millston anymore. Going back to the exhibit, he proposed a Line C which would use 1 125 Millston as a starting point and come across to an arbitrary point on 1760 Shoreline with the goal of minimizing or making efficient use of Lots 1,2 and 3 and minimizing the impact on 1760 Shoreline. Without a manufactured new average lakeshore setback, lots 2 and 3 will require variances to build on. Staff is proposing this to address the average lakeshore setback, at least for the initial construction on those lots...after that initial construction,then the normal average lakeshore setback issue would apply. Printup asked to be shown again why Lots 2 and 3 would be looking at variances. Barnhart answered the way they're proposing it they wouldn't need variances,however, if they didn't create Line C on the map,the average lakeshore setback puts the Lots in front of the setback. Printup said he understands. Barnhart noted there was already a comment made about protecting the vegetation on the West property line and that lot is quite a bit higher and they will try to mitigate as much as possible the impact on the view. Crosby said if the Council sticks to their guns,they'd use the top Line A,but it doesn't seem quite reasonable. Mayor Walsh said at almost every other Council meeting they're seeing houses that are far back and others that are really close to the lake and is it a hardship. Johnson asked how many acres are above the pre-development line. Page 8 of 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,September 14,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Barnhart asked if he wants to clarify how many acres are above Line A. Johnson said it's not the Council's job to design the development,but he is just curious if they maintain the average lakeshore setback,how many usable acres are there for a development. Barnhart replied depending on the road,his guess it close to four. He said to keep in mind that the average lakeshore setback will change based on the timing. Johnson noted there are already two established neighbors on each side and if this one is completely empty and it's a completely new development and that line is there,for example,he said if a single family home was going on,the Council would be very rigid to that pre-existing average lakeshore setback line. The question in front of the Council is because it's a development,and whether they should look at adjusting that line.He said he'll wait to learn more but at this point he doesn't see why he would support a line other than that average lakeshore setback and the developer can work within the pre-existing lines to determine how that development looks. Seals said it's a good question and they would hold a homeowner to the original line. Crosby said they'd do it very rigidly. He said looking back to the map the property to the East has a main house and perhaps a guest house. Barnhart said average lakeshore setback is a confusing topic and he'd like to make sure they don't go too far astray. The lot to the East on Millston is a separate lot and the reason the property owner may use it as a guest cottage is because it's a separate lot and is a principal structure on that lot,so they used the average lakeshore setback from that point. He pointed out that the time of the final plat of the property, the average lakeshore setback at the time of platting would mean the average lakeshore setback for Lot 1 will be based on the distance that Lot 2 is from the lake,there's no structure on that so the average lakeshore setback is approximately 75 feet,which is on a marsh so they don't have to worry much about it. Lot 2 is based on the location of the house on Lot I and on Lot 3. If there is no structure on either of those lots,then it will be 75 feet back. If there is one structure on either of those lots,then it is that distance. If Lot 3 happens to be the first one built,the average lakeshore setback(ALS)will be the distance(about 850 feet)of 1760 Shoreline,the lot to the West. Crosby asked if this is a new caveat on a newly platted lot. Barnhart said they do this frequently because when they have in-fill lakeshore development, as this one is, there are current expectations and situations and a desire to help mitigate those issues but also to respect what the code says. If there wasn't a proposed ALS Line C,and the property has been platted, Lots 1 and 2,depending on their order built, could be much closer to the lake as proposed. Johnson clarified Barnhart is saying that once developed,the ALS line changes. Barnhart replied once platted,the ALS line changes. Johnson said he understands that but the question at hand is that it's a singular lot being developed,and it makes sense to him that once everything is divided up and the way the houses are constructed can manipulate the line,noting he understands that. However, he doesn't think that is the question for him. Page 9 of 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 14,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Crosby said he's not seeing it either and asked if he's missing something. As Johnson said the developer could manipulate the line however they want it,for example going 75 feet back and bring everything forward. Johnson said the ALS is to protect(in his mind)the existing neighbors already there that had some sort of use and enjoyment. Just because it's a development he doesn't see why that affords more privilege because the lot is big enough to break down. Mayor Walsh said if it was one house,Line A is the line, but once they start breaking up the lots, Line A is not the line anymore. Crosby said there is no property there so basically they're moving things forward to create the argument. Johnson said they could still break things up and adhere to that line. Crosby is curious to hear the stance of the properties to the West and to the East. Mayor Walsh said for the sake of argument,the developer just goes and does that,where is the red line then. Barnhart asked to clarify the question-if the developer does what. Walsh said if the property is platted just like it's shown,where would the red line be now,noting the setback would be 75 feet from the high-water line and it would be right in the marsh. Johnson said this is the ALS from the Southern part of the lake based on the existing properties. Walsh responded if it was one property,but if it's not one property,those red lines don't apply and there are different rules that get appropriated in that case. He clarified that what Barnhart is saying is that instead of having the ASL be 75 feet in the middle of the marsh,they'd propose Line C as the closest they can get to the marsh. Johnson said in an effort to make Lots 1,2 and 3 feasible,that's what a person would do. Walsh said to remember that Line A is only because it's one property and once it's delineated into multiple properties, Line A doesn't exist anymore. Johnson stated he's not confused as to how they've come to the lines,he's just saying they could develop it and Lots 1,2 and 3 could be North of the average lakeshore setback and come up with a development that maintains the neighboring properties. Walsh is trying to show that the developer doesn't have to do that if it gets platted like this. They can be right where Line C is without asking permission because once they re-plat it,it's just information that's not on the map,and the line is actually right in the middle of the marsh. He said this is showing if it was one property,they would have to build above Line A. Crosby said wouldn't they need to be cognizant of the neighbors to the East and West. Page 10 of 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,September 14,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Walsh said once there are three properties in a row,they wouldn't do an average lakeshore setback three properties over, it would be with the properties next door. Therefore once there are three properties it takes away the farther neighbors. Johnson said maybe he has it wrong and asked if it is already platted and noted it doesn't exist yet. Walsh replied he's saying if it was platted,those red lines aren't the red line they'd be looking at, instead they'd be looking at different lines and wants to make sure that information is not missing. Johnson said exactly. Walsh said Lot 4 doesn't matter as it's not a lake lot, and regarding Lots 1.2 and 3,their line is in the middle of the marsh. Printup said point to point,as they already talked about it,goes with the contours of the land and out at Walters Port with the corners to corners,they put that to the side because they looked at the lakeshore. Crosby said they also pushed it back pretty far. Walsh said the question is,does the Council want to approve the plat because once they say they can go plat it,deal with the lines as they are,then it's not the red lines the Council is looking at. He noted they're not deciding that Lot 2 should build way up there, if it's platted this way, Lot 2 can build it within 75 feet or as close to the wetland as they want to,whatever the setbacks are. Crosby asked if its 75 feet back from the wetland or lakeshore. Barnhart said he thinks the setback needs to be 20 feet back from the wetland. Walsh said they're pushing it even farther from the wetland by creating Line C. Crosby said he'd like to hear what the neighbors think. Tim Whitten of Whitten Associates,representing the Jacobs Family Trust said he is here with Mark Gronberg,the Civil Engineer who created the plans they are looking at today. He said it's an extraordinary condition with lakes on both sides of the property and there is a single house on one side and another house setback a tremendous amount because of a wetland. He said to use that as a guiding point to determine how far the houses can be towards the lake is extraordinary in this case. If they look at the scale,they can see how far back they really are,the houses are over 200 feet back from the lake with Line C,so it's not a developable property if they can't set the line in that location. His position is that what is shown on Line C is a pretty fair position and when there are two properties next door that are 10- 12 acres and are setback from the lake by 200 feet,then the property next to it must be setback by 200 feet or greater and he thinks that is unfortunate for the property in the middle. He welcomed questions. Crosby asked the feedback they've had from the neighbors. Mr. Whitten responded they've had neighbor meetings and everybody loved it,there have been no issues whatsoever. He said they could hear from Barbara Burwell who is present tonight and she has been very gracious. Page 11 of 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,September 14,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Mark Gronberg noted the house to the West is dictating the average lakeshore setback line and because of the big marsh to the West,they're built back way up on the hill approximately 800 feet and is also 40-50 feet higher than the lots in question. He said it was a similar situation on Judd Dayton's property where there was a house to the West which had a big marsh and was set back on the hill and the Council looked at it and realized it was a unique situation. Ms. Barbara Burwell, 1 100 Millston Road, 1125 Millston Road, 1075 Millston Road and Green Trees Road(unsure of the numerical address)said there is a lot of information set forward tonight and she had the opportunity to meet with Mr. Barnhart the previous Friday and he was gracious enough to give her a peek at the proposal. She wants to choose her words very carefully noting this is not her genre and she appreciates the fact that elected officials are up-to-date on the various policies and procedures. This particular project greatly impacts her property in a variety of ways. First,she has been neighbors with the Jacobs Family for close to 40 years, and the property she lives on is 83 years old so they've had a pretty good homesteading run. In reference to the neighbors having no issues with the proposal,she thinks they are putting words in their mouths because Friday was her first real peek at the issues. There are about five points she'd like to bring up in no particular order. Ms. Burwell said the Line Mr. Barnhart explained to her on Friday,it's very clear that Line A is the line that is favored by herself,because the impact of Line C would really impact her property at 1125 Millston Road,which is a separate property with two additional lots and is a caretaker's home. Likewise,moving to the Tanager side,again she is greatly affected by Lots 6,3,2 and I which in order to be implemented would all need a variance. She asks herself if that is the normal procedure to go ahead and give a variance and has done some exploration of the home at 1075 Millston which was added to her house when they made a friendly lot line adjustment. She is concerned that they're changing the rules and she is not familiar with the old rule or the new rule, but it's important that she is involved with that rule. Over on Green Trees, she has a vacant lot which will be impacted by Line B and Line C,so that is why Line A is a critical factor in the decision of plotting the development. She said it may be a wiser decision to make it a smaller, less dense development from a standpoint of vegetation,trees,wetland and environment,and these lines are greatly impacting what has already been in place longer than Ms. Burwell even owned the property. She is also concerned about the environmental study,how it's going to happen and if there is a tree replacement requirement beyond the 75 feet from the lake,and who monitors this. She noted the traffic on 15/Shoreline Drive is of great concern to her as she watches the lots,which become lakeshore lots with the added variances and she mentioned at the last Planning Commission meeting there are many interesting traffic patterns coming up to her driveway. This included an accident last Tuesday in which there was a diabetic reaction and a person went right up into her trees during rush hour and that was a day after the fatality accident right off Heritage Lane and noted they had talked about people walking. She said she has a dock and walks across 15 and she has a much bigger pad from her driveway to her dock than the Jacobs and she doesn't know how that will work but she has a serious concern,as she does about 15 going around and how Lakeshore Marina hasn't had a fatality,she does not understand. She is interesting how the turn lanes would impact both the East and the West and would take issue with the County's assessment of that because she has seen and experienced the danger zone of crossing 15 and it is a problem that needs to be worked out. Ms. Burwell said at this point,the biggest issue for her is Line A and Line B impact her property greatly and would completely change the way her son would want to build a house and noted she has been there before the lines were drawn. She asked the Council to consider that very carefully and she thinks it needs more study. Her last point,which has nothing to do with this property in particular but is an issue she feels strongly about and brought up at the Planning Commission, is regarding the fire that affected the Davis Family on Wayzata Bay. Ms. Burwell is very interested in the entire area, including her home and how they look at not just sewer and water, but also fire abatement. She noted it is something to be Page 12 of 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,September 14,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. considered and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the plot. She would respect that the Council consider her concerns thoughtfully. Johnson asked Ms. Burwell if he understands that where the line is going on her property and he remembers doing a lot line rearrangement. Ms. Burwell said correct,that is the adjustment line. Johnson asked where the line is drawn right now what is the structure on the map where the red line crosses. Ms. Burwell said that is a rambler-style home built in the 1960's and is the caretaker home. Johnson noted Ms. Burwell owns it but it's a separate address. Ms. Burwell said that is correct,when they bought,their property had been proposed for a subdivision and she and Rod bought it the night before it was to come before the Council. They bought the land but 1075 was retained by Irwin and Alex and the Burwell's always wanted to own it because they put together the original parcel that the Wells family built and lived on for 25 years. She said if they go up the driveway there is a greenhouse and up further there was a barn that burned down on which there are now three converted garages and a chicken coop,and there is also the original caretaker house to the property. She noted on the map,going out past the tennis court is the Green Trees property,which they purchased because it was contiguous to their property and the plan has been to give each of their sons a piece of land for their possible wedding gift,noting they tore the house down after they let the police and fire department"terrorize"the neighbors. She said no one was very sad to see the house go except the raccoons and the mice. Walsh noted in some of her comments regarding variances and changing rules, having those three lots, if they were ever there become lake lots are really no different than the lots Ms. Burwell herself has,as the lake lots are combined with the shoreline as well. So by combining those with the shoreline,they also become lake lots by the same combination,otherwise Ms. Burwell's lots would not be lake lots on the main lake. He said it is pretty standard par for the course for that kind of issue. He asked to bring up the plat map and noted where Lot I is, if it was Line A,the house would just move up a little bit but is still there,so moving from Line A to Line C doesn't really change the house right next door to her property it just changes the houses that are another lot over and another lot over. Ms. Burwell clarified unless Lot 3 is built first. Walsh said he's just trying to answer Lot 1 because whether they have Line A or Line C,that house wouldn't change a whole lot, it may need to move up 20 feet but it would still be there. Whether the Line changes isn't going to affect Ms. Burwell's house very differently,there will just be another house over a hundred yards or so and another house a hundred yards beyond that. He said she probably won't even see those houses,he just wanted to react to the lines changing and impacting. He noted the Lines up at the top,assuming that proposed Line B is the Tanager lake ALS,and that line is just set by the lake and is a hard line already. Ms. Burwell said she is now aware that the Tanager lake line is based on the main house rather than the 1075 Millston Road house. Page 13 of 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,September 14,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Walsh said that's because the neighboring property is the main house. He noted the lakeshore setback is always to the neighbors' house. Barnhart asked to avoid some confusion and said the ASL of Tanager is based upon the existing Burwell house on the right and the vacant lot on the left. Walsh asked if the vacant lot is the 75 foot setback. Barnhart replied the vacant lot would be based on 1700 Shoreline and Tiffany's house. Walsh said that is a defined line,the Council isn't attempting to say it's a line that should be created because of any hardship. The line they are really talking about is Line A and Line C. He was trying to make the point that changing from Line A to Line C doesn't change a whole lot of regarding what is built next to Ms. Burwell. Ms. Burwell said she understands Line B and asked if it's just assumed that a variance will be granted to Lot 6. Barnhart responded the goal with Line B is to avoid the need for a variance by establishing the average lakeshore setback at the time of platting for the initial construction,therefore,no,Lot 6 would not need a variance unless they wanted to go in front or lake-ward of that line and which Staff would recommend no. Crosby asked Barnhart,compared to the caretaker's house,where would these three proposed homes line up visually. Barnhart replied above the caretaker home on the aerial map. Crosby asked if they'd lie to the North of the caretaker home. Barnhart answered the marsh is directly across from the caretaker home and the homes would need to be above the marsh. Ms. Burwell asked how they are defining the rule with the 75 foot setback that goes into the marsh. Walsh said there are setbacks for the marsh,noting the setback is 75 feet from the lake and since it's in the middle of the marsh they can't build there anyways. In that case,they follow the DNR guidelines in the setbacks from the marsh. Crosby asked if it's 20 or 30 feet from the marsh. Barnhart replied the minimum is 20 feet,but the Watershed District may require more. He said the homes couldn't be built that close,anyway. Crosby asked how far Line C is from the marsh. Barnhart said he didn't measure that. Page 14 of 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 14,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Rief said from here to there(noting two points on the map) is a 40 foot buffer. Crosby said from Line C, it looks like the narrowest is Lot 2. Rief said it looks like it is approximately a 40 foot buffer from the wetland. Johnson clarified it will be whatever is farther. Walsh said if they follow the rules regardless,they must be at a minimum of 30 feet and if they want more they can have more yard space in the back and they can design that. He noted they follow the Watershed rules because they are the water experts, noting the City doesn't come up with their own rules for that. Ms. Burwell asked if the Watershed is in charge of the beavers that are hanging out at Tanager,too. Walsh laughed and said Tiffany had all her trees torn up,too. Ms. Burwell said she is glad they brought up trees and said this property and especially the lot line are large white pines and asked how the requirements,environmental impact and replacement of those trees is handled. Walsh noted after 75 feet,there are no rules,they can chop down anything they want. With that being said,because it will be a development that the Council must agree on,that is why they like for the neighbors and the developers to talk,because if there are some foliage or tree issues,they can identify them within the approval. Ms. Burwell noted Kurt(who is not here tonight)brought up his concern about the trees to the West at the Planning Commission. She noted she is looking at the trees to the East and the impact of the road to the East and along Shoreline Drive. Walsh noted that is the reason these are open forums to make sure the Council can document all of these things. Ms. Burwell said at the Planning Commission, some of them live on Heritage Lane. Walsh noted at least two. Ms. Burwell stated a concern was brought up regarding the traffic at Heritage Lane and who would've thought there would be a terrible accident within less than a week. She said as a neighbor she observed the handling of that and it is a real problem. Walsh said that entire area with the quick turn right around by the property is... Johnson said they're only proposing a turn lane from the West,and asked if that is correct. Barnhart replied Westbound,so a right turn lane. Walsh said he doesn't think there is any room to do an Eastbound turn and that's the problem. Page 15 of 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,September 14,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Crosby said that is really the one that is needed. Seals agreed. Ms. Burwell said exactly. Walsh said he doesn't know how they'd ever get it and that's the problem. Johnson said maybe Ms. Burwell could give some of her land. Ms. Burwell noted that is another question on how it impacts her land. Walsh said it seems like if they had a turn lane that would be better than it is today for sure. Ms. Burwell noted it needs a turn lane on both sides. Walsh said he's seen people slide through into the brick wall. Ms. Burwell said they've replaced that wall many times and last week was not a good week on Shoreline Drive as right at the turn lane there was a motorcyclist than ran up into the gray house. She noted she doesn't need to belabor the fact that traffic is a problem, but she thinks there are some very important contingencies that need to be reviewed. Walsh agreed and said everything needs to be looked at including the trees,foliage,everything and it goes without saying that would be part of it and will take more conversation between Staff,developers and neighbors to bring all the conversations to the Council. Johnson noted this is preliminary plat rather than final plat. Ms. Burwell said she is a citizen and is trying to do her duty and be informative and she knows she's taken up more than her five minute allotment. Walsh said that is only for public comment and they have another thirty minutes. He said Seals brought it up earlier regarding the development from the YMCA land that no one likes to see something wide-open get developed but things do change and they're not increasing any density, it can't be any more than it is today. Can they make it work with everyone and accomplish things like sightlines,trees and everything along those lines at the same time. Crosby said for"not having concerns from the neighbors,"they've been talking about it for quite a while. Ms. Burwell said absolutely there are concerns and she is expressing those concerns from her perspective. She appreciates the fact that these are thoughtful deliberations and that the existing home that has been there for 83 years needs to be thought of,rules need to be in place and not necessarily just changed to accommodate. She said the purchase and lot line adjustment that Irwin and Alex and Rod and Barbara did seven or eight years ago, she noted now they would've probably adjusted it slightly differently but at that time they didn't realize. Walsh said hindsight is always 20-20. Page 16 of 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,September 14,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Ms. Burwell said exactly,and she is very much just trying to protect what she has and has had for close to 41 years. She loves the lake, she has no plan to move or tear anything down,except for the central park area which she tore down and mentioned the critters earlier. She said she thinks the Council gets the drift of where she's coming from. Walsh thanked her for her thoughts. Ms. Burwell said she'd be back. Mr. Whitten asked to bring up the point that Mayor Walsh noted,that even with Line A there would still be a house in that location that is adjacent to the Burwell property and the neighbors to the West did not have any objection to the site plan as shown. He said he thinks that speaks well and he hopes the Council seriously considers Line C. Walsh said he'd really like to take away from this evening in terms of the feedback, looking at all the lines and making sure everyone understands what those lines mean, is to make sure that the developer has heard the neighbors and if this does continue forward,they have some of those thoughts out there as well. He said those conversations go two ways. Mr. Whitten asked if there was a situation before on properties that would have hardships like this one, where the houses on either side are set way back. Walsh answered they see them on a pretty consistent basis because there is a lot of lakeshore in Orono. Johnson noted they can't make their own hardship,either, and this is a new development so one of the components they must meet is unique to the property that the developer didn't create. He said the developer is creating the hardship from the existing average lakeshore setback here. Walsh said if it was one lot it wouldn't be an issue,so what Johnson is saying is by creating a development,they are creating a hardship because of the lines. Crosby said to that point,with the property on the West being up on the hill and he knows that area, it does get a little exaggerated. He'd like to talk with the neighbors and meet in the middle,perhaps there aren't three lots there, but instead two which are pushed slightly back but not as far back as Line A. Walsh said it would be interesting because Kurt is the one to the West,and he'd be curious to hear from Kurt on a sensible level and talk with him about the trees and foliage issues on his side because he will potentially be looking down onto those properties and to get his feedback and they may solve part of those problems by bringing the line down to Line C. He'd like to have that conversation in the next couple of weeks and perhaps bring it back to the Council again. He noted for Ms.Burwell it won't change much between Line A and Line C,but for Kurt it might a little bit, maybe not huge but if they can solve the foliage issues and come to a reasonable solution then everyone is okay with it and understanding that in the past, including with Judd Dayton's property and on numerous occasions,the Council has put lines where it made sense. He noted in the end everyone was okay with it,also. Mr. Whitten said understanding that,they should ask that the project be tabled at this point. He thanked the Council. Page 17 of 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,September 14,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. Printup moved,Seals seconded,to table consideration of LA19-000048—Timothy Whitten OB/0 Irwin Jacobs 2018 Rev Trust, 1700 Shoreline Drive Preliminary Plat—Resolution. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Seals said prior to this one coming up again,she will reach out to the residents,and asked if Barnhart wants to come with her to walk the property because honestly,there is a lot going on in this situation. She said the property is such a fishbowl,no matter what the Council ends up doing,people will think it's crazy that they put all those houses there. She'd like to make sure they get it right. Barnhart said yes, he'd be happy to walk with her. Walsh noted he'd like to go with at the same time. Barnhart stated he could take two at a time. Crosby said perhaps he could do two tours because he'd also like to see it. Mayor Walsh recessed the meeting at 7:36 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 7:43 p.m. 16. LA19-000065—CITY OF ORONO TEXT AMENDMENT RELATED TO SUBDIVISIONS Barnhart reminded the Council this proposed text amendment was brought before them in early August and at the time the Council wanted time to review it.He noted he provided some confusing drafts that they wanted to review more clearly and he hopes they were able to do that. At this stage, Staff is recommending approval of a text amendment that would regulate or redefine the subdivision process. It would clarify what they're trying to do,how they're trying to achieve it and also clarify the code in terms of making sure definitions match across the zoning and subdivision code and that the ordinances are consistent with state statute. At the August City Council meeting,Council directed Staff to send this to area surveyors,the people who do the platting for projects in town. Staff sent it to five surveyors,and the only comment received was about the unbuildable definition or the definition for dry buildable. The only change proposed in terms of dry buildable definition is to make it consistent with the zoning code,so both zoning and subdivision codes match. He noted the comment received took offense at the 18%limitation and the argument was in some lots when you grade a walkout basement,the side hills to that area could be 22-22.5%and therefore would not be dry buildable. While that may be the case,Barnhart said they don't calculate dry buildable at the time of building permit, it is calculated at the time of plat creation and certainly in the subdivision code that is the only time they do it. He doesn't anticipate any issues there and are not changing anything in practice,it's just making sure they match. Staff recommends the changes as proposed. Johnson asked if the definitions on screen already exist in both the zoning and the subdivision. Barnhart said those are the definitions in the zoning ordinance and in the subdivision code for the same thing. He provided the Council with the email chain with Mark and noted his issue was the 18%and he felt that was excessive. Staff does not recommend a departure from that,there is a magic to that 18%and they only calculate it at the time of subdivision. He said the Council should keep in mind the dry buildable intent is to establish an area where they could reasonably put in a house or septic system and if there are steep 18%slopes,there is quite a bit of work necessary and likely with vegetation in that area Page 18 of 26 PC Exhibit K MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,October 26,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. There were no public comments. Mayor Walsh closed the public hearing at 6:18 p.m. Walsh moved,Johnson seconded,to adopt the attached Resolution providing for the certification of delinquent 2020 water and sewer utility charges, recycling program fees,on-site sewage treatment program,storm water charges to Hennepin County for collection of the 2021 Property Taxes. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT 8. LA19-000048—TIMOTHY WHITTEN OB/O IRWIN JACOBS 2018 REV TRUST, 1700 SHORELINE DRIVE PRELIMINARY PLAT Mayor Walsh noted the Applicant has requested to table the measure, and asked if anyone would like to come up and discuss. Meredith Kuhlman, 1760 Shoreline Drive, lives west of the proposed development. She noted her father purchased the estate years ago, and it was made into three lots and the Kuhlmans decided to move to Orono because of the great schools and sprawling location. Ms.Kuhlman and her husband watched the last Council meeting and noted Mr. Whitten said he had talked to the neighbors about the development and that many are on board. She said they had not been approached or talked about the development at all and that the original average lakeshore setback(ALS)proposed affected the Kuhlman's sightline to the lake. Ms.Kuhlman said they object to 5-7 houses being built,even though they will be beautiful,because if they had wanted to invest in a house in a neighborhood,they would have moved to Edina. She noted they tried to be very respectful of neighbors when they built their home and set it back into a hill. The fact that this development will be so densely populated is concerning and increasing traffic on Shoreline Drive adds to that.Ms. Kuhlman understands development of some sort will potentially be at the site, but noted the density of the current proposal as well as the fact that the communication hasn't been forthright and neighborly. Carolyn Nelson, 1780 Shoreline Drive, lives next to the Kuhlmans; she noted three proposed houses are so close to the wetlands and she thinks it would be unfortunate if they were built there as there is not much of a setback. Ms.Nelson also noted they have trouble on the driveway and the developer better make sure the roads are wide enough to accommodate two delivery trucks passing one another. She believes they are crowding more houses into the space than they ought to. Bob Nelson, 1780 Shoreline Drive,said he doesn't see why a variance should be granted as the developers know what the rules are and there doesn't seem to be a reason for the Council to grant a variance. Barbara Burwell, 1100 Millston Road, is the property owner of 1125 and 1075 Shoreline Drive. She stated she appreciates the Councilmembers service to the community. Today she feels sad as they have already talked about the density and proposal but there have been some changes that have upset her. She is not for this subdivision with 7 lots and she understands there is a new proposal which she knows nothing about. She was offered the opportunity to walk the property with the staking of three houses and said it was very helpful but she did not see anything regarding the road,or Lots 4-7. On October 16,2020 she was notified that the stakes were in place for the road and lots and went to the property on October 21, Page 3 of 7 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,October 26,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. 2020 and met with surveyor Mark Gronburg, realtor Mike Stedman, and developer Tim Whitten. They walked the property and at that point nothing was said regarding changes to the proposal. She noted they now have two proposals,one of which is completely different,with only one business day notice. She noted she objects to the first proposal with 7 lots and she is also not in favor of 6 lots. She believes it is in Minnesota State Statute that there must be 10 days' notice to bring a proposal. She has retained legal counsel and will ask Attorney Aaron Dean to share what they have been working on. The second proposal was 26 pages and it was not an incidental decision to put it forward the previous Friday night. She feels this is a bait-and-switch as it is a high-density 7 lot development reminding her of a square trying to be put into a circle and she does not understand it as the road goes right into her property and is a very big concern. Ms. Burwell stated this is affecting her property in a big way; at a previous meeting, she noted Mr. Whitten stated the neighbors 'love the proposal and they have had lots of meetings.' Ms. Burwell said there has been one meeting on March 12,2020. She was never asked for her consent and never stated she is for this and has never wanted a development there for reasons such as density, safety, the road,the forest,the beauty,and preservation. Ms. Burwell noted this development is a big step for Orono and she knows the City does not take it lightly. She asked that the City Council deny the application for the subdivision, start over and actually speak with the neighbors to disclose their true intentions. Aaron Dean from Moss and Barnett Law Firm stated he spoke with City Attorney Mattick earlier today and was not surprised by what the Applicant has done;the Applicant owns that they are putting themselves in harm's way by not providing notice to the neighbors. Just minutes before the meeting,the Applicant asked for a do-over and to table all discussion on the matter;they don't want a vote because they know they are in trouble. Wherever one lives,they deserve to have peace and the Jacobs Family Trust and their consultants have turned that truth upside down. He said they want the Burwells, Kuhlmans,Nelsons and others to live with uncertainty. Mr.Dean said the time is now to vote on the 7 Lot subdivision and the 6 Lot subdivision and provide finality on those two subdivisions. He noted the neighbors hate it and Ms. Burwell should not have to hire an attorney. He gave a power-point presentation outlining the objections along with video clips of the August 17,2020 and September 14, 2020 meetings. After audio difficulties,Mr. Dean asked the Council to go back after the presentation to consider comments by the Applicants and in a closed session go back and listen to those very audio clips so they have the benefit of a fresh recollection. Regarding one video clip,Mr.Dean noted Mr. Whitten talking about how the neighbors love the proposal;yet the Applicant only scheduled one meeting in mid- March with a little over one-week notice that no one was able to attend and they called it good because no one attended and voiced any objection. He said it is a shameful act by the Applicant to stand before the Council and say the neighbors are fine with it,when tonight three neighbors spoke and said they never agreed to it. He hopes this colors the view of everything the Applicant says going forward. Mr. Dean noted the Burwell property on screen and said somehow,they have lost sight that the Burwell residence is located on that singular lot. Staff and the developer have said they can draw a new ALS line down to 1125 Millston Road where the caretakers' house is...but that is not the purpose of the ALS line;rather the ALS line is to protect the actual resident and there has been no consideration to Mrs. Burwell about her actual home. Mr.Dean said the biggest problem with the application is that they are trying to have too much density and they would have been far better off with 2-4 lots depending on configuration. However,this is not the neighbor's problem,nor is it the Council's job to come up with a plan that meets City ordinance or state law;it is the Applicants job. Mr. Dean noted Mr. Barnhart said previously that the ALS line was arbitrarily created or"manufactured" in order to have some buildable areas on Lots 1,2 and 3. The standard for the ALS ordinance is not to arbitrarily set or manufacture a line. This 7 Lot development would require this City Council to ignore the problems with Lots 1,2, 3 and 6 and possibly Lot 5. Mr. Dean said they would have to overlook 4 lots that would require variances and that is not fair. Page 4 of 7 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday,October 26,2020 6:00 o'clock p.m. He asked the Council to keep in mind the proposed ALS (Line B)on the north side is also a manufactured line...now there are two manufactured ALS lines to try and fit a 7 Lot development on a parcel that is not big enough. Mr. Dean noted the Applicant met with Ms. Burwell one day after they submitted the new proposal and did not disclose their intentions; now they want the Council to allow them to sanitize their actions,pull it back and have no vote. He showed an aerial photo on screen and said the top ALS line stops on the Burwell property at an unoccupied accessory garage building. He gave the City Attorney the ordinances regarding principal versus accessory structure and also spoke about the road plans. He said there is a requirement for 10-days' notice under MN Statute 462.358 subdivision 3B; it was not published in the newspaper or provided to any neighbors. Mr. Dean showed an aerial on screen with a blue line which noted the definition of the ALS which would extend to Ms. Burwell's home. He hopes the Council takes time to listen to the developer and the video clips and come back tonight with a vote. Pat Steinhoff, a lawyer from the law firm Malkerson,Gunn,Martin,representing the Applicant,noted he thought they would be talking about the request to table and did not realize they would discuss the application itself. He said if the Council is not going to table,he asks that they allow Mr. Whitten and the Applicant to make their presentation on the application. Mayor Walsh said because the Applicant has requested to table;from the Council's perspective they will table it. However,because others were present at the meeting,he wanted to give them the opportunity to speak. He noted City Attorney Mattick would also address some of the legal arguments. Mr. Steinhoff said the reason the Applicant decided to table is because the application has been in front of the City since March with multiple Planning Commission and City Council meetings. One hour before arriving tonight,they received a 10-page letter from Mr. Dean and it is impossible to thoughtfully respond to everything in the letter,which it what they want to do. Therefore,they immediately contacted City Staff to ask that the application be tabled so they can respond in a thoughtful manner to all the things Ms. Burwell and Mr.Dean have said. He said the reason there are two alternative plans is in previous meetings there were many objections to the ALS, so the intent of the alternative concept plan was to respond to those objections by presenting a plan that put all the lots behind the ALS. Attorney Mattick said he also received Mr. Dean's letter earlier that afternoon and has a chance to read it, but would like the opportunity to provide the Council with his thoughts on the arguments that Mr. Dean raises. In fairness,before the Council votes on the merits of the application,Attorney Mattick would like to address those comments. Mattick understands that the Applicant would also like the opportunity to submit their thoughts on the items raised. If Mr. Steinhoff can give a date that his memo will be prepared, the City can then take all of the information,respond to it and allow the Council to make a meaningful decision. Mr. Mattick also noted there was discussion about lack of notice and neighbors having to scour the internet for information and he said that is an incredibly fair request and it might make sense to table the discussion to a date-certain so people know when that meeting would happen. The Applicant has provided the City a 60-day extension. Walsh motioned,Crosby seconded,to table LA19-000048 1700 Shoreline Drive until December 7, 2020. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Johnson had nothing to report. Page 5 of 7 PC Exhibit L MALKERSON GUNN MARTIN LLP 1900 U.S. BANK PLAZA SOUTH TOWER 220 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE 612-344-1111 FACSIMILE 612-344-1414 Patrick B.Steinhoff Direct Dial: 612-455-6601 Attorney at Law pbs@mgmllp.com December 3, 2020 Mayor Dennis Walsh Members of the Orono City Council City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55323 RE: Shoreline Estates Preliminary Plat Application Our File No. 3533.001 Dear Mayor Walsh and Members of the City Council: My office represents Trisha Blake and Mark Jacobs, as Trustees of the Irwin L. Jacobs 2018 Revocable Trust (the "Jacobs Trust"), owners of the real property (the "Property") located on Shoreline Drive in Orono. The Jacobs Trust has submitted a preliminary plat approval application to subdivide the Property. This application has already been before the City Council multiple times, most recently on October 26, 2020. I write this letter for the purpose of updating the City Council on the status of the application and to respond, in at least a preliminary way, to some of the comments that were made to the City Council by neighbors of the Property when the application was last before the City Council. I. BACKGROUND OF THE SHORELINE ESTATES APPLICATION. The Jacobs Trust's application was before the Planning Commission and City Council for concept plan review on, respectively, March 16, 2020 and April 13, 2020. The Planning Commission then held a public hearing on the completed application on August 17, 2020. After several delays(for the purpose of staking the property at the request of neighbors),the Jacobs Trust planned to present the application to the City Council at its October 26, 2020 meeting. However, the Jacobs Trust instead requested that the City Council table the application to allow the Jacobs Trust to consider lengthy written comments submitted by a neighbor, through her attorney,just prior to the meeting. The Jacobs Trust has amended the application in response to some of those comments. At the request of the City staff, the Jacobs Trust has agreed that the application can be returned to the Planning Commission for a new public hearing on the application, as amended. The Planning Commission will conduct that public hearing at its meeting on January 19,2021. 267234.DOC Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Orono December 3, 2020 Page 2 At the meeting on October 26, 2020, the City Council heard from a neighbor, Barbara Burwell, and her attorney,both of whom suggested that the Jacobs Trust has not been transparent about its plans to redevelop the Property. The Jacobs Trust respectfully disagrees with this statement. The Jacobs Trust has been working on plan to develop the Property for more than a year. It has involved Mrs. Burwell in discussions about the plan from the very beginning. Indeed, the first iterations of the plan contemplated a joint development with Mrs. Burwell's property because Mrs. Burwell expressed an interest in this to the Jacobs Trust's consultants. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a timeline prepared by the Jacobs Trust's consultants summarizing all of the steps that they have taken to solicit feedback from neighbors, from the City staff, and from members of the City Council concerning the development of the Property. The Jacobs Trust's consultants have tried their best to adjust the plans to redevelop the Property in response to the feedback that they have received. The most contentious feature of the application to date has been the Jacobs Trust's original proposal to establish an average lakeshore setback("ALS")that would apply to lots within the plat regardless of the sequence in which the lots are developed. The Jacobs Trust made this proposal for the purpose of facilitating a lot configuration that best suited the topography of the Property. The Jacobs Trust also made this proposal with the understanding that the City had approved similar arrangements for other plats subject to the City's ALS ordinance. Prior to the meeting on October 26, 2020, the Jacobs Trust had presented its proposed ALS line multiple times to the Planning Commission and City Council without any negative comments from any member of the City staff, the Planning Commission or City Council. The Jacobs Trust believes that the establishment of the ALS proposed in the original application resulted in a lot configuration that was most suitable for the topography of the site. However, due to the strident opposition to the proposed ALS communicated to the Jacobs Trust both before and after the meeting on October 26,2020,the Jacobs Trust has decided to amend the application so that all proposed lots within the subdivision are behind the current ALS. This required the Jacobs Trust to modify the configuration of the proposed lots and to also reduce the number of proposed lots from seven to six. Moreover, in response to Mrs. Burwell's comments, the Jacobs Trust has also redesigned the road within the plat to reduce the length of the proposed cul-de-sac. The Jacobs Trust would have preferred to have learned of opposition to its proposed ALS much earlier in the application process(e.g.,during the concept plan review in March/April 2020). Nevertheless, it has now amended the application to eliminate the proposed ALS in response to this opposition. It has also amended the application to address other objections to development of the Property relating to the proposed cul-de-sac. Having made these amendments to its application in response to public comments, the Jacobs Trust is hopeful that the application will receive another positive recommendation from the Planning Commission at its public hearing in January followed by a vote of approval by the City Council. 