The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04-25-2005 Council Packetir ( f i ^ ' AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, APRIL 25,2005,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the i\genda items are available in the Public Packet • located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL Co;» PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CONSENT AGENDA I. Approve/Amend *'^^511105 •Ng cirvofOHo, APPOINTMENT 2. Appointment ofPublic Works Maintenance Worker PRESENTATION 3. Presentation by Representative of Sojourner APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 4. Regular Council Meeting of April 11,2005 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Charlie Krogness, Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Roland Jurgens, Repiesentative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT • 5. #04-3008 Valek and Palmer, 4720-4750 Tonkaview Lane • Lot Line Rearrangement (Re-Plat)- Resolution * 6. #04-3010 Ted Capra, 3534 Ivy Place-Variance-Resolution 7. #05-3074 Sean and Melissa Wambold, 1379 Park Drive - Variance and Conditional Use Permit 8. #05-3080 Interspace West, 2060 Wayzata Boulevard West - Development Plan Review • 9. #05-3086 Philip Ordway, 1145 Sixth Avenue Nordi-Variance-Resolution * 10. #05-3089 Theodore and Deborah Rozeboom, 2967 Casco Point Road - Variance - Resolution * II. #05-3092 Mathew Hofmann, on behalf of Camelot Construction, Inc., 1225 Dickenson Street - Variance - Resolution • 12. #05-3099 Mary and Mamix Guillaume, 3060 North Shore Drive - Variance - Resolution • 13. #05-3101 Jon and Jane Schwartzman, 425 Oxford Road - VariaiKe - Resolution * 14. #2461 Bryson and Johnson, 650-660-670-680 Big Island - Lot Line Rearrangement - Extension of Effective Period of Approval - Resolution MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, APRIL 2S, 200S, 7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 15. Planning Commission Reappointments 16. Appointment of ISTS Program Manager 17. Recognition of Pat Wolfe, Park Commissioner - Resolution 18. Disposal ofExcess, Unclaimed and Abandoned Property 19. Purchase of Medical Siqyplies for Navarre Fire Station/Rescue Vehicle CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT * 20. LICENSES Sale of Consumer Fireworks * 21. BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 2005 04/25 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 04/28 • Council Work Session, Thursday. 5:45 p.m 05/02 05/04 05/07 05/09 05/12 05/14 05/16 05/20 05/21 05/23 05/26 05/27 05/28 05/30 Park Commission Meeting, 7:00 p.m. Planning Commission Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30p.m Spring Cleanup Day, Saturday. 8:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. Council Work Session, Thursday, 5:45 p.m. Spring Cleanup Day - Construction Debris Only, Saturday. 8:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. Planning Commission Meeting, 6:00 p.m. Leaf and Grass Disposal, Friday. Noon - 3:00 p.m. Leaf and Grass Disposal, Saturday. 9:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. Council Work Session, Thursday, 5:45 p.m Leaf and Grass Disposal, Friday. Noon • 3:00 p.m. Leaf and Grass Disposal, Satw^v. 9:00 a.m. > 3:00 p.m. HOLIDAY 06/01 - Plaiuiing Commission Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30p.m. 06/03 - Leaf and Grass Disposal, Friday. Noon • 3:00 p.m. 06/04 - Leaf and Grass Disposal, Saturday. 9:00 a.m. • 3:00 p.m. 06/06 • Park Commission Meeting>Aimual Park Tour, 5:00 p.m. 06/13* Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 06/16 - Council Work Session, Thursday, 5:45 p.m 06/20 - Planning Conunission Meeting, 6:00 p.m. 06/27 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 06/30 - Council Wo^- Session, Thursday. 5:45 p.m il DATE: April 22, 2005 ITEM NO: 2 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION R/trrriKfQ APR 2 5 2005 CITY OF ORONO Department Approval: NaMt RoMid J. Moone THte City Administrator Admlaistrator Reviewed: Item Deecriptioa: Appolatmeat of Greg Fasching to Pnbllc Works Maintenance Worker Position _______________________________ - Agenda Section: City Adminiitrator's Report Subsequent to the elimination of the Public Works Superintendent position, the Council authorized the addition of a Public Works Maintenance Worker position. The hiring process for the position is now complete. Oreg Fasching is the top candidate. Oreg has considerable experience in public works maintenance work throu^ seasonal positions with the City of Excelsior. It is recommended Oreg be appointed to the Public Works Maintenance Worker position effective April 20,200S, at the L^l 6, step 1 pay rate of $18.04/hour. Greg will attend the April 2S Council meeting to meet the Council members. . c COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to appoint Oreg Fasching to the Public Works Maintenance Worker position effective April 20,2005, at the Level 6, step 1 pay rate of $18.04/hour. k i • ' i I Li— iinifil* •s ’lwii mm ii’ III' I • DATE: April 22, 2005 ITEM NO: 3 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COMM/»n t4ecT]|^Q APR 2 5 2005 CITY OF ORONO Dcpartmcit Approval: Nam Ronald J. Moone Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Preseatatioo by Sojonmer A representative from Sojourner, an organization that provides support services to women who have been victims of abuse, will make a presentation to the Council regarding the services provided by Sojourner. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED No action required. . M 1.. f A A f » % i' MINUTES OF THE OHONO aTY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April 11,2005 7:00 O’clock p.m. Coiimpk KAcrjii^Q APR 2 5 2005 ROLL CITY OF ORO/VO The Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Pro Tern Bob Sansevere; Council Members Jim Murphy, Lili McMillan; City Attorney Thomas Barrett; Representing Staff were: City Administrator Ron Moorse, Planning Director Mike Gaffron, Planners Janice Oundlach and Melanie Curtis, Public Service Director Greg Gappa, Engineer Tom Kellogg, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor Barbara Peterson was absent and Council Member Jim White arrived at 7:04 p.m. Mayor Pro Tern Sansevere called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. CONSENT AGENDA Items 7,10,12,13, and 14 were added to the Consent Agenda. Mnrpliy noved, White seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *2. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 28,2005 Mnrphy UMved, White seconded, to approve the minutes of the March 28,2005 City Council meeting as submitted. VOTE: Ay«i4,NaysO. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Paul Pesek, Representative 3. RECOGNITION OF PAT WOLFE, PARK COMMISSIONER, AND APPOINTMENT PROCESS Gappa noted Fat Wolfe is not present at the present time and recommended the recognition of Pat Wolfe follow Item 12. Pesek stated the park tour is scheduled for June 6 at 5:00 p.m., but noted they would probably not be touring Big Island at Out time. White indicated he has assembled some information from Hennepin County regarding their park foundation for review by the Park Commission. White also distributed information regarding the history of Norenberg Park. Item 3, Recognition of Pat Wolfe, follows Item 12. PAGE 1 of 10 ti J MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April 11,2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Dave Rahn, Representative Rahn indicated he had no comments but would be available for questions during the meeting. McMillan stated the City Council did receive the letter from the Planning Commission regarding the future development of Navarre and recommended these issues be discussed further at a joint work session. PUBLIC COMMENTS None ZONING A1 ISTRATOR’S REPORT 4. #04-3010 TED CAPRA, 3534 IVY PLACE - VARIANCE Ted Capra, Applicant, and Katherine Alexander, Architect, were present. Oundlach noted this application did appear before the City Council in November of 2004 for a hardcover variance, and since that time the applicant has met with Staff to discuss an addition/remodel proposal, which was reviewed by the Planning Commission in March of 200S. The applicant is requesting a hardcover variance to allow 32.5 percent within the 75’-250’ zone where 25 percent is normally allowed and 49.5 percent currently exists, and a hardcover variance for the 0-75’ zone where 0 percent is nomully allowed and 4.4 percent cuirently exists. The applicant is proposing to renuNlel the existing structure and to add an attached garage and mud room. Gundlach indicated the applicant is proposing that the existing footprint and first floor rooms remain, ail existing outer walls remain, with the existing second story to be removed, including floors/first story ceiling, to accommodate higher ceilings, and a new second story added. The applicant is also proposing that the detached garage be removed and replaced with an attached garage. Gundlach stated one of the issues before the Council tonight is to decide whether this would be considered an addition/remodel or a rebuild. Gundlach indicated the existing square footage and proposed square footage of the new garage/mud room is included in the Planner’s report. The Planning Commission voted 4-2 to approve the requested hardcover variance for the 75’-250’ zone with the condition that additional hardcover be removed to reduce the hardcover to 30 percent and to confirm that the existing foundation is sufficient to support the proposed improvements. Sansevere inquired whetha- the City has received an engineering report regarding the existing foundation. PACE 2 of 10 r f't MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Moaday, April 11,2005 7:00 o ’clock p.m. (W4-3010 Ted Capra, Coatiaued) Gundlach staled a letter was received indicating that a further review would be necessary. White inquired what the age of the house is. Gundlach stated the house was built in the I920’s. Murphy inquired what the essence of the issue is with this application. Gundlach stated the applicant did submit a number of different proposals, with the amount of hardcover being requested varying. McMillan inquired whether the proposed garage addition is two or three stalls. Gundlach indicated the proposed garage would consist of three stalls. Murphy inquired how the hardcover could be reduced to zero in the 0-7S’ zone. Gimdlach indicated the applicant has agreed to remove a small shed, a stone path, and a small wall. White inquired whether the wall is supporting the slope. Gundlach stated the City Engineer did review that area and does not feel that wall is necessary to hold the soil in place. Gundlach indicated the applicant is entitled to a stairway or other access to the lake. McMillan noted more blacktop would be required with an attached garage but that in her view the additional driveway is needed to safely access the lot. Gundlach noted this property does not have a 2S0*-S00' zone. Sansevere inquired why some of the Planning Commission tiKmbers felt this is a rebuild and nut a remodel. Rahn indicated he had the opinion that since the footprint is being almost doubled with the remodeling project, it should be considered a rebuild. Rahn stated in his view homeowners should not be granted additional hardcover simply because it is a remodel rather than a rebuild. Alexander stated the proposed attached garage consists of 1,543 square feet and the existing square footage of the house is 1,091 square feet. Sansevere commented he views this as a remodel and that the applicant should not be penalized for adding a garage. PAGE 3 of 10 ( —-a MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Moaday, April 11,2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. (#04-3010 Ted Capra, Contlaaed) Oundtach stated there is currently nothing in the code that specifles whether this should be considered a remodel or a rebuild. Sansevere noted the applicant is utilizing the existing foundation and exterior walls. Murphy pointed out the appearance of the structure is being totally changed with the remodeling project. White stated the lots in the Casco Point area vary and that this lot has issues with access due to the topography. White noted the applicant is proposing a 1,S00 square foot house, which is not excessive. McMillan noted some type of variance would be needed in order to attach the garage and construct an adequate driveway. Murphy stated the applicant is willing to remove some hardcover in the 0-7S* zone and inquired whether diere would be any remaining hardcover in that area. Gundlach stated City Code does allow property owners to retain a walkway down to the lake and that a aection of the stone pathway could be considered access to the lake. Gundlach stated the variance request is for 32.S percent, with the applicant indicating he is wilting to reduce it to 30 percent in the 75'-250* zone. McMillan noted die proposed driveway would consist of 1,281 square feet and that a small turnaround would be needed. Capra stated he has attempted a number of times to reduce the amount of hardcover on this lot and that in his view die size of the house is not excessive. Capra stated he would prefer an attached garage due to the Minnesota winters. Capra indicated he was able to reduce the hardcover to 30 percent on the rebuild and that he would be willing to reduce the hardcover to 30 percent with the remodel. Capra stated he would like to improve the appearance of the lot. White inquired whether the applicant would prefer to construct a new house or remodel. Capra stated he would prefer a new structure. Capra indicated the house currently is not livable and that the costs associated with remodeling are higher than constructing a new residence. Murphy inquired whether the majority of garages in the Casco Point area are attached or detached. White indicated the majority of them are attached. McMillan stated according to her figures 3,540 square feet of hardcover would be allowed, noting that the driveway accounts for 1,281 square feet. McMillan indicated she would be willing to allow hardcover in the 28 to 30 percent range given the fact that a turnaround is needed for safe exiting from this lot PAGE 4 of 10 i MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April 11,2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. (004-3010 Ted Capra, Continued) Capra stated he would appreciate the extra hardcover and that he would prefer the 30 percent with a rebuild. White commented repairing an old foundation is not an ideal situation. Murphy inquired whether the applicant would need to reappear before the Council if he proceeds forward with the relmild. Oundlach stated the Council could stipulate a certain percentage of hardcover and that staff could review the plans to insure compliance rather than reappear before the Council. McMillan moved, Murphy seconded, to approve Application 404-3010, granting of a hardcover variance of 30 pa'cent for the 7S’-250’ zone due to the length of the lot requiring a longer driveway and to allow the construction of a new residence and attached garage, and denial of a hardcover variance for the 0-75’ zone for the property located at 3534 Ivy Lane. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 5. 405-3001 ZB CONSTRUCTION, 2670 KELLEY PARKWAY (OUTLOT E, STONEBAY) RPUD - DOCUMENTS AND RESOLUTION NOS. 5299 and 5300 Amie Zachman, ZB Construction, and Bruce Heller, Heller Design, were present. Gaffron staled the resolutions before the Council tonight grant preliminary and final plat approval and general development plan approval for PUD No. 4B, Stonebay Second Addition. Gaffron indicated the PUD No. 4B agreement and PUD/Development Contract is also before the Council. Gafliron noted final elevation views have been submitted. The City Attorney is recommending the following revisions: 1.Page GC-3 - Maintenance provision in Item 11 on Page GC-3 of the Development Contract General Conditions has been revised to read ‘Developer or Homeowners Association* to ensure maintenance by the homeowners association. 2.Page AP-7/8 - Maintenance provision identical to that in the Development Contract General Conditions was added as Item R on Page AP-8 of the Agreement (which is enforceable after the Developer assigns his interest to the Homeowners Association). 3. Table of Contents - Agreement Provisions section page annotations changed from “SP-” to “AP-** to match the page numbering system. Staff recommends adoption of the documents. PAGE 5 of 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Moaday, April II, 2005 7:00 o’clock pan. (#05-3081 ZB Conitrnctlon, Coitlnocd) White moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5299, a Resolution Granting General Development Plan Approval for Planned Unit Development No. 4B for ZB Construction, Inc., and JohnTerranceHomes,LLC., File No. 05-3081. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Mnrphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5300, a Resolution Granting Preliminary Plat Approval and Approving the Final Plat of Stonebay Second Addition, File No. 05-3081. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. McMillan moved, Sansevere seconded, to accept the language of the PUD NO. 4B Agreement & PUD/Development Contract as revised per the recommendations of the City Attorney outlined In the April 11,2005 Planner’s Report. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *6. #05-3085 JULANN HAIR FASHIONS, 3455 SHORELINE DRIVE - COMMEROAL SITE PLAN REVIEW - RESOLUTION NO. 5301 Murphy moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5301, a Resolution Granting Commercial Site Plan Approval and Occupancy. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *7. #05-3092 MATTHEW HOFFMAN, ON BEHALF OF CAMELOT CONSTRUCTION, INC., 1225 DICKENSON STREET - VARIANCE Murphy moved. White seconded, to direct staff to draft an approval resolution granting lot width, lot area and side street setback variances to permit coastmetioa of a new residence limited to 30 percent hardcover on the property located at 1225 Dickenson Street. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *8. #05-3093 JEFF LINDGREN OF STREETER AND ASSOCIATES, ON BEHALF OF MICHAEL AND BERIT FRANCIS, 2995 WATERTOWN ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 5302 Murphy moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOUTION NO. 5302, a Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit to allow plumbing within an accessory bnildiag for the property located at 2995 Watertown Road. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PAGEOoflO > ^knnns MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April II, 2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. *9. JOINT USE DOCK LICENSES - RESOLUTION NOS. 5303 - 5310 Murphy moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NOS. 5303 through 5310, directing stalT to Issue Joint use dock licenses to Forest Arms Homeowners Association, Carlson/Ncison/Gage, Foi Hill Homeowners Assocladou, Walters Port Maintenance and Improvement Associatioii, Victoria Estates, Kelly Cove Homeowners Associatton, Pheasant Lawn Homeowners Association, and Minnetonka Power Squadron for the period of January 1,2005 to December 31,2005. VOTE: Aycs4,NaysO. •10. NEW JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE - BOHN’S POINT LANE - RESOLUTION NO. 5311 Murphy moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5311, Directing Staff to Issue a Joint Use Dock License to Bohn’s Point Lane Homeowners Subject to Conditions Noted Herein for the Period of January 1,2005 to December 31,2005. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *11. MARINA LICENSES Murphy moved, White seconded, to direct staff to imuc commercial marina licenses to North Shore Marina Bast, Minnetonka Marine, Sailor’s World, North Shore Marina, and Wayzata Marine with nppropriate conditions as noted in the staff memo. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT McMillan noted a letter was sent from the City to the DNR regarding the Luce Line. Moorse staled the City did receive a call today from Martha Reger of Uie DNR who indicated that Xccl is committed to addressing erosion and drainage issues if necessary. Moorse stated Reger did request that die City also send a copy of the letter to Xcel. Murphy suggested getting a copy of the letter that Xcel sent to the DNR for the City’s files. McMillan inquired who would be responsible for removing debris along the trail. Murphy stated that is an unresolved issue at the present time, noting that the undergrowth has now been removed and has exposed some debris that needs to be removed. Pesek commented it is his understanding that the DNR :s responsible for maintaining the trait. PAGEToflO A L i! MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April 11,2005 7:00 o ’clock p.m. (Mayor/ConncU Report, Continued) Sansevere noted the Mayor would be attending the meeting rc^'jirding Townline Road at the City of Independence on Tuesday, April 12"*. Sansevere stated a resident has volunteered to serve as the LMCD representative. Moorae noted the appointment of an LMCD representative is on the next Council workshop agenda. PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT *12. SPATES AVENUE UFT STATION NO. 22 VALVES IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Murphy moved. White secouded by to accept quotation from Valley Rich Company, Inc., Chaika, Mlnnaota, in the amount of $6,200 for the Spates Avenue Lift Station No. 22, Valves Improvement Project, to be Ainded from the 2005 Sewer Fnnd Capital Outlay Budget with approval of a budget adjustment to reflect this expenditure. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Murphy moved. White seconded, to accept quotation from Northern Dewatering, Inc., Rogers, Minnesota, In the amount of SI 1,551 for the Spates Avenue Life Station No. 22, Valves Improvement Project, to be fnnded from the 2005 Sewer Fund Capital Outlay Budget with approval of a budget adjustment to reflect this expenditure. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 1 f'j - J. 3. RECOGNITION OF PAT WOLFE, PARK COMMISSIONER AND APPOINTMENT PROCESS Oappa noted Pat Wolfe was not present. Gappa recommended a motion be made accepting Wolfe ’s resignation and to table adopting the recognition resolution. Moorse concuned that a motion could be made accepting Wolfe ’s resignation from the Park Commission. Murphy moved. White seconded, to accept the resignatioa of Pat Wolfe from the Park Commissioa, effective Immediately, and to authortee Initiating a process to flV the Park Commissien vacancy. VOTE: Aycs4,NaysO. The City Council took no action on the Recognition Resolution for Pat Wolfe. PAGES of 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April 11,2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT *13. GOLF COURSE STAFFING Morphy moved, White seconded, to approve a seasonal employee pay range of $8.10 to $8.85 per honr for the 2005 season. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Mnrphy moved. White seconded, to hire the seasonal employees listed at the proposed wage rates and nnder the applicable provblons of the PERA rules. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *14. EXPENDITURE FOR AIR CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE LONG LAKE FIRE STATION Mnrphy moved. White seconded, to approve the payment to City View Electric in the amount of $3,155.00, and to Aind this expenditure from the Joint Fire Station Construction Fund. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. OTY ATTORNEY’S REPORT None *15. LICENSES SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT 1.Applicant: Event; Location: Date: Time: Gear West Run/Bike^un Orono School Grounds and Surrounding Area Sunday, May 22,2005 8:30 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. Mnrphy moved. White seconded, to approve the above listed permit. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *20. BILLS Mnrphy moved. White seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds account VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PAGE 9 of 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Moaday, April 11,2005 7:00 o’clock p.in. ADJOURNMENT Morphy aravcd, SMscvere secoadcd, to adjouro the Oroao City Council meeting of April 11,2005, at 7:58 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ATTEST: * -^ Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Bob Sansevere, Mayor Pro Tern , 4 > W'Mm r.,; t.w8#;S . , *j4' rAGElOoflQ L Item DcscripIloB: #04-3008 - Steve ft Joan Valek ft The Palmer Family Trust, 4720/4750 Tonkaview Lane Final Plat - Resolution Zoalng District: Rcqaircd Lot Area: Required Lot Width: LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1 acre 140* Ut Area A WMIh:Biialiaa Area Biistina Width Proposed Area Prooosed Width 4720 Tonkaview Ln 1.35 acres 200’1.20 acres-NEW Lot 3 165 ’ 47S0 Tonkaview Ln 0.7 acre 170’1 .0 acre - NEW Lot I 245’ OLD Lot 4 0.46 acre SO’ OLD Lot 3 0.49 acre 90 ’ NEW Lot 2 0.8 acre 132’ TOTAL 3 acres |3 acres List of Esbibits: A. Final Resolution for adoption B. Final Plat drawings C. Preliminaiy Plat Resolution No. 5194 Discussioa The applicants are requesting final plat approval to create 3 lots where 5 lots (4 tax parcels) currently exist. The application consists of the following: 1. The creation of 2 lots which meet or exceed the lot area and lot width requirements for the LR-IB zoning district. 2. The creation of one lot which meets 80% of the lot area and lot width requirements for the LR-IB zoning district. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached resolution. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF VALEKS SAGA HILL ADDITION FILE #04-3008 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing tinder the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter “City Council") has adopted subdivision and land development regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application by Steven F. Valek and Joan Valek, husband and wife and Gregg A. Palmer, James D. Palmer, and Mary E. Gotsch, Trustees or successor trustees of the Palmer Family Trust U/A (hereinafter the “subdividers”) for subdivision of properties located at 4720 & 4750 Tonkaview Lane and legally described as follows: Attached as Exhibit A (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, on June M***, 2004 the City Council adopted Resolution No. SI94 granting Preliminary Plat Approval for the proposed development of a three lot residential re-plat for single fiunily residential purposes; and WHEREAS, the Subdividers have completed or have agreed to complete all other re<)uirements of the platting regulations of the City including: 1. Completion of all platting requirements of Preliminary Plat Resolution No. 5194. 2. Dedication on the plat of perimeter Draiiuige and Utility Easements as required in Resolution No. S194. 3. Desigiuition and dedication on the plat of wetlands subject to City and other agency jurisdiction, and granting of the standard Floumge and Conservation Easement over said wetlands. 4. Payment to the City of flnal plat review fees and legal review and filing fees as identified Page 1 of3 within Resolution No. 5194. S. Provision to the City of a title opinion for the Property and certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the Property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based on the findings of Resolution No. 5194, the City Council of the City of Orono does hereby approve the plat of VALEKS SAOA HILL ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota subject to the following conditions: 1. The City Clerk shall release the plat documents for filing only upon certification by the City Attorney, Planning Director and City Engineer that all requirements of the platting regulations have been satisfied. 2. The aforesaid plat shall be filed with Hennepin County on or before October 25, 2005 together with a certified original copy of this resolution and executed copies of the easements and covenants pertinent thereto. The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the conditions of this Resolution have not b^ met or the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it vidll be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Adopted by the City Council of Orono this 25*^ day of April 2005. ATTEST: '.*'1 Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 2 of3 \ I STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The fotegoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 2S"' day of April 2005, by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this___day of 2005 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public 41' ■ . '. ;IS■ . .;r 5 pimm.V 1 Se3of3 . ■Aliini lull nrra'-arfAsct^Tjfc-fu irrnainin i ■' .L -L‘. V- V'-.-:i BcttlfelT A PROPOSED SUBDIVISION FOR STEVEN F. VALEK & RALPH W. PALMER ■iN-i.i)T3“l-«5r-BER<^Ui3T-€HfI€K-IjUNBS^^ -------- BERGQUIST k WICKLUNDS PARK. VACATED ALLEY. AND IN THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 7-117-23 OMNO. m S9JM RAl^ «. PAUCll (LOTS 4 * S) 4790 TQMAVfW OSk 59J€ORONO. IM. 99M4 rout CXISTINQ LCCAL OCfOflRTlON L«ll 1. 2. 3. 4 9II4 9. t*4 «ickliiA4l 4MUia«i l« 0«l4 WiekluAdt Pork H««*nt0tn 4L« Thol Mrt •< tk« Mor|lH»otl Ouorltr of Soctio** 7. To«AOlilf 117 Mortk. Po^ot 23 Wttl of Ikt 9lH PriMC«ool MfriOion twinm ««iUrt*«f TQlOUViCW CARQCNS HCNN. CO MtlO« «kic*> H«t 0«l»4t«« tht MofiMrIf I ill# 01 OorfOu'tl M Wicklt»«iO« *04*tioo If Oor^otftSl 0^4 WtChiuftOl Pork Nonncpm Coooly. MtoMffolo ood |Hf ootitrly prolO«»OOl io« of Ikt Norlhofly liot of THoI porlioo of |ko Otlfy Of dodicolod o<t Odd odjoiwiof iht oorlM^iy lino of Lol S io to!d Addil*o«». TRol port of IHo vocolod iiooa*«d oll«y odioi^lo^ Loll 2. 3. 4 ood S. Oorpowlit ood Wickiyods OddillOfi lo Ofrppuill ond WtCklyodo Pork. Moni%ioin Couoly. MifinfiolO- Thif lurioy okoof Iko Sotfodurltt of IM oMvt doterlbtd proptrly. ood Iko loeolioo of loo oil ft top kowiti ood 0 thfd Ikorooo. II dooo not oorporl lo ffido ony olkor iovro«o*o'»tt or oooroocnoooli. m or^oo ww^wm^r TooosrdoPy lokoo lean Or •oWiNOt iMoo Off Ml City ooot Mtfd ypoo OA oiKfkid dolifo 03-312 r/jB r^rrZissSSS5mtmwmm HHB HHBIB■■■■■■■ 1 doiiBERG ft Assocum na •TSpSTfr <4 flPOP Of wm» • M • Oo* 44f4mipm L0CU4C.Miim i: IW. w biim m •'V: ■ •--; ty. Vf ii'-'". -;■ ..'f i •. '•»? .:^jkitj::___ VALEKS SAGA HILL ADDITION C.R.DOC.NO. KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Stevtn P. Valtk and Joan Valak, husband and wifa. fta ownara of lha following dttcrlbad pfoparty allualad In tha County of Hannapln. Stala of MInnasota, to wit: Lota 1, 2 and 3, Bargquist and Wlcklund'a Addition to Baroqulst and Wicklund'a Park Hannapln County MInnaaota. ALSO That part of tha Northwaat Quartar of Sactlon 7, Township 117 North, Ranga 23 Was! of Principal Maridian lying Waatariy of TONKAVIEW GARDENS, Hannapln County, Minn. Which Has batwaan tha Northarly Nna of Bargquist and Wlcklund'a Addition to Bargquill and Wlcklund'a Park, Hannapln County, MInnasola, and tha aaatariy prolongation of Uia northarly Una of that portion of tha allay as dadicatad on and adjoining tha northarly line of Lot 5 In said Addition. ALSO That part of tha vacatad unnamad allay adjoining Lota 2 and 3, Bargquist and Wicklund'a Addition to Bargquist and Wlekhind's Park Hannapln County MInnasola, And that Gragg A. Palmar, Jamas D. Palmar, and Mary E. Gotsch, Trustaas or succassor trustaaa of tha Palmar Family Trust U/A dalad Novambar 18,2004, faa ownars of tha following dtscribad proparty aitualad In tha County of Hannapln, Stata of MInnaaota, to wIL Lots 4 and 8, Bargquist and Wlcklund'a Addition to Bargquist and Wlcklund'a Park Hannapln County, MInnasola, ANO That part of tha vacatad unnamad allay adjoining Lots 4 and 5, Bargquist and Wlcklund*s Addition to Bargquist and Wicklund'a Park Hannapln County Minrmsola, Hava causad tha sama to ba survayad and plattad as VALEKS SAGA HILL ADDITION, and do haraby donals and dadlcata to tha public for pubUc usa fPravar tha Allay, and tha dralnaga and utIHty aasamants as shown on tha plaL In witnass wharaof said Slavan F. Valak and Joan Valak, husband and wlfa, hava haraunto sat thair hands this_____day of___________, 200_; and said Gragg A. Palmar. Jamas D. Palmar, and Mary E. Gotsch, Trustaas or succassor trustaas of tha Palmar Family Trust U/A datad Novambar 18,2004, hava haraunto sat thair hands this_____day of__________, 200_. Signad STEVEN F. VALEK JOAN VALEK TRUSTEES OR SUCCESSOR TRUSTEES OP THE PALMER FAMILY TRUST U/A dalad Novambar 18,2004 GREGG A. PALMER JAMES a PALMER MARY E. GOTSCH STATE Of MINNESOTA COUNTY OF ______ and wlfa. day of Tha foragoing Instrumant was acknowladgad bafora ma this _____________. 200_, by Stavan F. Valak and Joan Valak, husband Notary Public, ___ My commission aapiras County, MInnasola STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF ______ day of . cw uy ^ r'flintvr, aamw »#. r •••••»», Mary E. Gotsch, Trustaas or succassor trustaas of tha Palmar Family Trust U/A datad Novambar 18,2004. on bahaN of lha TrusL Tha foragoing instrumant was acknowladgad bafora ma this j 200 . by Gragg A. Palmar, Jamas D. Palmar, and Notary PubUc,_______ My commissiofi aipkas County, MInnaaota GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES. INC. I haraby cartify that I hava survayad and plattad tha proparty dascribad on this plat as VALEKS SAGA HILL ADDITION; that thin pJat Is a corract raprasantation of said survay; that all dislances ara corractly shown In fast and hundradihs of a foot; that all monumants hava baan correcity placad In lha ground as shown; and that tha outsida boundary Unas are correctly designated on said plaL Mark S. Gronbarg, Land Surveyor and Engineer Minnesota License Number 12755 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foragoing instrumant was acknowledged bafora me this day of_____________, 200_, by Mark S. Gronbarg, Land Surveyor and Engineer. Notary Public,_______ My commission expires County, Minnesota ORONO, MINNESOTA This plat of VALEKS SAGA HILL ADDITION was approved and accepted by tha City Council of lha City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular mealing thereof held this_____________day of 200_. If applicable, lha written comments and recommendations of tha Commissioner of Transportation and lha County Highway Engineer hava baan received by tha City, or lha prascribad 30 day period has elapsed without receipt of such comments and racommandations, as provided by Mliinasota Statutes. Section 505.03. Subd. 2. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Mayor ^ Clerk TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT, Hennepin County, MInnasola I hereby cartify that taxes payable In_____and prior years hava baan piiid for land described on this plat. Dated this____________day of__________________, 200_. PATRICK H. O'CONNOR, HENNEPIN COUNTY AUDITOR By__________!_______________________, Deputy SURVEY DIViSiON. Hannapln County. Minnesota Pursuant to MINN. STAT. Sac. 383B.56S (1989) this plat has baan approved this day of_____________, 200_. WILLIAM P. BROWN, HENNEPIN COUNTY SURVEYOR By----------------------------------------------------------------- COUNTY RECORDER. Hannapln County. Minnesota i haraby certify that tha within plat of VALEKS SAGA HILL ADDITION was filed for record In this office this_____________day of_____________, 200_. at o'clock__. M. MICHAEL H. CUNNIFF, COUNTY RECORDER By___________________________________, Deputy ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS, PLANNERS . .*• < ei-iccT 4 r\c o oueexe -t* 1 1 m "t 9 H L 1 Ji J L !! 1 i • • • f i « V' ,CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO._____5 19 4 A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4720 & 4750 TONKA VIEW LANE FILE NO. 04-3008 >^EREAS, Steven F. Valek and Joan Valek, husband and wife and Ralph W. and Lydia Palmer, husband and wife (hereinafter the “subdividers’’) on April 20,2004, filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a three lot residential re-plat of property legally described as: AtUched as Exhibit A (hereinafter “the property’’); and WHEREASj after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono’s Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 17,2004, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on June 14,2004, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the subdivider noting the following findings of fact: 1.The property is located within the LR-IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 140’ in lot width and 1 acre of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. 3. 4. The properties contain 3.0 acres of land. The proposed re-plat consists of three residential lots. Proposed Lot I and Lot 3 will meet the minimum lot area requirement of the LR-IB, One Fanuly Lakeshore Residential Zoning District meeting a minimum of 1.0 acre contiguous dry buildable land and the minimum lot width of 140’. 5. Proposed Lot 2 will be of 0.8 acre in area which meets 80 percent of the lot area requirement and 132’ in width which is over 80 percent of the lot -J*-- . v; ■ : Page 1 of 4 1 i CITYoTORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO._____5194 width requirement of the LR-iB, One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 6. Standard S' interior and 10 ’ perimeter drainage and utilities easements will be granted along the new lot boundaries. 7.Because the subdivision is a re-plat consisting of combining 4 tax parcels into 3 tax parcels a.id is not creating a new buildable site, no park fees will be due. Additionally, because the subdivision is primarily the rearrangement of 4 lots into 3 the properties are not subject to Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fees. 8.The property in total was assessed for 3 sewer units as part of the 1970 LS-1 sewer project, hence no sewer connection charges are required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Steven F. Valek, Joan Valek, Ralph W. Palmer and Lydia Palmer at 4750-4720 Tonkaview Lane per preliminary plat drawings by Gronberg & Associates of Long Lake, Minnesota, dated April 20, 2004, subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer shall grant to the City 10 foot perimeter drainage and utility easements and 5 ’ interior drainage and utility easements. 2. The driveway serving 4720 Tonkaview Lane shall be removed and relocated to a conforming location entirely within the 4720 Tonkaview property prior to sale of4720 Tonkaview Lane and Proposed Lot 2 into separate ownership. 3. Subdivider is hereby advised that preliminary subdivision approval will expire within one year of the date of City Council approval (June 14, 2005). Should the subdivider fail to complete the filing of the final plat application within the year deadline, it shall be necessary for the subdivider to file a new preliminary subdivision application with the City. Final Plat Submittals: Page 2 of 4 ? ' I f ha GITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled City Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows: 1.Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City’s records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200’. Drawings to include: a. Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Gronberg & Associates of Long Lake, Minneso^ dated April 20,2004. b. Dedication of drainage and utility easements 10’ wide along the exterior boundaries of property and S’ along the internal lot lines. c. The naming of plat. 2. Legal documents required: a. Title opinion addressed to the City. Alt owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b. The applicants must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. 3. Fees to be paid: Total due: SS30.C0 a. Final plat fee « S2S0.00 b. Legal review and filing fees for subdivison and associated documents *> S280.00 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 14" day of June 2004. N : Page 3 of 4 1 hu>GITYoT ORONO ' -y RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Sl9<l ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this M*” day of June, 2004 by Barbara A. Peteraoiii Mayor of the City of Orono« a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. RAcnaocoa HOTAITf«aUC-MM«W’J.'< K^/icLA. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instmmenl was acknowledged before me on this _ day ofUjvJ—( 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. • f wwieeec; K3E (•RACHEL DODGE rwT.v.Y puBix • MS a ir ;ota ti4f ComMot.-Hvim 4wl 31. XOj '^cLA-f-u: PoncijjL. Notary Public <AiSiSS&SS. Page 4 of4 J &ct+i6ir A PROPOSED SUBDIVISION FOR STEVEN F. VALEK & RALPH W. PALMER IN LOTS 1-S. BERGQUIST & WICKLUNDS ADDITION TO BERCQUIST & WICKLUNDS PARK. VACATED ALLEY. AND IN THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 7-117-23 OMONO. tm *SM« •. »«UCM (LOTS « * S) *7JO f-------------omMo.«7SO rQMI«V<« !.«•< ---------IM. sJN4 M.SO Th«l 09ft •! Ih« Oworltr of Socliof* 7. fo^thi Frii»<iOO' MoriOiOM wttUrl* #f rOPOCAVlCW OMOC<«S H_ Iht HorlHorly Mn« o> §4rfOv>«( 000 WtedluoO* Mtfilion lo tor^ooist ro^thij 117 NortO. tto*»o« 23 «vtl of tfif O^ffOCm 00 yifOf wflicK l*4f Ofivttn _ 4., . . - - -- »Mi|ion la tar^ooist ono ^ara Ho«..4^.- tatlOflf prolooMlioo of IM Morlhtrl, lint Of Tl*ol poMioo of tha allay Of Pafl<ala4 oo onO oPioioiof mt ooMHaMy 7ioa of Lol 5 U toid iUdil«o«». • • *y « 0 IfOO nnarlia/ tooo^rooliy la*oo frcm Orooo Cdy o«of •oofto^a fi>—o o#a Paaad iipoo ao oaaymtf ^lun 03-312 liy?H 1_______gyrr _______1r^nrr. ^7 CRONBERG k ASSOCIATRSl INC •4S n fuov m iow urn. m, tun • i*ii> ci»w* nmf mm Km vierc«f9t «» ••I m»un 9f « ai oow ■» aoacT oaioi a»i « aM«ai «ap at « «a o «!€»•% t ■ O I— 5104 i |K)ei K«U l-tO- 9*n VIV04 ya ^ 03«SI| H -s\-i •Cdti r 1 cniiMrii h/ipftingDitc AppUcatioH Received: 4-2I-04 Date ApplieatioB CoasMered at Complete: 6-9^ 60-Day Review Period Eipirct: 8-0-04 eitended to 10-7-04 eitended to 12-6-04 cxtend|||^||^ ^^D^^^nded to 4- REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO Date: April IS, 2005 Item No.: (iz> Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Janice Gundlach^ Title: City Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-3010, Theodore L. Capra, 3534 Ivy Place - Variance Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - IC, One Family Lakeshore Residential District ('/i acre min.) 0.50 acres (21,926 s.f.) 104 feet @ Shoreline; 101 feet @ 75’ Setback List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Notice of Council Action dated 4-12-05 C - Draft Council Minutes from 4-11-05 Meeting Application Summary: Applicant requests the following in order to remodel the existing structure and to add an attached garage and mud room; 1. Hardcover variance to permit 32.5% hardcover within the 75’-250’ zone where 25% is * normally allowed and 49.5% currently exists. 2. Hardcover variance to permit 4.4% h^cover within the 0-75’ zone where 0% is normally allowed and 4.4% currently exists. Background: This applicant appeared before the Planning Commission in June and August of 2004 and also the City Council in November of 2004 attempting to gain approval of a hardcover variance for the 75*-250’ zone on a rebuild proposal, 'fhe applicant repeatedly was denied at which point the applicant met with staff to discuss an addition/remodel proposal, which was review^ by the Planning Commission on 3-21-05. At the April 11, 2005 City Council meeting the Council voted 4-0 to approve a 75’-250’ zone hardcover variance at 30%, rather than the requested 32.5%, and denial of the 0-75’ zone hardcover variance. Rather than conducting a remodel and renovation, the Council permitted that applicant to rebuild, if he so chose, as the process of proposing a remodel/renovation demonstrated the need for a hardcover variance. The applicant agre^ to submit a plan meeting 30% in the 75’-250’ zone and removal of all 0-75* hardcover, with the exception of an allowed access to the lake. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution approving a hardcover variance for the 75’-250’ zone at 30% hardMver and denying a 0-75’ zone hardcover variance for 3534 Ivy Place. i .1 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE PER SECTION 78-1288 FILE NO. 04-3010 WHEREAS, Theodore L. Capra and Nancy J. Capra, husband and wife (hereinafter “the iqjplicants”) are the owners of the property located at 3534 Ivy Place within the City of C^no (hereinafter the “City ”) and legtdly described as follows: Lots 177 and 178, TAYLOR’S SUBDIVISON OF SPRING PARK LOTS, and situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota (hereinafter “the property ”); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for hardcover variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1288 to allow 32.5% hardcover within the 75’-250* zone when 25% is normally allowed and 49.5% currently exists and a hardcover variance for the 0-75’ zone to permit 4.4% hardcover when 0% is normally allowed and 4.4% currently exists. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 04-3010. The property is located in the LR - IC, One Family Lakeshore Residential District, which requires a minimum lot area of 0.50 acres and a minimum lot width of 100’. The applicant’s lot is 0.50 acres in area and 104’ in width at the shoreline and 101 feet in width at the 75’ setback. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this triplication at public hearings held on June 21, 2004, August 16, 2004 and March 21, 2005 where ultimately a recommendation was made to approve a 75’-250’ zone hardcover variance at 30% and to deny the 0-75’ zone hardcover variance for an addition/remodel project based on the following findings: Page 1 of 6 — ?'• ' .* :.V ■ '^i8»pr- •'■ 4 a. While the area proposed as an addition is larger than the existing house foot{Nint, the majority of the addition will consist of an attached garage. b. The detached garage located at the road will be removed to offset the new structure and hardcover associate with the proposed attached garage. c. The applicant has agreed to remove all excess hardcover, including a non-conforming shed, within the 0-75’ lake setback zone. d. A significant decrease in hardcover in the 7S’-250’ zone from 49.5% to 30% is feasible, but reduction to the 25% limit would require relocating the house unusually close to the road and/or downsizing the house significantly below the 1 5% lot coverage limit. e. A 250’-500’ zone does not exist on the property which would normally allow for a detached garage and less hardcover within the 75’-250’ zone. f The size foot|mnt proposed is not out of character with the neighborhood, and does not exceed the structural coverage limit for the property. r.-' 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of die proposed variance on the health, safety and welfore of the conununity. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the {q)plicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in Page 2 of6 keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a hardcover variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1288 to allow 30% hardcover within the 7S ’-2S0 ’ zone where 2S% is normally allowed and 49.5% currently exists, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council qiproval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan t^ch are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. Hardcover in the 75*-250 ’ zone shall be limited to 4,248 s.f. or 30% per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit A. Applicant is advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. 3. The applicant has the option to rebuild rather than remodel in accordance with the plan submitted for review of this variance. 4. Applicant shall remove all plastic or fabric liner material from the decorative landscape beds on the property to ensure their permeability as non-hardcover surfaces. 5. Required removals of structure and hardcover shall be completed prior to the first required inspection for either a rebuild or an addition/remodel project. 6. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the q>plicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (April 25,2006). Page 3 of 6 I ih I fafcl rffiMii itr ■ "f, 7. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the teims and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically tenninate any autimrity granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 8. The undersigned applicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants ’ heirs, sueccssois and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Otono City Council on the 25"* day of April, 2005. ATTEST: LitKia S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Ownet(s) I’M ■>*) Itr;--- Page 4 of 6 w STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of 2005 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal coipmation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this_ day of j 2005 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Miim^ta municipal crnporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public ^age5of6 ..'! '■.* j.'. •.' * /li STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instnunent was acknowledged before me this__day of 2005 by Theodore L. Cafua, husband of Nancy J. Cq>ra^ husband and wife. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this__day of, by Nancy J. C^na, wife of Theodore L. Capra, husband and wife. Notary Public k y:: •^:V- Page6of6 ^2005 '' • ■ ■ V . ■ • i •-T^ - t ~T ' ' -'r .<‘^v -■ ^ !^,r>f-W.-’’ V'.-'i ............ ^‘.■ r-; ,J-.Vr-. • ^•?'*- t'i kT ••;• :§r^ - -TSp- ?! »’■ ; A 1HC /<rrwc-. ID i>6bJlU> I/O i^LOftwjOcg AU. O'-©' Mwsffe-^' GU^PTIOKi of AO<OW£P /w€Si> tt> C/« iMMn M tMun I MK IM ■« «Ma k fti I vO .-.-li.- ■>>,■—' >j| ■. \ \ 1 ’ • r»- .' V* ,3* eS55"CSS^ __________ >«f»v< LEG^D ------------ ' » ' ■:=:r. s HKNfwa :snA.f * i> - tm mjt. WBM£ m mr muuL • *jm m K . ’iCT *4 R ^ 3 I B^petmo '-tkiSicr. :i‘< % CITYOrORONO ZONING FILE: #04-3010 2750 Kdky Parkway P.O. Box <6 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Cryital Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4000 DATE OF NOTICE: April 12.2005 TO: Theodore L. Capra COPIES: Alexander Design Group 2849 110“'Avenue NE Kathryn Alexander Blaine. MN 55449 401 East Lake Street Wayzata. MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION:................................................................................... DATE OF MEETING: April 11.2005 VOTE: 4 FOR 0 AGAINST MotioB: To approve a hardcover variance for the 75’-250’ zone to permit 30% where 25% is normally allowed, and to pennit the applicant to rebuild rather than remodel. The nx>tion included a denial of die 0-75* zone hardcover variance and all 0-75* hardcover must be removed with the exception of an allowed access to the lake. Applicant*s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, April 25,2005; to adopt a Resolution formalizes the motion noted above. Mcc^g starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and qiproval by the City Council. i' 'm :..y/ . ■ • V o ; MINUTES OF THE ^ ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Moaday, April 11,2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. O^p^^ed Pat Wolfe is not present at the present time and recommended the recognition of Pat Wolfe follow It«l^2. stated t^koark tour is scheduled for June 6 at 5:00 p.m., but noted they would probably not be touring Big blandlyhat time. White indicated he hasRttembled some information from Hennepin County regarding their park foundation for review by th^^rk Commission. White also distributed information regarding the history ofNorenbergPark. Item 3, Recognition of Pat Wolfe, followntem 12. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Dl^Rahn, Representative Rahn indicated he has no comments but would be avail^fo for questions during tonight’s meeting. McMillan stated the City Council did receive the letter fro^^^ Planning Commission regarding the future development of Navarre and recommended these issues bS^scussed further at a joint work session. PUBUC COMMENTS None ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 4. MM-3010 TED CAPRA, 3534 IVY PLACE - VARIANCE Ted Capra, Applicant, and Katherine Alexander, Architect, were present. Gundlach noted this application did appear before the City Council in November of2004 for a hardcover variance, and since that time the applicant has met with Staff to discuss an addition/remodel proposal. which was reviewed by the Planning Commissitm in hbich of200S. PAGE 2 o MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April 11,2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. The applicant is requesting a hardcover variance to allow 32.S percent within the 7S’-2S0’ zone where 25 percent is normally allowed <<nd 49.5 percent currently exists, and a hardcover variance for the 0-75’ zone where 0 percent is lurmally allowed and 4.4 percent currently exists. The applicant is proposing to remodel the existing structure and to add an attached garage and mud room. Gundlach indicated the applicant is proposing that the existing footprint and first floor rooms remain, all existing outer walls remain, with the existing second story to be removed, including floors/first story ceiling, to accommodate higher ceilings, and a new second story added. The aj^licant is also proposing that the detached garage be removed and replaced with an attached garage. Oundlach stated one of the issues before the Council tonight is to decide whether this would be considered an additior^/remodel or a rebuild. Gundlach indicated the existing square footage and proposed square footage of the new garage/mud room is included in the Planner ’s report The Planning Commission voted 4-2 to approve the requested hardcover variance for the 75’-250’ zone with the condition that additional hardcover be removed to reduce the hardcover to 30 percent and to confirm that the existing foundation is sufficient to support the proposed improvements. Sanseveie inquired whether the City has received an engineering report regarding the existing foundation. Gundlach stated a letter was received indicating that a further review would be necessary. White inquired what the age of the house is. Gundlach stated the house was built in the 1920’s. Murphy inquired what the essence of the issue is with this application. Gundlach stated the applicant did submit a number of different proposals, with the amount of hardcover being requested varying. McMillan inquired whether the proposed garage addition is two or three stalls. Oundlach indicated the proposed garage would consist of three stalls. Murphy inquired how the hardcover could be reduced to zero in the 0-75’ zone. Oundlach indicated the ^ipUcant has agreed to remove a small shed, a stone path, and a small wail^ PAGES MINUTES OF THE OftONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April 11,2005 7:00 o'clock p.in. V^te inquired whether the wall is supporting the slope. Oundlach stated the City Engineer did review that area and does not feel that wall is necessary to hold the soil in place. Gundlach indicated the applicant is entitled to a stairway or other access to tire lake. McMillan noted more blacktop would be required with an attached garage but that in her view the additional driveway is needed to safely access the lot. Oundlach noted this property does not have a 2S0*-S00’ zone. Sansevere inquired why some of the Platming Commission members felt this is a rebuild and not a del. Rahn indicated he had the opinion that since the footprint is being almost doubled with the remodeling project, it should be considered a rebuild. Rahn stated in his view homeowners should not be granted additional hardcover simply because it is a remodel rather than a rebuild. Alexander stated the proposed attached garage consists of 1,543 square feet and the existing square footage of the house is 1,091 square feet. Sansevere commented he views this as a remodel and that the applicant should not be penalized for adding a garage. Gundlach stated there is currently nothing in the code that specifies whether this should be considered a remodel or a rebuild. Sansevere noted the applicant is utilizing the existing foundation and exterior walls. Murphy pointed out the appearance of the structure is being totally changed with the remodeling project. White stated the lots in the Casco Point area vary and that this lot has issues with access due to the topography. White noted the applicant is proposing a 1,500 square foot house, which is not excessive. McMillan noted some type of variance would be needed in order to attach the garage and construct an adequate driveway. Murphy stated the applicant is willing to remove some hardcover in the 0-75* zone and inquired whether there would be any remaining hardcover in that area. i*' PAGE 4 * I MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April 11,2005 7:00 o’dock p.m. Gundlach stated City Code does allow property owners to retain a walkway down to the lake and that a section of the stone pathway could be considered access to the lake. Gundlach stated the variance request is for 32.S percent, with the applicant indicating he is willing to reduce it to 30 percent in the 75 ’-250* McMillan noted the proposed driveway would consist of 1,281 square feet and that a small turnaround would be needed. Capra staled he has attempted a number of times to reduce the amount of hardcover on this lot and that in his view the size of the house is not excessive. Capra stated he would prefer an attached garage due to the Minnesota winters. Capra indicated he was able to reduce the hardcover to 30 percent on the rebuild and that he would be willing to reduce the hardcover to 30 percent with the remodel Capra stated he would like to improve the appearance of the lot. White inquired whether the applicant would prefer to construct a new house or remodel. Capra stated be would prefer a new structure. Capra indicated the house currently is not livable and that the costs associated with remodeling are higher than constructing a new residence. Murphy inquired whether the majority of garages in the Casco Point area are attached or detached. White indicated the majority of them are attached. McMillan stated according to her figures 3,540 square feet of hardcover would be allowed, noting that the driveway accounts for 1,281 square feel. McMillan indicated she would be willing to allow hardcover in the 28 to 30 percent range given the fact that a turnaround is needed for safe exiting from this lot. Capra stated be would appreciate the extra hardcover and that he would prefer the 30 percent with a rrimikl. White commented repairing an old foundation is not an ideal situation. Murphy inquired wheth» the applkant would need to reappear before the Council if be proceeds forward with the rrimild. rAGIS -A.. i MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April 11,2005 7:00 o’dock p.m. Gundlach stated the applicant could stipulate to a certain percent for the hardcover and that staff could review the plans to insure compliance and not reappear before the Council. McMillan nMved, Murphy seconded, to approve Application M4-3010, granting of a hardcover variance of 30 percent for the 75’-250* zone due to the length of the lot requiring a longer driveway and to allow the construction of a new residence and attached garage, and denial of a hardcover variance for the 0-75’ zone for the property located at 3534 Ivy Lane. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. M5-3081 ZB CONSTRUCTION, 2670 KELLEY PARKWAY (OUTLOT E, STONEBAY) RPUD-UMENTS AND RESOLUTION NOS. Amie Zachman, Z^onstruction, and Bruce Heller, Heller Design, were present. Gaffixm stated the resoluhh|u before the Council tonight grants preliminary and final ^i^pprovai and general development plan appro g^for PUD No. 4B, Stonebay Second Additiony^ffron indicated the elevation views have been submitted. PUD No. 4B agreement and PUD/De^lopment Contract is also before the^ouncil. Gaffron noted flnal The City Attorney is recommending the following n^sions: 1. Page GC-3 - Maintenance provision in Item 11 mVage GC-3 of the Development Contract General Conditions has been revised to tevelopeNar Homeowners Association’ to ensure maintenance by the homeowners assonation. 2. Page AP-7/8 - Maintenance pu^ion idetitical to that in the Deveratament Contract General Conditions was added asl^ R on Page AP-8 of the Agreement (whichVenforceable after the Developer assigns Unnterest to the Homeowners Association). 3. Table of Conufe - Agreement Provisions section page annotations changed from^HE-” to “AP-”Itch the page numbering system. Staff I ids adoption of the documents. PAGE 6 i ^ - — - ■^------— ninultmii a iti Date Applkatida Received: 12>22*04 Date AppUcatiM Considered as Complete: 01-66-05 60-Day Review Period Eipiration - Eitcnsion: 05-06-05 sspptinG APR 2 5 2005 CtTY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Dale: April 4,2005 Item No. 'I DqiartmcDt Approval: Name: Melanie Curtis Title: City Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Item Description: #05-3074 - Sean & Melissa Wambold - 1379 Park Drive - After-the-Fact CUP & Variances Zoning District: Lot Atm: LR-IB, One Family Lakeshore RcsMcatiak 1-acre 1.3 acre (56,845 s.f.) List of Exhibits: A. Revised Plan dated 03-08-05 (showing lower wall) B. Engineer Comments A Plan for Wall Removal A Grading C. Council Minutes of March 28,2005 D. Memo & Exhibits of March 28"' Application Snmmary: This a|q>lication was tabled at the March 28 Council meeting in order to allow for City Engineer Tom Kellogg to review the applicants* requests to allow specific portions of the walls within the 75’-250 ’ zone to remain. This area was shown by the neighboring property owner as an area requiring some retaining wall to help manage the storm water drainage and facilitate erosion control. At the Council’s request, Tom Kellogg reviewed the site and his comments as well as recommended grading and reconunended portions of the 75’ - 250 ’ boulder walls to remove/remain are attached as Exhibit C. Additionally, at the March 28"* meeting the applicants and their neighbor discussed the merits of allowing portions of the wall and the grass path within the 0-75’ zone to remain, listing erosion control and access to the lake yard for maintenance equipment as justification. Planning Staff Recommendation Approval of a hardcover variance within the 0-75’ zone for 166 s.f. or 1.46% hardcover to allow portions of an existing retaining wall to remain for a grassed lake access path. Staff also recommends approval of a hardcover variance within the 75’-250 ’ zone to allow portions of an existing retaining v^l to remain to facilitate erosion control as proposed by Tom Kellogg. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Direct staff to draft a Resolution reflecting Council’s decision, for adoption on May 9"'. • 1 I I^Bonestroo ffiiRosene wSAnderii(& ^\|| Associates Englfwart ft ArcMtccU 2335 \We$t Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 Office: 651-636*4600 • Fax: 65I-636-I3II wwwiMnestroo.com &uh»tr B March 31.2005 Ma. Melanie Curtie Planner CityofOrono Poet Office Box 66 Cryalal Bay. MN 55323 1379 Park Drive Pile No. 139-05-C Pbt No. 05-3074 Dear Melanie: We made a tile viait to 1379 Park Drive on March 30,2005 to apecifically review the need for an existing retaining wall located aouth and weat of the exiating home. The retaining wall was conatructed to provide support for a path/road from the rear of die house to the lake shore. The neighboring property owner at 1399 Park Drive has indicated that a portion of the existing retaining wall serves to prevent storm water from running onto his property. Based on our site visit we have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: • We generally concur with the comments that a portion of the existing retaining wall serves a beneficial purpose in containing storm water on the 1379 Park Drive property and diverting away from the 1399 Park Drive property. It is our recommendation that the portion of the wall that r ;ntains storm water on the subject property be allowed to remain. We fiirther recommend that approximately 45-feet of that existing wall can be removed and that area regraded without having any negative effects on the neighboring property. The portion of the wall to be removed and the area to be regraded are shown on the attached sketch. • All other non-sbuctural walls should be removed as shown in the drawing dated 3-8-OS provided by the applicant • Erosion control measures should be installed, inspected and approved by the city prior to any work on site. If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSBNE, ANDERLiK A ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg Attachment Cc: Greg Oappa, City of Orofio Bruce Vang, City of Orono • St. Paul. St. Cloud. Rochester. Willmar. MN • Milwaukee, W\ • Chicago. IL Athrmrnm Opyrniwity iwplByg and lipHy* OwfmB 1 L. Hi$irc 4. #05-3074 SEAN AND MELISSA WAMBOLD, 1379 PARK DRIVE - VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Curtis explained that the applicants recently purchased the property and were notified that the retaining walls and hardcover in the lakeshore yard was installed by the previous owner without proper city permits. As it was their intent to do some remodeling including a small addition in the future, they wished to bring the property into compliance. The applicants have provided a revised proposal with removals resulting in 2SVo hardcover in the 7S-2S0* zone and 268 s.f. of hardcover in the 0-7S* zone. Curtis indicated that the applicants feel that by allowing the current retaining wall, existing vegetation and path to the lake to remain within this zone there would be less impact on the lake and would allow for uninterrupted use of their lake yard. Curtis stated that staff recommends denial of an after-the-fact hardcover variance for the 0-7S* setback zone for hardcover in excess of the square footage that would be allowed for a permitted stair access. Staff would also recommend approval of a conditional use permit in order to re-gradc the lake yard, including an erosion control plan and timeline for implementation. (4. MS-3074 SEAN AND MEUSSA WAMBOLD, 1379 PARK DRiVE, Continued) Mr. Wambold stated that the neighbor next door was present this evening and had voiced his support for maintaining the retaining walls in an effort to control the excessive erosion which was previously caused by their property to his. Wambold pointed out that he had only recently purchased the property to which the landscaping contributed to the parcel, and was unaware of any problems with the yard until he was contacted by the city. He did not anticipate spending an additional $50,000 to remove and relandscape the property when he bought it. Scott Marorz, the landscape architect, interjected that the removal of the retaining wall and boulders would not be a good solution for the lake with regard to erosion and runoff. Steve Sigel. 1399 Park Drive, the next door neighbor stated that if the Wambolds were forced to regrade the slope, a number of large trees would have to be removed, further adding to the erosion problem he faced residing next door to the site. He urged the Council to allow the retaining walls to remain, since they slowed the velocity at which the runoff flowed from their elevation to his property, which was roughly a severe 30-40’ hillside slope. Mayor Peterson asked h«wv long ii;e walls had been in place. Sigel stated that the previous owner had spent two years on the project, with the city inspecting it at various phases. He questioned why the City red tag^d the property now, only after the new owners have taken possession. Attorney Barrett asked if the new owners were aware that the property had been red tagged. Wambold stated that he was unaware of the red tag until three days after he had taken possession when the City called him out of the blue after having been contacted by a realtor down the street. Curtis concurred, stating that the City was not aware that the work had been completed by the previous owner until that same realtor contacted them. Vang, the building inspector, had red lagged the work that it not proceed, therefore, nodiing was on file at the City. Wambold stated that it was their intent to bring the property into as much compliance as possible, but would like some leniency since some of the wails are necessary to control erosion. i! ] } M Murphy viewed two distinct problems, though nothing should exist in the 0-7S’ zone, the erosion problems seem to warrant their need so as to cause no Anther problems for the neighbor. He asked for the City Engineer’s comments. Engineer Kellogg stated that it was his opinion that all of the hardcover be removed from the 0-7S’ zone except steps. He was unsure whether the mature trees would be removed, but admitted that a great deal of fill would be necessary to obtain the 3:1 slope up to the lake edge. Since the boulders at the top of the path were aesthetic, he recommended they be removed also and that an erosion control plan be submitted. He did not indicate that ail of the boulders must be removed. McMillan asked whether the sloped hillside within the boulder retaining walls is landscaped. (4. 0QS ’3»74 SEAN AND MELISSA WAMBOLD, 1379 PARK DRIVE, Continued) Sigel stated that they contain beds of flowers and hostas, as well as mature trees which aid in erosion control. Wambold stated that he was willing to remove any of the unnecessary boulders and keep those that aid in the erosion control for the yard. Sensevere stated that staff should look at the side retaining wall also and make a recommendation. Attorney Barrett suggested that the Council table the application until staff and the City Engineer has an opportunity to review the side wall. White moved, Sanseverc seconded, to table Application IN)S>3074,1379 Park Drive, for Engineer review of the side retaining waN. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ’ '♦.lOrtV’f r* I 4 wCbi ■iliMik jiiU Exhibit D Date Applicatioa Received: 12>22*04 Date Applicatioa CoaeMered at Coaipicte: 01-06-05 60-Day Review Period Eipiratioa - Exteosion: 05-06-05 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: March 22,2005 Item No. Department ApprovaltA Name: Melanie Curtis k ^ Tide: City Planner ^ Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Item Description: .V05-3074 - Sean & Melissa Wambold - 1379 Park Drive - After-the-Fact CUP & Variances Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IB, One Family Lakesbore Residential, 1-acre 1.3 acre (56,845 s.f.) List of Exhibits: A. Revised Plans & Plan Reviewed by PC on 02-22-05 B. PC Memos & Exhibits of01-06-05 & 02-15-05 C. 60-Day Review Extension D. City Engineer Letter Review of Revised Plan E. PC Action Notices F. PC Minutes from January and February Application Summary: The applicants recently purchased the property at 1379 Park Drive. After purchasing the property they were notifled that the retaining walls and hardcover in the lakeshore yard was installed by the previous owner without proper City permits. As their intent is to do remodeling including a small addition in the future the applicants would like to bring the property into compliance. This application was tabled at the January Planning Commission meeting in order to provide the applicants time to work with a landscape professional to redesign and remove hardcover. For the February meeting the applicants provided a revised proposal with removals resulting in 25% hardcover within the 75 ’-250 ’ setback zone and 268 s.f. of hardcover within the 0-75 ’ zone. Although, the applicants have provided yet another set of revised plans meeting Staff and the Planning Commission’s direction at the February meeting, they would still like the Council to consider their request for a hardcover'variance to allow 268 s.f of hardcover within the 0-75 ’ zone. They feel that by allowing the current retaining wall, existing vegetation and path to the lake to remain within this zone there would be less impact on the lake and would allow for uninterrupted use of their lake yard. The applicants are currently working on a plan for a remodel of the residence for this fall and have agreed to remove any excess hardcover within the 75 ’ - 250 ’ zone as a part of this current application. Planning Commission Recommendation J li i • vJ On February 22,2005, Planning Conunission voted 4 -1 * on a motion as follows: 1. To deny the request for hardcover variances within the 0 ’-75 ’ and within the 75*-250 ’ zone; and 2. To approve a conditional use permit in order to re-grade the 0 ’-7S* zone in conjunction with 168 s.f of allowed hardcover - this hardcover may be either an allowed lake access stair or boulder retaining wall for a lake access path. * Commissioner Leslie did not agree with the 168 s.f. allowance. Planaiag Staff Reconmeadatioa Planning Staff recommends denial of an after-the-fact hardcover variance for the 0-75 ’ setback zone fi>r hardcover in excess of the square footage that would be allowed for a permitted stair access. Staff also recommends approval of a conditional use permit in order to re-grade the lake yard. The applicant should be provided with a timeline for hardcover removals, re-grading and vegetation restoration. Additionally, the iqiplicants should provide a re-grading and erosion control plan in a timely manner for approval and implementation spring or summer 2005 and apply for a stair installation permit if they choose to in^l a stair. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Direct Staff to draft a Resolution reflecting Council ’s decision. ./■' . !■* ;i 1 >««• Mi^tC FILE #05-3074 15 February 2005 Page 1 of 2 Date Applicatioa Received: 12-22-04 Date Applkatioa Coneidered as Complete: 01-06-05 60-Day Review Period Eipires: 03-06-05 To:Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Fronl: Date: Subject: Melanie Curtis, City Plaime^j^|^j|j(/i, February 15,2005 05-3074, Sean & Melissa Wambold, 1379 Park Drive - After-the-Fact Variance and Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1B, One Family Lakeshore Residential, 1-acre/l 40 ’ Lot Area: 1 >3 acre (56,845 s.f.) A/^icatioH Summaiy: This qiplication was tabled at your January meeting in order for the applicants to have time to hire a landscape professional to design a hardcover removal plan and to determine the areas of hardcover and walls which are critical to remain._____ SU^ Recommendation: Planning Staff recommends denial of the after-the-fact hardcover variance and approval of a conditional use permit in order to re-grade the 0- 75’ setback zone. _________________________________ List of Exhibits A. Hardcover removal plan dated 02-15-05 B. City Engineer Recommendation C. PC Report of 01-06-05 ver Calculations; Hardcover Zone Total Areata Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75 11,350 s.f.0s.f (0%) 935 s.f * (8.24 %) 268 s.f (2.36 %) 75 - 250 26,423 s.r.6,605.75 s.f. (25%) 8,193 s.f* (31%) 6,605 s.f (25%) 250 - 500 20,834 s.f.6,250 s.f. (30%) 3,356 s.f * (16.1%) 3.356 s.f (16.1%) After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Hardcover Variauce The applicants have proposed hardcover removals in both the 0-75’ and the 75’-2S0’ zones. Hardeover removals within the 7S ’-2S0’ zone would result in a reduction 1,588 s.f. for 25% total. Within the 0-75’ zone the applicants are proposing removals, but have II w FILEi05.3074 15 February 2005 Page 2 of 2 determined that 268 s.f. is necessary. In reviewing the proposals^ Staff feels that the removals within the 75 *250 zone are appropriate. However, in following with the City Engineer ’s recommendation staff feels that the wall and fire pit located in the 0-75 ’ zone should be removed as well. The hardcover within this zone should be removed and re-graded as appropriate. A stairway is allowed for purposes of lake access. Hardship Staff finds that there is no hardship to justify granting a hardcover variance to allow the hardcover within the 0-75 ’ zone, however due to the slope of the lake yard there may be justification to allow a lake access stair to be constructed. Issues for ConsMcnition 1. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Reconiniendation Planning Staff recommends denial of the after-the-fact hardcover variance for the 0-75 ’ setback zone and qqiroval of a conditional use permit in order to re-grade the lake yard. The applicant should be provided with a timeline for hardcover removals, re-grading and vegetation restoration. Additionally, the ai^licants should provide a re-grading and erosion control plan in a timely marmer for approval and implementation spring or summer 2005 and ^iply for a stair installation permit if they choose to install a stair. i Slone WaQs & Borders 493 sq.ft Steps 2S4 sq.ft Decks in rcwf of House 424 sq ri. Deck near Garage 243 sq.ft. House 2173 sq.ft. Front Porch 47 sq.ft Garage 642 sq (t Rear Porch 366sqrt Concrete Sidewalk 349 sq.ft. Cone. A/C Pad 9 sq.ft Cone. Sloop at Ration Door In Rear 32 sq ft. Flagstone Walk (Rear Near Garage)59 sq.ft. Flagstone Walk (Front near Garage)155 sq.ft Asphalt Driveway 1339 sq ft Total Hardcover 6605 sq.iL Total Land Area 26.423 sq.ft Proposed Hardcover Percentage; 25.00% 00ft. Zone Detached Garage 5u2 sq ft. Aspalt Driveway 2660 sq.ft. Concrete Apron 44 sq.ft. Pavers 9 sq.ft. Stone Borders 141 sq.ft. Total Hardcover 3350 sq.ft Total Land Area 20.834 sq.ft. Proposed Hardcover Percentage: 16.11% Hardcover Calculations 0.7Sf»Zont Slone Wall 240 sq.ft Fire pit 23 sq.ft Total Hardcovof 288 sq. ft Total Land Area 11.350 sq.8. Propose Hardcover Percentage: 2.36% 7S-a'3ft.Zone Stone Walts & Borders 493 sq.ft. Steps 254 sq.ft Decks In rear of House 424 sq.ft Deck near Garage 243 sq.ft. House 2173 sq.ft. Front Porch 47 sq.ft. Garage 642 sq.ft Rear Porch 386 sq.ft. Concrete Sidewalk 349 sq.ft. Cone. A/C Pad 0 sq.ft. Cono. Stoop ot Patton Door in Roar 32 sq.ft. Flagstone Walk (Roar Noar Garago)59 sq.ft. Flagstone Walk (Front near Garage)155 sq.ft. Asphalt Driveway 1339sq.fL Total Hardcover 6605 sqfL Total Land Area 26,423 sq.ft Proposed Hardcover Percentage: 25.00 % )0ft. Zone Detached Garage 502 sq.ft Aspalt Driveway 2660 sq.ft. CcHOcrete Apron 44 sq.ft. Favors 9 sq.ft. Stone Borders 141 sq.ft. Total Hardcover 3350 sq.ft Total Land Area 20.834 sq.ft Propoaod Hanfeovor Psroentage: 16.11% MARKELL - LABEREE DESIGN GROUP VKrAMxiofauanM' CAC4*I.IM f iKniiy ivit #(ti plati wax fmrpsrcd by aw «H aadtf wy «liif«i .i^irfvtsiou ml IM r tm «tMy tifjitltrvd t ANO.V*. \ Pt .\JUriincCT Bwhw Im law^nribr Sutc nfMlMKX4>ia Lcr LieaoM No.. e im g 0- 1 hm 0) S 2 I8 eI: JO s?d!! 3®™ .<$ cn iV 8 c £ S m fO — ^ P ■g 3^^V » Sean & MeAssa Wamboid -5"> Kiftir A •»— ,*^ <••, i '•Jr';u* . 4. '< >• ... ’ • • ' i ^ Hardcover Calculations 0>7SftZoiw Slone Wall 240 sq.ft Fire pit 26 sq.ft. Total Hardcover 268 sq. ft Total Land Area 11.350 sq.ft. Pfoposo Hardcover Percentage: 2.36% 7S*250ft.2one r. /5~rrr- LOT ; \ ■h SCALE :1*«20' Stone Walla & Borders 493 sq ft. Steps 254 sq.ft. Decks In rear of House 424 sq.ft. Deck near Garage 243 sq ft. House 2173 sq.ft Front Porch 47 sq.ft. Garage 642 sq.ft. Rear Porch 386 sq.ft. Concrete Skfewalk 349 sq.ft. Cone. A/C Pad 9 sq.ft. Cano. Stoop at Ration Door in Rear 32 sq ft. Flagstone Walk (Rear Near Garage)59 sq ft. Flagstone Walk (Front near Garage)155sqfl. Asphalt Driveway 1339 sq.ft Total Hardcover 6605 sq.ft Total Land Area 26.423 sq.fL Proposed Hardcover Porcentage: 25.00% 90ft. Zone De*sched Garage 502 sq ft Aspalt Driveway 2660 sq.ft. Concrete Apron 44 sq.ft. Pavers 9 sq.ft. Stone Borders 141 sq.ft Total Hardcover 3350 sq.ft. Total Land /Vreo 20.634 sq.ft. Proposed Hardcover Percentage: 16.11% \ V \ DRh/f MARKELL - LABEREE DESIGN GROUP imrAftMOir«.i f«‘Mf CACA*I.U| I 111 * y tnUfy U:.«i ll*n pltMt •vj% prt'psr:d Itj itio oi iMilvr tr.y Uiiect kOpm'^Ktu acwl RMrt I tm a ilul|r tt|>iUci44 r.ANOSrAr*{; .XkLIII irXT vthitr (be Ufr^nfil-x Suk IN Mi(mr)kNi I rv y «ko:i Pate:_________________ UnmeNo.________ c S3 S K. s Z Sd) a: g 2 8 1 -to S .C n8 ^ rNPNMCBMMr Stfiin t\ Melissa Wamboid • «i M * • J . • N .*/ i* • WW*tf * W • %# A t^WWAvtCte •••!*«»»•%«**•% MMA%4WWA%#AA r* * 0onestro6 Rosene .... Anderfik& Associates. SnflkiMra 4 Ardihsett 23J5 MMtsC Highway 36 • St Paul. MN 55ll3 Orrice: 6St-636-4600 • Fax; 651-636-1311 wwwJ>onestroo.com • ^ • • •* y •• Fdmiafy 17,2005 Ml. Melanie Cuitui Planner CiqrefOrono Poat Office Box 66 Clyitel Bay, MN SS323 **.• t.• t. ■' • 1379 PaikDrive FileNo. 139-05<C Plat No. 03-3074 • t e • .Dear Melanie: We havr ifviewed the plana for the ptnyoaed improvementa to the property at 1379 Parte Drive. The impeovamenta include the lemoval of boulder retaining walla within the 0 to 7S>lbot aetback fiom the lake. We have the'following conunenta with legardi to engineering mitten: • The plana ihow removal of moat tet not all of the retaining walla within 7S feet from the lake. Aa noted in our 1-6-OS letter all boulder walla wiOiin 75 feet fiom the lake could be removed and the lite regraded. The work will likely include extending the exiating atairwi^ to provide acceas to the lakeahoie. It itill lemaina our recommendatian that die plana reflect removal of all walla within the 75- fixit lakeihote aetback and that a corresponding grading plan be aubmitted fin review and approval. If yon have any queationa ploie can meat (651) 604-4863. • ^ a • ^ Yotoa vaqr truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE. AI^ERLBC ft ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: OtegOappa,CityofOrono Bruce Vmtg, City of Orono • V .• I • ••« •• • l .• SC. Paul, Sc. Cloucl. Rochcf cer, Wlllmar. MM ■ Milwautec. Wl • Chicago, IL . • .*• (•I • ■ -• . I t Exhibit C Date Application Received: 12-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 01«4d-OS 60>Day Review Period Expires: 03-06-05 FILE W5-3074 6 January 2005 Page 1 of 5 To:Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Melanie Curtis, City Planner ||4l^ Date: Subject: January 6,2005 05-'*0?^, Sean & Melissa Wambold, 1379 Park Drive • After-the-Fact Variance and Conditional Use Pennit - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-1B, One Family Lakeshore Residential, l-acre/140* 1.3 acre (56,845 s.f.) Application Summary: The applicants are requesting afler-the-fact approval for hardcover variances within the 0-75 ’ setback and the 75 ’ - 250’ setback and a conditional use permit for retaining walls and grading within 75 ’of the lake which was conducted by a previous owiier without proper City permits.________________________________ Staff Recommendation: Planning Staff recommends removal of the hardcover in the 0- 75 ’ zone and 75 ’-250’ zones that is not strictly necessary for lake access or slope stability.____________________________________________________________ Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-966. Land Alteration; Prohibited. It is unlawful for any person to build, alter or repair any seawall, retaining wall or otherwise change the grade or shore of lakeshore property without a conditional use pennit issued by the Council. Sec. 78-1250. Conditional uses. Conditional uses allowable within shoreland areas shall be subject to the review and approval procedures and criteria and conditions for review of conditional uses established in this chapter. The following additional evaluation criteria and conditions apply within the shoreland overlay district: 1. Evaluation criteria. A thorough evaluation of the water LoJy and the topographic, vegetation and soils conditions on the site must be made to ensure: a) The prevention of soil erosion or the possible pollution of public waters, both during and after construction; b) The visibility of structures and other facilities as viewed from public waters is limited; c) The site is adequate for water supply and on-site sewage treatment; and d) Tiie types, uses and numbers of watercraft that the project will generate are 4M V. ?!FILE #05-3074 6 January 2005 Page 2 of 5 rntm : ' • V : - * * .. . ’• ‘ . ^ri. ? ;'Avr W.V.'-)/ / compatible in relation to the suitability of public waters to safely accommodate these watercraft. (2) (3) (4) Sec 78-1282. Stairways, lifts and landings. Stairways and lifts are the preferred alternative to major topographic alterations for achieving access up and down bluffs and steep slopes to shore areas. Stairways, lifts and landings shall be allowed in the shore setback zone and must meet tire following design requirements: (1) Stairways and lifts must not exceed four feet in width. Landings for stairv/ays and lifts shall not exceed 32 square feet in area. Canopies or roofs are not allowed on stairways, lifts, or landings. Stairways, lifts and landings may be either constructed above the ground on posts or piling” or placed into the ground, provided they are designed and built in a manner that ensure, control of soil erosion. Stairways, lifts and landings must be located in the most visually inconspicuous portions of lots, as viewed from the surface of the public water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions, whenever practical. Facilities necessary to provide shore area access to physically handicapped persons shall be allow^ provided that the dimensional a** J pertbrmance standards of subsections (1)~(S) of this section are completed in addition to the requirements of the Minnesota Regulations, chapter 1340. A building permit shall be obtained for construction of stairways, lifts and landings regardless of whether such improvements are constructed above, at or below grade. Sec. 78-1286. Topographic alterations/grading and filling. (b.) Grading, filling or excavating of more than ten cubic yards is prohibited within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of the public waters enumerated in section 78-1217. Grading, filling or excavating of ten cubic yards or less shall require city staff review and permit and be si bject to other pertinent sections of this chapter. Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitatioHS. a) No hard cover or impervious surface shall be placed, located or constructed within 75 feet of the ordinary hi^ water level of any lake or tributary, except for stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in this Code. b) Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OHWL, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Between 250 feet and 500 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 30 percent hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 35 percent hardcover. ,v'V ‘ i M u 1^-■ FILE #05-3074 6 January 2005 Page 3 of 5 LittofExhIbiti A. ^>plication B. Ha^hip Documentation Form C. Survey (pre-grading) D. Existing Survey E. Site Plan with Photo Key & Photos F. Submitted Hardcover Calculations G. Letter fiom Engineer dated 1-6-05 H. Letter from staff dated 10-28-04 I. Memo from Building Inspector J. Property Owners List K. Plat Map Background The applicants recently purchased the property at 1379 Park Drive. After purchasing the propttty they were notified that the retaining walls and hardcover was installed by the previous owner without proper City permits. As their intent is to do remodeling including a small addition in the future the applicants would like to bring the property into conq>Uance. Orono Building Inspector, Bruce Vang, has provided a memo providing some background on this project. Briefly, the prior owner discussed with the City a proposal to do limited grading in the 0-75 ’ zone. He was advised to also contact the MCWD. City staff later discovered work had been completed. This all came to light shortly after the potential buyers contacted staff regarding our issues with the property. While this was no information regarding any violations in the file at the time of the inquiry, staff did advise the qiplicants of the issues as soon as it was known, in the interim the applicants had purchased the iroperty. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET LotArca/Width; LR-IB LiOt Area Lot Width Required 43,560 s.f. (1 acre)140* Actual 56,845 s.f (1.3 acre)>50 ’ Structural Coverage: Total Lot Area Total Structural Coveraae 56,845 s.f. (1.3 acre)Allowed: 8,526 s.f. (15%) Proposed: 4,370 s.f (7.7%) ■■■■■. if ■ •», /T V ■ • •••• ^ > T-■ ; • v;. UV..-• v- - : ,.v. - ■ !:rVy.V^ ■ . ■ V...- ^ A Tr ir iiMiritfiii I :• t- I''. FILE (W5-3074 6 January 2005 Page 4 of 5 Hardcover Calculationg: Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75 11,350 s.f 0 s.f (0%) 935 s.f * (8.24 %) 935 s.f (8.24 %) 75 - 250 26,423 s.f 6,605.75 s.f (25%) 8,193 s.f * (31%) 8,193 s.f (31%) 250 - 500 20,834 s.f.6,250 s.f (30%) 3,356 s.f * (16.1%) 3,356 s.f (16.1%) * After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Coaditional Use Permit Analysis A thorough evaluation of the water body and the topographic, vegetation and soils conditions on the site have been made, aiid are addressed by the following; • The prevention of soil erosion or the possible pollution of public waters, both during and after construction; a/ this time the lake yard appears to be stable with no existing erosion. • The visibility of structures and other facilities as viewed from public waters is limited; Visibility has not been minimized by vegetation plantings to screen the walls as viewed from the lake. • The site is adequate for water supply and on-site sewage treatment; Not applicable. The types, uses and numbers of watercraft that the project will generate are compatible in relation to the suitability of public waters to safely accommodate these watercraft; Not applicable. Hardcover Variance The 0-75’ zone hardcover level is currently 8.24% or 935 s.f. where 0% is normally allowed. All of the hardcover within the 75’ setback consists of boulder “outcroppings”, boulder borders and walls, and step stone path. On properties with steep slopes a stair to the lake is considered allowed hardcover as it is the preferred alternative to topographic alterations. The hardcover on this property, although partially for lake access, is not considered allowed hardcover due to the fact that it supports unnatural topographic alterations or is it purely decorative and not necessary. The 75’- 250’ setback zone hardcover level is currently at 31% where 25% is normally allowed. The 1,229 s.f. of boulder borders and a 91 1 s.f. flagstone patio account for 8% of the hardcover within this zone. During conversations with staff the applicants have stated their intention to seek approval in the future to conduct remodeling with a possible addition over existing hardcover. FILE #05-3074 6 January 2005 Page 5 of 5 C^e concern the applicants* have is how this situation has potentially damaged their prospect for variances for a home expansion in the near future regarding hardcover removals etc. Hardship Statement Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Anaiysis /m c0»MUertHg appUe«rtoMS for voriance, the PtoMHing Commission shall consUer the effect of the proposed vorUmce upon the health, spfety-and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic eondltloHS, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values ofproperty in the surrounding area. The Ptannlng Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances firom the thermi orovIsloHS of the Zoning Code in Instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship 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. Staff finds that there is no hardship inherent to the land to justify granting the conditional use permit for the grading or a variance for this type or amount of hardcover within 75’ of the lake. City Code Section 78-1282 provides properties with steep slopes a stair access to the lake yard rather than conducting extensive topographic alterations. A majority of the boulder hardcover is strictly aesthetic, as the boulders are serving as borders and not retaining any soil. There are a couple of areas where there is soil retention by the walls, namely the areas of the two graded walk .ay slopes. In staffs opinion these graded walkways are uiuiecessary as a partial stair system currently exists and would only need to be extended for lake access. Additions of boulder borders and related non-structural hardcover in the 75’-250’ zone would not have required a City permit, although this installation places the 75’-250’ zone out of hardcover compliance. However, the grading and hardcover additions in the 0-75’ zone bring the entire property's hardcover status under review. Since the additions of the boulder borders and flagstone patio areas have increased the hardcover level a''ove the permitted amount within the 75’ - 250’ zone the Planning Commission should discuss whether or not to grant a variance to allow the current level, or recommend removal of the 1587 s.f. of overage. Issues for Consideration Does the Planning Commission feel that there is justification or hardship for the excessive hardcover in eithw the 0-75’ zone or the 75’-250’ zone? Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends removal of the hardcover in the 0-75’ zone and 75’-250 zones that is not strictly necessary for lake access or slope stability. ewieir A CITY OF ORONO • GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION Application# Date Received I(fU Amount Paid PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ?A^V. Dui\// Di/^tnO.. kiKl Type uf Application to be Filed___________________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) APPLICANT Name . hkrWc^Ji W/im/iI/^^.U________________________ Phone (home)Phone(»vork) 4~lO • .^24*4 Address ft^T* Airi/. RIv/d. Cib \tir^rnr\A Zip Cjc,3qiUi OWNER ('■' '^^erent than applicant) Name Phone (hou.o). Address Phone (work) _ City_____Zip. Date Property Acquired I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. (monlh/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $600.00 Residential Accessory Use $600.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $600.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $600.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $600.00 Commercial/Industrial Use vr $600.00 Land Alteration + Permit _____Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain _____Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more _____Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $250.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) Afler-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$600.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consuitant fees) _____$600.00 Vacation _____$600.00 Easement Vacation _________ $100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$600.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$600.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals ____ Other - see Fee Schedule 5 ll. € ti /‘I • •. ; * i-'. \ // • J> W' \ t • • • . r ♦t* * • A * / REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. i gicstlon FSTO.. i say^mi-TiS ijcenseLgL^f^^ybr) * * ’ • i - - ’• ’** * 5. 6. 7. ^iption to application if not included on required survey. y|y. (existing and propbsed contours) if land alterations il»^il^iW.«s),ofa,,per.on.^,h.an,ln.i^tin, [^■his would' Ifty if not current 8. 9. owner(s). NBB^d^tfaafidnjBIgry^if ; fSSS^Staff forre quirement^).^ __As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 3 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS AND 1 COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require scaled drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:___________________________Date _________ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information suppliers true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant ’s signature Date 1^7-D Y OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date ZIO4-/ eetinq.Applicant must have all submittals mlo the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting Plannino Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at an scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. ;>) .i/ J 'A* jT A' ^ Sti.'*'.’—• fi4 H iiMSi r: \r City of Orono Variance Application Stre^ Address: 2750 Kelley Perlcway Orono, MN S53S6 Main: gS2'249-4600 tax: 952-249-4616 MaKIng Address: . P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55322-0066 Application# Date Received: / fpU Amount Paid. (rAvT-^^ Staff: Foe: MOO Renewal: $300 After-the-tact: $1,200 Double Fee i I This applicallon form must be completed in full. App'Icant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incompieto applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Sits Address: Qav'y P]r\ \Jc^ Property Identification Number (PIN): ____ Oirpyin , Mk\ (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey.) Data Property Acquired (month/year): lO/nU □ Yes. I own the adjacent parcels. Present use of property: □ Residential □ Other__________________________________ Zoning District _________________ APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal nares and marital status required for each interested party) Name: \A/AtAAlonlA '• M«rlf4</t VA/iii i/nljnlJ___________ Phone (home): ibcD4t43^ .ttVi A Phone (\wrk): ^ac7r) 4^^o Address: AtkaA«VK^ &i\jA . kik^ Email: c ^ia XkViyuft iiA/r.n . fM: NO CC^ hct^ucti OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names and marital status required for each interested party) Name: Phone (home): Address: __ EmaM: Phone (work): Fax: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost: $ Describe the request In detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): ______________ i; I 9 9 “ii'S-** V n r. t 4 /• t «'•/ **i i V. ■•as t i s 1 1 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: Ail of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be processed. ° I -ii I- Mlii ^i^drm/:cbinpleted by d-Qity Planner jp IP • «• □ UBnpUWIIIHIjlllW^DbbaMh^ □ Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150 ’ of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance, Government Center, A-603 300 South 6"' Street, Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 □ .Q|i^iMlnC(^^ fsl^ned by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the requirements lilteormnin^Ow packet including haracover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5" x 1 1 ” or 11" X 17" for reproduction. ^ GQmP)9tedihaDiqQyer calculation,worKsheets (qs provided within the variance packet). Provide one copy 8.5" X 11 ", □ ^.'SKetieKes'or' plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5^ x 11" or 11 ” x 17").“4 / □ Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. * APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: ^ ^ The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject It untli it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of its potential merit Applicant’s Signature: Applicant’s Signature: Oaje: l^|2C)(p>/ OWNER’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents, Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigationzind veiifu^tion of this request. Owner’s Signature: Owner's Signature: Date: Date: IZ|2d/d L. Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. !.•r ii: a. :w . Page 1 of 3 HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM This form it a rtquirtd aubmlttal for ALL variance applicationa. An application wHI not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City. Minnesota State Statue Section 394.27, Subdivision 7 requires that a hardship be demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted. The hardship must be unique to the property as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic sHu^ions are not considered valid hardships. In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated. HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP? This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship exista and how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a hardship, address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance Is Justified. The information the City receives is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will not be considered. Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request (some may not apply): 1."The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls." 2. "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." hJO TV\<. C_cr>^^or\f L^Xlrg ^>£40<e. "The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." 4. "Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." ff jrlf . I** / ‘••re •pu ri > •• V 8. 9. *?s "n5<’JX3 Page 2 of 3 "Undue hardship also includes, but is 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 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in hamwny with this Chapter." "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments 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.” "The special corKfitions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property." "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." 10. "The grantir>g of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.” 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." » Q n; A ffa'in ----------- - - Page 3 of 3 A 12. "The granting of such variance will not merely sen/e as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardsNp or difficulty." Hardship Statement ^ Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be desaibed in the above ciitena, descnbe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements In the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary); . linpia nurfiAatitna a mA /1»T^ Vojrk Dtrlvaj tH. ti& /M/iJ mfoyyyir^ ia -Hmsrg/ xaMc /iOAg._OH -rtYr nrlOir iV.DUir ni/iA^yAiip. TVifc rJh/ t/< -Hndt nt la irid<<ap)m Wa s pir/yj/y pMrvnUK , vvwg dU uinh kLi/iiA/ tyuUl^ x^rptiir^Lxac^^ ' ---------------------------------- pi^iwviptKj rxMfnf±rA ^ rily (hAfi \A>fc»K -to Pir/drj^ a 6mr\jcp ■yvy Uife \AiTJ/g Viug^^ \/ruAArn\i^.)r ilwtH^ -------- nos* 'tQ’iPih* 7n/^ *T\nMr^ \AJd4 /vi -fti^ IA/I4ti City fbK US li liivr kiiwn prior tb puroHd5n^5 -fUt proper^- TVt^ wualls 4Vw.f VA/^ pu,-f up on -fVi^ proper^ K25tAlnin<a walls 'Vt tooM toU +kwU- -to dovroc*!' -Hxkvi na /du Ic T cna up cawsJnfl yytoro erosion. -jve^ pohA between two yvtrtar so twxt +lip»e would be Icu^e accesswans was propenHes. v\f|Hiout nn etfliirg -ftjr lafcc O£joc%.pcitin ^ VA4T ar& aoinj our bPsT +0 CorrectdWS s.?-ftcif)cn etna put *U bokttha US* gH^ ' . .1 ,y‘-' .^ C. /.* I . . A a •. •% ’ ^ • y . * Ni VA. H ^ / r r i ' ' ^ * ». -■ /v ‘ *.*i '='■ <• : 4.*' f %ji i ^ c^L h /i 5sj l ! >2 I t' I% f / s i I* J • • t»? 1 S I j cnoweLi '■ 1 ■ ■ ^ »• *• • # #■% /. /«» w**- / / / :i; in f t A 7 \ \ \ • «U ' • : •■■ / ■ ''A\ \ arAVfT ^ *» iN.i r,/: tr I 'r "'.’/j s i / . •' / ’ \ • W‘- rsv^ •! • ! ■ » '*•» «•*•. »1 • / . v/ .••• \ *. • ’» •• : •• hM>fc.JL« I III T I ■ . .. ■■ iiwawm%y\i- r-'%y-pf^ i'1 • • ‘ \s ■ *\m ff.. • V., fill,■>*•■"■ K c wV'** ^<^v ■ •-p«i ^1^255 25 -t'i. ■ r^ .. li. ».> rf* » t,-* CE UJf iiUi^ JDJLiUUIV Of LiU IO lH^**llJf ULiVyUlV 9, iJl\VJ« AND PARTS OF VACATED FOREST BOULEVARD it VAC HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA • OMMUC' .... X y / / // •/ ^ Xs*^ V t/ /■ / LtCAL OCSCmPTQN or PPTWKCS : Lolt 13. H. and 15. BMi 6. ond Lots U ond 15. fto with thol portion of Vocotod Oak noc» lyM) h»t«H»an t it ol lh« ^Ihooilorly im* of Ln| 13, Block 6 ond th« OkKk G. Alfto looolhof with thot port of vocotod Forti of "Soi|0 Hi PtvfMd, Honnfpin County. Mkmoioto’* whic •■Itnoim ocrott i| of Iht Soothwtsttrly Irw of Lot 1 Hcrmtpin CmAity. Mkmnolo** ond the Noftheosterty Ine dmolwt iron markor LCCAL rueifMMi 1.01 1 X found (9003) dorH>t«« iron morkor m( ___ donotM tiioting spot devotion, moon mo level do — ; dermlee cnr^loiw Kne. meon mo le^ Beorinqi shown otm bosod °n otfu \ This survey shows the boundaries of the dbovc iscrib nf three existing buidktgs. ond the locotkin of visibii n does not piepurt to tfiow ony other improvements o I I / \ /I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 14 15 \ \ \ \ h \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ feWWT t I Ao7 I % \ \ 'Id 03i.V vl ck ' •P'. - %>. •<. / \ r/' .1 I :.»j T' n 1 IK -♦»?6- /'»;*• »: ^^90 v^jlOQg \ J - • pj. < \K\\ t >^r 'J . * ■^'■ ^ U/ m)mm '•’«* • vi •. / c - - ^ fjiriT *• V / ' ^ -•-r^ -*. - _^ t,V^-‘ s-i. * f'mV. K ^ l1^. \h\y\t \ku^ :,r >‘A‘ »<, ■•'■ / / /'■■ -.•* .' ■ ’ *,• ••*‘V'-^ •;* ■ • ■ ,%*R Mm ^ , L<i . - .•■.<«'4. ^T. » tmm m p8 -vtlfgf 'W:. '"^S ^ *• *•* V4 '>• 1 . ^ :*; ^ • , •'H ^ t'' ,-•: . * ‘.* • . • . % .. • M. . * ... ’, •• • ■* » ■•■f^ ‘ ' m'. •. »• , ' - . • ^ '.* . %,- ^ . m' • ■ * • ., ;t '-' • • • ■ ■ • • t. ' ■'' V-'.'- ■ V}-=V*'</■ r ' ,i.-.’-'. ••\ V., :.J •'V,;.-. . , ; « ^ • • < ; ' .'V > U >AV' -•.•> ■■^ f •'- * f • • ^ 5*^ ■;• ; -‘, ’».-. *r. •^- , .-Vi' •• ' • - ' \ ' • 1 . •■:■•-V \ ^ »*/,• V"....-' ^ i>.l 'Y 6^^ \ ,r,- •^'vT: ‘ 'n^.l, ”.>T •: ^'if-}- ■'. *■ y ■.9 ^ m ' r .*<. "•< j \ . . ' r* ■ • is’. ."■,'>V . .. ". • 'f -> ^ # • -*«-1 ■I ?.; t r • -■:r:i' './ • ^ tf ■ "A ' • -■' s’ 4I ;J» :i:' , r;\- •wrc. .** '• » ¥• "», ^ *• .!n y \r' -" ; K . ... .,>,v c •• ; .. / •^‘' « ♦**■-■ >: ■!.(?'' / ■ ••' l/«r r Vr V-.. t-/. ? V. •* ;*‘-r *■* ,«*■•'' ^**’, L V * • - * * '• ' - • * /' ^ <.-'V.-*V ‘ ■»• . ■ '* * .^ *■ • •‘ti ^ *-v? r"*- ■^^^.■■^-. • I * •. . ‘ I. •.•T» •i?.*‘. ? % V '//ly / .i 1 r: m t i * te ^ ■' V S’ ' "‘ • > I?/ V W • ' —: r.- • ‘. , imr^i • PaI?kr> » '‘V '« hnns * __u; -■"" ;-t^''«''v. r:r‘T, V^ ^ 5 ' |P^'«*' X- ' 'W'*'I.I&. ’^4,'- J- ■v^-J s. . X -»^ * .-X V/ . «._ ^ V. ^ ‘ t •• -^ '. V '\ * *<• ‘ ' *' ' V »;'•> •* '*-I>xV. \ ^ ‘ V N ; *• • I ^ ^ v^.i?. > ..•^'Svi?« • If r^\ m - m w..'; ■ ^mh mmf'j ’'Tii ' ... -.4^^'!^-' >... -K/ - te^:' ■nAS-i- IfciSfr--’ ^|8pj ________________________ j r ": It.';. . ^ Vv Ji^^^BSfW kUv; ;^-j; i'W m■:X: ./.••••: -f-''vv'■'••-v'V '•;■■• .- -• .;.1.■ .; V-■; ^:' - it". ■■ CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR SEAN S. WAMBOLD OF LOTS 13-15. BLOCK 0. LOTS 14-15. BLOCK 7, SAGA HILL REVISED AND PARTS OF VACATED FOREST BOULEVARD <e VACATED OAK PLACE HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA otr 9-2V%/V- 2SCf*-Sou' id!i|i|ipmh 1* -i-iSbif »' IUJ% , > N m i.-.y.T r-• •UK-- »e • / V • • • «' ^ - X’ f.. ■ *■ - .« rr 'T ^-Z4-cJf HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE Uaglh X X X B. Ovage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. PaliiyDeck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X O. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____________ + B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE' A House __________ X Unglh K X X B. Oarage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER INZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A_ _ _ _ _ _ _♦ B 75-250'250-500'500-1000' 8^^ Width -72 11.35^ X too Width S.24- X 100 - 1 '» ». !V «• , •' i •« * \-V ^ A.’ ■ • I*' • r4'.lw-73 g P _ SWn C V* ’ AmO BOAb^ S.F. SF. S.F. S.F.I S.F. S.F. 3 p .|iu4«5r<t/u( S.F.Wdtld NOii SHcRi.- S.F. S.F.“ • S.F. S.F. S.F. CPS.F.- S.J A S.F. B % S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.- S.F S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. A S.F. B % ■ i / i ‘IT' •. • V, * > A %-r bA- Y y-Z4-o4. SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZO?>fE A. House HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 0-75' X CZS-250]) 250-500 SOO.IOOO' Lingih X X X Widih 4-. I B. Oirage C. Driv-eway 26.3 X X s n D. Sidewalk X X a m E. Ps(io/Deck 245 - >»H 6 &AaM,e. x ^ ^ OKK 6C«»^(D424* 'wf ye/ 7 Wfirt-, a a WrK/g’fi’/O a/c *>40 - 9 X X 0. OU mt total hardcover in zone TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE + B X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE' A House Ungdi Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X ^ Lifxiscape ^ Vndertaifi ^ByPUstic ‘‘(^Febrio X X X a a 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ^ + B ry' &• X 100 - .it St u: /: 4 i* ..’r* V V. 21-73 15Y 306 642 1334 344 I ss- 667 4U M 1724 0143 26,42 ^l.oi S.F. • M(3<^5e P0IKH ft S.F." tf<ri»Artc6 S.F. 5T S.F."Sf’‘*<* P.*?' S.F. kiACl/'TVP S.F.' t>Vv<rn//v y S.F. COne.a£Te S.F. "i'OCiwAjm S F -FLACi*jr<>A»j 7ioeu.»»u<. S.F. "oecvj p»ita$ S.F. ~COf*c. f4»i S.F. S F -57 pnC w'y /^r>b dfitOl S.F. S.F. A S.F. B S.F. S.F. ST. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.P.- S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. A SF. B u t» « « * 9~Z4'04 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZO?^: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTINC HARDCOVER IN ZONE A House __________ 0-75' X Ltngth X X X B. Oarage C. Driveway 22. S X X D. Sidewalk X X E Patio/Deck > • • X X F. Landscape UndeHain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A + B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A House Lcfiflh X X X X B. Oarage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Palio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain ByPlastie Or Fabric X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ _ _ _ ♦ B t ,* % *.* • • - 75-250' <g0-S00:^ 500-1000' Width a> 22 3 5<?JZ 7J>(>0 4A ) 33S(5 X 100 Width XlOO - S.F. SF. S.F, S.F.^ P/iVCfiJ S.F. S.F.-BL^CHTOf li s F.-ce»icftg-ri S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.- • SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. ‘SSei25» S.F. Zn.ftjfhT S.F. 16.H______% A B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F; S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. SF. SF S.F. S.F. A S.F. B V* Jan Uli Ht LU aunnaiKUU KuamiK: nnije.rcL.11^ aaiaaoxa^A 2335 Wt$t Highway 36 • St Paul. MN 55113 Office; 65h636-4600 • Fax: 65I-636-I3II A vifwwJxmestroo.com EXttisir 01 Jmiify 6^2003 Ms. Mtlmie CuitU PIsMier CiQfofOrooo Pott Office Box 66 CiystsI Bxy, MN S5323 Re: 1379 Peik Drive Pile No. 1394)5^ PletNo. OS-3074 e DeerMtfenie: We Iwve leviewed the survey ibr the property et 1379 Psik Drive. The survey shows boulder bonier and teteiniaf iinptoveme^ installed pritnerilyslong the Iske side of the home. We visited die site yesterds to review impiovemsiits shown on die survey. Based on our site visit and the submitted survey we have the ftillowlng oomments with regar ds to errgineering mattan: • R is our opinion thet most of the improvements are not necmsary for bank stshiHy.stk>n or erosion oontroL Speeiflcelly, widi the exoqition of the and boulders elong the sboteline, all boulder borders and walla within die 0 to 73 foot setback could be removed and the slope regraded. Access to die lake shore could be provided by extending the existing stairway fiom the home to the landing area aloog the lake. If this option is pursued an etoaioo and sediment control plan should be provided for review and approval prior to any work on site. • The sutvayindieatos some ofthe boulder improfveniBnts were installed on neighboring properties. For the most part these improvements are decorative and should be removed. Ifyou have any questions please call me at (631)604-4863. ^ • Yours vary tn4y, BONBSTROO. R08ENE. ANDBRLK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg Co; Grog Qappa. City of Orono Bruce Vang, City ofOiono • St. Paul. St. Cloud. RochCfter, Wilimar. MN • Milwaukee. Wl • Chicago. IL ':'i ji 4 o »if .1 i . •••’ *•*• «iBrr H /• • \ .1 \. .i ;/ CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices October Streat Mdrass: 2750 Kelley Psrfcwsy Orom. MN 55356 Malllni Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 0066 Sean Wambold 8379 Alle^eny Grove Blvd Victoria. MN 55386 SUBJECT: 1379 Park Drive Unperniitted Land Alteration Dear Mr. Wambold: In approximately June of 2003, the previous owner of your property at 1379 Park Drive conducted unpeimitted land alteration work within the lakeshore yard and was notified by City staff of City pennit requirements and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) pennit requirements. Tire property owner was directed to 1) apply for MCWD approval and 2) proceed to the City for approval. It has recently come to my attention that this land alteration work remains unapproved. I am writing this letter baaed c> my conversation with you in the City offices on October 27, 2004. The City of Orono requires you to apply for a conditional use pennit for the land work performed within your lakeshore yard and a hardcover variance for the retaining walls and additional hardcover within the 0-75’ and the 75’- 250’ setback zones. The application deadline for the after-the-fact conditional use permit and variances is December 22,2004. The following supplementary information is required for our review: 1. Original certificate of survey, signed by licensed surveyor, indicating existing and proposed topography: and 2. All existing and proposed hardcover shall be calculated on the hardcover worksheets that are enclosed. The hardcover caladations must be completed by your surveyor: and 3. Existing (pre-alteration) and proposed (current) contours within the lake-yard, these contours should be shown extending 50' into the neighboring properties, within 75' of the OWHL contours should be shown in one-foot increments: and 4. Elevations of the top and the bottom of all retaining walls - retaining walb 4 ' and above will require engineered drawings and cross sections for our review: and 5. Hardcover surveys for each of the applicable setback zones from the ordinary high water level (OHWL) of Lake Minnetonka. •me • •• «#« • • • • • • 1McpiMNie(952) 24MM0 • Wex (952) 249^16 1 .AMI •• •« ' ex '’ ■ *■ f*.« . ; , Page! 1379 Park Drive Oeteber 28.2004 ; V Please sabmit completed permit applications and the items requested above by Wednesday, December 22,2004 in order to be scheduled for the January 18,2005 Planning Commission agenda. Your cooperation in this matter is appreciated. Please contact me at 952.249.4627 or mcurtistSlci.ofono .mn.ua should you have any questions. Sincerely, City of (^no , VWMMiuQ^C^ Melanie Curtis Qty Planner c: Lyle Oman, Building Official . rt V ■: • ‘•■V ■ ■. V, .ftii ’ i -> * * <«4; t; I * January 7,2005 To: Orono Planning Commission Re: 1379 Park Dr. File no. 04-3074 In June of 2003 we found excavating equipment working in the yard between the house and the lake at 1379 Park Dr. A stop work order was posted. The homeowner, Edgar Otte, contacted us and we met on site. We divided the project into three categories: 1. Grading near the house and outside the 0-7S' setback This work qipeared minor and not affecting any other properties or the lake. No after- the-fittt permit was requested for this work. 2. Excavation to create a cart path to the lake and retaining walls within 75* of the lake. Mr. Otte was informed that a CUP from the City of Orono as well as probably a permit from the MCWD would be required. Mr. Otte came to City Hall and got applications and went to the MCWD to start the process there. 3. Level off and plant the flat area in the flood plain and on the lake shore. This area showed some years of neglect. The remains of junk and equipment were being cleaned up, and we issued a permit to level off the ground and add up to one inch of top soil to prepare for planting. Mr. Otte apparently did not proceed with an q^lication for grading at the MCWD. InstMd he got only a rip-rap permit He never did a|q)ly for a CUP at the City. Mr Otte had assured us that he would apply if and when the MCWD approved his project. Bruce Veng Building ■>. A 4 RUN DATE: 1/^200 31 0711723410003 fROPAODR 31 ADDRESS UNASSIONED OWNERNAME CITYOFORONO taxpayer city op OROHO NAME/ADDR BOX 66 CRYSTAL RAY OROHOMN 5S323 PROP ADDR OWNERNAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 31 0711723410072 1390 PARK DR WMHOLMESRJMDAHL WAYNEMHOLMES 1390 PARK DR MOUND MN 55364 ■ PROP ADDR OWNERNAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 31 0711723410079 1375 PARK DR KATHLEEN A MURPHY KATHLEEN A MURPHY 1375 PARK DR MOUND MN 55364 31 0711723410066 PROPADDR 1345 NORTH ARM DR OWNERNAME HSHEKELSRLSHEKELSTRSTES TAXPAYER HDSHEKEU NAME/ADDR 1619 NORTH CARDWAL DR PHOENDCAZ 15026 36 0711723420012 PROPADDR 1399 PARKDR OWNERNAME SMSI0BLASE8IQBL TAXPAYER STEVEN MRSHERi^ESIGEL NAME/ADDR 1399 PARK DR MOUNDMN 55364 36 0711723420015 PROPADDR 1462 PARKDR OWNERNAME LUCILLEOKUTZ TAXPAYER LUCILLEOKUIZ NAME/ADDR 1462 PARKDR MOUNDMN 55364 HENNEPIN CX)UNTY PROPERTY INFORMAIKW SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PACE: I 3S 0711723410066 PROPADDR 1361 NORTH ARM DR OWNERNAME SWMALCHOWRNMALCHOW TAXPAYER SCOnrrWR NANCY MALCHOW NAME/ADDR 1361 NORTH ARM DR MOUNDMN SS364 31 0711723410074 PROPADDR 1400 PARKDR OWNERNAME RICHARDONORUM TAXPAYER RICHAROO NORUM NAME/ADDR 1400 PARK DR MOUNDMN SS364 30 07II7234IOOSO PROPADDR 1363 PARKDR OWNERNAME JKYOUNGRTLYOUNG TAXPAYER JOHN A TERRY YOUNG NAME/ADDR 1363 PARK DR MOUNDMN 33364 31 0711723410090 PROPADDR 1333 NORTH ARM DR OWNERNAME CTUUYAECHAUQREN TAXPAYER CTULLYAECHAU3REN NAME/ADDR 1333 NORTH ARM DR MOUNDMN 33364 30 07II7234200I3 PROPADDR 1422 PARKDR OWNERNAME PAULWAELOBES WEIBEL TAXPAYER PAULW AELOBES WEIBEL NAME/ADDR M22 PARK DR MOUNDMN 33364 31 0711723420016 PROPADDR 1403 PARKDR OWNERNAME PAKSHEARER TAXPAYER PRBOBRICK J SHEARER NAME/ADDR 1903 PARK DR MOUNDMN 33364 38 07II7234I007I PROPADDR 1388 PARKDR OWNERNAME MAG RASMUS TAXPAYER MAG RASMUS NAME/ADDR 1 388 PARK DR MOUNDMN 33364 38 0711723410073 PROPADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSICNED OWNERNAME ALEXANDRABLANG-ENGLAND TA3C>AYER ALEXANDRA B LANG-ENGLAND NAME/ADDR 1311 N MAIN ST MIAMI OK 74334-3324 38 0711723410082 PROPADDR 1339 PARKDR OWNERNAME RO EASTMAN A S M LASTMAN TA3CPAYER ROBERT O A SUSAN M EASTMAN NAME/ADDR 1 339 PARK DR MOUNDMN 33364 38 0711723410096 PROPADDR 01376 PARKDR OWNERNAME DAYTON F A TERESA K LARSON TAXPAYER DAYTON PA TERESA K LARSON NAME/ADDR 1 376 PARK DRIVE ORONOMN 33364 38 0711723420014 PROP ADDR 1442 PARK OR OWNERNAME G LSCHULTZETAL TAJCPAYER GEORGE L SCHULTZ NAME/ADDR 1492 PARK DR MOUNDMN 33364 38 0711723420017 PROPADDR 1413 PARKDR OWNERNAME J0SILLERUOAN ASILLERUD TAJCPAYER JONATHAN D A NORA A SILLERUD NAME/ADDR 1413 PARK DR MOUNDMN 33364 »? ^.;g: -r-. ■,:--vj.' r J.. .-" ^ ';f-'v"!:: M-^'- ■*. RUN DATE: l/noe M 07II7234M0II mORAODR I4IS rAUCDR OWNERNAME JDSILLERUDDNASHJLERUD TAXPAYER XmATHANDANORAASOiRRUD NAME/AODR I4ISPARKDR MOUNDMN SS3«4 31 071I723430S3I PROPADDR 1379 PARKOR OWNERNAME SEANSWAMMLOBTAL TAXPAYER SEANAMEUBSAWAMBOLO NAME/AOOR 1379 PARK DR MOUNDMN S93M 31 97II729440074 PROPADDR 3S ADDRESSUNASSiONED OWNERNAME VR.OPORONO TAXPAYER CITYOPORONO ^ 0^ NAME/AOOR POBOXM CRYSTAL SAY MN 33323 > V r*«fc ■idT! ■ 4.« • ' « , K -• 'f;.5 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE: 2 31 0711723420019 PROPADDR 1423 PARK DR OWNERNAME RLHOWELLS A JM HOWELLS TAXPAYER ROBERT LA JEAN H HOWELLS NAME/AOOR 1423 PARK DR MOUNDMN SS364 38 0711723420020 PROPADDR 1435 PARK DR OWNERNAME JAMES A MARTINSON TA3CPAYER 3AMES A MARTINSON NAME/AODR 1435 PARK DR MOUNDMN 55364 31 071I72343000I PROPADDR 31 ADDRESS UNASSIONED OWNERNAME FJHARDMinETAL TA3CPAYER FRANKLIN J HARDIN NAME/AOOR 1496 PARK DR RTI MOUNDMN 53364 38 0711723430013 PROPADDR 1496 PARK DR OWNERNAME FJ HARDIN lU AC A HARDIN TA3CPAYER FJ HARDIN IH AC A HARDIN NAME/ADDR 1496 PARK DR MOUNDMN 55364 38 07 PROPADDR 38 AOOR OWNERNAME DAYTONF TAJCPAYER DAYTON R lASSIONED LESAK LARSON iAK LARSON MN 33364 38 07VJ7234 ^70 PROPADDR 1376 OWNERNAME DFLARS^ATKLARSON TAJCPAYER DAYny F i^ERESA K LARSON NAME/ADDR 1376 Pi^ DR MOUNDMN 553( I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS ,4te V ■KM • • t. MNiBtT O S. -'•V. UH >% crrYoT r :(i NO V ManidiM] Offlcea SIratt yirau. 2750 Ndlsy Partmray Oram, MN 55350 MaWni AiMres$ P.O. B« 66 Ciystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Fd)niary23,2005 Sean A Melissa Wambold 8373 Allegheny Grove Blvd Victoria, MN SS386 RE: 60-Day Review Period Extension Application # 05-3074 Your application #05-3074 has not yet come to a close and the 60-day review period is ^yproaching. As ttiere is potential for your final review to fall after the 60-day period expiration it is necessary to extend the review period an additional 60 days. Therefore, the 69-4«^ review period is hereby extended an additional 60 days to May 6, 2005. Basically, this means that should the City need more time to review your application or should your application get tabled at the Council level the review period will not expire. If you have any questions please contact me at 952.249.4627 or by email at mcurtis(^i.orono.mn.us. Sincerely, City ofOiono Melanie Curtis City Planner TMiphjMi^)H» 4<ll • PlK<9»)2»44f| I "I II ifirtlimiUf'i J^Bonestroo ffisRiosene «jvAnderiik& |\|| Associates Englnctrs 4 ArcMtf U 2335 Utest Highway 36 • SL Paul, MN 55113 Orrice; 6SI-636-4600 • Fax: 6SI-636-I3II w%vwi)onesiroo.com ewtitiT p '*eCE(M6l> ' ^005 ^'^OPOfto/vo March 9,200S Ms. Melanie Cuitia Planner City orOrono Poet Oflloe Box 66 Cryatal Bay. MN SS323 Re: 1 379 Park Drive Pile No. 139^3-000 Plat No. 03-3074 Dear Melanie: We have reviewed the revised plans dated 3-8-03 for the proposed iniprovemenla to the property at 1 379 Park Drive. Tiic improvements include the removal of most of the boulder retaining walls within the 0 to 73-foot setback from the lake. The revised plans show the existing fire pit being removed and the removal of approximately 30-feet of the existing wail nearest the lakeshore. The previous plan proposed to leave the entire 90-feet of wall nearest the lakeshore as is. We have the following comments udth regard to engineerittg matters: • The revised plans indicate that the proposed reduced length of the existing wall nearest the lakeshore results in 166 square feet of hard cover. The r^uction in the length of the wall will require some grading along the existing path to the lake. The plans also identify that approximately 168 square feet of hard cover would be required to install steps in the 0 to 73-foot setback. We have checked the hard cover calculations and concur with die analysis for both the wall and the steps. • Prom an engineering perspective it appears that removing the entire wall along the lakeshore, regrading the site and installing steps ar reducing the length of the wall as proposed and not installing the steps ate viable solutions. Access to the lake using the second option would be by a vegetated path with a slope of approximately 3.2:1. It ie generally accepted that elopee of 3:1 or flatter (as this one is proposed) are maintainable with a lawn mower and walkable under most conditions. • If the no step option is approved we recommend that more detail be provided regarding the proposed vegetative screening shovm lakesi^ from the wall. It should be stated as a condition of this option that steps would not be permitted in the future without the removal of the wall nearest the lakeshore. • Either option will require the submittal of a detailed erosion aitd sediment control plan for review and approval. If you have any questions please call me at (631) 604-4863. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK A /.SSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono Bruce Vang, City of Orono S r -^-'i • St. Paul, St. Cloud, Kocheiter. Willmar, MN • Milwaukee, Wl • Chicago, It, AfVifMtIlfV ActlOT/B^wal Oppirtiwity Impioywf Ml Binplwfvw Owrewd iMriftrr ^ CITYOFORONO 2750 KcHey Parkway POB ok M Crystal Bay, MN SS323 952.249.4600 ZONING FILE 05-3074 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: Febraary 28,2005 TO: Sean St Melissa Wambold 8373 Allegheny Grove Blvd Victoria, MN SS386 COPIES: TYPE OF REQUEST: Aitcr-the-Fact Variances A Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: Febmary 22,2005 Plaaalag Comnissloa voted on a motloa to deny the reqnnt for hardcover variances within the 0’-75* and within the 75*-250* sone. And to approve a conditional nse permit in order to re-grade the 0*-75* zone in conjnnction with 168 s.f. of allowed hardcover, this hardcover may be an allowed lake access stair or bonider retaining wall for a lake access path. The result of the vote is as follows: VOTE: 4 FOR 1 AGAINST * The dissenting Commissioner did not agree with the 168 s.f. allowance.__________ Applicant’s next sdwduled meeting is confirmed as: Ci^ Connell - March 28,2005 Meeting starts at 7:00 pm If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Conunission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call City Planner, Melanie Curtis at 952.249.4627. ■ - 1 ■ -■. 'V k •• .'7. .v’vir-.K -V CTTYOPORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway POBox<6 Cryttal Bay, MN 55323 952J49.4600 ZONING FILE 05-3074 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: Janaary 25,2005 TO: Sean A Melissa Wambold 8373 Allegheny Grove Blvd Victoria, MN SS386 COPIES: TYPE OP REQUEST: After-the-Fact Variance A Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: Jannary 18,2005 Planning Commission voted on a motion to table the application in order for the i^licants to prepare a landscape plan indicating the necessary hardcover. VOTE;6 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: PlanniMi Commisaion - Febmary 22,2005 - Meeting starts at 6:00 pm If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available finom the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call City Planner, Melanie Curtis at 952.249.4627. V 7 V. V.. ii F PC HiMvKf Jfkhi It, m MS-3074 SEAN AND MEUSSA WAMBOLD, 1379 PARK DRIVE, AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 7:20 p.m. - 7:42 p.m. Sean and Melissa Wambold, Applicants, were present. Curtis stated the applicants have recently purchased the property located at 1379 Park Drive and were notined foltowing the purchase that the retaining walls and hardcover were installed by the previous owner without proper city permits. The applicants* intent is to do some remodeling in the future and they would like to bring the property into compliance. Curtis noted a memorandum from Bruce Vang is included within the flic providing some background on this project. Curtis indicated the prior owner had proposed to do limited grading in the 0-7S’ zone. He was advised by the City to also contact the MCWD. City Staff later discovered that work had been completed. The potential buyers contacted staff regarding the City’s issues with the property. While there was no information regarding any violations in the file at the time of the inquiry, Staff did advise the applicants of the issues as soon as they became known, but in the interim the applicants had purchased the property. The applicants are requesting after-the-fact approval for hardcover variances within the 0-7S’ setback and the 7S'-2S0* setback and a conditional use permit for retaining walls and grading within 75* of the lake that was conducted by the previous owner. Staff finds that there is no hardship inherent to the land to justify granting the conditional use permit for the grading or a variance for this type or amount of hardcover within 75* of the lake. City Code provides properties with steep slopes a stair access to the lake yard rather than conducting extensive topographic alterations. With the exception of the two graded walkways, a majority of the boulder hardcover is strictly aesthetic. It is Staffs opinion these graded walkways are unnecessary as a partial stair system currently exists and would only need to be extended for lake access. Curtis stated additions of boulder borders and related non-structural hardcover in the 75*-250* zone would not have required a City permit; although this installation places the 75*-250* zone out of hardcover compliance. Curtis indicated the grading and hardcover additions in the 0-75* zone bring the entire (MS-3074 Sean and Mdissa WamboM, Coatinned) property’s hardcover status under review. Since the additions of the boulder borders and flagstone patio areas have increased the hardcover level above the permitted amount within the 75*-250* zone, the Planning Commission should discuss whether or not to grant a variance to allow the current level or recommend removal of the I.5S7 square feet of coverage. Staff recommends removal of the hardcover in the 0-75* zone and 75*-250* zone that is not strictly necessary for lake access or slope stability as well as removal of the boulder borders that cross the property line. Mr. Wambold indicated they closed on the property October 15*^ and were contacted by a realtor shortly thereafter regarding some hardcover and setback issues. Wambold stated to their knowledge the prior owners are in Arizona somewhere and they probably would not be able to locate them. J I ■ li i ■ r il Wambold indicated theie is extensive landscaping on the property, which was one of the reasons why they purchased the property, and that they anticipate doing some remodeling in the future. Wambold stated they would like to bring the property into compliance but that they were not aware of these issues at the time of the purchase since there was nothing in the file. Wambold noted they would have to incur significant expense in removing the landscaping. Rahn asked for public comment George Daniels, 1375 Park Drive, addressed the Council regarding the improvements made by the previous ovmer. I^iels indicat^ a number of big pieces of equipment were brought in to do the work but that in his opinion there was not a formal plan ever submitt^. Daniels stated he would like the Planning Commission to allow some steps down to the lake in order to enable the new property owners to access that area and maintain it. Daniels noted some of the boulders are located on his property, which he was not aware of at the time the work was compic>*sl Daniels suggested a landscape plan be submitted to Staff. Wambold staled if steps were constructed in that area, it may be necessary to bring fill back in, which in turn could cause erosion down into the lake. Rahn stated in his view the Planning Commission would look at this application as if the landscaping were not there and decide what is necessary to allow access to that area. Rahn indicated he tends to agree with Staff that whatever hardcover is not necessary for slope stabilization be removed. Jurgens staled he understands the applicants* desire not to have to redo the work and the expense involved, but that perhaps one option is to locate the previous owner. Jurgens suggested a possible course of action tonight is to table the application in order to give the applicants some lime to hire a landscape architect and arrive at a plan for what should be removed and what they would like to have in that area. (M5-3074 Scan and Mc H sm WanboM, CoatiBHed) Winkey stated since the applicants are planning to do some remodeling in the future, it might be in their best interests to have some ideas about what type of work would be done in connection with the remodeling. Leslie pointed out that any variances granted by the Council would expire at a certain point in time and that the applicants may not be able to accomplish the remodeling and removal of the landscaping at the same time. Wambold stated they are hoping to be able to do the remodeling sometime this fall but that there is a pouibility it would be delayed. Leslie noted the remodeling would be a separate application f I imufirff !/■' ' SJ ,: Jurgens stated the applicants might want to take into consideration the remodeling project when they redo the landscaping. Jurgens pointed out the applicants would only be allowed 2S percent hardcover in this area. Wambold asked what amount of hardcover the Planning Commission is looking for in this area. Jurgens staled they would like the hardcover to be in compliance but that at the present time he does not have enough infbrmation to detomine exactly what needs to be removed and what should remain. Jurgens stated tabling the application, the applicants would have time to work with a landscape architect and staff to come up with a new lands^ing plan. Rahn stated the applicants would only be allowed to keep whatever hardcover is necessary to maintain the slope in the 0>7S* zone and that the Planning Commission at this time cannot determine exactly what ne^ to be removed. Raha aiovcd, Leslie sccoadcd» to table AppKcatloB #05-3074, Scan and Melissa Wambold, 1379 Park Drive, to allow them time to submit a landscape plan. VOTE: Aycs6,NaysO. L • e ■X ■'V . .V. ■ ■ :• pc Hium^ fee ti, 2. SEAN AND MELISSA WAMBOLD, 1379 PARK DRIVE-VARIANCE, 6:02 PJM.-6:35 Sean and Melissa Wambold, Applicants, and Scott Marolz, Landscape Architect, were present. Curtis noted this application was tabled at the January Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicants to have time to hire a landscape professional to design a hardcover removal plan and to determine the areas of hardcover and walls which arc critical to remain. The applicants have proposed hardcover removals in both the 0*7S’ and the 75’-250' zones. Hardcover removals within the 75*-250’ zone would result in a reduction of 1,588 square feet for 25 percent total. Within the 0-75’ zone, the applicants are proposing removals, but have determined that 268 square feet of hardcover is necessary. Staff feels that the removals within the 75’-250* zone are appropriate. However, in following with the City Engineer’s recommendation. Staff feels that the wall and fire pit located in the 0-75’ zone should be removed as well. The hardcover within this zone should be removed and re-graded as appropriate. Staff finds that there is no hardship to justify granting a hardcover variance to allow the hardcover within the 0-75’ zone. Staff recommends denial of the after-the-fact variance for the 0-75’ setback zone (fNI5-3074 Scan and Melissa Wambold, Coatintted) and approval of a conditional use permit in order to remove existing hardcover and to re-grade the lake yard. Mr. Wambold stated the reason for retaining one wall is that there are areas where it is necessary to hold back ground and that it would be necessary to re-grade and construct steps in the area. Wambold indicated they do have a grandmother that would not be able to use the steps, which is the reason for the grassy ramp. Wambold commented there are other property owners around the lake who currently who have boulder and/or wood retaining walls, and request^ that one portion of the boulder wall be allowed to remain. Fritzler stated the Planning Commission usually does not address what other property owners have on their property until the property owner approaches the City for some type of permit but that the City does typically require property owners to conform to all the regulations. Fritzler indicated he is in agreement with denial of the after-the-fact variance, but that he would be against leaving any of the hardcover within the 0-75’ zone that is not necessary. Fritzler stated he would be in favor of re-grading the area. Kempf staled he is happy that a majority of the boulders have been removed, but noted that the fire pit is not necessary and should be removed in the 0-75’ zone. Kempf indicated in his view the existing boulder wall running down the side of the ramp appears to be functionally good for the lot since it allows for a flatter area above it as well as the ramp that is going down at an angle. Kempf stated the hardcover would not be improved if steps were constructed in this area and that re-grading may not -V--------- V J '» improve the situation but could create an erosion problem. Kempf stated he would be in favor of retaining the one boulder wall that is still remaining since it does make the properly more useable and would require less re>grading of the lot. Leslie noted the applicants did not create this situation, but stated the boulders located in the upper area appear to be more decorative than structural. Leslie stated he is unsure whether there is a direct correlation between the ramp and the boulders, but that he is sensitive to Staffs recommendation and the recommendation of the City Engineer that some stairs may be necessary. Leslie stated retaining the boulders is not a solution. Marotz stated this area was backniled at one time and the boulders are retaining the ground. Marotz indicated that area would need to be re-graded if the boulders are removed and would cause an erosion issue until pemument plant cover could be established, which would be approximately two years. Marotz stated initially it was not necessary for the wall to be located in that area but that fill was later hauled in that now requires that wall. Marotz stated substantial work would need to be done >f the wall were removed and that erosion measures and extensive planting would need to be done. Leslie stated the question is whether the ramp could be constructed without the boulders. (M54074 Sean and MeHasa WamboM. Coatiaued) Marotz commented considerable re-grading in that area would need to be done if the boulders are removed due to the prior backfilling. Rahn stated he is in agreement with Staffs recommendation. Marotz inquired whether the stairs are excluded from the hardcover calculation. Curtis stated stairs are allowed in the 0-7S ’ zone. Rahn pointed out stairs to the lake would not be counted against any future project and that a stairway is allow^ in the 0-7S* area. Fritzler stated he is aware that there are materials that can be used to prevent erosion and that there probably has been a significant anrount of dirt that has washed down between the rocks and into the lake already. Rahn commented the applicants could take extra steps beyond what is being recommended by the City Engineer to prevent erosion if that is a major concern of theirs. Marotz noted it would take a couple of years for any plantings to take root and become established and that there would be a period of time whm the applicants would not have full access to the lake. Kempf slated it is his understanding the applicants are not asking to re-grade this back to the original contours of the land. 1 i ___ Rahn stated the applicants could submit a re-grading and restoration plan and that they probably do not need to restore it iMck to the original grade. Fritzler inquired whether it would be necessary for the applicant to appear before the Planning Commission again if Staffs recommendations are approved. GaRhm staled in his opinion the City Engineer could review the re-grading and restoration plan and that it may not be necessary for the Planning Commission to review the plan unless they so desire. Chair Rahn asked for public comment. Jeff Danbury, 4410 Shoreline Drive, Spring Park, inquired whether the boulder wall looks worse than a wooden set of steps down the slope. Danbury noted they would constitute the same amount of hardcover. Danbury inquired whether a portion of the boulder wall could remain along with the grass ramp. Rahn noted the applicant is not limited to constructing a wooden stairway and that there are other types of materials that couM be used. (#M-3f74 Sean aad Mcliasa WamboM, Coatiaucd) Marotz stated if some grading is to occur, it could be graded in such a way that a portion of the wall could be retained. Rahn stated in his view one of the issues is the visual impact from the lake and that typically all that is seen from the lake are boulders. Rahn stated the City Engineer has determined that the boulder wall is not necessary and that the applicants are not required to have a stairway down to the lake. Leslie noted the stairway being discussed by the Planning Commission and the City Engineer would be aibwed in the 0-7S* zone and not in the area where the ramp is being proposed. Wambold commented if the objective is to reduce the hardcover bebw 168 square feet of hardcover within the 0-7S ’ zone, leaving a portion of the boulder wall and having a ramp would be better than constructing stairs. Rahn stated if the stairs are not necessary at all, then the Planning Commission would prefer no stairs. Fritzler commented in his view this slope may not need a stairway. Marotz noted the City Engineer did recommend that stairs be allowed on this property due to the slope. Wambold stated they would rather have a ramp than stairs. Wambold asked if they are able to reduce the hardcover to bebw 168 square feet, whether they would be permitted to leave a portion of the boulder wall. Rahn inquired where the 168 square feet figure comes from. > i : h n Iii Marotz indicated that is the amount they calculated would be needed to construct a stairway to the lake. Kempf commented functionally the boulder wall is probably less disruptive to the whole yard as far as erosion control than to re-grade and that the same objective could be achieved by reducing the boulder wall to 168 square feet or less, with removal of the fire pit. Kempf stated in his view there is nothing particularly offensive with having one boulder wall. Rahn inquired how the length of the wall would be shortened. Marotz stated down at the bottom of the wall they would not be able to remove any of the boulders but that they could relocate some of the dirt towards the top and eliminate possibly the first IS feet of the wall. Rahn stated in his view there still is the visual affect of the wall from the lake. Curtis noted in past situations where a retaining wall has been allowed to remain the City has required vegetative screening of the wall. (fl0S>3074 Scan and Melissa Wambold, Continued) Bremer indicated she would be fine with allowing a portion of the wall to remain as long as it was under 168 square feet and it is screened with vegetation. Bremer stated there may be some confusion over the City Engineer’s letter since he indicates that the boulder wall is not necessary but that due to the steepness of the wall they should be allowed a set of stairs. Bremer stated in her view it does not appear that this slope would ne^ a stairway in order to access the lake. Bremer stated the Planning Commission typically looks at after-the-fact variances on what they would have allowed prior to the work being completed and that this work would not have been allowed had the proper steps been followed. Bremer indicated it is difficult to tell from the City Engineer’s letter whether the steps would be allowed all the way from the residence down to the lake. Curtis stated re-grading the property could result in the necessity for the stairway to be extended somewhat but that it is not necessary for the property to be re-graded back to its original grade. Raliu moved, Kempf seconded, to recommend denial of the after-the-fact hardcover variance and to recommend approval of a conditional use permit in order to re-grade the 0-75’ setback zone, with the appUcants having the option of choosing whether to retain a portion of the boulder wall, subject to the hardcover in the 0^75* zone not exceeding 168 square feet and further subject to appropriate vegetative screening being provided for the wall, or to construct a stairway down to the tohe not to exceed 168 sqnare feet. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Leslie opposed. Leslie noted the 168 square feet is a presumption on the part of the applicant and is not what the City Engineer is stating in his letter. Date AppHcaMra Rtcdvcd: 4-4-0S Date AppHcatioa CoBakkrad as Coaipicte: 4-7-05 M-Day Ravicw Period Eiplm: 6-6-05 COMM^ii *<*CCTIMQ APR 2 5 2005 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO Date: April 20,2005 Item No.: 3 Dcpartmcat Approval: Namt: Janice Gund]ach.^X Title: City Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #05-3080, Interspace-West, Inc., 2060 Wayzata Boulevard West General Development Plan Approval Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: B - 6, Highway Commercial District PUD, Planned Unit Development 2.637 acies (114,868 s.f.) 191 feet List of Exhibits A - Notice of PC Action dated 4-19-05 B - City Engineer Comments dated 4-18-05 C - PC Report and Exhibits dated 4-13-05 (fidl size exhibits can be provided if needed) Appticatkm Summary: The tqjplicant is requesting the following in order to construct 10 units of office condos on 10 lots and one common lot to be known as Amber Woods Office Center: 1. B - 6 PUD General Development Plan approval, 2. Final Plat approval in order to create 10 unit lots and one common lot, 3. Commercial Site Plan approval in order to obtain a building permit, and lastly 4. Easement Vacations in conjunction with dedication of new easements. The {qjpUcants have proposed development of 10 units of office condos on approximately 2.6 acres located at 2060 Wayzata Boulevard West The proposed condos will be 2-story walkouts containing approximately 34,186 s.f. of gross square footage. Each duplex style building will contain a walk-out level, a main floor level and a second story mezzanine. This is the final review stage of the PUD process and includes a final plat, a commercial site plan review and easement vacations. Plaming Commission Recommendation The Pla nning Commission voted 7-0 to q>prove the General Development Plan in accordance with the stipulations noted in the staff recommendation, noted below. The Planning Commission also heard from the neighbors requesting implementation of trees to the northeast comer of the site. The Planning Commission did not incorporate this into their approval recommendation, however the i^plicant agreed at the meeting to this. Staff Recommeiidatioa Staff recommends iqiproval of the General Development Plan with the following stipulations: 1. Plans illustrating dedication of a public driveway easement connecting from the southeasterly access to the site, to the northwest boundary of the site, should be submitted prior to final approval by the City Council. The driveway easement must follow the proposed drive aisle of the parking lot, be a minimum width of 24* and must be submitted as a separate document for filing, as it cannot be shown on the plat. 2. At the time the City’s landscape consultant submits comments regarding the proposed landscaping, those comments shall be incorporated into the proposed landscape plan. (Comments have been received alon'> with additional minor engineering matters, attached as Exhibit C. These items should be incorporated into the final plans.) 3. City Engineer approval of the Hinting plan and clarification of the method of lighting the proposed sign. 4. A revised monument sign plan shall be submitted meeting the base requirement and not exceeding 100 square feet prior to final approval. At the time a revised monument style sign is submitted meeting the monument standards, the applicant should also submit a plan illustrating the sizes and content of any signs to be affixed to the buildings, if any are proposed. 5. A revised set of elevations should be submitted illustrating like building materials for all ftcades to match the building materials noted on the front elevation. 6. Revised association documents must be submitted meeting the requirement noted on page 7, #16 of the concept plan approval resolution regarding formation of a review/approval committee to help regulate intensities of uses. Following comments received from the neighbor ’s of the Sugarwoods development, staff would oiTer the following questions to the Council to help fittilitate concerns regarding trees and potential loss: 1. Can trees be incorporated into the northeastern comer of the site? 2. Can the retaining wall systems along the northerly lot line be shifted 5 ’ south to give an additional S’ of protection to the root systems of the trees existing on the Sugarwoods residentia] neighborhoods outlot? COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED The Council may act on this application under one or both of the following scenarios: 1. Direct the applicant to revise the development plan giving some direction as to what may be acceptable. This may occur through a tabling if Council so chooses to allow for redesign. I, or 2. Direct staff to draft 1) a resolution approving the Genoal Development Plan implementing the infixmation noted within the above staff recommendation, and any additional stipulations deemed necessary; 2) a resolution for plat approval; and 3) a PUD Development Agreement fix review and adoption at the Council ’s May 9"* or 23"* meeting. X2liu.£ij: ---- CITY OF ORONO ZONING FILE: 05-3080 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Cryatal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 DATE OF NOTICE: April 19,2005 TO: Interspace-West, Inc. COPIES: P.O. Box 184 Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: General Development Plan BaTO ^Apnf iX 2005'............................................................. Plannlns Commission recommended as follows: The Planning Conunission voted to approve the request as submitted with the following stipulations; 1. Plans illustrating dedication of a public driveway easement should be submitted prior to approval by the City Council. The driveway easement must follow the proposed drive aisle of the parking lot, be a minimum width of 24’ and must be submitted as a separate document for filing, as it cannot be shown on the plat. 2. At the time the City’s landscape consultant submits comments regarding the proposed landscaping, those comments shall be incorporated into the proposed landscape plan. 3. City Engineer approval of the submitted lighting plan. The applicants should also verify the method of lighting the monument sign: with flood lights as shown on the lighting plan and/or back-lighted as shown on the sign plan. 4. A revised monument sign plan shall be submitted meeting the base requirement and not exceeding 100 square feet prior to final approval. At the time a revised monument style sign is submitted meeting the monument standards, the applicant should also submit a plan illustrating the sizes and content of any signs to be affixed to the buildings, if any are proposed. 5. A revised set of elevations should be submitted illustrating like building materials for all fiicades to match the building materials noted on the front elevation. 6. Revised association documents must be submitted meeting the requirement noted on page 7, #16 of the concept plan approval resolution regarding formation of a review/approval committee to help regulate intensities of uses. Although not part of the Planning Commission recommendation, staff would pose the following questions for discussion at the Council meeting in an effort to respond to neighbors’ concerns: 1. Can trees be incorporated into the northeastern comer of the site? 2. Can the retaining wall systems along the northerly lot line be shifted 5’ south to give an additional 5’ of protection to the root systems of the trees existing on the Sugarwoods residential neighborhoods outlot? VOTE: 7 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant’s next meeting is tentatively scheduled for City Council - Monday, April 25,2005; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of die official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they are available ftom the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Gundlach at 952-249- 4623. April 11,2005 Mr. Michael P. OafTron Senior Planning Coordinator CilyofOrono Poit Office Box 66 Cryital Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Amber Woods Office Center File No. I39-05-000 Plat No. 05-3010 Dear Mike, We have reviewed the revised site plans dated 4-4-05 Tor the proposed Amber Woods Office Center. The site is located just west of Orono Woods Phase 1 in the northwest quadrant of Wayzata Boulevard (T.II. 12) and North Brown Road. The use fbr this site is proposed as office condos. The site has been revised, but the plans have incorporated most of our comments from our letters dated I -1 1-05 and 2-14-05. The following arc comments with regards to engineering matters: I. 3. Traffic: The proposed parking lot design still causes some concern regarding truck access and turning movements. Turning movement ability could be enhanced by increasing the radius at the first right turn into the parking lot and by reducing the size of the *^bump out*' shown south and west of the center two buildings. A geotechnical report with pavement section recommendation should be submitted for review. 'Hie plan should be submitted to the fire marshal to review hydrant layout and fire vehicle access. A stop sign should be Installed for vehicles exiting the parking lot to the short service road to Highway 12. Gradtag a»d Laadacaplag. The top of the retaining wall shown west and south of the parking lot should be protected with a barrier such as a fence for safety reasons. It may also be necessary to provide some type ofbarrier along the retaining walls shown north of the buildings to provide protection for the neighborhood to the north. The proposed grading In the northwest portion of the parking lot has been lowered considerably from the last submittal. If the city ever intends to connect a roadway to the parking lot the proposed grades shown will require approximately 6-feet of cut across Outlot D. All retaining walls over 4-feet in height require an engineered design and details. The sidewalk north of building number I should not be used as a drainage way. At the back east entrance area of building number 5, the contours and spot elevations show sidewalk steeper than the maximum allowable 5H. Revising this will affect the emergency overflow, handicap access route, and possibly the building elevation. The landscaping plan appears to be generally good overall. We do have one recommendation regarding plant substitution. Honeylocust tend to have insect and disease problems that make them short lived and a maintenance problem. A plant with a similar appearance that is much hardier and disme resistant is the Kentucky Coffee Tree (Gymnocladus dioica). We recommend that this tree be considered as a substitute for the Honeylocust shown on the plan. UttUtles. The sanitary sewer betwemi manhole I and manhole 2 should be lowered to allow gravity service to building number 5. The horizontal and vertical alignment of the sanitary sewer between the existing manhole and MH I needs to be revised. The new sanitary sewer grade should not exceed 1% and should enter the existing manhole closer to 90 degrees from the out going pipe to the cast. A drop manhole upstream of the existing line seems to be the preferred solution. Dralnaia: The storm sewer calculations should include an analysis of the storm sewer downstream from this site to the pond to provide evidence that there is adequate capacity in the system. This should include an analysis of the downstream pipe sizes and grades along with storm sewer calculations for both the existing senior housing site and the applicant's site. This analysis should be based on as-built storm sewer plans and not construction plans as it is our understanding that changes to the storm sewer downstream from this site were made during construction. isL 1 S. EaiMmiti: New utility mnnents wilt need to be provided Tor ail constnicted water main, sanitary and storm sewer. Drainage easements should be provided across any existing or proposed drainage ways. FImhn Ib I Gmraataa: When the final plans are completed we will prepare an estimated cost fi>r site improvements to determine the amount of flnancii guarantee required. Please oontacl me at (651) 60MM.1 If you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENB, AN5BRLfiC A ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg oc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono ' 4 ‘t - • a*. ■/i MS-30M April IS, 2005 Pagt I of7 Date Applkatloa Received: 4-4-05 Date AppHcatim Coatidered as Complete: 4-7-OS dO>Day Review Period Eipires: 6-6-05 To: Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Rron: Janice Gundlach, City Planner^ ]>ate: April 13,2005 Svbjcct: 05-3080, Interspace-West Inc. on behalf of Philip Carlson and Robert Foster, 2060 Wayzata Boulevard West, General Development Plan Review, Final Plat, Commercial Site Plan Review, Easement Vacations Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: B - 6, Highway Commercial District PUD, Planned Unit Development 2.637 acres (114,868 s.f.) 191 feet j^^katioH Summary: The applicant is requesting the following in order to construct i 0 units of office condos on 10 lots and one common lot to be known as Amber Woods Office Center: 1. B - 6 PUD General Development Plan approval, 2. Final Plat approval in order to create 10 unit lots and one common lot, 3. Commercial Site Plan approval in order to obtain a building permit, and lastly 4. Easement Vacations in conjunction with dedication of new easements. The applicants have proposed development of 10 units of office condos on approximately 2.6 acres located at 2060 Wayzata Boulevard West. The proposed condos will be 2-story walkouts containing approximately 34,186 s.f. of gross square footage. Each duplex style building will contain a walk-out level, a main floor level and a second story mezzanine. This is the flnal review stage of the PUD process and includes a flnal plat, a commercial site plan review and easement vacations.________________________ SUiff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the General Development Plan proposal pending submittal of the following items: 1. Plans illustrating dedication of a public driveway easement should be submitted prior to approval by the City Council. The driveway easement must follow the proposed drive aisle of the parking lot, be a minimum width of 24* and must be sutmitted as a separate document for filing, as it cannot be shown on the plat. 2. At the time the City’s landscape consultant submits comments regarding the proposed landscaping, those comments shall be incorporated into die proposed landscape plan. 3. City Engineer approval of the lighting plan and clarification of the method of lighting the proposed sign. 4. A revised monument sign plan shall be submitted meeting the base requirement and not exceeding 100 square feet prior to final approval. At the time a revised MS-3080 April IS. 2005 Page 2 of 7 monument style sign is submitted meeting the monument standards, the applicant should also submit a plan illustrating the sizes and content of any signs to be affixed to the buildings, if any are proposed. 5. A revised set of elevations should be submitted illustrating like building materials for all facades to match the building materials noted on the front elevation. 6. Revised association documents must be submitted meeting the requirement noted on page 7, #16 of the concept plan approval resolution regarding formation of a review/approval committee to help regulate intensities of uses. The Planning Conunission could choose to table this application pending submittal of these items or move it forward to the City Council pending submittal of these items.____ Backgroiind The Concept Plan review stage was heard before the Planning Commission at the January 18"* regularly scheduled meeting, where an approval recommendation was made to the City Council. The City Council reviewed this application at the February 14"* meeting v^iere the application was tabled to allow the applicant to redesign the architecture to fit more with the Council’s vision of how the Highway 12 corridor should be developed. Further clarification to the applicants was provided at the February 28"* meeting and a redesign was presented at the March H*** City Council meeting. The City Council looked favorably at diat redesign and directed staff to draft a Resolution approving the Concept Plan stage for iqjproval at the next meeting. On March 28, 2005 the applicant receiv^ Concept Plan approval per the conditions laid out in the Concept Plan approval Resolution, attach^ to this report as Exhibit S. The qiplicants are now requesting General Development Plan approval, which is the final stage in the PUD, Planned Unit Development process. General Development Plan approval must be granted 3^en the conditions of the Concept Plan approval Resolution are completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission and City Council. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Concept Plan Approval Resolution Exhibit B - Final Plat Exhibit C - Sheet C1>1, Existing Conditions Exhibit D - Sheet Cl-2, Removals A Erosion Control Plan Exhibit E - Sheet Cl>3, Existing Drainage Map Exhibit F - Sheet C2-1, Site Plan Exhibit G - Sheet C3-1, Overall Grading & Drainage Plan Exhibit H - Sheet C3-2, Grading & Drainage Plan Bldg. #1 Lots 1-2 Exhibit I - Sheet C3-3, Grading A Drainage Plan Bldg. #2 Lots 3-4 Exhibit J - Sheet C3-4, Grading A Drainage Plan Bldg. #3 Lots 5-6 Exhibit K - Sheet C3-S, Grading A Drainage Plan Bldg. #4 Lots 7-8 Exhibit L - Sheet C3-6, Grading A Drainage Plan Bldg. #5 Lots 9-10 Exhibit M - Sheet C3-7, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Exhibit N - Sheet C3-8, Proposed Drainage Map Exhibit O - Sheet C4-1, Utility Plan J m.