267234.DOC Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Orono December 3, 2020 Page 3 II. THE APPLICATION, AS AMENDED, FULLY COMPLIES WITH THE CITY'S SUBDIVISION AND ZONING ORDINANCES. It is, and has always been, the goal of the Jacobs Trust to propose a subdivision of the Property that fully complies with the City's subdivision and zoning ordinances. As amended, the Shoreline Estates application achieves that goal. To the extent that neighbors have identified aspects of the application that they believe do not conform to the requirements set forth in the City's ordinances, the Jacobs Trust has amended its application to eliminate those possible non- conformities. The application, as amended, is fully compliant with all requirements of the City's ordinances. Municipal land use decisions are subject to a rational basis standard of review. SuperAmerica Group, Inc. v. City of Little Canada, 539 N.W.2d 264,266 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995). A decision lacks a rational basis if it is unsupported by substantial evidence, rests on a legally insufficient reason, or is premised on subjective or unreasonably vague standards. PTL, LLC v. Chisago County Bd. of Comm'rs, 656 N.W.2d 567, 571 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). "[W]here a subdivision ordinance specifies standards to which a proposed plat must conform,it is arbitrary as a matter of law to deny approval of a plat which complies in all respects to the subdivision ordinance." Nat'l Capital Corp. v. Village of Inver Grove Heights, 301 Minn. 335, 337, 222 N.W.2d 550, 552 (1974). In other words, if a preliminary plat application satisfies all approval standards in the City's subdivision ordinance,the City is legally obliged to approve the application and lacks the discretion to lawfully deny it. To the extent that members of the community oppose the Jacobs Trust's application because they want the Property developed in a different way or simply do not want the Property developed at all, these sentiments are not legally sufficient reasons for the City Council to deny the application. The law in Minnesota is that community opposition to a landowner's desire to use its land for a particular purpose is not a legally sufficient reason for denying a zoning or subdivision approval. Scott County Lumber Co. Inc. v. City of Shakopee, 417 N.W.2d 721 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988)and Amoco Oil Co. v. City of Minneapolis,395 N.W.2d 115 (Minn. Ct.App. 1986). Indeed, the Minnesota Supreme Court has held that a local government entity must base the denial of an application for such an approval on "something more concrete than neighborhood opposition and expression of concern for public safety and welfare." Chanhassen Estates Residence Assoc. v. City of Chanhassen, 342 N.W.2d 335, 340 (1984); see also Scott County Lumber Co. Inc. v. City of Shakopee, 417 N.W.2d 721 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988) and Amoco Oil Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 395 N.W.2d 115 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). The City does not have the discretion to deny,based on mere community opposition or any other reason, a preliminary plat application that fully complies with the City's subdivision and zoning ordinances. The Jacobs Trust is therefore hopeful that the City Council will approve this 267234.DOC Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Orono December 3, 2020 Page 4 application when the City Council considers it again following the second public hearing before the Planning Commission. III. CONCLUSION. Representatives of the Jacobs Trust will be present at the City Council meeting on December 7, 2020 and will be happy to answer whatever questions you may have concerning its application. I thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration of this letter. Very truly yours, MALKERSON GUNN MARTIN LLP /s/Patrick B. Steinhoff Patrick B. Steinhoff cc: Clients Jeremy Burnhardt, City Planner Soren M. Mattick, City Attorney Bruce D. Malkerson, Esq. 267234.DOC WHI 1' 1 EN ASSOCIATES, INC. Mike Steadman & Whitten Associates, Inc. meeting/activity history: Representing the Burwell property owner Mrs.Burwell: 6.28.19 Mike Steadman met with Mrs. Burwell,Mimi Bendickson and Westwood Engineering to talk about potential for both properties and concpet planning. 7.2.19:Meeting with Mrs. Burwell and Mimi Bendickson to review development options for both the Burwell and Jacobs Property. 7.3.19: Meeting with City staff Jeremy Barnhart and Melanie Curtis. 7.5.19: Designed concept Site Plans showing the options of developing each of the Jacob's and Burwell's property independently and also together as per Mrs. Burwell's request. Emailed the concept Site Plans to Burwell. Mike Steadman met with Mrs.Burwell, Mimi Bendickson and two financial representatives of Mrs. Burwell to walk the property and review the subdivision plans. Representing the Jacob's Family Trust: 1.29.20:Meeting with City staff Jeremy Barnhart and Melanie Curtis. 1.30.20:Designed concept Site Plan showing development of the Jacob's property. 1.29.20:Meeting with City staff Jeremy Barnhart and Melanie Curtis to review concept Site Plan. 2.18.20:Application for Subdivision Concept Review. 3.9.20: Email from Jeremy Barnhart stating he met with Mrs. Burwell and Mimi Bendickson to review the concept Site Plan and let them know staff did not see any red flags. 3.12 Neighbor meeting;invitations where sent out to the surrounding neighbors with our contact information.Presented the 7 Lot Concept Site Plan. neighbors Mr. and Mrs. Libby,a PC member,attended and Mimi Bendickson,representing Barbara Burwell. Response from all was generally positive. 3.16.20:Planning Commission Concept Review,supportive of the Concept Site Plan. 4.13.20: City Council Concept Review,supportive of the Concept Site Plan. 6.24.20: Subdivision Application submitted to City. 8.17.20:Planning Commission meeting;unanimous recommendation. 9.14.20: City Council meeting;tabled.Council requested staff to schedule on site meetings. 9.21.20:Met with Mayor on site to review property.Staked Lots 1.2.3. 9.23.20: Met with CC Seals,Crosby,and Jeremy Barnhart on site. 9.29.20: Met with Mrs. Burwell and Mimi Bendickson. 9.30.20:Met with the Kuhlmanns on the property. 10.18.20:Staked the road and balance of house pads on site per Mrs. Burwell's request. 10.21.20:Met with Mrs. Burwell and Mimi Bendickson for a 2nd time. 4159 HEATHEIZTON PLACEMINNETO747 0771 WHITTENASSOCIATES.COM EXHIBIT n.b • •', , Moss & Barnett December 7, 2020 VIA E-MAIL and ILS. MAIL dwalsh2@ci.orono.mn.us aprintup@ci.orono.mn.us Mayor Dennis Walsh Council Member Aaron H. Printup 2780 Kelley Parkway 2780 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Orono, MN 55356 vseals@ci.orono.mn.us rcrosbv@ci.orono.mn.us Council Member Victoria Seals Council Member Richard F. Crosby II 2780 Kelley Parkway 2780 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Orono, MN 55356 mjohnson@ci.orono.mn.us ibarnhart@ci.orono.mn.us Council Member Matt Johnson Mr. Jeremy Barnhart, AICP 2780 Kelley Parkway Community Development Director Orono, MN 55356 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55323 Re: 1700 Shoreline Drive Plat Proposal Dear Mayor Walsh, Council Members, and Mr. Barnhart: I represent Barbara Burwell. I write to you regarding tonight's December 7, 2020, Orono City Council Meeting. At the Orono City Council Meeting held on October 26, 2020, we raised concerns regarding the seven lot subdivision proposed by the Estate of Irwin Jacobs (the"Jacobs Estate") located at 1700 Shoreline Drive, Orono (the "Jacobs Property"). There are many problems with the proposed subdivision, including violations of City of Orono ordinances provisions and the need for variances due to violations of the City of Orono's ordinances regarding Average Lakeshore Setback ('GALS"), lot width, and the use and length of the proposed cul-de-sac road. The Jacobs Estate withdrew its original proposed plat and submitted a revised, six lot plan on November 18, 2020. We received a one page PDF plan prepared by the Jacobs Estates' representatives. A copy is enclosed for your convenient reference. 150 South Fifth Street I Suite 1200 I Minneapolis, MN 55402 P:612-877-5000 F:612-877-5999 W:LawMoss.com Mayor Walsh, Council Members, and Mr. Barnhart December 7, 2020 Page 2 This one page document is not as detailed as the prior, seven lot plat submitted by the Jacobs Estate. The one page document appears to be a draft document printed over a topographical map without engineered dimensions. The one page document is insufficiently detailed to properly and fully evaluate so the one page document cannot be considered. It is our understanding that the purpose of tonight's City Council meeting is to refer the new proposed plat to the Orono Planning Commission. Barbara Burwell and I will be present at this evening's City Council meeting to ensure that her objections are noted. We also received Mr. Barnhart's two page letter to the Jacobs Estate's representative, detailing some of the City of Orono's comments and concerns regarding the revised plan. A copy of the letter is also enclosed for your convenient reference. We share many of the same concerns as the City regarding this revised proposal, including concerns over the proposed cul-de-sac road's length and the ability of emergency vehicles to navigate the cul-de-sac. A high density neighborhood at 1700 Shoreline Drive will not work, and Ms. Burwell opposes a six lot development. We also have separate concerns not yet raised by the City. For example, the Northern ALS line depicted on the revised proposal seems to rely on an unbuilt house and a non-principal structure. In other words, it seems likely that the Northern ALS line is inaccurate. We are also concerned that some of the proposed lots do not meet minimum acreage requirements or minimum lot width requirements. The revised plat would require variances. And, as we explained on October 26, 2020, the Jacobs Estate likely cannot meet the practical-difficulties test required for variances. (See Orono City Ordinance 78-121). In light of the above-raised concerns, we plan to object to the revised, six lot plat. Our understanding is that there will be no substantive discussion regarding the Jacobs Property at the December 7, 2020, City Council Meeting this evening, and that the revised plat will be referred to the City of Orono Planning Commission for discussion in January 2021. To the extent that there will be substantive discussion regarding the new six lot plat, we object to the plat based on: (1) the concerns raised by Mr. Barnhart in his November 19, 2020 letter, (2) the concerns we have raised, above, and (3) the lack of detail in the proposed six lot plat necessary to conduct an accurate and thorough analysis of the proposal. We also object to any substantive discussion of the revised plat because the one page PDF is insufficient to properly and fully analyze the Jacobs Estate's proposal. Very truly yours, /s/Aaron A. Dean Aaron A. Dean Attorney At Law Mayor Walsh, Council Members, and Mr. Barnhart December 7, 2020 Page 3 P: (612) 877-5255 F: (612) 877-5033 Aaron.Dean@lawmoss.com AD/dshe Enclosures cc: Barbara Burwell (via e-mail) 6646199v1 \, ___7/;'/I„,,,//././_-- --..\\ I II, ‘,I-:','-‘)\\\\ 1--1 I ' 7,----I-III-iN------ - 9'-e--------,.--• „-------- -------- - \I\IV! . I i\ \III')\-\\\ \, I • _ / - „:_.7 , .1„..\ ,,, y . . ,,,,_,,_,_ 0 1l 1 1 I } ' \ v' Pk ' v r J.-1 �� �, r, {; "I I i'-/' /f 7. ( y\, \ , ,(,, l %\ 71/if /( ' ' ‘` � � __ -ter 5;.,y/' ".-- ' _....,--___, --------------r.,%-- -- (e.:04 "N,1 lip :..,---E----..--,--,„,- --.,-----, ------ ..ir_----,-,.-.7,--,-.-2.A. . .. \ a, 1 111:%7 .-: J J ACS E —z----- ..1„, \ _,,,,r- 30 1 c \N.:,,,,..._ :). ,(\,... :11:17::::,_,=7 -,,___A,_..:441L..... . '--4._ 0 p -, • / -- ...\'4,, H.Lp.,, ...i ,/, ' --.//c, 6 , , _ ... -tzk -- [---s 1.01„„,•"0-\:., i. - -------;. ,,----- - ...,- s or . . - / ,, , , ...,, .,, 1 twilit � iso _'it � _ -- 11 L— 50 � ..; 414 ' 111111111\ --,,,,,,,./f ---- e 23 West of - _ �'S=' -IIII , .` Ins west lance _______ 3' K ow known . ' ,f said Lake _-1 \,-- iff 50 \,_ j \\ \ 0 and 11 in -.. Ions 10 and "_".._.__ _ -- eat Northam -- -al. — ACR ,.�� ante southwesterly ------.� IRY/BI�H$ . southedY — running In _--"-- - bich Is Nth of the ---_____. �� , "• S ...1 lb east Unnetonka; ___---1\--- ---- ---' --:TT __-� \ i' /CLDBL. `N� \\ ! \50 ig described / -- -------'---------------/ ._�_/ \ west line �__._- _ - -- . s ce northerly. __ _ �?'��/-Y Y V \ ' \• ELL 1 ecting left 45 �_----- ;iJ V Y -__V .- \\\ \"'! ' S I 4.65 1 ACRES 2 � \ 3.65 31: ]. I 1'!1 ACRES • I 325 , ACRES \ � 1 1111' '; _ r � w ----7"----- _— E .- SHORELINEDR E 0' -pT= era-- - _ =I ^= Ate'/�/O0"�1.0r-~"" - 929.4 CONTOUR LINE : � 235.. �7 �����` CITY OF ORONO Street Address: Mailing Address: Telephone(952)249-4600 / 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O.Box 66 Fax (952)249-4616 r \!q Orono,MN 55356 Crystal Bay,MN 55323 www.ci.orono.mn.us /CFESHO� November 19, 2020 Whitten Associates, Inc. Attn:Timothy Whitten VIA EMAIL 4159 Heatherton Place tim@whittenassociates.com Minnetonka, MN 55345 Re: Shoreline Estates File#LA20-000048 Mr. Whitten, The City has reviewed your revised, 6 lot plan received November 18, 2020. After careful review, we have the following comments. Lots/Setbacks 1. Please show the bluff on lots 5 and 6 and the 30-foot top of bluff setback. 2. The plans indicate the amount of contiguous dry buildable area for lots 1-3. Please also include that calculation for lot 5. 3. Please show the 75-foot lake setback for lots 1-3,and 5. 4. The street side yard setback for Lot 1 is 30 feet. 5. Is an entrance monument proposed? If so, details should be provided and it should be located either within an easement or outlot. Average Lakeshore Setback 6. The plan shows an average lakeshore setback (ALS) line to the north, through lot 5, and to the south, through lots 1-3. Since upon platting, these lines will go away; showing these lines may add confusion. Please provide two exhibits: a. An exhibit showing current Average Lakeshore Setbacks impacting 1700 Shoreline (do not show any proposed lots, or any proposed house pads). The scale may need to expand to incorporate the principal structure of 1100 Millston in the graphic. b. An exhibit showing the proposal without the average setback line, because this will not be known until the lots are developed. Streets 7. Hennepin County has provided comments in a letter dated August 17, 2020,attached as Exhibit A. 8. The cul de sac design exceeds the minimum ROW width. However, because of the center island, please provide a turning template to illustrate that a firetruck can navigate the cul de sac. The plan has been forwarded to the Fire Chief for his comment. 9. The cul de sac measures 1005 feet from Shoreline ROW to the furthest edge of the pavement, through the center of the cul de sac. Because there may be a measuring error, please provide an exhibit showing the distance. Utilities 10. Engineering(sanitary,storm sewer, road design) needs to be completed based on this layout in order for the preliminary plat to be approved. 11. Any approval will be conditioned on Watershed District Approval. Grading/ Landscaping 12. A grading plan is necessary prior to approval. 13. Please show and list all trees that will be removed due to grading and those that are anticipated to be removed due to house pad preparation. 14. A landscaping plan must be provided. Street trees are required. One tree is required per 40 feet of street frontage. The City Council has recently preferred trees to be installed in natural clumps,in lieu of 40'on center placement. Other/Miscellaneous 15. As part of the final plat,the following legal documents will be required: a. Home Owners Association(HOA)documents to guarantee the maintenance of any community private improvements and the private street; b. Private Covenants to guide use and house design (if desired); c. Drainage and flowage easements(over wetlands); d. Conservation easements(over bluff areas, at minimum); e. Buffer documents(as required by watershed district); f. Drainage and Utility Easements as appropriate. It is helpful to provide a point by point response when submitting new plans,to facilitate more efficient review by the City. Further, we think it is advantageous to hold a new public hearing at the Planning Commission to ensure all interested parties can comment on these revisions. For inclusion in the Planning Commission meeting on January 19, 2020,this information must be provided by January 6,2021. Please feel free to contact me at 952.249.4626 or by email at jbarnhart@ci.orono.mn.us if you have any questions on the above requirements. Sincerely, CITY OF ORONO C7:67 Jeremy Barnhart,AICP Community Development Director PC Exhibit M •�i• , Moss & Barnett October 26, 2020 VIA E-MAIL AND U.S. MAIL Orono City Mayor Dennis Walsh Orono City Council Members 2780 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Re: 1700 Shoreline Drive Subdivision Our File No.: 61540.1 Dear Mayor Walsh and Council Members: I represent Barbara Burwell. At the last City Council meeting on September 14, 2020, the Council asked Tim Whitten, the Jacobs family's developer and architect, if he had talked to the neighbors, and the City Council asked Mr. Whitten whether the neighbors supported the proposed subdivision. Mr. Whitten's statement to the City Council was very telling: "The neighbors? Oh, we've got neighbor meetings and everybody loves it. We have no issues whatsoever. . . .That's not a concern. . . . As far as neighbors, I don't see an issue at all." See September 14, 2020, City Council meeting video, 1:00:00 and 1:00:31 marks. Mr. Whitten's statements to the City Council were untrue. Mrs. Burwell objects to the proposed subdivision. We are concerned that the Jacobs family's representative made this fundamental misrepresentation. Mr. Whitten had not even talked to Michael and Meredith Kuhlman, the next door neighbors who live at 1760 Shoreline Drive, before the September 14, 2020, City Council meeting. Mr. Whitten never obtained Mrs. Burwell's consent at any time, and she lives at 1100 Millston Road. Despite these facts, Mr. Whitten represented that the "neighbors loved" the development. Thus, the two families that live next to this proposed development were not consulted and never agreed to the subdivision, contrary to Mr. Whitten's representation to the City Council at the last meeting. The neighbors do not "love" the proposed subdivision. The neighbors object to the proposed subdivision. This is an important point, and this fundamental misstatement colors all of Mr. Whitten's actions to date before the City Council. 150 South Fifth Street I Suite 1200 I Minneapolis, MN 55402 P:612-877-5000 F:612-877-5999 W:LawMoss.com 6573570v1 Orono City Mayor Dennis Walsh Orono City Council Members October 26, 2020 Page 2 At tonight's City Council meeting, the City will decide whether to approve a seven lot subdivision that the Jacobs family applied for on July 22, 2020. The application should be denied. We are concerned that on Friday, October 23, 2020, the City provided notice — for the first time —that the Jacobs family/trust proposed a new six lot development. The City cannot consider this new six lot subdivision. Notice was not provided as required by Minnesota law. See Minn. Stat. 462.358, subd. 3b. As you will hear from Mrs. Burwell directly this evening, Mrs. Burwell objects to both the originally applied for seven lot subdivision and this newly disclosed six lot subdivision. The City must reject the application submitted by the Jacobs family/trust for several reasons discussed, below. In addition to these written comments objecting to the proposed subdivision, Mrs. Burwell requests to be able to address the City Council and then separately requests that I be allowed to address the City Council to explain why the proposed subdivision must be rejected. Mrs. Burwell has concerns about the proposed seven lot subdivision of the Irwin Jacobs property (the "Jacobs Property") located at 1700 Shoreline Drive in Orono.' This proposed seven lot subdivision asks the City to ignore its own established Average Lakeshore Setback Ordinance and the protections afforded neighboring property owners. The ALS Ordinance cannot be circumvented by the Jacobs family/trust, and the proposed subdivision must be rejected for the simple reason that the City should not grant a number of variances to overcome admitted deficiencies in the proposed preliminary plat that fail to meet code requirements established for the health, safety, and welfare of Orono residents. The City must reject the proposed subdivision. Minnesota Government Data Practices Act Request. We are concerned by the lack of transparency to date regarding the proposed subdivision. This concern relates to the actions by Tim Whitten and agents of the Jacobs Family Trust. We need to better understand what the Jacobs Family Trust has represented to the City's officials. Mrs. Burwell respectfully requests that the City Council deny the proposed application for the subdivision. Mrs. Burwell also requests copies of the following documents, pursuant to Minnesota's Government Data Practices Act: 1. All e-mails submitted by the Jacobs Family, the Jacobs Trust, Gronberg & Associates, Whitten Associates, Inc., Tim Whitten, or Patrick Steinhoff to the City related to the subdivision of 1700 Shoreline Drive in Orono since January 1, 2020. 1 Despite the assertion by Mr. Whitten at the City Council Meeting dated September 14, 2020 that the neighbors had no objection to the plat (see the recording of the City Council Meeting at approximately the 1:00:00 and 1:00:31 marks), the Kuhlmanns and Ms. Burwell are opposed to the development and have not previously indicated any approval of the subdivision as proposed. 2 6573570v1 Orono City Mayor Dennis Walsh Orono City Council Members October 26, 2020 Page 3 2. All text messages sent or received by Jeremy Barnhart of the City, other City employees, Mayor Dennis Walsh, or City Council members related to 1700 Shoreline Drive in Orono since January 1, 2020. 3. All documents received by the City of Orono related to the proposed subdivision or development of 1700 Shoreline Drive in Orono since January 1, 2020. 4. All documents showing dates of meetings on-site at 1700 Shoreline Drive in Orono by Jeremy Barnhart, any City employee, Mayor Walsh, and any City Council member since January 1, 2020, related to any proposed subdivision or development. 5. All e-mails sent or received by Jeremy Barnhart, City employees, City Council members, or the Mayor related to the proposed development or subdivision of 1700 Shoreline Drive in Orono since January 1, 2020. To be clear, Mrs. Burwell needs this information in order to understand the representations of the Jacobs Family Trust and its agents to the City. Mrs. Burwell is not implying that City officials have done anything wrong. Mrs. Burwell requests that no City Council meeting be scheduled until 21 days after all documents listed above have been produced by the City, pursuant to this Minnesota Government Data Practices Act request. Purpose of Orono Zoning Regulations Sec. 78-5 of the Orono Code of Ordinances, attached as Exhibit 1, defines the"purpose"of the Orono Zoning Regulations. Section 78-5(a)(2) explains that"[t]he maintenance of open space and the avoidance of overcrowding of land is a basic guiding principle in this plan." And Section 78- 5(a)(5) provides that"[t]he guiding principles of maintaining open spaces, avoiding the i//effects of overcrowding, avoiding premature development, avoiding the future pollution problems which are inherent in any plan to intensely develop land adjacent to wetlands and Lake Minnetonka, and the need to change some allowed uses in order to preserve the quality of the groundwater supplies in the area were recognized in the comprehensive municipal plan adopted on December 2, 1974, and the amendments to the comprehensive zoning chapter and map." (Emphasis Ours.) These stated purposes support application of existing codes to any proposed subdivision, not a departure from the ordinances that has the effect of increasing density and compromising the rights, safety, health and welfare of the property owners in and around the development. Average Lakeshore Setback Ordinance Section 78-1279(6) of the Orono Code of Ordinances—most recently updated on October 14, 2019 as Orono Ordinance No. 234, Third Series, establishes the general rule for Average Lakeshore Setbacks ("ALS"). A copy of Ordinance No. 234 is attached as Exhibit 2. 3 6573570v1 Orono City Mayor Dennis Walsh Orono City Council Members October 26, 2020 Page 4 Pursuant to the City's own records,2 the goals of the ALS are: 1) preservation of lake views; 2) accommodating unique circumstances, including meandering, concave/convex shorelines and peninsulas; and 3) clarity—the regulation should be understandable for the layperson. Both the 2004 and 2013 versions of the ALS, attached as Exhibit 3, included the following language: (6) a. In instances where the average lakeshore setback can not be met, administrative approval may be granted at the discretion of the planning director provided no lake views of an adjacent lakeshore lot are obstructed and adjacent neighbors provide written approval" (Emphasis Ours.) (See Ord. No. 11 3rd series, § 1, 5-24-2004 and Ord. No. 106 3rd series, § 28, 6-10-2013). Attached as Exhibit 4 is an August 12, 2019 City of Orono Memorandum (the "Memorandum") from Jeremy Barnhart, the Community Development Director, addressed to Mayor Walsh, the City Council Members, and City Administrator Dustin Rief. The Memorandum was prepared shortly before the October 2019 amendment to the ALS ordinance, at the direction of City Council, in order to"review Average Lake Shore setback regulations . . . in part to ensure that the regulations actually protected lake views." (Memorandum p. 1). The Memorandum makes multiple other references to the importance of lake views and to neighbor consent in order to preserve the sanctity of the ALS: Page 8 of the Memorandum comes from the City Council minutes from the July 15, 2019 ALS discussion. Mr. Barnhart indicated that the ALS "was established in 1992 and was intended to protect the views of lakeshore property owners." Further, Mr. Barnhart listed "[p]reservation of lake views"as the first of the goals of the ordinance. Pages 11 and 12 of the Memorandum refer to the ALS as being established "to protect the views of lake shore property owners from encroachment due to expansion and placement of structures on neighboring lots." (Emphasis ours). Subdivision of property would be an expansion of a neighboring lot. The City Council was also concerned with situations"where the average lake shore setback didn't realistically protect a lakeview." (Page 11 of the Memorandum). Attached as Exhibit 5 is a copy of the proposed subdivision with the different ALS lines superimposed over it. It is undisputed that the approximate existing ALS for the Jacobs Property is identified as Line A in Exhibit 5, and that it greatly limits the Jacobs Family Trust's ability to subdivide their property. Lots 2 and 3 are clearly ahead of the existing ALS line, as is a portion of lot 1. See recording of the City Planning Commission Meeting dated August 17, 2020 at approximately the 2:17:00 mark. 2 City of Orono Memorandum dated August 12, 2019 and accompanying Minutes of the Orono Planning Commission, Monday, July 15, 2019. 4 6573570v1 Orono City Mayor Dennis Walsh Orono City Council Members October 26, 2020 Page 5 Mr. Barnhart admitted that the proposed ALS, identified in Exhibit 5 as Line C, is arbitrary (see the recording of the City Council Meeting dated September 14, 2020 at approximately the 42:50 mark) and that views will be compromised (see the recording of the City Council Meeting dated September 14, 2020 at approximately the 44:30 mark). Thus, the sole purpose of arbitrarily adjusting the ALS for the Jacobs property is to allow significantly greater density of homes than is presently permitted under the City of Orono's ordinances. At the September 14, 2020 City Council Meeting, concerns were raised about the ability of an owner to convert their property into a better ALS by subdividing the property. The Council appeared to be in agreement that if a single-family home were to be built on the Jacobs Property, the established ALS would apply. However, some Council members advocated that the council could ignore the established ALS ordinance and arbitrarily establish new ALS lines C & B, in order to accommodate a higher density subdivision of the Jacobs Property.3 This position ignores the detrimental impact such action has on neighboring property owners that have relied, for decades, on the ALS line established under ordinance, and clearly circumvents the City's own codes and variance standards. No authority was cited for the City's ability to use a plat approval as a means of circumventing its own ordinances other than some suggestion the City may have done it before. A mistake in the past is not justification for a mistake in the future. In our review of the city Ordinances, we have not identified anything in Sec. 78-1279(6), its history, or any other Orono ordinance that suggests or provides that long-standing ALS rules established by the City for the protection of neighboring property owners can be circumvented by the City arbitrarily modifying the ALS. We respectfully request that the City identify its authority for ignoring the established ALS and subjectively inserting its own new ALS for the property. In the absence of such authority, we believe an ordinance change is required to give the City authority to so modify the ALS. Impact of Circumventing ALS When the ALS ordinance is not enforced, property views quickly become compromised, building density and watershed increases, and property values can be adversely impacted. That is evident from the present circumstances. In recent years, the Jacobs Family Trust sold a number of parcels of land that were previously part of the current Jacobs Property. See Exhibit 6. The premium prices obtained for these parcels doubtless had some basis in the ALS limitations and the general public's understanding of the impact of the ALS on housing density and location around Lake Minnetonka. After obtaining premium prices for parcels previously sold, some of which were owned by the Jacobs Family Trust, the Jacobs Family Trust now wants to undermine the very ALS that supported higher prices by increasing the housing density of their remaining property to maximize its value. This is an unfair result to adjoining property owners, including property owners who purchased high priced neighboring lots owned by the Jacobs Family Trust, yet now are having their property ownership values impacted by the proposed arbitrary re-writing of the ALS to support a new seven lot development of 1700 Shoreline Drive. 3 Mr. Barnhart, at the City Planning Commission Meeting dated August 17, 2020, at approximately the 2:14:40 mark, stated the City goal was subdivisions and not to initiate or create variances. 5 6573570v1 Orono City Mayor Dennis Walsh Orono City Council Members October 26, 2020 Page 6 The impact of this higher density also comes at the expense of longstanding owners of neighboring properties as well as future purchasers of the seven proposed Jacobs subdivision lots, given they also will enjoy more limited views in a higher density subdivision. In the present case, the City Council should deny approval of the proposed preliminary plat because the configuration of the seven-lot subdivision cannot be allowed to be used to further manipulate the ALS. See recording of the City Planning Commission Meeting dated August 17, 2020 at approximately the 2:17:50 mark. Had the Jacobs'proposed subdivision included only one south lot between the neighboring Kuhlman and Burwell parcels, the ALS line may have remained unchanged. By proposing three south lots, at least two of which presently violate the existing ALS, the Jacobs Family Trust seeks to convert their property into a more favorable ALS line by first building on the middle lot in order to manipulate the ALS. Lake Lots, Lot Width and Density Proposed lots 1, 2 and 3 are non-lake shore lots as initially proposed. Because lots 1-3 do not abut Lake Minnetonka, their lot width is measured by the width of the lots' front yards (which touch the proposed private road). (See Sec. 78-1 definition of lot width). As a result, lots 2 and 3 do not meet city code lot width requirements. (See Sept. 14, 2020 City Council Meeting recording at approximately the 31:00 mark where Mr. Barnhart admits that lots 2 and 3 are too narrow; also, the recording of the City Planning Commission Meeting dated August 17, 2020 at 2:09:29 — 2:09:55; see also Exhibit 5). Because lot width is measured differently for lake shore lots, lots 2 and 3 might meet the City of Orono lot width requirements if they were subsequently combined with the outlots on the south side of Shoreline Drive so as to abut Lake Minnetonka and thus become lake shore lots. But, as explained by Mr. Barnhart, under Hennepin County rules, lots 1-3 cannot be combined with outlots A—C until after platting. (See Sept. 14, 2020 City Council Meeting recording at 31:30 mark). But the proposed subdivision plan cannot be approved, because it fails to comply with the established ALS. As to the proposed subdivision lot density, when asked about the buildable acreage above the ALS as presently established, Mr. Barnhart stated there were about 4 acres of buildable land above the ALS line. (See the recording of the City Council Meeting dated September 14, 2020 at approximately the 45:50 mark.) That is the acreage that establishes the potential density of the Jacobs Property, if subdivided. Again, the Jacobs Family Trust asks the City of Orono to ignore its established ordinances and asks that the City approve a subdivision with two lots (lots 2 and 3) that do not meet minimum lot width requirements, two arbitrarily created ALS lines and an otherwise impermissible higher density. Put another way, not only does the Jacobs Family Trust seek to bootstrap lots 2 and 3 into ALS compliance, but by doing so, they are able to later bootstrap lots 2 and 3 into meeting minimum lot width requirements. 6 6573570v1 Orono City Mayor Dennis Walsh Orono City Council Members October 26, 2020 Page 7 The City should not ignore its own ordinances. And while a variance may allow the Jacobs Family Trust to establish lots 2 and 3 with their proposed, too-narrow dimensions, as discussed below, the Jacobs Family Trust does not meet the"practical difficulties"test for being granted a variance. Road, Cul-de-sac City ordinances discourage cul-de-sacs and set a maximum length of cul-de-sac roads at 1000 feet. (See Sec. 82-281(d)(2) and 82-283(b)(6)). These ordinances exist for the health, safety and welfare of the residents of Orono. For example, fire trucks and ambulances need adequate access and turnarounds to serve Orono homes and residents. The road proposed in the Jacobs subdivision is well over 1,000 feet long. Further, concern was expressed at the City Planning Commission meeting about traffic, the addition of a right turn lane with a possible shoulder, and parking (See the recording of the City Planning Commission Meeting dated August 17, 2020 at approximately the 2:43:30 mark.) What happens when there are large gatherings at one or more of the seven homes that have parking spilling over onto the private road, and an emergency vehicle needs access to the same or another home in the development? Circumventing normal safety standards will be to the detriment of the owners of these lots and any adjoining properties that may be impacted by delayed or compromised emergency services (such as fire trucks needed to put out a ground fire). It is also not clear what impact the addition of a westbound turn lane will have on the Burwell property, but it appears that such a turn lane will be in close proximity to traffic on and off Millston Road, creating a bottleneck of vehicular travel. This is a significant safety concern. Mrs. Burwell is also concerned is that a west bound turn lane is inevitable to accommodate a seven lot neighborhood, so Mrs. Burwell is concerned that the City's decision about this preliminary plat will eventually cause Hennepin County to require a portion of the south end of Ms. Burwell's property to be dedicated to widening Shoreline Drive to accommodate turn traffic. Mrs. Burwell objects to a high-density development. The City cannot promise that a west bound turn lane will never be required. The only solution is to eventually a consider a very low density subdivision, not a six lot or a seven lot subdivision. There are also many trees that run along the common boundary of the Burwell/Jacobs property. Based on recent staking, it is clear that most of the trees, some belonging to Ms. Burwell, will be damaged or removed to construct what appears to be a zero-lot line road along the common boundary. It is not clear if these trees will be replaced and at whose expense. The proposed road includes a cul-de-sac that exceeds the maximum length permitted under code and requires a variance. Arbitrary modification of the ALS lines and approval of a non-compliant subdivision is being requested so the Jacobs Family Trust can obtain a better return on the sale of their property, ignoring safety, health and welfare concerns and ignoring the Jacobs Family Trust's recent sales of adjoining lots when buyers paid price premiums for their parcels. 7 6573570v1 Orono City Mayor Dennis Walsh Orono City Council Members October 26, 2020 Page 8 The City should not allow any cul-de-sac. The cul-de-sac is being used to try to create a high density development, rather than a simple subdivision. The City should reject this effort by the Jacobs family/trust. Traffic The Jacobs subdivision will access Shoreline Drive along a stretch of the road that is already a safety concern. The City Council's approval of the proposed subdivision would create a larger safety hazard to an already hazardous stretch of road. The City, therefore, should deny the proposed application. Visibility along the road is compromised by vegetation and road curvature. Road speeds are not always honored. Recent accidents have already occurred. Under the Jacobs Family Trust plan, six or seven new homes will now be funneled through the same stretch of road for ingress and egress, bringing with these new residents all the additional traffic incidental to home use—multiple cars within a family, service providers such as garbage disposal, repairman, mail delivery, overnight package delivery, and guest traffic. The Burwell home access is also nearby. While deference has been given to the County over road control and access,this should be a City concern as well. Variance We respectfully submit that variances must be applied for/granted contemporaneously with the plat approval. The City's action in arbitrarily adjusting or assuming new ALS lines to facilitate subdivision approval effectively grants numerous variances to the Jacobs Family Trust without requiring the Jacobs Family Trust to meet the variance criteria. In the present case, lots 1, 2, 3 and 6 do not meet the criteria for a variance and should not be approved for variances. Variance Criteria Variances may be granted only under specific circumstances. "The council upon application may grant variances from the strict application of the provisions of this chapter and impose conditions and safeguards in the variances so granted, in cases where there are practical difficulties in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of this chapter and where the variance does not adversely affect the purpose and intent of this chapter nor the health or we/fare of the public." (Sec. 78-121) (Emphasis Ours.) The Jacobs Family Trust does not satisfy these requirements. First, they do not meet the practical difficulties requirement. Sec. 78-123 of the Orono Code of Ordinances lays out the "parameters within which a variance may be granted." One of those parameters is that "[t]he plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." (Sec. 78-123(a)(2)). This plainly does not apply to the Jacobs Family Trust; their problem with the ALS is not unique to the property, and it is one of their own making by attempting to subdivide a single property into seven different lots. The Ordinances further specify that "[e]conomic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties" meriting a variance. (Sec. 78-123(a)(4)). And the Jacobs Family Trust's pursuit of variances in order to establish and develop this proposed subdivision is purely economical in nature. 8 6573570v1 Orono City Mayor Dennis Walsh Orono City Council Members October 26, 2020 Page 9 Second, granting variances in order to enable the construction of the proposed subdivision would "adversely affect the purpose and intent" of the Zoning Regulations and harm "the health [and] welfare of the public." (Sec. 78-121). Rather than being mindful of the "maintenance of open space and the avoidance of overcrowding of land," as the Zoning Regulations intended, this subdivision and its variances seek to prematurely overdevelop the Jacobs Family Trust. (Sec. 78- 5(a)(5)). The Jacobs Family Trust hopes to sidestep the need for individual lot variances through the creation and use of arbitrary ALS lines and blanket plat approval. Doubtless, this has something to do with the challenge of meeting the "practical difficulties"test of a variance or changing an ALS ordinance. But the reality is, the Jacobs Property is not unique; there are no practical difficulties to its development. The property can reasonably be developed at a lower density and meet all current codes. The Jacobs Family Trust desires to place more homes on the property is to obtain a better return for themselves. But this comes at the expense of the adjoining neighbors who have reasonably relied on the protections of the ALS for decades and to the potential detriment of the health, safety and welfare of the residents in the area. As stated by the City's own Ordinances, economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties for compromising the rights of adjoining property owners. Lots 2, 3 The City admits that proposed non-lakeshore lots 2 and 3 currently violate the established ALS and require a variance. Further, even as platted, these lots are non-compliant with code until combined with the outlots south of Shoreline Drive. (See the recording of the City Council Meeting dated September 14, 2020 at approximately the 43:20-44:00 mark.) Lot 6 The City proposes to establish an ALS line for lot 6 based on yet unbuilt lot 3 of Tanager Estates and 1125 Millston Road. However, because lot 3 is unbuilt, the current ALS for Lot 6 is equal to the setback distance of 1125 Millston Road from Tanager Lake, which would limit the ability to build on lot 6 of the prosed Jacobs Subdivision. This realignment of the ALS by the City makes lot 6 a buildable site, likely avoiding the need for yet another variance. (See the recording of the City Planning Commission Meeting dated August 17, 2020 at approximately the 2:12:00 mark.) The problem with the northeast corner of the Jacobs property is that it is not buildable. As will be discussed at the City Council meeting this evening, proposed ALS Line B for the seven lot development is the wrong ALS line and uses the wrong endpoint on the Burwell property. The home shown in Lot 6 cannot be built for these reasons. 9 6573570v1 Orono City Mayor Dennis Walsh Orono City Council Members October 26, 2020 Page 10 Six Lot Development Published on the City's Website on Friday, October 23, 2020. The Jacobs Family Trusted cannot be allowed to have a six lot development for many of the same reasons that the seven lot development fails. The northeast corner of the Jacobs Family home is not buildable without creating an inaccurate and arbitrary ALS line, as shown in the City Council package for tonight's meeting. Ik " .'tL l - 4,4,..„ . ...— ..„.. .,,) -. . . is • ..,-- , •- „,, „. ., ,....,--,,, • ,.,.., . , , ..4 , . # ...._ . •,-. . { :•....„.., A. 'It .;.;/ 1 •If .I, i;, A. i� hr..._:3.;.„.. .4 J. 4. it . # ' FYI 1�3 '- ' fj ,1 II A ` .• 4, % : , , -( .' ' 4 Y4 h i R Y ' `ti, _e t,�.f.i '. ` . _ ' r .,. IALL Waw AWKA The ALS Line B proposed in the Jacobs Family Trust's six lot development uses the wrong starting points from both sides of neighboring properties. There is no home on the Tanager side (i.e., west side of 1700 Shoreline Drive and the Jacobs family proposes uses an accessory building (i.e., a non-occupied garage) to set the ALS Line B. Lot 5 of the new six lot development, which was first published on Friday, October 23, 2020, is not buildable. The correct ALS Line B would have to be set to the Burwell residence, which would not allow a home on Lot 5. This is a function of the Jacobs Family Trust proposing too high of a density. 10 6573570v1 Orono City Mayor Dennis Walsh Orono City Council Members October 26, 2020 Page 11 This is a good indicator of why the Jacobs Family Trust cannot propose either a six lot or a seven lot subdivision. The applicant is proposing too much density into too small of a land area. Summary The Jacobs plat, as presently drawn, should not be approved. Very truly yours, /s/Aaron A. Dean Aaron A. Dean Attorney At Law P: (612) 877-5255 F: (612) 877-5033 Aaron.Dean@lawmoss.com AD/dshe Enclosure 11 6573570v1 PC Exhibit N BRAUN Braun Intertec Corporation Phone:952.995.2000 11001 Hampshire Avenue 5 Fax:952.995.2020 INT E RT E C Minneapolis,MN 55438 Web:braunintertec.com The Science You Build On. July 20, 2020 Mr. Mark Gronberg Gronberg&Associates, Inc. 445 North Willow Drive Long Lake, MN 55356 Re: Addendum to Conservation Design For 1700 Shoreline Drive Shoreline Estates Orono, MN Mr.Gronberg, As you are aware,the original Irwin Jacobs property included approximately 31 acres along the western shores of Tanager Lake in Orono, Minnesota.The property was subdivided in 2016,which required a Conservation Design for the proposed 4 lots(3 undeveloped and one existing residence at 1700 Shoreline Drive). Svoboda Ecological Resources prepared the original conservation design (project no. 2015-004- 46) on September 15,2015.This conservation design included a site plan for the 3 undeveloped lots, however,no proposed development scenario or site plan was available for the residence at 1700 Shoreline Drive. The purpose of this letter is to provide a third party review and comparison of the proposed Shoreline Estates/Jacobs Property site plan to the original conservation design,and to provide proposed revisions that are project specific. Proposed Project Shoreline Estates/Jacobs Property site plan (Exhibit A,prepared by Whitten Associates, Inc.) is proposed to encompass Lot 4(20.14 acres)of the Tanager Estates Preliminary plat of the Irwin Jacobs property (Exhibit B).The proposed plan includes subdividing the property into 7 lots for single family homes.All proposed lots would share a common street(new construction)along the eastern property boundary(on the existing driveway alignment)to access Shoreline Drive. The proposed project has been reviewed for conformance to the sections presented in the original conservation design,with proposed revisions and amendments outlined below for the City of Orono's consideration: 1. Development Steps The proposed plan should meet the goals and guiding principles as described in the City of Orono's Community Management Plan Part 3A. Efforts to achieve these goals include requiring no less than two acres for each home with city sewer services and wells,utilizing previously disturbed areas to reduce the amount of dominant vegetation removal,and maintaining positive views of Lake Minnetonka and Tanager Lake from public properties. Shoreline Estates Conservation Design Addendum July 20, 2020 Page 2 2. Rural Oasis Study The proposed plan achieves the goals of the Rural Oasis study and the guiding principles have been followed. Lot layouts and street alignment utilizes most of the previously disturbed areas(house, structures,and manicured lawn)that do not have natural vegetation. Positive views of Lake Minnetonka from Shoreline Drive and other public spaces are unaffected. 3. Natural Resource Inventory a. There is no project specific addendum for this section. Lots 4 and the undisturbed areas of Lots 1- 3 are generally consistent with the MLCCS data on Map 3A-4 of the Orono Environmental Protection Plan. b. Trees are shown on the previous 2015 preliminary plat for this parcel.A tree survey has not been completed for the proposed project area.Significant trees must be identified by species,size, and location to quantify the proposed tree replacement plan. c. Delineated wetlands 5 and 6 types and boundaries appear to remain consistent with the approved wetland delineation report.The wetland delineation report expires on August 12, 2020. d. There is no project specific addendum for this section.The proposed project should adhere to the requirements and recommendations as described in this section. e. The proposed project is not located within a conceptual greenway corridor. Mapped vegetation remains consistent with the April 27, 2015 findings. 4. Conservation Design Master Plan a. There is no project specific addendum for this section.The proposed project should adhere to the requirements and recommendations as described in this section. b. Stormwater management has not been incorporated into the concept plan, but is being shown with the preliminary grading plan.Site grading will generally follow the existing conditions,with stormwater runoff draining into Wetland 5,6,and Tanager lake.Stormwater management design must adhere to the requirements described in the City of Orono Community Management Plan Part 3A, NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit, City of Orono's MS4 Permit, and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. c. There is no project specific addendum for this section. Mapped vegetation remains consistent with the April 27, 2015 findings.The proposed project should adhere to the requirements and recommendations as described in this section. d. A tree survey has not been completed for the proposed project area,however several major trees were surveyed during the initial 2015 topographic survey(refer to Exhibit C).The proposed BRAUN INTERTEC Shoreline Estates Conservation Design Addendum July 20, 2020 Page 2 project could potentially remove 34 trees,due to construction of the street(5 trees), Lot 1 (2 trees), Lot 3(12 trees), Lot 4(2 trees),Lot 6(6 trees),and Lot 7(7 trees). e. There is no project specific addendum for this section.The proposed project should adhere to the requirements and recommendations as described in this section. f. There is no project specific addendum for this section.The proposed project should adhere to the requirements and recommendations as described in this section. g. There is no project specific addendum for this section.The proposed project should adhere to the requirements and recommendations as described in this section. h. There is no project specific addendum for this section.The proposed project should adhere to the requirements and recommendations as described in this section. i. There is no project specific addendum for this section.The proposed project should adhere to the requirements and recommendations as described in this section. j. The current residence and associated structures will be demolished. 5. Density Bonus for Urban Density Development There is no project specific addendum for this section.The proposed project should adhere to the requirements and recommendations as described in this section. 6. Performance Bonus Requirements There is no project specific addendum for this section.The proposed project should adhere to the requirements and recommendations as described in this section. 7. Preservation Requirements There is no project specific addendum for this section.The proposed project should adhere to the requirements and recommendations as described in this section. 8. Buyer Education There is no project specific addendum for this section.The proposed project should adhere to the requirements and recommendations as described in this section. Vegetation Management Plan There is no project specific addendum for this section.The proposed project should adhere to the requirements and recommendations as described in this section. BRAUN INTERTEC Shoreline Estates Conservation Design Addendum July 20, 2020 Page 2 Attachment G Amended to include the attached Exhibit A.Shoreline Estates/Jacobs Property site plan. We appreciate the opportunity to provide this review and recommendations for revisions to the conservation design. If there are questions regarding this letter, please call Travis Fristed at 952.500.1180 or by email at TFristed@braunintertec.com. Sincerely, BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION Travis Fristed, PWS Group Manager,Senior Scientist Attachments: Exhibit A.Shoreline Estates/Jacobs Property site plan (Whitten Associates, Inc., 2020) Exhibit B.Tanager Estates Preliminary Plat for Irwin Jacobs(Gronberg&Associates, Inc.,09/11/15) Exhibit C.Tanager Estates Preliminary Plat for Irwin Jacobs—South Detail (Gronberg&Associates, Inc., 09/11/15) BRAUN INTERTEC \I\ ...