\ i «K)5-5080 ApHI 18,2005 Page 3 of7 Exhibit P - Sheet C8-1, Detail Sheet Exhibit Q - Sheet C8-2, Detail Sheet Exhibit R - Sheet Ll-I, Landscape Plan Exhibit S - Sheet L2*l, Lighting Plan Exhibit T - Sheet A-l, Lower Level Floor Plan Exhibit U - Sheet A>2, Main Level Floor Plan Exhibit V - Sheet A -3, Upper Level Floor Plan Exhibit W - Sheet A-4, Front Elevation Exhibit X - Sheet A*S, Walk-Out Elevation Exhibit Y - Sheet A-6, Side Elevation (1) Exhibit Z - Sheet A-7, Side Elevation (2) Exhibit AA - Proposed Sign Exhibit BB - Orem Space Illustration Exhibit CC - Homeowners Association Documents Exhibit DD - PC Report dated 1-14-OS General Developiiimt Plan Review This stage of the review is much like the final plat review stage, which ordinarily is not reviewed by the Planning Conunission. Rather than go through all the requirements of the B - 6 zoning district, wdiich was done in the attached concept plan PC report, the focus will be on fulfilling the requirements of the Concept Plan approval Resolution. The issues discussed below are a focus of the outstanding issues listed in the concept plan approval resolution. Architecture The City Council required that the iq)plicant incorporate a more traditional style of architecture, including features such as a pitched roof. The applicant presented the City Council with a fiont and walk-out elevation showing incorporation of a pitched roof and mme traditional fiont entry. The City Council accepted that design change but stipulated that at the General Development Plan review stage, the fiont elevation view should be further refined to incorporate some type of feature in the roof, possibly a dormer. The applicants have submitted new elevation views, attached as Exhibit V-Y, which appear to meet this requirement. However, in revising the architectural styles the site plan has changed somewhat from when the Plaiming Conunission originally reviewed this application. The changes consist of duplex style buildings with shared entrances in the center. The number of units, lots proposed, square footages, parking and proposed grading remain virtually unchanged however the number of clusters is now five rather than the previous three. The finished floor elevations and basement floor elevations are comparable to those shown on the three cluster plan thus not changing the appearance of the buildings from neighboring sites. The revised site plan meets all setl^k and lot standards of the B - 6 Zoning District WS-3080 April 18.2005 Pafi4or7 Parking In conjunction with the revised building layout, the parking layout has changed slightly and reducing the number of stalls provided from 103 to 102. The parking requirement of 3.S stalls/1,000 s.f. using 85% of the gross floor area requires 102 stalls (34,186 s.f / 1000 X .85 = 101.70), where the 102 stalls provided is adequate. Note that the 3.5 stalls per 1000 s.f. is a variance from the City’s 5.0 stalls per 1000 s.f. requirement for general office uses; this variance was approved for this site for office condo use in a prior application, and has support from staff as well as the City’s engineering and planning consultants. Easement Vacations At the time the senior housing site to the direct east was developed, drainage and utility easements were dedicated through this site to accommodate utility lines, as illustrated on Exhibit C. These easements do not fit with the site plan and parking layout of the applicants proposed plan and therefore have to be vacated. The applicants have proposed a drainage and utility easement over the entire common lot, but have not shown a driveway easement for ingress and egress for a future frontage road. This driveway easement should follow the proposed drive aisle of the parking lot, be a minimum width of 24’ and must be submitted as a separate document for filing, as it cannot be shown on the plat. This must be submitted prior to final approval by the City Council. Green Space The green space calculation of the original plan was 39%. With the site plan revisions the green space calculation in now 44.9% or 1.18 acres (including retaining walls) of the entire area of the lot, which is illustrated on attached Exhibit AA. The B - 6 district requires a minimum of 25% impervious surface. Even if the retaining walls were subtracted from the 44.9%, the proposed plan would more than meet the required 25%. Landscaping A major area of discussiem at the March 28,2005 City Council meeting centered on the proposed landscaping. Having not had a landscape plan at that meeting, the Concept Plan qiproval resolution specified conformance with the B - 6 zoning district landscaping requirements and dso required that the plan give ’’particular attention to bt^fering/screening design along the northern property boundary along the top tier of the proposing retaining wall design, and also along the eastern lot line adjacent to the Orono Woods senior housing development.” The intent of the City Council was to be sensitive to the residential uses to the north and east. A landscaping plan has been submitted as part of the Development Plan review and is attached as ^hibit R. Along the top tier of the retaining wall system along the northern property boundary the plan proposes 17 dwarf Korean lilac (24” in height), 5 Colorado spruce (6 ’ in height), 6 pago^ dogwood (6* in height), and 5 Austrian pine (6 ’ in height). Adjacent to the Orono Woods senior housing development is a native grass mix consisting of western tall grass prairie with a forbes mix and the incorporation of 3 Colorado spruce (6 ’ in height) and 5 River Birch (10 ’ in height). Staff finds that the proposed land^pe plan conforms with the B - 6 landscaping requirements, although the Planning Commission should discuss M^3080 April 18«200S Pages of 7 v^ether the plan is sensitive to the residential uses to the north and east, which the concept plan approval resolution required. This landscape plan has been submitted to the City’s landscape consultant. Once the City has received these comments they will be forwarded to the applicant for incorporation into the plan. Retaining Waib The concept plan approval resolution required a 5’ setback for all retaining walls with the e; *!ption of the v^l systems abutting the westerly and southerly edges of the parking lot Retaining wall systems along the westerly and southerly lot lines are proposed on the property line and the applicants have previously submitted an agreement with the adjacent property owner that would permit the use of the adjacent property for construction of these walls. Because the existing walls are located on the line and due to the drastic grade changes going west to east, staff finds the location of these walls to be satisfiictory. Retaining walls are also proposed 5* off the northern property boundary and S’ off the eastern property boundary. The height of these walls range from 2’ to 4’ per tier and will be screened with the landscaping proposed. Any walls exceeding 4’ in height will require an engineered design at the time of building permit submittal. The total height of the 3 tiered wall along the north boundary is approximately 12* at its highest point. Li^tiag A lighting plan has been received, however the City Engineer has not reviewed it as of the date of this report. The lighting plan illustrated little or no measurable foot-candle along the northern and eastern property boundaries, adjacent to the residential uses. The plan also illustrated pole locations and fixtures details per the requirement of the concept plan approval resolution. The pole lights will be downward facing and located along the peripheries of the parking lot with an additional pole located behind the first building along the handicap access and also at the main access to the site. The wall mounted fixtures qrpear to also be downward fricing and mounted to the walkout sides of the buildings. Staff has some concern regarding the proposed flood lights illuminating the nuun sign as the sign plan submitted indicated the sign will be back-lighted. Staff would recommend that the sign lighting be verified prior to approval. Signage The applicants have proposed a 19 ’ x S’ sign totaling 95 square feet, shown on attached Exhibit Z. The proposed sign will consist of brushed metal letters that will be back lighted mounted on a rock/metal frame structure. The area underneath the sign will consist of 200 s.f. of landscaping. The sign is subject to the monument sign standards adopted in May of2004 known as amendment Ordinance No. 6. Those standards require that the base of the sign be at least 50% of the width of the sign. The proposed sign does not meet that requirement and is considered a pylon sign, which is no longer permitted. Staff finds that in order to meet the base requirement, the sign will have to be redesigned so as to meet the 100 s.f nuucimum that includes the base and stone/rock surrounding the sign frice. Prior to final approval a revised sign must be submitted. MS-3080 April 18,2005 Pag«6of7 Based on the frontage on Highway 12 the site is permitted 191 s.f. of total signage. Due to the 100 s.f. maximum for the monument sign, 91 s.f is left for wall signage for the proposed buildings. At the time a revised monument style sign is submitted meeting the monument standards, the applicant should also submit a plan illustrating the sizes and content of any signs to be affixed to the buildings, if any are proposed. BHilding Matcriab The front elevation, attached as Exhibit V, illustrates a standing seam metal roof, stucco siding, aluminum frame windows, and ledger stone. These materials meet the architectural standards outlined in the B - 6 zoning district. The applicant has stated that these materials will incorporate earth tones. Staff would recommend that a revised set of elevations be submitted illustrating like building materials for all facades to eliminate confusion. Aasociatioii Documents The qjplicant submitted a draft of the association documents prior to the first City Council meeting, which are attached as Exhibit BB. During the public hearing at the Planning Commission, conunissioners expressed concern about regulating the types of uses that would buy into the project and their parking demands. The concept plan approval resolution notes that the “Applicant shall incorporate into association documents formation of a review committee to review/approve uses as they are introduced into the development.” The intent of this requirement was for a self-policing of the intensities of the uses. The documents submitted thus far do not appear to meet this requirement; therefore, revised association documents must be submitted for City Attorney review against this standard. The Planning Commission should discuss whether the concept plan approval resolution requirement covers the concern of intensities of uses and if any additional revision to the association documents should be considered. Issues for Discussion 1. Is the proposed landscape plan sensitive to the residential uses to the north and east? 2. Are the changes to the association documents regarding policing the intensities of uses reasonable? 3. Does the Planning Commission have concerns regarding signage that would be affixed to the buildings? What about lighting concerns? Staff Recomnitndation The Planning Commission could either table the application or move it forward to the City Council stipulating submittal of the below listed requirements: 1. Plans illustrating dedication of a public driveway easement should be submitted prior to approval by the City Council. The driveway easement must follow the proposed drive aisle of the parking lot, be a minimum width of 24’ and must be submitted as a separate document for filing, as it cannot be shown on the plat. (MS-30N April IS, 2005 Ptge7or7 2. At the time the City’s landsc^ consultant submits comments regarding the proposed iai«t«rjiping, those comments shall be incorporated into the proposed landscqie plan. 3. City Engineer approval of the submitted lighting plan. The applicants should also verify the method of lighting the monument sign: with flood lights as shown on the lighting plan and/or back-lighted as shown on the sign plan. 4. A revised monument sign plan shall be submitted meeting the base requirement and not exceeding 100 square feet prior to final q>proval. At the time a revised monument style sign is submitted meeting the monument standards, the applicant should also submit a plan illustrating the sizes and content of any signs to be affixed to the buildings, if any are proposed. S. A revised set of elevations should be submitted illustrating like building materials for all fecades to match the building materials noted on the front elevation. 6. Revised association documents must be submitted meeting the requirement noted on page 7, #16 of the concept plan approval resolution regarding formation of a review/qjproval committee to help regulate intensities of uses. ■f:. ;; ^: ■ v,v > ■■ vShiv .4 i :- -7 ■' ■I . via i." :v Mi w tmm 4 . , • . T . V. V . .V*^' ;> > . Btyii tWiiii ♦ ■ I 1 •• [ ■t A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2060 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST FILE NO. OS-3080 WHEREAS, Interspace-West, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, (hereinafter the "applicant**) has an interest in property located at 2060 Wayzata Boulevard West within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Orono Ambar, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the property is located in the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area for v^ch the City has established special requirements for development per Municipal Code Section 78, Division 17; and WHEREAS, the City of Orono Highway 12 Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinance (Municipal Code Section 78, Article VI) requires a multiple step q>proval process for properties developing via the PUD process; the General Concept Plan approval stage is the first step in the process followed by the Development Plan approval stage; and WHEREAS, the iqiplicant has requested General Concept Plan Approval for Planned Unit Development of this 2.6 acre property. The intended use of the property is approximately 34,000 s.f. of office townhouses/condominiums located on 10 lots and one common lot to be known as Amber Woods Office Centre; and WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting to amend the existing Planned Unit Development Agreement No. 2A in effect on the property which approved a 25,000 s.f. professional office building in 2001 in order to develop the property in accordance with the office condominium plans submitted and attached to this Resolution as Exhibits A thru 1, and WHEREAS, the Orono City Council makes the following findings in regard to this application for PUD General Concept Plan approval: Page 1 of 12 VWriffl IIT lil hi I iiii 1. 2. 3. 5. 6. hi. v-.-.'j ifetV'.v .1 ^'"'7 -■ ■■•>■■ ">v.- : ■ --c. 'j' . Bemm FINDINGS This iqipUcation was reviewed as Zoning File #05-3080. The property is located in the B - 6 Highway Commercial District and is also zoned for Planned Unit Development under the current Planned Unit Development Agreement No. 2A. The property consists of approximately 2.6 acres. The proposed office condominium use would conform to the B - 6 Highway Commercial District zoning requirements and upon subdivision qjproval enable the property to develop under the Planned Unit Development process for multiple buildings. The City has agreed to develop this property under Planned Unit Development Agreement No. 2A approved and executed in November of 2001. The PUD Agreement permitted a 25,000 s.f. building for use as professional offices. An amendment to the Agreement is required in order for the proposed 34,000 s.f office condominium project to be constructed. Other properties abutting or near the property are used for or plaimed for uses which arc generally compatible with the proposed office use. North of the property is the single family residential neighborhood known as Sugarwoods, directly east is the Orono Woods senior housing building, and directly west is an existing B - 1, Retail Sales Business District which includes a retail strip mall and a welding shop. To the south across Highway 12 is the City of Long Lake. The a|q)licant has provided preliminary plans attached to this resolution as Exhibit A, prepared by Interspace-West, Iiic. and Exhibits B thru I prepared by Loucks Associates all dated 3-10-05, noted below, which the City Council finds are sufficient to indicate the intent of the developer and the potential impacts of thefxroject. Exhibit A - Front/Rear Building Elevation dated 3-9-05 Exbibit B - Existing Conditions sheet Cl-1 Exhibit C - Removals A Erosion Control Plan sheet Cl-2 Exhibit D - Existing Drainage Map sheet C1-3 Page 2 of 12 f-' -r ■ 7. 8. 9. 4-' 10. Exhibit E - Preliminary Site Plan sheet C2-1 Exhibit F - Preliminary Grading & Drainage Plan sheet C3-1 Exhibit G - Preliminary Utility Plan sheet C4-1 Exhibit H - Preliminary Plat sheet C6-1 Exhibit I - Preliminary Detail sheet C8-1 The proposed site plan, attached as Exhibit E, meets the general access standards develop^ for the Highway 12 corridor. The property’s primary access will be from tte existing right-in/right-out access located within the Orono Wood senior housing site. The property will also have access through the Orono Woods senior housing site to Brown R<^ South via the shared access arrangements that were dedicated at the time of development of Orono Woods. The City will require sidewalk access from within the property to Orono Woods and Highway 12. Stormwater management is proposed to be provided by stormwater catch basins and storm sewer lines which would discharge to the existing stormwater pond located in the southeast comer of the Orono Woods senior housing site to the direct east This pond, located at the northwest comer of the intersection of Highway 12 and Brown Road South, was designed to handle the stormwater needs of the property. In addition to the City of Orono, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District will have approval authority over the applicants’ stormwater management plan. The City Council finds that the development of this property should be held to similar architectural design standards of other buildings recently approved along the Highway 12 corridor and the design standards informally envisioned during the Highway 12 turn-back review process. The City Council finds that the proposed development of the property for an office condominium use will not have negative impacts on the surrounding properties when all Concept Plan Approval conditions are met, ant^ is in keeping with the goals, policies and philosophies of the City. mm Page 3 of 12 m £ ' . .. ‘ " \ * - ^ CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby apjxoves the General Concept Plan for development of approximately 34,000 s.f. of office Goodominium buildings consisting of 10 lots and one conunon lot to known as Amber Woods Office Centre on existing Lot 1, Block 1, Orono Ambar, subject to the following declarations and conditions: 1.The City of Orono will grant preliminary and final subdivision approvals in order to create 10 units lots and one common lot on one block when the conditions of this resolution are fulfilled. 2. t ‘ Conditions fot Development Plan Approval are as follows: A. Devdopmcnt Standards and General Conditions I)The Development Plan shall meet all setback standards for building construction and parking as established under the B - 6 Highway Conunercial Di^ct requirements, as defined in the following table: '. . ' » V V 1 ■ " , BpIbllatllNvcIopHMat Staadards Reqalrod Lot Area 2.0 acre min. Lot Width 100' Priadpal Structarc Setbacks Froat(S)30* Sidc(E)35' Slde(W)10' Rear (N)35' ParUag Setbacks •iadadcs driviag laaes Froat(S)15' ;-:V i] Page 4 of 12 ■ ■■nil 1 - r- tij U \ • I. - ^ ' ’*%:tlR:i r : ' 1 . J- i . i \ A- Mkf :* lb. : ■ MubJitofe/ 1 ; Side(E)10’ Side (W)5’ Rear(N)10’ BttUdiag Height Peak Height N/A Defined Height 30’ max. The above table values aie based on the B-6 standards found in Section 78-797 (1-S) of the Zoning Ordinance. Required off-street parking per the reconunendations of the City ’s traffic consultant shall be 3.S stalls per 1000 s.f. using 85% of the gross floor area. Parking layout and traffic flow shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Acceptable ingress and egress easements shall be dedicated through the property to allow for connection of a future frontage road to Otitlot D, Sugarwoods at the northwestern comer of the site. A surmountable emergency vehicle only access shall be developed along the northerly portion of the western property boundary, per the recommendations of the City ’s Fire Marshal. Appropriate traffic and parking signage within the property shall be installed subject to the Orono staff and City Engineer review andq^m>val. Applicant shall demonstrate to the Council ’s satisfaction that the front &(ade of the buildings, as noted in Exhibit A, and specifically inq)lementation of an architectural feature to the roof, are incorporated so as to break up the expanse of the front view of thereof. The percentage of the property that is devoted to green space (not including areas within road rights-of-way) shall be maximized to the greatest extent possible but in no case shall be less than shown Page S of 12 lanKl TA.'K'rEM I ' ¥ 1 . . / ■ > V ’ - 8) i . .*&■ % . <■>*■ ^5*' '.s^. ? . , .-, - > V . -I P3R ■■■■■■«'4^ r'iV'.-,:: ’-’- vs V' on the Preliminary Site Plan dated 3* 1 0-05 and attached as Exhibit E. A landscaping plan shall be submitted for review which shall meet all landscaping standards established within the B - 6 Highway Commercial District standards of Section 78-797 (8) (a) through (g). The applicant shall pay particular attention to a buffering/screening design along the northern property boundary along the top tier of the proposing retaining wall design, and also along the eastern lot line adjacent to the Orono Woods senior housing development. The intent of the City is to be sensitive to the residential uses to the north and east. This landscaping plan shall also include screening for any retaining walls or retaining wall systems exceeding 4’ in height. All retaining walls shall be located not less than S’ from all perimeter property boundaries, with the exception of the wall systems abutting Ae westerly and southerly edges of the parking lot A lighting plan shall be submitted illustrating all lifting flxtures to be afBxed to the building, pole locations, fixture details, and foot-candle measurements up to the property line. No measurable foot-candle will be permitted to extend over the northern and eastern property boundary. Property lighting shall be low, shielded and directed downwards. A signage plan shall be submitted in compliance with the 190 s.f. allowance provided under section 78-1468 for B - 1, B - 2, and B - 4 Zoning Districts and also the Zoning Code Amendment approved on May 8, 2004 regarding monument signs (Ordinance No. 6, Third Series). The 190 s.f. allowance ^lall include any monuments sigruige as well as exterior wall mounted signage. Final decisions by the applicant regarding colors, types and qualities of building materials shall be subject to City Council qjproval. The proposed building shall be subject to the Page 6 of 12 Mr J ^ . f * t iboMfL: Architectural Standards for the B-6 District per Zoning Code Section 78>797 (9) a through e and material as represented thus far in the submitted plans. The use of the building is specifically approved for professional office use. Retail uses accessory to the office use may be allowed with the limitation that within any building, retail uses shall not exceed 5% of the gross floor area of that building. Applicants' architect shall submit final development plans to the Metro Council Environmental Services to determine the exact number of SAC units to be charged at the time of the issuance of building permits. Applicant shall provide suitable evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) approval of the stormwater management plan before Development Plan Approval will be granted. Erosion control shall adhere to "Best Management Practices for Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas". All erosion controls as required by the City and by the MCWD shall be in place prior to commencement of excavation on the property. Association documents must be submitted for review by the City Attorney anri City Council as part of fVnera! Development Plan review. Applicant shall incorporate into association documents formation of a review committee to review/approve uses as they are introduced into the development. The intent of the City is for a self'policing of intensities of uses. Final plat approval, commercial site plan approval, and easement vacations and dedications will be includ^ within the General Development Plan review and approval. This concept plan qrproval is based upon the known issues that may affect this project, but this approval does not limit the City Page 7 of 12 d B. ' ■■^^^.1' '... 1\. ; fh)in revising or amending these conditions as the review process continues. Plant and Specifications. The following plans and specifications shall be submitted for review and approval by the City and other appropriate jurisdictions: 1) Final plans and specifications for all proposed utility lines and services, including any proposed revisions to existing service facilities. The Public Works Department and MnDOT shall review and approve all utility improvements. Final sanitary sewer and watermain plans shall be provided and are subject to approval by the Public Works Department. 2) Final grading, drainage and erosion control plans showing existing and proposed contours, building locations, elevations, stormwater facilities and calculations, utilities and erosion control measures to be used during construction. Applicant shall review the existing storm sewer system at the adjacent senior housing property to ensure adequate capacity. Engineered designs shall be required for all retaining walls or retaining wall systems exceeding 4* in total height Development Plan Approval will not be granted until the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has approved the stormwater plans. 3) Final landscaping design plan with planting schedules including numbers and q>ecies, in accordance with the landscaping requirements of tte B-6 zoning district. 4) Final building construction plans, including: I .■’T a) elevations of all sides of the building; b) type and color of exterior building materials; c) proposed floor plan; Page 8 of 12 ■ 1 C. D. E. d) building dimensions; and e) the location of trash and recycling containers and of heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment. Parking lot construction plans, including confirmation that parking lots and driving lanes will be paved and provided with concrete curb and gutter, and that all driving lanes within parking lots shall have a 9-ton minimum pavement section. A geotechnical evaluation of the soil shall be done in conjunction with the pavement design and shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. Detailed signage plan including monuments signage and wall mounted signage. Lighting plan including pole and building mounted lighting. 8)Any additional plans and specifications deemed necessary by the City as review progresses. Development Agreement. Development Approval is contingent upon the successful execution of a Development Agreement between the applicant and the City. Such Agreement shall address all specific City requirements for the development. Financial Guarantee. The Development Agreement shall include a financial guarantee by the applicant to ensure the completion of site improvements. The City Engineer shall complete an estimate of improvement costs, including but not limited to landscaping, grading, erosion control, utilities, driveways and parking areas, trails, sidewalks, retaining walls and stormwater management facility construction, and the applicant shall provide to the City a financial guarantee of 150% of the improvement costs. Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee. The standard Storm Water ai*d Drainage Trunk Fee for conunercial development shall be paid by th; Page 9 of 12 I -’rH r;-1^ -./-• developer at the rate of $6,655 per acre (2005 Fee Schedule). F. Park Dcdkatioa. None. The park dedication fee of $35,510 was paid by 'X . Frank Dunbar on 11-20*03 bas^ on a commercial use of the property. x/.’r' • itW' O. t •• . » t'•.t t .ui Sewer and Water Connection Charges. None. The property was fully assessed for commercial sewer/water units as paric of the 1989 Highway 12 project, and no additional charges would be due for commercial use of the property. An>Ucant is responsible for MCES Sewer Availability Chaiiges (SAC) as noted in item A13 above. 3.This General Concept Plan Approval resolution ^>proves the development concept subject to the applicant meeting the requirements of this resolution and all other requirements of the City. Final development plan approval shall include review and recommendation by the Planning Commission pursuant to a public hearing and shall only be grant^ \^n the City Council finds that all “Conditions ‘for Development Plan Approval” as identified herein have been met. This General Concept Plan Approval shall be effective for a period of 6 months from the date of this resolution. If Development Plan Approval is not granted within that period, the terms and conditions of this resolution shall be null and void. The City Council at its sole discretion may extend this effective period. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the propoty. ^5; ■v' / < Page 10 of 12 A.'; ■ fV> Q ■ ■••*7 h'-': . ’•‘.■■Ik I ' Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 28"* day of March, 2005. ATTEST: Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Philip L. Carlson, Vice President (For Interspace-West, Inc.) mmm rr; -Sv::^ ■ V'-' y.ifi./ a' .*’ a , ,IVV.! ^ iSii...^^ k?? . $. 1» ^ «• - /• ••» ■••:•*-■ -y :: .:im = -••' r Page II of 12 >. ■■ 5^ vy.:';.->| L-.-V X.* fTi^ 1-^ ii' inflMlii-l STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this__day of 200S Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behal^of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this___day of 200S by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was execut^ on behalf of the City. Notary Public State of Mitu County of H ) (ss. pin ) day ofThe instrument was aduiowledged before me on this_ Philip L. Carlson, Vice-President of Interqrace-West, a Minnesota corporation. 2005 by Mm Notary Public Page 12 of 12 » . j. A,..I'l II AUKR woooe omce CBir KISnC. Ng.. mammt mf •« 1SAM5nSi#«ins;lavatO^ari tHMUMAI. anrcoiMn.op mvcMM iwr. i^iTX Ml infii ' 1 ASSOCUTtt tmB • 1k^4 AHmER ynoooe OFFICE CENTER ••• »% %$U II ( • • • 0 • «# %« %* :*r_ IT' ■•■':•: S' . >■) ■ ■•4. ? 5 !• .<■' sae ’viet L E I' 1 • •Cl »iai«v • *• •<4* vSV ^ 4 f «» »♦# 'Jf ,-y \ \ i ■' 5\\\ '• V • ' \ ^ 4'“V“V, ' \ \ Cvr%~544 C.> rr.“ «.tt H» \/ /I <lt ««il tjr*. m 4 •‘*0------- A ( KHcmA/m mti Of H^dtanl £1^ • ioa.4 ff#t (Mcvo *it; Sfi r A V ‘ ' ‘^r III I:/ V -.../ / / / ■> }f=«ffl£jr{^».s^ ■' \ I \ TIC POMT ^tcir COWWCCTOWS / / * iMMflO IK \ |i «rr. miL •i» * ''^’ / '//// ------------------------ if / / •'.......................— /ifU^ I ^'/r-.?V/ r ^ / / / V / / } li/:i:^..>n- / riy .iv . .»• .«ipr V *!*■: ______ ^__r t./ y r*i ti.. •••»>: IW ■flr» •«...*' 11Ji —■z::zT^ZJlJJIS fKiCMC CBSIM6 CUM - MCUf OaiMO VIUMMOU rt '• mvm; «en4# » I «r»M« « ^^yzatm \ ««< <Ka \«iy. ygjj o^. iTJftMi B •ijl \ ^ \ \ \ \ ------ / I ^ I I y' ---------------*K '' !'.,\r.,,* \ ,''.\ \ I \ / / I y f ; ! / / i> 's \ \‘'\ \ / 1 / •? 4 V -i r- — — V — ——^ ^ r \ « • • • \ I .* * I I \ If/Hi 4 f ? • : I- •1 SiTf PIAN CMMi NOTtS I. ^ PARKINC C^ CUtA'npNS fAKtONCtCQUm K» fMUUNC PROVIOIO 192 t n* ^ sssss;:;witfsr^«5e5a®-**'‘«. AM f. mlbri* M«feC9«rCM*«Rli itaaia \ \ A *i. ? TA-Tri. ---------' / !i J~^ i1 -----A'__ „« / ; f 'i 4 f ,'.o‘ y kmuhm V/ / I I * I nnc( j; lj\ \ \l mm CMO tMU *'x \ *••. ****• y . w ^ ; \\%\ \\ V % S \ V \\\ . 1 K. ri NOffm IQnTL SCALE IN It 1/1 «0* IMS tirt *1. • MMfct emrntmmmt i --- _________;I ^ _ •» ^ I \ . 5S«5w"«5ir~”“^?*^C“~“—----------- mrnmm t. 0ru 3CMX iiiMHiiii'ii A 0nr SCAlf mtm e 22SSim!i ■ y I J L norm *7% Bf t f % 0 f, f i ^ m m s^yj Cophe m* r’»tr r\ ■V VA-vJ’c::7f t ^ H^ •.. »W,. ••] X \ \ I / ___ t___ •- Olttwa —\ .' •• ;. .' ,.• ..* ....; .-.i •I ‘\V‘ ‘''v '••>! rr \\'\ ^■ .' \ \ WARMNC: TM OOMMCTOa INMl ■ ■WOMBU KM CMUNC KM lOCMKM « Ml tM«i«aiuimjl«lWt»KUCPO>M>ll»linN«ttUMmC OIM»H OM mmntmmmc fHan MMO AMO/atMUXAiONar iMi ilCM RCOUDEO HNNIDWNCt I ml 1MI GONiaMCTOI CONTACT OOPH0I fTAfl OM CAU AT Ml 4S44M9 AT lIMT « NOM M MMMCf KM Tl€ lOCAIKMOr Ml I •u nm mil «ia * 1WAMMI «€ CDNIMCIOi MMi I IMMQW OUMNC CXMlIkXTOl AT NO con T01»€ «tUM fm m nv t m oi I *>c 1 »€ « M MR • » M «• « M 01 4 « • I I & I• V. IRI •M I >_«PI 9. mm Stt I. » & ■ m» 1 • • «i ICi^4 cm 4 4Mm • 4 • 4 «0 4 ca •J*« 4 104 m 4 • 4 » 4 «H 4 M • m t « 4 9 4 • It 9 14 I It I rORM Stwtn DESIGN • MMER WOOD* UCKSmOCCTIMtIt OHONO.MN 4^<0S0A1E: cVflOtY MLO vBjocmr WARNING: fHE CONTUCTOH SHAU K RUf UIST1NC UTUTCV n«V SHAU C MAHHAINMC mUR XRVKt AN • 4 9 f 19 1 4 9 9 19 1 ex 19191 mi 1 m 1 9.99 940 941 99T 9« 9» 400 7179 4444 mif 1409 19127 1 9M49 OM 94479 19 19m 1.9 99t 10990 70 S9 994 10990 lO 99 lO 10079 or 99 179 10090 119 &9 7J9 1002.0 O 99 999 1991.0 19 OOO 19090 9e» IS 10910 190UB 102« 19 1QOO 1900 9909 19 1000 090 1999 19 090 9999 19 0979 9009 19 90 90 90 977 OJ9 097 SO 90 90 90 90 40 029 077 124 1.99 917 991 THE CONTRACTOR SHAU CONT/ AT UAST HOURS IN AOVAHa WfUS. CA9LE1 CONDUITS, mi STRUCTURES «TORI OlCONC 1 THE AOOVt WHEN OAIMACCO (X OINNOL IS 070 SMO 19 99 941 10090 S4 LO 090 9099 19 IS 11 0 • 1 7m 11 10 i 9 7 9 I 90 90 90 979 974 90 977 9149 9149 9919 1970 1S797 19119 1 10 19 19 M W 19 10 99 lO 19110 94 99 179 Olio 79 99 179 0190 09 99 129 0190 O 99 ITS 0140 IIS 99 419 0091 97 99 944 fOOJi O OOO 100.0 9449 19 OOO OOO 9SM 19 0019 0970 9299 19 0070 007.0 9409 19 097.0 007.0 9499 19 0070 070 0979 19 9970 090 2099 19 40 SO 112 421 422 0.0 927 SO S79 90 970 7.20 S91 lO 90 10 10 1.91 104 lO 40 S^j G J Rooi coNsmcnoN cntiimicc com. > MC m * (MM* •• «* iMtMM r (liV* M M*« t. «M •« , ?5** •» •».•»••• •••«»« ••«. mmt44m m« m mf$tm iittm* ^ —»—» (MM* •• M laMM •f: \;®• Sr^3?s« l|i HV MM «M« r«r4.*a.T!;n*--r?M*« •• *mm«•«M> Mt wm »N«IM • Mf MSfM MImW *M«< Mm 1r >Mt »lMl» gjgjlMS^rsj'w* — A masAiii« ZRi= tnmmy flfflSSsKSfif«w-“ T£ ViLVC lMtTJC.L^TItt| /■■M=»8«TMura«T e qapciwtifT Sbsl» 5wHS5.« TirtP^iriBri Wififnifi •I* I-• —V •1* •!• uuuu BITUMINOUS PAVING SCCTiON • VSfO^ • wa—' *3S?C»WL —air fe?7i»u;.&ai»L. t iMMM • «■ 11 I |M« ttT fBB I M\ < K \ AMB8I WOODS OrFKEONTU IHIMIMWJW OnMlMH (Hill CM !•«■• I \ \ /i 0 l'« tamrsr*Juu /l UP«T 'U8CI«I.*U — mm' £»«HB»‘«*»- flliw» I ;irmwjDSL •t n-.^ armmiATSMff ^bK1!I mm. I ( ) I f K ASSOCIATfS I AMea WOODS Office ONTCR • MM' orm.»vi 041 It C8-2 J ffl\ H}\ ®\ ®\BB\\ EB\\ 5B\ ffi\ K. ip ‘ ' / - » mmami !!IlUiMiTMOiW lOT jmiOQ 2 IfiUmAMm tW iOf p IT V Qrnmmmmtkm'limmf w pJWfkAC mmmmommmmmammrmmm i'df I w r LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE: l.()( A ssocia fwmg •€m$ *M VMMM-Mn AMBER WCK OFFICE CEN Orono, Mkmes IrtenfiKt-Wetf. FOluiM W^rtMLMNSS: mmmmmt on#M LANDSCAPER NOtKXCONSm# □utlot D .................................----- ii ii w ii ii li li II XiTy^TT^ t li w i» li itSir^**Jg^^c«*iy^ '^oiyzQta lL 5 j: i j 5',' FLQQRPLAM ' - -cv. s 5^ I* w ^vn$113p cs 6 Si iL. 1^ Si si i v7^ S o § A-2 •fi, ■ •••I'> -.'^ ’: . rrt:?s«-Si S ft:::; :.mmm n OORPI,^^ I CMp ^iS V’ <VTN i! Ci I • si k 1 1LI ■isir\ 1§ 1 8? A-3 ► • • •♦, -:.* •♦ ■ •, *. vi,y tel. . . r . • : V;-',■>•'/■ V ' r ■'v’ : ■ ■■ - - ■•-'•:■■• V S‘*v' *’>•. ■v-=^--. ;■'; f s Is III PS1 r ei I ipN A-4 k ‘Mm '[=•"V*'•. < V - • ‘'f .* ; ■;.J \S □ F 5 I ir\ 5 A-6 '' . -i,\ !• . k-' w •m ■ - .iV.-;.:;,;".: ' ‘ V-•■' ;.•■' •'* •^ / iv =. .;v::-.^ ^• ;;>•. -__St ==1 - CZlTJijy 3^CM ^lf S$s a. $ 5 OScs A-7 yv!== MONUMENT ik A/ ^ /‘ I f . SIZE: 19 FOOT LENGTH X 5 FOOT HEIGHT TOTALLING I9r SF (TWO-SIDED) COPY IS MIN. 20” ABOVE GRADE BRUSHED METAL LETTERS ON ROCK/METAL FRAME STRUCTURE GROUND SPOT LIGHTED WITHIN LANDSCAPE OF 200 SF. LETTERING IS BACK-LIGHTED BB ^^yxata rt/a Hwy. SIff riAN GB«IMl NOUS ^ ^ssssssmss&^’^d^^^g«:ssa;<9es?»3Eai>ir^ PAJUCINC CALCULATIONS PMUONCliQUMU) 102 PAOKMCfOOVIOlO 102 ^9^ & Al F. Mhria J I ’ r t y .'3 COMMON INTEREST COMMUNITY No. 1504 PlMoed Community SUGARWOODS OFHCE CENTRE DECLARATION Tins DECLARATION is made as of this day of Febniaiy, 7.005, by INTERSPACE- WEST, INC. a Minnesota corporation, (herein "Declarant") pursuant to the provisions of the Minnesota Common Interest Ownership Act, Minnesota Statutes Sections SISB.l-IOl through 51SB.4-1 18 (the "Act”X as amended. RECITALS Declarant is the owner of certain real estate located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and legally described as follows: ^ and ___, Block I, Sugarwoods Office Centre, Hennepin County,Lots 1,__, Miimesota, all of which real estate constitutes and is herein to referred to as the ‘^Real Estate”. Declarant intends to develop the Real Estate as three separate building parcels suitable for office and other uses permitted by City Code in a campus setting with certain shared common rnnenities and with uniform standuds of appearaitce and maintenance. Declarant wishes to reserve the right to add seven additional building parcels to this Declaration. Declarant has caused Sugarwoods Office Centre Condominium Association (the **Association”) to be formed as a Miimesota nonprofit corporation to serve as the statutory association of Unit owners for Sugarwoods Office Centre Condominium. Declarant wishes to establish the Real Estate as a planned Community under the Act. ^ NOW THEREFORE, Declarant declares that the Real Estate is and shall be divided, held, transfoied, conveyed, sold, leased, occupied and developed subject to the Act and to the covenants,’ reatrictions. easemen^ charges and liens set forth in this DeclaraUon, which shall run with the Estate and be binding igran all parties having any right, title or interest in the Real Es^, tteir heirs, successors and assigns, and which shall inure to the benefit of each Unit owner, and the heirs, successors and assigns of each Unit owner. Note to Readers ^ provisions ofthe Act ^ch govern this common interest Qmununity ("CIC"), and of I t ♦l^onprofit Corporation Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 317A under which the Association is formed, are not repeated in this Declaration. This Declaration should be read in conjunction with both statutes. 1.00 DEFINITIONS I.O! ^ords <lefined in the Act dull have the meaning ascribed to them in the Act. Thefollowing are supplemental definitions. A. **Additional Real Estate** shall Lots ^ inclusive. Block 1, Sugarwoods Office Centre, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which may be added to this. JC under the terms of Section 19.01 below. B. "Association'* shall mean Sugarwoods Office Centre Association, a Minnesota nonprofit cmporation. C. Atriurn shall refer to the Limited Common Element wedge*plan structure, one of which is located either adjacent to an Office Structure or between two Office Structures. D. E. F. O. »:i IIII of Directors" or "Board" shall mean the board of directors of the Association. “City shall mean the City of Orono, M “pmimon Area** shall mean Lot 1, Block 1, Sugarwoods Office Centre, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Elements** are defined in Section 8.01 below 2* H."Common Expenses" shall mean expenditures made or liabilities incurred by or on behalf of the Association, including those made or incurred with respect to easement rights over adjoining property which benefit the owners, together with any allocations to reserves. I. J. L. 2.01 County, Mi "Common Improvements" shall mean those toads, curbs, parking areas, utilities, lighting, directional signage, and walkways constaiicted or maintained upon the Common Area for the common benefit or owners and occupants of Units, and the invitees of such owners and occui “Exterior Landsciq>ing*’ shall mean all exterior grass, shrubs, trees, flowers and other plantings maintained within the Real Estate. K. “Limited Common Elements” are defined in Section 8.02 below. fice Structure” shall mean the building erected within a Unit. “Unit” ^1 mean anyofLots 2 to 11, inclusive. Block l,Sugarwoods Office Centre, Heimepin County, Miimesota. 2.00 IDENTrrY OF REAL ESTATE AND CIC This Declaration establishes Common Interest Community No. 1504, Hennepin >ta, under the name Sugarwoods Office Centre. It is a planned Community (and not a Miidominium or cooperative), and is not subject to a master association. The Real BMate inr-htded within fills CIC is legally described on the first page hereof. 3.00 CICPLAT 3.01 The plat of Sugarwoods Office Centre, recorded with the Registrar of Titles for Hennepin County, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 508, constitutes the CIC Plat for this CIC. 4.00 OWNERS ASSOCIATION Sugarwoods Office Centre Association has been incorporated as a Minnesota nonprofit corporation under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 317A to act as the association of owners of Units required by section 515B.3-101 of the Act. 5.00 UNITS AND UNIT IDENTIFIERS 5.01 This CIC consists of three (3) Units, namely, Lots_to__, inclusive. Block I, Sugarwoods Office Centre, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The Unit identifier of each Unit shall be the lot and block numbers and the subdivision name of the CIC Plat. 6.00 BOUNDARIES 6.01 The Unit boundaries shall be the boundary lines of the platted lots as designated on the CIC Plat The Units have no upper or lower boundaries. 7.00 USE OF UNITS 7.01 All Units are restricted to non-residential use. 8.00 AND LIMITED COMMON ELEMENTS 8.01 Common Elements. The Common Elements iiKlude the Common Area and those parts of the Real Estate designated as Cmninon Elements in the Act the Association's and the owners' easement rights set foirii below, and the Common Improvements. The Common Elements shall be subject to appurtenant easements for services, public and private utilities, access, use and enjoyment in favor of each Unit and its owners and occupants; subject to (i) the rights of owners and occupants in Limited Cormnon Elements appurtenant to their Units and (ii) the right of the Association to establish reasonable Rules and Regulations governing the use of the Real Estate. The mainteiuuice, repair, replacemoit, control, management and operation of the Cormnon Elements shall be the exclusive responsibility of the Association. Cormnon Expenses for the maintenance, repair, replacmnent, management and operation of the Cormnon Elements shall be assessed and collected frm the owners in accordance with this Declaration. 8.02 Limited Common Elements. The Limited Cormnon Elements are those parts of the Conunon Elements reserved for the exclusive use of the owners and occupants of the Units to which they are allocated, and the rights to the use and enjoymoit thereof are automatically conveyed with die conveyance of such Units. The Limited Common Elements allocated to the Units include each Atrium adjacent and allocated to one or two Units (as the case may be), and the water, sewer, natural gas, electrical, telqrhone, data and other utility pipes, wires, conduits and fixtures located in the Common Area but serving fewer than all of die Units. 9.00 ALinCATlON OF VOTING POWER AND COMMON EXPENSES 9.01 Common Expenses . Each of the Units is hereby allocated an equal share of the Common Expenses of the Association. However, certain expenses may be assessed on a different basis, or agai^ one Unit or fewer than aU Units, under the following circumstances: A. B. C. E. F. O. I. Any common expense associated with the maintenance, repair, or replacement of a Limited Common Element undertaken by the Association shall be assessed exclusively against the Unit or Units to which that Limited Conunon Element is assigned, and if it is assigned to more than one Unit, on the basis of (i) equality, (ii) square footage of the area being maintained, repaired or replao^, or (iii) the actual cost incurred with respect to each Unit. Any common expense or portion thereof benefiting fewer than all of the Units may be assessed exclusively against the Unit or Units benefited, and if more than one Unit is benefited, on the basis of (i) equality, (ii) square footage of the area being maintained, repaired or replaced, or (iii) die actual cost incurred with respect to each Unit. The costs of insurance may be assessed in proportion to value, risk or coverage, and die costs of utilities may be assessed in imipoition to usage. Reasonable attmneys fees and other costs incurred by the Association in connection with (i) the collection of assessments and (ii) the enforcement of the Declaration, Bylaws, the Act, or the Rules and Regulations, against an owner or occupant or their guests, may be assessed against the owner's Unit. FeeSfChargco^^ late charges, fines and interest may be assessed as provided in Section 51SB.3-116(a) of the Act. Assessments levied under Secticm 51 SB.3-1 16 of MClOA to pay a judgment against the Asso'.jiation may be levied only against the Units existing at the time the judgment was entered, in proportion to their common expense liabilities. If any damage to the Common Elements or another Unit is caused by the act or omission of any owner or occiqiant, or their invitees, the Association may assess the costs of repairing the damage exclusively against the owner's Unit to the extent not covered by insurance. If any installment of an assessment becomes more than 30 days past due, then the Association miQr, upon 10 days written notice of the owner, declare the entire amount of the assessment immediately due and payable in full. Expenses relating to the maintmance, repair, replacement or operation of all or any part or component of a common element or limited common element may be assessed against Units on the basis of use, which may either be measured or reasonably estunated. J.If common expense liabilities are reallocated for any purpose authorized by the Act, Common Expense assessments and any instalment thereof not yet due shall be recalculated in accordance with the reallocated common expense liabilities. Assessments described in Subsectknis 9.01.A*I shall not be considered special assessments as described in Section 10.03. 9.02 Voting. Each of the Units is allocated one vote in the Association. 9.03 Reasonable Estimates. Whenever an expense that is allocable to Units to which a Limited Common Element is assigned under Section 9.01 .A, to certain benefited Units under Section 9.01 .B, or to certain Units on the basis of use of utilities under Section 9.01 .C, is not separately metered or cannot otherwise be precisely measured, the Association may make a reasonable estimate thereof, and based on such estimate, may adopt for convenience a simple flat fee per each such Unit. 9.04 Formula. The allocation of interests specified in Section 9.01 above is based on equality. 10.00 ASSESSMENTS 10.01 General Provisions . Section SlSB.3-1 IS of the Act specifies how assessments are messed and collected. Section SlSB.3-1 16 specifies how the lien for assessments is created and enforced, and to which interests it is either superior or subordinate. 10.02 Annual Assessments. Annual Assessments shall be established and levied by the Board. Each annual assessment shall cover all of the anticipated Common Expenses of the Association for that year. Annual assessments mi^ provide, among other things, for contributions to a separate reserve fund sufficient to cover the perio^c cost of maintenance, repair and replacement of the Common Improvements and those parts of the Units for vriiich the Association is responsible, in accordance with the Association's reserve plan. The plan may assume that a portion of the future costs will be ftinded by future special assessments. 10.03 Special Assessments. In addition to the annual assosments authorized above, the Association may levy, in any assessment year, a special assessment payable over one or several messment years for the purpose of defraying, in whole or in part, die cost of any unforeseen or unbudgeled common expense, including without limitation the unexpected construction, reconstruction, repair or replaoement of a capital improvement and including fixtures and personal property related thereto, provided that any such assesanmt shall have the assent of not less than a m^ority of the Units. 10.04 Mqjnf^^pqoce Assessments. In addition to aimual and special assessments, the Association, 1^ the vole of a majority of the Units, may levy in any assessment year a maintenance assesanent for the pinpose of defraying in whole m in part the cost of curing a violation of a covoiant or fiulure to perform a condition contained in this Declaration after notice as provided in Sections 13.01 and 22.07 below. The assessment shall be a personal obligation of the owner and a lien against the Unit with the same priority and enforceability as any lien for annual or special assessments. j . ( ■ I 10.05 Commencement of Initial Annual Assessments. The annual assessments provided for herein shall commence as to all Units not later than one month after the first conveyance of a Unit to an owner other than Declarant. The first annual assessment shall be adjusted according to the number of months remaining in the calendar year. 10.06 Commencement of Annual Assessments. By November 30 of each year the Board shall fix the amount of annual assessments against each Unit for the following fiscal year and shall send written notice thereofto each owner. The due date for payment of annual assessments shall be as set by the Board. At the time the Board fixes the amount of annual assessments it shall adopt a budget for the following fiscal year and cause a copy of such budget in reasonable detail to be ftimisbed to each owner. 10.07 Lien Priority: Foreclosure . A lien under this Section is prior to all other liens and encumbrances on a Unit except (i) liens and encumbrances recorded before the Declaration, (ii) any first mortgage on the Unit, and (iii) liens for real estate taxes and other governmental assessments or charges against the Unit. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if a first mortgage on a Unit is foreclosed, the first mortgage was recorded on or after June 1,1994, and no owner redeems during the owner's period of redemption provided by Chapters 580, 581, and 582, then the holder of the sheriffs certificate of sale from the foreclosure of the first mortgage shall take title to the Unit subject to unpaid assessments fi>r Common Expenses levied pursuant to Section 515B.3-115(a), (eX 1) to (3), (f), and (i) of the Act which became due, without acceleration, during the six months immediately preceding the first day following the end of the owner's period of redemption. 10.08 Voluntary Conveyances: Statement of Assessments. In a voluntary conveyance of a Unit the bu)fer shall not be personally liable for any unpaid assessments and other charges made by the Association against the seller or the seller's Unit prior to the time of conveyance to the buyer, unless expressly assumed by the buyer. However, the lien of such assessments shall remain against the Unit until satisfied. Any seller or buyer shall be entitled to a statement, in recordable form, from the Association setting forth the amount of the unpaid assessments against the Unit, including all assessmento payable in the Association's current fiscal year, which statement shall be binding on the Association, seller and buyer. Alterrurtive Assessment Program. The Declarant hereby establishes an alternative assessment program of the type described in Section 515B.3-115(aXl) of the Act. Specifically, if a common expense assessment has been levied, any Unit owned by D^larant for initial sale shall be assessed at the rate of2S%ofthe assessment levied on other Units ofthe same type until a certificate of occupancy has been issued with respect to such Unit by the municipality in which the Um‘t is locaiad. Thoeafter, such Unit will be assessed at the full rate. This reduced assessment shall apply to each Unit owned by Declarant at the time that the Unit is created, and shall continue as to each such Unit until the issuance of the certificate of occupancy as previously described. In any event. anal obligation of the owner and a as any lien for annual or special lie annual assessments provided for er the first conveyance of a Unit to hall be adjusted according to the irember 30 of each year the Board the following fiscal year and shall ent of annual assessments shall be nnual assessments it shall adopt a budget in reasmiable detail to be tion is prior to all other liens and ed before the Declaration, (ii) any ther governmental assessments or mortgage on a Unit is foreclosed, )wner redeems during the owner's , then the holder of the sheriffs II take title to the Unit subject to :tion 515B.3-115(a), (eXO to (3), jring the six months immediately r redemption. In a voluntary conveyance of a ments and other charges made by time of conveyance to the buyer, assessments shall remain against Mement, in recordable form, from Its against the Unit, including all I statement shall be binding on the hereby establishes an alternative aXOoftheAct Specifically, if a Declarant for initial sale shidl be of the same type until acertificate nunicipality in which the Unit is b reduced a ssessment diall apply led, and shall continue as to each vioualy described. In any event. this alternate assessment program shall end on the fifth anniversaiy of the recording of this Declaration. There are no assurances that this alternative assessment program will have no effect on the level of services for items set forth in the Association's budget. 11.00 EASEMENTS 11*01 Easement for Maintenance. Repair. Replacement and Reconstruction. Each Unit shall be subject to the rights of the Association to a non-exclusive easement on and over the Units to the extent necessary to fulfill the Association's obligations under this Declaration or the Act, including without limitation, to maintain the Common Elements, the Exterior Landscaping, the Common Improvements, the Atriums and the Office Structures. 11*02 Declarant's Easements . Declarant shall be the beneficiary of the easements for construction and sales activity described below. 11*03 Right of Enjoyment over the Common Area . Every owner and lawful occupant of a Unit, and the invitees of any such, shall have the non-exclusive ri^t to use and enjoy the Common Area for ingress and egress, parking, utility access, and enjoyment of open spaces, subject to reasonable rules and regulations adopted from time to time by the Board. Nothing herein shall be construed as a grant of easement rights to the public. 11*04 Recorded Easements . The Real Estate shall be subject to such other easements as may be recorded against it or shown on the CIC Plat 11*05 Permanen t Easements. All easements described in this Declaration are permanent casements, running with the land, and are an>urtenant They shall at all times inure to the benefit of and be binding on the owner and the mortgagee, from time to time, of any Unit and their respective heirs, successors, personal representatives or assigns. Subject to the restrictions set forth herein, an owner may delegate the right of eiyoyment of an easement to tenants. 11 *06 Continuatio n and Scope of Easements . Notwithstanding anything in this Declaration to the contrary, in no event shall an owner or occupant be denied reasonable access to its Unit or the right to utility services thoeto. The easements set forth in this Article 1 1.00 shall supplement and not limit any easements described elsewhere in this Declaration or otherwise recorded, and shall include reasoiuible access to the Conunon Elements through the Units as reasonably necessary for purposes of maintenance, repair, replacement and reconstruction. 12.00 ASSOCIATION MAINTENANCE RRSPONSIRn .lTY 12*01 Common Elements: Exterior Landscaping: Snow Plowing . In order to preserve the uniform and high standard of function and appearance of the Real Estate, the Association shall have the exclusive responsibility for the nuuntenance and repair of the Conunon Elements (including the ComnxMi Improvements), the exterior surfaces of the Atriums and Office Structures, ar^ the Exterior Landscaping, which responsibility shall include, but not be limited to, the resurfacing and striping of 8 paved areas; maintenance, repair, painting and replacement of lighting fixtures, directional signage; planting, removing, mowing, trimming, replanting, raking and fertilizing of grass, shrubs, trees and other plantings; the nuuntenance and repair of exterior surfaces of all buildings on the Real Estate, including, without limitation, the painting and staining of same as often as necessary, the rqidacement of trim and caulking, the maintenance and repair of roofs, gutters, downspouts and overhangs, the maintenance and repair of exterior windows and doors, and the painting and decorating of the exterior surface of exterior dows and exterior wiiulow sashes. The Association shall not be reqwnsible for washing windows. In addition, the Association shall be responsible for snowplowing all driveways, parking areas and paved walkways throughout the Real E^te. In the event that the need for mainteiunce or rqiair is caused through the willful or negligent act or omission ofan owner or the owner's tenants or invitees, the cost of such maintenance or repair shall be added to and become a part of the assessment to which such Unit is subject. 12.02 Services . The Association may obtain and pay for the services of any persons or entities, to manage its affairs, or any part thereof, to the extent it deems advisable, as well as such other personnel as the Association shall determine to be necessary or desirable for the |Hoper operation of the Real Estate, whether such personnel are furnished or employed directly by the Association or by any person or entity with >«dK)m or which it contracts. The Association may obtain and pay for legal and accounting services necessary or desirable in connection with the operation of the Real Estate or the enftNcement of this Declaration. The Association may arrange with others to furnish trash collection and other common services to each Unit. 12.03 Personal Property and Real Estate for Common Use. The Association may acquire and hold for the use and benefit of all of the owners tangible and intangible personal property and real estate and may dispose of the same by sale or otherwise. Such beneficial interest shall not be transferable except with the transfer of title to a Unit, provided that an owner may delegate its right of eidoyment of such pnqrerty to tenants of its Unit A transfer of title to a Unit shall transfer to the transferee ownership of ^ transferor's beneficial interest in such property in accordance with the purpose firr which it is intended, without hindering or encroaching upon the lawful rights of other owners. The transfer of title to a Unit under foreclosure shall entitle the purchaser to the beiteficial interest in such property associated with the foreclosed Unit 12.04 Utilities. The Association shall maintain, replace and repair only those sewer and water lines and other utilities which (i) serve only the Common Area or (ii) are not maintained by the City or a utility company. 