`\..' 10 A 1' I 1,1,n1,1 '410 )Vi .7)NI `c.1.1\ I ), -\ Nil I !WV\ V>INO.LINNIW:DIVI V lqiqx3 07. 7.-1- 000l =“i 11VOS i Z 1 1 1 • 1 41141,6,,,.. 4 AV L_ _ -.- _ , ----- ...._ . ..\,, n' .''''' ---------t , , --__:-- / —'-------- ---- . • — - ! — ----- \ ,--. '2. 9 L .. . -.-DonlinvNvi TANAGER ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR 4-- IRWIN JACOBS IN GOV'T LOTS 1 AND 2, SECTION 10-117-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ,,,, -,-:" '-xl '-' ;--_ .-- I vitt 00c,----- 4 , '. so.Nt'''.4 b#,P' --)/ - ' C:J'' . , ,„40 - -,,.. o•z...,_ 1 G.C," 0 ,0". f TANAGER ...„,•7 y . , LAKE . ,71- ., ,,,..: "..,-)r., 4PORMESS.V SIOVIO I...E /I ...As"'---' '" ".?"' ,-'• ;.'"-. s, ---- ----„,‘77-- s• 7' '171.-11, %., k, L. , •''' A__ 7., .'..- / 'to v / 1 } 1,- ..,... . A ;0- / i , .., ;' ..- • . - ' , 46.4e..' --;' .. ___,. . • -- -S.,g tt . .10 -.i • ,a.-'. ------4 ' / •;.'. - • ••••..E.4 !- ....auave I, . • ,1, -, ----------- - ---='s•- - /--- -44 - '---- \--- ,"_... 2=$ iv ' !' i • 's . • 44.- -.1---.." \ , p, i3p V 4, . ..-, ''''..',-,,, .„. . ..11 ' ',.e. IL , .2 - 2 / '7 ',.k i I 7m..., tiTh ' I -'"-"• -.'"-IL -.__a. ret. '-- 'al_,,..,,,, _- -4.-c gAL „.., 'ir ---.--=-2—--- r,..A 1 A4?-,,ct I 5;), , ,sii..*4.- -.. ' '• NM sem.Carrsv.rs 1.•I ard I SW.IS Ss..09 II'S...Us a',..s. i 4 'V' rr' 13 te. i,. i __ 7.7•'••=7.1••••••••••:•1...717.•=0 itmer 'T;t,,. -i"---'v-"',',..--,..7 ..-:.,2.-'if.--•,-,....."•• • ,. Irrs•••••.•10....morla,UM bee/ors 0 nand U.0.1.11.1 Mow Va. v.is.....11111.1.••,.......010..00.1.11.01.1.••61.essIOIna r I le.ls means.d re ssriSof vow Or to Ifts•linnir Omen rie no 0/.11.10.0. ? Its•.•14••••nsornss••••••....../.....I•asaaa sur.1,1 lo............, 1 , v-- v.. -•- • Y.. .-...t.."' \ or...............1.1..v•Se sell 0.10.0........./ --- ..-,_&•- \‘\ LI:C.'"'.4.-"=".="1.7.'".17.."=.7. -•„-,. - - - - .....--.— 1.4.1........2.........v.•Ins psrasse....IONA Mills.G. tr.••........10 2 lavOrs......oar wins Vont sfi.....rnie ......••••......1.1..r•dm.Uwe 1..........,Oseir 0.0... \ 40011•Issr,el LW 2 DM I 101.1.5.3....111.1.....0 6 MEN.M.. • \ 4 ti- • 7.---... ,,....„,,te . --- :,---\,..---,-sgt t _. I .........,Ye.,Ws sr.•••••..........1 SS Ira nano nal., 't'-'--;;-.."-- .5__- -_,__-',..p- , `.-'14. 0....1.1.3*Imo•rI.Ssner of 1111.30...co Parevos.r.0.......10 •r",rf''-....1 .-"-T--—7.--N. *Toss Yrs..SO ros.b son...•Vuse.es.....• t.,.„,._ .1,1c---- - 2\1\1 ... Swam Antal tsrarrwr I .. Y..rield........,.0 "...a Oruro msire ...... „ . .. S s.........v...ran a.earn*a...... n Pus vv.env*.bray.ens sce.risseses..... ' SRI IV Sla1.1.0*.siarg 0.1•10/11..R•osis we PAW Sr I.I.VW Il..vv."...a r orwrorms OE k.S.I.0 WAAGE r rrif TVS. . - . I . , ><..................... 1 ,, ,, ,-.. a - #.4V----------------=-14.W-i- 161 l_ji........ l„,_ .0 • ,._:_lv.ciA.„..1,-r _'-''r. ,._i_r_.,:::.......„44.4______Ir....:::_7...._.,7 orsa° :,...,•__.-77_jvl...41.„...,simi-•-_., -"-_it4t...•,..,a"es....__,'z-2....1...01.=„7. ______•.. ___Arc_ CONIOVIr LOW MOTE 10Th TO at SERVED BY INDIVIDUAL WELLS -' MD CITY SEWER ' TOTAL WA•31 0.ACRES ../ LAKE MINNETONKA CRY•13 44.ACRES WET••Se•ACRES -R-E\151°116--- "'''''''":7";''''-"IT—... "`"`" '"'""-".7":11:Z.ZIr'•, e""" '''il' GRONBERG&ASSOCIATES, INC 2...,.. nu.. D.U. .............*^".""' .."."".. ""'""' "'"""' ''.... CIVIL ENOWEERS LAND SURVEYORS IMO PLARNERS OR IS 1.111110 solins Wass/fro Wale.kin.* ans.1/.......SW* t MIS ::iiiiiiifilicielleillOADMIST•t—a., 26....z.",..4,6_,..., _ 2,.........../ .2.,...„ rl.462 AM N.IMLLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE,MN 55356 fit. sop PHONE 1152473-4141 FAX 1152471.44,35 1.11 11 .iv J-,0' —ssox....g.t2»7' MR• s" .....,.........,s.., ....„ Exhibit C .r y TANAGER ESTATES > '� � '`s'',[,. 79.- TANAGER PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR 1' r1.--/),-,' -S> - �� . -'EKE IRWIN JACOBS ` SOUTH DETAIL ,44,-..-;_-_-,71 --,k1.-.,'(---_ _ ,, Ni I \ 'PA _t,52, 4„1.,,,' \ �S' ;..,_ . -,,,, ,. 4� ..++�� t I _ - - . d„ 1 �1- t 1,i k r,., t w `c-X w \J 71 � `7 i l -ter _ g._ ,I. -, . (I, _,• - - _ S 20 ACa.DiC?K I 2 y,..AGXED DRS '(. -A I. «_, 7-- ? __tea , -1'l r ' .�, _ J w. ,?7 .,R,,,_ '. , _ -_ 6 S s . - N �. let-, i y):t :4 i.J.N _• 410.:41-r,__ 31 SHORELINE°RN- — -e=_• • -a17AOT�—= QVTl4i�- o sa ioo 200 pUfitOT A- LAKE MINNETONKA SCALE_IN FEET 6l,CGiT MLNE REVI$JONS ?moms owpaa.nN.N.....o.mQ p.. �'�. GRONBERG&ASSOCIATES, INC. WT Wn6 r'vMN�rMrwwoa.owWm .1 ' M NM= D1MBIS dUUI N•......,7,:::,.,:........74,e. Y�w::,., tl..74,e r � i _ CAVIL l/gIMlDDD,LAID DIDIVDYpq.LAID►IAMMFRD --vacua___.- ..L`.! Ls.a XI; 445 N.WILLOW DRIVE LONO LAKE,MN 55355 114144 .. --. --- DAM f.,,.,. OW.•u e.,Li.11217 PHONE:982-4734141 FAX:952-473-4435 PC Exhibit 0 ._ I . . 1700 Shoreline Drive Orono,Ii MN 1 1 ( .., .. . . . .. - . ..! ;., Prepared by,Svobooda.Ecological J , le.- / t..7.1,,..:414 0,46, ., • Resources for: I ;'1 f' i4 I- j. -- . . . Irwin-Jacobs . ?1 i idr, _ . • . \ k'• el. . , ,•,.• ,,r...(-,?k, - , , •- • rt A141.11,11),...---rolt.• f. ..- • ."' 1 ))4t\ ' -/,'-' -';'' -- ' '' -:-'''• / ' i • , „,":.,t.: , , ' --,•:...,-,'-. ii ' / 1 i,•I' ,:,::''')':;., 7j-'Ia.:- t.''' ":11.:::;.:*C.: le / :r.',(..V.: 4.,.1' •.t '1'.:1',.,'- - ,,..'.:7 1, ',.it . ; .....t.1a.0 .0( .....,!,t:47-'..1....: . 7 k I Ifer;" '4 :: frL •...: . ,• • Vi I . ) f //. il . . , dil t . t: , ' : ''.. .? '' ..---1'..'"..,, Conservation Design ' t-...,- . #, IF, 1,, i b .• ... \ -. . N.' 1 1 i I „.& ,/ '•,-2. ....2„.„-_-- ,:...„. .i., :- - . '.•• '.... :. •• . ',-- ,. ,Y -. ,,,,•„ II -Project No: 2015-004-40 . ,,. . , ----=:„ ....,; , Ilk ..__ ____ .i, 011, I \I ., - - e I , , , , it . 1i Septembet j 5.,2013.. . . . . • . . . . . . . . . , . . .. . .„.. • - ,. . • . . ...,. . . ., .„ .. ... . \1.--- ,..7k '...4.'' ! I 7" 1111 \ \ I I PrOridill. 0.'1 '',t'll fitr ,1 1 ittt tut. IS \Ott,ril fir+futt f A i . ' ,J I 11010 WO ( OW, i ECT)/r OC; !CI I. R 1....svt 71?(:Es 22752County Road 7 • Hutchinson,MN 55331 (952)471-1100 • franks@gpsinnovations.com 1700 Shoreline Drive Orono, MN Conservation Design Report And Vegetation Management Plan Prepared for: Irwin Jacobs By: Svoboda Ecological Resources Project Number 2015-004 Revised September 15,2015 The contents and format of this report are considered intellectual property and are subject to copyright restrictions and may not be reproduced without the express permission of Svohoda Ecological Resources Table of Contents CONSERVATION DESIGN DEVELOPMENT STEPS 1 RURAL OASIS STUDY 2 NATURAL RESOURCE INVENTORY 2 CONSERVATION DESIGN MASTER PLAN 3 DESINTY&PERFORMANCE BONUSES 5 PRESERVATION REQUIREMENTS&BUYER EDUCATION 5 VEGETATION MANGEMENT PLAN PURPOSE 6 METHODS 6 CONTROL OF EXISTING BUCKTHORN 7 CONTROL OF EXISTING REED CANARY GRASS 9 CONTROL OF EXISTING GARLIS MUSTARD 11 SPECIES RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PLANTING 11 CERTIFICATION 12 LITERATURE REFERENCED 13 FIGURES: Tree Stands Invasives ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A-Seed Mix U7 Attachment B -Southern Mcsic Maple-Basswood Forest Attachment C-Seed Mix for Wetland 2 Attachment D-Seed Suppliers Attachment E—Common Buckthorn Conservation Design 1.Development Steps The purpose and intent of this conservation design is to meet the goals of the City of Orono's Environmental Protection and Natural Resource Management as specified in the Community Management Plan (CMP). In general, these goals pertain to water quality, wetland protection, and preservation and the enhancement of the "rural character" of the City. Emphasis is also placed on the preservation of open spaces in Orono. These open areas include but are not limited to woodlands, wetlands and wildlife habitat. Additionally, the City of Orono's Zoning Code further describes the intent of the conservation design as to reinforce and establish ecological connections throughout the City and preserve and improve the aesthetic views of Orono. Subcategories that are listed within the Environmental Protection section of the CMP help to detail more specific individual goals and guidelines which can be related to the overall goals listed above. Pertinent to this project, the subcategories emphasize development densities, which require no less than two acres per one home. This regulation is enforced in order to maintain the historic identity and character of Orono. Low density developments will assist with the preservation of open spaces and, from a sewer and water systems standpoint, will protect groundwater, and surrounding lakes and other surface waters. It is also emphasized that the primary method of sewage treatment and disposal within the rural area will be individual on-site systems. Goals for Environmental Protection and Natural Resource Management as specified in the Community Management Plan pertain to water quality and wetland protection and preservation and enhancement of the "rural character" of the City. Four (4) lots are proposed for the 30 acre site. To preserve the open, rural character, these lots will all be at least 2 acres in size. Specifically the proposed sizes will range from 2.19 acres to 3.59 acres in size.A remaining lot with the existing residence which is to remain will be 20.14 acres. Homes will be situated such that there will be negligible effect on the existing trees with an even greater emphasis on avoiding the high quality maples and basswoods onsite, and Lot number 4 (20.14 acres) is almost entirely located outside of the maple basswood forest area. One wetland will be impacted for the extension of Heritage Lane which will occur on a previously planned and dedicated street easement. The area is served by City sewer so no onsite septic systems will be required. The existing landscape of the site is a mixture of forest, wetland, and shoreline as well as a residence with a manicured lawn. The trees consist of green ash,boxelder, sugar maple, basswood,black willow, and common buckthorn, among others. The dominant vegetation in the wetland community of the property are invasive species, including reed canary grass and narrow leaf cattail. No rare, threatened or endangered plants are known to exist nor were apparent during the site visit. Svoboda Ecological Resources 1 1700 Shoreline Drive Project No.:2015-004 Irwin Jacobs 2. Rural Oasis Study The subject parcel is not adjacent to any of the documented corridors in the Rural Oasis Study. The views of the approximately 0.15 mile stretch of Shoreline Drive are entirely of Lake Minnetonka on the south side of the road.North of Shoreline Drive and looking onto the subject parcel from Shoreline Drive a wetland and treeline are prominent features, with no negative views save for the gated access to 1700 Shoreline Drive, powerlines overhead, and boat docks visible along the edge of Lake Minnetonka(Photos 12 and 13). The subject parcel is also visible from the Dakota Line bike trail. From this angle,only positive views from the maple-basswood forest can be seen(Photo 4). In general, there appear to be almost entirely positive views from Shoreline Drive, with the wetland and treelines obscuring the negative views, and the open water of Lake Minnetonka providing a large, positive view on the south side of the road (Photo 11-14). Please see the Photo Log at the end of this checklist. 3.Natural Resource Inventory a. After reviewing the MLCCS data on Map 3A-4 of the Orono Environmental Protection Plan it appears that Artificial Surfaces and Associated Areas (10000), planted or cultivated vegetation(20000) forests (30000), and Herbaceous Vegetation (60000) areas are present on the proposed lots on 1700 Shoreline Drive. More specifically, the site is listed with areas of Short Grasses and Mixed Trees with 26-50% impervious cover (13134), short grasses with sparse tree cover on upland soils (23111), short grasses on upland soils (23211), maple basswood forest (32150), medium-tall altered/non-native dominated grassland (61220), and semi permanently flooded altered/non-native dominated vegetation(61630). b. A tree survey was not required as part of this Conservation Design. A tree survey was completed for the area to be impacted by the cul-de-sac. Here all significant trees were identified to species, size, and location. A figure is included that shows the tree species present and diameters. c. A wetland delineation and report was completed for the subject parcel. Five wetlands were identified in this report as on the subject property while one additional wetland was outside of the parcel boundary and located within the Heritage Lane easement extension. Wetland 1 is listed as a Type 3/4, PEM, Shallow/Deep Marsh, Wetland 2 is a Type 1, PFO1, seasonally flooded basin,Wetland 3 is a Type 3,PEM1F, shallow marsh,Wetland 4 is a Type 1, PFO1, seasonally flooded basin, Wetland 5 is a Type 1, PEM1F, Shallow/Deep Marsh and Wetland 6 is Type 2/3 PEMC/F shallow marsh/fresh wet meadow. The wetland boundary was field reviewed by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District on 7/28/2015. The Notice of Decision was issued on August 12, 2015.The report is available from Svoboda Ecological Resources(SER)upon request. d. The topography of the subject parcel was completed by Gronberg & Associates, Inc. and is depicted on the attached survey map. e. The subject parcel was identified as a conceptual greenway corridor on Map 3A-5 and has a high quality community onsite in the form of the maple-basswood forest present. Due to this high quality community, management and protection will occur in the forms Svoboda Ecological Resources 2 1700 Shoreline Drive Project No.:2015-004 Irwin Jacobs of removal of invasive species present as well as the attempt to avoid any and all significant trees to the extent possible. When removal of significant trees is deemed necessary, these trees will be replaced in accordance with City of Orono requirements. No rare plant communities were observed on site and were not identified on Map 3A-5. Many areas onsite fringing the wetlands are dominated by invasive species, including garlic mustard, reed canary grass, and buckthorn. While management efforts will take place, due to the low quality nature of these areas,no special protection of these areas are necessary. 4. Conservation Design Master Plan a. The topography of the site is rolling hills with some areas meeting the City of Orono bluff ordinance criteria, with the highest point located in the central portion of the property, where the existing residence is situated. Stormwater runoff on the southern half of the property drains southwards in the direction of and into Wetland 5, which is adjacent to Shoreline Drive on site. On the northern portion of the parcel, the majority of the stormwater runs to the eastern edge of the property and into Wetland 2 and Tanager Lake, although stormwater also flows into Wetland 3 along the north edge of the property, as well as off site to the west. Wetland 2 is a closed, depressional wetland located in the north central portion of the property and collects stormwater runoff from a small percentage of the property as well. Wetland 4 is also a closed depressional wetland and most of its water source is the driveway and turnaround area for the garage of the residence to the south of the Heritage Lane cul de sac. Historic photographs were reviewed and showed no significant changes from the current property arrangement. b. The existing drainage patterns have primarily been maintained. Stormwater on the southern half of the property will continue to drain southward into Wetland 5. The majority of stormwater on the northern portion of the parcel runs to the eastern edge of the property into Tanager Lake and north into Wetland 3. Contours within Lots 1, 2, and 3 will likely be manipulated to each accommodate a future proposed residence, but will not significantly re-direct surface water or affect the wetlands or their functions. c. Invasive species were evaluated on April 27, 2015, and include common buckthorn, reed canary grass, garlic mustard, and narrowleaf cattail. Grouped locations can be found on the attached map. Buckthorn seedlings, saplings and trees run along the north boundary and east border with Tanager Lake. Reed canary grass is present in isolated populations within Wetlands 3, 4, 5 and 6. Garlic mustard is located in the adjacent upland area around Wetland 5 as well as in isolated patches throughout the maple basswood forest. Attached is a vegetation management plan for the invasive species observed onsite. d. The trees existing on the subject parcel range from poor to good health. Although some have died or are dying, the majority appear to be in good health with no signs of disease. Dead trees will be removed from the lots if they are within grading areas or if they pose a safety hazard. There will be 110 trees removed for the construction of the extension of Heritage Lane and the new cut de sac. Svoboda Ecological Resources 3 1700 Shoreline Drive Project No.:2015-004 Irwin Jacobs Although only preliminary lot development plans are in place,Lots 1-3 will be developed for single residence houses. Tree clearing will be avoided to the extent possible, but due to the lots being located within the maple basswood forest, a certain amount of tree clearing will be unavoidable. Building pad footprints have been selected to take advantage of natural clearings and existing flat grades whenever possible. When clearing is required, removal will first focus on undesirable tree species including green ash, American elm, and box elder. Any significant trees that are removed will be replaced at the required ratio and all work will abide by any Orono city code regarding tree replacement. Covenants are included which will provide protection to perimeter trees as well as a bluff area within the site. Other protective measures include the review of any home building plans by an architectural review committee in order to minimize tree loss. Perimeter areas around the wetlands are protected by MCWD required wetland buffers. e. Two areas within the project boundary meet the criteria for significant tree stands. This includes the maple-basswood forest located across the northern half of the subject property covering Lots 1-3 and the altered/non-native forest located along Wetland 5 and the driveway along the south and southeast portion of the property, limited to Lot 4. The maple-basswood forest is dominated by sugar maples, with basswood, green ash, boxelder,and American elm trees scattered throughout. The south area was dominated by black willow with various ornamental coniferous trees planted alongside the driveway and entrance. Please see Paragraphs 4d which address the Tree Protection Plan. f One of the six wetlands delineated onsite will be impacted during construction and development activities. Wetland 4, lying at the end of the Heritage Lane cul de sac and within an existing street extension easement(dedicated in a 1965 plat)will be impacted. Wetland buffers are proposed as follows. A 75 foot vegetated wetland buffer will be placed around Wetland 1, a 35 foot vegetated wetland buffer will be placed around wetlands 2, 5 and 6, and a 50 foot vegetated wetland buffer will be developed around Wetland 3. g. Three MLCCS areas onsite are listed with M_34X modifiers or modifiers indicating specific invasive species. The site has one Maple-Basswood forest that is listed as in good condition (M_34X modifier B). This area is listed as possessing Common Buckthorn(M 408) with a covering of 1-5 percent and garlic mustard(M^411) covering 6-25% of this area. One other area onsite, another Maple-Basswood forest, was listed onsite with a M_34X modifier onsite. Specifically it was listed as an area with poor conditions of a natural community (modifier D) but listed no other invasive species modifiers. Wetland D (Wetland 5 in the Delineation Report), listed as a semi- permanently flooded altered/non-native dominated vegetation area (61630) in the MLCCS did not possess a MLCCS modifier but was listed as 75-100% coverage of narrowleaf cattail (M LCCS modifier M_406). The remaining MLCCS areas are listed as Short Grasses and Mixed Trees with 26-50% impervious cover (13134), short grasses with sparse tree cover on upland soils(23111), short grasses on upland soils (23211) and medium-tall altered/non-native dominated grassland(61220). Svoboda Ecological Resources 4 1700 Shoreline Drive Project No.:2015-004 twin Jacobs h. Defining maintenance of ecological connections does not apply to this project because we cannot define anything that would prompt a change to maintenance connections. L Due to the proposed house locations within the maple basswood forest, all positive views will remain, with the residences protected from view by the large trees. The rolling hills onsite will further assist with the protection from negative views. j. The current residence and associated structures located on Lot 4 will remain in place. 5.Density Bonuses For Urban Density Development The applicant is not requesting any density bonuses in association with this project. 6.Performance Bonus Requirements The applicant is not planning any development enhancements and is therefore not requesting any performance bonuses in association with this project. 7.Preservation Requirements Please see Paragraph 4c. 8. Buyer Education A handout or brochure will be prepared and provided to the lot buyers informing them of the Conservation Design requirements pertaining to the property. Individual buyers may wish to implement the recommendations pertaining to conservation and natural resource management as presented in the City's Comprehensive Plan and Natural Resource Inventory in their individual concepts for the lots. Svoboda Ecological Resources 5 1700 Shoreline Drive Project No.:2015-004 Irwin Jacobs Vegetation Management Plan PURPOSE The invasive species located on this site include common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), and garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata). These species are considered invasive terrestrial plants by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and should to be managed accordingly. The vegetation management plan addresses the control of invasive species in all four of the proposed lots. In large part, the invasive species such as buckthorn occur primarily along the edges of the wetland areas and within areas that will be part of the wetland buffer. The reed canary grass present in the wetland along the regional trail is for the most part,outside of the platted lots and therefore beyond the control of the applicant. Reed canary grass is present in Wetlands 1,4, 5 and 6. With regard to Wetland 4,the reed canary grass will be eliminated as part of the construction of the Heritage Lane extension. Revegetation of the area will not include reed canary grass in the seed mix. SER recommends that these highly aggressive invasive plant species located within the wetlands and upland be controlled as circumstances present themselves such as part of an overall site landscaping plan. Removal of the buckthorn masses may result in large areas of denudation so buckthorn removal is not recommended on a large scale unless it is part of an overall project wide revegetation effort. Pursuant to Orono Municipal Code, Chapter 78, Article XII, Section 78-1632, "The Conservation Design Master Planning requirements of this article apply to all proposed residential subdivisions or multi-unit residential developments greater than five acres in total area or guided for urban density (greater than one unit per two acres)". The Vegetation Management Plan has been created as one of the conservation strategies used within the Conservation Design Master Plan to improve the sites' ecological assets. The developer is responsible for initiating the vegetation management plan immediately after development plans have been established. Selective vegetation management will initially begin within the area of construction and then be applied concurrently with the construction to the remainder of the area as appropriate. The vegetation management will continue annually until the invasive vegetation is eradicated. See the Schedule of Activities sections below for a description of the timeline involved with the vegetation management activities. METHODS The wetland buffer areas will require aggressive management to be preserved in a natural condition with predominantly native, non-invasive plant species. Management will include the control of existing non-native and invasive vegetation, the encouragement of native species, and future monitoring of the site to discover any newly established invasive plants.Native species that are dominant fall into the Northern Wet Meadow/Carr classification according to the Minnesota DNR Ecological Classification System Svoboda Ecological Resources 6 1700 Shoreline Drive Project No.:2015-004 Irwin Jacobs (Dunevitz and Lane, 2004). Common buckthorn occurs in various isolated locations on the site primarily along the shoreline of Tanager Lake. Reed canary grass occurs in wetland areas 1, 3, 4 and 6. We have provided control recommendations for the buckthorn,garlic mustard and reed canary grass observed in the wetland and buffer areas. A list of desirable native species that are known to occur within the Northern Wet Meadow/Carr community according to Dunevitz and Lane (2004) and in Restoring and Managing Native Wetland and Upland Vegetation (R. Jacobson, 2006) is also provided (Attachment B). The removal and annual control of invasives in the buffer areas will be either self performed by the developer or contracted out at the developer's expense. This will also be the case for the installation of the native vegetation. After the initial remediation of the buffer area is complete, Svoboda Ecological Resources (SER) (or another contractor chosen by the developer) will monitor the buffer area and submit annual reports to the city of Orono describing the progression of the management area if desired by regulatory personnel. The developer will retain SER as a consultant(or other contractor of their choice) for the purpose of monitoring the vegetation management activities within the buffer area for the time period of three years, where the chosen contractor will visit the site twice per year. The developer will request notification by the city of Orono before an on-site inspection is conducted by the city (or its designated authority). The developer's inspection contractor will report the progress of the monitoring activities to the developer after each site visit and will also discuss any issues with the city of Orono at the time of the scheduled on-site inspection. CONTROL OF EXISTING BUCKTHORN Common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica) is established along the shoreline of Tanager Lake and may be present in isolated pockets elsewhere on the parcel. Seed carried by birds has helped introduce this species throughout the region. Buckthorn generally does well in moderately shady forested areas. Buckthorn can usually be found throughout the Twin Cities in fragmented woods or city lots and invades first from forest edges and slowly moves inwards. Buckthorn has been successful at establishing itself in these woods due to its long growing season, rapid growth rate, and copious fruit production. This establishment of buckthorn has multiple ecological detriments such as out competing native plants, disrupting the forest structure, and reducing plant species diversity. These detriments have lead to major efforts to prevent the spread of buckthorn and restore the forests to an ecologically productive and functional state. Proper management and yearly follow-ups will be necessary for this site due to the seed bank left behind by buckthorn which can regenerate for up to 6 years after removal has taken place. To eradicate the existing buckthorn, cut the plants and treat the stumps with herbicide such as Roundup (or its counterpart in wet areas, Rodeo). Application should be full- strength. When cutting the larger buckthorn,place flags near the stump so that stumps are not missed when the chemical treatment is applied. Herbicide treatment needs to occur within two hours of cutting to be effective. Svoboda Ecological Resources 7 1700 Shoreline Drive Project No.:2015-004 Irwin Jacobs If cutting is to take place in the winter, flag buckthorn so that similarly appearing native plants such as black cherry are not mistaken as buckthorn. One application of glyphosate (Roundup or Rodeo)on the outer growth rings of a freshly cut stump in August or September has proven to be effective, though other treatments are known to work as well (Converse 2003). Applications during the autumn or winter are also proven to be successful. Do not apply glyphosate or other chemicals during the spring because this is considered the spring- flush growth period in which sap is running and the plant is using stored energy. Therefore, the chemicals that are applied in the spring will not make their way down to the buckthorn's roots. Glyphosate is a nonselective herbicide that will kill non-target plants if it comes into contact with them. Managers should exercise caution during application, and not spray so heavily that herbicide drips off the target species. For areas that are adjacent to wetlands on site, chemical treatments must be labeled for aquatic use such as Rodeo. Basal bark application of Garton 4 (University of Minnesota Extension Service 1999) is another option for a chemical application. To prevent dense re-infestations we advise careful monitoring of the site every 1-2 years. Upon the discovery of newly established plants it is recommended that the newly emerged plants be pulled out of the ground,including the roots, immediately. There are specialized weed pullers to facilitate pulling larger plants. Pulling is the preferred option when there are localized infestations of small plants; thorough monitoring should ensure early detection of newly emerged seedlings. In the areas where the desirable species are present, selective treatment and removal are the preferred control measures. These measures include mechanical removal by hand of the smaller stems and cutting and painting the stems with herbicide of the larger stems. Buckthorn removal should occur before fruit development or after the fruit has dropped to prevent spread to other locations if the material is to be transported. Removal by grading can occur when overall site grading is occurring and/or during the landscaping phase. In areas where major soil disturbance has occurred as a result of buckthorn removal, those areas should be replanted with species chosen from the list in Attachment B. Not all species need to be used; the list is a guide to species present in Maple-Basswood forests. The landscape contractor can use this list as a guide and use their discretion in species selection. During the buckthorn removal process it is important that soil disturbance is kept to a minimum and that already established native ground cover species are kept intact. By reducing this disturbance, rejuvenation of native plant species will increase and soil erosion will be kept to a minimum. On some sites,planting may not be required. Instead of planting, wait 2-3 years watching for natives to return from roots or seed. If a herb layer does not return after 1-2 years, lay down a layer of mulch with wood chips or leaves to assist with native germination. Under-story clear-cutting is not suggested and should be avoided as an option for buckthorn removal. This activity encourages herbaceous invaders such as garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata) and giant knotweed (Polygonum sachalinense) to take root in these disturbed areas. See Attachment E which briefly describes buckthorn and the need for eradication. Svoboda Ecological Resources 8 1700 Shoreline Drive Project No.:2015-004 Irwin Jacobs SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES FOR BUCKTHORN Year I Removal and Chemical Application: Flag buckthorn(if necessary). Cut buckthorn throughout the buffer areas. Treat stumps with chosen herbicide and corresponding methodology specific to the herbicide. Planting(Optional): Augment with native shrubs (3-4 different species, 2 to 3 per cluster or dispersed), trees, and herbaceous plants. Add mulch around each newly installed plant — about 1 foot radius. Protect young shrubs from browsing deer, rabbits, etc. using protective structures. Planting should occur in late spring or early summer to ensure successful establishment. On some sites, planting may not be required. Instead, wait 2-3 years to watch for natives to return from dormant roots or seed. Year 2 Monitor new plantings and maintain protective structures. Check area for buckthorn infestations as well as other invasive species such as tartarian honeysuckle (Lonicera tartarica) and burdock (Arctium minus). Spot treat invasive vegetation that emerges with recommended herbicide described in the procedure for Year 1. Year 3 Verify that the area is still dominated or becoming dominated by native species. Repeat procedure described for Year 2 for eradicating invasive vegetation. If native species have not become established and a planting did not take place in Year One, then Year Three is when a seeding/planting should take place. See attachments for appropriate seed mixes and seed rates. CONTROL OF EXISTING REED CANARY GRASS Reed canary grass is present in varying degrees within wetland areas 1, 3, 4 and 6. Reed canary grass forms dense and highly productive monocultures in a way similar to broad leaf cattail and purple loostrife. By producing these large monoculture areas, the biological diversity is then essentially homogenizing to that of one habitat structure. Reed canary grass grows from seed, stem fragments, and rhizomes. Within one growing season, the rhizomes in the soil produce a dense mass which will out compete the native plants already rooted in the soil. Reed canary grass is a facultative wetland species meaning that it can grow under a variety of hydrologic conditions. The grass tends to be found in moist or wet soils and can tolerate water conditions ranging from high water levels to drought like conditions. Reed canary grass is a persistent and tenacious Eurasian plant species that has been planted throughout the U.S since the 1800's. At the time, the grass was known for its large forage yields and erosion control abilities but as time went on other characteristics of the plant were recognized. Some of those characteristics include its prolific seed dispersal, robust vegetative growth, and dense network of underground rhizomes with thousands of dormant buds(Wisconsin Reed Canary Grass Management Working Group, 2009). Similar to buckthorn, the seed bank can last for up to 6 years meaning that follow Svoboda Ecological Resources 9 1700 Shoreline Drive Project leo.:2015-004 Irwin Jacobs up management will need to take place following the eradication of the invasive plant species. Reed canary grass is one of the first wetland plants to emerge in the spring and therefore is capable of shading out other native plants that emerge later. To eliminate reed canary grass, it is necessary to replant immediately with plant species that can out compete any residual plants or seeds, and retard erosion (Rhodes and Block, 2002). A list of the seed mixture for wetland buffer A can be found in Attachment C. The recommended way to eradicate the reed canary grass for this location is by using glyphosate. The best sequence for eradicating severe infestations of reed canary grass is to apply the glyphosate in the fall followed by a prescribed bum during the winter or early spring to bum off the dead thatch. Then spray again in the spring to kill the seedlings germinating from the seed-bank (Jacobson, 2006). The timing of these activities is extremely important for this method work effectively. Another control method is to mow the reed canary grass in late June and follow up with a late August or early September treatment with glyphosate by promoting active leaf growth. Also if a fall application of glyphosate is chosen, then no mowing should be conducted after July 15. It is important that these time periods are followed for a successful eradication of the reed canary grass. SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES FOR REED CANARY GRASS Year 1 Fall Application of Glyphosate(Rodeo,Roundup): A fall application of glyphosate will kill off nearly 100% of the existing reed canary grass. Make sure that the plant is still physiologically active before spraying. Year 2 Late Winter/Early Spring Burn: This burn should take place 30+ days after the fall application of the glyphosate. Spring Application of Glyphosate: This spring application will kill the grass's seed bank as it begins to grow. Reed canary grass is one of the first plants to emerge and one of the last plants to go dormant in the fall thus making it an easy target for herbicides. Spring Seeding:After the glyphosate application has taken place in the spring the suggested seed mix should be planted (Attachment C). This planting should not take place until 14 days after the application has taken place. Year 3 Verify that the area is still dominated or becoming dominated by native species. If reed canary grass still persists, another spring application followed by a fall application may be needed. The early and late glyphosate application can also be effective, providing 99%control in the first year(Paveglio&Kilbride 1996). Svoboda Ecological Resources 10 1700 Shoreline Drive Project No.:2015-004 Irwin Jacobs CONTROL OF EXISTING GARLIC MUSTARD Eradication of garlic mustard is not proposed at this time as it occurs outside the buffer areas of the wetlands and is very localized in its presence.The areas where garlic mustard does occur are areas likely to be affected by grading for future lot development. Such areas are covered with sod or seeded once construction activities have ceased. Purchasers of the lots should be advised to be on the lookout for the appearance of garlic mustard and take steps for early eradication. If detected early, garlic mustard is easily controlled by pulling when the soil is wet such as after a rainfall. Garlic mustard should not be disposed of in compost piles as it can continue to mature after pulling and still produce seed. Any garlic mustard collected should be placed in a plastic bag (size determined by amount of garlic mustard collected and to be disposed of) and allowed to dry. The unopened plastic bag should then be placed in the trash and disposed of in a covered landfill. SPECIES RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PLANTING Attachment A contains the Minnesota state seed mix, Woodland Edge, South and West (36-211)that SER recommends to be used in the bare areas that will likely be created as a result of buckthorn removal (Wetland Buffers 1 and 2). See Restoring and Managing Native Wetland and Upland Vegetation(R Jacobson,2006), for more information on this seed mix. Attachment B contains a list of possible species to be added in the buffer management area that exists within the Northern Wet Meadow/Carr classification according to the Minnesota DNR Ecological Classification System (Dunevitz and Lane, 2004). This list, however, is not a seed mix. It only provides examples of species that could be planted within this type of community. Attachment C contains a suggested seed mix for the Wetland 1 Buffer which is currently dominated by reed canary grass. Attachment D contains a list of seed suppliers as well as native vegetation consultants for central Minnesota recommended by the Department of Natural Resources. Attachment E gives a brief description of Common Buckthorn Svoboda Ecological Resources 11 1700 Shoreline Drive Project No.:2015-004 Irwin Jacobs CERTIFICATION Frank Svoboda and David Kuhlman completed the Vegetation Management Plan on this day, September 15,2015. The plan was reviewed by Franklin Svoboda,President of Svoboda Ecological Resources. Client: Irwin Jacobs Project Name: 1700 Shoreline Drive Project No.: 2015-004 Location: Orono,Minnesota President, Svoboda Ecological Resources Svoboda Ecological Resources 12 1700 Shoreline Drive Project No.:2015-004 Irwin Jacobs REFERENCES Converse, C. 1984. Element Stewardship Abstract for Rhamnus cathartica, Rhamnus frangula (syn. Frangula alnus). The Invasive Species Initiative. The Nature Conservancy. Last updated 2004. Accessed May 17, 2005. <http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/esadocs/documnts/franaln.html> Delaware River Invasive Plant Partnership - Invasive Plant Fact Sheet - Reed canary- grass -http://www.paflora.org/DRIPP.html-Authors: Ann F. Rhoads and Timothy A. Block-April 2002. Dunevitz, H. and C. Lane. 2004. Species Lists for Terrestrial and Palustrine Native Plant Communities in East-Central Minnesota. A joint project of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources,Great River Greening, and Ecological Strategies,LLC. Paveglio, F.L. & K.M. Kilbride. 1996. Integrated management techniques show promise for control for reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) in seasonal wetlands (Washington).Restoration and Management Notes 14(1):79-80. R. Jacobson. 2006. Restoring and Managing Native Wetland and Upland Vegetation. A joint project of Minnesota Department of Transportation and Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources. University of Minnesota Extension Service. 1999. Thistle Control. Yard and Garden Brief http://www.extension.umn.edu/yardandgarden/ygbriefs/h525thistle.html University of Minnesota Extension Service. 1999. Buckthorn Control. Peter Dzuik, Script Writer. MN Dept. of Ag. Bulletin Buckthorn and Its Control: Hennepin Parks, U of MN Dept. of Forest Resources. http://www.extensioiiumn.edu/info- u/environmentBD516.html Wisconsin Reed Canary Grass Management Working Group. 2009. Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea) Management Guide: Recommendations for Landowners and Restoration Professionals Svohoda Ecological Resources 13 1700 Shoreline Drive Project No.:2015-004 Irwin Jacobs Figures Hennepin County GIS-Printable Map haps://gis.hcnncpin defaidtaspe -455372.... rteacti`, LAStu , ji ,._,:,,,-,u! ,_ r,5 1 f r d yam-k' 46/11111, 7. E '1 f � �lt'�` c. •-_ Y i i k k P' I Iki e k4 r ' . .. V.:-... If'' ," i k• 1 ! • .. ti' 1 Parcel ID: 1011723140018 Map Scale: 1'go 400 ft. N 3 Address: 1700 SHORELINE DR,ORONO,000001 Owner Name: Print Date:7YX►l2015 -{ ] ` 'Acres: 29.81 Ecologically Print Leaend, Land Cover: Multiple Significant Area Yes Present: Natural Resource No Solis: Multiple Corridor Present I This map Is a compilation of data from varbus Public Waters Yes Wetland ,sources and la furnished'AS 1S'with no Present: Present Yes represerdabbn or warranty expressed or Impded, Including fltness of any pier purpose, Floodplain Present Yes Watershed: Minnehaha ;mere ortheacct acyand Creek completeness of the information shown. COPYRIGHT O HE MMEPTf COUNTY 2015 i aA Think Green' 1 of 1 7/20/2015 1:18 PM Hennepin County GIS-Printable Map helps://gis.beimepin.us/nadaalresources/print/default.aspx? 455372.... itertrussn Inte' active N�_att_u ( :al Resources i‘'iaEDs Map c . b i,, S 1 , ,, ,, h j :r r , I ••,. v , W i A i i ;lid Alk :it ,,I° $. r �.1 . 1 it i ! .. ., I "t _r iw 1**„.."' ... iotagorer it 1 Parcel ID: 1011723140018 Map Scale:1"vs400 ft. N I Address: 1700 SHORELINE DR,ORONO,00000 Print Date:7/20/2015 i I Owner Name: i 1 Acres: 29.81 ? Ecologically , i Land Cover: Multiple Significant Area Yes I Present Natural Resource i No Solis: Multiple j Corridor Present: This mep 1a a compilation of date from various Public Waters Wetland sources and is furnished AS Kr with no Present_ Yes Present: Yes tepresentatlon or warranty expressed or Implied, 1 inctudino fitness of any plc purpose, Floodplain Present Yes Watershed: MCreek i completeness information shown. COPYRK3HT O FIENNEPN COUNTY 2018 { iiIi 'Mills Greece ;` 1 of 1 7/20/2015 1:18 PM Attachment A CHAPTER 3:Seed&Seed Mixes Mixture U7(Native Savanna&Woodland Edge) Common Name Botanical Name Seeds/oz. Seedsift2 %of Mix „ Bluestem,big Andropogon Berardi 10,000 4.4 8.0 rn a Oats or winter wheat' Avena sativa or Triticum aestivum 800 1.7 38.0 0 U` Wood chess,hairy Bromus purgans 7,600 4.2 10.0 a Wild-rye,Canada Elymus canadensis 5,200 1.7 6.0 �j Bottle-brush grass Elymus hystrix 7,600 1.7 4.0 "d Wheat-grass,slender Elymus trachycaulus 6,900 3.8 10.0 IA 1 Wild-rye,Virginia Elymus virginicus 4,200 2.3 10.0 N Lo Rye-grass,annual" Lolium Italicum 20,000 11.0 10.0 Switch grass Panicum virgatum 14,000 0.8 1.0 Hyssop,fragrant-giant Agastache foeniculum 90,000 1.0 0.2 Aster,smooth-blue Aster laevis 55,000 0.3 0.1 Aster,large-leaved Aster macrophyllus 27,000 0.1 0.1 Milkvetch,Canada Astragalus canadensis 17,000 0.4 0.4 Tic-trefoil,showy Desmodium canadense 5,500 0.1 0.4 Sunflower,early Heliopsis helianthoides 6,300 0.1 0.4 v, Bergamot,wild Monarda frstulosa 70,000 0.4 0.1 o Black-eyed Susan's Rudbeckia huts 92,000 1.0 0.2 11- Golden-glow,wild Rudbeckia laciniata 14,000 0.2 0.2 Aster,upland-white Solidago ptarmicoides 64,000 0.4 0.1 Goldenrod,stiff Solidago rigida 41,000 0.5 0.2 Vervain,blue Verbena hastata 93,000 0.5 0.1 American vetch Vicia americana 10,000 0.1 0.1 Alexander's,heart-leaved Zizia aptera 12,000 0.1 0.2 Alexander's,golden Zizia auras 11,000 0.1 0.2 Total: 100.0 Recommended Rate: 15.0(PLS lbs/acre) 'Note: Oats are used in spring&summer and winter wheat in the fall. Summaries Mix Seeds Per Square Foot Mix Seeds Per Square Yard Mix Seeds Per Acre 37 331 1,604,208 %by wt.Grasses %by wt.Cover Crop %by wt.Forbs 49.0 48.0 3.0 %by Seed Count Grasses %by Seed Count Cover Crop %by Seed Count Forbs 51.0 35.0 14.0 R.Jacobson. Wetland Restoration&Management Page 35 of 70 Attachment B Native Plant Community Species Lists for East-central Minnesota Class: Southern Mesic Maple-Basswood Forest MHs39 ,., _ ' T 1 _ 7 Status '14 r� `Abu d� 3ludt* CanopTrees(110 m) __.j...._ 1_ ! € - - " _ _1 _ Acer.. ._____. Isaccharum € _4M ___ _•..'_. _.___-_......... —Swat maple ——y t 1001 591 5900 Tina !americana ' • ;L, 'Basswood i 71` 211T 1491` •Quercus _._ rubra i 1 !L. !Northern red oak- . ...11. _53 41 742; 'U/mus •rubra ;Muhl. s 'Slippery elm ; - - -_.'18i 3.12' Ulmus americana L. ; American elm t 21�� - ____-. . .__. __ . 391 12` 2521 Os a ?vi Wiens ill K.Kochi s ? i 1 1 ' _ ____ ��M__ �) (Ironwood 16; 6 96, iFraxinusy_ __tyre Marsh. 1 'Black ash---— _— M`---4-7.1.1721- 18-,`-------___--47______--"1722; 3__ -_' (Wang.)K. 1 ___—,--_ ;Carya !cordiformis 1 ---_Koch .__! __.. -._-_ •Bittemut hickory 1 !! 13: 44 521 Pinus- _..._ __Istrobus __ ..._ -__.-F j -----'L.•_-- I _.._ __ White pine 1 --_ 39. 153___ 4.-5-�1 iQuercus_.._.__.-.-_-,_€macrocarpa !. IMichx. 1 - Bur oak 8 _._ 2j___.__ 1Celtis occidentalis ' IL. T1�— Hackberry 5} 'Fraxinus !vents I (Marsh. )-� _ __ - Green ash '! .___.__.. . .�... _.. - __ _.._..• —.. 11` 21_—_22 €Quercus falba [ t. IL. 1 ....,,White oak _.[. 1 31 31 91 'Acernegundo ! ( 1L. I _ Box elder I _ _ 3 3; 91 ,Prunus _ _{s _ erotina — . _i ._.__ _ jEhrh. _-j iB1ack ch�tr _-_ .___ . ._ ( _ -_� 3-.-. 1_—. 31-�_ 9: sJuglans nigra L.1 L. 1 'Black walnut 1 I 3i 1 31 1Unde_rsto Trees 1 i 1 i I f • €Acer _(saccharum i ;Marsh. 4 }Sugar maple 10050 5000 `Ostrya virgintnna i —! _t(Mill.)K,Koch ilronwood i 53' 15i 795! -This _—_._ __ !americana —_.— _ __ +1L. -- -• 'Basswood— , 1 766 _-61. -_4561 ;Carya cardiformis ' 'Koch i iBitternut hickory 3 _8 I 1 4201 1U/mus %rubra I Muhl. Slippery elm _-- , 391 91_. 3511 Celli: 'occidentalis iL. Ilackberry _ 50 -_ 4! _001 s Ulmus 1 americana � "-- I,. American elm - -----." _._.._._'_-.-__�..-.. 32" �5 .— _.1 _.___4. __. _ 1 _ 160 1Fraxinus _ ;nigra _1.-__ .4.. _ _ !Marsh. _.__.l. _ -- Black ash i —18'__ 51 __ iFraxinus ennsylvanica ' _Marsh. — — Green ash J 1 2_91 31.__._._.87 euercus _ rubor�_ —I i :L Northern red oak 1 1 421_ 2; 841 iCa inns Icaroltniana ss . vi ana Walt. 1 arch. Furw lo i31uebeech ---��_1 _ 5 _-� g -y 401 EAcer._,_ . .——_3negundo -- .' 'I.__ �._. _ ..,Box elder -_—— �,� 18 ,...)2 __ 36j A joint project of the Minnesota DNR and Great River Greening Sample size:38 reeves 52 Published January 2004 1Native Plant Community Species Lists for East-central Minnesota Class: Southern Mesic Maple-Basswood Forest M11s39 cercusmacrocaa I j — Michx. _ Bur oak 3 3 _9 Populus — macrocarpa tremuloides 1 Michx. - Quaking aspen 3 3 9 !ShrubsI ,Ribes � cvnosbadi — IL. -firrickly gooseberry I 97 _ 4 _ _ 388 [Sambucus racemosa _ — IL. !Red-berried Elder 53 6 318 (Prunus virginiana _ - _ �L._.__� IChokecherr 53 3 159 Zanthoxylum_ —4americanum __I IMill. — - [Prickly ash 39 3117 Cornus alternifolia `IL.f. IPagoda dogwood _ 32; 3 — 96 jRibes missouriense Nutt. — 1Missouri gooseberry 13 5 651 Sta hylea tnifolia ,L. — tBladdemut 8 7 56 Dirca _palustris palustris L Leatherwood 8 2 _ 16 Prunus — americana Marsh. Wild plum � 8 2 16 Sambucus canadensis L. - Common Elder _ 5 3 15 Ribes americanum I Mill. � Wild black currant 3 3 9 Viburnum rafnesquianum ISchultes ' Downy avow-wood 3 3 9 Viburnum lentago j� L. Cornus racemosa Lam. �1N�y�y 3 �--- 3 Vines Gray dogwood Parthenocissus spp. Virginia creeper 58 6 348 Menispermum canadense iJ _ L. Michx. __ Canada moonseed 32 4 128 Hits riparia Wild grape ' 13 3 39 Smilax �—hispida Torr. Green bear I3 31 39 Celastrus scandens I L. Climbing bittersweet 8 3 24 IForbs , rtea _ canadensis -I_ (L.)Wedd. Wood-nettle 74 17 1258 (Hydro hyllum virginianum I i L. _._.. �^.. _,� Virginia waterleaf 89 13 1157 fErythronium albidum Nutt. White trout-lily 29 27 783 Asarum Icanadense L. ,Wild ginger 142 16 6721 (Michx.) I osmorhiza claytonii Clarke Clayton's sweet cicely 7 497 Galium _ aparine _ IL. - 1Cleavers 5 410 Viola =4 — � , Violet 5 380 IDieentra cueullarw (L.)Bernh. Dutchman's-breeches 7 350, fSanguinaria _ canadensis L. t Bloodroot 3 252 Caulorhyllum thalictroides I (L.)Michx. Blue cohosh 4 252 Thalictrum dioicum L. Early meadow-rue 4 252 Anemone acutiloba ((D.C.)I awson iSharp-lobed hepatica 7 238 A joint project of the Minnesota DNR and Great River Greening Sample size:38 releves 53 Published January 2004 1Native Plant Community Species Lists for East-central Minnesota Class: Southern Mesic Maple-Basswood Forest MHs39 Uvularia f grandiflora {Sm. Yellow bellwort 71. 3 237 1Cardamine lconcatenata (SchwarzCut-leavedtoothwort 26 9 234 ISoI lidago [flexicaulis _ IL. (Zig-zag goldenrod 551_4 220 I Circaea_ I lutetiana Imp. canadensis L. (L.)Asch.&Magnus Canada enchanter's nightahadle 50�— 4 2001 [71-EU;-----.___� tricoccm" (uAit. � Wild leek -,_...�._......_.._ _ 66� 3.1.___ 1981 Smilacina~— racemosa ! ( —~(L.)Desf. Racemose false Solomon's-seal 581 3 174 !Phlox —^� `divaricata ssp. laphamii L. (Wood)Wherry JBluephlox 42 4 168 !Anemone l quinquefolia var. bifoliaL. Fares. —Wood-anemone _ 55 3 165 jArisaema Itriphyllum — _ (L.)Schott Jack-in-the-pulpit 53 3 159 1IiEnemion Ibiternatum (Raf.) _ 'False rue-anemone 8 19 152 Phryma leptostachya _1L. seed MI 42 3 126 Cryptotaen a canadensis ( _ i k(L.)DC. --- Honewort —�- - 29 4 116 Pilea spp.i { IClearweed 1 3 38____ 1141 Anemone americana 1.(DC.)Hara (Round-lobed hepatica 31 38 114 Imzatiens spp. ! I 'Spotted touch-me-not _ 261_ • 104 Viola cml ! Violet 3 —T(521 102' IAAplectrum hyemale I I(Willd.)Torr. 1 --- utty-root 32 3 96 t l Polygonatum biflorum � ((Walter)Elliott i _'Giant Solomon's-seal 29 387 (Michx.) I Trillium grandiflorum I--� Salisb. --- Large-flowered trillium 11 77 Ranunculus abortivus L. Kidney-leaf buttercup 74 Polygonatum pubescens j I(Willd.)Pursh jHairy Solomon's-seal 1.11M 3 72 Smilax cmx. ��Carrion-flower _® 2 64 Geum canadense Jacq. ,Whiteavens _ 32 2 64 LGalium - `-- tnflorum Michx. --- Three-flowered bedstraw 21 3 63 Trillium cernuum i L. _ _ Nodding trillium 29 2 58 lSanicula _ `gregaria Bickn- �iGregarious black snakeroot 16 3 481 rGeranium maculatum --- IL. IWild getanium 8 — 6 48 1Amphicarpaea bracteata l(L.)Fern. jHog-peanut 16� 3 48 !Osmorhiza longistylis ;(Ton.)DC. Anise-root 8 6 48 Trillium �_— I- flexOes _ �' + 1Drooping trillium 1 16 3 48 (Mitella diphylla L. (Two-leaved miterwort 11 4 44 LActaea rubra _—I(Ait.)Willd. (Redbaneberry 13 3 39 Orchis pectabilis } L. _ _ _�— Show orchis 1313 39 }Sanicula Imarilandica ' IL. Marilandblack snakeroot !! 111. 3 33 A joint project of the Minnesota DNR and Great River Greening Sample size:38 releves 54 Published January 2004 1Native Plant Community Species Lists for East-central Minnesota Class: Southern Mesic Maple-Basswood Forest MHs39 [1Claytonia virginica L. 'Virginia spring-beauty 8 41 32 nudicaulis L• virmia rinralia -^_ __ �f _ _� r -- - -beau Wild sarsaparilla _ 8 4 32 �ralla racemosa L. American spikenard 11, __ 2 22 ;Aster cordifolius L. Heart-leaved aster 11 2 22 1lPrenanthes _ alba L. _ White rattlesnake-root i 1 2, 221 -Rudbeckia -- —laciniata �+ _ — IL � -- J Golden low - 3_—_..________. l— —....-_.----F — —_________�__ g _ _ 8 2 T 1 ,Ranunculus Jhispidus Michx. -- Cyprrpedium calceolus � Y f Hispid buttercup � 5, 3� 15� L. Yellow lady-slipper J 5( 3 151j Galium concinnum -- IT.&G. _ I —_T El tbedstraw 5!! 3 15 1E toriwn rugosum Houtt. 1 _ Common snakeroot 5 3 15 IHackelia s... ' — Stickseed 5 2 10 1 Urtica dialect ssp. gracilis IL. (Ait.Selander Stinging nettle 5 10 ,A�legia ]canadensis IL. 'Columbine 5 10 Corallorhiza spp. { - Cor'airoot 3 3 9 Sicyos angulatus — L. Bur-cucumber IIIIIMIIIE9 Helianthus hirsutus �Raf• Woodland sunflower 3 3 9 LSanicula canadensis L. Canadian black snakeroot 3 3 9 IGeum aleppicum var. striclwn lacq. (Mt.)Fern. Yellow avens 3: 3 —1 iIMaianthemum canadense Deaf. _ Canada mayflower _© 3 9 Allium tricoccum var. burdickii iAiton Hanes. Burdick's leek _ - 3� 9 1 Uvularia sessilifolia ( -74 L — Pale bellwort 3 3 9 (Muhl.ex —i __—__� _,_ Desmodium glutinosum I Willd.)Wood 1 _ Pointed-leaved tick-trefoil 3 31 9 oCamp u1a americana L. L Tall bellflower 11111111111111111111519 xalis CUMj - wood-sorrel -� 3 N -- 3 Monotropa unFora ---� IL.. 1 �lndianpipe 3 1^.— 3 Grasses,Rushes and Sedges � 1 ! _I MuhL ex Carex pedunculata !Wild. ILong-stalked sedge - 371 6 2221 f (Wahlenb.) 1 1 Carex radiata Small '�_ __ _ ]Stellate sedge 3. 4 136 Pennsylvania sedge 29 4 116 Carex .ensylvanica L 1 1 Carex blanda 'Dewey ' Charmi =sedge 32 3� 961 Carex sprengelii Sprang. _ 1 Sprengel's sedge _ 11 4 441 Carex hirtifolla � Mack. IHairy-leaved sedge 13 3 39 Carex albursina y Sheld. -- 1 White bear-sedge 13_ 3 39' jElymus ihystrix I 1 L. JBottlebrush grass 111 3 331 A joint project of the Minnesota ANR and Great River Greening 55 Sample size:38 celeves Published January 2004 INative Plant Community Species Lists for East-central Minnesota Class: Southern Mesic Maple-Basswood Forest MHs39 `•Brachyelytrum- __ lerectum �-_L "Beaux_._. 1 _____ !Bearded shorthusk t `— 1Oryzopsis Iracemosa 1(Smith)Ricker' 1Black-fruited rice-grass 51 3f ' ',(Pers.)E. tFestuca__ bverticillata 6 _ ;Alexeev. _ _ $Noddin fescue .. __-- $_.-__•__...._-_..-____.!__ , 5; 3' 151 ;Carex 4 __- +amphibola ?var. €tur&a sSte_ud,` -;Fern. __.___ !Ambiguous sedge -- - 5,---3+-...__ 3 _ is' Caret - -lintumescens __._ 3var. ;fernaldii ?Budge ;Bailey -!Bladder sedge - --_ t - 56 31 15 6Carex�_ ___ ~-pecldi� 6__-' ___- ',Howe ... __ ___._ _ ;Peck's ?___ 3f _. ._ ,Carex ?deweyrma - —__I ._....-._+____ -.._.._ 5: M-15 ?Schwein.___ 6 #Dewey's sedge _ t -5` -2`- 10: Oryzopsrs _ y iaspenf,ha ��_. _ __.,Michx - �_ _ _.___lMountainrice-grass __._. _� '_ 3.:_ 3 9: :Carex igracilescens 1 =Steudel. ? __- !Necklace-sedge - ; -._ `Carex grnctllima ; Schwein`- g_. ^- - -{-_ .- 3 .-. _-._9' Graceful sed C sedge ___.3; 3 - 9 •Carex !leptonervia ; ± 'F� IFine-nerved sedge __.�_.._.._.. f_.. -- 3 _ 3; Carex Ihitchcockiana ;_ . ,,_. ;Dewey [Hitchcock'ssedge _ --__.�_ +Elymus �villosus ! Muhl. {Downy wild rye l--- ---_3,._.._..___1`__.__ 31 `Ferns and Fern Allies ! ' ! 1 I '.Bot chium..,,_. ivir$+irianum,_-._..._.,�.-...;___ _3(1—)Sw• i 6Rattlesnakefem : . 53- 21 106; Athyrium filixfemina ,vat. !=pawn ;(L.)Roth :L fern _-__.-_... _ f 45+ _ 3. 135 ._.._. -:Aam .-• �edtnum _....�I T"-_ _..., ;Maidenhair fern �._ _._. __ 2b� -3?. 781 Matteuccia^- +,struthtopteris :var. I ica Todaro i rlld Morton ;Ostrich-fem :. i iBo hium imulhfidum i ;Rolm G.Crmel.) , L E ;� -_ -` ; ------._.--.-I-- --_—_ _ pr. ;Leathery ° 3.1._ 31 `Cystopteris l bulbrfera _.+ [+-_-- i(L)Bernh. -3 Bulbtet bladder-fern + , . Cyst° ._ IfraAlfis. -- ! �? 1.0.01.0.0 Beeth. . ..__. _ ._ -_-',Fragile bladder-fern 1 3` l: 3i Cystopteris Itenuis 1 �(Michx.)Dew.iIMacey'sbrittle fern -! ~ 3` ll 31 i l ! Exotic Invasive Species-Do .Not Plant ! 1 ; + s Rhamnus_....^,.. cathamca :L. ..M.. _..,.f: ..'..r,.. :C-ommonbuckthornrt.t�... .._:.',.-.... .r.i,..., �:....� . .31.. �. 72 Taraxacum _..sRP -... .. i Common dandelion = • _.,...... � # 3.2 Lonicera ..tatarnea L. Tartartanhoneysuckle ._1._____...L.......,10.,!i3'i .- .•_ 3 ._._ Poa Pmtensrs ' ' ..__. .L�. _.. _..._. .i '..^.. .-...±. ICentuckybluegrass. . _.. fi ...• _... T. _.. 3;... 9 Arctium Imtnus • kali)Bengt ' Common burdock ; • e . ' 1# . ... 3 Leonurus �caidtaca Iaon'sear _3 if 3 A joint project of the Minnesota DNR and Great River Greening Sample size:38 releves 56 Published January 2004 1Native Plant Community Species Lists for East-central Minnesota Class: Southern Mesic Maple-Basswood Forest MHs39 L_- -- I 'See the report Species Lists for Terrestrial and Palusbzne Native Plant Communities in East-central Minnesota for instructions for using these species lists 2Rarity Status: State-listed rare species. E-Endangered,T-Threatened,SC-Special Concern 3Frequency: Number of releve plots in which species occurs divided by total number of releve plots,multiplied by 100 4Abundance: Average percent cover of species within the community. It is most appropriate to interpret each value as a cover class similar to those used for original data collection(see text of report for more details) Index of Commonness: Frequency multiplied by Abundance A joint project of the Minnesota DNR and Great River Greening Sample size:38 releves 57 Published Jamrary 2004 Attachment C CHAPTER 3:Seed&Seed Mixes Mixture U8(BWSR Native Mesic Prairie) Common Name Botanical Name Seeds/oz. Seedstft2 %of Mix Bluestem,big Andropogon gerardi 10,000 3.3 6.00 c Oats` Avena sativa 800 1.8 40.00 0 1,, Wild rye,Canadian Elymus canedensis 5,200 2.3 8.00 ea Wheat grass,slender Elymus trachycautus 6,900 3.8 10.00 w;0 Rye grass,annual` • Lolium italicum 20,000 11.0 10.00 ESwitch grass Panicum virgatum 14,000 0.8 1.00 Bluestem,little Schizachyrium scoparium 15,000 8.3 10.00 Indian grass Sorghastrum nutens 12,000 6.6 10.00 Aster,smooth-blue Aster tae vis 55,000 0.3 0.10 Milkvetch,Canada Mirage/us canadensls 17,000 0.7 0.80 Prairie lover,purple Dalea purpureum 18,000 0.7 0.70 Tick-trefoil.showy Desmodium canadense 5,500 0.2 0.70 , Sunflower,early Hellopsis heliantholdes 6,300 0.2 0.70 LL°, Bergamot,wild Monarda fistulosa 70,000 0.8 0.20 Black-eyed Susan's Rudbeckia hide 92,000 1.0 0.20 Goldenrod,stiff Solidago rigida 41,000 1.1 0.50 Vervain,hoary Verbena stricter 28,000 0.8 0.50 Alexander's,golden Zizia aurea 11,000 0.4 0.60 Total: 100.0 Recommended Rate: 15.0(PLS lbsiacre) Summaries Mix Seeds Per Square Foot Mix Seeds Per Square Yard _ Mix Seeds Per Acre 44 397 1,920,144 %by wt.Grasses %by wt.Cover Crop %by wt.Forbs 45.0 50.0 5.0 %by Seed Count Grasses %by Seed Count Cover Crop %by Seed Count Fortis 55.0 30.0 15.0 R.Jacobson. WeLand ResfwsGon 8 Management Page 36 of 70 Attachment D Native Plant Nurseries and Native Vegetation Consultants for CENTRAL MINNESOTA Page 1 of 5 4!512012 411 �,� (T 3r a'> rrn3 r,_bra j re ��.• I :�, z Upland Aquatic Shrubs - Supplier _perennials perennials and trees Products Services Applied Ecological Services Inc. Ecological consulting and research, 21938 Mushtown Road environmental design,restoration Prior Lake,MN 55372 contracting,natural areas (952)447-1919 management. (952)447-1920 fax kimeilapplied co.com Spring Lake Restoration Nurseries x x Local ecotype Contract installation;grows for 21938 Mushtown Road wildflower and Applied Eco!oglcal Services Inc Prior Lake,MN 55372 grass seeds and (952)-447-1919 plants,MN (952)-447-1920 Fax jessiva.oausaappiiedeco.corri Blugardens x x Primarily native Wholesale nursery 12975 32nd Street Minnesota plants, P.O.Box 637 some from other Watertown,MN 55388 states (952)955-3631 (952)955-3981 fax Stevedan773151eo&com Bonesirco Rosene Anderlk&Assoc. Consulting and Installation of native 2335 Highway 36 W plant communities;blo-engineering, Roseville,MN 55113 non-native brush removal,and other (651)636-4600 land management services (651)638-1311 Fax Dbocd2bonestroo.00m Cattail Corner,Inc x some native Design and installation of prairie and Landsc.Design&Garden Center perennials Lakeshore restorations;retail nursery 520 Sixth St. Howard Lake.MN 55349 (320)543-3511 cattaltccrneramsn.com Country Acres Gardens+Landscape x Consulting,design,installation. 12975 32nd St. Lakeshore restoration,wetland Watertown,MN 55388 restoration,water gardens and (952)955-3831 ponds. (952)955-3981 fax Ecological Gardens L.L.C. Consultation,design and instalation; 4105 Washburn Ave N specializing In native,edible and Minneapolis.MN 55412 medicinal plants (612)588-3942 www.ecokmicaklardens.00m paulat ecOlooicabacdens_cpm Ecological Strategies,LLC Consulting,design,Installation 4050 39th Av S. management,and site-specific Minneapolis,MN 55406 monitoring plans.Conduct training, (612)721-8021 research,including site assessment. carolynecarrd thotmalLcom Ecoscapes Sustainable Landscaping Design and installation of Craig R.Stark,Landscape Designer conventional and native landscape (812)965-0848 protects creigstarkaecoscapasl.com_ 1W.w.ecOscaaes1 AOrn Earth Wizards,Inc Design and installation of 1071 County Hwy 10 N.E. reingardens,shoreline and wetland Minneapolis,MN 55432 restorations (763)-784-3833 info gtearthwizards-ogm www.earthwizzards.com Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Native Plant Nurseries and Native Vegetation Consultants for CENTRAL MINNESOTA Page 2 of 5 } 415/2012 � � ,rt'� r 15-l.,y-c ! T� � D k �1_y' �� I:�+ t � jai. Js''. , + a ,f5- + OTA 4 Upland Aquatic ;hrues Supplier perennials perennials and trees Products Services EnergyScapes,Inc Consulting,design and installation 1708 Selby Ave and maintenance of native gardens St.Paul,MN 55104 and landscapes (612)821-9797 (612)821-9799 Fax proiectmanaoe`nl.�enerayscaoes,corri ww w,enerovscapes.com Fortin Consulting Inc. Consulting,design,and Installation of 215 Hamel Road native gardens and native Lakeshore Hamel,MN 55340 restoration projects.Lake (763)478-3606 management. invasive plant control. (763)478-3612 Bioengineering.Environmental fciti)iaxs.net education,seminars,workshops. Go Native Consulting,design and installation of 509 Second Str NE native gardens and landscapes Minneapolis,MN 55413 (612)378-7060 anniZoonativemn.com Glacial Ridge Growers x x Mostty native Wholesale nursery 7140 Casey Parkway wildflower and Prior Lake,MN 55372 grass plants; 952-447-6858 some not-native 952-447-6863 fax to Minnesota GlacRidceGruwersaapl com Great River Greening Consulting,design and Installation of 35 West Water Street native plant communities Suite 201 St.Paul,MN (651)665-9500 (651)665-9409 www.ureatrivergreenina.org Green Earth Gardens consulting,earth-friendly landscaping 612-250-2630 services,plantings,raingardens and www.oreenearthlandscapedesign.com edible landscapes Green Leaf Nursery x Some native 'Retail nursery 15790 10th St SW shrubs and trees Cokato,MN 55321 (320)286-2762 Phone Gustafson Design,Inc. Consulting and design services 1845 Wisconsin Ave.N. native,lake shore and upland, Golden Valley,MN 55427 traditional and historic spaces (763)544-4215 www.uustafsondesion.corrt Hata Nursery,Inc. x -Some native Retail nursery 10000 Great Plains Blvd. shrubs and trees Chaska,MN 55318 (952)445-6555 Phone (952)445-6557 Fax Harmony Wildflowers x native grasses Consulting,design and Instalation St.Louis Park,MN 55416 and perennials 612-270-2637 j-IarmonvW Ildflowersavahoo.com www.HarmonyWildflowers.com Haylend Woods x x x Local ecotype Consultant for lakeshore restoration. Shelley Larson woodland 6549 Keystone Road perennials, Mace,MN 56353 grasses,ferns, Phone:(320)983-8354 and scrubs,and Fax:(320)983-2151 wet meadow eriarsontpnorthic.com plants, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Native Plant Nurseries and Native Vegetation Consultants for CENTRAL MINNESOTA Page 3 of 5 415/2012 V} _ x� $", `r " .':.,..e ',.'—'''.' 1.-i-.;—.'.; la 1 ' ri_ rw a, Upland Aquatic Shrubs supplier perennials perennials and trees Products ,Services Hilscher Design and Ecology Inc. Consulting,design,end installation of 910 Oakgreen Ave.N native landscapes. Stillwater,MN 55082 (651)436-3836 intuition Logic Consulting and design,stream and 16020 4th Av N lakeshore restoration. Minneapolis,MN 55447 (612)845-4475 (866)947-0332 fax bsrieoi aol.com Landscape Architecture and Ecology Consulting and design services Simonet Design 354 Stonebridge Blvd St.Paul,MN 55105 651-695-0273 cslmonet(visi.com The Kestrel Design Group Consulting,design,and Installation of 7101 Ohms Lane native plant communities;prescribed Minneapolis,MN 55439 burning (952)928-9600 (952)224-9860 fax www.kestreidesiongroup.corn kbergesch ltkdn.net Lakedale Landscaping&Nursery x Some native Consulting and installation of P.O.Box 212 shrubs and trees lakescaping projects Hwy 189 N.Onamia,MN (320)532-3594 Landscape Alternatives,Inc. x Local ecotype Retail and wholesale nursery 25316 St.Croix Trail wildflower and Shafer,MN 55074 grass seedlings; (651)257-4460 woodland flowers www.lendscapealtematives.com and ferns Landscape Designs by Sherry Consulting and design 22423 Co.Rd.15 Elk River,MN 55330 (763)263-2205 Landscape Restoration,Inc l Consultation for,and control of (612)-590-9395 primarily woodland invasive species, cheM(Qlandscaoe-restoration.com such garlic mustard and buckthorn; www.landscaoe-restoratlon,com Presentations and workshops on the Lill'Nursery x subject Lil' 6895lBatley Road Some native Retail nursery shrubs and trees Woodbury,MN 55125 (651)459-9851 Local Roots Landscapers LLC Design,installation and restoration of 651-222-7405 primarily native plantings and natural local root5051,ahoo.c0m stonework www-lova I root s andsc ape rs.c o rn Louis Nurseries x Some native Retail nursery 16615 Hillside Court shrubs and trees Paynesville,MN 56362 (320)243-3836 Phone/Fax Minnesota Native Landscapes,L1 C. x x x Source identified Contract installation of native seeds; 8740 77th Street NE seeds and plants prescribed burning;exotic species Otsego,MN 55362 and an control; 763-295-0010(P) assortment of 763295-0025(F) native shrubs and www.mnnativelandscapes.com trees pee nlcoro.Coni Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Native Plant Nurseries and Native Vegetation Consultants for CENTRAL MINNESOTA Page 4 of 5 4/5/2012 pggir AI* Upland Aquatic Shrubs Supplier perennials perennials and trees Products Services Native Zen Gardens Garden and landscape design, Minneapolis,MN 55406 installation and consulting as well as 812-599-7512 ecological restoration and www.nativezenoardens.com maintenance for residental, Info(anattvezennsrdens.com commercial and public land Natural Resource Restoration,inc. Prescribed burning;exotic species 2013 Walnut Avenue NW control New Brighton,MN 55112 (651)636-3462 Phone (651)639-8097 Fax candresecomosst.net Natural Shore Technologies,Inc x x Minnesota native Consulting,design,and Installation 8275 Pagenkopf Road aquatic,shore- services for stwreland restoration, Maple Plain,MN 55359 land end some wetland restoration,aquatic (612)703-7551 upland plants, landscape design.Wetland www.NaturalShore.com wholesale and delineation and restoration planning. contract growing. Naturally Wild x 75%native Retail Nursery Native Minnesota Wildflowers perennials,25% 3539 West 44th Street herbs and Minneapolis,MN 55410 cultivars 612-922-9279 flaturaOvwik1001 avahoo.cern North American Prairies x x Consulting services;contract Tony Borer installation of native seed;prescribed 11745 Jarvis Avenue NW burning;exotic species control;retail Annandale,MN 55302 nursery (612)810-8342 cell (320)274-5316 Phone/Fax (320)983-6817 Phone/Fax Greenhouse i nfoa n orthp rnerica n o r e i ri es.co m Out Back Nursery Inc. x - x Wide selection of Consulting services;design/build, 15280110 Street South native shrubs and retail and wholesale nursery Hastings,MN 55033 trees,native (651)438-2771 Phone wildflower;and (651)438-3816 Fax grasses,all potted www.outbacknurserv.com Prairie Meadows Native Seed x x Local genetic MCIA approved collector/producer; 10850 Echo Avenue origin wildflower, source identiled seed(yellow tag); Lonsdale,MN 55046 grass and sedge mail order and retail nursery 651-214-2357 seed www.p raldem ea dowsnativeseed.com Prairie Restorations,Inc. x x x Local ecotype MCIA certified vendor,seed cleaning, P.O.Box 327 wildflower and blending;contract instalatlon; Princeton,MN 55371 grass seed and prescribed burning;exotic species (763)389-4342 Phone seedlings;native control;other land management (763)389-4348 Fax grass mulch, servlces;retail nursery www.prairieresto.com several native trees and shrubs. Raetz Scenic Nursery x Some native Retail nursery 1325 Scenic Drive shrubs and trees Sauk Rapids,MN 56379 (320)252-8316 Phone (320)252-8316 Phone/Fax Res. Sandstrom Land Management Design and Installation of native plant Bruce Sandstrom communities Including wetland and 888 Burke Ave lakeshore restorations;Invasive Roseville,MN 55113 species management;maintenance (651)249-9910 of native plantings brucesand strum n va hoo.co m Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Native Plant Nurseries and Native Vegetation Consultants for CENTRAL MINNESOTA Page 5 of 5 4/512012 .1'i1': _ r i. ..�. a lir' Upland Aquatic Shrubs Supplier perennials perennials and trees Products Services Savanna Designs Inc. Consulting, design,and installation 3511 Lake Elmo Ave N. Lake Elmo,MN 55042 651-770-6910 651-770-1166fax s desia nsaworldnet.att.net SBC Services,Inc. x x Carry some Design and installation service,retail Appiewood Nursery&Landscape Supply native trees, nursery 7775 Lake Blvd. shrubs and Forest Lake,MN 55025 perennials; 651-462-5554 erosion control 651-462-5549 fax Shadow Dance Stoneworks Consulting, design and installation 612-706-4166 an drewQshadowdancestonewprks.com www.shadowdancostoneworks.com Southviiew Garden Center Inc x Some native Retail nursery 50 East Crusader shrubs and trees West St.Paul,MN 55118 (651)455-6669 Phone (651)455-7416 Fax Sunrise Native Plants x x x some native Retail nursery P.O.Box 336 shrubs and vines Center City,MN 55012 952-432-2672 infoRsunnsenativedantscorn www.sunrisenativeplants.com Syd Siephan's Tree Fields x some native trees Wholesale nursery 22200 Meadowbrook Ave N Scandia,MN 55073 651-433-4338 office 612-685-5440 cell 651-433-3480 fax 'SBS Specialists deslgn,Instatlatlon and management 405 Hardman Ave of native vegetation;custom South St.Paul,MN 55075 restoration of wetlands,shorelines, 651-451-6907 woodlands and prairie;invasive ivww.sstree.com species control;natural resource InfoCalsstree.com inventories Top Notch Treecare installation end maintenance of trees 5505 n.Hwy 169 and shrubs.Wetland and shoreline Plymouth,MN 55442 restoration. Primarily use native (763)253-0027 plants. (763)253-2273 fax WWW.topnotcht ree.com Tree House,Inc. x Some native Retail nursery 12389 Point Douglas Dr.S. woody plants. Hastings,MN 55033 (651)437-7625 Wild Ginger Outdoor Design - Consulting,design,landscape management,habitat restoration 4326 Sheridan Ave N Minneapolis,MN 55412 (952)454-8428 veronikaph illins5)msn.c orn Wild Habitats x x x native and non- design build P.O.Box 514 native plants Sauk Rapids,MN 56379 320-252-5340 wI ld ha b itats&6aoi.co m www.wildhabitats.com Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Native Plant Nurseries and Native Vegetation Consultants for CENTRAL MNNESOTA Page B of 5 4/512012 4 � - obno;'art �^ • Upland Aquatic Shry• Supplier perennials perennials and trees Products Services Wid Orchid Native Gardens$Tree Care Consulting,design,installation and 192 George Street maintenance;tree care Excelsior,MN 55331 (812)8253251 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Attachment E 1 7 ! J els 0414414111 N - A /.. • / frr 1 4 yw 1,1c1c,triont - \. 1. _ ,.�+ ♦9 , . :. „......IFA i • ,1 Rhamnus cathartica L. /.. , . . DESCRIPTION: Common buckthorn is a Ishrub or small tree in the buckthorn family � ai 4' • (Rhamnaceae)that can grow to 22 feet in height with a 10-inch wide trunk. The crown shape of mature plants is spreading and irregular. The grey to brown bark is rough textured when mature and may be confused with that of plum trees. The inner bark is yellow and the heartwood is pink to orange. Twigs are often tipped with a spine. In spring, dense clusters of 2 to 6, yellow-green,4-petaled flowers emerge from stems near the bases of leaf stalks. Small black fruits about 1/4 inch in cross-section and containing 3-4 seeds, form in the fall. Leaves are broadly oval, rounded or r- b; pointed at the tip,with 3-4 pairs of up curved veins, and have jagged, toothed margins. Leaves appear dark, glossy green on the upper surface . .. and stay green late into fall, after most other deciduous leaves have fallen. =�r" ECOLOGICAL THREAT: Exotic buckthorns tend to form dense, even-aged thickets, crowding and shading out native shrubs and herbs, often completely eradicating them. Dense buckthorn seedlings prevent native tree and shrub regeneration. In fire-adapted ecosystems such as savannas and prairies, the lack of vegetation under buckthorn prohibits fires. Buckthorn control is also of interest to small grain producers; the shrub is an alternate host of the crown rust of oats, which affects oat yield and quality. .,,,, Vi-owns DISTRIBUTION IN THE UNITED STATES: Common buckthorn ik !"1 ` has become naturalized from Nova Scotia to Saskatchewan, south to Missouri, and east to New England.. , HABITAT IN THE UNITED STATES: Common buckthorn prefers lightly shaded conditions. An invader mainly of open oak woods, '' deadfall openings in woodlands, and woods edges, it may also be found in prairies and open fields. It is tolerant of many soil types, well drained sand, clay, poorly drained calcareous, neutral or alkaline,wet or dry. CURRENT MANAGEMENT APPROACHES:This plant is listed as an invasive and noxious weed by the U. S. federal government. Mechanical, physical and chemical methods are used to control common buckthorn and glossy buckthorn (Rhamnus frangula), also an invasive exotic plant. Prescribed fire is another method proposed for controlling buckthorn seedlings in fire-adapted natural areas. Careful application of herbicides such as, triclopyr herbicide effectively controls common buckthorn. References: httc://nlants.usda.govl httc://www.nps.aov/plants/alien/ Photo Log Conservation Design--Photo Log ":$M: .-••:• PAPA) ,L .. 51:1 ." -1:4 • ,y • • ' Photo 1: View of Wetland 1 and Tana•er Lake `•�,-w7t. ,iµ4:. J ` :a b„i - , { Y4 • ' •- .X11 y f� _ Cw�r ala • a. L k 'Y :G' X1.1�,+ A' tib'• r ,, • 5, ♦ at to + ( x' l• ir.. "Ve''.',. Photo 2: Alternate view of Wetland 1 along Tanager Lake facing southwest 1700 Shoreline Drive,Orono,MN 1 July 20,2015 Conservation Design—Photo Log y � •,y • ro rt Photo 3:View of buckthorn alon Tanager Lake r Photo 4: View of the north edge of the property from the Dakota Rail bike trail 1700 Shoreline Drive,Orono,MN 2 July 20,2015 Conservation Design—Photo Log y 4 ! ci r F; ) �r • 1 ., - I fj ' • / i t. 1. ,h �C a;'-. V I r.'• ;i I • ' i4 '; • t . fid' dF�: i r. ; ( !ft• �11 :1 • J I'. _ Vit. I tee- • i•aax,s 1 r .. - , lY ru`SL N#L.`` fArLt• , a - ?.• 'tit•--- tib [. - 4-7 :� . 4• .4,„ .r -16 Photo 5: View of Wetland 2 .101146 • 41 _ ��_ '• • ~� ii est: • - �:• • • —710 • if� ,`♦����'�"`e�i4y , Photo 6: View of Wetland 3 1700 Shoreline Drive,Orono,MN 3 July 20,2015 Conservation Design—Photo Log ' • ' r 4 - ,, • t, -4 vrovAilL,.....A.:--‘ • r • 0411 • " v PiktIrIeJ avg%., •tA --44.1t*W"- - " - 417,,,ITO...41.,ino, •- , • . • • !go_• - . .".• - ' , r . 141: ••• telt • • • • /OW II° 44kk ; '11 IP'. 1 Er dA, - • • • Photo 7: View of buckthorn along Wetland 3 , • - 2' _ • ••• • %. v.4. t •• $ ; 2 • t., -14 • Photo 8: View of Wetland 5 and narrowleaf cattail 1700 Shoreline Drive,Orono,MN 4 July 20,2015 Conservation Design—Photo Log ik,.. ! lbs`.' • t 0 , +,,• ". a' h r. Photo 9: View of reed cana rass and r arlic mustard along 7.::and 5 �,[� i t. `moi(( t ` p1 _: ty�r 4„ s os ‘,1 41t$ ,, �p r '# �t(�� 7 ' i �', CC}rd ti i f ,; • r'. 11. t . ! i a, I,L�- t fly t J S. E•rk ai` *744'�rt^e,.' -.'�.-: '`.. ,•'Y'.. t ip.,,4'�. Yap, ','.- ,/� ..,,; '±,..'- '•:•••• 4....11-`. ,+"I' - ' �/'�s- 'A%.;', . ,"', .r,0_,I, 1,,,' .moi ( EV SMy,-- L ,"�tsa •Y� `I h`.Fs".F •.<...A- l t • >. w a:•- -1, ,,.47-,-,..„,:...,,t-N. ter{ •+f> • •C .i ,w,.'y — �y�,,,..+. '1 X71": `� r1 ; r f ►r'.t, .,� ts...`ta. 'c ��`��,r��.� ' °Kai.�x. 1r ..., -,-. .+�Y_+.' ., - _ - - _ ,'amih-2-4 •^moi .,,,,,, .... r, k.., 3r a ' t +� • - �� fit' .¢ Photo 10: View of maple-basswood forest • 1700 Shoreline Dries,Orono,h4N 5 July 20,2015 Conservation Design—Photo Log • .4. :it , r • osit, Photo 11: View of lot 4 drivewa from Shoreline Drive ial;• .1 7.1" 411 ' - , - . • -"vii • • 1,4 t . AStt f_dab' -%• , • -",bt- .44 A' ;le,*• ',r•P $. 444 t , - - %f- — • ,or-.,,,kgx, • - r • " . `Zt46-4",' • • ;4114 - , toir *47 • .,,E* r Ani 7 • ojE tse • . • ,„ -- .1„,;!•1 • - Is •• • , - - : - • - g - 4 Ny -•41 • o- • = Photo 12: View of Lake Minnetonka from southeast corner of subject property facing south 1700 Shoreline Drive,Orono,MN 6 July 20,2015 Conservation Design— Photo Log • •.•: , • P'. • • ..!*4.g ,-.--- • , • •;'_1,. t•- : ' ‘ 4,••/_:.;-• •' tif 1'44 • Ak.;-' •IVf. • Photo 13: View of Shoreline Drive corridor from southeast corner of subject •roie facin• west ' 4'1'sf • I .444 .• A • 0' • 5 ..:%••••-,;-4-,..;•1,5' . •,, . • r .. • • .•„ . •••• -0 •;., • - • • • • 4-AR • 4. ' * • - iNt "IC .•-t P • '• I 7 • ; • . , . II *11 , ..J ; 1. -; •K' ;;", • ••, ; - / I ••11 I'. • vrfI I . z. • Photo 14: View onto subject property from south edge of property facing north 1700 Shoreline Drive,Orono,MN 7 July 20,2015 Attachment F MCWD Notice of Decision .d hof lig r -- ,r�_- iF� . -- 4,� 1 *.1•p.! � .. , _.'L:•.F_3 CP,T i , - !,11114,1#(311 *V•�• MIC f,i /'`i``W � '�S C+ / , - - , � 1 `,• •, t � �� L. dt t i z J J i • � l Ct � / y. R -eft.. y.v �': !' ',.z.,4.--' r•. ice, .-� s ".-.. , t '� '' , j ▪ • ,oitior. - �,� �'P ;Ls. 0p;'S it,.., ; r "'i. +► A.;Te.04.5. '� l co:4..,,, ....po S �� Q W .:1� -;x ' � i�: f es•t. 1t � t�.._.•,) , lis t f' 4 1 . :�` -- --.446114't ."--'7'L —. !' /',6. "' .I i-,.-. ...-,' ( - - dry F [ "�' .. t•...a. •e. liT'+• r' ,,-4i.4'.. y' I-+' •• _,- '. �J • n• 1• 1. • ,.- # RI• , •-its M'�> z -•�=+o0441.4 0':-.;7-1 :---41E-4%- r, • , +,. ,� �.. �.". �f,'� _;'^i. 3, � iffi1• K✓Lt+'•.z1a !tf•rl ftl'#'ys:. • ,• +..;.!^• +- �•` ,I�,. _ ME. 6/-"A�--4r,...T ir... _. ,,, R lit.,.;^ X_ I .:'„,r, y t I ',414 +• .,. w j. • --,;..1'...' R�f -.1---; c "�'' , �+ .141 fr ,' •.`+!`� ,.. •1! - G ., . • ( 7-'•P s�� .. .,,§ :-..a.•;:'," ._.. ;•: 1:-. e .=-rr 'x+ '�1 i Yom? f ',' qtr "ti � J'"ty .+ ..-�'�--Y -:7?;(/'7,7 a. �n> 5:lit; ) -•ice t-'� ,--7,:1-,' 1 r L' I 9`µR'S7 ' +- Gr'� r 7 n 4 '1?-1 0 t Al �7.a Y'"i r, E.. .tb• • 'i#t fE. r-.'l t/yt 'N' }\,r.:1- ',..;'(;1 - f 5 t t"a •gyp �,i+ IV i 15.4-: — � ta�. -'�✓,� r �' t ;�' �ff <��rS"f�es+ r,7 • ii _ tBrt 0.', f I T s I •R t �s i Pi ,� y :,t, r t , ii a = � h 4 f. ,. „'-.4,-,":,4; # .‘ •• r� -�« ,4� *t,7;,?' a �, �I„" +I t x• a:11._,E.-;:-...� "' �' '+ + • t,�, yrs ., ,.;4;�* -1';',,,4-i.,„%'7 �s M '# kt. Ep f ... a„ 31(K:. , -. ': - 4„ j. : :- ...,"''„%.-..,,-4' .1- -'-r:.; ,:+ s y �. vt t L4.a• ' f Lc 1, tt. iiii:',:ks. 1..,t r • r sv,t , '"---•,t i z r et.:.- # �'t. fir ,..,,vi.-7, ►"^; i*- L< . ' .':--..'4 ,-.7,e. a....,•-z4`.: &..• X f.' 1 a `r .; , ` ,,,„- q qb'-,a '� �' ,c'i+,�y, likifii 1.1.7,A•f i,..--,----,-:•., ,1 --..i:,,,i'lk,-• ,...,,ii, Ci i '`t�ttff i LJ 'r �, iir`'$t I: ‘,.'•:!,0-;-..' ; t.., ' I -- ."-"'•.-- ,•.. r tr i°r. 7;."..r, IL{rE: . i. v is �I,.' .#rq . `�, :".' �'r•. 4 ....,P ' sf -x `-c :til i a -, 1 Parcel Boundary M vs *�' s�tri# # r€ k fJ t i • L; 7.' d . .-}icy . ... :-1-,� i v TI I7N R23 W SIO Overview Figure 1 Overlaid on Topographic Map 2015-004 SVOBC)DA a 1,300 2,60o 5,200 1700 Shoreline Dr Ecological Resources Feet Orono,Minnesota N ' - • .. •-• I ' I ; [ ) MIMS • I ' 1 .'. . , :, /\ ctiand a sp 2_ 1 1\-\ . i_ , ] \ \..........' _ ,...„ ,..). 0 isamto l / l ii i' l) () I \\'‘'' 1 ' - . . , , I) i I) • . 4.A IA A-- .e ille't MORES -;- ..' i......,... 41,. i - 1 ' / 1 . . A.....'... .. . )i . * if . ..2'• 41)101,, .,.,0 \vetia Ild .- . **.....' * Sample Point '• * Approximate Wetland Boundary =I Parcel Boundary T117N R23W Sl°Approximate Wetland Boundaries Figure 5 Overlaid on 2014 Aerial Photo 2015-004 4SVOBODA 0 175 350 700 1700 Shoreline Dr ir.Ecological Resources . ,Feet Orono,Minnesota Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Decision Local Government Unit(LGU) Address Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 15320 Minnetonka Blvd Minnetonka,MN 55345 1.PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Name Project Name Date of Application Irwin Jacobs&City of Orono 1700 Shoreline Drive Application Number 6/4/15 W15-21 (Incomplete) 6/16/15 (Complete) ®Attach site locator map Type of Decision: ®Wetland Boundary or Type ❑No-Loss El Exemption ❑ Sequencing El Replacement Plan El Banking PIan Technical Evaluation Panel Findings and Recommendation(if any): ❑Approve ❑Approve with conditions ❑Deny Summary(or attach): 2. LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT DECISION Date of Decision: 8/12/15 ®Approved ❑Approved with conditions(include below) ❑Denied LGU Findings and Conclusions(attach additional sheets as necessary): BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 1 of 3 Irwin Jacobs and the City of Orono applied for wetland boundary&type confirmation for the wetlands located at 1700 Shoreline Drive and on the Heritage Lane Extension Easement in the City of Orono,Hennepin County,Minnesota(P11) 1011723140018).Legal description: Section 10, Township 1 I7N,Range 23W. A wetland delineation was conducted by Svoboda Ecological Resources on April 23 and 27, 2015.A complete delineation report and WCA application were submitted to MCWD on 6/16/15. Six wetlands were delineated on site. Wetland 1 was identified as a Type 3 shallow marsh/Type 4 deep marsh adjacent to Tanager Lake;Wetlands 2 and 4 were identified as forested,Type 1 seasonally flooded basins;Wetland 3 was identified as a Type 3 shallow marsh;Wetland 5 was identified as a Type 3 shallow marsh/Type 4 deep marsh; and wetland 6 was identified as a Type 3 shallow marsh with Type 2 fresh, wet meadow fringe. Two DNR Public Waters are present on site. MCWD and BWSR reviewed the boundaries in the field on 7/28/15.MCWD and BWSR requested that additional flags be positioned around Wetland 4 to fill in gaps in the flagged boundary but otherwise were in agreement with the boundaries of the wetlands on site as they relate to the two property boundaries.MCWD and BWSR discussed that the boundaries of Wetland 4 extend off of the two subject properties,and advised that any future impacts proposed for Wetland 4 must also consider any direct or indirect impacts to the portions of Wetland 4 not covered by this wetland delineation. MCWD approves the wetland boundaries and types as delineated in the field and documented in the delineation report for the two subject parcels.This decision is valid for five years.A future project located on this property may require a permit from the MCWD. For Replacement Plans using credits from the State Wetland Bank: Bank Account# Bank Service Area County Credits Approved for Withdrawal(sq.ft.or nearest .01 acre) Replacement Plan Approval Conditions. In addition to any conditions specified by the LGU, the approval of a Wetland Replacement Plan is conditional upon the following: ❑Financial Assurance:For project-specific replacement that is not in-advance,a financial assurance specified by the LGU must be submitted to the LGU in accordance with MN Rule 8420.0522,Subp.9 (List amount and type in LGU Findings). ❑Deed Recording:For project-specific replacement,evidence must be provided to the LGU that the BWSR "Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants" and "Consent to Replacement Wetland" forms have been filed with the county recorder's office in which the replacement wetland is located. ❑ Credit Withdrawal:For replacement consisting of wetland bank credits,confirmation that BWSR has withdrawn the credits from the state wetland bank as specified in the approved replacement plan. Wetlands may not be impacted until all applicable conditions have been met! LGU Authorized Signature: Signing and mailing of this completed form to the appropriate recipients in accordance with 8420.0255, Subp. 5 provides notice that a decision was made by the LGU under the Wetland Conservation Act as specified above. If additional details on the decision exist,they have been provided to the landowner and are available from the LGU upon request. Name Title Beth Brown Permitting Technician BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 2 of 3 Signature Date Phone Number and E-mail 8/12/15 (952)641-4504 ebrown@minnehahacreek.org THIS DECISION ONLY APPLIES TO THE MINNESOTA WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT. Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands. Applicants proceed at their own risk if work authorized by this decision is started before the time period for appeal (30 days) has expired.If this decision is reversed or revised under appeal,the applicant may be responsible for restoring or replacing all wetland impacts. This decision is valid for three years from the date of decision unless a longer period is advised by the TEP and specified in this notice of decision. 3.APPEAL OF THIS DECISION Pursuant to MN Rule 8420.0905,any appeal of this decision can only be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal,including applicable fee,within thirty(30)calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice to the following as indicated: Check one: ® Appeal of an LOU staff decision. Send ❑Appeal of LGU governing body decision. petition and$0 fee(if applicable)to: Send petition and$500 filing fee to: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Executive Director 15320 Minnetonka Blvd Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Minnetonka,MN 55345 520 Lafayette Road North St.Paul,MN 55155 4.LIST OF ADDRESSEES ® SWCD TEP member: Stacey Lijewski—stacey.lijewskd@co.hennepin.nm.us ® BWSR TEP member:Ben Meyer—benaneyer@.state.mn.us ❑ LGU TEP member(if different than LGU Contact): ® DNR TEP member: Kate Drewry—kate.drewry®state.mn.us ® DNR Regional Office(if different than DNR TEP member): Brooke Haworth- brooke.haworth@state.mn.us ❑ WD or WMO(if applicable): • Applicant(notice only)and Landowner(if different): Irwin Jacobs— mbsteadman@cbburnet.com,City of Orono—jloftus@ci.orono.mn.us ® Members of the public who requested notice(notice only):Frank Svoboda(SER)— franks( gpsinnovations.com,Christine Mattson(City of Orono)—cmattson@ci.orono.mn.us ® Corps of Engineers Project Manager(notice only): Melissa Jenny— melissa.m.jenny@usace.army.mil ❑ BWSR Wetland Bank Coordinator(wetland bank plan applications only) 5.MAILING INFORMATION >For a list of BWSR TEP representatives: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/aboutbwsr/workareas/WCA areas.pdf >For a list of DNR TEP representatives:www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/wca/DNR TEP contacts.pdf >Department of Natural Resources Regional Offices: NW Region: I NE Region: Central Region: Southern Region: Reg.Env.Assess.Ecol. I Reg.Env.Assess.Ecol. Reg.Env.Assess. , Reg.Env.Assess.Ecol. BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 3 of 3 Div.Ecol.Resources Div.Ecol.Resources Ecol. Div.Ecol.Resources 2115 Birchmont Beach Rd. 1201 E.Hwy.2 Div.Ecol.Resources 261 Hwy. 15 South NE Grand Rapids,MN 1200 Warner Road New Ulm,MN 56073 Bemidji,MN 56601 55744 St.Paul,MN 55106 For a map of DNR Administrative Regions,see:http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/dnr regions.pdf >For a list of Corps of Project Managers: www.mvp.usace.army.mil/regulatory/default.asp?pageid=687 or send to: US Army Corps of Engineers St.Paul District,ATTN:OP-R 180 Fifth St.East, Suite 700 St.Paul,MN 55101-1678 >For Wetland Bank Plan applications,also send a copy of the application to: Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Wetland Bank Coordinator 520 Lafayette Road North St.Paul,AN 55155 6.ATTACHMENTS In addition to the site locator map,list any other attachments: ®Approved wetland boundaries BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 4 of 3 Attachment G Site Plans 204.1,1l'-U:YVM II,-up-Lia:iFONa ,..f,YYYNrlO]\Y•1 r.-..-a u.. r..=, ... 3-C.a NM NII'3NY1 DNO1 Magi MOTIIM•N itt raj �'7--7►!/ —�•�Ji'r.r.ve - _.-- •••••-••=74,72t,>•P•, MiI'S M1r1'3OSSI601ROV 8NO rr� -�RNI y Yi^A .. /Ya BHN 'SNI S3iV100SSV'�J2138NOaJ y..•e\.�..\,P�.s„ w..1� P>d.a+�+w�irowl � .�`v° a I a 1 $ 11'1;111!11 ill (`iiI III' t W ili'�11II11' I,41II1I'ii�_ III!,1 #i i! 1' ; 11111 II111 ,! y LL 11'an1! ;ii I . W 0 ."...11, 1 r,`. 0 at. ! '?:,If 1:,111; 1i id 0kIl •f: 1. E-- Z !1,111;1 I if!;;I I I I III!Ili 1,! 1!1,1 I! l:1"4 I 1•1'I 1, W ! l' III I'll •`rill III I"I.I Ce Q LL ," 11111;111 71 II W = IL !I 111.:!I I Ellj! 'i w O �" 1{I 11.11.E I , IFI L �•I a 0' 1i** ii lie ,11 ij" : !:1,! 'sl '1, O 'i 11;':111 ' 1:1111 i{,If11..' w Q Cf)O _ IWIi: Ii'!; • 1111''Ill i 11,, ,.'I,; J- i- a .. 11 i..:l 01r: 1:11 :11. o 11'61.I;lF' �li X11 a ' �i i�,.1 f 1�1' 114 !I ,„ 1'1;,,►� iei 1 .11 ' ; I I,i1,1.�,I`! u�Il:i 1 I 4 iii ;;!� ,.�I j'IIIItI����N_prj(/���II+]I `�Il `•,r l7l fife ' .1 11''iili: '1.„ l.. 1.III i. iMM1 ,, ill \_ 1 I 1 1 \ `1 i \ ♦ \\ ,. -,- `�� I1. 1'ri, I ! 1111 4' •' 111f iH1 :11 i1• V--'' \�I 1 1 1! i ;cy'1j,I a -f -', # :ri' 1 11:111 1 11 11 I �`\ 1 1 1 i i 1 A--� / \\ III 1 !:: 'fi (111!1'•• 1 1 I, ' \I I i 1 ..i ii + • f.`•I 1 \♦ 111 ,11 1:,11 li .1 ;� 11 11,1 . /" , y 1 4,1, II—_♦f ` \\\ . 1, !', ii"11 111,1 11,,:1;;1 , ; jj66■■eye 4 : a ll.,..44,.._....__.. ,.4. \� _ t, 1 \ '� �- ♦ • \ \ I ...' ? 1 'r-- el A.i-. .r A,; 1-, .1v 4,,ii.----_, ! ,.. -4,,,.---_je-,-----\,:‘,,„:\ ........." 1 ,,,.,.:.,. , _ 14 - ‘rAt;! ikk\ N_.: 1; ,i111,, r\l,s1/4,1k ,4- -- . „.i.,-..-,,,,:_,_-,.:_-_----:::\ \' a.. .„ MO sr.w.NA . 5., - Ilk. lii,,,,,, ', ___:Is `\'\\♦\\\'\ ♦ I/f' --"'+6 - ••-'W. 1-'M_• "'° q '\\ \\ \'1 \ ii:/ '�- ." r� �i J p / 1 . I 1!11— + \\ \1�1; C=am`% `W - ``2. , �lik\ �� . 1, � `` $j \\\\ 1111 11 1 - `� a r 7 I l{ ill 111 \\\ \\ \\`1,`1111 \ \1 '-i --___,-----ft---______ ``--moi\ \ \• 1 1 i! illi \\\\ \'\\\\ \ \ r \\‘'‘‘ N it \‘‘‘,.\\1/4;\ 'I ' f1R I I1 TANAGER ESTATES 'I� '��` ;' ��;II r ;/,%'' .. .- T AGER PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR / /r'r�Ij;1;' ;' � (I �r „� ," � ' C, IRWIN JACOBS - ,'I'i "';,,.. l SOUTH DETAIL :-— . • \ ' ~ 'r' '''� /,;////2/4::',/-� ��\ ,� 4'it k _ _ — ��1/.� l ------------ - " i -' N'. - rr .� i • ftstaiRrNA1 0 ,ik,147...'.... 'S. --7:71-11, -...' ,......,, .4471.71r lit \ , Jim D ii-,,E --_-.=-:_-_„„L----_,==-_:-...„----.-3----- .4‘Ar ''' i44;f. " � � - c. • ar !- • / - `4 .�-- • i ........- • .A p..ffriIets zi 1. / . I-_tNSWzh. _-___-_.. Z —_- -_-_--_-----_-__ ,_ ,Ir' ! t 5 �� _ '=yam _ Nikvtls 1 , \. :-,,, _. --• __,-- *',.--4\ \%,116- I ,r � 3 i 41; ; 4 0 I le r i f/ lif I1I f 11r 1 i = --I:N9 &ff; ±------.-----31f • '.r .,rALA _ as •. e• - -- — I�+�Irrr• ... - LAKE MINNETONKA w�" aw SCALE IN FEET REV�$16Ns J�� ;:".4.�w.n wa.�O1�'a..... ' OPE .r ADAM NF7,.. .............a.r '�^' " GRONBERG&ASSOCIATES,LINC. ..,. M.WRIA.Awn.'NN irrw. ar.r +� {�=J-, c4r WOPr�N,WO auxywroIe.LAND puas �"� ,Ta3 446 N.WILLOW DIDVE LONG LAX!.MN WNW .n x..... ..r�:mrr ,rsa �_ PHONE,P55473.4141 FAXI 544-pY4477 TANAGER ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR gig ll IRWIN JACOBS �� __fig NORTH DETAIL _ - - _ o IiENK.CO.REGIONAL MIL AUTHORITY —�� _________:==;_i_._—_ ==: - /1154' ---------�_._ .y �? _c=== --- EAY-NOFFAIERN- _—T T�II� � y _- , --------Wil::=:—--_--- s.... .Q�KP__ _._ _ om ��� � 1 ggiz ' ji , 'r— r1k5°. 1. 1� ` " tom �+ ( '�ti 411111 . -' I s 1„... -....tirf,, ...„1:..,,,,,..__ .._....,N.,, _ „.,.. ___ ) , a.. -1. //-7,,--„or" 1 1 _ jam.-g,„..id`. f'1 7/ !Mil 4 , ---_-:,.-.-1-._-.-.- .: ;/,'/„//; LJ '�17 _ ! ..�_.._.___ 1•• / 3 I' lid / �� { ---.-.4-',_,. r/��- moi' / j_ _ �]..�.�7�1 !•i• `\t 41R / / :_____//� '�' `mac I,iI lir'! , I K1 j, --: 1 j;t r III --3,-,...,:z"�; .�-- Ai 11 i ,,J•+ , � !)n!) I " y / y IE1 i Ail / 75. 4,4,) !, 4-4.:04 ' ;-',..... 14-k--.:-... 1,../,, , .., iii, _ ......-, „ ri; _ lit :I.:::\ , ri iv, „:„1,././h Li% ii 1 -,,/ -___= 1 \�, ,11'11..1 ,rfigis----- I��� � �}f - 0\��‘� \\r�� 1 ` �.... '0 E I\ ��•� d -" .o�a SPM • '>• � .s\am.-t �• � I \ \ 4� ,)�t. � . � y / , kfi � 11 4 Fsa ,to aoo ; i ..w f +• SCALE IN FEET Iiiii TANAGER ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR IRWIN JACOBS IN GOV'T LOTS 1 AND 2, SECTION 10-117-23 : ‘.:4(...V %' HENNEPIN COUNTY MINNESOTA •• �� l J •••. — v dy 11 2 ''`' r+ • ;•� -- • s /� • ms./ -It",;-- i 'II, TANAGER LAKE .,. j:� , ,4.4 .. i A (1 It lmnwarmro wm, /::-%:-t--, �� .. I;,/ ! ), ./ , �•. ''jl�• R..00II,CI.,III! '.% '-':::"--':41364': ‘•••'"'.- ' .4 ' • i '•iie. l'it'‘ 1r I 14 "1 Jr � tt '1 *, 1. '"� :( ,44\4wri"....4,--4 ii.r.,Q7 ,:-., 't ) lilt4 '` 't'�#mit t. 11.) ,lip A iiiiis .f r,-",:�`-• �1 i( ,3ter i 4D ►r. ?' tl�� ..A1',/,7,,---- 1 I '.r? '%� , it�� •' ..' i � +' i `i; .7 `,� • i Ir { ' �� '?-' 4 Heli‘‘• I 11111=Wart.111- 11/ r' Com— —— ., 7k. )p-1111yr. �r Cileil-- ar laa..e.u...rra..a.a: ., 7 2 rtI I urs.Nrla ar.r.n Nn,r.r.ar.r �_ ..'" aa,- �. 11' ---i I AlraIhM��f lNrllYsr�¢ry "i ...rrIMiYllrmw la brwrnNN WrdYlll.b., -�w 'CL1rf�� �I� �� I.T..4.� tld.:111 raolr..arrr us i,, +� r.sr e,I�i ri•lhrrcr..rrr...1.1 .r,ln U'��'�fi�r' '�"�, = I lT..rr.n"le dm lee..rr.rrwr.w.a�r,.. .ar -r - u' �! f r=t—ro,-;I..IWrwrflrN..rrt.. -r.o..wr. _airat `Ait 4.. ' \ M.o./M 4gm ss. '�i rl. tr.ln..rl"�t rsn"`r qi _�I'a�..r� ` CI V rrrrl rrr r trrree.rNrll.. II au=rrnniwrw.irr.illxi. 1:""lr.aaW`rA "'r �� I I =IL=IMO Mimi i imea .r.rwr.,r..s.. -1M rL� - vrs.�sa.r.N...r�ii.r.r�rrrP.r. L►O° � „� �' :IID.r..er l.ar tiwnar.rr•r.awrr1.Yrq.a...r. a� „�� \ rrla.arrraamr t0 : rrw0awerah ► �y�� rr+r.rrp, M.Ir arewao.rrr. �� �r � �•La�r � �i 1; '! / r.r..s+rweerr.r�':r.�r.M�.r..�0.'�i ��_ r T�r� �`�t`��a� 11 •:...rr..r ` . 104 -.-....."r.411..r...CR,rm..... 7 a....s..rr.s.rrOWL • iNCI.'g TMw•w. r. 1 _.rr... rrrsr r..../~. 4,.` 1 A 1 rImliar...l.r.\.rrTls.Yn. `8 I6lFTE ISaus...in s 1 1 `.I1 Al . T 1 :I P 0....4 "Ruses.R.R.ross•NAIL �` _-..SIr"s�=✓11c ce► ..A1:4.• I caw saws.urs NaTE%Jticm DESERVED EY INCLVmW1L WELLS MIX ARM -„"ACM DRY MELAKE MINNETONKA TS REVISIONS '�� y.,r.wrrr ....r. ..rer..rsrn...sr...r MIDDiD HN T4s ..rasw.e.oaw -- ti•.r Isla—.s .r.I..� lis LGIGiN 3 A IENII,LAND V YDRO LAM PLA INC. OS �� n � V J's� .....S.yr..r.....+.r Tame nam = N111 VIILLOW ORFVE LONG LAKE,LIN 66786 66. ..r-..-rr ERR.. moss.aga o.rw+r ...nsa...y...0 PHONE; 734141 FAX 164734436 OCWY-WINI1014 wsni Sl3NOHd •"r•"•• ... i OMR Nil UV ONO'1 3Nl1O MOTILY'N IMP l Ir` Nocessa IfaIMNV1d amt*tumorr awn Varau Nom-Imo 1 w ���'3N1'631.V13065116 D1138NO2D . nw >"wwww,. "i pw 33,49 goi 8 —... .-ae 0 1 ( 1 1 y i �h--i f l rX %r --\ 1 i 11 1 li I CVi I J^���,, 1 r I I ; s*, r lel," y/r I idi j I 1 ` \ pp ` t ` 111 7 ea 8k �~-ik "PE i "Wrkl- \\\\\\ \ y 1 S ���IR 1 111 1 i i 1, 4"-r ``\ ..• \\\ Wj i k® 1 J — . \ {\ 1 l� 14'e\ ----041-__\ I St._ \\• \` I 1 . I1 1 -Ua . s• i _ • \ • \\_~ . {�153 i O I ,�,._^ -Vm� U^; I ` --- -lam 1 \ \ �' yy I W Meg* `‘ * I i 'y ' " ----,,,, i I ‘19',_<:-- --.- 7 `r 1 ,'r� `\ k YJ `` fir;-- --__ M_ u•.. \ VO ---1k \1 .,1- --- ; II • r 111 .,-,.>4,p41-7 ii I \ . I4 1,4 1 1 1 1 1 � 1 m''gfr T � '� 111` l — �Il \.1' 1t��_ ---.--__ \ 01.. .',7', st:,,V\s's\41 1 ji N." it(ipirr,..,:.,...-..,,' ,6, Vt.** 1 0 \ . 11 I PC Exhibit P Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map Date: 7/23/2020 tea. f ,4100,----/ . ° Tonager Luke I 4 „..,...1, • IC r r c, n I • ore nex; r. R, . IP:4 , ,.., 15._;:............_____„,„ Buffer Size: 500 0 100200 400 Feet Map Comments: i i ) ( I ( ( ( I 1700 Shoreline Drive This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with re representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii)is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (ii) is notsuitable for legal, engrreering a surveying purposes.Hennepin County shall ret be liable for any damage,injury or loss resulting from the data. For more information,contact Hennepin County GIS Office 309 6th Street South,Minneapolis,M N 55487/gis.info©hennepin.us RUN DATE:07/23/2020 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) PAGE:I 38 10-117-23 11 0003 38 10-117-23 13 0024 38 10-117-23 14 0022 IRWIN L JACOBS 2018 REV TR WOODHOUSE SHORELINE LLC IRWIN L JACOBS 2018 REV TR 975 HERITAGE LA 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 1700 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 00000 ORONO MN 55391 MARK E JACOBS WOODHOUSE SHORELINE LLC MARK E JACOBS TRISHA BLAKE 600 HIGHWAY 169 S#1660 TRISHA BLAKE 8096 EXCELSIOR BLVD MINNEAPOLIS MN 55426 8096 EXCELSIOR BLVD HOPKINS MN 55343 HOPKINS MN 55343 38 10-117-23 11 0004 38 10-117-23 13 0025 38 10-117-23 14 0024 GERARD&TIFFANE FERRER SCOTT W&MORGAN A KIRCHNER C NELSON&R W NELSON 980 HERITAGE LA 1090 HERITAGE LA 1780 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 GERARD&TIFFANE FERRER SCOTT W&MORGAN A KIRCHNER ROBERT&CAROLYN NELSON 980 HERITAGE LA 1090 HERITAGE LN 1780 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 38 10-117-23 12 0005 38 10-117-23 14 0005 38 10-117-23 41 0002 KELLY B KROMER DENNIS L LIBBY FOXHILL ASSN 1005 HERITAGE LA 1000 HERITAGE LA 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 00000 KELLY B KROMER DENNIS L LIBBY BRUCE FLESSNER 1005 HERITAGE LA 1000 HERITAGE LA PO BOX 612 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 13 0002 38 10-117-23 14 0006 38 10-117-23 410003 K L RISCHE&D A ZIEGLER BARBARA E BURWELL REV TRUST IRWIN L JACOBS 2018 REV TR 1180 HERITAGE LA 1125 MILLSTON RD 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 00000 KELLY L RISCHE BARBARA E BURWELL MARK E JACOBS DAVID A ZIEGLER C/O BURWELL ENTERPRISES INC TRISHA BLAKE 1180 HERITAGE LA 8500 NORMANDALE LAKE BLVD 8096 EXCELSIOR BLVD WAYZATA MN 55391 BLOOMINGTON MN 55437 HOPKINS MN 55343 38 10-117-23 13 0003 38 10-117-23 14 0011 38 10-117-23 42 0001 J P LEWIN&JESSICA F LEWIN BARBARA E BURWELL REV TRUST B W FLESSNER ET AL REV TRUST 1160 HERITAGE LA 1100 MILLSTON RD 1190 HERITAGE LA ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 JONATHAN P LEWIN BARBARA E BURWELL BRUCE&MELANIE FLESSNER JESSICA F LEWIN C/O BURWELL ENTERPRISES INC 6280 BELLERIVE AVE#202 1160 HERITAGE LA 8500 NORMANDALE LAKE BLVD NAPLES FL 34119 WAYZATA MN 55391 BLOOMINGTON MN 55437 38 10-117-23 13 0004 38 10-117-23 14 0012 38 10-117-23 42 0002 WEST BAY HOMES CORPORATION BARBARA E BURWELL REV TRUST TASHITAA T TUFAA 1150 HERITAGE LA 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 1185 HERITAGE LA ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 00000 ORONO MN 55391 WEST BAY HOMES CORPORATION BARBARA E BURWELL TASHITAA TUFAA 10425 BLUFF RD C/O BURWELL ENTERPRISES INC 1185 HERITAGE LA EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 8500 NORMANDALE LAKE BLVD WAYZATA MN 55391 BLOOMINGTON MN 55437 38 10-117-23 13 0005 38 10-117-23 14 0013 A SUZANNE RETZLER TRST ET AL BARBARA E BURWELL REV TRUST 1100 HERITAGE LA 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 00000 KURT E RETZLER BARBARA E BURWELL 1100 HERITAGE LA C/O BURWELL ENTERPRISES INC WAYZATA MN 55391 8500 NORMANDALE LAKE BLVD BLOOMINGTON MN 55437 38 10-117-23 13 0007 38 10-117-23 14 0017 MICHAEL D KELLY&ANNE KELLY M D KUHLMANN TRUST ET AL 1080 HERITAGE LA 1760 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 MICHAEL D KELLY&ANNE KELLY MEREDITH M KUHLMANN 1080 HERITAGE LA MICHAEL D KUHLMANN WAYZATA MN 55391 1760 SHORELINE DR ORONO MN 55391 38 10-117-23 13 0008 38 10-117-23 14 0020 S L BYRNES JR&P S BYRNES BARBARA E BURWELL REV TRUST 1025 HERITAGE LA 1100 MILLSTON RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 PAMELA&STEPHEN L BYRNES JR BARBARA E BURWELL 1025 HERITAGE LA C/O BURWELL ENTERPRISES INC WAYZATA MN 55391 8500 NORMANDALE LAKE BLVD BLOOMINGTON MN 55437 38 10-117-23 13 0023 38 10-117-23 14 0021 WOODHOUSE SHORELINE LLC IRWIN L JACOBS 2018 REV TR 1800 SHORELINE DR 990 HERITAGE LA ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 WOODHOUSE SHORELINE LLC MARK E JACOBS 600 HIGHWAY 169 S#701 TRISHA BLAKE MINNEAPOLIS MN 55426 8096 EXCELSIOR BLVD HOPKINS MN 55343 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. PC Exhibit H From: Tim Whitten To: mdkuhlmann(@amail.corn Cc: "Steadman.Mike B";)eremy Barnhart;"Heather Maanum" Subject: RE:Shoreline Estates, 1700 Shoreline Dr,Orono MN Date: Sunday,January 10,2021 11:37:52 AM Attachments: 20 01 09 Shoreline Estates ALS Site Plan Aerial.odf Good morning Michael and Meredith, We recently submitted a revised application to the City of Orono scheduled to be presented at the Planning Commission public hearing on January 19, 2021 and the Council on February 22nd, 2021. Attached is a Site Plan of the six-lot subdivision for your reference. It is our understanding that the proposed Subdivision is in full compliance with the zoning and code requirements of the City of Orono, Hennepin County and would be reviewed by the Minnehaha Watershed District. We had hoped to have scheduled a neighbor meeting to discuss our proposal but due to the Covid 19 that option is unavailable. We have mailed a letter to the neighbors that included the Site Plan and suggested if they have any comments, questions, or concerns prior to the Planning Commission meeting to please contact us directly to set up a telephone or video conference. We would be happy to meet with you separately as well, please let me know if you have time available this week. Thank you TIM WHITTEN AIA WHITTEN ASSOCIATES, INC. 4159 HEATHERTON PLACE MINNETONKA MN 55345 612 747 0771 From: mdkuhlmann@gmail.com <mdkuhlmann@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, October 17, 2020 12:10 PM To:Steadman, Mike B <MBSteadman@cbburnet.com> Cc:Tim Whitten <tim@whittenassociates.com> Subject: Re:Shoreline Estates/Kuhlmanns Hi All— Thanks for sending. Would you be able to stake the new proposed house footprint. Sent from my iPhone On Oct 13, 2020, at 6:00 PM, Steadman, Mike B<MBSteadman@cbburnet.com> wrote: Michael, We would be happy to meet with you back out at your property if you would like. Best, Mike Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Steadman, Mike B" <MBSteadman@CBBURNET.COM> Date:October 12, 2020 at 12:21:49 PM CDT To: Kurt Woodhouse<woodhousel8Paol.com> Cc:Tim Whitten <timPwhittenassociates.com>, "Pawlik, Casie" <casie.pawlikCEcbburnet.com> Subject: Fwd: Shoreline Estates/Kuhlmanns Kurt, Attached is a drawing showing how the siting of a future home could be built if the average lakeshore setback moves to the north. We are happy to meet back out at the site to walk the lots. Best, Mike Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From:Tim Whitten <timPwhittenassociates.com> Date: October 12, 2020 at 12:17:29 PM CDT To: "Steadman, Mike B" <MBSteadmanPCBBURNET.COM> Cc: "heatherPwhittenassociates.com" <heatherCEwhittenassociates.com> Subject: Shoreline Estates/Kuhlmanns Mike, We created an exhibit(see 1st pdf)that compares the house pad for Lot 3 with the Average Lakeshore Setback Line A and the proposed Line C(see 2nd pdf). I recommend we share this information with the Kuhlmanns as it shows that the Lot 3 house would actually be 140' closer to their home and 20' higher then our proposed house.This is partially due that Lot 3 side setback is 30' whereas Lot 4 has a 50' rear setback. We might consider increasing the Lot 4 rear setback if the Kuhlmanns would support ALS Line C as well. Let me know if you have any questions or if the Kuhlmanns want to meet to better understand these options. Thanks TIM WHITTEN AIA WHITTEN ASSOCIATES, INC. 4159 HEATHERTON PLACE MINNETONKA MN 55345 612 747 0771 *Wire Fraud is Real*. Before wiring any money, call the intended recipient at a number you know is valid to confirm the instructions. Additionally,please note that the sender does not have authority to bind a party to a real estate contract via written or verbal communication. <20_10_05 Aerial Kuhlmann.pdf> <LA20-48 ExH Average lake shore setback.pdf> From: Dean,Aaron A. [mailto:aaron.dean@lawmoss.com] Sent:Tuesday,January 19, 2021 3:26 PM To:JonRessler@outlook.com; ericksonrobert@comcast.net; Christopher Bollis <christopherbollis@gmail.com>; Matt Gettman<MattGOronoMNPlanCommissionMbr@@gmail.com>; Scott Kirchner<kirchner.scott@gmail.com>; Dennis Libby<dennislibby@remax.net>; Mark McCutcheon <mccutcheon.r.mark@gmail.com> Cc: Dean,Aaron A.<aaron.dean@lawmoss.com>; Soren Mattick<smattick@ck-law.com>;Jeremy Barnhart<jbarnhart@ci.orono.mn.us>;tim@whittenassociates.com; Patrick B. Steinhoff <pbs@mgmllp.com>; Barbara Burwell<beburwell@burwellenterprises.com>; Schumann,Glen E. <glen.schumann@lawmoss.com> Subject: Burwell//Jacobs-- 1700 Shoreline Drive, Orono. Chair Ressler and City of Orono Planning Commission Members: I represent Barbara Burwell. Attached to this e-mail are copies of: 1. My 12 page letter objecting to the six-lot development proposed by the Jacobs Estate. 2. Exhibits 1-4. Many of the same problems that existed with the seven-lot development proposed by the Jacobs Estate continue to exist with the proposed six-lot development. As discussed in my attached letter, the City of Orono cannot approve the six-lot development without granting several variances and without ignoring several City of Orono Ordinances. Barbara Burwell and I will attend tonight's Planning Commission Meeting. We request the opportunity to address the Planning Commission. We further request that the Planning Commission either reject the proposed six-lot subdivision or table all discussion until complete engineering is provided by the Jacobs' representatives. Aaron A. Dean Attorney Direct: (612)877-5255 Cell: (612)916-7733 Aaron.Dean anlawmoss.corn Fax: (612)877-5033 vCard Bio www.LawMoss.com 150 South Fifth Street Suite 1200 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Notice important discla=rners arca limitations apply to this email Please click here for our o:sclairner and here for our privacy policy_ • ••i , Moss & Barnett January 19, 2021 VIA E-MAIL AND ILS. MAIL Attention Chair Ressler Orono City Planning Commission Members 2780 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Re: 1700 Shoreline Drive Subdivision Proposal Our File No.: 61540.1 Dear Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members: I represent Barbara Burwell. This evening, the Orono Planning Commission will review a proposed six-lot development for the property owned by the Irwin Jacobs Estate located at 1700 Shoreline Drive. Reprinted below is a Table Summary from Jeremy Barnhart's January 19, 2021, memo to the Orono Planning Commission. LR-1A Required Area Provided Area (acres) (acres) Required Width(feet) Conforming Buildable Gross Buildable Gross @BSL (ciOHWL/75 Lot 1* 0.5 2.0 1.08 3.25 200 225'225 Yes Lot 2* 0.5 2.0 1.06 3.67 200 213/213 Yes Lot 3* 0.5 2.0 2.20 4.69 200 216/222 Yes Lot 4 0.5 2.0 2.04 2.07 200 200 Yes Lot 5(Lake) 0.5 2.0 2.78 3.09 200 257.16 200 Yes Lot 6 0.5 2.0 2.12 2.12 200 216 Yes The Table Summary highlights the basic problem with the proposed development. There are 18.89 total acres, but only 11.28 buildable acres. Less than 60% of the approximate 19 acres are buildable. This Jacobs Estate land presents challenges for development. There are wetlands, two lakes, bluffs, and existing neighbors. It is no one's fault, but a seven-lot development does not work and a six-lot development does not work either. 150 South Fifth Street I Suite 1200 I Minneapolis, MN 55402 P:612-877-5000 F:612-877-5999 W:LawMoss.com 6733724v1 Orono City Chair Ressler Orono City Planning Commission Members January 19, 2021 Page 2 The Jacobs Estate's representatives have explained that the property is going to be converted into a Homeowners Association and a new westbound turn lane will be needed to access the new development. As explained, below, there are multiple problems with the proposed development and the Orono City Planning Commission should table all consideration of the proposed development so that the Jacobs' family's representatives can further discuss the proposed development with neighbors. On Friday, January 15, 2021, we met via Zoom with the applicant's developer, Tim Whitten, AIA, and the applicant's counsel, Pat Steinhoff, for 35 minutes and basic questions could not be answered by the Jacobs'family's representatives. A Planning Commission Meeting is not the locale for resolving neighbor concerns. A continuing discussion between the Jacobs'family representatives and neighbors is needed. Either the Orono Planning Commission should reject the application or, at a minimum, take no action this evening and table all discussion. I. Background. At the Orono City Council Meeting held on October 26, 2020, we raised concerns regarding the seven-lot subdivision proposed by the Irwin L. Jacobs 2018 Revocable Trust (the "Jacobs Trust") located at 1700 Shoreline Drive, Orono (the "Jacobs Property"). In response, the Jacobs Trust withdrew its proposed plat and submitted a conceptual drawing for a revised, six-lot plan on November 18, 2020. We received Jeremy Barnhart's two-page letter to the Jacobs Trust's representative dated November 19, 2020, detailing some of the City of Orono's comments and concerns regarding the revised plan, and Mr. Barnhart's most recent Staff Recommendation dated January 19, 2021, recommending preliminary approval of the revised subdivision. At tonight's Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission may decide whether to recommend approval of or reject the proposed six-lot subdivision. For reasons stated below, we believe the Planning Commission should recommend denial of the proposed subdivision or, at a minimum, table discussion of the proposed six-lot development until the Jacobs' family representatives can answer questions in detail and provide detailed engineering to address concerns. In addition to these written comments objecting to the proposed subdivision, Mrs. Burwell requests that I be allowed to address the Planning Commission and then she requests that she separately be able to address the Planning Commission to explain why the proposed subdivision must be rejected or, at a minimum, consideration of the proposed subdivision should be tabled. 2 6733724v1 Orono City Chair Ressler Orono City Planning Commission Members January 19, 2021 Page 3 Like the proposed seven-lot subdivision before, this proposed six-lot subdivision asks the City to ignore its own established Average Lakeshore Setback Ordinance, subdivision ordinances, and the protections afforded neighboring property owners. The ALS Ordinance cannot be circumvented by the Jacobs Trust, and the proposed subdivision must be rejected for the simple reason that the City should not grant a number of variances to overcome admitted deficiencies in the proposed preliminary plat that fail to meet code requirements established for the health, safety, and welfare of Orono residents. II. Purpose of Orono Zoning Regulations. As previously referenced in our prior correspondence to the City Council, Sec. 78-5 of the Orono Code of Ordinances, attached as Exhibit 1, defines the "purpose" of the Orono Zoning Regulations. Section 78-5(a)(2) explains that"[t]he maintenance of open space and the avoidance of overcrowding of land is a basic guiding principle in this plan."And Section 78-5(a)(5) provides that"[t]he guiding principles of maintaining open spaces, avoiding the i//effects of overcrowding, avoiding premature development, avoiding the future pollution problems which are inherent in any plan to intensely develop land adjacent to wetlands and Lake Minnetonka, and the need to change some allowed uses in order to preserve the quality of the groundwater supplies in the area were recognized in the comprehensive municipal plan adopted on December 2, 1974, and the amendments to the comprehensive zoning chapter and map."(Emphasis Ours.) These stated purposes support application of existing codes to any proposed subdivision, not a departure from the ordinances that has the effect of increasing density and compromising the rights, safety, health, and welfare of the property owners in and around the development. III. Average Lakeshore Setback Ordinance. Section 78-1279(6) of the Orono Code of Ordinance— most recently updated on October 14, 2019 as Orono Ordinance No. 234, Third Series, establishes the general rule for Average Lakeshore Setbacks ("ALS'). A copy of Ordinance No. 234 is attached as Exhibit 2. Pursuant to the City's own records,1 the goals of the ALS are: 1) preservation of lake views; 2) accommodating unique circumstances, including meandering, concave/convex shorelines and peninsulas; and 3) clarity—the regulation should be understandable for the layperson. Both the 2004 and 2013 versions of the ALS, attached as Exhibit 3, included the following language: 1 City of Orono Memorandum dated August 12, 2019 and accompanying Minutes of the Orono Planning Commission, Monday,July 15, 2019. 3 6733724v1 Orono City Chair Ressler Orono City Planning Commission Members January 19, 2021 Page 4 (6) a. In instances where the average lakeshore setback can not be met, administrative approval may be granted at the discretion of the planning director provided no lake views of an adjacent lakeshore lot are obstructed and adjacent neighbors provide written approval" (Emphasis Ours.) (See Ord. No. 11 3rd series, § 1, 5-24-2004 and Ord. No. 106 3rd series, § 28, 6-10-2013). Attached as Exhibit 4 is an August 12, 2019, City of Orono Memorandum (the "Memorandum") from Jeremy Barnhart, the Community Development Director, addressed to Mayor Walsh, the City Council Members, and City Administrator Dustin Rief. The Memorandum was prepared shortly before the October 2019 amendment to the ALS Ordinance, at the direction of City Council, in order to"review Average Lake Shore setback regulations . . . in part to ensure that the regulations actually protected lake views." (Memorandum p. 1). The Memorandum makes multiple other references to the importance of lake views and to neighbor consent in order to preserve the sanctity of the ALS: Page 8 of the Memorandum comes from the City Council minutes from the July 15, 2019 ALS discussion. Mr. Barnhart indicated that the ALS "was established in 1992 and was intended to protect the views of lakeshore property owners." Further, Mr. Barnhart listed "[p]reservation of lake views"as the first of the goals of the ordinance. Pages 11 and 12 of the Memorandum refer to the ALS as being established "to protect the views of lake shore property owners from encroachment due to expansion and placement of structures on neighboring lots." (Emphasis ours). Subdivision of property would be an expansion of a neighboring lot.The City Council was also concerned with situations"where the average lake shore setback didn't realistically protect a lakeview." (Page 11 of the Memorandum). As with other lakeshore properties in Orono, the Jacobs Trust property is currently subject to ALS limitations. Those limitations currently prevent development of Lot 5 of the proposed subdivision. However, in the proposed subdivision, the northerly ALS line runs, at the northwest, from a conveniently presumed home pad location on Lot 3 of Tanager Estates to, at the southeast, the Burwell home. On Friday, January 15, 2021, I had a conference call with Barbara Burwell, Glen Schumann, a real estate lawyer from my Firm, Tim Whitten, AIA (the Jacobs' family's developer), and Patrick Steinhoff, the Jacobs' family's lawyer. During the January 15, 2021, Zoom call, many questions were asked of Mr. Whitten regarding the revised six-lot subdivision proposal, for which he had no answer. 4 6733724v1 Orono City Chair Ressler Orono City Planning Commission Members January 19, 2021 Page 5 During the Zoom call, Mr. Whitten made it clear that he did not know the basis for the location of the presumed pad on Lot 3 of Tanager Estates, which is used to anchor the asserted northerly ALS line. Mr. Whitten had no information about where the owners of Lot 3 of Tanager Estates intended to build their home. Mr. Whitten speculated that the pad was placed 75 feet back from the ordinary high water line, the minimum setback distance from a lake. The real explanation why the "Proposed House Pad" location for Lot 3 of Tanager Estates was chosen by the Jacobs family is using this location for a pad site extends the northerly ALS line closer to Tanager Lake, allowing greater density of homes in the proposed subdivision. Similarly, I talked with Jeremy Barnhart of the City of Orono on two occasions last week. Mr. Barnhart acknowledged that the current owner of Lot 3 of Tanager Estates has not submitted a building application or obtained a building permit. And the current owner of Lot 3 of Tanager Estates has not indicated that the proposed house pad will be placed anywhere near where it is shown in the Jacobs' proposed subdivision. This is critical and fatal to the current six-lot proposed subdivision. There is no factual basis for anyone to believe that the"Proposed House Pad"shown in the Application is correct. ,� , \ 11. .. J w` t4 A.4 e,j ti a 11:14r /f Y !, 0 = D v I ri; -- ` id , WETLAND iE� t ' r,' (PRESERVE) `f , ` . tf, ,fk, * - / ,, - AL S LI * .. i ii . .. \ . \ t if i . - ' -._•::.. om" } ``*Y;„ w . \:. ` Tw1. �,-.. I_ M1 , \ I •1 �' ,t•. y-.'- f i q . - `�•, � .. ` \ y - •u • �1 t `.. a sti -., ...."----4:: ,N. ..... -- —.=` The only reason that the"Proposed House Pad"was placed where it is on Lot 3 of Tanager Estates is to create an artificial ALS line on the northern boundary of the Jacobs property in order to try to justify a six-lot development. 5 6733724v1 Orono City Chair Ressler Orono City Planning Commission Members January 19, 2021 Page 6 Additionally, "the Proposed House Pad"on Lot 3 of Tanager Estates is not at least 30'away from the existing Bluff Line shown in the Application. Thus, the Proposed House Pad cannot be used as an anchor point to create an artificial ALS line. Compare the shown Bluff line to the 30'setback in Lot 5 of the Application to the house on Lot 5. Now compare that setback area to the area between the established Bluff Line on Lot 3 of Tanager Estates and the "Proposed House Pad." The Planning Commission can easily confirm that the 30' setback line is violated. Further, the "Proposed House Pad"on Lot 3 of Tanager Estates is clearly shown to be placed on a bluff— as demonstrated by a review of the topographical lines shown in the Application. City Ordinances do not allow building a home on a bluff. The"Proposed House Pad"on Lot 3 is being used to create an artificial ALS line even though the "Proposed House Pad" is located on a bluff and is not at least 30'away from a bluff. Additionally, survey notes show that a Wetland Buffer Monument is just under the south corner of the"Proposed House Pad"so a home cannot be built in this location and an ALS line cannot be arbitrarily set in this location to try to achieve higher density for 1700 Shoreline Drive. The Jacobs Trust and City Staff appear to propose suspending application of the ALS to the Jacobs Trust property to permit the subdivision to get approved, and then re-applying the ALS rules as if the subdivision had always existed. Mr. Barnhart in his Staff recommendation states that: "Once the plat is approved, the ALS for the lake lots will be applied as written in the city code."(Emphasis Ours.) The Staff Recommendation further states "No "artificial" ALS is proposed with this p/at." (See page 3 of the Staff Recommendation.) This is incorrect. An artificial north ALS line has been created without any basis in fact. A north ALS line shown on the proposed subdivision is established by pretending a home currently exists on Lot 3 of Tanager Estates. This artificial line makes it possible for the Jacobs Trust to claim it is in compliance with current ordinances, obtain subdivision approval, and forever alter the ALS lines relied upon by adjoining property owners for decades. No authority has ever been cited for the City's ability to suspend the ALS ordinance to allow an otherwise non-compliant subdivision to get approved. The presumed pad site location should not serve as the location for the ALS line under City Ordinance 234. Under Orono Ordinance No. 234, Third Series, the ALS is defined as a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. Under subdivision a. of the Ordinance,"In situations where improvement is proposed on a lot adjacent to a vacant lot or right-of-way, the average lake shore setback shall be equivalent to the setback of the most lakeward protrusion of the resident building on the immediately adjacent improved lakeshore lot." The City Staff recommendation appears to acknowledge this fact. At page 3 of the Staff Recommendation, the recommendation states "There was some question as to the average lake shore setback for lot 5. Until construction occurs on lot 3 of Tanager Estates, the ALS for lot 5 is the distance from the lake to the principal structure of 1100 Millston." This is "boot strapping." 6 6733724v1 Orono City Chair Ressler Orono City Planning Commission Members January 19, 2021 Page 7 The current ALS lines are ignored to allow lot 5 to be platted as an impermissible, unbuildable lot, and after lot 5 is platted, the ALS line is readjusted to allow the lot to be buildable. The Staff Report further admits that the home locations may be different (than shown)depending on the timing of construction on the lots. The building areas of some of these lots are confined by wetlands and bluff areas and required setbacks. This high density subdivision sets up potential future variance issues, since there is limited space within each lot to relocate the illustrated building site. The Planning Commission should deny approval of the proposed preliminary plat because the configuration of the six-lot subdivision violates the current northerly ALS and would create at least one unbuildable lot. IV. Lake Lots, Lot Width, and Density. Proposed lots 1, 2 and 3 are non-lake shore lots as initially proposed. Because lots 1-3 do not abut Lake Minnetonka, their lot width is measured by the width of the lots' front yards (which touch the proposed private road). (See Sec. 78-1 definition of lot width). Because lot width is measured differently for lake shore lots, lot 3 does not meet the City of Orono lot width requirements, but might be able to do so if subsequently combined with an outlot on the south side of Shoreline Drive so as to abut Lake Minnetonka and thus become a lake shore lot. But, as explained by Mr. Barnhart, under Hennepin County rules, lots 1-3 cannot be combined with outlots A—C until after platting. (See Sept. 14, 2020 City Council Meeting recording at 31:30 mark). But the proposed subdivision plan cannot be approved without a variance, because it fails to comply with the currently established ALS, and the current width of lot 3 is non-compliant with City ordinance. Under City Ordinance Section 82-6, the City has the authority to review, approve, and disapprove subdivisions of land. Under Section 82-7, the "provisions of this chapter shall be held to be the minimum requirements for the promotion of the public health, safety and general welfare and prevention of harm to the public health, safety and general welfare." Thus, under the City's ordinance, no subdivision should be approved unless it complies with existing ordinances — the minimum requirements for the promotion of the public health, safety and general welfare. For reasons stated above, the proposed subdivision does not meet the minimum standards. And even if a variance allows the Jacobs Trust to establish lots 3 and 5 with their proposed,too-narrow dimension or ALS non-compliance, as discussed below, the Jacobs Trust does not meet the "practical difficulties"test for being granted a variance. V. Road, Cul-de-sac. City Ordinance Section 82-283(6) states that cul-de-sacs are to be discouraged. Section 82- 281(d)(2) sets a maximum length of cul-de-sac roads at 1,000 feet. These ordinances exist for the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Orono. For example, fire trucks and ambulances need adequate access and turnarounds to serve Orono homes and residents. 7 6733724v1 Orono City Chair Ressler Orono City Planning Commission Members January 19, 2021 Page 8 The road proposed in the original Jacobs Property subdivision exceeded the maximum length, and in the most recent proposal, has been squeezed down to exactly 1,000 feet long. However, the actual length of the road and cul-de-sac exceeds 1,000 feet. The Applicant and City Staff have acknowledged that the road was measured by adding two measurements: (1) the road length from the start of Shoreline Drive to the location where the road starts to curve to the west, and (2) from the start of the curve of the road to the most distant point of the cul-de-sac. Basically, the Applicant has measured the diameter of the cul-de-sac, but not the road of travel of the cul-de-sac. A diameter of a circle is always less than the circumference of a circle. By only measuring these two data points of the road, the City and the Applicant are not measuring the actual length of the cul-de-sac area of travel. The road still exceeds 1,000 feet. The road and cul-de-sac are non-compliant. (One might also ask what has been compromised to get down to 1000 feet.) However, issues with a cul-de-sac at 1,000 feet are no different than cul-de-sacs a few feet longer. Concern about the street was expressed at a previous City Planning Commission meeting about traffic, the addition of a right turn lane with a possible shoulder, and parking. (See the recording of the City Planning Commission Meeting dated August 17, 2020 at approximately the 2:43:30 mark.) What happens when there are large gatherings at one or more of the (proposed) six homes that have parking spilling over onto the private road, and an emergency vehicle needs access to the same or another home in the development? Circumventing normal safety standards will be to the detriment of the owners of these lots and any adjoining properties that may be impacted by delayed or compromised emergency services (such as fire trucks needed to put out a ground fire). VI. West Bound Turn Lane. The County now requires a right hand turn lane, although during my conversation with Mr. Whitten last Friday, he did not seem to know much about the right hand turn lane requirement. Jeremy Barnhart has explained that a right-hand turn lane for westbound traffic on Shoreline Drive is required by the County. It appears that such a turn lane will be in close proximity to traffic on and off Millston Road, creating a bottleneck of vehicular travel. This is a significant safety concern to Mrs. Burwell. If the right hand turn lane requires any land to be taken from Ms. Burwell, she is not interested in selling. We need actual engineering and completed plans to vet any claim by the Applicant that the existing Right-of-Way on Shoreline Drive is sufficient to create a right hand turn lane. The Orono Planning Commission cannot make decisions based upon anecdotal statements or guesses. Actual engineered drawings need to be proposed and vetted before any decision is made. 8 6733724v1 Orono City Chair Ressler Orono City Planning Commission Members January 19, 2021 Page 9 VII. Traffic. The Jacobs subdivision will access Shoreline Drive along a stretch of the road that is already a safety concern. The Planning Commission's recommendation of approval of the proposed subdivision would create a larger safety hazard to an already hazardous stretch of road. The Planning Commission, therefore, should deny the proposed application. Visibility along the road is compromised by vegetation and road curvature. Road speeds are not always honored. Recent accidents have already occurred. Under the Jacobs Trust's plan, six new homes will now be funneled through the same stretch of road for ingress and egress, bringing with these new residents all the additional traffic incidental to home use — multiple cars within a family, service providers such as garbage disposal, repairman, mail delivery, overnight package delivery, and guest traffic. The Burwell home access is also nearby. While deference has been given to the County over road control and access, this should be a City concern as well. VIII. Trees. There are also many trees that run along the common boundary of the Burwell/Jacobs property. Based on recent staking, it is clear that most of the trees, some belonging to Ms. Burwell, will be damaged or removed to construct what appears to be a zero-lot line road along the common boundary between the Jacobs and Burwell properties. It is not clear if these trees will be replaced and at whose expense. IX. Variance. We respectfully submit that variances must be applied for/granted contemporaneously with the plat approval. The City's action in arbitrarily assuming new ALS lines to facilitate subdivision approval effectively grants numerous variances to the Jacobs Trust without requiring the Jacobs Trust to meet the variance criteria. In the present case, lots 3 and 5 do not meet the criteria for a variance and should not be approved for variances. Variances may be granted only under specific circumstances. "The council upon application may grant variances from the strict application of the provisions of this chapter and impose conditions and safeguards in the variances so granted, in cases where there are practical difficulties in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of this chapter and where the variance does not adversely affect the purpose and intent of this chapter nor the health or we/fare of the public." (Sec. 78-121) (Emphasis Ours.) The Jacobs Trust does not satisfy these requirements. First, they do not meet the practical difficulties requirement. Sec. 78-123 of the Orono Code of Ordinances lays out the "parameters within which a variance may be granted." One of those parameters is that "[t]he plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." (Sec. 78-123(a)(2)). This plainly does not apply to the Jacobs Trust; their problem with the ALS is not unique to the property, and it is one of their own making by attempting to subdivide a single property into six different lots. The Ordinances further specify that"[e]conomic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties" meriting a variance. 9 6733724v1 Orono City Chair Ressler Orono City Planning Commission Members January 19, 2021 Page 10 (Sec. 78-123(a)(4)). And the Jacobs Trust's pursuit of variances in order to establish and develop this proposed subdivision is purely economical in nature. Second, granting variances in order to enable the construction of the proposed subdivision would "adversely affect the purpose and intent" of the Zoning Regulations and harm "the health [and] welfare of the public." (Sec. 78-121). Rather than being mindful of the "maintenance of open space and the avoidance of overcrowding of land," as the Zoning Regulations intended, this subdivision and its variances seek to prematurely overdevelop the Jacobs Trust. (Sec. 78-5(a)(5)). The Jacobs Trust hopes to sidestep the need for individual lot variances through the creation and use of arbitrary ALS lines and blanket plat approval. Doubtless, this has something to do with the challenge of meeting the "practical difficulties"test of a variance or changing an ALS ordinance. But the reality is, the Jacobs Property is not unique; there are no practical difficulties to its development. The property can reasonably be developed at a lower density and meet all current codes. The Jacobs Trust desires to place more homes on the property is to obtain a better return for themselves. But this comes at the expense of the adjoining neighbors who have reasonably relied on the protections of the ALS for decades and to the potential detriment of the health, safety and welfare of the residents in the area. As stated by the City's own Ordinances, economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties for compromising the rights of adjoining property owners. 10 6733724v1 Orono City Chair Ressler Orono City Planning Commission Members January 19, 2021 Page 11 X. Six-Lot Development. The Jacobs Trust cannot be allowed to have a six-lot development for many of the same reasons that the seven-lot development fails. The northeast corner of the Jacobs Family home is not buildable without creating an inaccurate and arbitrary ALS line, as shown in the Planning Commission package for tonight's meeting. ,. I. _ <� _i: . 's. TANAGER LAKE �g,- „ .— V� \`z. ""--,,--'-z:_;-- ria'''' '.i+,. • 4* . U 4 di,e4,Ar7V.a ,`!;VIIIW ,T#14141 Iii .f I ', ... may. , %/ (�l/�'' i } .i 11r*..,... ,7,_...-",op ei-- v ii,10,1 ,Y 4 'ftm-1- - . - ;. —4 ra 14111C,, kb,',,%741yAr,111 Adk A ,r lir 49 , 0.,' iiir ' 4:.: . , .tc„( 1 ..ttec,&,-.,- --,,,,i,w,„,...d,,i1.1 ,. $ IA 7;, 1, . _ , „I. , ile4pitakt., ...4";:its,;,... .•,,, 4#4..."----- 41. ' '' -C.0,:vagor 'ilik. . ',te,'' — !.. r. !!„.. 1.,0-4,,,,- ...,, ,,,--,-r,,,,„ ---44V, ,mikiiii4:, ... u,,. of r 1, iiiitATE. _,JU___„. .T". "VI IL Ms." • \‘ Alp , e 7,.. 4 „, , r11.4 il la sts.a. '. ,i.-•'' °' ' t i ilk a.,1. r tt.,1,,,..,11_,,, kil,470..1,,,:scam.-...-4ffimprio gm,-4 0,11.t..,'-4.4,t :.',.1,;1 - '- r`` W•��� ," ' -�, • g u atrah.. is r p ,. { wsII t ,,,;AI 4 1 '1 kil it r{�� i" ir ! +b ,vr tnR • 00 1 ,= IS."N'. LAKE MINNETONKA 11 6733724v1 Orono City Chair Ressler Orono City Planning Commission Members January 19, 2021 Page 12 The ALS Line B proposed in the Jacobs Trust's six-lot development uses the wrong starting points from both sides of neighboring properties. To the Northwest, the Jacobs Trust relies on the imaginary building pad. To the Southeast, the Jacobs Trust uses an accessory building (i.e., a non-occupied garage) to set the ALS Line B. Lot 5 of the new six lot development, which was first published on Friday, October 23, 2020, and which was most recently illustrated on January 9, 2021, is not buildable. The correct ALS Line B would have to be set to the Burwell residence's distance from the shoreline, which would not allow a home on Lot 5. This is a good indicator of why the Jacobs Trust cannot propose either a six-lot or a seven-lot subdivision. The applicant is proposing too much density into too small of a land area. Rather than continue to have the Planning Commission's time absorbed by this Application, the Jacobs Family should submit a different proposal after answering all neighbor questions. Summary The Jacobs plat, as presently drawn, should not be approved. At a minimum, the proposed six- lot subdivision should be tabled until full engineering is completed. Very truly yours, /s/Aaron A. Dean Aaron A. Dean Attorney At Law P: (612) 877-5255 F: (612) 877-5033 Aaron.Dean@lawmoss.com AD/dshe Enclosures C: Barbara Burwell (w/encs.) (via e-mail) City Attorney Soren Mattick, Esq. (w/encs.) (via e-mail) Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, City of Orono (w/encs.) (via e-mail) Patrick Steinhoff, Esq. (counsel for the Jacobs Family) (w/encs.) (via e-mail) 12 6733724v1 EXHIBIT 1 Sec.78-5.-Purpose. (a) Guiding principles. (1) The city is growing in population from a rural agricultural community to a rural residential community. Use of land for residential purposes is considered primary with other uses viewed as supporting this use. While present commercial or industrial activity,where consistent with residential use and other guiding principles,will be protected by ordinance or conditional use permit, it is not the intention to expand or allow all such commercial or industrial activity to a degree where it conflicts with the primary residential use and the other guiding principles.The continued use of land for farming and similar purposes will be protected by ordinance or conditional use permit where sufficient acreage allows such use to continue without conflict with expanding residential use. (2) The maintenance of open space and the avoidance of overcrowding of land is a basic guiding principle in this plan.In addition to avoiding the ill effects of excessive,intensive land development,it is the policy to also avoid the threat to public health which occurs with excessive crowding of private sewage disposal systems on substandard building sites. (3) The city has recognized that many of the open space policies which have previously provided the basic direction of the land use policies have proven to be inadequate.It is now clear that on- site disposal systems must not be allowed on any site of less than two acres.It is now clear that the physical characteristics of the city make the extension of public services such as sewer extremely expensive and almost impossible in some areas.The city and other governmental agencies have learned that the premature development of open areas can be costly and disastrous to the environment. (4) Of paramount importance to the citizens of the city and to the citizens of the metropolitan area is the preservation of Lake Minnetonka and the wetlands that provide the only practical system of filtration and purification of the stormwater so vital to the preservation of Lake Minnetonka and the groundwater supplies in the area.The disastrous effects of intense residential and commercial development within the city,and especially in those areas adjacent to Lake Minnetonka and the wetlands,are painfully evident.The adoption of additional regulations,rezoning of certain areas and the creation of larger lot sizes in unsewered areas is mandatory in order to protect the safety,health and welfare of the citizens of the city. 6735689v1 (5) The guiding principles of maintaining open spaces,avoiding the ill effects of overcrowding, avoiding premature development,avoiding the future pollution problems which are inherent in any plan to intensely develop land adjacent to wetlands and Lake Minnetonka,and the need to change some allowed uses in order to preserve the quality of the groundwater supplies in the area were recognized in the comprehensive municipal plan adopted on December 2, 1974,and the amendments to the comprehensive zoning chapter and map 6735689 v EXHIBIT 2 Orono Ordinance No. 234, Third Series ORDINANCE NO.234 THIRD SERIES CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES PERTAINING TO AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK • THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Chapter Sec. 78-1279 Placement of Buildings and structures on lots shall be amended to read as follows: (6)Average lakeshore setback. No principal or accessory building shall be located closer to the Iakethore-Ordinary High Water Line(OHWL)than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots; • -- - - - - - - -- - - - - •. This does not apply to patios and other accessory structures less than 42 inches above existing grade, stairways, lifts, landings, lockboxes, flagpoles and pump houses. Further, the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. a. In situations where improvement is proposed on a lot adjacent to a vacant lot or right- of-way, the average lake shore setback shall be equivalent to the setback of the most lakeward protrusion of the residence building on the immediately adjacent improved lakeshore lot. b. In situations where the average lake shore setback line bisects the principal structure building located on either adiacent lot,the next most adjacent lake side point of the bisected principal fie-building shall be used for determining the average lakeshore setback. If the line continues to bisect the structure, the next most lakeside point is to be used until the setback line does not bisect the building on an adjacent lot. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED this 14th day of oct. , 2019 on a vote of_5_ayes and nays by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota. ATTEST: afrret_414E Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of N om, 2019. (6) Average lakeshore setback. No principal or accessory structure shall be located closer to the lakeshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots; except that this does not apply to stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes. Further, the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. a. In instances where the average lakeshore setback can not be met, administrative approval may be granted at the discretion of the planning director provided no lake views of an adjacent lakeshore lot are obstructed and adjacent neighbors provide written approval. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(C)),2-24-1992;Ord. No. 11 3rd series, § 1, 5-24-2004) (6) Average lakeshore setback. No principal or accessory structure shall be located closer to the lakeshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots; except that this does not apply to stairways, lifts, landings, lockboxes, flagpoles and pump houses. Further, the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. a. In instances where the average lakeshore setback can not be met, administrative approval may be granted at the discretion of the planning director provided no lake views of an adjacent lakeshore lot are obstructed and adjacent neighbors provide written approval. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10,56(16)(C)),2-24-1992;Ord. No. 11 3rd series, § 1, 5-24-2004;Ord. No. 106 3rd series, §28, 6- 10-2013) EXHIBIT 4 August 12, 2019 Memorandum CITY OF ORONO MEMORANDUM L0/� DATE: August 12, 2019 TO: Mayor Walsh,City Council members Dustin Rief,City Administrator KEs"OcLt FROM: Jeremy Barnhart,AICP, Community Development Director RE: Average Lake Shore Setback discussion Recognizing the varied lot configurations of lake shore property,the City Council directed staff to review Average Lake Shore setback regulations, in part to ensure that these configurations are adequately addressed in the City Code, and in part to ensure that the regulations actually protected lake views. The Planning Commission discussed this issue at their meeting on July 15`h. Minutes from that meeting are attached. Staff seeks confirmation of goals,and with those, will prepare a draft ordinance for consideration: Preservation of Lake views • Is it the city's intention to preserve a 180 degree viewshed, free of structures? Or reasonable views of the lake,given inherent development densities? Accommodates various unique circumstances • Include meandering,concave,convex shorelines,peninsulas. • Extreme neighboring setbacks (Farview Lane, others). Is it the City's intent to preserve views for homes that are setback more than 200 feet from the lake? Should there be a maximum ALS? • Unique orientation to the lake (Forest Arms Lane). Is it the City's intent to preserve views where the homes are orientated over another's' property? • Lots with double lake frontage Clarity. Any resulting regulation should be understandable for the layperson. This often precludes numerous exceptions. Any change to the zoning ordinance will require review by the planning commission and a public hearing. Exhibits Exhibit A Area Community Comparison Exhibit B Lot Samples Exhibit C Pence Lane example Exhibit D PC Minutes Exhibit E PC Staff report Lake view protection in neighboring communities Excelsior 17-6(2)Ordinary high water level setbacks.The complete shoreland provisions are found as article 60 of this Appendix E.a. No principal structure or building addition other than an existing water oriented accessory structure as specified above shall be located closer to the ordinary high water level than the greater of: 1. Fifty feet,or 2. Five feet on either side of a line which is drawn between the two closest riparian principal structures on either side of a proposed building site. Mound None Wayzata 991.09.D No principal structure or building addition other than a water oriented accessory structure as specified above shall be located closer to the ordinary high water mark than the greater of:a)Seventy-five feet; b) A line which is drawn between the two closest riparian principal structures on either side of a proposed building site; c)The average setback of the two closest riparial principal structures on either side of a proposed building site;or d)The average setback line shall be measured parallel to the ordinary high water level. In all circumstances,the setback shall be established by measuring the distance from the ordinary high water level to that part of the said principal structure that is closest to the lake. Victoria 100-150 setback,based on lake classification Tonka Bay 1011.03.5.d "For riparian lots, no principal structure or building addition shall be located closer to the ordinary high water mark than the greater of fifty(50)feet,or the average setback of the two adjacent riparian principal structures on either side of a proposed building site.In all circumstances,the setback shall be established by measuring the distance from the ordinary high water level to the part of the said principal structure that is closest to the lake." Minnetonka Beach (F) (d)Specific Design Criteria for Structures in the Shoreland District(i)Average Minimum Lakeshore Setback(AMLS) Principal structures—and accessory structures as may be required by this ordinance—shall be located no closer to the lakeshore than a line derived by the greatest setback required by a combination of the following: 1.A line drawn 75 feet parallel to the lakeshore;2. If the lot is between two(2)lots that contain principal structures,a straight line connecting points on each side lot line that are setback from the lakeshore a distance equivalent to the principal structures on the directly adjacent lots.3. If the lot is adjacent to only one (1)lot containing a principal structure,a straight line connecting points on each side lot line that are setback from the lakeshore a distance equivalent to the setback of the lakeward most point of the adjacent principal structure. Hennepin Hennepin County Property Map Date:7/11/2019 "S :F � n ,4. ,f' 1 r 'S ba $t • r '}: it / — rte,a.„—.., .. _x _ , I �'` 1 r1 inch =100 -et i No results Comments: Casco Avenue Black line 75 lake yard Red line ALS for red starred lot Blue line is AVS for blue starred lot This data(i)is furnished'AS IS'with no representation as to completeness or accuracy;(ii)is furnished with no warranty of any kind;and(Ili)Is notsuitable for legal,engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage,Injury orloss resulting from this data. COPYRIGHT©HENNEPIN COUNTY 2019 Hennepin Hennepin County Property Map Date:7/11/2019 • • l j 1 inch =200 feet No results 75' Comments: Farview Lane Black line 75 lake yard setback Note 450 foot setback This data(i)is furnished'AS IS'with no representation as to completeness or accuracy;(li)is furnished with no warranty of any kind;and(ill)Is notsuitable fur legal,engineering or suryeying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage.injury or loss resulting from this data. COPYRIGHT©HENNEPIN COUNTY 2019 Hennepin Hennepin County Property Map Date: 7/11/2019 r • ,.. ,1' A r Ilt.F ;til ,4ii y , I__ dry � r '4 4;;. 1 ' \ 1 y } y ,f '', , ., f, v .., i En 1 inch =200 feet No results Comments: Forest Arms Lane Black line 75 lake yard Red line ALS for red starred lot Note orientation of houses This data(I)is furnished'AS IS'with no representation as to completeness or accuracy;(II)is furnished with no warranty of any kind;and(ill)Is notsuitable for legal,engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage,injury o r loss resulting from this data. COPYRIGHT®HENNEPIN COUNTY 2019 Hennepin Hennepin County Property Map Date: 7/11/2019 . p O a P; rxa " � : '''''''''''I''''",... tl• t 1P ‘; 5 1' do f r It i1 T 1 ( P 1 \........ . . ..., _... , i t 1 inch = 100 feet , No results KI Comments: Shadywood Road Black line 75'lake setback Red Line ALS for red starred lot Blue line ALS for blue starred lot This data(i)is furnished'AS IS'with no representation as to completeness or accuracy;(ii)is furnished with no • warranty of any kind;and(Iii)is notsultable for legal,engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage,injury or loss resulting from this data. COPYRIGHT©HENNEPIN COUNTY 2019 • 2710 Pence I / ji.... t jYj • / Black areas representportions of . P �-- r a�N���.:... • .._..�.- / / _. NW CORNER OF PILE . neighboring houses that"block" -----I--------_J— -� \ ' % � ' 310 views 1_____--s- -` � ---------1r------- / _-- _.Wo-------------- — — -M—'-- 1 — DOG.N0.1@QC Itlk. ----' ‘N___ '--------------------- \ / ,0 • I Li') m ik 5� i /Lo-r-2 z i \ ,i EXISTING H• --_----- I Z 1�i #2715 ' /_ -r 1�` w N 66.54'17'W 146.30_—_ ,o C \ \ 0 / 1 1 \ Cri " 1; 1\ 1 may. !! g n 11\ 1 \ 1 \1Q� a�O / 8 �. 5� 11'' y ; 11 V '� roe 3 R, l; \` 1 w p III j ; ,, \ NOUSEPROPOSED f� 1!i 1 I \ "Iron ��Ck A l =� � 1 N I IIA ;j\ \\\ 1 w�` _ ��®r'° 7 !`it,, I(( 1 f T d I n,�y_-- T ' EXISTING HOUSE v \ff \`\ \\ I #2715 i 111111111W,.. \\ \ .�', \ . �J 1 \1111\\�.I A\ � f o t 7.7.-.—1---_._:-N,,__...----"1 GI \\\� w y+°"_ SHORELINE OF \ �'::_���_` .. LAKE MINNETONKA _"'`��� -. i' LAKE MINNETONKA LEGAL DESCRMON: Lot 2.BIdra 1.PENCE LANE ADDRION 0 30 60 120 144ii4.4e eeee.Mami marker i:�set bon found marker Ll.nela w•Nrp oIo or •eMeMeFefa :Denola gopoeed eWvabn SCALE IN FEET This arerey intends m show the boundaries Nine above described MONO.•Proposed Pana,•Proposed and adsib•drive.and e pod.H does not purportto slaw spy other awoadlew orr Imprw.aras. REVISIONS In°'°0ymap^i1t"'apan.' °"•or^port laisla N..peasdbym•vundermySs•dwpaMsbn GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC. DATE BY REMARKS —r. and Br.E I am•duty thsr,M land Sm ayor under l'3 °b Isms M Bn EtatsofpgNNsotA CML ENGINEERS,LAND SURVEYORS,LAND PLANNERS ui / _ MS _ 445 N.WILLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE,MN 55356 oat IV-Ar-/r MIK MIME IMAM/27.17 .ms PHONE:952.473.4141 FAX:952473.4435 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,July 15,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. 7. LA19-000053 CITY OF ORONO,AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK DISCUSSION, 7:56 P.M.—8:30 P.M. Barnhart stated this item is intended to be a discussion on the City's average Lakeshore setback and will likely be discussed at a work session. The average lakeshore setback was established in 1992 and was intended to protect the views of lakeshore property owners. Typically,the average lakeshore setback is established by the location of the principal structures on the neighboring lakeshore lots but there are some exceptions for lots adjacent to right-of-way or vacant lots. The City recently observed a situation where the average lakeshore setback didn't realistically protect a lakeview as the setback line prescribed by ordinance went through the neighboring principal structures. Another example is an average lakeshore setback where it goes right through the house. It is Staff's belief that the following are the goals of the ordinance: 1. Preservation of lake views. Is it the City's intention to preserve a 180-degree view shed,free of structures or reasonable views of the lake given inherent development densities? 2. Accommodates various unique circumstances,including meandering,concave/convex shorelines, and peninsulas. Is it the City's intent to preserve views for homes that are set back more than 200 feet from the lake? Should there be a maximum average Lakeshore? Is it the City's intent to preserve views where the homes are orientated over another's property? 3. Clarity. Any resulting regulation should be understandable for the average citizen. This often precludes numerous exceptions. To date,no public comments have been received. Planning Staff requests direction on how to proceed. This direction will be provided to the Council and both will be used to develop regulatory solutions for future consideration. McCutcheon asked if the common rule is 75 feet from the lakeshore. Barnhart indicated he looked at Mound and Excelsior and most of those communities have some regulations to preserve views. Mound does not. Victoria uses a 150-foot setback to preserve the views. The other cities have similar regulations. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 8:11 p.m. There were no public comments relating to this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 8:11 p.m. Barnhart noted Staff did not notice this as a public hearing. Ressler stated he would like the ordinance to be written so it is understandable by the average person. Some of the issues might be mitigated if an average of two or three neighboring properties is taken into consideration to help understand where that line is represented. Ressler stated one example is of a Page 1 of 3 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,July 15,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. property on a quasi-peninsula and whether the City should also consider the number of feet to the neighboring structure,so it takes into consideration that shoreline point. Barnhart stated Bohns Point is a peninsula and currently the average lakeshore setback is a straight line, so the setback would be 150 feet. Ressler stated that is kind of what he is getting at and that a straight line does not seem to be fair for that lot,which should be taken into consideration. Libby stated he tends to agree from the standpoint of how they look at the metrics. When there is something that has irregularities,it is not uncommon to take the measured empirical distance from either the center line of the street or curb,measure back a block's worth of properties,and then divide the number of properties within that block. Instead what the City is trying to deal with is a very static line that does not take into account the irregular shoreline. Barnhart noted Staff does use its average measuring tool for some nonconforming properties but not for lakeshore lots. The problem with the average number for most situations is that the line is logical. The view is established by where the structure is. Libby stated as long as that stays the static purpose,there is no way to do it differently. Preserving the lakeshore is important and is similar to the dock alignments,which is very complicated. The LMCD attempts to have something fair and reasonable so the docks line up but the lakeshore is not linear and does not take into account that the lakeshore differs. McCutcheon stated he agrees it is a problem and that perhaps they could look at having some sort of minimum for the neighborhood. Barnhart stated in his view,if the average lakeshore setback is 219 feet,there should be some sort of maximum lakeshore setback since there are probably some situations where the house is 450 feet back. The question then becomes,is it fair to have that lot set the average lakeshore setback for the neighboring house and should it be protected as much as the homes on Casco Point where they are all lined up. Barnhart stated that type of situation should be part of any discussion since that creates some of the issues. While a new ordinance is not going to eliminate all variances,it could help reduce it somewhat. Hollis stated he would be in favor of eliminating it,which should be brought forward for discussion. Gettman commented they also did not discuss vegetation that can obstruct a view. In the application earlier,there were some trees that were blocking the view and the other neighbor was willing to remove those. Having that as part of the discussion would also be helpful. If one property owner puts in a bunch of trees,it ends up defeating the purpose of having these protections. Barnhart noted the Council did look at regulating landscaping in the lake yard in the past and ultimately discarded any changes because they did not want to get into regulating that. The City is trying to protect the lake but they also want to preserve a natural view. Gettman stated enforcement of the ordinance also needs to be looked at. Page 2 of 3 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,July 15,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart stated enforcement of the ordinance can be discussed at any point. Ressler stated something else to take into consideration is the added cost of surveying the shoreline, which in his view is being utilized in ways it should not be. The City should take into consideration the average lakeshore setbacks of neighboring properties and not just the two adjoining properties. Erickson stated as it regards the 180-degree view,that is really unrealistic,and the idea of reasonable views has more merit. The City has three different lot sizes on the lake,which makes a difference if someone has a 50-foot lot or 100 or 200 feet of lakeshore,and is the reason why there should be an average. Erickson stated he could probably support some type of upper limit. As it relates to flag lots,Erickson stated he would like to see something that disregards the flag lots. If it was a new subdivision, flag lots would not be allowed,and if somebody next door wants to build a house, they should not have to drastically compromise their layout to accommodate someone whose house is behind them. One way to deal with that is just to ignore the flag lot and go to the next house and use that as the average. In addition,every house has a front yard and a back yard. As far as views are concerned,not many have a nice view out the front door. Instead,it is the back yard where they have their picture window and easy chair to admire the sunset. That situation would favor the back yard more than the front yard. Erickson stated a good point was raised also about vegetation and that he would not want to regulate vegetation too much beyond what the City does now,which is to regulate tree removal within 75 feet of the lake. Erickson stated he would encourage people to plant a tree since it is a good thing. The City also has similar rules on fences because fencing and tree planting are going to happen. Libby asked whether Staff will draft something and bring it back before the Planning Commission. Barnhart stated his plan is to summarize the comments of the Planning Commission and then have the same sort of discussion with the City Council to gain their input. Ressler commented the City typically is for maintaining vegetation and not removing it,and that he does not want to get into regulating that. The Planning Commission took no formal action on this item. Page 3 of 3 �oNo To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief,City Administrator te• e41cESHG�� From: Jeremy Barnhart,Community Development Director Date: July 15,2019 Subject: #LA19-000053,City of Orono Text Amendment:Average Lake Setback Application Summary: This the first step in a larger discussion regarding Average Lake Shore setback provisions,and whether modifications to the ordinance are appropriate. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff requests direction. Background The Average Lake Shore setback is established in 1992(Ordinance 101 2"d Series)to protect the views of lake shore property owners from encroachment due to expansion and placement of structures on neighboring lots. Typically,the average lake shore setback is established by the location of the principal structures on the neighboring lake shore lots,though there are some exceptions for lots adjacent to right of way or vacant lots. In the 18 months since January 2018,the city has processed 48 variance applications;of these variance applications,8 included a variance from the average lake shore setback in some form. The regulation may be found in Section 78-1279: (6)Average lakeshore setback. No principal or accessory building shall be located closer to the lakeshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots; except that this does not apply to patios and other accessory structures less than 42 inches above existing grade, stairways, lifts, landings, lockboxes, flagpoles and pump houses. Further, the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. a. In situations where improvement is proposed on a lot adjacent to a vacant lot or right-of-way, the average lake shore setback shall be equivalent to the setback of the most lakeward protrusion of the residence building on the immediately adjacent improved lakeshore lot. The City Council recently observed a situation where the average lake shore setback didn't realistically protect a lakeview,as the setback line prescribed by ordinance went through the neighboring principal structures(Exhibit C). That,coupled with the variance frequency suggests a review of the regulation is appropriate. Average Lake Shore setback was last amendment in 2015,to accommodate lots adjacent to right of way. Analysis This item is not yet scheduled for a public hearing. At this stage,staff seeks confirmation of goals FILE#LA19-000053 July 15,2019 Page 2 of 2 prior to developing solutions for the public,Planning Commission,and Council consideration. Staff has polled area communities to understand their regulations attached as Exhibit A. Excelsior, Wayzata, Tonka Bay, and Minnetonka Beach have an average lake setback similar to Orono's. Victoria relies on a 100 or 150' setback (based on the lake classification), and Mound does not have any additional regulations. Goals. Staff understands that the following are the goals of the ordinance Preservation of Lake views • Is it the city's intention to preserve a 180 degree viewshed,free of structures? Or reasonable views of the lake,given inherent development densities? Accommodates various unique circumstances • Include meandering,concave,convex shorelines,peninsulas. • Extreme neighboring setbacks(Farview Lane,others). Is it the City's intent to preserve views for homes that are setback more than 200 feet from the lake? Should there be a maximum ALS? • Unique orientation to the lake (Forest Arms Lane). Is it the City's intent to preserve views where the homes are orientated over another's' property? • Lots with double lake frontage Clarity. Any resulting regulation should be understandable for the layperson. This often precludes numerous exceptions. Examples of lot configurations and the unique circumstances they represent are attached as Exhibit B. Note the setback lines illustrated on the exhibits are estimates only, based on aerial photography. Public Comments To date,no public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission agree with the goals? 2. Does the Commission have additional goals that should be included? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning Staff requests direction. This direction will be provided to the Council,and both will be used to develop regulatory solutions for future consideration. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Area Community Comparison Exhibit B. Lot samples Exhibit C. Pence Lane example Date Application Received: December 11,2020 Date Application Considered as Complete:December 15,2020 AZLOATo 60-Day Review Period Expires: February 13,2021 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members y A. Ron Olson, Interim City Administrator ``e � "IkES H O�� From: Jeremy Barnhart,AICP Community Development Director Date: January 19, 2021 Subject: #LA20-000073,All Energy Solar o/b/o Brian O'Connell, 3145 North Shore Drive, Variance Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a variance to allow solar arrays to cover 75.3 percent of the roof plane,where a maximum is 70%. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval Background The applicant is working on behalf of the owner who recently purchased the parcel. They propose a roof mounted solar array that covers 75.3%of the roof to which it is affixed,the maximum is 70%. The difference between conforming roof coverage and the proposal is two panels. This is the fourth variance related to Solar Arrays since 2017. Most recently, in December 2020 the City Council reviewed and approved a variance to allow 83% roof coverage on an accessory structure (LA20-69). Practical Difficulties Analysis Applicant Submittal Information:The applicant suggests that the roof design, its orientation, and the presence of trees in the lake yard provide inadequate access to sunlight is a practical difficulty.Additionally,they have provided supporting documentation regarding Practical Difficulties attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application.The applicants also note that ground mounted solar arrays are not permitted in Orono. Planning Staff Practical Difficulty Analysis: To correct inadequate access to solar for this site,the remedy is removal of the trees,which is undesirable for the city,or redesign of the roof structure. Staff concurs that the design of the roof,the location of existing trees creates a practical difficulty. While the array may be visible from certain points off the property,this visual impact for the additional coverage is not deemed to be a substantial negative. FILE#LA20-000073 January 19,2021 Page 2 of 5 LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-330—Setbacks: LR-1B DISTRICT Required Existing Proposed (Array only) Rear 30 100 100 North side 10 30.2 109.9 South Side 10 11.3 16.4 Lake 75 148 190.9 Section 78-395-Lot Area/Width: LR-1B DISTRICT Lot Area Lot Width Required 43,560 s.f. (1 acre) 140' Actual 49,320 s.f. (1.12 acres) 117'@ 75'/110' @ OHWL Section 78-1403-Structural Building Coverage: Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 49,320 s.f. (1.13 acre) Proposed as part of other improvements: 4,524 s.f. (9.1%) Section 78-1700-Hardcover Calculations: No hardcover increases are proposed. Stormwater Overlay District Total Area in Allowed Proposed Zone Hardcover Hardcover Tier Tier 1 49,320 s.f. 12,330 s.f. 9,999 s.f. (25%) (20.3%) Applicable Regulations: Variance (78-1379 (e) 2. h.): Maximum area. In all residential zoning districts,the collector and mounting system of a roof-mounted solar energy system shall cover no more than 70 percent of the roof to which it is affixed. 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 FILE#LA20-000073 January 19,2021 Page 3 of 5 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 intent of the 70%rule is to avoid the visual impact of solar panels covering a roof. The proposed location of the panels is on a portion of the roof directly abutting the neighboring property. The visual difference between the proposal(roughly two panels) and the allowances by ordinance are negligible. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.The Comprehensive Plan includes"To preserve open space, light, air,and solar access for all citizens while maintaining night sky"as a general goal (CMP Part 2 Community Plan Foundation, page 13). Additionally, Cities are required to include an element of protection and access to for solar energy systems (CMP Part 3A Solar Access Protection,page 14.) 2. 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 placement of solar panels is a reasonable use. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; the property owner did not build the house,and the desire to maximize the use of solar panels does not appear to be the key objective during construction and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The excess coverage(of panels)will likely not be discernable. Further,removal of the trees to place panels elsewhere on the roof would have a negative impact on the neighborhood and the lake. Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 3. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations has not been the sole factor in the variance approval determination. 4. 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.The applicant has noted that the design of the house roof,the presence of mature trees, and the City's prohibition of ground mounted arrays limit adequate access to sunlight. 5. 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 solar arrays are permitted in every district. 6. 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. FILE#LA20-000073 January 19,2021 Page 4 of 5 7. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.The structure's orientation and the existing mature trees do not support adequate access to the sun. 8. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located.The conditions would apply to other structures not properly oriented to the sun. 9. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.The right to the sun for solar arrays is a right provided by the city and the state legislature. 10. 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. No suggestion that the increased level of solar panels will impact health,safety,and comfort has been received. 11. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The variance is not merely a convenience to the applicant. 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. No correspondence from the immediately adjacent neighbor has 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, 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? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Staff visited the site, and was able to view the property from the lake. Pictures taken during this inspection are provided as Exhibit H. The issue is not the presence of the solar panels, but the presence of 2 extra arrays, intended to provide 41%of the electrical load for the structure (versus 38%). The difference in impact to the standards for variance is negligible. Planning Staff recommends approval of the variance as presented. Additionally, Staff recommends an amendment to the ordinance, removing the maximum. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Construction Plans Exhibit D. Supplemental Information FILE#LA20-000073 January 19,2021 Page 5 of 5 Exhibit E. Project illustrations Exhibit F. Survey Exhibit G. Satellite photo Exhibit H. Site photos Exhibit I. Variance narrative Exhibit J. Excerpt Solar Energy System Regulations Exhibit K. State Statute Exhibit L. Mailing information References 2040 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Application Summary Application Date: 12/11/2020 Address: 3145 North Shore Drive Orono, MN 55391 Parcel Number: 0911723330013 Land Use Number: LA20-000073 Application Submitted By: Agent on behalf of property owner Owner: Name: ZACHARY J PARISE Address: 5501 HUNTER ST EDINA, MN 55436 Applicant: Name: Colin Buechel Company: All Energy Solar Address: 1264 Energy Lane St. Paul, MN 55108, MN 55108 colin.buechel@allenergysolar.com Contact Information: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Project Description: Installation of a flush mounted to the roof solar PV system on the residence. Land Use Application Type: Amendmend Application Appeal of Admin Decision Concept Application Conditional Use Permit Site Plan Application Subdivision Application Subdivision Exception Vacation Application Variance Application Applicant Signature: PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM LA20-000073 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Chapter. Response: The solar ordinance as outlined by the City of Orono allows solar energy systems to be used in all zoning districts, but is only permitted as a roof-mounted system. The property owner proposes to install a roof-mounted solar system. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. Response: The residence was built in 2006 and the current property owners purchased in 2020. The roof structure consists of multiple roof planes varying in direction and size and includes many hips and valleys. The majority of the south facing roof planes, which is most ideal for solar, may be shaded by the adjacent roof plane and inhibit the sun access. The roof plane on the southeast side of the house that is south facing is shaded heavily by a tree. The roof plane on the southwest side of the home and is south facing, is the most ideal for solar. This is where the solar is being proposed to be installed. The factors listed above are outside of the control of the landowner. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Response: Rooftop solar PV is a permitted use in the City of Orono. The proposed array would only be visible from one neighboring property but none others due to the flush mounted design, natural screening, and location and tilt of the roof plane. 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter. Response: Our design meets the 2020 State of Minnesota Building code; however, it does not meet the City of Orono's requirements outlined in Sec. 78-1379 of Orono's Zoning Ordinance. Specifically Sub e, number 2, letter h which states, "Maximum area. In all residential zoning districts, the collector and mounting system of a roof-mounted solar energy system shall cover no more than 70 percent of the roof to which it is affixed". The current array design covers approximately 75.3 percent of the roof plane. Minnesota Statute 462.357, subd. 6, states that inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems is a practical difficulty. 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 116106, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter. Response: The proposed location for 30 solar panels is at an azimuth of 180 degrees. Due to Minnesota residing on the North side of the equator line, the optimal azimuth for solar access is South, therefore this is the ideal spot on the roof. Additionally, the residence's roof structure consists of many valleys and hips between other south facing planes and are slightly shaded and less supreme. The ordinance would require two of the 30 solar panels be removed. It is impractical to require two solar panels be placed on another roof plane, a great distance away. Due to the nature of the layout of the roof, even the other south facing roof planes would not acquire comparable photovoltaic rays. The reduction of two solar panels results in almost a 1,000 kWh loss of potential sunlight obtainable by this roof for the homeowner. Minnesota Statute 462.357, subd. 6, states that inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems is a practical difficulty. 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: The proposed location for 30 solar panels is at an azimuth of 180 degrees. Due to Minnesota residing on the North side of the equator line, the optimal azimuth for solar access is South, therefore this is the ideal spot on the roof. Additionally, the residence's roof structure consists of many valleys and hips between other south facing planes and are slightly shaded and less supreme. The ordinance would require two of the 30 solar panels be removed. It is impractical to require two solar panels be placed on another roof plane, a great distance away. Due to the nature of the layout of the roof, even the other south facing roof planes would not acquire comparable photovoltaic rays. The reduction of two solar panels results in almost a 1,000 kWh loss of potential sunlight obtainable by this roof for the homeowner. Minnesota Statute 462.357, subd. 6, states that inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems is a practical difficulty. 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: It is the property owner's and right to supplement or utilize alternatives to conventional fuels, in which they are choosing to do so by installing a solar energy system. 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 City of Orono's Community Management Plan, Part 3A Environmental Protection Plan outlines the need for protecting solar access. Granting this proposed variance will not impair health, safety, comfort, morals or otherwise, but rather be contributing to the City's 2040 plan. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Response: Our design meets the 2020 State of Minnesota Building code; however, it does not meet the City of Orono's requirements outlined in Sec. 78-1379 of Orono's Zoning Ordinance. Specifically Sub e, number 2, letter h which states, "Maximum area. In all residential zoning districts, the collector and mounting system of a roof-mounted solar energy system shall cover no more than 70 percent of the roof to which it is affixed". The current array design covers approximately 75.3 percent of the roof plane. Minnesota Statute 462.357, subd. 6, states that inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems is a practical difficulty. , i /ALL ENERGY ,.,. COMPANY INFORMATION ALL ENERGY SOLAR,INC 1264 ENERGY LANE R ST PAUL,MN 55108 NORTH SHOp� (800)620-3370 / .,,.. , . ' . RT DR INFO@ALLENERGYSOLAR.COM AO CLIENT INFORMATION BRIAN P O'CONNELL • 3145 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA,MN 55391 18"RIDGELINE SETBACK _ P038607 .`,T.; `. Panel Type , ._ 111111, . j. LG 375 BOW �F #of Panels , , .... __ „....r, ,, ,_ ," /A m. mm,illmm ulaum 30 1 // '1_.:... 1_1.1:1„, 3'ACCESS PATHWA', System Size(kW) • `. � 11.250 a ` Flush Roof Mount ! NOTES: 7.(30)ENPHASE 107+ ' INVERTERS) 1111111, 2.ARRAY 1: / 28°TILT,1 BO°AZIMUTH AZIMUTH N ,I, I r, 'T-----------_______.41 \ REVISIONS } LAST:09114/20 MG PROJECT-PAGE TITLE COVER PAGE PAGE NUMBER AO I ALL ENERGY COMPANY INFORMATION FLASHING 2X6 TRUSS©24"OC SNAP N RACK MODULE ALL ENERGY SOLAR,INC 1264 ENERGY LANE ST PAUL,MN 55108 (800)620-3370 I INFO@ALLENERGYSOLAR.COM 1 i 1 CLIENT INFORMATION -______ / BRIAN P O'CONNELL • 1 9 - ^ i - I- • .. - 9 ; •- • - i *.+ 3145 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA,MN 55391 I 1 ! 1 , � PO 38607 I I I I SYSTEM DETAILS t # _ • _ • • U � ;- I SNAP-N-RACK . _ MOUNTING HARDWARE: ! 1.(63)L-FEET ▪ • , Ii • - • • - U--. .. f - • L ! 1 2.(8)RAIL SPLICES ❑ tl ❑ 3.CLAMPS -- � -- -_ t I rt- (50)MIDCLAMPS 9_, (20)ENDCLAMPS 4.RAIL LENGTHS: (15)168"RAILS ✓ 4 p [ V V V V • - V i U 1 i 1 -- -- -- 2X6 TRUSS @ 24"OC NG TO BE I I I I I I •' I I I 1 I DETERMINED ON SITE ARRAY 1 AZIMUTH N ,4, (30)LG LG37501C-V5 MODULES REVISIONS (30)ENPHASE IQ7+INVERTER(S) LAST:09114120 MG CIRCUITS: MAX CIRCUIT 15A 20A LENGTH(120/240V) BREAKER BREAKER (3)CIRCUIT(S)OF 10 MICROS LEGEND: ENPHASE IQ7 12 16 ENPHASE IQ7+ 9 13 PROJECT-PAGE TITLE OPEN END: O ENPHASE IQ7X 9 12 RAIL AND TERM CAP: 0 ENPHASE IQ7A 8 11 STRINGING DIAGRAM PAGE NUMBER A3 SOUTH ELEVATION 495" ` ALL ENERGY 445" 39" COMPANY INFORMATION ALL ENERGY SOLAR,INC 1264 ENERGY LANE ST (8 0)620 337008 INFO@ALLENERGYSOLAR.COM CLIENT INFORMATION x' ?r � �p is BRIAN P O'CONNELL $tr f: a A '. � �A - 3145 NORTH SHORE DR t ra " s r x v > �; q 4 e a,-v" w4 5A MN 55391 i k,4 si ,ry s, z: uii „? 4 4 Kra n g aa,x P038607 M to M r ""a r;t h wr;F rHa..w _ y '* y ,,4 `,`z c - 7' a L tg(4+1 Y l -. SYSTEM DETAILS "n x'2x i .s" s",s. 4. ' 1'.;:•.-.;'•• -14,-'-'•-,.', k std - ` i V NOTES: . t „r a f, � i -i ELEVATIONS MAY ': a ,* ,, ¢ VARY DEPENDING ON akxti t rr a ,r 1- e'r a , G1ROUND ELEVATITON tela�,'0r a } t h., ' " .i THE BEST OFOURO a 'xe. S �3 ABILITY 4> , w g 2.2X6 TRUSS @ 24"OC WEST ELEVATION o qa t-x a t m Ui^ ?i � a'5 � sr ` ''�# t ,:ca REVISIONSv"� y .Av .:'-'0,..„:,,,..,,,,4,,,,:.:::,,,,i..,-..„.`4,,..., s s LAST:09/14/20 MG i. G-ex!. a x ki c a C r ,,,i,„.:,.,,,,..„..,,,, C r,r 3 4a 31s. r, . yt ax s + y " :,',''''..,P4'44 .44',","-;".'.'"', t, 2 „ .¢ sr k a r 5 .a„ iw. . 4,,,,,,,,,,...,:::4,.....•..,; 4k.t' vt -;,,,,.,,,:s.,: .'-:.,, y tir �3:: „,,Y '1x ^` , ” s aC`^;1 Yra l 4 ``G y Eg, 4rk PROJECT-PAGE TITLE " s S ica.* , ,,;, ELEVATIONwa ^ as`a Yz s ' x„Ei ' x ''''''',./,'"41:::.'i , ? ,ws v : DRAWINGS '''''''''''''''''4";;'''4'14 : e � r#�° 4 3'ra ro � PAGE NUMBER A24x DISTANCES CALL-OUTS: �i /ALL SOLAR PANELS -INVERTERS:5'MAX ENERGY INVERTERS-IQ COMBINER PANEL:75'MAX 1:SOLAR PANELS IQ COMBINER PANEL-UTILITY PV AC DISCONNECT:2' 2:INVERTERS NORTH SHORE DR UTILITY PV AC DISCONNECT-PV PRODUCTION METER:2' 3:ENPHASE ID COMBINER PANEL COMPANY INFORMATION PV PRODUCTION METER-UTILITY ESS AC DISCONNECT:2' 4:UTILITY PV AC DISCONNECT ALL ENERGY SOLAR,INC UTILITY ESS AC DISCONNECT-BI-DIRECTIONAL METER:2' BI-DIRECTIONAL METER-OFF-PEAK METER:2' 5:PV PRODUCTION METER 1264 ENERGY LANE OFF-PEAK METER-MAIN LOAD PANELS:5' 6:UTILITY ESS AC DISCONNECT ST PAUL,MN 55108 MAIN LOAD PANELS-OFF-PEAK LOAD PANEL:2' 7:BI-DIRECTIONAL METER - ' (800)620-3370 OFF-PEAK LOAD PANEL-TESLA BACKUP GATEWAY:2' 8:OFF-PEAK METER - INFO©ALLENERGYSOLAR.COM TESLA BACKUP GATEWAY-GENERATOR TRANSFER SWITCH:2' 9:MAIN LOAD PANEL(1 OF 2) GENERATOR TRANSFER SWITCH-ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM:2' 10:MAIN LOAD PANEL(2 OF 2) O CLIENT INFORMATION 11:OFF-PEAK LOAD PANEL NOTES: 12:TESLA BACKUP GATEWAY / 13:GENERATOR TRANSFER SWITCH BRIAN P O'CONNELL 1.LOCATION OF SERVICE PANEL AND ELECTRICAL 14:ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM 3145 NORTH SHORE DR EQUIPMENT ARE SHOWN.FINAL LOCATION MAY WAYZATA,MN 55391 CHANGE - PO 38607 2.LOCATION OF SERVICE PANEL AND ADDITIONAL ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT NOT DRAWN TO SCALE /� SYSTEM DETAILS 3.PV INTERCONNECTION IS A SECONDARY BO H N'S POINT R D NOTES: INTERCONNECTION /500' 4.AC DISCONNECT AND PRODUCTION METER WITHIN 1 J 1.(30)ENPHASE)= .7Dk INVERTER(S)=8.70kW AC 10'OF MAIN SERVICE METER/BI-DIRECTIONAL 2.ARRAY 1: METER. 24/7 UNESCORTED KEYLESS ACCESS TO BE O 180°AZIMUTH,2e°TILT PROVIDED FOR UTILITY AC DISCONNECT,PV (30)LG 375W=11.25kW PRODUCTION METER,8 BI-DIRECTIONAL METER. ,:,.,.. 5.PV EQUIPMENT SHALL BE INSTALLED IN m / ACCORDANCE WITH NEC 690 AND POSTED WITH APPLICABLE WARNINGS,SIGNAGE,AND PLAQUES , , / PER NEC ,690-17,8 PS EA(b)(5). �� 6.CIRCUITS: (3)CIRCUIT(S)OF 10(20AMPS EACH) -44411111111r ACCOUNT:51-0293230-7 + ,mL PREMISE:302201293 METER:43000153 �, CASE#03946721 ''.#11 /411,01 AZIMUTH N i � ] AR ( �""! ""-. -.> REVISIONS 'N �© .j LAST:09/14/20 MG '01.1111111111 I tti m PROJECT-PAGE TITLE ll LABELS LOCATED ON PV PRODUCTION METER,BI- ' 4'4" Q SITE MAP DIRECTIONAL METER,AC DISCONNECT(S),INVERTER(S),AND APPROPRIATE LABELS ON MAIN ELECTRIC SERVICE.ALL LABELS ARE PERMANENT,WEATHERPROOF,AND DURABLE PAGE NUMBER THERE ARE NO CLEARANCE ISSUES DUE TO OVERHEAD A 1 POWERLINES. �6�e6c hum keen s.q.¢ Re 3143 N5D ranaze Draw rwdr:mar.December 30,]oxo 11:18CO an Attii4M1m4414 65(3.1252255.1.14M91.5111168_36411 Hi Jeremy, A couple of answers to your questions: If we remove the 2 panels from the array to meet the 70%threshold,then those two panels will just be installed on a different roof plane,which is less appealing to the homeowner and would be more of a neighborhood impact visually then if we kept them all in 1 array. The 30 panel system is designed to offset 41%of the electrical load.The 28 panel only offsets 38%If we remove 2 panels from the design we would then meet the 70%coverage limitation.I have attached the site map with property lines and setback amounts to this email. I'm not convinced the panels can be seen from the'public spaces"aka lake.There are quite a few trees between the back of the house and the lake,and the neighbor's house is doing the majority of limiting the vow from the lake I was able to it some photos from Realtor Coln that show the roofplane we are proposing the solar on is not visible from the lake.Hes&boos(also shown below).They also show the Vee coverage on other prospective roof planes. • of ;;L;ssjy Additionally,if your comments about neighborhood impact are about the Essential character of the locality,it is important to note that adding solar increases the t:Able of the home which could have positive effects on the value of properties within the neighborhood Brim has attempted to make contact with the adjacent property owners,but a combination of the holidays and tum not actually residing in the house yet,he hasn't been able to get any of the adjacent property owner acknowledgement forms yet.I em not expecting to receive those from him prior to January 4th,but if I receive them before the meeting I will get them to you ASAP. Additionally,I am assuming since you sent the letter,you will he doing the staff report for this,is that correct? I think I addressed everything from the letter,but let me know if you have any questions,or need any other information. Thank you, Coco Buechel Demotic,Lia:sor. Direct (651)642.9404 Office-(900)6203370 rn IywwAllEneruosolar nom numeral nonua Pmaram On Thu,Dec 17,2020 at 2:11 PM Jeremy Barnhart<ih mhan'aci,.rr, wrote: Colin, Please review the attached.Let me know if you have any questions. Jeremy Barnhart,AICP Community Development Director City of Orono 952-249-4626 t ,. EN E "'! _ , , K_ z ;.. %• f . : 11i; �, N. 4,- - r +1'` COMPANY INFORMATION „.r•'' '..%W A?,, V 7r ALL ENERGY SOLAR,INC r a . 41 N7:if; + ST PAUL,MN 55108 '4Y ht ii .. '• A- (800)620-3370 �, -' 4 :'� -� ° -e, INFO(SALLENERGYSOLAR.COM r- • • a y }r F� A+° . _ CLIENT INFORMATION_ -s } !1" f +' w " +�` `1•" BRIAN P O'CONNELL 4 ti r ' r Ark, .� Nt- �~ , 3145 NORTH SHORE DR c( 4 • -1 Iv -f WAYZATA,MN 55391 r ? 111,,, PO 38607 A _�9' + ta f ! + ,' "1� , . SYSTEM DETAILS 1 A, "+ „ ' k �•� NOTES: « �7y if As- ''r" �,r 1.(30)ENPHASE Kr* q. f.``.' N •t +11-x$i s .+t` INVERTER(S)=8.70kW AC • , i • Ile .4 i � ` 2.ARRAY 1: -a r 180°AZIMUTH,28°TILT .,,t.,,�, P # y , + y. .. (30)LG 375W=11.25kW . liro, ,.,. lilk fr s1:iw�td+.� + : ]< may+ X31 'r'f" y� 1D .-4 .•fr.. �t £ j• " 91 ` !'it • Y 4 ' } s� y 1 �` 1‘1-,. t ACCOUNT:51-0293230-7 et‘ q ; ..;r {� '... rt + "* {it PREMISE:302201293 Yr,(, t ,fIr -,..-.2' -�i }p' Y6 .1 METER:43000153 + •,[.'If 7 -1-^„...., 94.. - �,. CASE#03946721 k'. ! ? � +. �' - Fr- "� AZIMUTH r s ei. r r a.>: • ♦ tiro :{, :1- t 4 y � 3+, '..jly 6 e • ;'; _ 94 ;: ..;Rti {yREVISIONS 'a LAST.12/29120 MG �.. wil 1 A� — '.4.:°°- PROJECT-PAGE TITLE ` tie r. � . , PROPERTY MAP `.4 ry _ d se if ! .1 x p PAGE NUMBER r A9 x z, t Ni a N $ a ,,, 0. b g Eil,,,..3pq, 5 i 1 ' ct Z � o :::::.:::.!.! gw e�a. .EO II Z U ,9. i ` / �' Za " LLisi,xi a i:: Ea / a` �� is� a° o g s �ti ? w 3 p"�S'p 3 \ i 1 �.; .. i o $ ' 7. I! / �(i F$ c>41%,-, ce IL--.. r,(:s\ fo ��:\i\ CUR il \it /• 3 .z a�'tivig a e.. } Z \ 1 if if/iii'',6/11/ moit - ' ' 1/` \\� \ M b ---.I .r-_i s 1 6 \TQi 'r , q -_ g V / i' Bd. , € - , I 'a '''ii —1'" \\\\ / _i_cr/ NI \ 5 , f , r 3r ;.y� ITs � a5 £ j 3 a a .s§ e •L.) I '' \ a\ .\ ^ •' o l\ g�z a-. i q a BG i 8 $ e Jcrrr sra zeakar srao .- S - rirka•tar r.cc.ao�al / � '\--- G �.a.. 1 i\,\.,, i e @ 111 k' 1. � I :t c a a a as= -1117, Om oaief4 A rig _.— Odee998 La0.OTdN e . _ q111' yp", " )IM rl W 'titV Mill d ;s-=qq • i xt2;= ILUC4 y d o fx = 02 o'lUm Z Q oo F ti = _ & ! I.'E .1 ��iQ ° =5 a , Bn U) 0CC NtZW °36833 ,110 8 �s=Ng C9Eli , _ ION CA W " s .ccCZE weeoe egg e = _ ooR M C t_-Lim z g E'tHH'14,•moHE'E'E 0000' t1 m o 0 o e \\�' — N �,_0_4CY v o ...®❑.o °.e.uagDno:�eeaW\`t I nnr, qCO §� m � " ��JM o ppp .. II[iFM M 4P� O1x1=i i �{ 1S 6 6 g z LJLJi'+ C i€ = _ �& wWw UH p, e ,2 G'' Z4GS V O= Oi I _ e� raj Vgt7A i -_-,, -L- '1 0 co _c. ..._ o p, ,--, 1 t, 1 _ : . .. it.,... I ,..., .... t 4. .. 1 ,., . • t ,: ui.`,1j S�' . . 44.4::,kve2e. ,,,. 4—4- ,./Alik.\\\\\611t, . .2_..._...;;-,.. . ,?....: . R>> p �n ►s�:" :ACJ Y fv'. , 1 •ate'/ 9. d1... 3'`47-7 p -�5: �` ..\ �ailka I _ /. Ali, IF •ry `n �y it y ' '. , ®Iii 1 r ;54.. >... --- __-. ;•. � `�. `.. 00 ..4 Q1..... r r .� r 00,"-14"..‘ei• nay 1 , r;••,.:44':-.. i :'• .•1 izi.lc r� `\ lr 4 * 1, t. 1 , r. S t • # , «, - Lam. , k- _ i si — , ! JJt t X}�+� a •� •�•� ivy i• a y rl�E,•.— .'‘' --'..„. ••••,• '''' .-' ' '';' •i7 s14.1.'..r,• 4 _ ts--.ir _ .._ .• F. ....., 4;3., ......i........ ..• .. . .. , ., ,,...,.. _.?... , .. ..t..41.. ... .1‘ ,...... .... . ...„,„A , ._:,..,..... . 0, .--,.._. ...„4:-. . .. __ ..i. ..... .r. S fir , -mai A's* ' N r ,, .-, ,,,v....::•41111°::::01P, . oma ,.l rtY je t . i .-; ilig,t,,,,,, 'I �^ . ,I/ ALL ENERGY 1264 Energy Lane St.Paul, MN 55108 www.allenergvsolar.com December 11, 2020 Dear City of Orono, Brian O'Connell lives at 3145 North Shore Drive in Orono. He is seeking to install a solar photovoltaic (PV) system on the roof of his residence. Minnesota §462.357, subd. 6, states that inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems is a practical difficulty. The combination of ground-mounted solar PV arrays not being permitted in Orono and the uniqueness of the property, limit access to direct sunlight on this property. In order to maximize production of the system on the property, All Energy Solar has designed a flush-mounted solar PV system to go on the South Western most facing roof plane of the residence and attached garage. The solar will be interconnected to a meter that is located at the residence. The array will not be visible from North Shore Drive. Our design meets the 2020 State of Minnesota Building code; however, it does not meet the City of Orono's requirements outlined in Sec. 78-1379 of Orono's Zoning Ordinance. Specifically Sub e, number 2, letter h which states, "Maximum area. In all residential zoning districts, the collector and mounting system of a roof-mounted solar energy system shall cover no more than 70 percent of the roof to which it is affixed". The current array design covers approximately 75.3% of the roof plane. This proposed system will not impact the character of the neighborhood and will not affect the welfare, safety or health of the community. The proposed system will help Brian O'Connell offset his electricity use and contribute to the State of Minnesota's clean energy goals. Sincerely, All Energy Solar Sec. 78-1379. -Alternative energy systems. (a) Scope. Section 78-1379 applies to alternative energy systems in all zoning districts. (b) Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of this section is to establish standards and procedures by which the installation and operation of alternative energy systems shall be regulated within the city. The city finds that it is in the public interest to encourage alternative energy systems that have a positive impact on energy production and conservation while not having an adverse impact on the community. (c) Definitions. For the purpose of section 78-1379, the following definitions shall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning. (1) General definitions. Accessory. A system designed as a secondary use to existing buildings or facilities, wherein the power generated is used primarily for on-site consumption. Alternative energy system. A ground source heat pump, wind energy conversion system, hydronic furnace or solar energy system. (3) Solar energy systems definitions. Building-integrated solar energy system. A solar energy system that is an integral part of a principal or accessory building, rather than a separate mechanical device, replacing or substituting for an architectural or structural component of the building including, but not limited to, photovoltaic or hot water solar systems contained within roofing materials, windows, skylights and awnings. Flush-mounted solar energy system. A roof-mounted system mounted directly abutting the roof. The pitch of the solar collector may exceed the pitch of the roof up to five percent but shall not be higher than ten inches above the roof. Passive solar energy system.A system that captures solar light or heat without transforming it to another form of energy or transferring the energy via a heat exchanger. Photovoltaic system. A solar energy system that converts solar energy directly into electricity. Solar energy system. A device or structural design feature, a substantial purpose of which is to provide daylight for interior lighting or provide for the collection, storage and distribution of solar energy for space heating or cooling, electricity generation or water heating. (3) Safety. Ground source heat pumps shall be certified by Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. and meet the requirements of the State Building Code. (5) Permits. A city building permit and any other required agency permits shall be obtained for any ground source heat pump system prior to installation. Borings for vertical systems are subject to approval from the Minnesota Department of Public Health. (e) Solar energy systems. (1) Zoning districts. Solar energy systems in accordance with the standards in this section are allowed as a permitted accessory use in all zoning districts. (2) Standards. a. Exemption. Passive or building-integrated solar energy systems are exempt from the requirements of this section and shall be regulated as any other building element. b. Roof-mounted systems allowed. The only solar energy systems allowed in the city are those that are roof-mounted, c. Height. Roof-mounted solar energy systems shall comply with the maximum height requirements in the applicable zoning district. d. Setbacks. Roof-mounted solar energy systems shall comply with all building setbacks in the applicable zoning district and shall not extend beyond the exterior perimeter of the building on which the system is mounted. e. Roof mounting. Roof-mounted solar collectors shall be mounted parallel to the surface of the roof and within three feet of the roof surface, unless manufacturer's documentation is provided indicating that collectors must be angled to provide optimum performance. No portion of the collectors or their mounting system shall extend above the peak or ridge height of a pitched roof. On a flat roof, collectors and their mounting systems shall not extend more than 5 feet above the roof surface. f. Easements. Solar energy systems shall not encroach on public drainage, utility, roadway or trail easements. g. Screening. Solar energy systems shall be screened from view to the extent possible without impacting their function. h. Maximum area. In all residential zoning districts, the collector and mounting system of a roof-mounted solar energy system shall cover no more than 70 percent of the roof to which it is affixed. i. Aesthetics. All solar panels shall be designed, installed, positioned and constructed of materials so as not to cause any glare or reflective sunlight onto neighboring properties or structures, nor toward vehicular traffic on land or on a lake, and so as to not obstruct views. Reflection angles from collector surfaces shall be oriented away from neighboring windows. Where necessary, screening may be required to address glare. j. Feeder lines. The electrical collection system shall be placed underground within the interior of each parcel. The collection system may be placed overhead near substations or points of interconnection to the electric grid. (3) Safety. a. Standards and certification. 1. Certification. Solar energy systems shall be certified by Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, the Solar Rating and Certification Corporation or other body as determined by the building official. The city reserves the right to deny a building permit for proposed solar energy systems deemed to have inadequate certification. 2. The equipment or device must be designed and constructed in compliance with all applicable building and electrical codes, and (if for co-generation) must be in compliance with all state and federal regulations regarding co-generation of energy. b. Utility connection. All grid connected systems shall have an agreement with the local utility prior to the issuance of a building permit. A visible external disconnect must be provided if required by the utility. (4) Abandonment. If the solar energy system remains nonfunctional or inoperative for a continuous period of one year, the system shall be deemed to be abandoned and shall constitute a public nuisance. The owner shall remove the abandoned system at their expense after a demolition permit has been obtained. Removal includes the entire structure including transmission equipment. (5) Permits. A building permit shall be obtained for any solar energy system prior to installation. 1 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2020 462.357 462.357 OFFICIAL CONTROLS: ZONING ORDINANCE. Subdivision 1.Authority for zoning.For the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare,a municipality may by ordinance regulate on the earth's surface,in the air space above the surface,and in subsurface areas,the location,height,width,bulk,type of foundation,number of stories, size of buildings and other structures, the percentage of lot which may be occupied,the size of yards and other open spaces,the density and distribution of population,the uses of buildings and structures for trade, industry, residence,recreation,public activities, or other purposes, and the uses of land for trade, industry, residence, recreation, agriculture, forestry, soil conservation, water supply conservation, conservation of shorelands, as defined in sections 103F.201 to 103F.221, access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems as defined in section 216C.06,flood control or other purposes,and may establish standards and procedures regulating such uses.To accomplish these purposes,official controls may include provision for purchase of development rights by the governing body in the form of conservation easements under chapter 84C in areas where the governing body considers preservation desirable and the transfer of development rights from those areas to areas the governing body considers more appropriate for development.No regulation may prohibit earth sheltered construction as defined in section 216C.06, subdivision 14,relocated residential buildings, or manufactured homes built in conformance with sections 327.31 to 327.35 that comply with all other zoning ordinances promulgated pursuant to this section. The regulations may divide the surface, above surface,and subsurface areas of the municipality into districts or zones of suitable numbers,shape,and area. The regulations shall be uniform for each class or kind of buildings, structures, or land and for each class or kind of use throughout such district, but the regulations in one district may differ from those in other districts. The ordinance embodying these regulations shall be known as the zoning ordinance and shall consist of text and maps. A city may by ordinance extend the application of its zoning regulations to unincorporated territory located within two miles of its limits in any direction, but not in a county or town which has adopted zoning regulations;provided that where two or more noncontiguous municipalities have boundaries less than four miles apart, each is authorized to control the zoning of land on its side of a line equidistant between the two noncontiguous municipalities unless a town or county in the affected area has adopted zoning regulations.Any city may thereafter enforce such regulations in the area to the same extent as if such property were situated within its corporate limits, until the county or town board adopts a comprehensive zoning regulation which includes the area. Subd. 1 a. Certain zoning ordinances.A municipality must not enact, amend, or enforce a zoning ordinance that has the effect of altering the existing density, lot-size requirements, or manufactured home setback requirements in any manufactured home park constructed before January 1, 1995,if the manufactured home park,when constructed,complied with the then existing density, lot-size and setback requirements. Subd. lb. Conditional uses.A manufactured home park, as defined in section 327.14, subdivision 3, is a conditional use in a zoning district that allows the construction or placement of a building used or intended to be used by two or more families. Subd. 1 c.Amortization prohibited.Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, a municipality must not enact, amend, or enforce an ordinance providing for the elimination or termination of a use by amortization which use was lawful at the time of its inception.This subdivision does not apply to adults-only bookstores,adults-only theaters,or similar adults-only businesses,as defined by ordinance. Subd. 1d. Nuisance. Subdivision lc does not prohibit a municipality from enforcing an ordinance providing for the prevention or abatement of nuisances, as defined in section 561.01, or eliminating a use determined to be a public nuisance,as defined in section 617.81,subdivision 2,paragraph(a),clauses(i)to (ix),without payment of compensation. Official Publication of the State of Minnesota Revisor of Statutes 462.357 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2020 2 Subd. 1e.Nonconformities. (a) Except as otherwise provided by law, any nonconformity, including the lawful use or occupation of land or premises existing at the time of the adoption of an additional control under this chapter, may be continued, including through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance, or improvement, but not including expansion,unless: (1)the nonconformity or occupancy is discontinued for a period of more than one year;or (2)any nonconforming use is destroyed by fire or other peril to the extent of greater than 50 percent of its estimated market value,as indicated in the records of the county assessor at the time of damage,and no building permit has been applied for within 180 days of when the property is damaged. In this case, a municipality may impose reasonable conditions upon a zoning or building permit in order to mitigate any newly created impact on adjacent property or water body.When a nonconforming structure in the shoreland district with less than 50 percent of the required setback from the water is destroyed by fire or other peril to greater than 50 percent of its estimated market value, as indicated in the records of the county assessor at the time of damage, the structure setback may be increased if practicable and reasonable conditions are placed upon a zoning or building permit to mitigate created impacts on the adjacent property or water body. (b)Any subsequent use or occupancy of the land or premises shall be a conforming use or occupancy. A municipality may, by ordinance, permit an expansion or impose upon nonconformities reasonable regulations to prevent and abate nuisances and to protect the public health,welfare,or safety.This subdivision does not prohibit a municipality from enforcing an ordinance that applies to adults-only bookstores,adults-only theaters,or similar adults-only businesses,as defined by ordinance. (c)Notwithstanding paragraph(a), a municipality shall regulate the repair, replacement,maintenance, improvement,or expansion of nonconforming uses and structures in floodplain areas to the extent necessary to maintain eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program and not increase flood damage potential or increase the degree of obstruction to flood flows in the floodway. (d)Paragraphs(d)to(j)apply to shoreland lots of record in the office of the county recorder on the date of adoption of local shoreland controls that do not meet the requirements for lot size or lot width. A municipality shall regulate the use of nonconforming lots of record and the repair,replacement,maintenance, improvement,or expansion of nonconforming uses and structures in shoreland areas according to paragraphs (d)to(j). (e)A nonconforming single lot of record located within a shoreland area may be allowed as a building site without variances from lot size requirements,provided that: (1)all structure and septic system setback distance 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 does not exceed 25 percent of the lot. (f) In a group of two or more contiguous lots of record under a common ownership, an individual lot must be considered as a separate parcel of land for the purpose of sale or development, if it meets the following requirements: (1) the lot must be at least 66 percent of the dimensional standard for lot width and lot size for the shoreland classification consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 6120; Official Publication of the State of Minnesota Revisor of Statutes 3 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2020 462.357 (2)the lot must be connected to a public sewer, if available,or must be suitable for the installation of a Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, and local government controls; (3)impervious surface coverage must not exceed 25 percent of each lot;and (4)development of the lot must be consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan. (g)A lot subject to paragraph(f)not meeting the requirements of paragraph(f)must be combined with the one or more contiguous lots so they equal one or more conforming lots as much as possible. (h)Notwithstanding paragraph(f),contiguous nonconforming lots of record in shoreland areas under a common ownership must be able to be sold or purchased individually if each lot contained a habitable residential dwelling at the time the lots came under common ownership and the lots are suitable for, or served by, a sewage treatment system consistent with the requirements of section 115.55 and Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080,or connected to a public sewer. (i)In evaluating all variances,zoning and building permit applications,or conditional use requests,the zoning authority shall require the property owner to address, when appropriate, storm water runoff management,reducing impervious surfaces,increasing setback,restoration of wetlands,vegetative buffers, sewage treatment and water supply capabilities,and other conservation-designed actions. (j)A portion of a conforming lot may be separated from an existing parcel as long as the remainder of the existing parcel meets the lot size and sewage treatment requirements of the zoning district for a new lot and the newly created parcel is combined with an adjacent parcel. Subd. 1 f. Substandard structures.Notwithstanding subdivision le,Minnesota Rules,parts 6105.0351 to 6105.0550, may allow for the continuation and improvement of substandard structures, as defined in Minnesota Rules,part 6105.0354, subpart 30, in the Lower Saint Croix National Scenic Riverway. Subd. 1 g. Feedlot zoning controls.(a)A municipality proposing to adopt a new feedlot zoning control or to amend an existing feedlot zoning control must notify the Pollution Control Agency and commissioner of agriculture at the beginning of the process, no later than the date notice is given of the first hearing proposing to adopt or amend a zoning control purporting to address feedlots. (b)Prior to final approval of a feedlot zoning control,the governing body of a municipality may submit a copy of the proposed zoning control to the Pollution Control Agency and to the commissioner of agriculture and request review, comment, and recommendations on the environmental and agricultural effects from specific provisions in the ordinance. (c)The agencies'response to the municipality may include: (1)any recommendations for improvements in the ordinance;and (2)the legal, social,economic, or scientific justification for each recommendation under clause(1). (d)At the request of the municipality's governing body,the municipality must prepare a report on the economic effects from specific provisions in the ordinance. Economic analysis must state whether the ordinance will affect the local economy and describe the kinds of businesses affected and the projected impact the proposal will have on those businesses.To assist the municipality,the commissioner of agriculture, in cooperation with the Department of Employment and Economic Development,must develop a template for measuring local economic effects and make it available to the municipality.The report must be submitted Official Publication of the State of Minnesota Revisor of Statutes 462.357 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2020 4 to the commissioners of employment and economic development and agriculture along with the proposed ordinance. (e)A local ordinance that contains a setback for new feedlots from existing residences must also provide for a new residence setback from existing feedlots located in areas zoned agricultural at the same distances and conditions specified in the setback for new feedlots, unless the new residence is built to replace an existing residence. A municipality may grant a variance from this requirement under section 462.358, subdivision 6. Subd. lh. Comprehensive plans in greater Minnesota; open spaces. When adopting or updating a comprehensive plan in a municipality located within a county that is not a greater than 80 percent area, as defined in section 103G.005, subdivision 10b, and that is located outside the metropolitan area, as defined by section 473.121, subdivision 2, the municipality shall consider adopting goals and objectives for the preservation of agricultural, forest, wildlife, and open space land and the minimization of development in sensitive shoreland areas. Within three years of updating the comprehensive plan, the municipality shall consider adopting ordinances as part of the municipality's official controls that encourage the implementation of the goals and objectives. Subd. 1 i.Airport safety zones on zoning maps.Airport safety zones must be included on maps that illustrate boundaries of zoning districts and that are adopted as official controls. Subd.2. General requirements. (a)At any time after the adoption of a land use plan for the municipality, the planning agency,for the purpose of carrying out the policies and goals of the land use plan,may prepare a proposed zoning ordinance and submit it to the governing body with its recommendations for adoption. (b) Subject to the requirements of subdivisions 3,4, and 5, the governing body may adopt and amend a zoning ordinance by a majority vote of all its members. The adoption or amendment of any portion of a zoning ordinance which changes all or part of the existing classification of a zoning district from residential to either commercial or industrial requires a two-thirds majority vote of all members of the governing body. (c) The land use plan must provide guidelines for the timing and sequence of the adoption of official controls to ensure planned, orderly, and staged development and redevelopment consistent with the land use plan. Subd. 3. Public hearings.No zoning ordinance or amendment thereto shall be adopted until a public hearing has been held thereon by the planning agency or by the governing body.A notice of the time,place and purpose of the hearing shall be published in the official newspaper of the municipality at least ten days prior to the day of the hearing. When an amendment involves changes in district boundaries affecting an area of five acres or less, a similar notice shall be mailed at least ten days before the day of the hearing to each owner of affected property and property situated wholly or partly within 350 feet of the property to which the amendment relates. For the purpose of giving mailed notice,the person responsible for mailing the notice may use any appropriate records to determine the names and addresses of owners.A copy of the notice and a list of the owners and addresses to which the notice was sent shall be attested to by the responsible person and shall be made a part of the records of the proceedings. The failure to give mailed notice to individual property owners, or defects in the notice shall not invalidate the proceedings, provided a bona fide attempt to comply with this subdivision has been made. Subd. 4.Amendments.An amendment to a zoning ordinance may be initiated by the governing body, the planning agency, or by petition of affected property owners as defined in the zoning ordinance. An amendment not initiated by the planning agency shall be referred to the planning agency,if there is one,for study and report and may not be acted upon by the governing body until it has received the recommendation Official Publication of the State of Minnesota Revisor of Statutes 5 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2020 462.357 of the planning agency on the proposed amendment or until 60 days have elapsed from the date of reference of the amendment without a report by the planning agency. Subd. 5. Amendment; certain cities of the first class. The provisions of this subdivision apply to the adoption or amendment of any portion of a zoning ordinance which changes all or part of the existing classification of a zoning district from residential to either commercial or industrial of a property located in a city of the first class, except a city of the first class in which a different process is provided through the operation of the city's home rule charter.In a city to which this subdivision applies,amendments to a zoning ordinance shall be made in conformance with this section but only after there shall have been filed in the office of the city clerk a written consent of the owners of two-thirds of the several descriptions of real estate situate within 100 feet of the total contiguous descriptions of real estate held by the same owner or any party purchasing any such contiguous property within one year preceding the request, and after the affirmative vote in favor thereof by a majority of the members of the governing body of any such city. The governing body of such city may, by a two-thirds vote of its members, after hearing, adopt a new zoning ordinance without such written consent whenever the planning commission or planning board of such city shall have made a survey of the whole area of the city or of an area of not less than 40 acres, within which the new ordinance or the amendments or alterations of the existing ordinance would take effect when adopted, and shall have considered whether the number of descriptions of real estate affected by such changes and alterations renders the obtaining of such written consent impractical, and such planning commission or planning board shall report in writing as to whether in its opinion the proposals of the governing body in any case are reasonably related to the overall needs of the community,to existing land use, or to a plan for future land use,and shall have conducted a public hearing on such proposed ordinance,changes or alterations, of which hearing published notice shall have been given in a daily newspaper of general circulation at least once each week for three successive weeks prior to such hearing, which notice shall state the time, place and purpose of such hearing, and shall have reported to the governing body of the city its findings and recommendations in writing. Subd. 6.Appeals and adjustments.Appeals to the board of appeals and adjustments may be taken by any affected person upon compliance with any reasonable conditions imposed by the zoning ordinance.The board of appeals and adjustments has the following powers with respect to the zoning ordinance: (1)To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order,requirement,decision, or determination made by an administrative officer in the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. (2)To hear requests for variances from the requirements of the zoning ordinance including restrictions placed on nonconformities. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance,means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.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 section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with the ordinance.The board of appeals and adjustments or the governing body as the case may be,may not permit as a variance any use that is not allowed under the zoning ordinance for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.The board or governing body as the case may be,may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. The board or governing body as the Official Publication of the State of Minnesota Revisor of Statutes 462.357 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2020 6 case may be may impose conditions in the granting of variances.A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. Subd. 6a. Normal residential surroundings for persons with disabilities.It is the policy of this state that persons with disabilities should not be excluded by municipal zoning ordinances or other land use regulations from the benefits of normal residential surroundings. For purposes of subdivisions 6a through 9, "person"has the meaning given in section 245A.02, subdivision 11. Subd. 7. Permitted single family use.A state licensed residential facility or a housing with services establishment registered under chapter 144D serving six or fewer persons,a licensed day care facility serving 12 or fewer persons,and a group family day care facility licensed under Minnesota Rules,parts 9502.0315 to 9502.0445 to serve 14 or fewer children shall be considered a permitted single family residential use of property for the purposes of zoning, except that a residential facility whose primary purpose is to treat juveniles who have violated criminal statutes relating to sex offenses or have been adjudicated delinquent on the basis of conduct in violation of criminal statutes relating to sex offenses shall not be considered a permitted use. Subd. 8. Permitted multifamily use.Except as otherwise provided in subdivision 7 or in any town, municipal or county zoning regulation as authorized by this subdivision,a state licensed residential facility serving from 7 through 16 persons or a licensed day care facility serving from 13 through 16 persons shall be considered a permitted multifamily residential use of property for purposes of zoning. A township, municipal or county zoning authority may require a conditional use or special use permit in order to assure proper maintenance and operation of a facility,provided that no conditions shall be imposed on the facility which are more restrictive than those imposed on other conditional uses or special uses of residential property in the same zones, unless the additional conditions are necessary to protect the health and safety of the residents of the residential facility. Nothing herein shall be construed to exclude or prohibit residential or day care facilities from single family zones if otherwise permitted by a local zoning regulation. Subd. 9.Development goals and objectives.In adopting official controls after July 1, 2008, in a municipality outside the metropolitan area, as defined by section 473.121, subdivision 2, the municipality shall consider restricting new residential,commercial,and industrial development so that the new development takes place in areas subject to the following goals and objectives: (1)minimizing the fragmentation and development of agricultural,forest,wildlife,and open space lands, including consideration of appropriate minimum lot sizes; (2)minimizing further development in sensitive shoreland areas; (3) minimizing development near wildlife management areas, scientific and natural areas, and nature centers; (4)encouraging land uses in airport safety zones that are compatible with the safe operation of the airport and the safety of people in the vicinity of the airport; (5) identification of areas of preference for higher density, including consideration of existing and necessary water and wastewater services,infrastructure,other services,and to the extent feasible,encouraging full development of areas previously zoned for nonagricultural uses; (6) encouraging development close to places of employment, shopping centers, schools, mass transit, and other public and private service centers; (7) identification of areas where other developments are appropriate;and Official Publication of the State of Minnesota Revisor of Statutes 7 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2020 462.357 (8)other goals and objectives a municipality may identify. History: 1965 c 670 s 7; 1969 c 259 s 1; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7; 1973 c 379 s 4; 1973 c 539 s 1; 1973 c 559 s 1,2; 1975 c 60 s 2; 1978 c 786 s 14,15; Ex1979 c 2 s 42,43; 1981 c 356 s 248; 1982 c 490 s 2; 1982 c 507 s 22; 1984 c 617 s 6-8; 1985 c 62 s 3; 1985 c 194 s 23; 1986 c 444; 1987 c 333 s 22; 1989 c 82 s 2; 1990 c 391 art 8 s 47; 1990 c 568 art 2 s 66,67; 1994 c 473 s 3; 1995 c 224 s 95; 1997 c 113 s 20; 1997 c 200 art 4 s 5; 1997 c 202 art 4 s 11; 1997 c 216 s 138; 1999 c 96 s 3,4; 1999 c 211 s 1; 2001 c 174 s 1; 2001 c 207 s 13,14;2002 c 366 s 6;2004 c 258 s 2;2005 c 56 s 1; 1 Sp2005 c 1 art 1 s 92;art 2 s 146;2007 c 140 art 12 s 14;2008 c 297 art 1 s 60,61; 2009 c 149 s 3; 2011 c 19 s 2; 1Sp2019 c 3 art 3 s 110,111 Official Publication of the State of Minnesota Revisor of Statutes Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map Date: 12/11/2020 30441 354a • 3f.. 3090, 3;170 3120 , 1i&e /3166 31E0 20 CI 3595 q� q..' .14, ..i�l CI' 74 �:' :$ 3'f,5 otale 31'5 fab51 1131 1135 33 3`75 3105 71 lags 3115 3155 nl 1r 4410 14E0 ti^+ 15(38 Buffer Size: 500 0 50 100 200 Feet Map Comments: LLIIIIIII 3145 North Shore Dr. This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (i)is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (ii) is notsuitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes.Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage,injury or loss resulting from this data For more information,contact Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South,Minneapolis,MN 55487 lgis.info@hennepin.us RUN DATE:12/11/2020 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) PAGE:1 38 08-117-23 41 0001 38 09-117-23 32 0012 38 09-117-23 33 0004 SCOTT FALKUM/NATALIA FALKUM JAMES A DAHL HOWARD R ALTON III 3200 NORTH SHORE DR 3190 NORTH SHORE DR 1480 BOHNS POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 SCOTT FALKUM/NATALIA FALKUM JAMES A DAHL HOWARD R ALTON III 3200 NORTH SHORE DR 3190 NORTH SHORE DR 1480 BOHNS POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 41 0002 38 09-117-23 32 0013 38 09-117-23 33 0009 MARK A&KRISTIN M FINNEY THOMAS K CONNELLY M&C RUSSIN 3210 NORTH SHORE DR 3115 NORTH SHORE DR 3175 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 MARK FINNEY THOMAS K CONNELLY MICHAEL&CATHERINE RUSSIN KRIS FINNEY 3115 NORTH SHORE DR 3175 NORTH SHORE DR 3210 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 41 0003 38 09-117-23 32 0014 38 09-117-23 33 0013 ROBERT G&JANET L LABATT MICHAEL R SIME B P O'CONNELK/L M RASUSSEN 3202 NORTH SHORE DR 3095 NORTH SHORE DR 3145 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ROBERT&JANET LABATT MICHAEL R SIME BRIAN P O'CONNELL 3202 NORTH SHORE DR 3095 NORTHSHORE DR LYNNE M RASMUSSEN WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 3145 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55391 38 08-117-23 44 0006 38 09-117-23 32 0015 38 09-117-23 33 0015 GREGORY HUGH PERRILL PAUL A OLSON/MARTHANN OLSON H B COBURN&RANDI H MORITZ 3220 BOHNS POINT LA 3085 NORTH SHORE DR 1406 BOHNS POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 GREGORY HUGH PERRILL PAUL ALLEN OLSON HUTCHINS B COBURN 3220 BOHNS POINT LA MARTHANN OLSON RAND]HOLLYN MORITZ WAYZATA MN 55391 3085 NORTH SHORE DR 1406 BOHNS POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0006 38 09-117-23 32 0016 38 09-117-23 33 0016 D F MCGLYNN REV TRUST ET AL T H FRAHM&M K FRAHM TRUMAN 2016 SC6 TITLE TRUST 3090 NORTH SHORE DR 3105 NORTH SHORE DR 3185 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 DANIEL J MCGLYNN THOMAS H&MICHELE K FRAHM U S BANK N A 13841 WILLISTON WAY 3105 NORTH SHORE DR C/O FAY SERV LLC NAPLES FL 34119-0920 WAYZATA MN 55391 1601 LBJ FREEWAY#150 FARMERS BRANCH TX 75234 38 09-117-23 32 0007 38 09-117-23 32 0018 RICHARD A BORN&TRACEY BORN KELLY J MARX/MELODEE S MARX 3120 NORTH SHORE DR 3135 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 RICHARD A BORN&TRACEY BORN KELLY J&MELODEE S MARX 3120 NORTH SHORE DR 1 WEBSTER PL ORONO MN 55391 HOPKINS MN 55305 38 09-117-23 32 0008 38 09-117-23 32 0020 M S WALLACE&D D WALLACE REARDON PROPERTIES LLC 3160 NORTH SHORE DR 3070 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 MICHAEL S&DONNA D WALLACE REARDON PROPERTIES LLC 3160 NORTH SHORE DR 3080 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0009 38 09-117-23 33 0001 CASEY CAPITAL VI LLC J L&P MANDEL 3180 NORTH SHORE DR 3155 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 CASEY CAPITAL VI LLC J L MANDEL&P MANDEL 1161 WAYZATA BLVD E#302 3155 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 32 0010 38 09-117-23 33 0002 MICHAEL&NATALIE J N JONES WAGENER PROPERTIES LLC 3186 NORTH SHORE DR 3165 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 MICHAEL&NATELE J N JONES WAGENER PROPERTIES LLC 3186 NORTH SHORE DR 2605 W WAYZATA BLVD WAYZATA MN 55391 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 09-117-23 32 0011 38 09-117-23 33 0003 M RUCINSKI&H RUCINSKI MAURICE J WEGENER TRUSTEE 3188 NORTH SHORE DR 1420 BOHNS POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 MICHAEL RUCINSKI MAURICE J WAGENER HOLLY RUCINSKI 1420 BOHNS POINT RD 3188 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 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. Item 2 From: Brian 0"Connell To: Jeremy Barnhart Subject: Fwd:Solar Variance Date: Tuesday,January 19,2021 2:41:48 PM Jeremy, Per our discussion,the email below is from my neighbor next to the solar array supporting the variance. Please include this in the packet for tonight. See you at the meeting. Thanks, Brian O'Connell 952-221-3153 Sent from Brian's iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Brian O'Connell <BPOC62@gmail.com> Date: January 19, 2021 at 2:36:58 PM CST To: Jim Mandel <jim.mandel@orangehook.com> Subject: Re: Solar Variance Thanks so much Jim! Sent from Brian's iPhone On Jan 19, 2021, at 2:12 PM, Jim Mandel <jim.mandel@orangehook.com>wrote: To: Orono Planning Commission and City Council From: Jim Mandel RE: Solar Variance at 3145 Northshore Drive DA: January 19, 2021 Dear sirs: I have reviewed the solar plan and variance requested by my neighbor, Brian O'Connell, and have no objections to it. Since I am unable to attend any variance meetings, please consider this discourse my acquiescence to the project as presented. Thank you, Jim Mandel 3155 Northshore Drive Orono, MN 55391 IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail communication may contain confidential or legally privileged information and is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive the confidential information it may contain. Please do not read, copy, forward or store this message unless you are an intended recipient of it. Any review, use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication by other than the intended recipient or that person's agent is strictly prohibited pursuant to the Electronic Communication Privacy Act,18 USCA 2510. If you have received this message in error,please notify the sender by forwarding it by email to the sender and then delete it completely from your computer system. Date Application Received:12/14/2020 Date Application Considered as Complete:12/16/2020 sLOAO 60-Day Review Period Expires: 02/15/2021 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members y Ron Olson, Interim City Administrator `°� "IkES HO°' From: Laura Oakden, Planner Date: January 19, 2021 Subject: LA20-000076, Chris Moe, 2425 Thoroughbred Lane, Conditional Use Permit, Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow plumbing of a bath/shower in an oversized accessory building. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. Background The applicant wishes to install full bathroom facilities in roughly a 1,500 square foot accessory building with a garage on their property which includes a recreational space. A conditional use permit is required due to the proposed shower. Applicable Regulations: Plumbing in the Accessory Building CUP (Section 78-328(7) &78-1434) The proposed oversized accessory building, a detached garage with recreation space, is conforming to the ordinance,the applicant's request to install a bathroom with full bathing facilities requires a CUP. The property is 2.71 acres in area,allowing a total of 2,400 square feet in accessory building. The property currently does not have any other accessory buildings. Applicable Regulation:Conditional Use Permit(Section 78-916) The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council may grant a Conditional Use Permit(CUP) as the use permit was applied for or in modified form. On the basis of the application and the evidence submitted,the city must find that the proposed use at the proposed location is or will be: 1) Consistent with the community management plan;The proposed use is residential in nature and residential use is consistent with the Community Management Plan guiding for this neighborhood. 2) Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as required by article V, division 3 of the City Code; The proposed accessory building improvement including the plumbing fixtures are compliant with the zoning ordinance. 3) Adequately served by police,fire, roads, and stormwater management;The proposed use will be adequately served by existing services and facilities. LA20-000076 January 19,2021 Page 2 of 3 4) Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system.The property is served by septic and well. 5) Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; This criterion is met. 6) Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is planned to be used in the future; The proposed accessory building with a garage and entertaining space is residential in character and its use is expected to be compatible with the surrounding area. 7) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; The accessory building including plumbing is residential in visual character and is expected to be compatible with the house on the property and the surrounding area. 8) Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; The architectural styling of the proposed accessory building is expected to be residential-looking in character and consistent with that of the principal structure on the Property. 9) Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area or have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses; The use of the accessory building with entertaining space which includes plumbing is not expected to have any adverse impacts. No information has been presented to indicate such. 10) Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and activities likely to disturb surrounding uses; The accessory building will be situated in a conforming location. Screening is not appropriate. 11) Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise,glare,vibration,odors,fumes, dust, electrical interference,general unsightliness, or other means; The proposed accessory building with plumbing is not expected to cause any of these undesirable impacts. 12) Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties,traffic congestion, or unsafe access; It is anticipated that the proposed building will not generate any of these undesirable issues. 13) Designed to take into account the natural,scenic,and historic features of the area and to minimize environmental impact; The proposed building has been visually designed to conform to the residence on the property,and will not have a negative environmental impact. 14) All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; Applicants are hereby advised of this requirement; and 15) Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare.This criterion is met. A CUP may be granted subject to such conditions as the Council may prescribe. Further approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met: 1. The council finds that the proposed use of the accessory building with a shower will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. LA20-000076 January 19,2021 Page 3 of 3 2. The council finds that the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the applicants' intended use of the accessory building. 3. The accessory building is conforming in location,size and height. 4. The property owner agrees to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that the accessory building will not be: a. Used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the city or if allowed by this Code. b. Used as a dwelling unless a guest house conditional use permit is obtained. c. Rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. Additionally, a CUP shall remain in effect as long as the conditions imposed by the City Council are observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the city from enacting or amending official controls to change the status of conditional uses. Public Comments The applicant has submitted a letter of support from the abutting neighbor. Issues for Consideration 1. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval conditioned upon the property owners' agreement to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property addressing the plumbing and the status as an oversized accessory building, providing that the accessory building will not be: 1. Used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the city or if allowed by this Code. 2. Used as a dwelling unless a guest house conditional use permit is obtained. 3. Rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. 4. Regarding future subdivision of the property: a. No future subdivision will be approved that places the oversized accessory building within a lot that has no principal building b. If the property is subdivided,the oversized accessory building and principal building will be located together within a lot that meets the minimum lot area requirement for the given size of the oversized accessory building. c. In subdivision approval,the setback required for the oversized accessory building shall remain. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Proposed Survey Exhibit C. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit D. Narrative Exhibit E. Neighbor Signature Letter Exhibit F. Property Owners List and Map Letter View Exhibit A Land Use Application Summary LA20-000076 Application Date: 12/14/2020 Address: 2425 Thoroughbred LN Orono, MN 55356 Parcel Number: 0411723110018 Land Use Number: LA20-000076 Application Submitted By: Property Owner Owner: Name: COLIN M DAVIE Address: JULIE M DAVIE 2425 THOROUGHBRED LA LONG LAKE, MN 55356 Applicant: Name: Chris Moe Company: Address: 2425 Thoroughbred Ln Orono, MN 55356 cmoe@hjdevelopment.com Contact Information: Associated Contact: Max Windmiller max@windmillerds.com Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Project Description: Addition of a poolhouse Land Use Application Type: Amendmend Application ❑ Appeal of Admin Decision 0 Concept Application 0 Conditional Use Permit 0 Site Plan Application Subdivision Application 0 Subdivision Exception 0 Vacation Application 0 Variance Application 0 Applicant Signature: L_ file:///C/Users/loakden/Downloads/Land%20Use%20Application%20Summary.htm[1/14/2021 12:57:39 PM] SIN i 95f55 NIN'ONOHO NV'I U 1 HOflONOi SZVZ ,U I41n � � NI � QI5 � 2I � OL�IHp 8l'46Z M ;17-6;01-00 S c.,._,/,-- o o¢z r \ mg \ aN 01 K \\ 2L, \ Uw \\ -3:5 \ \ o� \ J�b��Q,�a`sL$r q. `O aD \\ `�J�btil L2b.J W s % - �L - \\� -I Z I �;\\ J \ rum / Wo M m,In T ---------- ": .bu -- - -.i I \\ CC so � J . i I L \ If i O ._.11 I / / ' axe •p 1 N II I II -1-- I / i ' \ I \tiI'• 1112 •,� I 1 // / �\\.. \NENy m ! Is oo o .I �` r / iz a' 11 1i J/ 1 i \\ II En 1 .N 11 III X 1 / i i IL N\ a II b? f 11 Z 0 0 I I M3 I\.`�.\ I •1. jam••I l^�aL-JyI I j W 11 S3O.F1 17111 / �' \�,'�"�•. __________.____-__ �0 11 Ol �s:1 Gs / / g — 'l IQm 9 1,1111 1 I ft / r/ I \ 't_ '1°' �0 ` •-p., s .45 goi 1 I 11 o Is •.• I 1 I I 11 11 \\ I s ••:• It n a wo — __\\ __ ... Z 6C'6LZ , _ apish\ fna4—nUN ` ---___ 3 .0C,SC.V0 N "« O , §G) LE 51 -43 30-0 I o __ , _i__ __ _ _ __ _____ __ _F—_ 0 I m 4 L 70' _ _ 4 i I— I 1--- 7 .h e-5' 4'\2-6' 3'-6' 2 1-2 3'-3' n \ 8'6. r c T - � ` - Z i / -4 _ C i k U f 1 it1 a 1 3E / 1 0 c I I III // 3is 0� " ¢ d; i r —s. 4 L_c_ J 13'-0' 3-0' s ii / 0-0' 22-0' 10'-0' m N ? O Q O O C7 O O V 0) p \ oz • a MOE RESIDENCE o ��j�� C 2425 THOROUGHBRED LANE ORONO, MN 55356 I ( IJ O -,m n T. o O Z L: C C C kh U - I_ EZEk MIZa iV i , 1 1 t 4-o° t 7 ve• or 1:_q, g ; 0 rl`a N d MOE RESIDENCE pN �I,�I 0 z2425 THOROUGHBRED LANE ORONO, MN 55356 2 (n,. o_ -.m II D o Z -1?-,-.3 41'-=%"g l'i'0 I p I O Imo m I 1 4-0' ` 9-1 118' 11 D ' 1 1 8-0' 4 '^\ • • 'U".I FALTIANII—_ _ :...•I.. (�II -------- 124111P —_— I,,11 Pi 1:sew. malp.ror . ,7II r N 4 Mit-' N o d MOE RESIDENCE .,,,. Zr—+ › 2425 THOROUGHBRED LANE ORONO, MN 55356 f o (�J' O ;LI o O 1-03' -t',� mo g ag lye I Ii 0-11/Er • z i IIil 1— 111111 10-0' 11'.1 UT I° to Is ;! YAI m h7 .J z \ MOE RESIDENCE 0,, N 2425 THOROUGHBRED LANE ORONO, MN 55356 �Vit O m II Z t° 1-79; is g 0 0 Ig I� m I I Jr 4-0' 11'-I I/B' { J�- fi=—_ -- — — 2 LIE f g _ _ _ _ maticor - ar 4-0• 111 Y-I I/O Ip m� N MOE RESIDENCE p oh*. O• („k) 2425 THOROUGHBRED LANE ORONO, MN 55356 -o ��♦ Exhibit D LA20-000076 Subject: 2425 Thoroughbred Ln Poolhouse To Whom It May Concern Chris and Ashley Moe are seeking a conditional use permit to construct an accessory structure on their property located at 2425 Thoroughbred Ln in Orono. The structure will be used as a pool house for entertaining friends and family and contain storage space as well. Elevations have been shared with city staff. The exterior materials will match that of the existing home on site that just got a full exterior remodel. We are looking to start construction this spring. Best Regards Chris and Ashley Moe Exhibit E LA20-000076 December 7th2020 Jim and Carrie Lundberg 2485 Thoroughbred Ln Orono, MN 55356 Hello Carrie and Jim I hope you're staying well so far this holiday season. What a wild year its been....)think we're all looking forward to having 2020 in the rearview mirror! We're reaching out to share with you our plans for our backyard that we're looking to start work on this coming spring.(We would have stopped by in person but figured a letter or email would be better due to Covid 19 concerns) The kids are very excited to have a great gathering place for their friends and we're excited to be able to entertain friends,family, and neighbors outdoors for years to come. We've taken meaningful measures to minimize the impact the plans will have on you as our closest neighbors. The structure is set back 50'from the property line vs.the standard 30'setback city ordinances typically call for. Additionally,we plan to add a row of screening trees which will continue the line of trees that currently runs between our houses. Between the trees and the poolhouse any impact from the activities generated from those at the pool should be greatly mitigated. The structure itself will having matching materials to those used in the exterior remodel of our home that was recently completed to ensure a uniform and aesthetically pleasing look. We're currently going thru the city approval process as part of that process the city is looking for an acknowledgement that we have alerted our neighbors of the plans. By signing this document you are not indicating support of the plans, but instead merely acknowledging that we've alerted you of our plans. If you would be willing to show your support via an email to Melanie Curtis(the planner we are working with at the city—mcurtis@ci.orono.us)that would be appreciated but obviously not required. We're happy to talk thru any questions or concerns you may have at your convenience. Thank You! Chris&Ashley Moe Acknowledged By: [_20..-r rr ./ i L r�6 e cz Date: lot-`d- �0 l December 8, 2020 Chris&Ashley, The plans for your backyard pool look great! We appreciate the measures you have outlined to protect our sightlines in particular the additional screening trees between our homes. This will be important to us when we sell our house. All the best, Jim &Carrie Lundberg Exhibit F RUN DATE:12/14/2020 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OV LA20-000076 38 03-117-23 22 0005 38 04-117-23 11 0004 38 04-117-23 110021 JOHN P THYSELL LIVING TRUST SHAUN WINKLER/STACIA WINKLER A J CHAVEZ/MICHELLE H CHAVEZ 2375 LONGVIEW CIR 2450 COUNTRYSIDE DR 2575 THOROUGHBRED LA ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 JOHN P THYSELL SHAUN WINKLER ANTHONY J CHAVEZ 2375 LONGVIEW CIR STACIA WINKLER MICHELLE H CHAVEZ LONG LAKE MN 55356 2450 COUNTRYSIDE DR 2575 THOROUGHBRED LA LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 03-117-23 22 0010 38 04-117-23 11 0005 38 04-117-23 11 0023 ANNE P BOWMAN ET AL TRSTES J E FULLERTON&A M MOLDZIO ORONO LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 10 WILLOW DR S 2435 COUNTRYSIDE DR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 00000 ANNE P BOWMAN JOHN E FULLERTON TONY EIDEN COMPANY 10 WILLOW DR S ANDRIA M MOLDZIO 4100 BERKSHIRE LA LONG LAKE MN 55356 2435 COUNTRYSIDE DR PLYMOUTH MN 55446 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 03-117-23 22 0013 38 04-117-23 110006 38 04-117-23 110024 D&L BLAUER B A HITE&H E HITE JR TRST A G NAFSTAD&K L NAFSTAD 2380 DEVIN LA 2475 COUNTRYSIDE DR 145 MANOR CIR ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 DARRELL W BLAUER H EUGENE&BARBARA A HITE JR ADAM G NAFSTAD 2380 DEVIN LA 2475 COUNTRYSIDE DR KRISTIN L NAFSTAD LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 145 MANOR CIR LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 03-117-23 22 0014 38 04-117-23 I1 0007 38 04-117-23 11 0025 LOUIS J SONSTEGARD ET AL C DE LANGE&L DE LANGE NEIL A HEINEN&S T HEINEN 2320 DEVIN LA 2515 COUNTRYSIDE DR 130 MANOR CIR ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 LOUIS J&LOIS J SONSTEGARD CONSTANCE DE LANGE NEIL A HEINEN 2320 DEVIN LA LEON DE LANGE SIGRID T HEINEN LONG LAKE MN 55356 2515 COUNTRYSIDE DR 130 MANOR CIR LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 03-117-23 22 0015 38 04-117-23 110013 38 33-118-23 44 0019 KELLEY&KELLEY INC BRADLEY HANSEN RICHARD W WAGMAN 2325 WATERTOWN RD 2430 THOROUGHBRED LA 2480 WATERTOWN RD ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 KELLEY&KELLEY INC BRADLEY HANSEN RICHARD W WAGMAN 2325 WATERTOWN RD 2430 THOROUGHBRED LA 35 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 03-117-23 22 0019 38 04-117-23 110014 38 33-118-23 44 0028 D J&T A PORTMANN TRUSTEES J G COLIANNI&T G COLIANNI ADAM HARWOOD&KARA JOHNSON 2315 DEVIN LA 2460 THOROUGHBRED LA 2440 WATERTOWN RD ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 DOUGLAS J&TAMRA A PORTMANN JOSEPH G COLIANNI ADAM HARWOOD&KARA JOHNSON 2315 DEVIN LANE TAMMI G COLIANNI 2440 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 2460 THOROUGHBRED LA LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 03-117-23 22 0020 38 04-117-23 11 0015 38 33-118-23 44 0029 C&R CARODENUTO E L DELATTRE&M F DELATTRE G KENWORTHY&T KENWORTHY 2375 DEVIN LA 2520 THOROUGHBRED LA 2420 WATERTOWN RD ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 C&R CARODENUTO ERIC L&MONICA F DELATTRE GEORGE KENWORTHY 2375 DEVIN LA 2520 THOROUGHBRED LA TERRI KENWORTHY LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 2420 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 03-117-23 22 0023 38 04-117-23 11 0018 38 33-118-23 44 0030 THE NURSERY HOMEOWNERS ASSOC CHRISTOPHER MOE&ASHLEY MOE C F NELSON&N K GIESE 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 2425 THOROUGHBRED LA 2400 WATERTOWN RD ORONO MN 00000 ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 NURSERY HOMEOWNERS ASSOC CHRISTOPHER S MOE CAROLYN F NELSON DEVIN LANE ASHLEY E MOE 2400 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 2425 THOROUGHBRED LA LONG LAKE MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 38 03-117-23 22 0024 38 04-117-23 11 0019 38 33-118-23 44 0035 STEPHANIE M DOERING REV TR J LUNDBERG&C A LUNDBERG L C ACOSTA&V P ACOSTA 2325 LONGVIEW CIR 2485 THOROUGHBRED LA 40 TRUFFULA TR ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 STEPHANIE M DOERING JAMES LUNDBERG LUIS C&VERONICA P ACOSTA 2325 LONGVIEW CIR 2485 THOROUGHBRED LA 40 TRUFFULA TR ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 04-117-23 11 0003 38 04-117-23 11 0020 38 34-118-23 33 0080 ROSS NATHANSON BRADLEY E&MARY J BAKKEN STEPHEN GAGNE/STACEY WILSON 2420 COUNTRYSIDE DR 2525 THOROUGHBRED LA 2380 WATERTOWN RD ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 ORONO MN 55356 ROSS NATHANSON BRADLEY E&MARY J BAKKEN STEPHEN E GAGNE P O BOX 189 2525 THOROUGHBRED LA STACEY LYNN WILSON LONG LAKE MN 55356-0189 LONG LAKE MN 55356 2380 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 RUN DATE:12/14/2020 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) PAGE:2 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: 12/14/2020 L: as, 9. 2_ a-. 40 2350 234(5 a "3' . .11''' : lall '—'4,-...„..%. - 'Watertowfn Rd 1-. •Watown+ I f it 4 _._L ,,s, 240 'w' id?i 3, D 'lb 3 ,ra, 1\ ;rai'' 23 ta; trpP [Sf - ,......_ - i F ......... ...... .�.._ :;Devin i 2375 , 145 1450 232 1311 1 as• ddd rt n ?r, Countryside-Dr , -• - �` • , ...•., 2515 2475 2435 2555 Buffer Size: 500 0 50 100 200 Feet Map Comments: I i ( ) I ( i l I 2425 Thoroughbread Lane This data () is furnished 'AS IS with no representation as to completeness or accuracy;(ii)is furnished with no warranty of any krrd; and (ii) is notsuitable for legal, engneering or surveying purposes.Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage,injury or loss resulting from this data For more information,contact Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South,Minneapolis,MN 55487/gis.info@h en nepin.us Date Application Received: 12/16/2020 Date Application Considered as Complete:12/30/2020 1OA4 60-Day Review Period Expires: 02/29/2021 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members .t1 ` Ron Olson, Interim City Administrator C� 'kESH00" From: Laura Oakden, Planner Date: January 19, 2021 Subject: LA20-000077, Premium Construction LLC,Variance Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting an average lakeshore setback variance to allow a wood burning chimney on a new home. Staff Recommendation: Staff finds the practical difficulties are not met. The Planning Commission should determine if the average lakeshore setback variance is supported by practical difficulty and make a recommendation. Background The applicant is asking for an average lakeshore setback to allow for a chimney for a wood burning fireplace to be constructed lakeward of the average lakeshore setback along the north side of the new home. This property received an average lakeshore setback variance and hardcover variance in 2019 (LA19-000048)to construct a new home. At that time a chimney was anticipated on the south side of the property behind the average lakeshore setback. The applicant has received a building permit for a new home (RPS20-000142)with the chimney removed from the plans,which meet the approved variances and city codes. Practical Difficulties Analysis Applicant Submittal Information:The applicant has identified the extreme average lakeshore setback 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 variances previously granted for the property allow for construction of a new home and allows for a reasonable use of the property. A chimney would act as an amenity and not necessary to the use of the property for a single family home. The applicant has shown they can meet the city code by submitting plans and receiving a new house building permit. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-350-Setbacks: DISTRICT LR-1C Required New House Permit Street 30' 40' Side 7.8' (North) 14' LA20-000077 January 19,2021 Page 2 of 4 Side 7.8' (South) 8' Lakeshore 75' 141' Average Lakeshore Not Met with New Proposed Chimney Location Applicable Regulations: Variance(78-1279) Average Lakeshore Setback. No principal or accessory building shall be located closer to the Ordinary High Water Line (OHWL)than the average distance from the shoreline of existing principal buildings on adjacent lots;This does not apply to patios and other accessory structures less than 42 inches above existing grade, and/or stairways, lifts, landings, lockboxes,flagpoles and pump houses. Further,the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to tributaries.The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the principal buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. The applicant is proposing to construct a chimney for a wood burning fireplace with the new home project. The chimney will be forward of the average lakeshore setback but portions of the approved new home will sit closer to the OHWL than the proposed chimney location. The chimney is proposed to be taller than 42 inches in height,and extend above the abutted gabled roof but no taller than the highest proposed peak of the house. 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 request for an average lakeshore setback variance to allow a chimney on a new home is not in harmony with the Ordinance at the property has reasonable use to allow a home and opportunity in for a chimney in conforming locations. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.The variance which would allow for a chimney to a single family home in a residential zone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. LA20-000077 January 19,2021 Page 3 of 4 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 add a chimney to a new home within the average lakeshore setback does not appear to be reasonable as the current property has an open building permit and plans that meet all the City Codes with adequate use of the lot for a single family home. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The owner's desire to add a chimney for a wood burning fireplace within the average lakeshore setback to the home is a condition created by the landowner, however the average lakeshore setback line was not created by the property owner and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. A chimney is a noticeable, but common feature on a home.Adding a chimney would not alter the character of the area. 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 average lakeshore setback is peculiar for the property with a neighbor's home located behind the applicants home, creating an extreme setback line. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located.The extreme location of the average lakeshore setback line in unique to this property creates a difficulty for additions to the property. The council has approved a variance to allow the construction of a new home on the property for reasonable use of the lot. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The council approved a hardcover and average lakeshore setback variance in 2019(LA19-000048)to allow the construction of a new home on the property. This request for a variance is to allow revisions including a chimney to the home. The owners have reasonable use of the property with the current approved variances and issued building permit meeting all the variance and city code requirements. The proposed chimney would act as an amenity and convenience. It is not necessary for the use of the land. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals,or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter.The applicant states this to be true. LA20-000077 January 19,2021 Page 4 of 4 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty.The property owner has an open permit to build a new home meeting all pervious variance criteria and city code requirements. The addition of a chimney for a wood burning fireplace is not necessary to alleviate a practical difficulty and would merely serve as a convenience to the Owner. 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 The applicant has submitted neighbor acknowledgement signatures from the two abutting neighbors. (Exhibit F) Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning Staff finds the practical difficulties are not met and to allow a chimney would act as a convenience not necessary for reasonable use of a single family home for the property. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application and Narrative Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Existing& Proposed Survey/Site Plan Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit E. Submitted Hardcover Calculations Exhibit F. Neighbor Acknowledgement Form Exhibit G. LA19-000048 Resolution Exhibit H. RPS20-000142 New House Building Permit Plans Exhibit I. Property Owners List and Map Letter View Exhibit A Land Use Application Summary LA20-000077 (plication Date: 12/16/2020 Address: 2967 Casco Point RD Orono, MN 55391 Parcel Number: 2011723310064 Land Use Number: LA20-000077 Application Submitted By: Agent on behalf of property owner Owner: Name: TIMOTHY JOHN OARE Address: LESLIE MARIE DENNIS OARE 2967 CASCO POI INT RD WAYZATA, MN 55391 Name: Robert Schmitt Applicant: Company: Premium Construction LLC Address: 480 Emma Street Norwood Young America, MN 55368 r.p.schmitt@att.net Contact Information: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Project Description: ALS Variance Land Use Application Type: Amendmend Application ❑ Appeal of Admin Decision 0 Concept Application 0 Conditional Use Permit Site Plan Application 0 Subdivision Application ❑ Subdivision Exception 0 Vacation Application Variance Application ❑ Applicant Signature: 5 file:///C/Users/loakden/Downloads/Land%20Use%20Application%20Summary%20(1).htm[1/15/2021 8:24:42 AM] City of Orono, We currently have a variance to build a new house and during the process to obtain said variance discussions revolved around average set back and sight lines. The City council's discussion prior to approving the variance discussed that the house to the north is skewed so far back that it did not make sense to include that property when figuring our setback. The counsel never discussed roof lines or other aspects of the house design they just concerned themselves with site lines and determined that the neighbors view would not be affected by our proposed changes. The current proposal to add a chimney also has zero effect on the neighbors site line due the proposed position of the chimney on the house and the fact that it is lower than the peak of the roof. We believe that if this chimney was on the original plans that the variance would have been approved and we would not be here today asking for a variance to add it to the house prior to construction. Thank you for your consideration Robert Schmitt Letter View Exhibit A Land Use Application Summary LA20-000077 plication Date: 12/16/2020 Address: 2967 Casco Point RD Orono, MN 55391 Parcel Number: 2011723310064 Land Use Number: LA20-000077 Application Submitted By: Agent on behalf of property owner Owner: Name: TIMOTHY JOHN OARE Address: LESLIE MARIE DENNIS OARE 2967 CASCO POI INT RD WAYZATA, MN 55391 Applicant: Name: Robert Schmitt Company: Premium Construction LLC Address: 480 Emma Street Norwood Young America, MN 55368 r.p.schmitt@att.net Contact Information: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Associated Contact: Project Description: ALS Variance Land Use Application Type: Amendmend Application ❑ Appeal of Admin Decision ❑ Concept Application ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Site Plan Application ❑ Subdivision Application LI Subdivision Exception 0 Vacation Application 0 Variance Application 0 Applicant Signature: W'ctfAti file:///C/Users/loakden/Downloads/Land%20Use%20Application%20 Summary%20(1).htm[1/15/2021 8:24:42 AM] Letter View LA20-000077 PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM Exhibit B LA20-000077 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Chapter. Response: Install a wood burning fireplace into a new construction house 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. Response: We have a variance to address the new construction by changing a setback. I believe the chimney should be considered a part of the new construction. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Response: Other houses have chimneys 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 116].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: -- 7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Response: -- 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. Response: The variance we received determined that our setback line should be different than what it is and a new line was proposed and the house was set on that line. With that adjustment I believe a chimney on the house should also be allowed because we are behind said new setback line 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. Response: -- 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. file:///C/Users/loakden/Downloads/Practical%20Difficulties%20Documentation%20Form.htm[1/15/2021 8:44:46 AM] Letter View Response: There is a major difference between a real fireplace and a gas fireplace and the homeowner had real fireplaces in the past and would like to continue that into the future . The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, ...orals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. Response: No 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Response: I believe if we had this shown on our original plans we submitted for a variance to build the house it would have been approved. The entire conversation with the city prior to issuing the variance concentrated on site lines and hardcover the location of this proposed chimney does not change the site line of any neighbor. file:///C/Users/loakden/Downloads/Practical%20Difficulties%20Documentation%20Form.htm[1/15/2021 8:44:46 AM] LA20-000077 Exhibit C -- E,4 T n V NT 0 TA1 OARE REolvf_Jilui, z .,„:, „ ,, .2,5 ›.- \ PROPOSED H A 'DCOVEN XHIB T kr, ,0 O600c.---.. . \),\•01/0 ,,,,, , -44, trl Si \ \.„ 1.1. i-v 0 / 96o 0 < 00 ,( ,,,,, k,,, • 4%. '3,...,— , ta .\•)<Vs, • C:t = f•.'4 It C75 . !' Vf`'). --__, .i. . V- '4. \ \,-,, ,.,4T-4-f'i.4411, '' 1, ,f,320.3_f., i \\ ..,'' Al / \ V :, '.1. / ___. ,-• 1= \ i VI- , \e".- -----/ ..... "1111 —.,4 A —a 2 7's''E iiii ,i. / I ,00' „,,,..\% -;i.rse i AP.P.,, '4'4 \ -f. fr6 V, 1-*/ ./ ,‘•%. ..,.. - .,.,.. \ <,,,V19., ,• m.a 6 ‘,66” ',1: 1 , ;4'.1n;‘ /,---;77 0 ,7 CA ' .0""'> 6 6. , h• ,;=•• cz 41 10 411 ' ''''. PROPOSED HARDCOVER 7) \\ __ \.. , \• , It '' ' ' a (see inventory sheet) /If / p,' sVs \ \ riod5 ,,,t 0 Denotes iron monument . \ .. ,,- , ., ' ,,6%.6- • Denotes found monument \ seefee„„.. ,,000.0 Denotes existing elev. (0000) Denotes proposed elev. '.\\(MOONVS'EN\ l'a'•\ ' \ ''':'‘ —•- Denotes surface drainage , ..., Denotes top of retaining moll V.0/A. .\••' ... ,t..... \ \ . ------c,g ,, — Denotes bottom of retaining wall LAKE . „6.-,60 --- Denotes silt fence/erosion control NA- ‘, .-, , „...„ . "Bio Logs"ot base of existing Proposed first floor elevation =955.6 ...1 69 retaining walls os needed MINNETONKA \ # , 4, • — As-Built first floor elevation =I-1 1.4. s \\\\ \ / SITE ADDRESS: Proposed top of foundation elevation = 954.6 \\ '\k \\ ' 0 „ Arl 2967 CASCO POINT ROAD As-Built top of foundation elevation =1 I Proposed garage floor elevation = 943.0 \ \.1- '' - '3bc. 'bl 05 As-Built garage floor elevation =I , , A < \ , 51.59 Revised: 5/11/2019 update LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Proposed basement floor elevation = 944.69 As-Built basement floor elevation =I 1 Revised: 12/29/2020 update TRACT B, R.L.S. NO, 1470 Revised: 12/30/2020 update See graved building plans for constructimn dimensions and devotions hereby certify Shot this survey, plan or report was prepared by me File No. DEMARS—GABRIEL or under my direct supervision and that I am o duly Registered Land CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR: Surveyor under the Laws or the State of Minnesota. 14 787 C LAND SURVEYORS, INC. 3030 Hcrbor Lone No. 0014.- 127610 Book-Page 426/31 ROBERT SCHMIDTT - PREMIUM CONSTRUCTION Piymouth. MN 55447 vid ECrook Phoneg'763) 559DaE.-0905 Scale Fax :(763) 559-0479 Dote February 21, 2005 Minn. Reg. No. 72414 1 =20 PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.odffactorv.com / ,., .„/ onto r o ma w ti ti hi k—, o � li Ci ww�o 1 0c, / L--_i b U N 2 �jb to y p,ti" / O O? "�N 'c ``gypN W jCiD i r • ° ° .a X 0 -•-•',., I 4 „g. " 3 n i_, %., ! �,,Ooo LyJ 3 o at ,,�o� ,i ,ol \ / N "-1, N.'' f =�j/ t V / o 3o- Z% g°gZ A .3 t-P .P 'V � % cT p�AA / } a 6� E+;per// R° c�,t "',E Qc\d�^� P o Q. /.tied �d a %s5 / �g. '� _ - �� \ ° II� n aNi x v m O„ � = �� L eQ� "> SI X I co ' N �►. �a t t ce 4b 'Fe ---1 z m % r . �.�\ �A',. �9 \€ i-' S B2°00'00" E O sc n rn ` jo<>▪ •ON �\ 1. °'..9L,‘(,' X15.56 U2 vi ~ D rn a �% C Cp I— v a000000000 "F' � i 11----��11 ,0 n y r�° ° ° °°°°° ' ,.....,„„„„.„.....1.„„-...., t SPG; niO- \ '� 2,22 N b 1n N N,n vim' , ' `\ /-\I ^k :'I o°/G. • Q 4 r I� n F ». Pp`; Urn - < % 5. cL 5. ,Z 'l 9"o nm� .P O Z (e) w2 ' <o - < 3 —I n o w Q ¢ `\ - Z j O �\ C\ 1 -. = °— ze' ,h. g „g�,81°6 gg gz L- 00,00°6 S — £ S g = 61‘9°°0 O o CD CDI IIII I II II CI /\ I P a �\ o 1 0 1 Pr, o r—r m _— O `,„ y HDAIHQISIII 3[11V0 ;o 0; z` d' ii JH1 IOd HINOHMm.1 it iiip II s I ;� I 1 bill ; 11$ 0 :ALM / a 1 o 0 0 0 5 o 0 S 5L a o i 4- , = 1 I o _. 1 ! I o I dio Z 2 :4 o "IW '-- 11 b7 ,1„1 L03 I mil ::■li = _ s --■ . al i ; I26. iikl d4— 111 4qI1=II11Ili CD ..i....4. 2.-mi ; 1 11-P.iii- ' 11IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIFig ,� � ��IIII j _I r �ii i; � i! i °�f I gI �3 �` � mal�IIIIIIIII !- " aq.S Sa 0 S3 It...wr- j Irritilir.r!"Ag:MIELI111.11111111'�. I �� IY ill L 11,1,1,,„1„,1,1„,11l� iiilil II�I!Iii I'lij!il�lllq!Ih IIII!1�11117!Ih�llgllli Ilii!I�IlIIi( 'I U n■Il! ' il'1,,,i,ilI,,,i,In,j;,,,1,,lili1In,;,,,1„,,,,,,;„,11,,,,1pl,11,„ llil�ilglli7 110.1 !I:011,'1Illlgl'Ii IIi,I!'l 110,11 Ilijllli 11101 illii Ow I,,611..Iiii!I �ltd!I I III1!n•'Aljii�.Ililm SLI III ltril Il111,1i 1'10111 llh!ld �o slli,-�1 _ _ I! HWHHI 11 , a m .' f�a E # ' ii•�_ iiI' c II IIMENT1 ' ism E � � .;4 �, , •. IIIIIII� I rr U .I3I ?9 U) NI IIii,1114,1 I 11_A'• I mom ILI BE !Ogg E�! p ,/ rr_r.: _ A I ISI IILI 7: __ �� I 2 in I..— ii!F'� I I �� Ill i p f'i��� lifigi II I, p-- �, 111 .e'r\•- ��� 61--. ILII a Esc=` N _ I ���. :'•11 1 1 ,::;;;,,;;,,� I 61,1. :11 X1./5 � lil' , W Ili .-.• ... / 11.„; I IVd OM* ILIIIIIIIIIIII'''`�i11 "� plI. i i 11PIE _ i I J J EE 3I ,�� 1 1 ' rfj 1 il I d1,111 di 11 1 - - I'l .,IIIlIIhj ll! t I II'I II ¶.! '/ 1,;41111, 9 w €.p 'illllif Q w ' C= :_. '.1 ,. .5 5 1.;.-,1..-.. I 151;:11:50.1515,,iii, Iln'!I ! 'IINIi!!:.__-� IIIIIIIIIIIII'iil!ii , til 1 51 b 1 ! D ®0000®®®®®o®000000000000000000000000 P Z ' " ° t ` `_ t. t' . 2j€05Rialiimm gpipP py R 9 K 4 8 X X Ili 4 X � X � c {p p� R� Q9� 9 i § ,4 1 d P i S 1 g�g S t X i l S 4 [ I l e i 6 i [ 2 t X I C C s S t n {l IFP§ g i I k O dri. ` l 5 X Y i R k i R R e k X d3 i 'i 0 z1 AI 5�¢li ]° °y m P -, ° � RS ' tgiiQUQ•TA = • 4 z 36€ , 3 . 4 4 = 4 i 4 • R 4. 4 4 4 6 1 4 4 ° - ° Y• • - 4 4 4 6 " p. R x_ x S x 5 5 x x S x S x `S. x x x S x 5 x y x x S : 5 S w x x x x x F x x x i. x z ,x. .. x _ u x a x .ti • x x x 3 a 4 i i ft d s 8 - 1 ; ' F . F 4 4 g i e i 4 F ; F . 4 • F g 5 F + F g a • r lift A , el a z R. i RiF,,, z 1R s 0 z L Y ql — 6 6 1' ,0 1 MEI FF la11.11..,:iiii:LF: I IQ), fiT is 1l — 7:- ii 1•i5 i EPu /�. SQ . 66III �i0I.' i- Ilii n1R 2� WiErr RRRi �� r �€ Vi ,6g1, a6Ir ERS �� dS- P.. I1S�I IS Qi '�11I- p W !i. i-;-;;;--•0Lam..� i! i"� ii �i' _ R ISI ? �. L ,. _`__<" IRS i t% 4 : i l'alF i8 i ' MI. ' F 9m r ._.Ilit 111 d 16 6 >�r� 0 'tl 4. 1 ,3r▪ ' A i 1@i .gr- 'y7�'Y�A. 3i 3Pt IN H• z ' m s •� ' ....OM u - l: i R&RiY'S6 T r 1 RSA A a R� Egi t I . F i gr i$Ba . W,..� :� IxI 3xl �i R Rai N; � niw� e F r I 1_ I _ e z"- � mrrw� - el � 3_ L_J_-I ICO' H-E )k NEW HOME FOR THE °" e Rx y m OARE RESIDENCE ®O©O®©®O®00©000000000000000000000000 P 0 4 €s Ra°" " `z 9 9 x x x x x �r 9 x a d x x eirr. R 2 6 z p a W $ m l k. i t R 1 x F S r g e $ i B l s "4 x 1 is t I t 9 e l l K $�9i`� 7philt o 6 $ rI. a P a 1 gt ill§.1 i 3 • • : � o 6 '4:•-ii ' q i 4 Z S § § i 4 iF " A Q • - e j x 4 i4 ° x ° - Si x Q Q 4 6 6 g xx 'ixSxxSxSx5xxx5xSx „ x xS5 = „ xxxx5p - a: s " xx .. ax • x x Uxax + . • ex • xx ' r y • exx + 5 j • F S ` Fi C . t $ ° • i $ • • a4: , q .,. .. . • F • Q F, R - - - . - - - - ' - ” - " • c 3 F. a s 51 g2 a m , m 6 p I iiR.0 z 6. Q•• i O Y • �, mii r_ :11 .II �11:. i pSpIIII; 1 2 .1 AlQ V I .,e■ 'ir . f+I '.'I I i 'n § nit Zy .�, f ii� - Oy i S �•' 7 ` l e i 4 a 1 --.,H • 8 *-1a is E M: a PI 4 :4-4, Y .�4I NI -.-r-I_, 4.,... .... �r,ebw.em. NI 1 ii:�!91 6 i '. 1 ® Q• .V O li * 0_111 1:v t ���� i / "��1011' ----- ; .�q�I18YS (< II iii +°" - 2i 8 FI as 4 g.� . . ___.._i •. Ful 1 I R "3i R .Y {yam— T 1 1 1 1 ji 1 i i] § __3I____ CIL___]'r .,.1 1 3 � /�0 ' �� ._ �d ._li' 1 IMIONIF ' I: ;i 1 1 s G I ��� 6P N • Lei ,---- l`.wfw..,7. -_-' ' RwR...N -_ 4 • QpL{ 1 g CR y i irIN i•fl'Y ---1 -41-- # O 88g lyy } ° 4{{ A. 5y � I�. • Z O J 0' "IEllJ4 MMI rY-N'�+r 1 FP2K: 1 IIS <C al'A—.�Y t ` t. As z V IP!!' )R NEW HOME FOR THE ?,IV 4� g 1m OARE RESIDENCE ®O©O®®®O®O0®0000000000 @00000000000000 P7 q. t. =Z g .- i e a 6 g 1 1 i g d g g g g 1X i V g g a d g k g asg g 4 g i 84042 a OP IrN14 10m a E * k. * g E x z kg i < m 41411'M� a ti, P 'i .. i :11119 AR; o 4ya4 a 6 RR z 6 AROQ t§ ; S I o:', 'b 3 R • 4 4 i 4 i 4 4 4 !; e § 4 e . d i C C 9 6 p x x ' x S x x 4 x S x x x S x g x x x 5 . x x x x , / 5 i x . x •, a 4 • V a u ; a • 4 1` . x x x 4 ". • • x $ $ 4 I L I s e s : i e F i a : t F. $ 4 ' i § i 4 F ; y. 4 1 4 i 4 F F • • F .` F F g g F 4 �, ee hj'i Wil id,i K r ft 1 � Q" y � ZH 1114111 X 1 " o : b.'b, O ,. g 11 EE e r `r li i.ill z ' ---7,--' ; ,p J � --r . d i!! •(4 Q. I A- CT •�• .. •�. ® � . - ~ Ir ' @I opo � z ® ig; —7-2=Ii 11 i:t ,.; lo 1 I.i i (R) %Ili 1 7,4 _' iMtk Olt,'°•• ---' ;--"'-'1 -'''Iri'''''' i 0 ; : . 6-1 / - i rl rr ... I O��t1 1 p8.! — - :Q ..'� m . ii 2 p k O � o w Dai �1 i a Z ! r, .I u T ii mil 0 O 4 O l a P II Gv i 114 F lolV F Ili 0 + i II Z \.00 O w. O �l o.,....? •p { > .•O ...,,l.. e W 7IM' )0, NEW HOME FOR THE 1_ Im OARE RESIDENCE 1 • H---- '111;�I11h 1111181 "+ !FORM "11M1 11 1 .11.14 1,1 7 II \\.1 di i if:it II- , :14;ir.A ii_ii ni p:;..... 11 41 11 .11111I1 En- am1] § m �IYiI = i jj 11 I I I I€ //: I I �r- r„ Gi llji m 1 1 I � al 1 !1 1,1�111 If (► m iel__=.11ll� -._. III 1 _ ���, €m's,: II ill �1 ��� a.>.::.;in II I 1111. €i - - rot I 6 ',ill.: 7:614;mmoili I. • L.d 1' 11 i::-::=:1 s Oi i Li •��I E r+ 1. J_ i ii`�i'1"Illi;X] ■■ ii:l::i:::_2: ! �r, L. Eu' i'§ il ra I !LEI _____ • IfilLII ,IIr . 0 ,. T g :...� §� 1 II i1rai "110 w�iw�ww�i 19 11 :_: I ■■■ i1:i;i'p_:.0 h U W'V11711I1VIV Ti,1Ij7l 1i'lI11-_",Ilji,'I,111 , I•gIR":19117419•,1174111 111 �1Igi11li1111j101lip�l1141j1�r1IliIi1114116ii114p61!illoilip141111111 ISI Ip ll'1IIp 0�117 14 1U II IU IP IIS II IU 11'II� 1111 II II u!,I1u�lyd!Idgi l,l�!I,Illy,yl l0 laiiull�lr;!6Il j l�'!111 11'7-1,Ii i�i.111V ill,;!1,1 EN 4II Id III l ld 11'1 Id 1 41 1 61 114 1 61 11'1 1 61 I III 11.11IN 61111'1 hl IJ �j E 16p�1.@1d41 illil 11141111111IMI141 ___________ it ill ilia1d i1 11 ..d..*... 111.11Ki .,■ ■: 11 II �� 51 91 1 iq i ii.1 I s r 7 £ ' z Il REF UM i'iFiEilieili! I fIL e Io 1 11. -i-i...-:-. lict4 et _---iiko ,, nil it--_-L..-:-.-:% 11 r OM >t J II _ 1 ' ° — z C -P 1 , r I I_ . _ . , ,.. o _ _ 1o °= .. [' „,,:: . INi_, 'a�eaei4 IF Idit� iia>_ til A, iii1 I 3 q 1 s .o SH NEW HOME FOR THE r 1 g 71 6 -m OARS RESIDENCE 1R a3NaaISl2I a2IVO j soh .w LO rt: 3H11I033INOHM3N p$#ig \ [ I a V IL 'DP 1I 13 i �, -- j I e !/ 0 f '^t` t1) ;_ hI! ¢ RSIs Q ;— 61a A. 9 �i �'� L_ i1S•;a S yw IL-, G i W.1a 11I I ZiIF SII = ,, ■. i:i:i:i: ! . °��°- ==� Of IIIiIi!tIIII - J�— l.el$ I€ ° !Ea mml I [ :: :-,rill 20 1 iii:!:!°�=!_!li .'' al._ n__ I 4 �/ i_1_1! 4 !aiiiiaSi 110001 WA I II 11 I 1 ri / , ;1;1:111°I -- jiur r, .i_i 'i'i . I !Emma iI ::d:ii:ii y ,,\ iia - ! € i111 ME .! IM 1 _ g •--.€ _ ! _y_y_yg_y�i�• — i'-i'-i'-i1i i i'-i'-i'1. iii 1 `i 111111111111111 i--, € €Illi!!!! 0111II II� 1:1_Ilylllj! ~ 4LU 2 �4 �,3,_ !la4!! Q 1i'i;412iiGi1 c •;i 1411` W o � ��i - : j I I � ala - € ifj Ai 1 ilil iili aii, I�� li ir , , ow, lill.j�ililill�i�!ilIi , , , ... , :lt�?,t l!!!l19�i .��I1�'ilil�jU���il�jll�l�.lj�il _ ILJ III L. F • I II 14787 Premium Construction LA20-000077 OARE RESIDENCE Exhibit E Property Address: 2967 Casco Point Road,Wayzata,MN Prepared by: Demars Gabriel Land Surveyors, Inc Date: 12114/2020 Step 2: PROPOSED HARDCOVER Revised:12/29/2021 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. K Hardcover item(Describe) Length x Width Total Survey_ (Square Feet) (Example) (Garage) (24'x 30) (720 SF.) A ' Walls 230 x 1 230 S.F. B Patios 172.5+284.4+185.5 642.4 S.F.-' C i House 3087.5 S.F. D i Garage (attached see above) S.F. E i Walks 4 x 7 ) 28 S.F. F Driveway 1820.3 S.F.. G Landscape 0 S.F. H Deck 356 ST .— I Stairs 243 S.F. J S.F. K 1 S.F. L S.F. F. M S' N S.F. 0 S.F_ P -- S.F. O ---— I S.F. R S.F. S S.F. T S.F. US.F. V S.F. W S.F. X S.F. Y S.F. z S.F. (1) Total Proposed Hardcover 6407.2 S.F. Excludable Hardcover(See City Code Sec 78-1884): A Walls 230 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. - S.F. (2) Total Excludable Hardcover 230 S.F. (3) Net Proposed Hardcover [Subtract line (2)from line (1)] 6177.2 S.F. (4) Total Lot Area 20943.2 S.F. Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3) i (4)] 29.5 % ItOproter 310.2012 LA20-00077 Exhibit F ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS' ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM • ( I (we) t 1� �',1 ( cceu'i of (16l.75 6 S (o Pt - 12rou- ) [print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Jultroperty Owner Date ti ! Property VWner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building &Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. zzz*zzz*zzz*zz*zz***z*zzzz*zzzz:***************************************lett.********zz*************•*************z**************** ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS' ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM I (we) of [print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans for the • oposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to .s Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this ac'.owledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to .onfirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's •roject or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review . this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building &Zoning I •ice at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. January 2020 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS'ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM I(we)CLUFPorci 4 ba - Swett-0N of 'a965 Ctscc &iir/' Roxig.DByZa1ar MN 653W [print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at WC67�Poi also referred to as Land Use Application No.© w& {bona. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we)am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are)aware of the Improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property ��err Date011 �Qa� - - I Property Owner 4110 Date If you have any Information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application,please submit your comments to the Building&Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. *M******llMtRtNN*MYMfilimrtfH/H******tl/fRMM************lHMM****** ************************Ihk* *****ffflf******int * ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS'ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM • I(we) of [print name(s [print address] have reviewed the plans for the • •posed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred t. .s Land Use Application No. I (we)understand that in executing this ackn• edgement, 1(we)am (are)not asked_to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to co for the City Council that I (we)am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's pro : or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land . Application,please Nbmit your comments to the Building&Zoning Office at least 16 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. C'! aq cal Pt-- Rd 1111111111111111111 11141 LA20-000077 Exhibit G Doc No T05644541 Certified, filed and/or recorded on Sep 13, 2019 10:42 AM Office of the Registrar of Titles Hennepin County, Minnesota Martin McCormick, Registrar of Titles Mark Chapin, County Auditor and Treasurer Deputy 52 Pkg ID 1875524E Document Recording Fee $46.00 Document Total $46.00 Existing Certs 1476037 • This cover sheet is now a permanent part of the recorded document. v_.Oko CITY OF ORONO Iti\1RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL G�� NO. 7 0 0 9 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-350,78-1279, 78-1700 • FILE NO. LA19-000048 WHEREAS, on July 1, 2019, Premium Constuction LLC, ("Applicant"), applied for a variance from the City Code for the property addressed 2967 Casco Point Road and legally described as: Tract B, R.L.S. No. 1470 (hereinafter the"Property"); WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-350 for lot area and lot width to allow the development of an undersized lot; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow for the home to be built forward of the average lakeshore setback ; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1700 to allow for hardcover to exceed 25% to 29.5%; and WHEREAS, on July 15, 2019, after published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, on July 15, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the variances; and WHEREAS, on August 12, 2019,the City Council reviewed the application and the recommendations of the Planning Commission and City staff; and NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby approves the requested variance as described above based on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning the Property: FINDINGS OF FACT: f I �Op CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL tiff NO. 7009 �cr G -kESH ov-- 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #LA19-000048. The analysis contained within staff memos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the above mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings are hereby incorporated by reference. 2. The Property Is located In the LR-1 C Zoning District. 3. The Property contains 0.48 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 78 feet, 4. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25%according to the Stormwater Quality Overlay District. 5. Applicant has applied for the following variance[s]: a. Lot Area b. Lot Width c. Average Lakeshore Setback d. Hardcover 6. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. ANALYSIS: 1. "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance . . . ."The proposed variances are in harmony with the purpose of the Ordinance. The lot includes difficulties In Its substandard size and width,and location of adjacent homes. 2. "Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan." The proposed variances to develop a nonconforming lot of record are consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. "Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. 'Practical difficulties,'as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that: a, The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, however, the proposed use is not permitted by the official controls. 2 CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 11+ �� NO. 7009 .cEsHor- The request to permit construction of the home on the substandard lot,exceeding 25% and average lakeshore setbacks, appears to be reasonable as the property's nonconforming size,the neighboring homes'orientation with respect to the lakeshore, and adjacent properties creates difficulties.The hardcover level decreases overall from existing levels and the home is set to meet all other setbacks. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The nonconforming lot size and the neighboring home locations prevent a residential footprint consistent with the neighborhood.The proposed overall hardcover level will decrease with the new proposed plan. The circumstances are unique to the property; and c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality" The variances are requested in order to permit construction of a home designed to fit the character of the neighborhood according to the submitted information. 4, "Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties." Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. "Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to Inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78."This condition is not applicable 6. "The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located."This condition is not applicable,as the use for a 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 and orientation and the setback from the lake of the adjacent homes creates difficulties for the Owners In redeveloping the property consistent with the homes in their neighborhood. 3 �Op CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 7 NO. ! 009 4xESH00 9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located."The property's nonconforming size and the relationship between the existing home and the setback of the adjacent properties create difficulties for the owners. 10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant."Granting lot area,lot width,average lakeshore and hardcover variances are necessary for the preservation of the property right of the applicant. 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 hardcover,lot area,lot width and average lakeshore setback 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 requested variances for lot width, lot area, and average lakeshore set setback are necessary, and do not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS: Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-350, 78-1279, 78-1700 to allow the development of a single family home, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings. 2. The approved project shall conform to the survey with revision dated June 30, 2019 and building plans submitted by the Applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibits A. 3. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction and commencing construction of said project. A framing inspection must be completed within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date(August 12, 2020). 4 app CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL y C' NO. 7009 et 4kEsH01 t4kESHO- 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution may result in the termination of any authority granted herein. ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this I A4k day of 41,91A11-- , 200, ATTEST: CITY •F ORONO: ifAil (( /) d?4-- • Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor • 5 . .,..1%- . tii056 \ Yv5iph git.ii,‘ ry o , ,, . -, g. .4 > 1 j 1 >0.4tii ..• L 1/4. er i ir0 1 ;r. iti �o. l+ t „te ,w .N m I l'\ Eit v 44.1.. , moo. - *,6,:„, .4,..„?.. — ,..,_o'ce) A OVV,,,....00 :,...„ s S'‘, . _Vs. ;-.a. - :.:MI '44.04 Bic0:00" E 0 T •"-- IVII..), 1 IP \• : ,; .„, . , , ..- -../1111.1°'-• N I i%,Z1 'Z' N y r o Y;� z o b N 6-P o 6-5'.M o --51.<3.. a `•- • * •o o to zRz ma R. do -, Q qa o 4R^ vx � N \,..,\ ... a ° " R a a LI . z pppa t R z a a ( {{{��� _. , ,4 g O q a g 4 ° a I `��.. • \. • .,y,ry, 4 T }2 c i n , u a R'6V, rte"' `•_ �F y I, N }n�,r. �y z ti � . ��- - M0kTKGX ibw rni0HNa � .9I''gtO6 ° no'E0. 6 Pjpc VII' $bb4b'b",51 XI .6.".oa$o,.0 n b99Zr S " r ' rrrrrP' C � r 4y Ili TP e �Ja F r,i51 NEW HOME FOR THE Q o 0!I +i 1 OARE RESIDENCE p 2967 CASCO POINT RD. ORONO,MN e c e . 'llllPI 1 a;Mil 1 ill i i E M IR i -II i 6 �;1 { I i Y "�nl li_______..._ _______;____ .6 r,53,3 , 1 n —I__ i _ vii 1 I Pr- ; gi ..]L iiitj__...1, 1m _ IilipiVLI- 1 1 ' ' it i l r ....„ ...... ...... y i S. NEW HOME FOR THE -- I 1 ( OARE RESIDENCE O • 29117 CASCO POINT RD. ORONO,MN 0 VD • • O O N N OROT10 'Q21 MINODSVO L96L a aui�saa cavo �1 i! a¢C•1 s 1•. - ______--ir 4 _____ _, ,, r.: e II li FF pg 1 1 1 f. 1.1 y ". LL ib rizierv-in 211 1 — — .1 1 CUutv) ii] I eir_-7-41 r : i I II_ t Olt [ U� � __ __ � — . --- t;11 , E olk. cji , 1 1 .,,___nrIELliwr Y i Al_ 4_ 4 .... u 1 i al i II-ill i 114 I liiii illirlil 1 ql t1161113 11111011 1e 2 22 22 ON NNCONO110 'MI.LNIOdOOSYOL96L aaN UIS' anyO ill I I M i c) au.uad HFIOH teem 9I Y 4 ;rte I U ! t � - d1 — �I1 wrictoligii^ ... , 1 I ill t° III L IV 11 lid N 1 11 , 1 - , il , , , A Ii 1.1 • ..---• 1 � 0 I I 1 ) U \ 3 iv' ii a IM t R I iiiii 1 thilii I 4 It 11l1 1°11 s in Q A 2 Q ] a O fill } CT O N}V'OItOU0 'ON11,1Od OOSVO L96L aDNauisau alIVo I I;t 11 V'a Q HHL HW O30H MHN i, d ti I�1 l i 1 ■■ I : 11!' i i • 1■ -- i _ moss lisj. : JihL : f ■■■Msfat ! \ • It'I` � I■■ss `,I ti �\ II Irr. t1■■ • I,� ppi\' ■■O ■mMs \ t�iiii ' 0;n 'I; � ,�I p •• 'I `� 1111: t(�C. 111III ; , -- I■Ial � ::.: 1 : .1 ,,, _ 5_ • 1 7= 1I, hl 6 c ��• 1 t, 1/ / L7.77,,,,•,,-,..;;.,, -- r [� .1:,:111,1;'11,1', :;',,',',i II l' itl� I 6 �I w t =lil�li II %1 ■ 'I ' \ 1 1i�� II ICL I�� �I al _ iii: Ii'il: 11 _ II , \ I 1 l_ 4 i I I ,-_ ti I i it i�!°IIiNi!t; ' , j;.l'iIj141717j1 II l.a lill I I II 1 II NW`ON0110 'Q2(LNIOd OOSYO LY6L 6 C3 IU OONHQIIS a iv0 111I i`r'' Co ti n II I ! II LLL el II {ii ! nn II II swimII, JJl nano, � I < / W 1 1 I II o nu III Tr) un un 1 .w _ I-' II uu MI _ �1 III y uI . �I u - emu = iii•1 III 6 irk !I 111:10 L:.".! 1 I i I 4))i '77-;: , Atif ill: ■. ■U .■ .. :: .: I:: oQ it immaimi I 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The undersigned,being duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Orono,Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at the meeting of the Orono City Council on August 12,2019 with the original thereof on file in my office,and the same is a correct transcription thereof. WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this 13th day of August,2019. Anna Carlson, City Clerk (seal) J., ^`kct):4," ti{ J 1 r c ' .G. . fi . i � ( I) L r. U`.;. Letter View LA20-000077 Exhibit H IRPS2O- CITY OF ORONO 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY 000142 fi ORONO, MN 55356 G� (952) 249-4600 FAX (952) 249-4616 t'kEsHo0' DATE ISSUED: 01/11/2021 ADDRESS: 2967 CASCO POINT RD Orono, MN 55391 PIN: 2011723310064 PERMIT TYPE: Residential Principal Structure Building Permit- New Construction PROPERTY TYPE: Residential Lakeshore CONSTRUCTION TYPE: ACTIVITY: Build a new house VALUATION: $ 1,100,000.00 APPLICANT Permit approved based on: Premium Construction LLC 480 Emma Street Norwood Young America, MN 55368 PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE OWNER STATE SURCHARGE (VALUATION): TIMOTHY JOHN OARE Description Amount LESLIE MARIE DENNIS OARE Building Permit Fee $6,674.92 2967 CASCO POI INT RD Plan Review- Residential 65% $4,338.70 WAYZATA, MN 55391 Surcharge Fee (.0004 of Valuat $ 540.00 Total Permit Fees $ 11,553.62 AGREEMENT AND SWORN STATEMENT The work for which this permit is issued shall be performed according to the approved plans and specifications, applicable PAYMENT(S): City approvals, and the State Building Code. This permit is for Payment Reference#Amount Paid only the work described and does not grant permission for Date additional or related work which requires separate permits.All 11/28/2020 2820201198255296702 $4,338.70 provisions of laws and ordinances governing this type of work rps20-000142/2967 Casco Pt. shall be complied with whether or not specified herein. This 01/11/2021 Rd. $7,214.92 permit will expire and become null and void if construction authorized is not commenced within 180 days of the date of ISSUED BY: issuance, or if construction is suspended for a period of 180 "'a...1— days at any time after work has commenced. The applicant is January 11, 2021 responsible for assuring all required inspections are requested in conformance with the State Building Code. This permit may be revoked at any time for due cause. JASON RECH BUILDING OFFICIAL Applicant Permittee Signature: file:///C/Users/loakden/Downloads/Permit%20Approved%20(1).htm[1/15/2021 9:18:11 AM] o ®0®0®®®S®©®®00000000®00000000®0000®Q P 3 ! o ' V ' 'm g K IID 9 9 x x x x x gg 4 x g a li — P" r d ,4 A ! ! P i t z ; i l X i l g 3 e " i s 8 z x 8 f s f d i9 ^ pi i ii1041 0 • ii of i k k i g i _ kg g 11 A g $ g 23 4 o b s " � Pigxy O = l € a mb � � � S .▪ 44 k z g.A1O , i S 'F. F R S ; Z''4 1i1 5 EC s ��� • e ' " g R i _ 4 R • R i. 4 4 q : I e 4 ; 6 4 ° - e yp • ' R R R w p N X x i x S S x x S x s x s x x x `S. X S x x x x `S, p 5 F `§. LH, x x 4 4 p $ 3 R 7 a " x x ♦ u ► x x ;' x 1 x ! w o s x ' a x y Z y • s f, . + 4 0 4 , , , - S ' ' - 1 a 4 R ' i ! a 4. 7 8Q 8t R 4444 11 l, Z 18 Fo six.m 1 I. r-: a 1 ! z L� Y F i aS I� ie a 3 3 3g •9-6 �`" , , I 3 SII i 1 SE iiia M- i e V 01 � i Ela : ill �I�,r i :41 iRt 4 ;tie t �t1,0 a a ° 101 i111 e1* -/;' 4 :1 .iii_, lid ,. i © e 4 l's I llLkii ;s ilii !¢� ��§Sj x.y —. �J 1i 1�•i it g'3El ;i�:Fir� :: `_— _'4.-,.? nii Y ,I -g iliit4 ; , gig; r_,„ _, m, ii ' '-: ;ii dli n ti a I - N- —— L-- ag 11 10:° I!i �. T6 � � I 3 T ! 01 .. _ ii 11e 8 n ac 5 m # J � i� �� 3 0 r � � 13,l ifiC • - 07,3a 7N 'iii'iii f a s r -1 91 101 I I -L----1 -- L I g p p .. 1`;: SP, NEW HOME FOR THE 2" ; ,'c., xa €xxN im OARE RESIDENCE D ®O®O®®®®®O®®00000000®000000000000000 P• o qt t ° ` `id A �`� gII H ' 4 Yy g x i x x C K x ' e e u gp i• s s ° d li e $ i . ort0404116 § r = i R 'FII g 401221P 5P av 1m i 131vga 1 1 Ohp # - R z L�.I11�o. X + : 4 i = Q § i 4 i a 4 4 4 ? - i b i 4 ¢ 4 d S e ' i = 9 4 R i y . i tlssY sXsxsxx � s ; s = � XX4 : gis ) Ayxxs s 0 + % u x \ ', - ; x - x i x x % � X + 2 Xi4eifF4- ii4I 64 � s ; Fi. isR4 = gi7 : ; ; S ; 4 , ai F F • F + F +`. ilizA li p r o o!"z .iFz Si R- : FP m 0 11 m O . Y I C> ._ ,_ of �� o f ._ ' ..o1�.s of„+ •- .01 .."01;.,1 ¢ �, yy \ Y SII �; 1 rz �.�. 0 i Ii B�. ➢I y 1sa� p- iFaE E.-ro y69 !i ii I •� i ag=i� -ani-F� I'$ E� _ 21--15 15 m,".2,.. ei! —yll EI I i 0 2 i . i I , res rwb...e� - i 1 i9 in i4i � � Pi '�O�, I OP Com{ 'Y r r ° I I 41 0 hili I i PM til. M Iq 8A4 •�i I �° vi f! RD ` 'i .. €1 : __c W+_ _??_6-.1 �I o a I "I i ,, . 'I ; •__ �. er _ fes` _.__—_.— -- _y.,,._ �C�I iaa�w�.1i�x - ------ O i+ !1 _ '011' _* ?' ---,r T1- i......... I__ ' 1E 41~ Iii '-I F.lF# - 9 h 4' C) 11 l �°�4 4' 110g A } 1.7.,-,j, . '1 �`. . i 13 .1.4 "eel a0 e a -1 11 .---,- __t-_ - 7g, :4 2r @y ivw' • • t it7r 1,17, _ 1T =f -7,1- , l . 1I3, •.gNo4 � 11,Ir_ 1 :441...„,„,...1O Oint e . ` f D i 0 e0 r 1zf3 Sr, NEW HOME FOR THE N 9 :.�g 1m OARE RESIDENCE 4 ®OO®®®®®® ®000000000000000000000000 P z I' t.t t " =Z © tai P § a I . A S '1 1 m �.gi -s g cgs x x ' x 5 S x x § x S x S x x x 6 x S x x x S x ., ,,-. • 5 ,x, x x x , 5 : $ x x Z , u e x t +. = y x +- x a : ! x ! x x x _ ! s o x x F B a • § 4 F F ' ° F S k • 1 ,• F g F o• 4 F F F a F F a F ° F a j sr RI Reif oho Z itR.61 � m a � _r r: 6. . 1'` —11 1 s .,11:04s o Q . F-- g a 5'e B !a" A- ab� ! © �RY '"� _ cg _ ttDIY ;__ y ®_� d8` J3 li z Z I 1 ® *Iltt �` ,� o � g� �i o o E ,+ / L ` i ± * L1: J �D! ! I .11 4. 1 r(11 1 9 [� LJ �, q .i#..�" y�• { 15 0 ; - 10as1 e Yu : _7 ri _� :,..,. ..... — ,— _ .Jzm,F 1mOz o , ,p , 4Oi®iO ,. o 11 NEW HOME FOR THE Y H W &tiaaH bm OARE RESIDENCE a 11 11 111!t4F 111 51114 lilL\ PON: N g 41 11 t 1141'1 XIII ill agi .' /; i. is a m S Ii II !�Il��e _ =' a 1111 11 Ntl" it it --�IIll�j `�77f I _}_{P.M e i 12i r,l,JJ lii{IIliIIMIN m � i WWII I: iii::::: ,\\ 1141. \ !1 9 fJ1 II @ %IiiJ @ I'!SI} ::.:. :c /w _ @n 1.4 P ia1:1LS 1 JJ- 1 "-F1H li \\ F.` , J 10 I 1 til ill a _:_:_41: °:' ",aye 41 .e:". i C9 i li'iiiii i '.i�ii!iii!i�--- !t .• FF 1 .'S MON 1'.. i4i .■■ ®�'z 9 § .1 it '" FI . ` 1 1 • (`i" to li III 'NiI.i.:1 i5 t 9 11 J nlllul Am. i @ E 16c 1 g ! s q. `� E il :11172111114 , ibi liililil #1 c'li-: fT dr yt _ i:q=i=444 ♦W t.,I • € g.— ra ra 8 c @4. i, _t___), ..... , tiop L, II �, 3p � 9r / r(13. P II 1 1 r�S],f ..z.. i ,$1:1 Ed`s . 4 _. pelf€ai:i Yii BSO Ohs I i`b 99'��€I i e�� I I ayi' JP, NEW HOME FOR THE •7.0q Im OARE RESIDENCE I I III � � l`r i is 41 E IN ..—E I �1 ti ,L,_ ..„-:111.1.:-Ii.:1 . ,_❑ .. 1I iii ` , 11111111111111111T I Ell :...1.1 ..r!: 92 m lO mi .. Y .i itl!: �. itFRRI- 1 < „ i;�i±"±'!i ililililili I' g E 1=14.1- i D ii 11111111111111111 i!-:'-4 1:1 1 II ,R 5 1' s D ( II :a"•; r -AlVi i:i.1 i ':_:eke::::::::: 1,...,... ', � ±±±±± I pup IIIs e, / 1 �:xk!. k om ...I: 1 IMEN bi— , • 1 / ',, :: _ice .. a j__IIsiIsig 1 ill 1 =-11.- E-- II 7 1 �+ E�� ..„ 111°11°11 i 1.114 I4 i 4'� 1 4 R Il LLil v b �s' d�l� ai3 P1 if —1 �. 1�8 -11 R li 6 D 4.B.. 3 L.II RNl7/11 S FI:1 i p Ii -i Rr 1.1 7� R I f 1 R R1 , ,1" NEW HOME FOR THE 4 C)1 m� 1m OARE RESIDENCE E LA20-000077 RUN DATE:12/17/2020 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) Exhibit I 38 20-117-23 31 0026 38 20-117-23 31 0048 38 20-117-23 310064 STEVEN G SIGAFOOS ETAL NANCY G BROWN T J OARE&L M D OARE 2900 CASCO POINT RD 2933 CASCO POINT RD 2967 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 STEVEN G SIGAFOOS NANCY G BROWN TIMOTHY JOHN OARE 2900 CASCO PT RD 2933 CASCO POINT RD LESLIE MARIE DENNIS OARE WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 2967 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 31 0028 38 20-117-23 310049 38 20-117-23 31 0065 ANGELA L WILSON DON ADAMS&SHEILA ADAMS CITY OF ORONO 2910 CASCO POINT RD 2927 CASCO POINT RD 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 00000 ANGELA L WILSON DON ADAMS&SHEILA ADAMS THE CITY OF ORONO 2910 CASCO POINT RD 2927 CASCO POINT RD P O BOX 66 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 20-117-23 31 0032 38 20-117-23 31 0050 38 20-117-23 31 0072 EMMA LOU POWELL TERRY PETERSEN M D BARRETT&D M BARRETT 2916 CASCO POINT RD 2925 CASCO POINT RD 2912 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 EMMA LOU POWELL TERRY PETERSEN MICHAEL D BARRETT 2916 CASCO PT RD 18077 ELM TRL 2912 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 NEVIS MN 56467 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 31 0033 38 20-117-23 31 0051 38 20-117-23 310073 PAULA N D KANNE/RYAN G KANNE ALYSSA DWYER&ERIC BIERMANN D C PALMER&T L PALMER 2920 CASCO POINT RD 2915 CASCO POINT RD 2918 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 PAULA NUNES DIAS KANNE ALYSSA DWYER&ERIC BIERMANN DANIEL CLEMENT PALMER RYAN G KANNE 2915 CASCO POINT RD THERESA LYNN PALMER 2920 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 2918 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 31 0034 38 20-117-23 31 0052 38 20-117-23 34 0001 JONATHAN A MENTH TODD M BALAN JAY S HULBERT TRUSTEE 2930 CASCO POINT RD 2905 CASCO POINT RD 3035 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 JONATHAN A MENTH TODD M BALAN JAY S HULBERT 2930 CASCO POINT RD 2905 CASCO POINT RD 3035 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 31 0035 38 20-117-23 31 0053 38 20-117-23 34 0002 R G SORENSEN/S D SORENSEN GREGGORY SMITH/MELANIE SMITH S SCOTT&I S STANDA 2940 CASCO POINT RD 2895 CASCO POINT RD 3025 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ROBERT G SORENSEN GREGGORY A SMITH STEVEN&IRENE STANDA STACI D SORENSEN MELANIE S SMITH 3025 CASCO POINT RD 2940 CASCO POINT RD 2895 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 31 0036 38 20-117-23 31 0055 38 20-117-23 34 0003 PAUL F JOHNCOX ALYSSA M DWYER/ERIC BIERMANN D P SEIDEL&H N SEIDEL 2948 CASCO POINT RD 2917 CASCO POINT RD 3015 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 PAUL F JOHNCOX ALYSSA DWYER&ERIC BIERMANN DANIEL&HELENA SEIDEL 2948 CASCO POINT RD 2917 CASCO POINT RD 3015 CASCO PT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 31 0038 38 20-117-23 31 0060 38 20-117-23 34 0023 EDWARD PEKARIK JR J A MARTINSON ET AL TRUSTEES CASCO POINT LLC 2990 CASCO POINT RD 2970 CASCO POINT RD 2987 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ED PEKARIK JR JERRY&BONNIE MARTINSON CASCO POINT LLC 2990 CASCO POINT RD 2970 CASCO POINT RD S 2987 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 31 0045 38 20-117-23 31 0061 38 20-117-23 34 0024 NEIL GOODWINBARBARA GOODWIN J R MILLER&A R MILLER CASCO POINT LLC 2975 CASCO POINT RD 2980 CASCO POINT RD 3005 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 NEIL GOODWINBARBARA GOODWIN JONATHAN R&AMY R MILLER CASCO POINT LLC 2975 CASCO POINT RD 2980 CASCO POINT RD 2987 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 31 0047 38 20-117-23 31 0063 38 20-117-23 34 0025 MICHELLE WILLIAMS-ABBOTT TR C A SWENSON&B B SWENSON TR D J HASSELMAN&J HASSELMAN 2941 CASCO POINT RD 2965 CASCO POINT RD 3020 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 ORONO MN 55391 MICHELLE WILLIAMS-ABBOTT TR CLIFFORD A SWENSON DANIEL J HASSELMAN 2941 CASCO POINT RD BARBARA B SWENSON JESSICA HASSELMAN WAYZATA MN 55391 1346 PONCE DE LEON DR PO BOX 1238 FORT LAUDERDALE FL 33316 RANCHO SANTE FE CA 92067 RUN DATE:12/17/2020 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS LIST) PAGE:2 38 20-117-23 34 0026 A DETERMAN&T DETERMAN 3026 CASCO POINT RD ORONO MN 55391 ANTHONY F DETERMAN TRINA D DETERMAN 3026 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 34 0027 CASCO POINT LLC 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO MN 00000 CASCO POINT LLC 2987 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 42 0005 VIL OF ORONO 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO MN 00000 CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 20-117-23 42 0006 HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ORONO MN 00000 HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND NOT FOR SALE/UNDER WATER IN LAKE MTKA 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 County Locate & Notify Map X'.: Date: 12/17/2020 am 370SF783 3f,-„,.i 2669 2074 3600 izi Xs, 2n ,ra, ',zz' 2914 2918,, 'li ss:. 2871 Cato-cot," 29na 261 54 1 1 f, 2320 .."41, 3.• ll7!. °. 2.36.5: 2917 azi5s. L33'>a 29125 2915,Str 2925 2. 'sa' 2927 15]1337.,, 296,5 • 23 i 1 u7' 2980 A!. 2 u;ti7< 1,0000.....60,;‘,20:313, /.1.4�\\\'t t 2ri,,s,VII 4 s :25' x �. 3040 ✓'tl' 3945 rs 3065 305` 3035 ill: 3661 .l3_ 3105 Buffer Size: 500 0 50 100 200 Feet Map Comments: 11 1 I III 1 I 2967 Casco Point Rd. This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii)is furnished with no warranty of any khd; and (ii) is notsuitable for legal, engneering or surveying purposes.Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage,injury or loss resulting from the data. For more information,contact Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South,M irneapolis,MN 55487/gis.info@h en ne pin.us °Ivo To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Ron Olson, Interim City Administrator y � F L� From: Jeremy Barnhart,AICP 4kESH0f" Community Development Director Date: January 19, 2021 Subject: #LA21-01, City of Orono Text Amendment related to appeals Public Hearing Application Summary: The proposed text amendment will guide the process for appeals of decisions of the city differently than appeals from code enforcement action. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval as drafted. Issue An interested party has the right to appeal decisions made by the city, outlined in several sections of the code, depending on the source of the regulation to be appealed. In the course of administering code enforcement activities, however,the appropriate appeal process is through the court system. The City Code is not clear on this issue. Solution The City Attorney recommends amending the city code with the proposed text to clarify the appeal process when responding to potential criminal,civil,or administrative penalties. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Are there any issues or concerns with this proposal? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval of the ordinance as drafted. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Draft Ordinance CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS RELATED TO ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL: SECTIONS 2-41,66-253,and 78-96 OF THE ORONO CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORONO ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Title I, Article II, Sec. 2-41 of the Orono City Code is amended as follows, underlined language is an addition and strikethrough language is removed: Sec. 2-41. -Right to administrative appeal. Except as otherwise provided, if any person shall be aggrieved by any administrative decision of the city administrator or any other city official, or any board or commission not having within its structure an established review schedule or an appellate procedure, such aggrieved person is entitled to a full hearing before the council upon serving a written request upon the mayor and city clerk. Such request shall contain a general statement setting forth the administrative decision to be challenged by the appellant. An appeal under this section shall be filed no later than ten days following the decision. Failure to file an appeal within ten days of the decision shall constitute a waiver of the person's right to a hearing.A hearing on the appeal shall occur at the next regularly scheduled council meeting that is at least seven days after the appeal is served. At such hearing,the appellant may present any evidence he deems pertinent to the appeal; but the city shall not be required to keep a verbatim record of the proceedings. The mayor, or other officer presiding at the hearing, may, in the interest of justice or to comply with time requirements and on the mayor's own motion or the motion of the appellant,the city clerk, or a member of the council, adjourn the hearing to a more convenient time or place; but such time or place shall be fixed and determined before adjournment so as to avoid the necessity for formal notice of reconvening. An employee of the city who is aggrieved by an action or decision of another city employee that relates to their employment shall exhaust the grievance procedures set forth in the administrative and personnel policy before requesting a hearing before the city council. The city council's decision on appeal may only be appealed to the Minnesota Court of Appeals. This section shall not apply to hearing officer decisions under section 50-32; decisions of an administrative officer under chapter 78; decisions of an administrative officer under chapter 82;ef-decisions of the planning director under section 78-1604.; code enforcement letters that warn a person of a potential criminal, civil, or administrative penalties; or any matter regarding a pending or actual criminal charge based on a violation of this code. SECTION 2. Title V, Chapter 66, Article VIII of the Orono City Code is amended as follows, underlined language is an addition and strikethrough language is removed: Sec. 66-253. - Payment. Once notice of an administrative violation is given, the person responsible for the violation shall, within 14 calendar days of issuance of the notice, pay the stated violation penalty to the city. At any time before the payment of the administrative penalty is due,the person who has been given notice of an alleged violation may request to appear before the city council to contest the request for payment of the penalty. After a hearing before the council,the council may determine to withdraw the request for payment or to renew the request for payment. Because the payment of the administrative penalty is voluntary,there shall be no appeal from the decision of the council. A notice of an administrative violation does not include code enforcement letters that warn an individual of possible criminal, civil, or administrative penalties. Further, any criminal matter must be adjudicated through the court system, and may not be appealed to the city council, pursuant to Minn. Stat. $412.861 subd. 1. SECTION 3. Title VI, Chapter 78, Article II of the Orono City Code is amended as follows, underlined language is an addition and strikethrough language is removed Sec. 78-96. -Board established. (a) A zoning board of appeals and adjustments is established. The planning commission is constituted as the board of appeals and adjustments. The board shall have the following powers: (1) To hear and decide appeals from any affected person where it is alleged that there is an error in any order, requirement, decision or determination made by an administrative officer in the enforcement of this chapter. (2) To hear requests for variances in accordance with this chapter. (3) To exercise other functions as provided in this chapter. (b) Subject to such limitations as may be imposed by the council, the board may adopt rules for the conduct of proceedings before it. Such rules may include provisions for the giving of oaths to witnesses and the filing of written briefs by the parties. The board shall provide for a record of its proceedings, which shall include the minutes of its meetings, its findings and the action taken on each matter heard by it, including the final order. (c)An order, requirement, decision, or determination does not include code enforcement letters that warn an individual of possible criminal, civil, or administrative penalties. Further, any criminal matter must be adjudicated through the court system, and may not be appealed to the city council, pursuant to Minn. Stat. §412.861 subd. 1. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective ADOPTED this day of , 2021, by the City Council of the City of Orono. CITY OF ORONO BY: Dennis Walsh, Mayor ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Ron Olson, Interim City Administrator ti� o • From: Jeremy Barnhart,AICP q Community Development Director ` kESH�4 Date: January 19, 2021 Subject: #LA21-02 City of Orono Text Amendment related to the definition of dry buildable: Public Hearing Application Summary: The City is proposing a text amendment that would alter what is considered dry buildable. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval as drafted. Issue Dry Buildable is important in determining lot areas during subdivision. In non-sewered zoning districts, each lot must provide 2 acres of dry buildable land (for septic systems and the home site) and in sewered areas,each lot must have 0.5 acres,for the home site. Slopes greater than 18%are excluded from the area of land calculated as dry buildable currently. In the development of the Subdivision Code (LA19-000065) last summer,the City Council noted the definition for Dry-Buildable, and inquired as to the origin for the 18% limit. The Council felt that 18%was too restrictive, and after staff could find no historical or statutory reason for the 18%, and directed staff to prepare an ordinance amendment to move the limit to a 3:1 slope. Staff proposes a 30% limit,for ease of communication. Solution The attached draft ordinance in Exhibit A completes this task. Staff's analysis of the issue is attached as Exhibit B. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval of the ordinance as drafted List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Draft Ordinance Exhibit B. Dry Buildable Discussion Exhibit A LA21-02 ORDINANCE NO. ,THIRD SERIES CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATED TO THE DEFINITION OF DRY-BUILDABLE THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 78-1 Definitions shall be amended by adding and deleting text for to the definition of Dry Buildable to read as follows: Dry buildable means that portion of the lot not encumbered by the waters of a duly recorded lake or river, wetlands, bluffs, or slopes steeper greater than 30 percent. 18 percent. SECTION 2. Section 82-2 Definitions shall be amended by adding and deleting text for the definition of Dry Buildable to read as follows: Dry buildable land means that portion of the lot not encumbered by the waters of a duly recorded lake or river, wetlands, bluffs, or slopes steeper greater than 30 percent.1-percent. SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED this day of ,2021 on a vote of_ayes and_nays by the City Council of Orono,Minnesota. ATTEST: Anna Carlson,City Clerk Dennis Walsh,Mayor Ordinance published in The Laker Pioneer newspaper the week of , 2021. 1 CITY OF ORONO MEMORANDUM -sz,01`TO DATE: October 12,2020 TO: Mayor Walsh, City Council y ; Dustin Rief, City Administrator F likfsHov-t FROM: Jeremy Barnhart,AICP,Community Development Director RE: Density discussion The City Council requested information regarding the origins of the 18 percent rule as it applies to the existing and proposed definitions of"dry buildable". Dry Buildable is used in the development of lots as part of a subdivision and is intended to remove lands that are either not buildable due to protected status(water,wetlands,bluffs)or their characteristics make development of home or septic sites not appropriate without major grading that is likely to change the nature of the development. There is a minimum of 0.5 acres of contiguous dry-buildable for sewered lots, and 2 contiguous acres for non sewered lots. Dry buildable has been referenced in ordinances since at least 1976, but not defined until May, 2018 (Ord 206 3rd series)as part of a general clean-up of ordinance definitions. Historically, dry buildable had only been applied to subdivisions, in the creation of lots. Steep slopes were identified as those 12%or greater when the city adopted the DNRs Shoreland regulations in February, 1992. Those same regulations identify toe and top of slope,referencing an 18%grade below or above a bluff. In researching this question,the 18%designation of steep slopes,staff reviewed the state rules and statutes regarding septic systems and Shoreland rules,and the city code regarding floodplain, Shoreland management, and septic rules. Staff could find no reference in those sources specifically referencing 18%,the only place it is mentioned is in the definition of toe and top of bluff. Given there is no state definition of dry-buildable,the City Council may establish their own definition of dry buildable to include or exclude any slope desired. The slope definition could also be removed. Dry Buildable(Zoning Code)Dry buildable means that portion of the lot not encumbered by the waters of a duly recorded lake or river, wetlands, bluffs, or slopes greater than 18 percent. Dry buildable land(Subdivision Code)means land area occurring within the property lines of a parcel or lot, excluding drainageways, flowage areas, floodplains, wetlands,marshland or slopes of 18 percent or greater. The graphics below illustrate the comparative slopes. BASIC MEASUREMENT Of SLOPE 404 hrt te.e• 200 gist Cal i««I a`«d..ovl riwy.t I P.A.-4.O.561 Awn*d Yao 441 c•..t•F..yn•wd« ►aixxtr 74? •iorv,ir..tical • MO,dC• 2 •7e6a.p.wKole mta+get Q') •OS, OoSo 3096i3:1;-136 136 __-- 22:S% --- - 32°x_ ____ Exhibit A Definitions. City definitions: Lot area(Zoning Code)means the area of a lot in a horizontal plane bounded by the lot lines, but not including any area occupied by the waters of a duly recorded lake or river or wetland or area which has been dedicated as public right-of-way. Lot area, minimum, (Subdivision Code)means minimum area required for each proposed lot as prescribed in chapter 78. In rural zones not served by sanitary sewer, each lot must contain a minimum of two acres of contiguous dry buildable land exclusive of wetlands, public and private rights-of-way,vehicular or pedestrian easements, surface areas below the ordinary high water mark of any surface water or areas at or below the floodplain elevation for a specific property. All rural lots must comply with chapter 58, article II. In urban areas served by sanitary sewer, each lot must contain contiguous dry buildable land equal to the minimum areas as prescribed in chapter 78 or half-acre, whichever is less (exclusive of public and private rights-of-way,vehicular or pedestrian easements, surface areas below the ordinary high water mark of any surface water wetlands or areas at or below the floodplain elevation for a specific property), and have legal access to the building site without encroachment of a wetland or floodplain area. Steep Slope means lands having average slopes of 12 percent or greater as measured over horizontal distances of 50 feet or more,that are not bluffs. Bluff means a topographic feature, such as a hill, cliff or embankment, having the following characteristics(An area with an average slope of less than 18 percent over a distance of 50 feet or more shall not be considered part of the bluff): (1)Part or all of the feature is located in a shoreland area; (2) The slope rises at least 25 feet above the ordinary high water level of the water body; (3)The grade of the slope from the toe of the bluff to a point 25 feet or more above the ordinary high water level averages 30 percent or greater; and (4)The slope must drain toward the water body. Bluff, toe of the, means the lower point of the lowest 50-foot segment with an average slope exceeding 18 percent. If the lowest such point is lakeward of the OHWL,the OHWL will be defined as the toe. Bluff, top of the, means that point on the cross section of a bluff below which the slope becomes more than 18 percent and above which the average slope for a distance of 50 feet or more is 18 percent or less. Minnesota Administrative Rules 6120.2500 Definitions: Steep slope. Subp 15b. "Steep slope" means land where agricultural activity or development is either not recommended or described as poorly suited due to slope steepness and the site's soil characteristics, as mapped and described in available county soil surveys or other technical reports,unless appropriate design and construction techniques and farming practices are used in accordance with the provisions of these regulations. Where specific information is not available, steep slopes are lands having average slopes over 12 percent,as measured over horizontal distances of 50 feet or more,that are not bluffs. Septic rules. Mn Rules 7080.2230 subpart B. "At-grade systems must not be installed in areas with slopes greater than 25 percent." �0 Ai 0 CITY OF ORONO A MEMORANDUM s A. `lkESH0V-t DATE: January 19, 2021 TO: Chair Ressler, Planning Commissioners Ron Olson, Interim City Administrator FROM: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Development Director RE: PC Liaisons to City Council though March, 2022 The following is a proposed schedule for Planning Commission member attendance at Council Meetings in 2018. The Planning Commission will provide a liaison for the first Council meeting of the month only. Meeting Date Representative February 8 Bob Erickson March 8 Dennis Libby April 12 Mark McCutcheon May 10 Scott Kirchner June 14 Chris Bollis July 12 Matt Gettman August 9 Jon Ressler September 13 Bob Erickson October 11 Dennis Libby November 8 Mark McCutcheon December 6 Scott Kirchner January 10,2022 Chris Bollis February 14,2022 Matt Gettman March 14,2022 Jon Ressler Planning Commission Action Requested Motion to approve the schedule for planning commission member attendance at Council Meetings through March,2022.