13.00 OWNERS' MAINTENANCE 13.01 Upkeep and Maintenance . Except only as such work is provided by the Association, all rruuntenance, repair and replacenrent of all Office Structures, Atriums and other fixtures located with a Unit shall be die sole obligation and expense of the owner thereof (or in the case of a shared Atrium, the adjoining owners^ who shall maintain the same in a reasonably clean, neat, attractive and safe exterior condition and in accordance with the architectural standards established by this Declaration, failing which the Association, on thirty (30) ditys* prior written notice, may (but is not U . r ■ . .1■1H-* - required to) enter the Unit and perform some or all of the neglected woric at the expense of such owner. 14.00 INSURANCE 14.01 Association ’s Policies . The Association shall maintain casualty insurance coverage and general liability coverage on the Conunon Elements and Common Improvements. The Associatimi may also carry any other insurance it reasonably considers appropriate. All such insurance premiums shall be a common expense. The Association may enter into binding agreements with one or more holders, insurers or guarantors of nuNtgages obligating the Association to keep specified coverages in effect for specified periods and to notify a holder, insurer or guarantor of any changes to coverage. The Association shall adjust losses under any such policies and shall use casualty insurance proceeds to rebuild Common Improvements to original standards or to a functional equivalent, unless otherwise directed by vote of a majority of the Units. 14.02 Owners* Individual Policies . Each owner should cany insurance for its own benefit insuring its property, provided that all such policies shall contain waivers of subrogation and further provided that the liability of the carriers issuing insurance obtained by the Association shall not be affected or diminished by reason of any such addidonai insurance carried by any owner, that is, owner ’s policies shall be "without contribution" against Association policies. 15.00 ARCHITECTURAL RESTRICTIONS 15.01 Review of Building Plans. No improvement^! be erected, placed, or altered on any Unit until the building or other improvement plans, specifications (including front elevation and/or architects rendering) and a plot plan showing the locations of such improvements on the particular Unit have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Architectural Control Committee as to conformity and harmony of external design with existing structures in the development, and as to location of the improvements on the Unit, giving due regard to the anticipated use thereof as same may affect adjoining structures, uses and operations, and as to location of the improvements with respect to topography, grade, and finished ground elevation. The Architectural Control Conunittee and Declarant shall not be liable to anyone in damages so submitting plans for approval, or to any owner by reason of mistake in judgment, negligence, or nonfeasance of itself, its agents, or employee, arising out of or in such plans. Likewise, anyone so submitting plans to the Architectural Control Committee for approval, by submitting of such plans, and any party becoming an owner, agrees that it will not bring any action or suit to recover for any such damages against the Architectural Control Committee or Declarant. In the event the Architectural Control Committee fails to approve or disapprove such plans and specifications in writing within thirty dqrs after they have been submitted to the Architectural Control Committee, the plans and specifications will be deemed accepted by the Architectural Control Committee. If an improvement is begun in violation of the terms and ccmditions hereof, or without written approval as required, and no suit to enjoin the erection, establishment, or alteration of such improvement has been commenced prim to the completion thoeof, this covenant shall be deemed to be fulfilled and in conq>liance. The Board, on request, will issue a certificate as to the state of compliance or noncompliance of a particular Unit, and any such certificate will be binding as to third parties. Any deviation from said plans and specifications as approved ^ch in the judgment of the said Committee is a substantial chan^ or a detriment to the appearance of the structure or of the surrounding area shall be corrected to conform to the plans and specifications as submitted. 1S.02 Standards for Certain Exterior ImjTOvements. The Architectural Control Committee shall maintain and enforce specifications for the design, materials, colors, appearance and quality of all exterior directional signage, lighting fixtures, retaining walls, edging materials used around plantings, paving materials, outdoor seating and tables, awnings, umbrellas and all other exterior fixtures and furniture furnished by an owner or tenant and used on the exterior of a Unit, matching those udiich the Association acquires and maintains as Common Improvements. The Architectural Control Committee nuiy revise and add to these standards from time to time, but may not require replacement solely to at^eve a different appearance, except with the consent of the vote of three of the four Units. 15.03 Standards for Plantings. The Architectural Control Conunittee shall maintain and enforce specifications for the species, color, placement and size of all plantings within the Real Estate. Without limiting the generality of die foregoing, it may disapprove disharmonious flower beds and other plantings. 15.04 Declarant's Rights. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to prohibit Declarant fiom making changes to the plans, specificatimis, and iqipearanoe of buildings constructed form time to time on vacant Units, but all buildings shall be consistent in terms of quality and harmonious in general appearance with previously constructed buildings. During the period of Declarant control, the decisions of the Architectural Control Committee must have the written ^roval of the Declarant 15.05 Compositio n 9f CfflUflffiftff rnmmitw clinll In. tlw. Hftnari of Directors of the Association, macommittee of three or more persons so designated by the Board. 15.06 Signs. All advertising signs and devices shall have prior written approval of the Ardntectural Control Committee and shall confimn to the following: a. The total advertising square footage shall not exceed the area permitted by the ordinances of the City. b. No single surface of a sign shall exceed 600 square feet c. Signs shall only identify the owners or tetuuits of a building and may not advertise products or services not related to the building. d. No signs dull be painted directly on a building. e. No signs shall contain a rotating light beam or a flashing light tystem. f. No signs shall be located on the roof of a building. 16.00 GENERAL RESTRICTIONS 16.01 Prohibition of namaye and Certain Activities. No damage to. or waste of the exterior of the Real Estate and buildings shall be oonimitted by any owner or any invitee of any owner, and each owner shall indemnify and hold the Association and the other owners harmless against all loss resulting fiom any such damage or waste caused to the Association or other owners by such owner or the owner's invitees. No noxious, destructive or offensive activity shall be allowed on any Units or any part thereof, nor shall anything be done thereon which may be or may become an unreasonable nuisance to any other owner or to any other person at any time lawfully on the Real Estate. No hazardous substances shall be generated, stored or used on the Real Estate other than reasonable quantities of usual cleaning and office supplies. 16.02 Animals. Any cat or dog brought Upon the Real Estate must be kept uiKler the direct control of the pet owner w another person able to control the pet The person in charge of the pet must clean iq) after it The Board may ad<q>t more q>ecific rules and penalties not inconsistent with the foregoing. 16.03 Prrdubited Structures. No structure of a temporary character, trailer, tent or shack shall be constructed, placed, or maintaiiied upon the property, except accessory to and during ruction of permanent buildiitgs. 16.04 General Storage . Storage ofall materials, products, either in process of construction or in completed form, equipment, HVAC equipment, or other necessary tools or articles outside of any building shall be in an area designated for such purpose and enclosed by a fence or other appropriate enclosure which shall screen such storage fiom public view. Plans for such storage arrangements must be aiqiroved by the Architectural Control Committee in writing. The storage or collection of rubbish of any character whatsoever, any material that emits foul or obnoxious odors, and the harboring of the source of any noise or activity udiich disturbs the peace, comfort or serenity of lawful occuppnts is prohibited. Usual tradi aixl garbage shall be regularly collected and may be kept outside only if in sanitary containers which ate so screened. 16.05 Perking. No truck or automobile parking shall be permitted on driveway easements. No boats, snowmobiles, trailers, camping vehicles, buses, camper tops, "all-terrain vehicles", tractor/trailers, trucks in excess of9,000 pounds gross weight, w unlicenWd or inoperable vehicles shall at any time be stared on the Real Estate outside of a building without the express written approval of the Board, which may be withheld without stated reasoiL 10*06 Addititwal Units. A Unit owned by the Declarant may be subdivided or converted into two or more Units, Limited Commem Elements, Common Elements, or a combination of Units, Limited Common Elonentsor Common Elements under the authority of Section 51 SB.2-112 of the Act. In such case, the common expense liability and Conunon Element interest formerly allocated to i ■/, the Unit 80 subdivided or converted will be reallocated to the resulting new Units in proportion to relative land area, and the voting power of the entire Association shall be reallocated ba^ on the relative rentable floor area of each building. 16.07 No Time Shares. Time shares, as deflned in the Act, are not permitted in this CIC. 16.08 Rules and Reaulations. The Board shall have the exclusive authority to adopt from time to time such other rules and regulations governing the administration of the affairs of the Assodidion, the use, maintenance and enjoyment of the Real Estate, and the conduct of persons using the Real Estate, as the Board in its reasonable discretion deems desirable or necessary to implement the intent of this Declaration. New or amended rules and regulations shall be effective only after reasonable notice thereof has been given to the owners. 17.00 FIRST MORTGAGEES 17.01 Agreements with Mortyay* HhliWa The Board may enter into binding agreements with holders and guarantors of mortgages secured by interests in a Unit, obligating the Association to give jqirecified notice or other ri^ts to such holders and guarantors. 18.00 SPECIAL DECLARANT RIGHTS 18.01 Special Declarant Rights. Declarant hereby reserves the following rights (referred to in MClOA as Special Declarant Rights) for its benefit: A. B. C. the right to create Units by this Declaration; the right to construct and crmiplete improvements; the right to maintain sales ofBce, management oflBce, signs advertising the CIC, and models, provided tiiat no more than one combined sales and management office will be nuuntained at any (me time; die right to use easements through the Com making improvements within the CIC; and Elonents for the purpose of E.the right to appoint or remove ariy ofSoer or director of the Association during the poiod of declarant control, which shall expire on the earliest of the following events: 1. surrender ofthe right ofcontrol by the Declarant; 60 days after the conve^uice of 75% of the Units to Owners other than Declimnt;and ■ --------------------------------------------------------------— 1 r . [ 3.three years fh>m the first conveyance of a Unit to an Owner other than Declarant F. the right to add Additional Real Estate as set out in Section 19.01 below. 19.00 ADDITIONAL REAL ESTATE 19.01 Declarant*s Rights to Add Additional Real Estate . Declarant hereby expressly reserves the tight to add the Additional Real Estate to the Real Estate, by unilateral action under Section 5 15B.2- 111 of MCIOA, subject to the following conditions: A. B. C. F. The right of Declarant to add the Additional Real Estate to the CIC shall terminate ten (10) years after the date of recording of this Declaration or upon earlier express written withdrawal of such right to Declarant or a successor Declarant, unless extended by a vote of the owners pursuant to Section 51SB.2-I06(2) of MCIOA. There are no other limitations on Declarant's rights hereunder, except as may be imposed by law. The Additional Real Estate is described in Section l.IO. The Additional Real Estate may be added to the Real Estate in one or more parcels and may be designated as any combination of units, common elements and limited common elements. There are no assurances as to the times at which all or any part of the Additional Real Estate will be added to the Real Estate, the order in which it will be added, the number of parcels per phase nor the size of the parcels. Declarant is under no obligation to add the Additional Real Estate to the Real Estate, and the Additional Real Estate may be developed by Declarant or its successors in interest for other purposes, subject only to approval by the appropriate governmental authorities. D. The maximum number of Units that may be created within the Real Estate and the Additional Real Estate together is ten (10). Any buildings erected iqxm the Additional Real Estate, whm and if added, shall be compatible with the buildings on the other Units which are part of the Real Estate in terms of architectural style, quality of construction, principal materials employed in construction and size; subject (i) to any changes required by governmental authorities or lenders and (ii) to any interior and minor exterior changes made by Declarant to meet changes in the market and the needs of users. All covenants and restrictions contained in this Declaration affecting the use and occupan^ of Units shall apply to all Units created on the Additional Real Estate. All such Units will be restrict^ to non-residential use. O. The common expense liability and voting power in the CIC shall be reallocated 14 effective upon the recofding of the amendment adding such parcel of Additional Real Estate. Common expense liability shall be reallocated equally among all Units, and voting power shall be allocated one vote per Unit All improvements intended for further phases will be substantially completed prior to annexation of that phase. 1. ^0 In the event additional Real Estate is added to this CIC, the owners of Units in all phases will share easement rights in the Common Elements of all phases to the same extent as owners in the Real Estate included within this original Declaration share such easements in the original Common Elements. J.The assurances made in subsections C through I above shall not apply to any Additional Real Estate which is not added to the Real Estate. 19.02 Easonent for Use of the Driveways and Paridny Area. The three Um'ts which are initially constituted a CIC by the recording of this Declaration and the other seven Units to be located on the Additional Real Estate will share the driveways and parking area located on the Common Area. These driveways and parking areas are part of the Common Elements of this CIC, but the owners and occtqxuits of any such Units which may be built but are not part of this CIC also need the right to use tte driveways and parking areas jointly with the Owners and Occupants of this CIC. A. Now therefore. Declarant, as owner of both the Real Estate and the Additional Real Estate, hereby declares that the owners of all or any part of the Additional Real Estate shall have a perpetual, non^clusive easement, appurtenant to their land, in, over and iqx>n the Common Area for access and perking purposes for themselves, their tenants and their invitees. B. The Association shall at all times maintain the Common Area in good and attractive condition and rqxur, including periodic sealcoating, striping, signage renewal, and lawn and plant nuuntenance, and shall keep the paved areas reasonably clear of snow and ice. The owners of those portions of the Additional Real Estate which have not then been added to this CIC shall reimburse the Association promptly on invoicing for the reasonable cost thereof, in proportion to the number of Units then within and without the CIC. C. In the event the Association neglects any such maintenance to the point that safety and reasonable standards of qipearance are affected, the owners of the Additional Real Estate may, after IS days written notice to the Association, undertake such work and invoice the Association for its proportionate share. In the case of a pattern of gross neglect of snow removal responsibilities, the owners of the Additional Real Estate may undertake such work upon reasonable notice to the Association. D. Both the Association and the owners of the Additional Real Estate shall keep in 15 force and effea at all times general liability insurance against claims for personal injury, death or property damage occurring upon the Common Area. Such insurance shall be in amounts as may be required by law and as might be carried from time to time by prudent owners of first class, multi-Unit office buildings within the City of Orono, and shall name each other as co*insureds. Each policy shall provide that the acts of any insured party, including a member of the Association, shall not invalidate the policy against any other insured party. E. The Associatirm may adopt reasonable rules and regulations regarding the use of the Common Area, including prohibitions on the parking or storage of certain types of vehicles or personal property, so long as such rules apply uniformly to occupants of both the CIC and the Additional Real Estate. F. The easements created under this Section 19.02 shall terminate automatically as to each portion of the Additional Real Estate if and as such portion is added to this CIC by a record amendment to this Declaration. 20.00 AMENDMENTS 20.01 Declarant ’s Joinder . In addition to the other requirements for amendment of this Declaration and the Bylaws contained herein, so long as Declarant owns a Unit, the written joinder and consent of the oiwlarant shall be required for any amendment of either the Declaration or Bylaws. This right may be waived in whole or part at any time by recording a written waiver executed and acknowledged tty Declarant. 21.00 COMPLIANCE AND REMEDIES 21.01 Compliance . Each owner and occupant and any other person owning or acquiring any interest in the Real Estate, shall be governed by and comply with the provisions of the Act, this Declaration and Bylaws, the Rules and Regulations, the decisions of the Association, and such amendments thereto as nmy be made from time to time. A fiulure to comply shall entitle the Association to die relief set forth in this Section, in additkm to the rights and remedies authorized elsewhere by the Declaration, Bylaws or the Act 21.02 Entitlement to Relief. The Association may commence legal action to recover sums due, for damages, for iqjunctive relief w to foreclose a lioi owned by it or any combination thereof, or an action for any other relief authorized by the Declaration or Bylaws or available at law or in equity. Legal relief may be sought tty the Association against any owner, or by an owner against the Association or another owner, to enforce compliance with the Declaration or Bylaws, the Rules and Regulations, the Act or the decisions of the Association. However, no owner may withhold any assessments payable to the Association, or take (or omit) other action in violation of the Declaration or Bylaws, the Rules and Regulatioos or the Act, as a measure to enforce such owner's position, or few any other reason. Alamam \. 21.03 RiyhttoCure . In the event that any owner violates any covenant or fails to perform any condition contained in this Declaration, the Association may perform the act, remove the defect or correct the violation upon thirty (30) days written notice to the owner. If the Association so acts m behalf of an owner, the Association may levy an assessment against the owner ’s Unit for the cost of the performance or correction as a Maintenance Assessment as provided in Section 10.04. 21.04 Sanctions and Remedies. In addition to any other remedies or sanctions, expressed or implied, administrative or legal, the Association shall have the right, but not the obligation, to im|dement any one or more of die following actions against owners and occupants and/or their guests, who violate the provisions of the Declaration or Bylaws, the Rules and Regulations or the Act: A. Commence legal action for damages or equitable relief in any court of competent jurisdiction. B.Impose late charges of up to 15% of each late payment of an assessment or in^lment thereof. C.In the event of default of more than 30 days in the payment of any assessment or installment thereof, all remaining installments of assessments assessed against the Unit owned by the defaulting owner may be accelerated and shall then be pliable in full ifalldelinquentassessments, together with all costs of collection and late charges, are not paid in full prior to the effective date of the acceleration. Reasonable advance written notice of the effective date of the acceleration shall be given to the defaulting owner. D.Impose reasonable fines, penalties or charges for each violation of the Act, the Declaration or Bylaws, or the Rules and Regulations of the Association. B.Restore any portimis of the Omimon Elements or Limited Common Elements damaged or altered, or allowed to be damaged or altered, by any owner or occupant or their invitees in violatira of the Declaration or Bylaws, and to assess the cost of such restoration against the responsible owners and their Units. F.Foreclose any lien arising under the provisions of the Declaration or Bylaws or under law, in the manner provided for the foreclosure of mortgages by action or under a power of sale in Minnesota. 21.05 Lioi for Charges. Penalties. Etc. Any assessments, charges, fines, penalties, or interest imposed under this Article shall be a lien against the Unit of the owner against whom the same are imposed and the personal obligatimi of such owner in the same maruier and with the same priority and effect as assessments under Article 10.00. The lien shall attach as of the date of : V. ■A .J k A ji imposition of the remedy. All remedies shall be cumulative, and the exercise of, or failure to exercise, any remedy shall not be deemed a waiver of the right to pursue any others. 21.06 Costs ofProceedings and Attorneys Fees. With respect to any collection measures, or any measures or action, legal, administrative, or otherwise, which the Association takes to enforce the provisions of the Act, Declaration, Bylaws or Rules and Regulations, whether or not finally determined by a court or arbitrator, the Association may assess the violator and its Unit with any expenses incurred in connection with such enforcement, including without limitation fines or charges ineviously imposed by the Association, reasoiuible attorneys, fees, and interest (at the highest rate allowed law) on die delinquent amounts owed to the Association. 21.07 IJahilitv for Owners* and Occupants* Acts. An owner shall be liable for the expense of ally maintenance, rqiair or replacement of the Pn^iefty rendered necessary such owner ’s acts or (Hiiissions, or by that of teiumts or invitees in the owner's Unit, to the extent that such expense is not covered by the proceeds of insurance carried by the Association or such owner or tenant However, any insurance deductible amount and/or increase in insurance resulting fiom the owner's acts or omissions may be assessed against the owner responsible for the condition and against its Unit 21.08 Rnfnrcement bv Owners. The provisions of this Section shall not limit or impair the independent rights of other owners to enforce the provisions of the Declaration, Bylaws, the Rules and Regulations, and the Act as provided therein. 22.00 MISCELLANEOUS 22.01 Association Acts through Board. The power and authority of the Association as provided in the ^licable Statutes, the Declaration, Bylaws, and Rules and Regulations shall be vested in a Board of Directors elected by the owners in accordance with the Bylaws of the Association. The Association shall act through the Board ofDirectors and the officers elected by the Board; aocordirtgly, all references in the Declaration and Bylaws to action by the Association shall mean the Board of Directors acting for the Association, imless action by t^ vote of the owners, memben or mortgagees is expressly required by the Declaration, Bylaws, or the Act 22.02 Notices . Any notice required to be sent to any owner or the Association under the provisions of this Declaration shall be deemed to have been received sent when mailed, postage prepaid, to the last known address of such member appealing on the records of the Association at the time of such mailing or to the address of the Association, except that a notice changing the address of a member shall be effective on receipt by the Associatioit in the case of multiple owners of a Unit, to any one of such owners shidl te deemed notice to all.I I I V- 22.03 Captions. The headings in this Declaration are intended for convenience only and shall not be given any substantive effect. 22.04 Construction , far the event ofan apparent conflict between this Declaration and the Bylaws, the provisions of this Declaration shall govern. The use of pronouns such as "it”, "its”. 1 "his**, "he" and "him" are for literary purposes and mean whenever applicable the plural male and female fonns. 22.05 Not Subject to Ordinance. This CIC is not a conversion of existing buildings to a CIC within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Section 51 SB. 1 -106(cX and is therefore not subject to any ordinance of the type authorized or permitted 1^ said statute. 22.06 Declaranfs Rights and Obligations. The Declarant shall enjoy the same rights and shall be deemed to have assumed the same duties with respect to its unsold Units in the CIC as any other owner, except as modilGed or extended by the alternate assessment program and the special declarant rights described in this Declaration. 22.07 Ritdit to Cure. In the event that any owner violates any covenant or fails to perform any condition contained in this declaration, the Association mt^ perform the act, remove the defect or ctmect the violation upon thirty (30) days writtm notice to the owner. If the Association so acts on bdialf of an owner, die Association may levy an assesmient i^ainst the owner’s Unit for the cost of the perfomumce or correction as a Maintenance Assessment as jmvided in Section 10.04. 22.08 Public Anencv RMements. The City is hereby declared to have the right and easement to enter the Common Elements for public safety purposes. 22.09 Clean and Neat Apfiearance of Qrounds. The City is not req[>onsibie for any mowing, landscape maintenance or cleaning of the Common Elements. The Association is obligated by this Declaration to maintain the same at all times in a clean and neat condition at its expense. 22.10 City May Amcm for Curative Work. If the Association fails to perform any of the maintenance referred to in Section 22.09 above, or to keep the access and utilities reasonably open and fimctioning, the City may enter die Real Estate a^ perform curative work (but is urider absolutely no obligadrm to do so), in which case the City may assess the Units within this CIC for the cost thereof. 22.11 Uiuesolved Disputes. In the event of an unresolved dispute between the Unit owners, or a qilit decision Ity the Association or Directors, and such dispute shall not be resolved within thirty (30) (fatys, then the matter shall be submitted to binding and final arbitration under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Cluqiter 572, by application to Hennepin County District Court, which shall appoint a neutral arbitrator. Such frtitiation shall be conducted in accordance with the rules and procedures of the American Arbitration Association. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Declarant has caused this Declaration to be executed as of the day and year recited on the first page hoeof. A. ... V . ■ : . ' .ii - >- * t* INTERSPACE-WEST, INC. By: Philip L. Carism, President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was 'jcknowledged before me this___day of 2003 by Philip L. Caiiaon, the President of INTERSPACE-WEST, INC., aMii on behalf of corporation. ta corporation. THIS DOCUMENT DRAFTED BY: N. Waller Ondf Beat ft Flanagan LLP 22S Soulh Sixdi Street, Suite 4000 MbwaapoliB. Minaeaola SS402-4690 (612)339-7121 Notary Public 01727MSQ001M5H9J i. ,J>. i if«v mmI" I't >• ■SPr':x* > ->i. V fc: ‘•■“I .*5'. il r. I Ditc Appllcallon Received: l•19•4)5 Date Applicatloa ComMered at Complete: 1-19-05 lalllal M-Day Review Period Expiree: 3-20-05 M-Day Eiteiulon Notillcallon oa 2-2S-05 to: 5-19-05 »*errriMG APR 2 5 2005 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF CRONO Departaieat Approval: Name: Michael P. Gafli Title: Planning Director Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Date: April 20,2005 Item No.: _____ lUm Description: #05-3086 Philip & Cassandra Ordway, 1145 Sixth Avenue North - Variance -Resolution List of Exhibits A • Resolution B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 4-20-05 C - Planning Commission Memos of 4-14-05 with Selected Exhibits AppUaMon Summary: Applicants request a variance to the required 30-foot ‘top of bluff setback to allow construction of a new home to replace the existing home on the property. Pursuant to the initial Planning Commission review in Fdmiaiy, the plans were revised and the house repositioned so that the only encroachment of the bluff setback is at the location of the existing detached garage, resulting in no significant new encroachment ofthe bluff setback, and eliminating any grade changes within the blu IT impact zone. The new gradingplan also redirects a portion of the roof runoff to the north, away fiom the lake. An average lakeshore setback variance is also technically required, although the location of the residence has no impact on lake views enjoyed by adjoining lakeshore owners.. PUmnbtg Commission Recommendation: Plarming Commission reviewed the revised plans as part of their April 18 meeting agenda and recommended approval per the staff recommendation on a vote of 6-0 with no discussion, placing the item on their consent agenda. StaffRecommendation: Staff recommends approval of the bluff impact zone, bluff setback and average setback variances per the revised site plan, subject to: 1. Approvalofthenecessaiyminorgradingwithinthebluffimpactzonetoallow for construction of the new garage portion of the new home, and to restore the existing house site. 2. Applicant to provide confirmation of hardcover percentage compliance. 3. Revised grading plan is subject to City Engineer’s review and approval. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached Resolution. ------- - A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1279 FILE NO. 05-3086 WHEREAS, Philip W. Ordway and Cassandra S. Ordway, husband and wi fe (liereinaher "the ^licants") are owners of the property located at 1145 Sixth Avenue North within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: That part of Lot 1, Auditor’s Subdivision No. 291, Hennq>in County, Minnesota, lying East ofa line parallel with and 1055 feet East fiem the East line of the West half of the Southwest quarter of Section 26, Township 118, Range 23 and its extensions Southerly and South of a line parallel with and 366 feet North ftom the South line of said Section 26. (hereinafter "the property") (also identified as PINS 26-118-23 34 0006); and WHEREAS, the applicants have submitted an iqjplication requesting variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to permit the construction of a single family residence, a portion of which is proposed to be located less than the required 30' setback from the defined top of bluff; located partially within the defined bluffimpact zone where no structure is normally allowed; and located lakeward of the defined average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is normally allowed. WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a pubi ic hearing on February 22,2005 and April 18, 2005, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. NOW,THEREFORE,BElTRESOLVEDbytheCityCouncilofOrQno,Minnesota: FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #05-3086. The property is located in the LR-1A Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum lot area of 2.0 acres and a minimum lot width of200* for residential development. Thepn^ierty is approximately 3.65 acres in diybuildable area and approximately600 feet in defined width. Page 1 of 6 4. The Planning Commission reviewed the variance application at a public hearing held on February 22,2005 and reviewed the revised plan on April 18,2005. Planning Commission subsequently recommended approval ofthe requested variances by a vote of 6-0 bused on the following findings and hardships: a)The portion ofthe lot that is buildable is very small compared to the entire lot area. The property contains nearly four acres of dry buildable land. However, the environmental constraints within the site including the creek, wetlands, lakeshore, bluf& and steep slopes, combine to limit the actual bui Idable area of the site meeting required setbacks to less than one-half acre. The property is constrained by bluffs to the northeast, east and south ofthe buildable area. The existing house and its associated driveways and patios are located at the confluence of the bluff lines where their visibility and drainage impacts are substantial. The topography also presents a hardship to the property in making it di fficult to establish a driveway access into the site with reasonable grades. The existing house and patios severely encroach into the required bluff setback. These eiKroachments will be removed, to be replaced with a residence that save for an attached garage, does not encroach the bluff setback. The initial plans have been revised and the house repositioned so tliat the only enc.TMichment ofthe bluff setback is at the location ofthe existing detached garage, the footprint of which will be re-used in construction of a new garage attached to the residence. This garage is located at a point where the bluff is receding and becomes merely a steep slope area by definition, and the slopes within 30' ofthe garage location are less than 30%. The proposed continuation of the 26’ encroachmentofthe defined bluff setback will haveminimal drainage and visual impacts, as this area is behind the house as viewed from the main body ofthe lake. Further, re-use ofthe existing garage footprint results in no significant new encroachment of the bluff setback, and eliminates any grade changes within tlie bluff impact zone. The CoufKil finds that while the proposed residence will be located lakeward ofthe defined average lakeshore setback line, the adjoining residences are positioned such that neither will have lake views encroached upon by the new residence. Page 2 of 6 i { li i 5.The City Council has considered this s|)plication including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City stafT, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 6.The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air norposeafire hazard or other danger to nei^boring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279to permit the construction of a single family residence, located less than the required 30' setback from the defined tqjofbluff; located partially within the defined bluff impact zone where no structure is normally allowed; and located lakeward of the defined average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1.Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant and attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2.This approval includes the necessary minor grading within the bluff impact /one to allow for construction of the new garage portion ofthe new home, and to restore the existing house site to the contours shown on the approved site plan. 3.\pplicants shall provide confirmation of hardcover percentage compliance per standard procedure prior to issuaiKe of building permits. 4. The proposed grading plan dated April 11,2005 is approved subject to City Engineer ’s review and approval. Page 3 of 6 TrfTi 111 lUn I ■■■■ iM~ I ~ 11 Tfi ■ m 5.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a land alteration permit for the revised grading plan within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (April 25,2006). 6.Vioiationofor non-oon^Uance with any of the tenns and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 7.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and herd)y agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants* heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of diis resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 25th day of April, 2005. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Prcq)ertyOwner(s) 1• , •p , . ' > 1 ■■■ 1 ■ .V.; "4 Iti .'I Page 4 of6 i:1 v; ha -----T~r- STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instroment was acknowledged before me on this__day of .,2005 by Baibara A. Petenon, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. "4 t.-i- t;- • m Notary Public m^- STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this_day of .,2005 by Linda S. Vee, City Cleik of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on bdudf of the City. Notary Public m m k Page 5 of 6 W’mrnM •••• • ;..:r- .';fm::’ssm^ ST-; STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this Philip W. Ordway, husband of Cassandra S. Ordway. _dayof ^2005 by Notary Public i i STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was adoiowledged before me this Cassandra S. Ordway, wife of Philip W. Ordway. day of .,2005 by Notary Public i Page 6 of 6 ' ii * |! . •H^2x> CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway ZONING FILE #05-3086 i .P.O. Box 66 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION tj Crystal Bay, MN 55323r;(952) 249-4600 DATE OF NOTICE: April 20, 2005 1 ]TO: Philip & Cassandra Ordway COPIES: t 1550 County Road 6 :u Long Lake. MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING: April 18. 2005 Motkm: Recommend approval of the bluff impact zone and bluff setback variances per the revised site plan, subject to: 1. ^iproval of the necessary minor grading within the bluff impact zone to allow for construction of the new garage portion of the new home, and to restore the existing house site. 2. Applicant to provide confirmation of hardcover percentage compliance prior to Council review. 3. Revised grading plan is subject to City Engineer’s review and approval. Vote: In Favor Against (Placed on PC Consent Agenda) Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, April 25, 2005; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of die official Planning Commission minutes, they are available fiom the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please contact Planning Director Mike Gaffion at 9S2-249-4600. VJ. ii r* ^■ I'/ ^ '•<>.WB-M • '•V' I ar, Dale Application Received: 1>19>0S Date Application Considered as Complele: 1-19-OS Initial 60-Day Review Period Expires: 3-20-0S 60-Day Extension Notification on 2-29-05 to: 5-19-OS uj-ZJO -os To:Chair Rahn and Planning Com'.nissioners Ron Moorse, City Administra'or From: Date: Subject: Mike Gaffion, Planning Director, April 14,2005 5^ #05-3086 Philip & Cassandra Ordway, 1145 Sixth Avenue North - Variance Revised Plan - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-1A Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acre min. Gross area: 3184144 s.f. (7.313 acres) per Hennepin County tax records Net area (excl. wetlands): 158,900 s.f. (3.65 acres) approx, per staff calc. ‘Buildable* area meeting setbacks: 16;J00-18,000 s.f. AppUeaHon Summary: Applicants request a variarce to the required 30-foot *top of bluff setback to allow construction of a new home to replace the existing horns on the property. The plans have been revised and the house rqxisitioned so that the only rncroachment of the bluff setback is at the location of the existing detached garage, resulting in no sigr.ificant new encroachment of the bluff setback, and eliminating any grade chan^ within the bluffimi act zone. Hie new grading plan also redirects a piortion of the roof runoff to the north, away from the lake. Staff RecoMimeudation: Staff recommenrls approval of the revised site plan, subject to: I.Approval of the necessary minor grading within die bluff impact zone to allow for construction of the new gatuBC portion of rhe new home, and to restore the existing house site. 2. Applicant to confirm hardcover percentage compliance prior to final Council action. 3. Revised grading plan is subject to City Engineer’s review and approval. List of Exhibits A - Revised Site & Grading Plan B - Additional Site Plan Submittals 1 - Original Design and Bluff Setback Depiction 2 - Original Design / Revised Bluff Setback 3 - Existing Non-Conforming Hardcover 4 - Original Variance Proposal 5 - Revised Variance Request - Re-Use Existing Garage Footprint 6 • Elevation Views - Photo Depictions C - Original Building Plan/Elevation Drawings D - Notice of Planning Commission Action 2-28-05 B - Memo and Selected Exhibits from February PC Meeting #0S>3086 1 14S Siith Avenue North April 14,200S Page! i iMiiiHSummary of Revisions Houae/Garaye Reorientation. Applicants have relocated the proposed house further north and west on the site to eliminate any encroachment of the south-facing bluff, and will maintain the required 30* structural setback in this area. In addition, the garage wing has been shifted westward to reduce the degree of encroachment to the northeasterly facing bluff, nearly eliminating any new encroachmmts by aligning Uie garage wing over the location of the existing detached garage. The small trash enclosure area abutting the existing garage will be moved forward towards the driveway on the new garage, placing it furtlier from die top of the bluff. This is an area of the site where the bluff starts to flatten out and disappear, while the si te of the garage is still encroaching the defined bluff setback, the slope directly east of the garage is around 10%, to the northeast is 20-25%, and directly north is are in the 15-20% range. Staff is very comfortable with the new garage wing as now proposed. The new plan also lowers the garage wing to a level 4-1/2 feet below the main living level, allowing the driveway to maintain slopes no steeper than 7-8% which is very reasonable, and eliminating the need for a retaining wall next to the driveway at the west side lot line. The new driveway maintains the required 5' sqiaration from the west lot line. Site Drainage. In order to le-direct roofand deck drainage away from the steepest part of the south- facing bluff, a swale is proposed at the west end of the house and alongside the driveway, directing drainage to the north. While this iq>pears to be a positive drainage solution that avoids new runoffonto the adjoining property, this change was so recent as to not have had the benefit of the City Engineer’s review. Grading plan approval should be granted subject to City Engineer approval. Haidcovar. Althou^ new hardcover numbers have not been provided, the house fbotpp* nt is not changed appreciably and the new site plan appears to have a slightly reduced driveway area as compured to the original proposal. Hardcover was not an issue with the original plan, but applicant should confirm the hardcover percentages prior to Council review. 1 Issues for Consideration I.Are the limiting site factors of steep topogrr^hy, wetlands/lakeon three sides, and limited buildable envelope saflBcient hardah^ to support a variance f« the minimal encroachment of the bluffsctback in the area of the pre-existing garage? 2. 3. Will diere be any impacts to the surrounding neighborhood if this request is approved? Does the Planning Commission have any concerns about this proposal that have not been addressed? If fcaian --- MS-30M lUSSlithAvcRuc North April 14,20M POfOS staff RccoauMadatioB Staff is satisfied that theplanshavebeensufiBciently revised to eliminate virtually all new enaoachmoitsof die bluff setback, and that rebuilding a new attached garage in the area where the existing detached garage encroadies, has no significant inqMcts. The existing home with its substantial bluff setback encroachments, will be completely removed, and the new home, save for the garage wing, has no encroachments on the bluff or die 30* setback. Grading and drainage appears to be properly dealt with, subject to the City Engineer's approval, and the driveway is quite functional. Based on the above, Staff recommends approval of die bluff impact zone and setback variances per the revised site plan, subject to: 1. .^ipiovalofdienecessaiy minorgradtngwidiintliebluffhnpactzone tuallow for construction of die new garage portion of dw new home, and to restore the existing house site. 2. ^iplicant to provide confirmation of hardcover percentage compliance prior to Council review. 3. Revised grading plan is subject to City Engineer ’s review and approval. k •*'V ''--v r;.’. ’v:;,v; *.%::.t:; !f I • j • I I»i 1111 • 111.,, ■(, i(.. I,, i 4 t t I • 4 «• i i » J • t r t t I 11 A4 « I • I tt 4t. • •! •#■14 ,t«t#.i»t //’ I- •' •••«►<•. .r l*r«^ ft*jl *•«•# 1 I»» V,\' X'X*? • « .y-r=^;. ,’r Vf! ii . I* ‘ I .' * IZ 1! ‘ * "j '• £|^ii!iii'.#i 'i,;i ii' iimiitei |ji!::.i i!iii I I I i!===iz='c==; I I ==3<=z!e: miw* tCUTM I—T IXT—OW MJVittiaM n--------------j_: yj f «' f t b» t > < 9 « • > 9 • r 4-’..........■ f v't •' a t •‘m/A » ’»•»# <»••*•»• 4l.ll {^'■a •• MB B* ■iii|j i|Hiiiii|ii ^ Mp^ UT mtrmomm^xnoH GmvmAT MesfDCMCE (• L ' p t- kiJ)\;.-f -^'J f'S'\ f''- T~^ms^ —•SSi&e- iflf^ iiiii bIi'III’P li #» s K>^l| r ! S. „ll 1 ill! 11 i ■!.; IIII & ,:iil mi ERTi'illldlliaa ^^IlHBaSaili iraB 4U1UHiii-jii-jiihii[nij --«fe-IliffiillilJllil^ liiSiiMili :^sa *-efe 1 'i1illl!lll Pt=9 •• ■• ;■■ ■■t«l| li[fl " lf“ ■ 2!' ^---tL--1-:,L-L---Ii!--4---__.J-!^___ fCUTW S-44T »<TlWOH ELEVATION \^' (M» . r-#“ ' " ■—\ Sgr-~^ ©s; siISsSS*®A6lt > ) 4 . '■'1 • •'; • -1 ■• •«• .••*:. * /,:■ “ ■■•■ ■■■' • •;* ■■•• ... ••• : .- i •' • • v:>J I !• ■*!r iT^ s,: f/;- w / : ^ i » / .• V ■■ . V . '>•'//■!;,■.•• ■■' ‘■'." ■X''' ^■.r~'; '’' / ' = -r'- ,vf'' •:': 1 • : • : , ! ■ , ■ ■I .'^ »X‘ \ - ^ _ T 'T i 4 * • CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE #05-3086 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: February 25, 2005 TO: Philip & Cassandra Ordway COPIES: 1550 County Road 6 Long Lake. MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING: February 22. 2005 Motion: Table to March 21 Plaiming Commission meeting, pending stafT review of revised plans. Vote: S hi Favor Against Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as; Planning Commission - Monday, March 21, 2005; meeting starts at 6:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available fiom the City Recorder after review and approval by the Council. If you have questions, please contact Planning Director Mike Gaffion at 952-249-4600. 60-Day Review Period Extension State law provides that Cities shall make decisions on zoning requests vithin 60 days from the date of application, md that this review period may be extended by notification to the applicant. Your application was received on January 19,2005 and the 60-day review period would end on March 20,2005. However, because your application was tabled by tlie Planning Commission to the March 21 meeting, the earliest potential date of final Council action falls after the 60-day period ends. Therefore, the 60-day review period is hereby extended an additional 60 days to May 19, 2005. 'lilitaitfri" i ■» irm .........atfi 1 !■ i 1 Date Application Received: 1-194IS Dale Application Conildcrcd as Complete: I'H-OS M-Day Review Period Eipirca: 3-20-«5 To:Chair Rahn and Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Mike Gafiron, Planning Director February 18,2005 #05-3086 Philip & Cassandra Ordway, 1145 Sixth Avenue North - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-1A Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acre min. Gross area: 318»544 s.f. (7.313 acres) per Hennepin County tax records Net area (excl. wetlands): 158,900 s.f. (3.65 acres) approx, per staff calc. ‘Buildable* area meeting setbacks: 16,000-18,000 s.f. Apptictttion Summary: Applicants request a variance to the required 30-foot ‘top of blufT setback to allow construction of a new home to replace the existing home on the property. Additional approvals arc required for certain grading aspects of the plan unless revisions are made. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends as follows: 1. Denial of the requested variances for stmctural encroachments of the required 30' setback from top of bluff. 2. Denial of any required CUP for retaining walls or grading within 5' of the lot side lot line. 3. Approval of any necessary grading within the bluff and bluif impact zone to allow for restoration of grades after the existing home and garage are removed. 4. Direct applicant to re-design to eliminate any stmctural encroachments of the 30' bluff setback. List of Exhibits A - Application & Description of Request B - Hardship Statement C - Survey D - Site Plans - Sheets Cl, C2, C3 E - Building Plans and Elevation View F-AirphotosofSite G • Bluff Analysis Sheets H - Site Photos I - Plat Map J - Property Owners List Kl — b -11 JL ii-1 . . irihhi n I Ilin I (V0S>3M6 1145 Sixth Avenue Nortk February 18,2005 Page 2 Pertinent Code Sections Section 78-1279(2): Required minimum structure setback from top of bluff = BO*. Section 78-1279(3): Bluii impact zones. Structures and accessory facilities, except stairways, landings, and loek boxes, must not be placed within bluff impact zones. Section 78-1286(e)6,7,8: 6. Fill or excavated material must not be placed in a manner that creates an unstable slope. 7. Plans to place fill or excavated material on steep slopes must be reviewed by the City Engineer for continued slope stability and must not create finished slopes of 30% or greater. 8. Fill or excavated material must not be placed in bluff impact zones. Section 78-967(bX3): Proposed elevation changes within 5' of a lot line, except for drainage swales and ditches, are considered as ‘unusual land alterations’ requring a conditional use permit. Summary of Request Applicants have purchased this property and plan to remu ve the ex isting house and detached garage in order to construct a new residence with attached garage. This is a unique site, with signi ficant topograpliic limitations. The buildable area is within a 3-acre triangle of land including southerly and northeasterly facing bluffs and steep slopes rising from the shore of Long Lake. The applicants share an existing driveway which also serves two neighboring homes on the higli ground to the inunediate west. The site is heavily forested. The existing house, garage and driveway apron extend to the defined top of bluff, with no setback fix)m (and even some slight encroachment into) the bluff itself. The proposed new residence has been located to generally be further fix>m the top of tlie bluff than the existing house, but constraints of driveway slope and tree locations limit developability of the site for the home design proposed. The applicants arc requesting top ofbluffsetback variances for a small portion ofproposed deck, and for the attached garage; approvals are also required for restoration ofgradcs after the existing house is removed, as well as minor grading to accomplish foundation construction and drainageways within the ‘bluff impact zone’, i.e. witliin 20* of the defined top ofbluff. Hardship Analysis m f coHsMeiirng •Homs for vmrioMce, the PioMoiog CommissioM sHoU consider the effect of the proposed vmtimmee upon the ,»th, smfety omd welfare of the community, existing and unticiputed truffle conditions, iight end uir, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and Ihe effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Hanning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the Uterai provisions of the Zoning Code in Instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances nnigne to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is lemonstrated that such acHons will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. n i . S t'.’1 m-m6 1145 Slith Avenue North February 18,2005 Page 3 The applicants have provided adetailed hardship statement (Exhibit B). From staffs perspective, an argument could be made that a di fTerent home design could be created for this property that would require no setback variances, althougli grading within the blu ffimpact zone would be required to restore the grades where the existing house would be removed. The applicants have refined their design from an initial plan which would have had major grading encroachments in order to create a walkout situation, to a plan which has relatively minimal site grading, but does result in the need for a number of retaining walls, some of which are proposed and others which appear necessary but are not shown on the plans. Deck Encroachment . The proposed 6* deck encroachment results again from the design and size of the house in relation to the narrow buildable corridor between the two bluffs. It appears the main floor of the home (elev. 994.88) is being kept 6-7' above existing grade surrounding it (984-988'), in order to retain the ability to have a desirable south-facing lookout/walkout situation. The proposed grading on the south side, which does not encroach the 20* top of bluff grading setback, creates a swale under the deck to at low rnofi'deck runofifto discharge further west where the slopes arc less steep. The top ofbluffis very distinct on the south side of the proposed house. The 6* deck encroachment is over an area that is currently a relatively flat driveway apron, which has no existing vegetation. The 6' deck encroachment would have little impact on views from the lake nor on tlie stability of the bluff. Adding some trees and/or shrubs in the flat area between the bluffand the lake is an option if Planning Commission has any concerns about views from the lake (see Site Photos, Exhibit H). Garage Encroachment . The proposed encroachments arc in part a result ofthe applicants' intent to not have a tuck-undor garage that would be entered from the basement. Such a layout would alleviate the driveway slope concerns but would not be as functional for daily living, and would likely not result in tlic style or quality ofhome the applicant desires. While the applicants have refined their design to have the garage floor about 4' below the home’s main level, the driveway slope still ranges from 7% to nearly 10%; the City has no standard for individual driveway slopes, hut 10% is generally tlie upper limit for safe access. Offsetting the garage 28' westw.4d on the site would eliminate the bluff setback encroachment, but would also result in a much steeper driveway unless the garage is lowered an additional 2 feet. Driveway Location . TheexistingdrivcwayenterstIiesitefromtheshareddrivewayapproxiniatcly4'from the west side lot, then angles away from the line, to a point about 20' from the line about 100* into the site. The proposed driveway, apparently in order to preserve an existing tree and to maintain the length needed to limit the driveway slope, is within 2 feet of the side lot line and 5 feet above existing grade. This leaves an unacceptable slope (actually a severe drop-ofO adjacent to the outside curve and could be dangerous. Additionally, Orono ordinances do not allow grade changes within 5' ofthe lot line, and the final grade should not exceed 3:1. Adding a retaining wall here within S' of the lot tine is not acceptable. If the driveway location does not change from this proposal, applicant will have to obtain an casanent for grading onto the adjoining property, and revise the design to eliminate the drop-off. Planning Commission has also indicated to staff in the past that variances granted on the basis of 'trying to save a tree’ should not be granted, since it has been our experience that those trees as often as not end up dead witliin a year or two and the basis for the variance no longer exists... MS-30M 1145 Sixth Avcnnc North Fcbmary IS, 2tWS Page 4 Retaining: Walls at Edge of Driveway Apron. An 8' high, two-tiered retaining wall is proposed at (he northern edge of the driveway apron, as backup and parking area. This wal I is j ust above a 17% slope, and a portion of it encroaches perhaps 3 feet into (he 30' top of bluff structural setback. The wall as proposed will require an engineered design. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET LR-1A Standards Lot Area Lot Width Required 87,120 s.f (2.0 acres)200 ’ Actual 158,900 s.f (3.65 acres)600* + at shoreline and at 75' stbk Setbacks Required Existing Proposed Lake (South)75’120 ’160 ’ Uke (NE)75*260'270 ’ Side (West)30 ’150'55’ Top of Bluff 30 ’5'Deck: 24’ Garage Wing: 2 ’ Grading within Bluff Impact Zone 20* from Top of Bluff NA Grading to accommodate attached garage will be within I- 2 ’ of the defined top of bluff Average Lakeahore SedMck (No Encroachment Allowed) 260 ’±200 ’± Grading near lot line 5* setback required NA 2 ’ from side lot line for new driveway 5’ above existing grade Hardcover Caiculationa; Note: Zone ■rest colcMlotMl by itafTbaicil on moil recent survey; only zones south of creek are reported here. Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75'103,500 s.f Os.f (0%)1,200 s.f ± (1.2%) 1,200 s.f (i.2%) 75-250'136,500 s.f 34,000 s.f (25 %) NA 18,320 s.f (13.4%) 250-500’13,175 s.f 3,950 s.f (3C %) NA 3,734 s.f* (28.3 %) 'Includes 8,900 s.f. of ihaied driveway ^Includes 1,200 s.f. of shared driveway «05-30M 114S Sixth Avchttc North Pchniary It, 2005 Pages Ifiuoh for Coosideration 1. Has the applicant presented hardships adequate to support granting of the requested variances? If not, should additional design revisions be recommended to reduce or eliminate the need for variances? 2. Will there be any impacts to the surrounding neighborhood if this request is approved? If so, what reasonable conditions can be established that will mitigate those impacts? 3. Does the Planning Commission have any concerns about this proposal that have not been addressed? Staff Rccomincndatioii Applicants were initially brought into this process as a result of a misinterpretation of the definition ofthc *top of bluir by their surveyor. This ultimately lead them and their architect down a design path that required what staff advised were unaccqitable encroachments of the bbifT. Since then, they have revised the plan and shifted the house location to eliminate any encroachments of the bluffitself but still propose encroachments of the required 30' setback from the top of bluff. In past rebuild situations where site conditions related to the shape, size or character of the land, the City has allowed some encroachments of the bluff setback. A recent example is 4753 North Shore Drive, where a house setback of 15* from the top ofbluff was approved, in order to allow that 8,000 s.f, 50' wide lot to have a home meeting the 1500 s. f stmctural coverage allotment. In that case, the bluffhad a unifomi 55*60% slope down to the lake, and special engineering was required after variance approval to ensure the foundations remained stable so close to the bluff In the current situation, slopes downhill of the proposed garage are in the range of20-25% for the first 20-30', then drop quickly at a uni form 50% to the wetland. Slope stability for the garage here is less critical than for the North Shore Drive example. In the current case, however, the lot is much larger. The City is requested to grant variances for a footprint approaching 5,000 s. f on a buildable envelope of about 16,000-18,000 s.f, within a 3-plus-acre lot. Hie portion of the lot that is buildable is small compared to the entire lot area. There certainly are topographic constraints to the site. Nevertheless, staff is hard-pressed to find a conclusive hardship, given that a multitude of different home designs could be buih on the site witliout the need for variances. Staff recommends as follows: 1. Denial of the requested variances for structural encroachments of the required 30 ’ setback from top ofbluff 2. Denial of any required variances for retaining walls or grading within 5' of the lot side lot line. 3. Approval ofanynecessarygrading within the bluffand bluff impact zone to allow for restoration of grades after the existing home and garage are removed. 4. Direct applicant to re-design to eliminate any structural encroachments of the 30' bluff setback. #05-3014 1 14S Sixth Avenue North Pebmory It, 200S Peget Optloni for Action Follow staff lecominendation; or B.Conclude that some or all ofthe necessary variances are supported by sufficient hardship and recommend approval subject to specific conditions; or ^ 4 f C. Other X i •4*1 - .•. ■ •■ * ri * '■me!'*' .. r:m m MMmf: " ■■' i,-\- > '■>i Mm : - j 4r.- 5'fiir^m .•'' y‘ '\:\.r V *. •• §' ■•*••■•• ■ " I. • ujil < -:. •• • . : .Ci . '•• I ’*^.' . .I, ■ I *.. 'J ii‘c*#AarA‘.fy' ' mmSt- mm ■ '■ '•»■ ■ nH '■ --:y I ; .- 'ic ■•1^- 1^^: .' r.^A iiASBEiNMutitSMiiAi T DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REQUEST We tfMnk you for jiDur oontidention of this request, which ii following oonskleratkins: The possibfo huildins nad siie tnd locflthm is shnrply Hinitec i de in Uglit of the of Uw property. The site is a sleiider|W)inl of la^lyundrf^^ by the unique diameter »p slope to the lake on __________________________sqokkfy from the street On the lakeside, the bhifiTMthacta create a stender wedge shape too small to xeasona )ly build on. As the wedge widens* meeting a huger building area, foe building pad i pushed into an overly close proximity with the street Every effort %vas made in nting the house to balance fosse GC nflicting restrictions. The house was also sited with an eye toward preservmg as many mature trees as possible. By moving the house ciosar to the street, the removal ofmoretnies would be requited. A tedesigiied twitdibodc drive, vdiidi is required on the sloping die, would necessitate fifftfaer tree renmvaL The proposed location of the bouse is the ohly reasonable location for a house qiproprirte to the neighborhood, which preserves th I unique character of the she, and which minimizes the im^ of new conrtruction. Under this varianoe request, lOOH of foe house itself would »mply with the bhiff setback rsquiremBnts. The variance request is to allow reasonable relief fom the bhiff setback in only two secondary bcations. The ftdlocatfon is a amall portion of foe deck ixipf ftUMfeang nrhich watind intD the bhiflFietback. (See attichedjiropoied site plaa) The second locatkm fr the new garage, wUeh is to be teiOt in lat se part at foe present locationof an existiiv garage. Iffoese requests were granted the home would be situated in such a way that a swhchback drive will not be reqr.^ to real It building pad. This would allow the ptesee vation of dozens of mature trees on the hiU rising from foe street side of the lot, as wen as ramimize grading of the she. Additiomilly, the sodsting »oBlitioas of foe she would be subrtantiaUy improved in Cplease see attedhed diagrams). M < f aetbadc compliance n ‘H ■‘t—r’, y V* * •- ,•10 —.A.-y VI a « A ^* ~«w OWNER'S RESPONSE TO HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATI INFORM 1. Ilie iwssibte buikling pad size and tocatbn is sh^ly liniited by the unique chameter of the |iroperty. The site b a slender point of la^ bounded by a steep slope to the lake on thrae of its sides, while the finiith asqends quickly from the BtiM. On the lakeside, the bluff setbacks create a dendci wedge shape too small to reasonably build on. As the wedge widens, creating a vger building area, the building pad is pushed into an ove^ close pioxenity witn the street By moving raid be required. A redesigned switchbadr drive, which is required on the skjping site, would necessitate further tree removal 2. As sighted above, the hardship is due to die unique coatou, form and steqmess of dw she, not by ciicumatances created by the laadowoer.' fbe owner is precluded from building on the ingority of his prqierty by various ake, wetl^ and Muff setbacks. We adc that some allowanoe be grant^ on the lunall portion which is buildable, so that a home nuqr be situated in a minimally intrusive and reasonable fitfhioa 3. The existing home and garage located on the she were bi ih prior to present day Muff setbacks and are much cloaer to the lake than we pr spoae to build the new lift me Til this way we are inqiBDving the “esaential chare rterofthe locality.” The proposed home is entirely in character with surrounding leighborfaood. 4. The variance request is not due to economic hardship. T1 e hardshqi is related to the unique conjuration of the she. 5. This hem is not applicable to our request 6. The variance request is not related to‘^ise.” 7. This item la not appUeaUe to our request. 8. As sighted above, die hardship is due to the pointed sluq»e of the land and the steepness of the she and are **peculiarto this property.” 9. This she being a very sleivtor point of land in unique in configuratiou and not typical of other land ir jie distriet that die land is located. 10. The granitog of the qiplicatkm will allow for a home, vdiich is iqipropriate in scale and shing to the naighboriiDod. With out the gnroting of the ^qilication the owner would be blocked from reasonable use of his land. 11. The gmting of the varianee will not impair the hBahh, safety, confott. O'9rals and will in efifect cany forward the intent of dte zoning code in that h wiU allow reasonable use of the land when the configuration of the land creates .r-tzl undue hardship to the owner 12. The gnuBtiiv of the variance is not just a cpnvenieooe to the owner but as sighted in Item #1 above is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship and difficulty. to A r:.;> \ ’■ St .-‘v B •mrei p er% Dale Application Received: 2>14-0S Date Application Coneidered at Complete: 3-14-05 60-Day Review Period Expiree: 5-14-OS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION APft 2 5 2005 CITY OF OHONO Date: April 22,2005 Item No.: /(D Depnrtment Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Janice Gundlach^ Title: City Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #05-3089, Theodore & Debroah Rozcboom, 2967 Casro Point Road Variance - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - 1C, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (Vz acre minimum) 0.48 acres (20,936 s.f.) 82’ @ shoreline, 76 ’ @ 75 ’ setback LIstofEihibits A - Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendaticn B - PC Action Notice 4-19-05 C - Memo to PC dated 4-14-05 D - PC Memo and Exhibits of 4-11-05 Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variances in order io constru.;t an addition to the street side of the home connecting to the existing detached garage: 1. Hardcover variance for the 250’-500’ zone to permit 54% when 30% is normally allowed and 64.4% currently exists. 2. Average lakeshore setback variance tc -ermit the existing het tub to be relocated to the roof of the lake side enclosed porch, wt . currently encroaches on the average lakeshore setback. 3. Side yard setback variance to permit a side yard setback of 5.5 ’ when 10’ is normally required and 5.5 ’ currently exists in order to allow the garage to become attached, rather than detached. At the Planning Commission meeting the applicant again revised his request and eliminated tlie proposed addition that would have made the detached garage become attached to the house. In doing this the applicant eliminated the need for variance #3 noted above. However, the applicant proposed a new roof overhang to run along the street side of the house meeting the required 10’ setback to the side lot line. This proposed roof would require approval of a new variance to permit a S’ separation between the new roof attached to the house and the detached garage when 10’ is normally required. 7: tiiahiiihili ; naaning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission voted 5-1 to i^)prove the variances as revised by the applicant during the meeting, with the following stipulations: 1. At the time of bu'iding permit submittal, hardcover calculation worksheets shall be submitted confirming compliance with the hardcover numbers represented on the revised request. 2. The only access to the hot tub shall be internally from the house so as to minimize negative impacts on lake views by new outside stairways. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting an average lakeshore setback variance, a 2S0’-S00’ zone hardcover variance, and a building-to-building setback variance for 2967 Casco Point Road. i li i: ,• r! } ■ 'ia - . ,w. ----------------- A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1288,78-1279 (6), 78-1438 nLE NO. 05-3089 W' iL ' WHEREAS, Theodore Rozeboom and Deborah Rozeboom, husband and wife (hereinafter "the ^plicants") are the owners of the property located at 2967 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: Tract B, R.L.S. No. 1470, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for an average lakeshore setback variance, hardcover variance, and building-to-building setback variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-1288, 78-1279(6), and 78-1438 to allow reconstruction of the existing lakeside porch, relocate a hot tub in a non-conforming lociUion to the roof of the proposed new porch, and construction a new roof overhang on the street side of the home between the existing detached garage. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: 1. 2. 3. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File 05-3089. The property is located in the LR - 1C, One Family Lakeshore Residential District which requires a minimum lot area of O.SO acres and a minimum lot width of 100 feet. The applicant ’s property is 0.48 acres in area and 82’ at the shoreline and 76* at the 75’ setback. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at public hearing held on March 21,2005 and April 18,2005 and recommended approval of the requested variances based on the following findings: Page 1 of 6 X • wi k 5. >•!{? a. No further encroachment of the average lakeshore setback will result with construction of the lakeside porch in the same location, and therefore no existing lake views enjoyed by neighboring property will be impacted negatively. b. Placement of the existing hot tub on the roof of tlie lakeside porch, while technically an encroachment, will not negatively impact views to the lake enjoyed by neighboring property owners due to the height. c. The current location of the hot tub is non-conforming in that it is within 10 ’ of the side lot line. d. The deck and fence existing on the side lot line in place for use of the hot tub, will be removed. e. Excess hardcover within the 75’-250 ’ zone will be removed and result in a conforming percentage of 25%. f. The proposed roof overhang attached to the principal structure and to extend to 5’ from the detached garage will merely be an extension of the existing non-conforming building-to-building setback existing between the house and detached garage. g. The proposed roof overhang will meet the required 10 ’ setback to the side property boundary. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of tlie Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City CouikiI finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not aj^ly generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial prx^)erty right of the applicants; and would be in Page 2 of 6 keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above Endings, the Orono City Council hereby grants an average lakeshore setback variance, hardcover variance, and buiiding-to- building setback variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1288,78-1279(6), and 78-1438 to allow reconstruction of the existing lakeside porch, relocate a hot tub in a non-conforming location to the roof of the proposed new porch, and construction a new roof overhang on the street side of the home between the existing detached garage, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council iqrproval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants and armotated by City staff, attached to Ais Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Plaiming Commission and City Council review. 2. Hardcover in the 0-75’ zone shall not increase above the level of 660 s.f or 11%. Hardcover in the 75*-250 ’ zone shall become conforming at 25% and hardcover within the 250’-500’ zone shall not increase above 1600 s.f. or 64.4% as depicted on Exhibit A. Applicant is advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. 3. Hardcover calculation worksheets shall be submitted with the building permit to verify compliance with the hardcover calculation represented on attached Exhibit A. 4. The qrpUcant may phase the hardcover removals as shown on attached Exhibit A; however, all hardcover removals shall be completed at the time the garage is changed to a front load, for which a permit must be obtained no later than April 25, 2006. The hardcover removals shown as phase 1 must be completed prior to the final inspection for the lakeside porch. 5. Applicant shall remove all plastic or fabric liner material from the decorative landsciqje beds on the property to ensure their permeability as non-hardcover surfaces. Page 3 of 6 • A n m ■ -ft ♦ 2 ■V ■ , >6. The only access to the hot tub shall be internally from the house so as to eleminate negative impacts on lake views that would be created by new outside stairways. 7. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the i^licants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (April 25,2006). 8. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. . 4.. ' -i A 9. The undersigned applicants have read, understand and herd>y agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants* heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 25*** day of April, 2005. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Cleric Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owneifs) ▼T,. -r. ** r Page4of6 TIhlfimfli I A T > 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of 2005 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City, , 2005 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Miimesota Notary Public a 'VV *. ■ ' .V , • Page 5 of 6 art iA4 naair-ftjM f I i •' t i . » f STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instniment was acknowledged before me this__day of ,2005 by Theodore Rozeboom, husband of Deborah Rozeboom, husband and wife. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this__day of by Deborah Rozeboom, wife of Theodore Rozeboom, husband and wife. ,2005 Notary Public / ' mm I Page 6 of 6 ‘ ■ Mtwse^ fbf ^\tfp9 ^Mad (iMkoKrr vJft)H««dko/«r bMc A^Kion 1^ 41 fxH>e>ir A iVN Wf. EXISmC HARDCOVER 0-73 f»H MnltoMoHub 4o t^jf^Oedc. oD^^ot legal DESCRIPTin^- TRACT B. R.LS. NO. 1470 DEMARS-GABRIBL LAND SURVEYORS, INC. JOID ^ Lam $ta. MW 59447 t) 599-5Mi 59i-5479 -------l)f fIM ^ WWffttwitf land flMd d emu Palm rabfvenf 21. 5flQ5 K^ffseo (mrouRs wukh 14, 2005 nia Ho. 12761 B flofviW 1ff i4o (ftifOni) 4144. l?o'MaWiMuail (to«p) CWC. 0(KJ 4f) (lolkc^ fauUfiM) thuc C126 sf^ ovcgMfIft ^ MM GhOe ^ U4D HClVf. 5144 sr ■ If 11 SfTE ADDRCSS Wota, Polio, Bach and Stoira 660 Sq.n. Tetot Hordeomr 660 Sea Lot Afao 5984 Sq.a X of Hordeovar m 11.0 X ------------73-750 faai Houaa 1330 Sq.P. Geroga 303 SQ.a Drfva, Roth. •Wk ood WoHa 2289 Sq.fi Total Hordcomr 4144 Sq n lot Arfo 12467 SQa 3J.7* 730-500 laai OvHa, WbKt 1900 SqJI 1600 So ft Lot Arao 2463 Sqa X of Hardcovmr m 64.4 M M»wl Wit, Wb. Book-Poga 426,^1 Seda r»3Q* 2967 CASCO POINT ROAD CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR: THE DANBERRY COMPANY- MR. JEFF DANBERRY ^ J r |/-V ' i 1 • i- (.1 I. n K ' CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Cryatal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE: 05-3089 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: April 19,2005 TO:Theodore & Deborah Rozeboom 2967 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Average Lakeshore Setback, 250-500 Hardcover, and Side Yard Setback Variances DATE OF MEETING: April 18,2005 Planaing CommissioD recommended as follows: The Planning Commission approved the applicant’s amended proposal which included rebuilding the lake side porch, placing the existing hot tub on the roof, and a roof addition at the street side of the house in-betw een the house and garage. The amended proposal included the following variance approvals; 1. Average lakeshore setback variance to permit the porch to be reconstructed in the same location and to permit the hot tub to be placed on the roof 2. Hardcover variance to permit 64% hardcover within the 250’-500’ zone where 30% is normally allowed and 64% currently exists. 3. A building-to-building setback variance to allow a 5’ separation between the proposed roof addition at the garage side of the home where a 10’ separation is normally required. These ^provals are contingent upon the applicant providing a revised plan for Council review and reducing hardcover in the 75’-250’ zone so as to be conforming at 25%. VOTE;FOR 1 AGAINST Applicant's next meeting is tentatively scheduled for: City Couacil - Monday, April 25,2005; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Plaiming Commission or Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Gundlach at 952-249-4623. • -W ’ -‘^MSliriL Memorandum ‘ ;,'J Date: To: From: RE: April 14.2005 Planning Commission Janice Gundlach, City Planner (VOS-3089, Theodore A Deborah Rozeboom, 2967 Casco Point Road After the report was written and he packet was copied, the Building Inspector informed staff that the existing porch on the lake side of the home needs to be completely rebuilt. Staff was under the impression that it was an existing seasonal porch with walls where only improvements were needed, such as insulation and windows, to make it living space, which apparently isn’t the case due to the age of the structure. Because the qjplicant needs to remove die existing walls and construct a new roof to siqiport the hot tub, the average lakeshore setback variance needs to include this. Cunendy, the report only requires the average lakeshore setback variance to put the hot tub on the roof The recommendation regarding this variance needs to include rebuilding of the walls and roof Staff would support approval of this variance as no ftuther encroachment is proposed and it will be constructed in the same location. Also, the variance necessary for the addition proposed to connect the existing house and detached garage should have more detail^ stipulations incase the building code requirements raise unforeseen issues. For example, the building code will require that the detached garage have a foundation that the proposed addition can attach to. If a foundation does not exist and the qipKcant chroses to rebuild the garage to make the addition confonn to the building co^, the garage must then meet the 10 ’ setback from the aide lot line (and of course 30’ from the road). This should be included in the recommendation for the requested side yard setback variance. life m .* ■ •• -'i Vj - . ■ •• 1 Mill M5-3089 April IS, 2005 Page 1 of 3 Date ApplicatioB Received: 2-14-05 Date Application Considered as Complete: 3-14-05 00-Day Review Period Expires: 5-14-05 To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Janice Gundlach, City Planner^ April 11,2005 PREVISED REQUEST* 05-3089, Theodore & Deborah Rozeboom, 2967 Casco Point Road - Hardcover, Average Lakeshore Setback, Side Yard Setback Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - 1C, One Family Lakeshore Residential District ('/a acre min.) 0.48 acres (20,936 s.f.) 82’ @ shoreline; 76’ @ 75’ setback Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variances in order to construct an addition to the street side of the home connecting to the existing detached garage; 1. Hardcover variance for the 250’-500’ zone to permit 64% when 30% is normally allowed and 64.4% currently exists. 2. Average lakeshore setback variance to permit the existing hot tub to be relocated to the roof of the lake side enclosed porch, which currently encroaches on the average lakeshore setback. 3. Side yard setback variance to permit a side yard setback of 5.5’ when 10’ is normally required and 5.5’ currently exists in order to allow the garage to become attached, rather than detached. Stt^RecommendatioH: Approval as requested stipulating the following: 1. At the time of building permit submittal hardcover calculation worksheets shall be submitted confirming compliance with the hardcover numbers represented with this revised request. 2. The only access to the hot tub shall be internally from the house so as to minimize _____negative inq>acts on lake views by new outside stairways.__________________ Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (a) No hard cover or impervious surface shall be placed, located or constructed within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of any lake or tributary, except for stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in this Code. (b) Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OHWL, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Between 250 feet and 500 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 30 percent hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the OHWL there shall be no ^«ater than 35 percent hardcover. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series. § 1(10.56(16XL)), 2-24-1992) «M)5-30i9 April 18.2005 Page 2 of 3 B 5 t i' I 1 a Sec. 78-1279. Placement of structures on lots. (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 a|q>ly 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. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(1 6XQ), 2-24-1992) List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Revised Survey & Hardcover Calculations Exhibit B - Notice of PC Action dated 3-22-05 Exhibit C - PC Report dated 3-17-05 t Background The applicant appeared before the Planning Conunission during the March meeting requesting hardcover variances and an average lakeshore setback variance to permit a 4’ edition to the lake side of the home. The Planning Commission recommend^ denial at that meeting noting that lake views of the neighbor to the south would be negatively impacted by the proposed addition. The ^plicant indicated he would redesign. The applicant has submitted a revised plan, wdiich abandons any lakeward addition. The new proposal consists of relocating the hot tub to the roof of the existing porch (which currently is a deck), an addition connecting the house and detached garage, and removal of hardcover within the 75 ’-250 ’ zone. Hardcover within the 250 ’-500 ’ zone is proposed to change to allow the garage to front-load, but will not increase above the existing 64.4%. Average Laknhore Setback Variance Placing the hot tub on the roof requires an average lakeshore setback variance because the existing structure encroaches on the required setback. During the initial review, sUJf and the Planning Commission commented that an upward addition would not negatively impact lake views based on the photographs contained in the report. Staff frnds that the placement of the hot tub on the roof has less of an impact on the neighbor’s views than an upward addition, and would therefore recommend approval of that request. Staff would stipulate that the only access to that hot tub should be internally from the house to further lessen negative impacts. 7S*-2S0* Hardcover The applicant has proposed to eliminate qjproximately 1,000 s.f. of non-structural hardcover widiin the 75 ’-2S0* zone. The removals consist of retaining walls, hot tub and associated deck, driveway and walkway with approximately 340 s.f of new hardcover. The new hardcover will consist of the action fnoposed to connect the house and garage and new driveway. With these improvements the ^^licant has proposed a conforming level of 2S%, no longer requiring a variance. The structural coverage amount will w IK)S.3089 Afiril 18,2009 Page 3 of3 increase slightly but remain conforming. 250*-500* Hardcover Variance The aj^Iicant has proposed to change the detached garage to a front load rather than a side load in an effort to help decrease the 75 ’-250* zone hardcover percentage. While no substantial reductions in ha^cover are proposed for this zone, a variance is still required as the nature of the existing hardcover is changing. A net decrease of approximately 9 s.f. is proposed. Staff reconunends approval of the hardcover variance for the 250*-500’ zone based on the limited area within this zone to accommodate a garage that has existed prior to adoption of the current hardcover restrictions. Side Yard Setback Variance In proposing an addition that attaches the existing detached garage, a setback variance for die southern side lot line is required as the side setback of the existing garage is S.S’ vriien 10* is normally required, and the garage is becoming part of the principal structure. Staff is recommending iqiproval of this variance as the garage is not being rebuilt and the existing non-conforming setback was established prior to adoption of the current setback standards. Staff Rccomneiidation Approval subject to the following: 1. At the time of building permit submittal hardcover calculation worksheets shall be submitted confirming compliance with the hardcover numbers represented with this revised request. 2. The only access to the hot tub shall be internally from the house so as to minimize negative impacts on lake views. iM. -.i.t ■ A- M *•' . % , + •' ii \ rtor »i(W\05 4 S\*||P5. ^Mdd i/tuiujcr VIM HwdfaMr teMcArkliKen 1^ EXHIBIT A EXISTING HARDCOVER LAKE MINNETONKA _7_ ' ■ ■ ■" ww^wmm • €M« W»««l«l MMMf MM mn«; Ommm mmmm «mk DEUAKS-GABMEL LAND SURVEYORS, INC. J0» Mw*w> Uw MW JS447 sat-MM f« (7^ m^0479 MoWrtoKab 40 u^Oedc>o)N^ P»re»» (tf rttBfAj) L£GAL DESCRiPTinN- TRACT B, R.L.S. NO. 1470 ftofoiw fettx:nou-^/Aa?^ ■V-DSo (etifttfuO 4144- ^ 'IV MbiWni|uaU (t0<9r) MH<b4 nsdc. O^o dff.) f^'iwio CkoUcOM ftjo ftw^ (nto ^ Addlhon^BMb^e *vio ir MM 6Mtw|^ ortilo «<noy U49H(;^f^ 0-75 f99t Worn. Potlo. Obc * end 5(0^ 660 Sa H. fa(d HordcovBf 660 Sort L0t Arao 3664 Sa.n X of NortfeOMf •rr.o JT 75-230 7ad Nbut#IJ30 sa n. Corona 305 Sa n Oma. Path. Waft ond Wdft 2266 Sa n fold Noidcowar 4144 Sa n I'*! 4rao 12467 Sa/l JJ.2S 250-500 foot (>«aa. Wdfa 1600 sa^n foW Hor^covr >600 St^ Uo ( |J U( >lr»o X •/ Nor6c o»w 2«as s^ n. 66.4 n * IM tMi Burvor, ar npart wm anpo t94 tm am y ,***^*^ bb 6 Mat I aai a BBM /laatitBrvB lanW mb llBiB a/ —rr ^ PfytSCD CONTOURS mRCH 14. 2005 ni0 Mb . 0 sl!S£a 2967 C4SC0 PO/Nf ff040 »)-600(6fiBVy|') l&OOir (V44V »1l« Mr_^feQMCLjLL.JQQS.Mha. Mm Wb. flaoB-PlSfa Seda f«J0* CERTinCATr OF SURVEY FOR: THE DANBERRY COMPANY- MR. JEFF DANBERRY _________ /Pez*Aoo\^ i#%i •ILJI • O I CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE: 05-3089 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: March 22,2005 TO:Theodore & Deborah Rozebooni 2967 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Average Lakeshore Setback Variance, 75’-250 & 250 ’-500 ’ Zone Hardcover Variances DATE OF MEETING: March 21,2005 PlaBBlng Commission recommended as follows: Motion and second to table the application. The applicant was directed to revise the proposal to not expand the current footprint. The applicant was also advised to make further reductions in hardcover including removal of the fence located at the southern property line and removal and/or relocation of the hot tub and associated deck 1 ’ and 2’ off the southern property line respectively. VOTE:FOR AGAINST Applicant’s next meeting is tentatively scheduled for: Planning Commission - Monday, April 18,2005; meeting starts at 6:00 p.m. If )«)U desire certified copies of the official Plaiming Commission or Council minutes, they are available fiom the City Recorder after review and sqjproval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Plaimer Janice Gundlach at 952-249-4623. r U * ;■ i i! :1 4 Date AppHcaltea Rccttecd: 0M3^ Date Ap^tealfoa Coaiptete: 6t-Day lUvtew Period Bipiralion: 0S*I7>0S REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION APR 2 5 2005 CITY OF ORONO Date: April 20,2005 Item No. I I Department Approval: Naam: Melanie Curtis Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Title: City Planner Item Description: #05*3092 - Mathew A Michelle Hofoiann - 1225 Dickinson St - Variances Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: RR*1B, One Family Rural Residential^ 2-acrca/200* 0.62 acre (27,086 s.f.) 135* ListofExhiMts: A. Resolution B. Council Memo ft Exhibits of April 11"* C. Council Action Notice Application Summary: This Implication for lot area, lot width and side street setback variances was approved on the Consent Agenda at the April 11*** City CouiKil meeting. Planning Staff Recommendation 1 • J l*. I of the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached Resolution. .•err * ■ i' : 4 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-420(8) FILE NO. 05-3092 WHEREAS, Mathew L. Hofmann and Michelle Hofmann, husband and wife (hereinafter *‘the applicants”) are the owners of the property located at 1225 Dickinson Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City ”) and legally described as follows: Lots 9,10,11, and 12, Block 16, including the adjacent half of the vacated alley, Miruietonka Bluffs, Heimepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the “property”); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal 2toning Code Section 78-420(B) to allow lot width, lot area and side street setback variances for construction of a new residence. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS I. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 05-3092. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB, One Family Rural Residential Zoning District which requires a minimum lot area of 2.0 acres in area and a minimum lot width of200’. 3. 4. The property contains 27,086 s.f. or 0.62 acre in area and 135’ in width. The Zoning Code requires a side street setback of 50’ in the RR-IB Zoning District. 5.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on March 21,2005 and recommended approval of variances based on the following findings: Page 1 of 5 J ri 6. 7. a. No additional land is available for acquisition by the applicants to make the property conforming in area. b. The property is served with municipal sewer. A single family residence has existed on the property for many years. c. The size of the proposed residence and property is consistent with other approved development in the neighborhood. d. The ^plicants have agreed to a self imposed 30% hardcover limit although the property is located in the 500* - 1000’ hardcover zone. e. The proposed 30* side street setback is supported by the small size of the lot and because the 30’ setback will not be inconsistent with that of other home in the Minnetonka Bluffs neighborhood. The side street is a dead end serving two other homes. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning distiict; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 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 78-420 Subdivision B to allow lot width, lot area, and side street setback variances in order to construct a new single family residence, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of S I... V-* *rim 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. Hardcover in the SOO’ - 1000’ zone shall not increase above the level of 8,125.8 s.f. or 30%. Applicants are advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. 3. An>licants shall remove all plastic or fabric liner material from the decorative landscape beds on the property to ensure their permeability as non-hardcover surfaces. 4. Required removals of structure and hardcover shall be completed by inspection of the Demolition Permit. 5. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (April 25,2006). 6. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishuble as a misdemeanor. 7. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants’ heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 25"* day of April, 2005. Page 3 of 5 ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before n e on this _ day of j 2005 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public V. y;/;. Page 4 of 5 .i' STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instnunent was acknowledged before me on this _ day of __, 2005 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this__day of 2005 by Mathew L. Hofmann, husband of Michelle Hofmaiui. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this__day of by Michelle Hofmann, wife of Mathew L. Hofinann. .,2005 Notary Public Page 5 of 5 L ■ .t t^3n~-A c : ■MON kum tAMTMTV KWI MN MM OIV-97I.OO MVDir DICKENSON STREET 1 kl SAMTMIY KWa MN & a 1®. © .)• •. ' ■<' '■ •' •' y48 / / .• y ^ I' SWDO'OOMr ______ **• I / / / :r.‘M V 1 T ....J-- / / ••'■ I I .I / / eh>9>^J :) y I j./# .............-I l/t A I --'-4 1 r I CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kcll^ Parkway P.O. Box 66 Cryital Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING PILE 05-3092 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: April 12,2005 TO: Mathew A Mkhdlc Hotaaaa 15472 FiUaMre St NW Elk River, MN 55330 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: VariaBCca DATE OF MEETING: April 11,2005 VOTE: 4 FOR 0 AGAINST Mottos: To approve per the findings and conditions of the staff report previously mailed to you. Applicant*s next scheduled meeting (for resolution approval) is confirmed as: City CooBcll - April 25,2005 - Meeting starts at 7:00 pm______ If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approvri by the City Council. If you have questions please call Melanie Curtis, City Planner, at 952.249.4627. r Exhibit B Date AppHcalioR Received: 02>23>95 Date Application Complete: 03-17-OS 60-Day Review Period Eipiration: 05-17-05 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: April 4,2005 Item No. DcpartmcBt Approval: Name: Melanie Curtis ii^) Title: City Planner ^ Admiaistralor Approval:Agenda Section: Item Description: #05-3092 - Mathew &. Michelle Hofmann - 1225 Dickinson St - Variances Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: RR-IB, One Family Rural Residential, 2-acres/200* 0.62 acre (27,086 s.f.) 135’ List of Exhibits: A. PC Action Notice dated 03-22-05 B. PC Memo & Exhibits of 03-14-05 C. Draft PC Minutes Applicatloa Summary: The applicants are requesting lot width, lot area and a side street setback variance in order to rebuild a new single family residence on a property 135* wide and 0.60 acre where 200’ of width and 2 acres are required. Additionally, the applicants are requesting a side street setback variance to construct the proposed home 30* from the side street where a 50* setback is required. Planning Commission Recommendation On March 21,2005, Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the lot area, lot width, and side street setback variances. Discussion The applicants originally requested a 35* setback from the side street, but during the meeting the applicants discussed an additional 5* side street setback variance due to the sloping topography to the east of the lot. The Planning Commission agreed with the additional 5* variance however wanted to restrict the applicants to the extent of the footprint as proposed on .he site plan. The applicants were unaware of the restriction on the footprint size until they received the Planning Commission Action Notice after the meeting. At that time they met with staff to discuss options. At 20.7% their proposal is well under the hardcover limit and below the structural coverage limit with 10.5% lot coverage proposed. The applicants would like to ask the Council to consider their lot width, lot area and side street setback variances without tying the approvals to specific house footprint dimensions. The applicants would like to be able to alter the house footprint dimensions within the approved side setback and allowed building footprint areas and the structural coverage and hardcover limits. As a concession, the applicants have agreed to commit to a plan ^ch does not exceed 30% hardcover although the property is within a 35% hardcover zone. Ptanning Staff RccoaiBicadatloB Staff reemnmends approval of the variances and supports the applicants ’ updated request for an open building footprint plan within the approved parameters. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Direct staff to draft a Resolution reflecting Council’s action. «P- ■ 'r ■ ■'■•ilf) *«'' ■’ !’ ■ A?. »|i ' i • 4 - Miaw* I LMi. V : c ' A CITY OF ORONO 27S0 Kdlcy Parkway POBoiM ZONING nLE 05-3092 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Crystal Bay, MN SS323 952J49.4m DATE OF NOTICE: March 22,2005 TO: Mathew A Michelle Hofmann 15472 Fillmore St NW Elk River, MN 55330 COPIES: TYPE OF REQUEST: Variances DATE OF MEETING: March 21,2005 Plannini Coaunission recommended as follows: Afjproval of lot width, lot area variances and approval of the amended variance request for a 30’ side street setback from Keene Avenue in conjunction with construction of a new home with the proposed 65’ x 40’ footprint. VOTE;6 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Connell-April 11,2005-Meeting starts at 7:00nm If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available fifom the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call City Planner, Melanie Curtis at 952.249.4627. ft iih k rrafiirfniiAi m niiiiS 7. MS-3092 MATTHEW HOFFMAN, ON BEHALF OF CAMELOT CONSTRUCTION, INC., 1225 DICKENSON STREET, VARIANCES, 7:22 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. Matthew HofTman, Applicant, was present Curtis stated the applicant is requesting lot width, lot area, and a side street setback variance in order to rebuild a new single-family residence on a property 135 feet side and .60 acre where 200 feet of width and two acres are required. The applicant is requesting the side street setback variance to construct the•m' proposed home 35 feet from the side street where a 50-foot setback is required. Staff recommends approval of the lot width and lot area variance for a home rebuild on this property. Additionally, if the Planning Commission finds the 50-foot side street requirement to be a hardship for this property, a side street setback variance would be appropriate. Curtis noted the proposed driveway curb cut is wider than 20 feet, which would have to be reduced to 20 feet or less. HofAnan indicated idw landscape plan has been revised and that the curb cut for the driveway has been reduced. Hoffman inquir^ whether he could have a 35-foot setback rather than 30 feet from the street. Rahn inquired why the applicant is requesting the additional five feet. ^ ^Hollinan indicated there are steep slopes in that area. Hoffman noted the existing residence is located seven or eight feet from Keene Avenue. There were no public comments regarding this application. Rahn commented he does not have a problem with this application with the 30-foot setback. Bremer inquired whether the footprint would remain the same. Hoffman indicated he is considering adding five feet to the house. Rahn stated he would be opposed to adding to the existing footprint. Rahn stated the Planning Commission hu to deal with what is being proposed tonight and that the applicant could table his application if he would like to redesign his plans. III l4 I III -r*nir-¥ T»i»Ik il |B(| 111 I -Ki • 1 n iw iiri^i -Into uriii¥i I > '*■ ikf» • k 11 |X*1 iH ITk 1 iTW Il-J 1 K^MTiT* III II I 1 M Ti I i.iiiii •nid • I I •]ik¥ it [•1 iXiTii7iT71Gll ' ■ • lU'i’i K« iH X) wm ■imM . : .• V •• . s'.:'- . I* . IV; in iia I liVill. ITI • I -■*(1 I I I i ' i (-{i I nil I ;.• • ••: •• ■. • ••;, J •4 1 Exhibit B pM^Eios-aow^AlllUll » l4M«reh2005 Page 1 0(4 Data AppIkalioB Received: I2>23^)5 Date Application Contldcrcd ai Compkle: 03-17-05 <e-Day Review Period Expiree: tS-17-05 To;Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Fron: Date: Sabjcct: Melanie Curtis, City Planner March 14,2005 05-3092, Mathew & Michelle Hofmann, 1225 Dickenson Street, Side Street Setback, Lot Area & Lot Width Variance Public Hearing Zoafaig Distrid; Lot Area: RR-IB, Oae Family Rural Resideatial District, 2 acre/200’ 0.62 acre (27,086 s.f) A§^taMon Summary: The applicants are requesting lot width, lot area and a side street setback variance in order to rebuild a new single family residence on a property 135’ wide and 0.60 acre where200* of width and 2 acres are required. Additionally, the an)licants are requesting a side street setback variance to construct the proposed home 35’ from the side street where a 50’ setback is required. ____________________ Staff RecommeadatUm: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the lot width and lot area variance for a home rebuild on this property. Additionally, should the Planning Commission find the 50’ side street setback requirement to be a hardship for this property a side street setback variance may be appropriate. Hardship: The existing property is the result of the combination of 4-50' lots and does not meet the District minimum requirements for area or width measured at the front lot line. Pcrtiueit Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-420. Area, height, lot width and yard requirements. (a) Height. No structure or building in any RR-IB district shall exceed 2 1/2 stories or 30 feet in height except as provided in section 78-1366. (b) Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be observed: Lot Area (acres) Lot Width (feel) Front Yard (leel) Side Yard (ftel) Side Yard Adjacent to Sireci (feet) Rear Yard (feet) 2 200 50 30 SO SO L., • •» f ‘ • F r’,* 1 FILE i 05-3092 14 March 2005 Page 2 of 4 List of Exhibits A. Application B. Ha^hip Documentation Form C. Existing & Proposed Survey/Site Plan D. Proposed Plans and Elevations E. Landscape Plan F. Submitted Hardcover Calculations G. Memo from the City Engineer H. Letter from Applicant I. Property Owners List J. Plat Map BackgroMd The applicants are the owners of the property at 1225 Dickenson Street. The property is 0.62 acres in area where 2 acres is required as well as 135’ of lot width measured at the front lot line where 200 ’ is required. Lot width and lot area variances are required as the ^)plicants would like to build a new single family residence on the property. With the current proposal the applicants also require a side street setback variance in order to construct the home 30 ’ from Keene Avenue (a dead end street) where a 50’ side street setback is required. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot Aren/Width; RR-IB Lot Area Lot Width Required S7,I20s.f. (2 acres)200 ’ Actual 27.086 s.f. (0.62 acre)135’ Setbacks; RR-IB Required Existiai Proposed Front 50’8.5’50’ Rear 50’130’110’ home 94 ’deck Side Street 50’7’30’ East Side 30’65.9 ’33.4’ Stiuctural Coveraae; The proposed home will be below the 15% structural coverage limit. Total Lot Area Total Structural Coveraac 27.086 s.r. (0.62 acre)Allowed: 4.062.9 s.f. (15%) Proposed: 2,859 s.f (10.5%) r • FILE #05-3092 14 March 2005 Paga3of4 Hardcover CakalatioBi; Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zoae Allowed Hardcover Extetiog Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 500-1000 27,086 s.f.9,480 s.f. (35%) 2,186 s.f.* (8%) 5,616 s.f. (20.7 %) After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Lot Area and Lot Width Variances The applicants’ property is the result of the combination of 4 - 50’x 135’ lots with a total area of 27,086 s.f. and lot width of 135’ where 87,120 s.f. in area and 200’ of width is required. These variances are required to rebuild any home on this property. Side Street Setback Variance The applicants have proposed a 40’x 65’ home situated with the front door facing Dickinson Street and the garage accessing off of Keene Avenue. This proposal meets the 50’ front and rear yard setbacks as well as the 30’ side yard setback. However the proposed house does not meet the required 50’ side street setback rather is proposed to be located at 35’from the side street property line and 52.5’ from the traveled right-of-way. Additioruliy, the curb cut of the driveway is not permitted at a width greater than 20’ at the street. The driveway as proposed would need to be reduced at the curb. Hardship Statement Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis /n eomMUttU^ appHcaHom for vortonce, Ike PtomiiHg Commtahn shell consider the effect of Ike prepeoed rorlence npon Ike keohk, spfety end welfore of Ike community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, llgkt and air, danger of fire, risk to Ike public safety, on values of property In the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from Ike Utera! provisions of the Zoning Code In Instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship 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. Staff finds that there is hardship to justify granting the lot area and lot width variances as the property is a small lot, similar to the rest of the lots in the immediate small lot neighborhood located within a 2-acre zoning district. Regarding the side street setback variance, should the Planning Commission And that due to orientation of the property, the immediate neighborhood, and the nature of the dead end side street there is hardship Justifying a 35’ side street setback a variance may be warranted. Issues for Considcnition Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? FILE# 05-3092 14 March 2005 Paga4of4 Staff Rcconneadatton If the Planning Commission feels (here are sufficient hardships to justify granting the variances as presented, then a recommendation for approval may be appropriate. If Planning Commission wishes to maintain a 50* setback from the side street, then a redesign or reorientation of the proposed home may be necessary. The applicant should be asked to address the concerns raised in the City Engineer’s letter. Council will be asked to address this applicant should be responsible for road upgrades. / ,g ;■ . J y tAiTibn street Addmss: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 5S3S6 Main: 952-2404600 fax: 952-2404616 MaUng Address: . P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 Application# Date Received: ^iZ^JOfr Amount Paid: Jbob- Staff: Fee: S600 Renewal: $300 After-the-fect: $1.200 Double Fee This applicalion form must be completed in full. App scant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: ^ . Site Address: Property identifica^ Number (PIN): <D^ I / "7.^ 331OC H n (Attach legal description to application if included on Date Property Acquired (montIVyear): IfmCSra Ye Present use of prope^: pf Residential D Other__ Zoning District: KIZ>^ I & iecluded on the survey.) Yes, I own the adjacent parcels. APPLICANT INFORMATION: (CompMs legal nar es and marital status required tor each interested party) Name. AtCt»gcc€^ ___ ______ Phone (home). _________Phone (work): ---------- Address: /^73i P/tc^on^ — Email: ^ Wf ULboo a g "7 ^ — OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete ImsI names and marital status required for each interested rarty) . Marne' rVtlTTftg*^ (rv^rT/ln^g3^ rAlcH^ccg L/^An.(iiBO_Y Phonefh^^: - Phone(work): Ul^-gT? Address:_______ t<r^72. pt^*^0(Ur CMC- Alt/g/t. >vi<^ — Email: €)Fax: ?*/. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: EstimatedPioject Cost: Describe the request In detailiattach additional sheets if necessary): Jpe>rvi4> o A- e>ii".sf»Vi^^ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- . .*• ■ -x fi: r; - )■ ' application to be processed. 0^ Pre^plication Meeting Forni, completed by a City Planner. Complete Application Form B Completed Hardship Documentation Form Certified Property Owners List — owners within 150' of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance, y Government Center. A-603 300 South 6“* Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 w Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or ^ 11" X17" for reproduction. 0T Xompleted hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet). Dk Topographic survey - including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8.5" x 11" .or 11" X 17" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17"). Additional items may be requested by CHy Staff depending on the scope of the project. * APPLICANT'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or oonsuftant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely rasponsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of its potential merit Applicant ’s Signature: Applicant ’s Signature; Date; ^ _ Date: OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and furtiier authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents». Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of thte request.fication of thte Owner’s Signature; Owner’s Signature; Date; 2/^7/ / . Date: Applicant must have ail submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project i- M 1 i 41:kJtr —: rr \ ? fft < / / / '« 4. .•• •V»-« y ‘v .i.'*Jrf *^U a*»’ UlM ifi: City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form (TNs form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting.*) Street Addirvss: 2750 KeMey Parkway Orcmo, MN 553S6 Maying Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 For Office Use Only: City Planner Main: 952-24IM600 Fax; 952-249-4616 Date/rim^ ZI?ZIO^ : PC Ar^OuCZ. Meeting Date/T^me PC Date What is ^9 purpose Of a pn^ppllcation meeCng? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal, inform them of the procedures and reguirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORRMTION: Site Address: fZZS Oi’ck.^hi 0>y~_3IL Property Identification Number (PIN): _______________________ Zoning District: Size of Property: t7f0Sb s f . DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST>^.$7?€er“ □ Average Setback □ Hardcover □ Other: EQUEST;^: ^Skte'Yard Setback □ Rear Yard Setback □ Lot Coverage ^Lot Area □ Front Yard Setback ^Lot Width Applicanrs j,aA/1< HARDSHIP: Applicant has received the Hardship Documentation Form, initials:mK understands it as rt has been explained to them, and Is aware that it must be completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal variance application. OTHER INFORMATION *Please note: Your variance application will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this form virill be completed by City staff. Date: ^ jy2 jc> SAeolicant Slonature; require you to fUmish certain private or confidential information. You are notified that: 1. The Information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. - ' 3. The information may be shared vdth other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permit or license. 4. If your requested permit or license requires Council action to approve, some information may become public. 5. You have certain rights under M.8.13.04 (see following page) to review private data on yourself. 6. Your fuB name is required to process this application or permit. ______JAM-'i-c th^Ann._______ Address City Pi\/gK State Phone I understand my righto as stated above. Signature ^ %. JJ. rp.y...•".v:O'>■ Iv*t» fk •^1 ’i ’ V ij'- - »,aI ‘3’‘^^e>o j 'nfsttomi I i DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY In accordance with M.S. 13.04. Subd. 2. "Rights of sut^s of data", we would like to inform you that your request for a permit or license from the CKy of Orono or any of Its departments may require you to fUmish certain private or confidential information. You are notified that: 1. The Information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or Hoense requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. 3. The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permit or license. 4. If your requested permit or license requires Council action to approve, some information may become public. 5. You have certain rights under M.S. 13.04 (see following page) to review private data on yourself. 6. Your full name is required to process this application or permit. f\AiCLftiCoJ Address _____________________________ Middle Last City State Phone I un^rstaad my rights as ^aM above lignature f on, I V-. i.-'S V HI<: .*9 P-5S2 I .A r ^6lfB Page 1 of3 ta". we would like to inform you any of its departments may r qualification for the permit or at the City deny the permit or sderal agencies to the extent I to approve, some information age) to review private data on Brmit. __________________________ Zip Phone \ .V HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City. Minnesota State Statue Section 394.27, Subdivision 7 requires that a hardship be demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted. The hardship must be unique to the property as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic situations are nof considered valid hardships, in order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated. HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP? This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a hardship, address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance ia justified. The information the City receives is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation, if you leave something out it will not be considered. Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request (some may not apply); 1. 2. 3. "The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls.” "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner.” , TU«^ <; TVxg ior ”The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.. J - - hOCtJc^t 111%^, II will iivi aiici IIIV V90VIIU0I \#ilaia\iFivi wi uiv ^ ^ .^Qwv V A* . ^9 'Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if ijPyi^able use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter.” 83 WiArr .t i •I ■ Page 3 of 3 12."The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the aoplicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty." n lAc^u^e PtTS -n4g~ \e/t Lt\at»ent fO-t-H-gp oe?u>i4 Hardship Statement Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be described in the above criteria, describe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary): ' - ^ H ■ V . Tm . T •• V''. -'-xidi L*-iI KMCN wm SAMTAIIY wmn MN m afv-f72.oo MVDVT DICKENSON gpNMi.M __STREET m tAMfAHY KWH IM MM 0£V»ttaN k \ © .-• . ^.. . ... ^ a § M s M 9 J 9 _ '■| .A t - : ' C'/'- - ^ ' •• ' '‘i »<Hi0irPi 't t^y 3BE asE ffl BB 3 fn y # • « 1 /f ■ • r«d n^i I9iI iii il! H t J \ • I ftD & W&: 'it. "•’ ■>'.-m.'.!• %’ P FUOL <inii;ii|I il»P S 1 <91 *• .• S I «ie r t 4 I MmimMrn r a: kV, & t4V . I»v .:? -l*-^V-«/ - h*# v-fcf 1 >■••* .vw Y-i#'5A*r .Itir ^• 1 1i1 « - >•«/. <-«r .♦'V _____i’l V^Fuot- t 1; 1 e 0 I I % Ir I 9i\ 1 ^ V 4:'f'tv:.''^;;^/.y^ Wm '.*- ....»1:H■illifci:::);. •• *'i; ' r". *»■•.'•'V'' : ■. -:'-T*-i • , i : 1 *•■ •_* ' 1,'lt i-; &'•ft .■i U".r f : j * i 1^ iHifc ftOMM t f OU /..: ./■■^' ^• ^ i£i.v ' *■ '•!*i « i 1 j 15 f'-"■ ’’1H emu^i r —SelTBACX ZONZ: (CIXCL2 O.VE) 0-T5* r I- r r TS-lfO* TrqgnNG tv zqni A. Kcuie ____________ fcsSSJtiS X X B. Gms8 C Drivewiy X X D. Skiiwtik X X E PitiorDeck X X F. Undscipt Unckrliio By Ptisiie X X X C. Other total hardcover w zone TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ♦ B ____X 100 »onposip WARPCQVra in ZONE A. HAom WMfli Cm X X X a G«it c Drivtwiy X X D. Sidewalk X X E PadcyOeck X X p. Underioia By PIxKse X X X C. Other •total KARDCOYaR IN ZONE total property area in zone ♦ 3 ____X 100 CO’/ rjO-iQOO’^<====xr- 1 S-St. UCe S-". SJ- S.r. s=. (MS’S5. S=. ioQ Sx. S.r. Sx. Si^. S.F. SJ. S.F. 3g-S.F. 2,16^<0 SF. SS. ■ H •f S.F. • lO SJF. 1 -JZ-_SJ. / • r. >S.F. i^HS SJf. SJf. 10 0*5 SJ. SJ. 2.S3_S.F. •E.VY____S.F. SJ. 3»r. S.F. \W S.r. 5^U»•SJ. S^. y« *<Tti - •'** j * • * v j Kt\ fm/r •n ^ *.• • •u 1 .;p : I 1 t : ! i 1/ Isonestroo Rosene vSAnderlik& |\|| Associates Engineers & Architects 2335 Vilest Highway 36 • St. Paul. MN 55113 Office: 651*636-4600 • Fax: 651-636-1311 www.bonestroo.com March 10.200S Mt. Melanie Curtia Planner CityofOrono Post Oflice Box 66 Ciystal Bay. MN SS323 deceived MAK 11 2005 CITY OF ORONO 122S Dickenson Pile No. 139-OS-O Plat No. OS-3092 Dear Melanie: We have reviewed the aite plan dated 2>3-OS for the proposed home construction at 122S Dickenson. The improvements include the removal of an existing home and construction of a new home. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: The plans should be revised to include existing contoun at least SO-feet beyond the south and east lot lines. The plans should include the proposed lower level and first floor elevations. Additional information should be provided regarding the proposed sanitary sewer connectioa Will this home be served firom the existing sewer stub or is a new connection planned? If the plan is to abandon the existing stub and construct a new connection details should be provided wtui the plans for the new connection and abandoning tlie existing connection. When the property to the south developed a couple years ago the city required the developer to pave the portion of Keene Avenue that abutted that property. The reason for this was due to the street grades on Keene Avenue and the potential for erosion. It would make sense to finish paving Keene Avenue north to Dickenson Street, possibly as part of this project The city should consider what, if any. street improvement contribution the applicant should provide as part of this application. Plans should include gutter and downspout information keeping in mind that storm water should not be routed over retaining walls and should be directed towards side y^ swalro and not towards adjoining properties. The grading plan should incorporate a swale east of the proposed home to contain storm water on the subject property. Fiiud plans should include erosion and sediment control details and design. A landscape plan should be provided that incorporates best management practices to slow storm water runolT. particularly water discharging to the south and east If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly. BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK A ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: OtcgGappa.CityofOroao Bruoe Vaitg. City of Orono • St. Paul. St. Cloud. Rochester. Willmar. MN • Milwaukee. Wl • Chicago. IL AmnwHM ActtwVCxMl Op»«rtMwli|r SipHyir anS SipUyi OwmU h J -♦ ' ^ :v h March 17^005 As per the last communication I received frcun the city of Orono I have had my surveyor make the necessary changes to the survey that were requested. In reference to the sewer cranection, it is my intention to use the existing sewer stub for the new construction. In reference to the gutter and downqxuit information requested I have mariced the downqxwtsonthehouseplan. Tte down^xuits are to be ran down alongside the house and thra terminated undoground with draintile as to the existing contours and swales. -c. ; ' ■' v.'A .“■ ‘•V c [uJ m F/- ' ' r-. • •/< Thank you, Mathew Hofouuui Camelot Construction f-r ' ■■ . ' •/ "- :V/ '■ '"w ■' *•; ^ “■ ifr . (* ' * r tk..-. - MHl^An:VSm$ 31 0211723310002 tOPADDR 1230 DICKENSON ST ^ERNAME WWMCOUIREANMMCGUIRE OCFAYER WW MCGUIRE AN M MCGUIRE KME/ADDR 1210 DICKENSON ST WAYZATAMN 55391 31 0211723310021 tORADDR 539 KEENEAVE WERNAME DHB0YD4CKB0YD OCR AYER DUSTIN H BOYD \ME/ADDR 539KEENEAVE WAYZATAMN 55391 31 0211723310042 iORADDR 561 KEENEAVE AfNERNAME DONALDEAX)ANHEKDAVIDSON OCPAYER DONALD E A X3ANNEK DAVIDSON 4ME/ADOR 561 KEENEAVE WAYZATAMN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 31 0211723310003 PROPADDR 410 RUSSELL AVE OWNER NAME JOSEPHINE B CARPENTER TAXPAYER JOSEPHINES CARPENTER NAME/ADDR PO BOX 659 WAYZATAMN 55391 31 0211723310040 PROPADDR 1205 DICKENSON ST OWNER NAME AMY LKLAERS AJOHN KLAERS TAXPAYER AMYLKLAERSAJOHNKLAERS NAME/ADDR 1205 DICKENSON ST WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0211723310047 PROPADDR 450 ORONOORCHARDRDS OWNER NAME KEVIN GARNETT TAXPAYER KEVIN GAR^V^• NAME/ADDR 601 CARLSON PKWY 6615 MINNETONKA MN 55305 1 38 02II7233I0027 PROP ADDR I2SS DICKENSON ST OWNER NAME MARION J DETTIOFF TAXPAYER MARION J DETTLOFF NAME/ADDR I25S DICKENSON ST WAYZATAMN SS39I 31 02II7233I004I PROPADDR SS9 RUSSELL AVE OWNER NAME PC PETERSEN ATJENSTAD TAXPAYER PCARY PETERSEN NAME//VDDR SS9 RUSSELL AVE WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0211723310048 PROPADDR 1225 DICKENSON ST OWNER NAME M L HOFMANN A M HOFMANN TAXPAYER MATHEW L HOFMANN NAME/ADDR 1225 DICKENSON ST WAYZATAMN 55391 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENtT^ T^E BES OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. ^ S;’^ ■ PAGE: I Ch p ‘t J i i s : frti = /*'• V. Ditc Application Received: 3-3-05 Date Appikatioa Coaiidered as Complete: 3-30-05 60-Day Review Period Espires: 5-29-05 COi SArpTiigQ APR 2 5 2005 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ORONO Date: April 20,2005 Item No.: Department Approval: Name: Janice Oundlaclv^ Title: City Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: IIOS-3099, Mamix A Mary Guillaume, 3060 North Shore Drive Variance - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR- IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (I acre minimum) 1.43 acres (62,308 s.f.) 106.59* @ shoreline; 109* @ 75’ setback (140* minimum) List of Exhibits A - Resolution per Planning Commission Reconunendation B - PC Action Notice 4-19-05 C - PC Memo and Exhibits of 4-4-05 Af^Ucadon Summary: Applicant requests the following variances in order to construct a deck off the main level of a walk-out style home, on the lake side, a covered entry over existing hardcover, and a pergola: 1. Hardcover variance for the 0-75’ zone to permit 12.7% hardcover when 0% is normally allowed and 14% currently exists. 2. Lake setback variance to permit a lake setback of 58* (deck) when 75* is normally required and a 41 ’ setback currently exists (patio). 3. Hardcover variance for the 75*-250* zone to permit 33.6% hardcover when 25% is normally allowed and 33.9% currently exists. Plamiing Commissioii Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended 7-0 to approve the request as submitted in accordance with the staff recommendation and removal of an additional 192 s.f. of hardcover within the 75’-250* zone. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNOL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting 0-75’ and 7S*-250 ’ zone hardcover variances and a lake setfMck variance for 3060 North Shore Drive. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1288 (A) (B) AND 78-1279 (1) ^ FILE NO. 05-3099 WHEREAS, Mamix Ouillaume and Mary T. Guillaume, husband and wife (hereinafter **the q)plicants**) are the owners of the property located at 3060 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City**) and legally described as follows: Tract A, except the highway. Registered Land Survey No. 717, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the “property**); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made qiplication to the City of Orono for hardcover and lake setback variances to Orono Municipal 2U>ning Code ^tions 78- 1288 (A) (B) and 78-1279 (1) to allow construction of a deck off the lake side main level ot a walk-out style home including a covered entry over existing hardcover, and a pergola. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. This iq)plication was reviewed as Zoning File 05-3099. The pro perty is located in the LR - IB Zoning District which requires a minimum lot area of 1.0 acres and a minimum lot width of 140 feet. The applicant*s property is 1.43 acres in area and 107* in width at the shoreline and 109* in width at the 75* setback. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on April 18,2005 and recommended approval of the variances based on the following findings: Page 1 of 5 4. 5. a. A patio located closer to the lake than the proposed deck will be removed and allow for a wider un-obstmcted lake yard. b. The ai^licants have agreed to remove 236 s.f. of existing hardcover in conjunction with construction of the proposed deck, covered entry and pergola. This results in a net reduction from existing 75’-250' hardcover from 33.9% to 32.6%. c. The location of the existing house less than 75’ from the shoreline makes it impossible to construct a lake side deck without approval of hardcover and lake setback variances. d. The property consists of all four hardcover zones with the 250’-500’ and 500’-1,000 ’ zone well under allowed hardcover percentages. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and reconunendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do net apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would rmt adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCXUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants hardcover and lake setback variances to Onmo Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-1288 (A) (B) and 78-1279 (1) to allow construction of a deck off the lake side main level of a u^-out style home including a covered entry over existing hardcover, and a pergola, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 5 •M. 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant and aiuiotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the she plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. Hardcover in the 0-75 ’ zone shall not increase above the level of 1,066 s.f. or 12.7%. Hardcover in the 75’-2S0 ’ zone shall be limited to 6,576 s.f. or 32.6% per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit A. Applicant is advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or change the fwture of existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. 3. The applicant shall remove an additional 192 s.f. of hardcover within the 75’-250’ zone than what is shown on the proposed survey. This brings the allowed hardcover percentage in the 75’-250’ zone to 32.6% where 33.6% was proposed. 4. Applicant shall remove all plastic or fabric liner material from the decorative landscape beds on the property to ensure their permeability as non-hardcover surfaces. S. Required removals of structure and hardcover shall be completed prior to the first inspection for the proposed covered entry, deck and pergola. 6. 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 within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variances will expire on that date (April 25,2006). 7. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically termiiuite any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 8. *rhe undersigned applicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants’ heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to tlw recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 I fr h :4.‘ Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 25*** day of April, 2005. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owneifs) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of , 2005 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. ’• •;Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The fiwegoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of ^ 2005 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota, 1 , ---------^ ------------------ -- ^ municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This iiutnuneiit was acknowledged before me this__day of .2005 by Mamix Ouillaume, husband of Mary T. Guillaume, husband and wife. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before m.* this__day of by Mary T. Guillaume, wife of Mamix Guillaume, husband and wife. . 2005 iiK. m r Notary Public m;.' f t-m mm Page 5 of 5 I 1 wit in ON I <2€mo\/ac EXHIBIT A >•'- •* -pit AfPUtAiOT MUST AtSO MMW/6 ADPITIO/JAL. Ml s-f. Of W|I»J 1HE -®'-Z5'0' I 70^6 fOi?. A 75'-i56' Of 3Z.(»y» fo BE (ZEM^VED fEREMoU o^inc <KS C)-T5' rtM^P«>V6|l. APf POUBP •• >,on.»^ ov nn^ NV S£ALG*rc3o‘ >~ f >JU* 4>^ r '!':V •4- ; CITY OF ORONO 27S0 Kdicy Parkway P.O. Bok 66 Crystal Bay, MN SS323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE: 05-3099 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: April 19,2005 TO:Mary A Mamix Guillaume 3060 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION:0-75 ’ A 75 ’-250 ’ Hardcover Variances, Lake Setback Variance DATE OF MEETING: April 18,2005 Planaiag Commlsiion recommended as follows: To approve the application as submitted stipulating the following; 1. The area beneath the pergola remain grassed so as to remain pervious, 2. Removal of the lake side patio within the 0-75 ’ zone, 3. Removal of the concrete walk within the 0-75 ’ and 75 ’-250 ’ zone around the north side of the detached garage, and 4. Removal of 192 s.f. of hardcover of the applicants choosing somewhere within the 75 ’-250 ’ zone. VOTE:FDR AGAINST Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is conflrmed as: City Connell - Monday, April 25,2005; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they are available from fte City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Gundlach at 952-249-4623. .■r . = ; •;* .' ••• - *■ ■ m i1 W5-3099 April 18.2005 Pag! I ofS Dite Application Received: 3-3-05 Date Application Couidered at Complete: 3-30-05 60-Day Review Period Eipircs: 5-2!M)5 To:Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Janice Gundlach, City Planner]^^ Date:April 4,2005 Subject:#05-3099, Mamix & Mary Guillaume, 3060 North Shore Drive - 0-75’ & 75’-250’ Hardcover Variances, Lake Setback Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre min.) 1.43 acres (62,308 s.f.) 106.59’ @ shoreline; 109’ @ 75’ setback (140’ minimum) AppNcaiioH Summaty: Applicant requests tlie following variances in order to construct a deck off the main level of a walk-out style home, on the lake side, a covered entry over existing hardcover, and a pergola: 1. Hardcover variance for the 0-75’ zone to permit 12.7% hardcover when 0% is normally allowed and 14% currently exists. 2. Lake setback variance to permit a lake setback of 58’ (deck) when 75* is normally required and a 41 ’ setback currently exists (patio). 3. Hardcover variance for the 75’-250’ zone to permit 33.6% hardcover when 25% is normally allowed and 33.9% currently exists. St^ Recommendation: Staff recommends approval as submitted witli the stipulation that the area beneath the pergola ren.^in grassed so as to remain pervious, including removal of the lake side patio within the 0-75’ zone and concrete w^k within the 0-75’ and 75’-250’ zones around the north side of the detached garage. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (a) No hard cover or impervious surface shall be placed, located or constructed within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of any lake or tributary, except for stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in this Code. (b) Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OHWL, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Between 250 feet and 500 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 30 percent hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 35 percent hardcover. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(L)), 2-24-1992) ri I #05-3099 April 18.2005 PigelofS Sec. 78-1279. Placement of structures on lots. When more than one setback applies to a site, structures and faciliUes must be located to meet all setbacks. Structures shall be located as follows: (1) Structure and on-site sewerage system setbacks (in feet) from ordinary Sitkacki Sewage Public Water___________Structure Treatment Ctaisificatioa__________Unsewcfcd Sewered System NE ISO ISO ISO RD too 7S 75 GD 75 75 75 Tributary too 75 75 List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applications Exhibit B - Hardship Documentation Form Exhibit C - Existing and Proposed Survey Exhibit D - Hardcover Calculation Worksheets Exhibit E - Addition/Removal Plan Exhibit F - Site Plan of Proposed Entry and Pergola Exhibit G - Elevation of Proposed Covered Entry Exhibit H - Description of Proposed Deck Exhibit I - Floor Plan of Proposed Deck Exhibit J - Photographs Exhibit K - Property Owners List Exhibit L - Plat Map Background Prior to submitting application for hardcover and lake setback variances, the applicant met with staff to discuss the likelihood of gaining i^>proval for a deck and covered entry.'pergola. At that time the iq)plicant was instruct^ to not request any additional hardcover and that existing hardcover would have to be removed, at a minimum, in order to accommodate the requested deck and covered entry/pergola. The applicant was advised that this was typically how similar requests have been reviewed by staff, the Planning Commission, and Council. The applicant has not proposed any increases in existing hardcover levels. At the time of the pre-applicant meeting staff understood the deck to be at-grade, not elevated. L .LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET LR-IB Lot Area Lot Width Required 43,560 s.f. (1.0 acre)140 ’ Actual 62,306 s.f. (1.43 acres)106.59 ’ @ Shoreline — - ■: ! M)S-3099 April IS. 2005 Page 3 of5 109’ @ 75 ’ Setback LR-IB Required Existing Proposed Front N/A N/A N/A Rear 30 ’375 ’ house 335 ’shed NO CHANGE Left Side (SW)10’ 8.6’ house 2.5 ’ shed 8’ retaining wall 12.5 patio Removal of patio 12.5 off lot line Right Side (NE)10’ 31.5 house 15.7’ detached garage 28’ proposed deck Lakeshore 75 ’41’ patio 60 ’ house 58’ proposed deck Average Lakeshore 53 ’ - 60 ’ (NE-SW)41’(patio: non- conforming)58’ (conforming) Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 62,308 s.f. (1.43 acres)Allowed: 9,346 s.f. (15%) Proposed: 3,564 s.f. (5.7%) Hardcover Calculations Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75 8,399 s.f.Os.f (0%) 1,226 s.f* (14%) 1,066 s.f. (12.7%) 75 - 250 20,166 s.f.5,041.5 s.f (25%) 6,844 s.f* (33.9%) 6,768 s.f (33.6%) 250 - 500 31,729 s.f 9,519 s.f (30%) 2,827 s.f* (9»/o)NO CHANGE 500-1000 2,014 s.f 705 s.f (35%) 159 s.f* (8%)NO CHANGE After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds 0-7S* Hardcover Variance The applicants are requesting to construct a lake side deck at the northeastern comer of their home. This deck is fully within the 0-75 ’ zone as is much of the home. The applicants have proposed to remove the patio located off the southwestern comer of the home in an effort to not increase the amount of hardcover in the zone. While a net #05-3099 A|>ril 18,2005 Page 4 of 5 decrease of 160 s.f. results, a variance is required as 12.7% hardcover will remain where 0% is normally allowed and 14% currently exists. 75*-250 ’ Hardcover Variance The applicants arc proposing to construct a roof over the existing entry way and stoop and also a pergola just to the east of the entryway. The covered entry will be placed over existing hardcover and only the posts (14 s.f.) for the pergola arc considered hardcover. The applicants h''ve proposed to remove a concrete walk around the north side of the detached garage to ensure no increases in hardcover result. While a net decrease of 76 s.f. is proposed, a hardcover variance is necessaiy as 33.6% hardcover will remain when 2S% is normally allowed and 33.9% currently exists. Lake Setback Variance The applicants have proposed to construct a deck located on the lake side of the home off the main floor of a walk-out style home. The existing home exists within 75 ’ of the lake at a setback of 60*. Currently a patio also exists on the lake side of the home at a setback of 41*. The {q)plicants have proposed to remove this patio and construct a 15 ’ x 15 ’ deck where an existing 6’ x 14’ patio exists at the NE comer of the home. A variance is required as a 75 ’ lake setback is normally required and a 58 ’ lake setback is requested for the proposed deck. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis /H coittUerlMg appllcatloHsfor variance, the Planning Conunlssion shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, spfety and welfare of the conununity, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to thepnbUc safety, and the effect on values of property In the surrounding area. The Planning Conutrisshn shall consider reconunending approval for variances from the lUeral provisions of the Zoning Code In instancLs where their Uriel utforcement would cause undue hardship because of cIrcumUances unique to the InJ-' > ual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when It Is demonuraled that such actions will be in keepint vlth the spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds there is a valid hardship to support granting of the requested variance to allow the lakeside deck and that the hardship is the location of the existing home on the lot. The home sits within 75 ’ of the lake and was constructed prior to 1970, where the 75 ’ setback was adopted around 1973. Also, the proposed deck would not get any closer to the lake than the existing home and the homes on both sides of the applicants’ sit within 75 ’ of the lake, not altering the existing character. Therefore, any desire to have a lakeside deck, short of removing the existing home, would require variances. The applicant has proposed to remove a patio in the lake yard at the southwest corner of the home to accommodate the hardcover for the deck. In doing this, hardcover will be pulled back an additional 17’ within the required 75 ’ setback. Lastly, removal of that patio will eliminate an existing non-conformity as it does not meet the required average J ^1 s' 1 1 %v. m-v- W5-3099 April 11, ZOOS PaceSofS lakesbore setback and a net decrease of 160 s.f. will result. While staff recognizes that technically a trade for non-structural hardcover for structural hardcover is requested, the benefits of this outweigh the negatives as noted above. Also, it should be noted that the deck will not be fully elevated as it will be located off the main level of a walk-out style home rather than ccmipletely elevated off a second story for example. Staff also finds there are valid hardships to support granting a hardcover variance for the 7S*-2S0* zone, as is necessary for the proposed covered entry and pergola. The property is approximately 536 ’ in length containing all 4 hardcover zones. The hardship again lies in the location of the house and secondly, the existing hardcover. The proposed covered entry will be located above existing hardcover and the posts for the pergola are minimal at 14 s.f. The applicants have proposed to remove a concrete walk around the detached garage to compensate for the proposal. While both of these proposed features, covered entry and pergola, are considered structural the property complies with the 1 S% structural coverage limit Again, non-structural hardcover is being traded for structural hardcover and the Planning Commission should discuss the reasonableness of the proposed covered entry in relation to the proposed removals in making a recommendation. The Planning Conunission could also choose to request additional hardcover removals, possibly in driveway hardcover. Issues for Cousidenition 1. Do the benefits of trading non-structural hardcover for structural hardcover out-weigh the negatives in relation to approving the lakeside deck? What about tliu covered entry and pergola? 2. Are the requests reasonable? 3. Could additional hardcover be removed within the 75’-250’ zone? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this iqpplication? Staff Rccoremeudatioa Staff recommends approval as submitted with the stipulation that the area beneath the pergola remain gras^ so as to remain pervious, including removal of the lake side patio within the 0-75’ zone and concrete walk within the 0-75’ and 75’-2S0’ zones around the north side of the detached garage (these removals will accommodate a total reduction of 236 s.f. of hardcover on the property). The Planning Commission should determine if additional driveway hardcover could be removed within the 75’-250’ zone to further justify the trading of non-structural hardcover for structural hardcover. Proposed is a net reduction of 76 s.f. E:iiil City of Orono Variance Application EXHIBIT A I 4 : street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Main: 952-249-4600 fax: 952-249-4616 MaHIng Address: . P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 553230066 Application# Oft Date Received: Amount Paid; jyo6.^ Staff; _ JHJih ~ Fee:$600 Renewal: $300 After-the-fact $1,200 Double Fee This application form must be completed in full. App icant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the appiication. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: (PIN):Property Identification Number (PIN): M A ^ ^ SO • A C a« A it ~ _ . _ . W K h/A^iJrA MA/ K'CJO/ (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year): Yes. I own the adjacent parcels. Present use of property: Ifrt^esldential □ Other______________________________ Zoning District: Lfi~ //Q________ APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal nares and marital status required for each interested party) AuAte/9us/^o / _________ Phone (work): ^ Name: MMU 4 m AAA/iA Ao/ Phone (home)r ^ Address: S/i b o 9^^ <HojLe /)JPil/c //2 4/ k/^tA?Ar4 ju/u 4Vy^/ F»: .Email: A^APru/JrA, ^ y4rsi . Z’nju - S293 OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names s.nd marital status required for each interested party) Name: MA au f mA p/u /x A u J /'/^o rnAA^A ^ ________ PhonePhDne(work): //2 Address: A'OJtrH f/YOAi^ A Al/'wAfiArA m A' S’^J Fax: VEmail: A^apaz /Jt A ^ AoL.f 7/ - DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost: $ //. Describe the rMuest in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): K/&. .. //Jyi? >. following Information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be processed. CT Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. BT Completed Application Form eT Completed Hardship Documentation Form _ . u , .j i * □ Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150’ of the subject property, labels and plat map. List labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance, Government Center, A-603 300 South 6“* Street, Minneapolis, telet^hone 612-348-5910 □ Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" X17" for reproduction. □ Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet). Topographic survey -• including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8.5 x 11 ^ or 11" x 17" for reproduction. « » « « □ Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17 ). □ Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. * APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT; u m The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regai Applicant's Signature: Applicant’s Signature: igan^s of its potential merit 'avifmisB.mi Date: f a v~ Uri(_ ^ oy\A — D3t6^ f OWNER’S ACKNOWLEDGEMEN-h . w. The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents, Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigatioirand verification of this request. Owner's Signature; Owner’s Signature: jatiQfrbnd verification of this Date: J Date: /// to ;rrb\ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month. Appiicsfits must b® prasont 8t 8ll pchodulod roviow iriMtinp® of tho PlHnning Coimulssion snd Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend In place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. vi.1( ■a, n 'Cv./ji kJ 'Zj III i . City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form . _ ^ ^ ^ ft • ae A*(This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting.*) Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN S5356 MaKIng AMress: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Main: 952-249-4600 Fax: 952-249-4616 For Office Use Only: § City Planner Meetina Datemmi; 'bltiOT A7/r/W PC Date:msTiis What la tha purpoaa of a pra-appHcahon moating? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal, inform them of the procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION^ ^0 AJdrPh D h YJ- ______ Property Identification Number (PIN): 00/7 Site Address Property Idei Zoning District;Size of Property: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: □ Average Setback □ Side Yard Setback □ Rear Yard Setback ^ ^Hardcover ^7^ □ Lot Coverage □ Lot Area /Ts ^ pother: 7S'2S0 SUbitUC □ Front Yard Setback □ Lot Width ^ (LtZoytyjy^fJUL hlO iAur^a/u^ lA Applicant . Initials: HARDSHIP: Applicant has received the Hardship Documentation Form. _ understands it as it has been explained to them, and is aware that it must ~ be completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal variance application. OTHER INFORMATION: ifti,. *Pleasenole: Yourvariani meeting during which this. ipiication will NOT be accepted without a pre-application will be completed by City staff. Applicant Signature:Date: ^ /p jt J EXHIBIT B Page 1 of 3 HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM m This form is a required submittai for ALL variance applications. An application will not be consicered complete or placod on any meeting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City. Minnesota State Statue Section 394.27, Subdivision 7 requires that a hardship be demonstrated In order for a variance to be granted. The hardship must be unique to the property as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic situations are not considered valid hard^ips. In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated. HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP? This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a hardship, address alt the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance Is Justified. The information the City receives is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will not be considered. Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request (some may not apply): 1."The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the cfficial controls.” d//} y r J IKUr____________________________________________ 2."The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landownei." 3.‘The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." OIjM A4tt Ad^CA /jy/'/Z. (T//L Ac ft 7 "Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." 7k0 7 if 11 O €\ 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Page 2 of 3 "Undue hardship also includes, but is 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 1 16J.06, Subd. 2, when in hannony with this Chapter.* ___________A^o T y4 fifiL /c ________________________ •The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is f^ot permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.* ________AtM----------------------------------------- •The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling."________mIa-----!----------------------------- •The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property." !——--------------------------------------------------------------------------- "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." •The granting of the applir^aon is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. k/iu. n terFDfi^A/Jb^4A.e7JT /30T it*'IL •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 th Zoning Code* ______________/Cox>jgfcrz: 7~_______________________________ - . Page 3 of 3 The granting of such variance will not merely servti as a convenience to the applicant, 1^ is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty.” /Aj A^h/T/cjJ ^rjencyofi-^ I17. 4It fsooi iv/JU7^ CmAj AtTtOKf^ ^ //■ , _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Hardship Statement Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be described in the above criteria, describe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing cotnpliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the fo'iowing lines (attach additional sheets if 'necessary): Ay/f ujj/j. AAf 3^ CaF. PA'JiD_o^.7Ji£L J Ak'j=- /ju /ia AAJt -y»» /U^T r^iT l/4/l Pinfi y/r/T . a _ A ___ . ^ ^ ^ ^ ^/A A nry/i LU ^ />yy- uM^ aj ^6 '7 *^e‘ As^k f=y)A >4AAi Tf'o^At ^ juj ^a ^u A/^ jd< u/iTiLL ------ --- ^ * .Jik A Am A irtA*r#» Zlyi i J Mm m AJA autnt FAxAiT hooA Aa/A /^'Tfi^LA iMjAUtUifAy -r^LuAfibi: ^ AKAAtT fiAA^AiCAUry^ /l^/^UTy *<AAcry -TW^ it£)uA^ * ' ' LL A/‘LO/LtfiLlfUi?t\ lA/ 'i TNAti T /kJ M^r//-r/AAf /J AA A/V-i un^ . Juoyj. ICoof *« J0r .'V ■f' T- . ' 'V ^ ' A'i . V- /'j ■•i '< • N .' '. .•? V.;sa^’ .. 'A .\V-^ * t \y.. ^ aiad sI . . V ■ >;• i, mmmmk ::*-''(r;;.in'>;‘,W>; r/ ‘: ;1 / . ■% ' - . * • *i- '. -««ry»-ijy,VyK^exhibit c iic$ -*-"---- -^iiM ittMitfMtJDl /•t-veo /EXHltfli U EATJ^COYER CALCULA7I0?f WORKSEZZT 3 F*c SZTBACXZONZ: (CIRCLS OffE) &> TS-ISO*ISO-SO* rrsn TSkracovrn ts tosz A. Kcttit -!_______ * X X X B. Gc«|t C Drivtwqf X X e. HUBmk X X X X p.X X X "■gsn. TOTAL KAADOOVOUN 2CME TOTAL PKOPBKnr AXZA IN ZONE ♦ B ___X 100 * A. Umm M«lvl ' X X X E Ommi C Drh««xar X X "•8 t 1 X X E fmlclDKk X X T.X X X ESifi ^•KlTOTAL KAIDCOVW. IN total noraenr ABBA or * xlQO - ‘>V M-iiijtilli 5C0-lCQ(r s'yo IZZ^ t^.6 % % Zl*4 ^2- 1 066 Wr s_-. SJ. SJ. SJ. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. A B H SJF. sj: SJ, &F.r SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. si. SI. A _______SI. 3TT^ % *? ■ i [* ■■ ; '■yj ICUCCLS OfOk) 0-7F 5vU-iUUU* rvff gAuncovra rv zovs A. Kcttw ■ X Ws-i X X X B. Gitisx C Drivtwqr ’'■<4 X X D. Sldiwiik X X E PkHoMc X X F. UaMiii By PiMic X X X O. Oter TOTAL BABSCOVER IN ZntE total property area in zone B ___X 100 “PI % X % & Cnii C % X Ct^hyc % % Tom'S X X F. Lsdntr UodirfiiB X X X <L Odsff total EARDCOV bR IN ZONE xIOO • L98B-»L»-2Se 22^5 ^6\ •2,846 'ZOl 33. <1 Z330 361: 31? blM TB’ s.?. S-* 5--- c ~ S.-. c T S.5. SF. SJ. SJ. SJ. SF. SJ. iP. SJ^. A S.F. B H SJ^. S^. S.F, SJv / /■•• 5.F. RF. &F. EF. SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. SiF. SF. SI. 'SI. A 1.0 SI. B . t dsoseo so oe 1 k' I UAKUCUViLK CALLLi^TlUf<l ^tTBACKtOUt: (CttlCLS Of(£) 0-?r ‘w-ao*SOO-IOOO* TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 'VAL'j ■*• B j.l _ * 100 »Pn>OK»n HARDCOVtH IN ZONE A. Hww ____________ *wiak X X B. Cnfc _ C Driv«w^ ___ D. Sidewtik E. Padonkek F. Undifipff Umhrtaia By Plask 9 Ml a OA«r total HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B ___X 100 - ‘ / - •> If ^ ■ •1 (( k, r.\/i' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A.Koust X -ss. Lcagdi X a S^. X S*^« X •sy. B. r Gantfi X «i ss. •♦ • • ••# X •i •2>8Z7 SJE. X m . SJ. D Sidawaik X m SJ. X m • ^ - S.T. E.PrtWrWrfc X m ss. * MB X m SJ. r • X m SJ. r • tifidcfIfiB X m SJ. Bv PiBtfk X m SJ.i • S.F.ir c.Othar X m 'Li'fT.l ^ / 7 2.7 QuX S^. A sj: b % SJ. s;f. S.F. SJ. S.F. S.F. S.F. SJF. SJ. S.F. S^. SJ. SJ. &F. SJ. • SJ. A "SJ. B " % 0m 9 .f^»%mi HARDCOVER CALCULATION WUKA*tu!a!.i SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-7r '‘TS-aO* tNG tunpcQvra rv zqnik A. Kcnse ________ x W!d± X X X Bb Gmgt • • • • C DfhwMiy O. WmnOi E. Patk^Deek F. UadvWn By FlMlic C. OtfMT TOTAL KAROCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE I ♦ B 2x>l 4- * 100 PROPOSED HABPgQVER IN ZONE A. lto«*t ____________ X WUP & CaiiBe C Drivtway D. Sidmik B. PadoIDcck F. iMihcapa Undartain By PiMk O. Otbcr total hardcover >n zone total PROPERTY AREA W ZONE B ___xlOO - n” o • y<• • I *. V. V. t . • *•'v.v • B # - ^ SJ\ S.T. ss. /^7 • ’ SJ?. • .• SJ. S.r. "7.0 1 4- J2 i£V SJ. SJ. S.F. SJF. SJ. S.F. SJ'. A IT B % SF. SOF. S.F. S^. / S.F. S.F. SJ. SS. SS. SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. ■SJ. A ~SJ. B % 2'/ EXHIBIT E 'll i a r-. V) BE (2EM0VCD ■ i‘ i S£M£- Ts “Jc* 4 -, .•— IFW-T-- I- , \ - —Hfe %t^=s^fesdlB jf'.'W .^aM. ,'l'jj^' ; . ..; ,f :V-.V. . : i'.ii; S:€ ■■1 -.■■Vfj --m=:■•'T-vvy,/; ■ > :-:; r><.: H •■ V ^ •.: . V': ^:-y..r >,, ,. '■;' -'.•..■■I' i«*w-- • t!! Y A. AMUfe!^-■■■ft-rr -r*i ■*•*- ------------. EXHIBIT G / ■ 22. 23. 24. hive a bronze modized finish. Install a new aluminum clad stonn door on n§ door. I have included a $300.00 nulerial allowance for this item Infill small double hung window opening at East wall of existing Windows on West, Norfii and Soudi walls to be cottage styl^^dduble hung windows. Windows to remain in same location. Window on East wall of ouster bedroom to be a cps^i^t window to meet egress codes. Frame new tough openings for two new sin^'i)^^ casement windows in kitchen, bsuhna and caulk around exterior and required for a weather tight seal . RqMir plaster, sbeetrock or wood papelmg around windows as requited. Some of the wood panning nuy not be matched. Supply and install a paint mde S/8** x 3 1 /2" wide flat casing, with two eased edges, on thetwoaidesofthei^Bflw,a%**x5 14** top piece with a %**x 1 ** top ciq>. A sill extenskm will bejaddra die existing window sill provided 1^ Loewen windows and will be apptonnpMfy V a ” x I W* paint grade material. The wiiKlow apron will be x 3 W* point md^material. Claafi^ and diqjxioe of all ddxis generated by Hunetberg Construction Company. Prating of interior of windows completed under each room break down. Deck EXHIBIT H 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Refocate double headed spot light as required for new deck. Air conditioner condenser is to remain in same locatioiL If it is required to be moved, diis would be an additional cost Remove aiding as required fa Installation ofrequiredd^ flashing fiir a new 12* x 14* deck. The footings will be 12** diameter x 42** deqi concrete, formed with sonotubes. The fiaming will be 2 X10 treated joists 16** on center. Joists will besupportedby 6x6 amootfi cedar posts on a double 2 X10 treated header bolted to the posts. We will puts 1 V4** X Vt" mpmn trim bond around the top and bottom of die two cefa 6x6 posts. Ihave included a H**x 11 %**smoodi cedar fiwcia to cover iq> die fine of the treated rim joists. Deddng to be a 5/4** x 6** Mangaris brand, run perpendicular with the joists. Decking will be finlened to joists with special screws designed fa K^mgaris decking. Cut edges of decking to be sealed per manufiwturers recommendations. The tailing will be a Deckontofs brand widi a stiai^ cedar top and bottom rail. Spindles will be steel. Railing height will be between 36** and 40** to meet building codes. There can be no more than a 4** qwce between any part of the railing^. Posts fa tailing to be 4** x 4** smoodi cedar, no more than 8* -0 apart I have included one 3*-0 wide straight staitwqr down to ground level. (f.. V (/. > s.' ' ‘"■•N ufr 5,. K* * > • I - * *p .. »r ♦> • * I ' •* ***—■■* ■ i 1 I ' ; EXHIBIT I VJ Uj \ n t - Iv.sl StLm^ «r4iii k<i' / •• • • •• ••p*. emm ■••; vv-frMii'iiJ^j jpp Li'M /TLA "V C 3 C ■■■ ! t- tii.. 5: .r-f "V y J&My- ■■ I ) -’-'■"N-l I Mllltl I .1 »'i • *^' , . *. ^v . .■ *• ’ • * IJ Iggii..! ^ Si arr'!'*?■’5»3B=|’- K"*W ' a,\ m*I: I •. I* • »•« ■f' »/ A- "<if r '^. - f: "•••^ 1.' .;fe^ .js: V-- u ♦ . » •• ?iir> i i r‘(-^ S>'< . m \ % ‘^■ f •*.. • %i>' ^ -4 V.-i ' ' «» i; ^ U c ■.•.ft* .’l 14 *J '1 :^\^\; ■ ...... u ?6ahon J of ?<iopos£D pec< w'v-‘ •''•r!;V>'*W.*•• r / / ii I i s MI *■^■7 ’3m‘.C0.m% ;u , t/ • ‘ ’ **•• ^ - ’ • h ■ A Irfy ' - '.* *t. . r»C y f • i.C' » \ V M.f A 44 »-4 .•>' L ^'i - V.* V —.»-. » ri * • > ^..v-.:. 'W-.. ...^ii fe?V V.;yK*. • ;; • * .. •T!',-( ISlii wK'i: je^:i ^T, t ‘ EmsTiMfj lak£sipe pAffio pwposeo ®6 ftEA40\/CC>'\A/A(X>S TO ^MA<lJ V^'s^ ■*■ . ., » • 'i • r *.•■.♦'• i2;.T' # n.r c' :?rV. mmw^m ':■'■-■■ V ■ '>.-•■ ■•- mmy .. .'. ..^S/.-;iv:jt.'v:-’:; •H?. -- j .:.» •; - r-r ■■ v.wl ! • X. .15 A m. * • r- ^ ^ ' r- <* :—/L . . ' ■ - ^ r-^«>- ^t’_^ • • ••■-■• ‘ ^ -'v/ ' / * f \*^ i i ? '-^/.^ ~ J ! ~ l LJ$^ y :^J.. *-■..' • !■ '9i^ |fi ■h 1 i .. - ^ ^ 1^ . R J*. LOCAf loM 6f ?^POSGP P6R.C jOUA w (oplY posfb eoHsiveU^o nM^OCOv^E^) ■Pi: mm k h^At*v.vnjflilw«^i#~. c-«r>>rHY t>^*^frx— '.--■*<*i<C-> Pw . - *'■ - v‘: 'i p•V-, V?** '‘vl- : /^}AMmm ¥ v<. • I m \'V I j{ v: L. mp" A« I.. • .^v'. /A 'N !■• • •, r ■' I’-^■ MS --------*♦■ ■yiml o .f ••ty*■A. tf *4 i^’ :: I#% •i S*;»a . - ps«- VVmT? ^-1 ■ N ■ mhr- RUN DATE: 3/30005 31 0911723320001 raOTADOR 306S NORTHSI»REDR OWNERNAME NLEDWARDSRCKEDWARDS TAXPAYER nancy KR CODY K EDWARDS NAME/ADOR 3063 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN SS39I HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 3t 0911723320002 PROPADOR 3017 north SHORE dr OWNERNAME JUDY A HIGGINS TRUSTEE TA3CPAYER JUDY A HIGGINS NAME/ADDR POBOX62 CRYSTAL BAY MN 35323 38 0911723320003 PROP ADDR JO20 NORTH SHORE OR OWNERNAME JRRKCSWENSON TA3CPAYER JACK R SWENSON NAME/ADDR 3020 NORTH SHORE DRIVE WAYZATAMN 35391 PAGE: I 31 0911723320004 PROPADOR 3041 NORTH SHORE DR OWNERNAME JTRRCDEPIETRO TAXPAYER JAMES RROSELLAOE PIETRO NAME/ADDR 3040 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 33391 31 0911723320006 PROP ADDR 3090 NORTH SHORE DR OWNERNAME DANIELJMCOLYNN TAJCPAYER DANIEL JMCOLYNN NAME/ADOR 3090 NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATAMN 33391 38 0911723320014 PROPADOR 3093 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME RUSSELL C HEOLUND & WIFE TAXPAYER RUSSELL C HEOLUND NAME/ADOR 3093 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 5S39I 31 0911723320013 PROPADOR 3013 NORTH SHORE OR OWNERNAME RUTHLOLSON TAJCPAYER PAUL ALLEN OLSON NAME/ADOR 3083 NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATAMN 33391 4 31 0911723320020 PROPADOR 3070 NORTHSHCMEOR- OWNERNAME CWWOODRUPFRMM WOODRUFF TAXPAYER MARY*CHARLES WOODRUFF NAME/ADOR 3070 NORTH SHORE IHt WAYZATAMN 33391 JI f*'- 'M ':.ii 31 0911723320017 PROPADOR 3060 NORTH SHORE DR OWNERNAME MARYTGUILLAUMEETAL TAJCPAYER MARY RMARNDC GUILLAUME NAME/ADOR 3060 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 33391 t: j t M 38 0911723320019 PROP ADDR 3080 NORTH SHORE DR OWNERNAME L V REARDON * J M REARDON TAJCPAYER LAURENCE & JANET REARDON NAME/ADDR 3080 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 35391 I CERTIFY THATTiC FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND niUB REPRESENTATION OF IFFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF TWieWEPINCXXJNTY TAJCPAYER SERVIOESDEPARTMENT^TO THE BEST. — OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. ^/a < n / V!< ■I ' ►.L i Iw 7i EXHIBIT L V v.^ v'.'f;!.*' ^V. ^ \* '< wi* ‘pin El Hennepin County r'. .‘V ' ■ ,<wa. *vr- / Taxpayer Services Department »• f.. ■ ' -a*'* •. ■’7’. TMS/iifloteJepaiy/ecoRMmap. It fpn$tnl$ » eompMion oUnfonnatlon antf eMa AomOty, County, mH/SI$t9roml»ulhoflHn and oth$r$oure9$. Date AppHcatioa Received: 3>II-0S Dale AppHcatioa CooiMered as Conpletc: 4>7*0S 60-Day Review Period Eipircs: 6-6-05 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CO. ^Pf^ 25 2005 city of ORO/VO Date: April 20,2005 Item No.: Departmoat Approval: Name: Janice Oundladvjlfo TMe: City Planner Adminiitrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Dceeriptioa: #05*3101, Jon ft Jane Schwartzman, 425 Oxford Road - Variance - Resolution Zoning Dbtrtet: LR -1 A, One Family Lakeshoie Residential District (2 acre minimum) Lot Area: 2.033 acres (88,579 s.f.) Lot Width: 250* @ shoreline; 229 ’ @ 75* setback List of Exhibits A - Resolution per Planning Cmnmissioh Recommendatirm B - PC Action Notice 4-19*05 C - PC Memo and Exhibits of 4*8*05 AppUcaHom Summuy: Applicant requests an average lakeshore setback variance to permit an encroachment of approximately 45* uften no such encroachment is normally allowed and none currently exists in order to construct a 20* x 40* in*giouiKl pool. Planning Coaunissloa Recommendation The Planning Conunission voted 6*0 on the consent agenda to approve the requested variance in accordance with the staff recommendation Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution that stipulates the existing shed be moved to a 10’ setback from the side lot line. COUNaL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting an average lakeshore setback variance for 425 Oxford Road. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1279 (6) FILE NO. 05-3101 WHEREAS, Jon H. Schwartzman and Jane Schwartzman, husband and wife (hereinafter *Hhe applicants”) are the owners of the property located at 425 Oxford Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City ”) and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 1, Stielows Second Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the “property”); and WHEREAS, the applicant has nuule application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 (6) to allow construction of an in-ground pool on the lake side of the home closer to the lake than the average lakeahore setback, as determined by the adjacent homes. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDmGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File OS-3101. The property is located in the LR - lA, Zoning District udiich requires a minimum lot area of 2.0 acres and a minimum lot width of 200’. The i^licant’s property is approximately 2.033 acres and 250’ in width at the shoreline and 229’ in width at the 75’ setback. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on April 18,2005 and recommended approval of the variance based on the following findings: a. The i^licant’s lot sits lower in elevation than the neighbor to the south, who would potentially be most impacted. Page 1 of 5 b. Due to the large lots, views to the lake enjoyed by adjacent neighbors over the iqiplicants* property are already limited by vegetation and distance, and the proposed pool will have little or no impact of further limiting those views. c. Substantial vegetation exists along the property boundary providing screening to the neighbor to the south. d. The neighbor to the north has a tennis court located much closer to the lake than the imposed pool location. e. The neighbor to the north does not have views to the lake over the applicants property where the pool will be located as it is much higher in elevation. f. The curve of the shoreline around the east end of the Stubbs Bay limits views to the lake, regardless of the location of the pool. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of ^ proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a Are hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 (6) to allow construction of an in-ground pool on the lake side of the home closer to the lake than the average lakeshore setback, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 5 ¥ r t 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Conunission and City Council review. 2. Hardcover in the 0-7S* zone shall not increase above the level of 0 s.f or 0%. Hardcover in the 7S*-2S0 ’ zone shall be limited to 25% per Zoning Ordinance regulations and the pool shall be constructed on the property in accordance with Exhibit A. 3. The shed located along the southerly property boundary next to the garage shall be moved to meet a 10* setback from the side lot line, and be no closer to the garage than 10*. The shed shall be moved prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the pool. 4. Audiorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but ue permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for die new construction within one year of the date of Council appro' il, or the variance will expire on that date (April 25,2006). S. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. The undersigned qiplicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and die applicants* heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of tide of the property. Page 3 of 5 r: ^ ■ Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 25*'' day of April, 2005. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee. City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(8) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of ^ 2005 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal ootporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. t: Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of ,, 2005 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City, Notary Public Page4of5 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this__day of,3 2005 by Jon H. Schwartzman, husband of Jane Schwartzman, husband and wife. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged befr’-e me this__day of _ by Jane Schwartzman, wife of Jon H. Schwartzman, husband and wife. ,2005 Notary Public ‘.ft Page 5 of 5 n j : ,1 i I X EXHIBIT A MOV/ED AN apditiohav. V Off S6UTH^|ttY U>1 UAie SO AS rt> hi€BT A IP' ffiOfOSEP UOCArX^ M -i I 1 r T j :‘-r CITYOFORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Boi 66 Cryital Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING RLE: 05-3101 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: April 19.2005 TO: Jon A Jane Schwartzman COPIES: 2905 N Ferry Street Anoka, MN 55303 TYPE OF APPLICATION:Average Lakeshore Setback Variance DATE OF MEETING: April 18.2005 Plaaaing CommietloB recommended at follows: To an>rove the variance as requested stipulating that the existing shed be moved 2’ further off the southern lot line so as to meet the required 10* setback. VOTE:FOR AGAINST Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Cornell - Monday, April 25,2005; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Plaiuiing Commiasion or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Gundlach at 952-249-4623. ms-3101 AprH 18,2005 Pap I of 3 Dale Applkatioa Received: 3-18-OS Date AppNcatioB CoaiMered at Complete: 4-7-OS 60-Day Review Period Eipirci: 6-6-OS To:Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Fron: Janice Gundiach, City Planner Date:April 8.2005 Sabjcct:05-3101, Jon & Jane Schwartzman, 425 Oxford Road • Average Lakeshore Setback Variance • Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR- lA, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acre min.) 2.033 acres (88,579 s.f.) 250' @ shoreline: 229’ @ 75’ setback AppUariioM Summary: Applicant requests an average lakeshore setback variance to permit an encroachment of approximately 45’ when no such encroachment is normally allowed and none currently exists in order to construct a 20’ x 40’ in-ground pool._________________ Staff RecotameaiaiioH: Staff recommends approval as submitted as no lake views for neighboring properties will be obstructed due to the curve of the shoreline. This approval recommendation is conditioned upon the existing shed being moved 2’ further off the southern lot line so as to meet the required 10* setback. PertiMBt Zoalng Ordtaance Secrions Sec. 78-1279. Placement of structures on lots. When more than one setback applies to a site, structures and tecilities must be located to meet all setbacks. Structures shall be located as follows: (6) Average laheshon 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 coiuiecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. LIstofExhibUs Exhibit A - Applications Exhibit B - Hariship Documentation Form/Applicant ’s Narrative Exhibit C - Existing and Proposed Survey Exhibit D - Hardcover Calculations Exhibit E - Photographs Exhibit F - Aerial Photograph Exhibit O - Property Owner’s List Exhibit H - Plat Map . r \ It- ^ ;ir ^•1 INI5-310I April 18,200S Pige 2 of 3 Background The applicants submitted and obtained a building permit in order to construct an addition on the north side of the home as well as a deck addition on the lake side of the home and a stoop addition on the front of the home. The applicant met with staff in March to discuss construction of an in-ground pool. Due to the location the applicant requested, it was determined that an average lakeshore setback variance would be required. There is an existing 128 s.f. shed south of the garage that is 8 ’ from the side lot line, which should be relocated to meet the required 10’ setback. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET LR-IA Lot Area Lot Width Required 87,120 s.f. (2.0 acre)200’ Actual 88,S79s.f. (2.033 acres)250’ @ shoreline; 229 ’ 75’ setback LR-IA Required Existing Proposed Front N/A N/A N/A Rear 50’157’NO CHANGE Left Side (north)30’30’NC CHANGE Right Side (south)30’ 34’ house 8’ shed (non- conforming) 20’ pool (conforming) Lakeshore 75* 206’ house 200’ deck (already obtained building permit) 155’ pool Average Lakeshore 265 ’-200* (north to south)conforming Approximate 45’ encroachment Structural Coverage This property is in excess of 1.99 acres and is therefore not subject to structural coverage requirements per Section 78-1403. Hardcover Cakulatiou Hardcover Total Araa la Allowed Existing Proposed Zone Zone Hardcover Hardcover Hardcover Mjoi April 11,2005 Pagt3of3 0-75 17,641 s.f.Os.f (0%) Os.f.* (0%)NO CHANGE 75 - 250 37,024 s.f.9,256 s.f (25%) 3,460 s.f.* (9.3%) 4,932 s.f. (13.3%) 250 - 500 33,914 s.f.10,174 s.f. (30%) 7,677 s.f.* (22.6%)NO CHANGE After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Average Lakeshore Setback Variance The applicants would like to construct a pool along the southern property boundary, located lakewaid of the existing house. The pool will be setback 20 ‘ from the southern property boundary and well out of the 75’ lake setback, complying with the accessory structure setback standards. However, the location proposed will be located in front of the required average lakeshore setback line as shown by connecting the adjacent homes. This requires approval of a variance. Hnrdahip Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony tegarding the application. Hardship Analysis Ai cotukkHmt apfHe&thmsf»r imrkmc*, tk* Pluuikig CommbahH i*«// comUer the effect of the ffopotei meioHce ofom tke keohk, pffMf emi weffore of ike eemmoHky, existing omd mntk^ted tteffk tmUrtmu, iigkt end oir, danger of fire, risk to tke pnbtk safety, *"d the ^eet on values of property ki die surrounding area. Tke Planning Commission skull consider recommending approval for variances from th t lUeral provbhns of tke Zoning Code In Instances wkere their strict ertforcement would cause undue hardship because ofcircunatances unique to the Individual property under conMeroHon, and shall recommend approval onfy when It Is demonstrated that suck acdone wU be In keeping wkk die spirit and bilent of tke Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds that there is a hardship to warrant granting a variance. The average lakeshore setback ordinance exists merely to protect adjacent neighbor’s lake views. Because these homes are setback more than ISO’ from the lake, adjacent lake views are minimal because they stretch over huge expanses of property first. Also, the most affected neighbor to the south already has an obstructed view of the applicant’s lakeshore consisting of the screening vegetation that exists on the shared property boundary. What views are visible through the vegetation spread over some 400’-S00’ -t- before you get a view of the lake, which is it the end of Stubbs Bay where the shoreline curves. This most affected property also sits higher in elevation than the applicants where views expanse over the applicant’s proposed pool. Innas for CoasideratkMi 1. Are any views negatively impacted? 2. Should the existing shed be required to be moved so as to meet the 10’ setback? 3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff RecomawndatkMi Approval as submitted stipulating that the existing shed be moved to meet a 10’ setback off the southern property boundary. I mffi ilHii f! ' K . t City of Orono Variance Application EXHIBIT A O' street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 5S3S6 rilf Main; 952-249-4600 fax: 952-249-4616 Meilir^ Address: . P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Application # Date Received: Amount Paid: SbOn. Staff: ^ImCP Fee;$600 Renewal: $300 After-the-fact: $1,200 Double Fee This application form must be completed in foil. App leant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incomplete applicationa will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: _ . . ^ Site Address: Property Identification Number (PIN): (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year): Yes, I own the adjacent parcels. Present use of property: .^TKesidentiaK □ Other_______________________ Zoning District: _________________ APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal nares and marital status required for e^h interested party) Name: ^ Phone (home): #’^hone (work): — Address Email: frf7 Fax: OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names a.-^d marital status required for each interested party) Name: ____________________ Phone (home): Address: Email: Phone (work): Fax: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost: $ Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): ______________ 1 U * m e • V “ffijl "T i REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following Information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be processed. □□□□ □ □□ □□ Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. Completed Application Form Completed Hardship Documentation Form Certified Property Owners List - owners writhin 15Q' of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance, Government Center, A-603 300 South 6'*’ Street, Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meetirig all the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5* x 11* or 11* X 17" for reproduction. Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet). Topographic survey - including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8.5* x 11* or 11" X 17* for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5 ” xiror11”x 17"). Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. * APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide ail information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/she Is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of its ootentij Applicant's Signature: Applicant's Signature: ^ Date: Date: OWNER’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents, Cornmission & Council Members for purposes of investigation and verifidatioh of this requesf Owner ’s Signature: Owner ’s Signature:^ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. (■» # €? 1 tW O J u J&. ii City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form {This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting.*) Stre^ Addmas: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 MaHing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 For Office Use Only: City Planner Meeting Oate/Time; PC Date: Main: 952-249-4600 Fax: 952-249-4616 What la tha purpoaa of a pn-appileatlon mooting? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal, inform them of the procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: Art___________________ Property Identification Number (PIN): ___________________ Zoning District: C41-I6 ? Size of Property: l2.0Aa/S DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: ^Average Setback □ Side Yard Setback □ Rear Yard Setback ^ Li—I------ □ LqI Coverage □ Lot Area <jjr/£/A; h'M -tfom ^ Af%sl ^ IO’ AJ-tA/iJh □ Hardcover □ Other: □ Front Yard Setback □ Lot Width 004/ ^ idbdMian O' Applicant's Initials: W/VAj/y'/m O-f (UAywmjL^ fen/ tbmo- HARDSHIP: Applicant has received the Hardship Documentation Form, understands it as it has been explained to them, and is aware that it must be completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal variance application. OTHER INFORMATION: *Pleaae note: Your variance application will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this fopo will be comisletj^ by City s^ff. / / J3. a D.„:Applicant Signatu /(AJ U . > : i?1 JL a . EXHIBIT B 1. N/A 2. The only place that we can put a pool on our property is the S. W. side of the house, which is elevated above the lake Minnetonka water level. 3. No. If the variance is granted it would not alter the essential character of the locality because we are only asking for a variance of between 20-40 feet This would still allow for screening of the pool by the existing landscaping and new landscaping we would be willing to add if needed. 4. N^A S. N/A 6. The pool construction fidls within the permitted uses on our (Hoperty. 7. N\A 8. No, the pool constructirm does not create a ^)ecial condition or peculiar use of our property 9. No, our pool construction is allowed and is fiequently permitted by other homeowners in our area. 10. If we were not granted diis request for a 20-40 foot variance, our pool placement would be diflBcuh, due to die hardships listed on the attachment. 11. No, die granting of the variance would not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or moral of die zoning code because this would not effect the gene^ public. 12. Please see attachment page. Thank you very much for your consideration. ..n “f*1 ...»V 1 --------- ri !2J I’v L:l i \ >. i Jane ft Jon Schwartzman aie requesting a variance based on the following. 1) Background: We would like to put a pool on our property located on the south side of our existing house facing west. There are No Set^ck concerns from Lake Minnetonka or the Neighboring properties. There are No Hard cover issues. The only issue is the site line for the location that we wish to establish our pool. We would like to locate the pool approximately 20 feet further west towards the lake. The hardships of not putting the pool in this location are listed below. 2) Hardships: A) Sunlight: t he pool would be shaded by trees if located east of the desired location. If the variance was not granted and the pool needed to be located east of our desired area, numerous trees would have to be cut down to allow for sunlight on the pool. B) Mechanical: Currently our air-conditioning units and I>awn sprinkler main Junction Box are located in the area were the pool would have to be placed if a variance was not granted. These would have to be re-located if possible. C) Safety: With two young kids, it would be veiy difficult to watch them swimming from tte house if the pool was east of or our desired location. There is only mie small side kitchen window overlofrfcii^ the Non- variance qx)t This is the reason we want to locate the pool 20 feet further west so diat the pool is in view from the main windows of the house. Without pushing the pool out 20 feet we would not be able to monitor the activities in the pool from central windows of the house. •fWtVi Currently our neighbor on the north sideofour property has a tennis court which is well beyond the she line of our property. We understand that diey are grandfathered, but feel that our variance would not impact the neighbors, and provide a safer and much more logical location for our pool. Thaiftyou, Jon ft Jane Schwartonan I (T^^)I r > . Cm JL. I iiinsnifii EXHIBIT C ..1-.... fi i-f' 4!. SZI3ACX Z0«2i (CiaCLE 0«S) «Gjg^2gCQ^3J2ifi2S rs-aa*250-ivO'500-1G03*EAHimi V cr A. Rooe X X X % Goigt C Drivfwv X X X X E PilWDtefc X X F. UaMiti By Pb«k X X X s^. SJ. SJ. a Otar total KABDOOVBR IN ZONE WMV total WOreiCTY AREA W ZOHB ♦ B ___X 100 ^ i A• ) ^0 -! <»iHAB]LBL A. taw X X X E Gw|i C Drhtwy X X a Shhwk X X E P«ioM X X F-LwStaP Unctota By nwfe X X X a ottMT S--. a-r. S-?. S^. ss. SJ. SP. SJ. SF. SJ. SP^. SF. A B H &F. SP. SP<. SP. / ; /••• SP. SP. SP. SP. SP. SP. SP. SP. SP. SP. 'dWlZV ♦ B —XIOO - y Ws' V 10- ty-s0 I SZT3ACXZ0MZ: (CIRCLE ONE) O-Tff rYTSTTNC gARPrOVTR Pf ZQga - 50-fuO*50O-1C00* A. Kctts« X X X B. Cage C Drfvxwijr X X a Sldtwilk X X E Pido/Deck X X P. U&dnpi Uateftix By PlHfe X X X O. OttMT (LAWniHQ (Mi total HARDCOVER W MHE tOT^^^TYARyiNK^^X too T*i A*•(•ki *imti A. Hmm X X a OOTfi C Drt*w»V X X D.X X a p«io®rt PeO\'\ X X • txsSafxp! \hUUa Br rfmtk X X a Oter xlOO - 'Vi V t ^ J-.l' '1,^0'!’Z'S SS. SJ. < 3w*A • Sx- Sx. S5. 'J70 SJr. SJr. 6^6 SJ. SJ. SJr. SI. SI. SI. .3 SF. A S^. B % T- HO^ SI. 61“ sj. SI. SI. - f ■r SI.\ S^. SI. SI. SI. ■ S.F. t 1.5 » SI. SI. SI. _______SI. \3i___s^- ^SI. A ~~ i%oiTlsi. B - I3L3 _H ii inr I'liiiiiiii M 4ju 4C^‘< SET3ACX Z0rC2: (CSCLS O^j 0-7 TS-7ffr mSti^SMXr /svv-jLugy’ g gAam-ovra tv tc-vs A. KcB» __________ *2/5^ £?. ■?¥«* X z X 3. Gcigs C Odwngr X X CL StdmOc E f«iaMc F. a oftv TOTAL EAKDOOVSE IN COMB TOTAL FtOfOWY ABBA IN ZONE mtJ»UBAP BAM LBL r4t,\| E ObV! C OtNwBy X 100 Jt E malDtt±» 4 X F.-LffAg^ UodicUo a. odMT % % SJ< c r SJ. &5. yy- /^:7 SJ. s--. SJ?- SF. SF. &F. &F. &F. A -y-X9/y- EF. B % 2/5^ EF. 3Eg___Sf. ________SF, ER % % /r:y 4f. ‘*>7$' sr. ___SF. 3a SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. 3F. SF. total EAJOCOV3B W total FBOFggY Am ^ gag ^ /Z8^ SF. »SF. A 33T/y~~SF. 3 [0-m-oH- 0 aTiiiMT^H ■! kJ4 iLA.ik'kAAliMkrf* A.iw k lAtrfViBftLkflAAvi -■ tTtEO AlTTia ill i^ill it^mi lill^tBirBl till ' I Bill ■ ■ ■Bl'^ ■ 11 ■ ^ II N M ■■J “3: i I >^ymmii '■T.7 1 \\.W i \ At P » V Jfi V ■> . '* > • . V. ' "■ * * * •' / I* . ' • * . • •*’ ' *• ■ ••> ' ■ •* ., ■ ■ *• •, , - . . . -.. -■ •.• . ', • • “•-V - V'S ••'^^••...v.' ’ .. K , " •• ••* ' •• •— **'J .*',1^ -. »t> 1 o ?r^5%.,. / ' f- • .^ . V : .’ V , ’ ^•f ‘ * . t, ,'■ • ,>•■*,.’v'■ t.' • .y,; • .:■■ ' •• '■'■?, ..V,'' *•’•■ ■ '■• Cly-^ 'i ' u X . ^ V«tW fiWM A)a6Heol2-«)0TH - '• *. ■ ■ . • \ f.m-$ -'mm V‘. 5lr« •■ .'J ■EW ppx:, ■* 'iVi'' , • I * ■• \k h|51 ■ .f•.•■' ^'• ‘ : -if r/ '•< •-■.■-v^.v’Vjvi^vrv I*** . ^ VV, >;■ 9ImE. 'j ^ •'* L - • - T .**ii ■ 5 =•■=' “ ' ***jfa“‘*«»**^ ■ 9 ■ \ J PH 7. ■';: • Ji- * i Sk#-'^ J"' >ii^* . . % . 5; V ■ :*.• /- tT'Wj Pf^lir?^ ■-- t- ^ ;/*» .-•»--------.-.•r* . c*“ ■■-.0HSi .'ll iwiEi-^^ ^3^-. ’ly-. ••^f. .^( ,■- •■ .it'' ■? ■>• .^%'.| .- •• ?tt;*-m h* ■ * ; " •i^L: c ..*- ■ '■' i- ‘ ■: ' 'M V, . . •■* 3 ‘ '■• •■’cSs la*5 ms ‘ * £»■. M - ; Vise.-,Vi. ^'W- ,,^lsSSE^^S^^yir^ ' < fvfi, - T-.j:/ r -^r • .u* . . J if^I . '^•^1 , y .** • jr 9i,y**rw*- ■ ' .• -.'■r-V.*.'.'■> ■■ ^. • . ' ..■■ •='» k» - ' :Ji, y 4 itaiiyMM ■5' >h;:*;;u_:- ri RUN DATE; 30/2005 30 03M7234I0010 niORAOOR 475 OXPORORO OWNERNAMB OEFBHERJRAAOmHER TAXPAYER ORVliRE* ALEXANDRA PBHER NAMB/AODR 475OXP0RDRD tONGLAKEMN 55354 31 0511723410032 PROPAODR 405 OXIORDRD OWNER NAME MARYANN 0 RRANDENBURO TAXPAYER MARYANN 0 BRANDENBURG NAMB/ADDR 40SOXPORDRO LOMGLAKEMN 55356 f" X1. . iVftT ••V • w -^ • :f »•» f 'm- /•-V i ) >. r*nB>i W«'* '5' » » f‘>S; ■* *!•'>'>■'' * ■ HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE: I 3S 05II7234100IS PROPAODR 500 OXPORORD OWNERNAME AiRSRNELSON TAXPAYER ALBIN JR SUSAN K NELSON NAME/ADOR 500OXPORDRD ORONOMN 55356 3S 0SII7234I00I6 PROPAODR 400 OXPORORO OWNERNAME TLANOERSONRORANOERSON TAXPAYER OAV1D A T UNOSAY ANDERSON NAME/AODR 400 OXFORD RO LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05II7234I0Q23 PROPAODR 425 OXPORORO OWNERNAME JONHSCHWARTZMANETAL TAXPAYER JONHAJANESCHWARTZMAN NAME/AODR 425 OXPORORO LONG LAKE MN SS3S6 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUEREIRESENTATIGN(X> IPFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATEONTHE RECORDS OFTHEIEN4EPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SroVICaDEPARTMB>n7{rO TUB BEST>k - L/ .Jk< - . rh r-. <; 4 I W: .ft r>’'V > f ( •. i • ». sHo ^•-DR8sA»4^i.<.^-rtnupiirni f i4Bh> EXHiBmr I imt’iim Hennepin County taxpayer Services Department *• ;» :'.V .' .. • «!_•-* ''/r . *: 1 /' (• ' « V, u.'V *Pmro^ Infonrmilon V.- ID 081172341002 HoiM NOmOMr 428 otf^ nmm oxFom n V ■ TNtknatt l$gi^neofdfi(im /freprMentt • eornpmon dlntommHoh ■i mHlddathim aiy, Owjn^jr.^fdarttmw/autfwf^ "/■V ••'»;■■ v'-<i r : ’ f 1:1 ‘ X REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION POl • ir-i APR 2 5 2005 Date: April 21.2005 Item No.:^'^^•FORONO Ocpartmcet Approval: Name: Michael P. Oaflron Title: Planning Director Mi Admlnittralor Approval:Aecnda Section: Zoning Item Dcscriptloa: #2461 William and Thelma Bryson & Janies A. R. Johnson 650-660^70-680 Big Island - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement _____________________- Further Extension of Effective Period of Approval Zoaing Diitrict: RS - Recreational Seasonal District List of Exhibits A Extension Resolution for Adoption B Letter of Request 4-19-05 C Resolutions No. 4794 and 5246 Appticatiom Summary: Applicants request extension of the lot line rearrangement qiproval granted April 22,2002 via Resolution No. 4794, which initially expired in April 2003 and which was extended to .Kpril 22,2005 via Resolution No. 5246 adopted November 8,2004. The approval allowed 4 *ReoofdLots'onBigIalandtobedividedandcombinedtorr.‘iultinjust2 final lots. The applicants have been unable to complete the filing due to various legal proceedings, and request a further 6-month extension to October 22,2005. Please review the exhibits. The reason last fidl for the requested extensbn is that the subdivision was never filed with the County, because the qrplicants encountered title issues which were finally resolved last fall but since then there have been other complications as noted in the letter of request. Exhibit B. Our standanl boi leiplate language required that this subdivision be filed with the Cbunty by October22,2002. This application was seen by staff as a win-win for the ^plicants and the City, as it results in new lots that are more conforming in size than the prior layout. The City Attorney has indicated that while no hearing is required to extend the approval, formal Council action is necessary. Staff RecommendatioD Staffrecommends approval of an ectension of the effective period of subdivision approval to OctobCT22, 2005 per the attached resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached resolution. w I 0 A A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTIONS NO. 4794 AND NO. 5246 nLE NO. 2461 WHEREAS, on April 22,2002, the City Council of the City of Orono (the “City”) adopted Resolution No. 4794 granting approval for a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for properties on Big Island owned by William Bryson and Thelma Bryson and James A. R. Johnson (collectively ‘the applicants’); and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 4794 required that the applicants complete filing of the lot line rearrangement with Hennepin County no later than October 22,2002; and WHEREAS, the applicants were unable to file the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement within the timeframe allotted due to title issues, which have just recently been resolved; and WHEREAS, the Applicants requested an extension of the effective period of subdivision approval in order that the lot line rearrangement may now be filed, which extension was granted by the City Council via Resolution No. 5246 adopted November 8,2004; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have requested a further 6-month extension of the effective paiod of subdivision approval due to legal complications which have delayed the filing; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the findings and conditions of Resolution No. 4794 are still valid and appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, as follows; 1. Conditions 5 and 7 of Resolution No. 4794 and Condition 1 of Resolution No. 5246 are herd>y amend^ to allow filing of the lot line rearrangement with the Hennepin County Recorders Office or Registrar of Titles Office on or before Octobff 22,2005. Page I of2 J 1 2. AH'other terms and conditions of Resolutions No. 4794 and No. 5246 are hereby reafTimied. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 2Sth day of April, 2005. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Cleric Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of 2005 by Barbara A. Peterson. Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of 2005 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 2 of2 J f 4 PmsoN A Pnaiu m IP MMUUiNiMAi. UMrnflt I jAHu rrr rMUrNMUiw AmMNKVSMriAWr loss MAirr WAY/ATA OOULVi Sl'ITH.W WAVlOVrA. MINNnSOTA s JOHN H. nCMON CHKiriOfHlWi. PieilSON April 19,2005 Mr. Mike Oaffion Plumiiig Director Chy ofOroito P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bi^, MN 55323 Lots 3,4,5.6,7 and 8, PLEASANT VIEW AT BAKE MINNETONKA (Big Island) Lot Lina Reanangement File No. 2461 Request for Extension DearkA. OalAoii: B ARD J9I TKI.KPHONK |VS3i 47.(-i<HKI FArsiMii.r; i953» .n.MFiw As you may recall, our film leprwenti the Biysons and Jdinaons in connection suggestion of City Attorneywith the abovo»r afeianeed lot line ioana ngamant At MRay Bland of the Hhuhaw A Culbertson firm, 1 anJsending you this letter to request iimnally a O^nonth extension of aty CouncU Resoliions 5246 and 4794. The original approval of this lot line reairangainent (Resolution 4794) was ded by Resolution 5246 through April 22,2005 Id allow my clients to r^lve various issues Ae title work disclosed. 1 have been wradng cooperatively with Mr. Bland, my clianta. and Guaranty'nUe Insurance Comaany to resolve these issues. We were iaAeproeeas of executing final documents in JBuaiy of this year when ono of the titleholders became a patty to nunriage dissolution proceed ings. We could not proceod with execution of the documents until either fiiose prtieeodings were completed or the parties thereto resolved any competing clainu to the is that such a resolution will be fbttiicoining soon, bn ofthe lot line reanangement docum ents by toe April not in ti«»e to complete execution 12 deadline. In nwking this request fin an extension my cli not obligated to grant this or any subsequent extensio are iK>t completed by the new d^line, then the City to toe matter. nts understand tiuU (i) the City is and (ii) if the City’s requirements Its iu> obligation to consent further C00/S00*i cosli Hm N0SV114 t NOSSSIi |ect property. My understanding «960 et.9 m 6»:9I 900Z.6r«SV ii I ismmm 11 le I aisun you thit my oliests tod I strong dMiii to cofBplcte tilis muclHlcItyed lot liMTNinngBmint as Mxm as pottle. IhopeflM tfa extsDskm and we will aoon thereafter oompletcM * 1 ' • t Sity will grant the requested 6- tha rearrangement oo:Din A Hielinft Bryson Janies Johnson JefftoyD. Bland H per KAi- ■; * V If \ r CM/tfS*4 cost#nn Nossiii t Nossaxa 6S60 U9 296 S002.6r«4V .1 r, Hi • m-: • r-.' A 'i GITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.____^ 4 ^ A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. 4794 FILE NO. 2461 WHEREAS, on April 22,2002, the City Council of the City of Orono (the "City”) adopted Resolution No. 4794 granting approval for a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for properties on Big Island owned by William Bryson and Thelma Bryson and James A. R. Johnson (collectively ‘the applicants ’); and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 4794 required that the applicants complc - filing of the lot line rearrangement with Hennepin County no later than October 22,2002; and WHEREAS, the applicants were unable to file the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement within the timeframe allotted due to title issues, which have just recently been resolved; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have requested an extension of the effective period of subdivision approval in order that the lot line rearrangement may now be filed; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the findings and conditions of Resolution No. 4794 are still valid and appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Conditions 5 and 7 of Resolution No. 4794 are hereby amended to allow filing of the lot line rearrangement with the Hennepin County Recorders Office or Registrar of Titles Office on or before April 22,2005. v-‘:^ y; .• • 2. All other terms and conditions of Resolution #4794 arc hereby reaffirmed, Page 1 of 2 I i 1^': CITY «f ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 524®NO. Adoptrf by the City Council of the City otOrono, Minnesota at a regular meetinglield on the 8th day of November, 2004. ATTEST: jj. ^ Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ^°“^°forSSitnient was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of Nov^ber. 2004 by Barbm A. ptterL. Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. ^ ^•2 XtU L./ Wtaf^ublic JAC:-: YOUNG e-JSjC-' V . f»r.— STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ^ ,, ,______/fV^MavQfA/rcu:/?;^ \ ^ instrument was executed on behalf of the City. (RACHEL DODGE t r rCcf Notary Public r ‘aV’-' Page 2 of2 AjiiL /4 c-a " ❖ kC CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _______4? 9^ A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 650,660,670 AND 680 BIG ISLAND FILE NO. 2461 WHEREAS, the City of Oiono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and .WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter "City Council") has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement by William Bryson and Thelma Bryson and James A. R. Johnson (hereinafter "the subdividers") of properties legally described as: Lots 3,4, S, 6,7 and 8, Pleasant View at Lake Mirmetonka (hvreiriafter "the properties”) to be rearranged by transferring of properties new legal descriptions as: Lots 3,4 and 5 (hereinafter "Parcel A”) and Lots 6,7 and 8 (hereirudter "Parcel B”) WHEREAS, After due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.3S8 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 15,1999, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to qieak thereon; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and tabled the request on April 12,1999 by the subdividers to rearrange the boundaries between the properties; and WHEREAS, the subdividers have completed requirements of the City for a subdivision to rearrange the property Unes between the properties. Page 1 of 6 V'v 'T ^ 1 :r’r f' ^: \ . i f . r f ■ >: . GITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.-------------4-f-®4 WHEREAS, At their regular meeting held on April 8,2002, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of William and TheHa Bryson, and James A. R. Johnson noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within the RS district. The existing lots are as follows: 3. 5. Eilitifls Address Legal Description 650 Big Island Lots 7-8, Pleasant View (seasonal dwelling; 660 Big Island Lots S-6, Pleasant View (vacant) seasonal dwelling was removed in 2001. 670 Big Island Lot 4, Pleasant View (seasonal dwelling) 680 Big Island Lot 3, Pleasant View (vacant) to be rearranged as follows: Proposed Address Legal Description Parcel B 650 Big Island Lots 6>7>8, Pleasant View (seasonal dwelling) Parcel A 670 Big Island Lots 3-4-5, Pleasant View (seasonal dwelling) The lots are currently 2 separate seasonal residences on four tax parcels that are to be combined and rearrange into 2 parcels. The lots meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Orono by not creating additional building sites. 650 Big bland (Lots 7 and 8, Pleasant View) has been legally combined into one tax parcel. The lot contains one seasonal dwelling that would remain upon completion of the proposed subdivision. With the addition of Lot 6, the property would increase Page 2 of 6 A. r.--H ■i 7/ GITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO--------------4^4 to 28,186 s.f. from 19,074 s.f. The total frontage on frie lakeshore would also increase from 100* to ISO*. The lot does contain a non-conforming septic system due to the system being located within 3' of the water table. However, lot line rearrangements do not require conforming sites as conditions will improve as the site will grow larger, and the number of residential units in the area will decrease. ^ , 6.670 and 680 Big Island (Lots 3 and 4, Pleasant View) are not combined. The properties do serve as one common lot, and are imder common ownership. The cabin is located on Lot 4 with a shed and deck/patio areas. Lot 3 is not developed and contains the septic system for the two adjacent lots to the south. Easements have been created across Lots 3 and 4 to Lots S and 6 for access to the septic site. The easements would no longer be necessary when Lots 5 and 6 are split A lot line reanrangement will place the entire septic system on one property, eliminating the need for easements and maintenance agreements. 7. ;■. 660 Big Island (Lots 5 and 6) will go away as a result of the lot line rearrangement. The property would be split leaving Lot 5 to join Lots 3 and 4, and Lot 6 to join Lots 7 and 8. 8. A single well located on Lot 6 would serve both Parcel A and B. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Orono hereby approves the lot line rearrangement of the above referenced property by the subdividers as shown on the certificate of survey by Paul A. Johnson, a licensed surveyor of McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc., a registered Land Surveyor and Civil Engineer, dated December 10,1998, attached Exhibit "A”. The approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.Prior to filing the new property descriptions, an inspection of the 660 Big Island property is required to ensure all existing structures and the stairway are removed. 2.The easement that was required for a shared septic system shall be eliminated since it no longer is required. Based on the new property line location, the drainfield and tanks would now be located on the same property as the cabin they serve. 3.Property owners shall have tlMir surveyor provide legal descriptions for drainage and utiliQr easements S' along the interior property line and 10* along exterior property lines. Page 3 of6 ■ [• I'viV*GlTYofORONO M:RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO._________4-7 84 Property owners shall be advised that the minimum lot size for subdivision on Big bland u 5 acres. The S acre minimum lot size would prohibit any future subdivision of the lots. V 5.The aforesaid divuion shown on the attached Certificate of Survey shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder ’s OfiQce or Registrar of Titles Office on or before October 22,2002 together with a certified original copy of dib resolution. 6.The CiQr of Orono shaU not issue any permits fo * improvements to either of the new parceb prior to recording die subdivuion. 7.The approval granted by dus resolution shall expire if the division has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, a new qiplication may be required for the City of Orono review. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: •)Tide Oirinions addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein s^ sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. The subdivider must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affiecdng the property. c) Three Copies of Certificate of Survey, with signature blocks, for filing with Hennepin County. Drainage and Utility Easemenb documents for easem^ts 10* along exterior property lines and S' along interior property line. ' --fi . Page 4 of 6 .1 i I GITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. -----------------------^ Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota this 22nd day of April, 2002. ATTEST: T V « 4 Linda S. Vee, City Cleric Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor \j{p I : STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 22nd day of April, 2002 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Miimesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN notary PUBUC-MWCSOTA |l «TCommisslonEj«ph.:;.-i p' The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 30^'^ day of _____1200 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. RACHEL DODGE NOTA-RyPUNXt»cuiiiaiiwen*wJw.3i.acB DODGE I i'MMNErOTA I l-/ai Notary Public ♦ Page 5 of6 i •i\ ->v ■Mkr-- *-'-,y^-i-':i\.^''. ■•'. , . V-. ■' *: isaoo (PUT) laaos (MCAS)J^/±ni!j isaoo (PUT) rV'— isaoe (i«s) __ r----Ti--------------• ~^X ’’ITKrm KTTy'A ' ‘ \^' isaos (i^s) « o* H* ft e^sO DATE: April 22, 200S ITEM NO: *|5 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITYOFOROtvo Department Approval: Naaic Ronald J. Moone Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: 0 Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Planning Commission Refippointments The terms of three members of the Planning Commission, Marc Fritzler, Cynthia Bremer, and Travis Winkey, expired on March 31,2005. All are eligible for reappointment to an additional term. All have indicated they are interested in serving an additional term. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to reappoint Marc Fritzler, Cynthia Bremer, and Travis Winkey each to an additional thrM year term on the Planning Commission, expiring on March 3 1,2008. .•rv wmm M;. " •f." 1 - - F m I Jk DATE: April 22, 2005 ITEM NO: REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Cr»MM/s„ »*trCT|(^Q AW 25 2005 CITYOFORONO •( DcpartmMit Approval: Naac Ronild J. Moone Title City Administrator Adraiaistrator Reviewed:Ageada Section: City Administrator’s Report Item DcKriptioa: Appointment of William Gibbs to ISTS/Building Inspector Position The hiring process to replace the ISTS inspector position is now complete. William (Willie) Gibbs is the top candidate. Willie has extensive experience in the ISTS area, and has been working toward a degree in Building Technology. It is recommended William Gibbs be appointed to the ISTS/Building Inspector position effective May 16,2005, at Level 2, step I of the Supervisory/Administrative pay schedule, which is $45,100. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to ^)point William Gibbs to the ISTS.^uilding Inspector position, effective May 16, 2005, at Level 2, step 1 of the Supervisory/Administrative pay schedule, ^ich is $45,100. 'AH ■ i. - j. ■ U-' . ' - v-r'' - W ./'V ^ •■i'' • iriVV :■ . ,■•11/ fc . irV-; r\. =.-^rv 7 . ' v' -•7- .• v^-v^ v '- mm , « '■ • • , - St «7 m : ■.-% ■ ■m 7^ 7 I • :%Mmarnmii \ I ;v, - £j; r r-;‘ - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION APR 2 5 2005 DATE: April ITEM NO.: /7 Dcpartmnit Approvtl: Num Qitgofy a. Gappa TMW Director of Public Seivicea Admiobtrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services Director’s Report Item Deicription: Recognition of Pat Wolfe Faric Commissioner - Resolution ■A Park Commissioner Pat Wolfe has resigned from the Park Commission effective after the March meeting. Pat has been on the P»k Commission since March 2001. Council accepted his resignation at their ^nil 11,2005 meeting. The staff recommendation is for Council q>proval of the attached resolution recognizing Pat Wolfe for his dedicated service on the Park Commission. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached resolution recognizing Pat Wolfe for his dedicated service on the Park Commission. i. :?- ~ .=i . ■ . i i V: t A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO PAT WOLFE FOR DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE PARKS, OPEN SPACE, AND TRAILS COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5312 WHEREAS, Pat Wolfe has served this community with distinction during his four years as a member of the Parks, Open Space, and Trails Commission; and WHEREAS, his years of service have been mariced by exemplary dedication to the best interests of the community, and WHEREAS, he has earned the admiration and high regard of those with whom he has woriced; and WHEREAS, the performance of his duties and responsibilities as a member of the Paries, Open Space, and Trails Commission has been characterized by excellent and constructive contributions to the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono does herd>y express its sincere appreciation and thanks to Pat Wolfe for his distinguish^ service to the community and does also highly commend him for the manner in which he has carried out his duties and responsibilities. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council extends to him best wishes for continued success in his future endeavors. Adopted bv the City Council of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 25 day of April, 2005. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor I \ ) REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CnUM^fl tiICCTiryjQ APR 2 5 2005 DATE: 04/25/WY OF ORONO ITEM NO: Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name: Stcpkany Good^# Tide: ChiefofPolke / Item Description: Disposal of Eiceii, Unclaimed or Abandoned Property Exhibits: Inventory attached DISCUSSION: The Police Department is cleaning house and seeks to dispose of excess, unclaimed, or abandoned property in a cost effective manner. The police department has advertised a sale through public (silent) auction to be held on May 6,2005 from Sam - Noon, in the police garage in conjunction with the Orono Clean-Up Days. There are equipment and office items which are no longer used that cannot be sold, traded or disposed of in a time effective matmer. There is property that has been recovered that has not been claimed that includes miscellaneous electronics, clothing, jewelry, tools, sporting goods, etc. All attempts at locating the property owners have been exhausted. There are two retired squad cars which will also be offered by silent bid: 1. 1999 Ford Crown Victoria with aprox. 115,000 miles. Minimum Bid $1,500 2. 2002 Fon' Crown Victoria with aprox. 75,000 mile** Minimum Bid $2,500 The police department also wishes permission to dispose of old uniform clothing that can no longer be used (Orono Police Patches removed) through charitable donation. All items for which there are no bids will be discarded. If there are no minimum bids for the squad cars, they will be sold at State Auction. lliere is a plant grow light unit (valued between $50 - $100) for which the Orono Primary School has a use. The police department recommends that the City donate it to the school. An inventory of all of the property is attached. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED; Motion to dispose of excess, unclaimed, abandoned property through silent auction, charitable donation, and disposal as proposed above. .... ... . ^ iL ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT AUCTION INVENTORY 4/8/OS Item Description DeWalt Circular Saw 7 % with electric brake case Sears 2 hp plunger router in case Craftsmrn roofing nailer Porter Cable Router in case Tile Cuher (saw) Four tire chains Four scales and wood blanks Greatland mini quad chair/green (2) sets of golf clubs in bags Blue set of water skis Synthiz rifle stock Green plastic ammo box Black plastic gun case 2 misc golf clubs ! Calloway hawkeye Big Bertha driver 1 Calloway system III Big Bertha #S driver 1 Callowawy proforce 6S Big Bertha driver 7 car stereos 4 car amplifiers 3 sets of speakers/ 2 car 1 home Radar detector Roller ball scooter MN Vikings leather football 3 CD holders w/ urJcnown cd’s 4 unisex c<q) leather jackets 3 IBM typewriters 1 typewriter table 2 black office chairs Wooden podium Misc office organizers 6 office chairs 1 box old phone parts 2 black metal de^ 2 old file boxes 1 public safety display 1992 Metal desk arid extension Fax machine Sewing machine table Lexnuurk printer Prima scan flat bed scanner HP DeskJet printer SSO Epson fiw a^ power cords HP Printer/fax/copier3 Monitor Deil^piiirter Singer projector Spectra phone Kaito rapid Sunglasses and case Knife case Plant light 4 tower computer hard drives: 486 DX2 PC Tailors (and keyboard) 1999 Dell Dimension 4100 2000 Dell Optiplex 2000 Dell Dimension XPS R400 2 Audiovox walkie talkies Head light Brown duffle bag Purple duffle bag Cologne Electric razor 2 GE walkie talkies Kodak 2000 Camera Kodak Cameo Camera Clock Mack quartz Sharp Calculator (jold colored money clip CD’s a .d case Kodak Advantix Camera Men’s cologne Electric razor VHS tape Kodak Advantix 3200 Camera 3 water filter chemicals BRIT A Bag stones Pocket knife/nail clippers Cell phone-Motorola Panasonic clock radio Olympus tape recorder Canon camera 9 DC/AC inverter Small tool kit^ use Collozio pocket radio Cross and chain Gold 20 k. black onyz ring ”K” Crucifix Keg-liquor establishment Misc. Uniform clodiing 4 misc. computers, cords and components Li^tbar Misc. hand tools Misc. Jewelry 1999 Ford Crown Victoria w/ approximately 11S,( 2002 Ford Oown Victoria w/ iqpproxinudely 75,0< 0 miles VIN 2FAP710WOXX168661 miles VIN 2FAP71W92X157201 I. r^.* 'v- u >. ■ ■ DATE: April 22, 2(WS ITEM NO: fCj REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION aiCCTIigQ A. R 2 5 2005 CITY OF ORONO DcpartoiMit Approval: Naac RonaM J. Moone TMc City Admuiistrator Adaiiaiitrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Deicription: Medical Supplies for the Navarre Fire Station/Rescue Vehicle An inventory of medical supplies needs to be purchased for the Navarre Fire Station/Rescue Vehicle. These stq;>plies range from bandages to stabilization supplies, such as collars and splints, to personal protection supplies, as well as storage and carrying cases for the supplies, llie total cost for tlwse supplies is $6,000. COinVCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the purchase of medical supplies for the Navarre Fire Station/Rescue Vehicle in an amount not to exceed $6,000. ti II I all i xrcTiMQ APR 2 5 2005REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: April ITEM NO: Dcpartmcit Approval: Name LinVee Title City ask Administrator Reviewed: Name m Agenda Section: Licenses Item DescriptioD: List of Ucenses for Council Approval SALE AND/OR STORAGE OF CONSUMER FIREWORKS 1. Applicant: Todd Anderson/Snyder Drugstore Lotion: Snyder Diugstore 2380 Shadywood Date: June and July, 2005 Time: Monday*Friday, 9:00 a.m.-9:00 p.m. Saturday, 9:00 a.m.-?:00 p.m. Sunday, 10:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to tqtprove/deny the above listed licenses. ;:Vi, ri. '! ..................■•'J S -■ 5 r' >11 PERMIT FOR SALE AND/OR STORAGE OF CONSUMER FIREWORKS DATE ISSUED:April 2S, 200S DATES AND TIMES OP SALE OP CONSUMER PIREWORKS: June and July, 2005 Monday-Friday, 9:00 a.m.-9:00 p.m. Saturday, 9:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. Sunday, 10:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. NAME OP APPLICANT:Todd Anderson Snyder Drugstore Navarre #5025 PHONE NUMBER:952-471-3591 LOCATION OP CONSUMER SALES:Snyder Drugstore 2380 Shadywood Road Orono, MN 55391 TYPE OP PRODUCT:Nonexplosive and Nonaerial Consumer Fireworks CONDITIONS: 1. Permit holder must comply with all rules and regulations of the Minnesota State Statutes, Minnesota Uniform Fire Codes and City of Orono Municipal Code. 2. Permit holder to provide Certificate of Insurance in amount of at least $1,000,000. in which the City is named as an additional insured. 3. Business must be conducted during hours noted above. 4. By acceptance of this permit, the permit holder, on behalf of any and all organizations and private persons granted authority to operate under this permit, agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Orono from all claims arising from said activity. The permit holder, all organizations and private persons exercising authority under this permit, do waive and release all claims against the City of Orono, its officers or employees for any damage to person or property arising from the exercise of privileges granted by this permit and agrees to hold harmless the City of Orono, its employees and officers from any such claim. 5. The Orono Police Department and its officers arc empowered to revoke this permit at any time for any safety concerns that are not immediately resolved by the permit holder or a representative of the permit holder. This revocation shall cause the immediate cancellation of the activity originally authorized by this permit. (City Seal) Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66, Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Phone: 932-249-4600/Fax: 952-249-4616/«rww.cLorono.inn.us ■liftliBBaiiAliklikiAaiata. OB:H m Ffo«<ITY OF OMMO 41822494111 T-99S P.002/004 F*27i J. ’t CicyofOrono 2750 Kdley P«ricw«y P.O. Box 66 Ctysua Bay, MN 55323 Fee: $50.00 DateReedved: ^ Sale and/or Storage of Consumer Fireworks Permit Application Applicant Name: "TlAJ BusinessName:^ br^/ 5»r7UL>'^S’t^S AddreSt? City, State 2in! CS^rrrjJ <47^ 3rs~j«j/ Phone#: ^5^^ ~ - »V?/ Emergency Pho6e #: State license#:__ CeUPhone#: ' :•» .• • AppheantNamp: Business Name; Address: J-----iii -1 g:I*,iiL^.iiJa»Av5^Aa .w:• .-"Jf*:•Wfawiga City, Stale, Zip:. Phone#:____CeU Phone#: Emergency Phone #: . E ^ ^ - ' r OwnerNamr. > ^n^oeti iiiiwiiiiiaiiiiiiaiiiiiiliiaiii Business Address: City,State.Zin: wa£sr 7 «____e * 7Home Address Phone#:CeU Phone#: Emergency Phone #: Fire Service Area: Long Lake Fire Department X Mound BreDqMvmMQi ___Wi^zan Fire Depanment Dale(s)of8alaa: ^ua *c TabT HowrsofSeleB: M-f * 7-7 ApprexiaiaiaQwmtityenSile: iiirU Tyne nf rimnymer Ffrewoilrs to be «oW? iXPt:. ,{ ■■. .•; ! '•■ . i y.'.v T;-~ tv ■ Cj ;^: V' } V m IWK ifc"iySlH it:'« V. 4 .’i SNYDER DRUGS PLAH 1 if^niM UF^(, S.3S26S 45110'3 IPhmIam’s Cliolc* Ast Description,/ _ • '^jr ; -.1.1 ; ii. ‘ilJ QTY PER CASE.- Snaps <75 ct) 0-3Sat» 4S015-8 Color Smoka Balia (12pc Cawft O-SmSSOIOt-S W Ooid Spafktara (6H>ack) 0-382SMS03(M Phantom Fufv Aaat. Tray j'0<S82M<4S04aG Phantom Watuma Aaat. Tray 90 60 10 "7 90 TbAGS 48 60 BDLS TRAY TRAY r* .*H 112 jg^jr ■■■ .- v.J. >■■ IPS r. .. :r ■■ : >0^ r:^ ■jRv-V r:^* '- ‘ '3^-' JULY 4TH FIREWORKS PROGRAM 48040 Phantom Rrturns Aast. Trav 7-1 Jtsm H-008 Quontitv 1 U/M PCS Descriptioo Asst #3 Fountains T1611C 10GR H-017A 2 PCS Happiness Fountain (S&S) 72*6 H-02S 6 PCS Spark Plug Fountain 12-24-4 H-040 2 PCS Friendship Fountain 48-12 H-042 1 PCS Golden Flower Fountain 48-12 H*043 1 1 PCS Large Golder Flower 3C-4 H-044 1 PCS Large Friendship Fountain 36-4 H-0S2 2 PCS HN-60 Asst. Jade/Buner. 36-4 H4)55 1 PCS HN90 Asst. Fountain 9 18-4 1 eox 1'-Asst. Fountain 13-40-5 ?«i72 1 BOX Asst Crackling Fountain 144-4 H-095 1 PCS Hissing Cobra Fnt(3’*X 8") 36-1 H-111A 1 PCS Peach Flower In Spring 36-4 * M-046 1 BOX Meteorites 8-40-4 M-047 2 ibx Cracklin'Laser Flash 6-50-6 Esmna BOX #8 Gold Sparkler (NEW) 24-12-6 |S4)14A 1 3 BOX #14 Gold Sparkler 24-6-6 iiiiiinriifrffc>MftrriMiinniinii *i- :• r'** i: .*>. > ^*-,-,•.'* -;*r j V8^h|JHV*‘ .i» ♦.••'•»* #• •»• * ■mi^- ■m- f: •nifapwy-*-Hf I- i i L <,.06 ^7 / ISJ u u C 4] «I i ^ W fln/tfl rf^.AMft«AEkr h^a&C1blk<lAA*kU^k*lA4tf. ^ M c :ty of orono Chdck Detail Register® 04/1 3A)5 7:26 AM Page 1 APRIL 2005 Check Amt Invoice Comment QOiio'/'it »«ceTiNG APR 2 5 2005 CITYUF ORONO Ift 10100 Primary CMh Faklilik# ONofr first national bank of lakes 0101-21701 FadaralWMilwIilIng $10,05606 0101-21703 FICATaxWIMMidIno K717.05 0101-21703 BICATaxWlMwIdlng K717.0S Total FW&T NATIONAL BANK OF UKE8 $19,490.16 ?J36hki'6Wi78 4/f3/2005 ICMA RETHtEMENT TRUST -457 0101-21705 OlharRallmiTwnI $1,038.62 FEDERAL W/H FICA & MEDICARE W/H FICA & MEDCR CITY SHARE DEFERRED COMP-302030 Total ICMA RETHtEMENTTRUPT.467 ■ i5S3(T $1,038.62 PaMCMi# OMF i3/2005 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE 0101-. * winton Duos $0.00 Total LAW ENFORCMENT UBOR SERVICE $0.00 L'NIONOUESM0 6i168 PMChkiOOMiO 4/130009 MN DEPT OF REVENUE CITY OF ORONO check register 04/1?/057:32AM Pagel Clwck Number CmployM Name Pay Parfod 004233 004234 00423S 004236 004237 004236 004230 004240 004241 004242 004243 004244 004245 004246 004247 004246 004240 004250 004251 004252 004253 004254 004255 004256 004257 004250 004250 004260 004261 004262 004263 004264 004265 004266 004267 004260 004260 004270 064066 054967 054960 054970 064076 064077 064070 054070 064000 064001 064902 064063 064964 054005 054906 064007 054000 054900 064000 004001 054902 MOORSE. RONALD J. 8H.US. BARBARA G. VEE. UNDAS. KUEHN. THOMAS M. OLSON. RONALD J. PETTIT. SAWRA 1C ANDERSON. BRUCE L BOBZIEN. SUE A. BORIS. SCOTT W. BUDIO. STACIE M. CORNICK. JAMES L DAY. SUSAN J. DEMBOUSKI. JAYC. FISCHER. CHRISTOPHER K. GOOD. STEPHANY R. MCNtCHOLS. DAVID L. RUSSETH. KYLE M. SCHOENHOFF. JOHN B. STEN8RUD. CHAD R. TOEWE. KIMBERLY D. TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. TOMCZYK. MARKW. WHITE. ANTHONY J. WITTKE. ANTHONY A. KLI8ZC2.0AVIDA. PHARO. CHRISTOPHER M. CURTIS. MELANIE OAFFRON. MICHAEL P. QAPPA. GREGORY A. GUNOLACH. JANICE J. MEYER. WILLIAM C. OMAN. LYLE E. DEBAERE. DONALD L HANSEN. STEVEN O0ERAIGNER. SCOTT G. OBRIEN. RANDY L PALMER. GREGORY A. RATHBUN. BARRY J. DODGE. RACHEL M. LE8KINEN. DENISE M. BOBZIEN. SUE A. BORIS. SCOTT W. ERICKSON. KURTR FARNIOK. CORREY L FISCHENICH.OANT. MADSON. ADRIENNE M. MCNICHOLS. DAVID L. MOROWCZYNSta. JAMES PERSEU. WNJ.IAM R. TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. OAFFRON. MICHAEL P. OMAN. LYLE E. VANG. BRUCE L GREGORY. JAMES D. HANSEN. STEVEN OBRIEN. RANDY L PALMER. GREGORY A. RATHBUN. BARRY J. 8KREEN. DALES. 0 a i B Cbaclc Check Amounl Data Chack Statue $2,309.44 4/13/2005 Outstanding $544.76 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1.110 43 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,409 18 4/13^005 Outstanding $1,231.14 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,094.24 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1.846.66 4/13/2005 Outstanding $855.00 4/13/2005 Outstanding $20.00 4/13/2005 Outstanding $863.82 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,552.77 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,417.69 4/13/2005 Outstanding $2.072 47 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,723.94 4/13/2005 Outstanding $2,002.80 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,100.00 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,764.35 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,763.15 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1.229.61 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,210.43 4/13/2005 Outstanding $900.00 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1.469.00 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,251.38 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1.526.07 4/13/2005 Outstanding $499.12 4/13/2005 Outstanding $927.95 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,183.05 4/13/2005 Outstanding $125.00 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,834.20 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1.302.57 4/13/2006 Outstanding $620.57 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1.400 00 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1.288.78 4/13/2005 Outstanding $075.00 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,644.39 4/13/2005 Outstanding $550.00 4/13/2005 Outstanding $400.00 4/13/2005 Outstanding $200.00 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1.009.09 4/13/2005 Outstanding $939.00 4/13/2005 Outstanding $60.87 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1.835 43 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,647.12 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1.0d6.78 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,616.18 4/13/2005 Outstanding $033 26 4/13/2005 Outstanding $783.17 4/13/2005 Outstanding $926 54 4/13/2005 Outstanding $157 85 4/13/2005 Outstanding $601.30 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1.430 96 4/13/2005 Outstanding $356.70 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,305.00 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1.090 42 4/13/2006 Outstanding $359.70 4/13/2005 Outstanding $447.15 4/13m06 Outstanding $751.16 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1,163.64 4/13/2005 Outstanding $1.132J» 4/13/2006 OutatancOngi » Jr F CITYOFORONO ch«ek rtgister 04/13^5 7:32 AM Page 2 Ctwaii Par Cliack Ctwek Numtar CmployM Nhm Parlod Amount IM* ChMk Stalut 0M993 JEN8EN.ROONEYW.6 9117.86 4/13/2006 Outstanding fliuoaa ROSS. JOHN A.6 9108.47 4/13/2006 Olilflanding 064996 116 9126.64 4/13/2006 Outstanding 064996 8TEFPENHAOEN, RONALD 9 91.409.23 967.463.12 4/13/2006 Outstanding Mm::-Sa . * ••’Ji'*' .. ‘-V' :>'v ;■■<■'■■/.i'.'^ * ..■..■■■ "ag ||I®SS rV -'■■: “:.y;";- SS'.>3SL-'i'f. ! J \ *. I- 1 CITY OF ORONO 04/22A)5 10 47 AM Pagel *Check Detail Register® APf«L2005 CfMck Ami InvolM Comnmnl 10100 PitmafvCMh TOdSKCToSoeSf 4/2M oos a-irental E 613-4963(M15 Ottwf Eipilpnwit Rentals Total A-1 RENTAL $63.90 20925 Power Rske 163.90 ?5ff5H3r55o5Sff'“n^S55R acclaim benefits E101-41900^ Other Mtooellsneous Charges E 101-4190040il Otbtf Mitoillafwolft Charget Total ACCLAIM BENEFITS $69.95 $100.00 349401 349462 COBRA Adm-3/2005 FSA Admin - 3/2009 $169.99 TSTcRSToaoeSo AhMxm ADVANCED IMAOINO SOLUTIONS E 101-4190CM13 Omoa Equipmant Rantal $095 66 Total ADVANCED IMAOINO SOLUTIONS 37013964 Copier Lease • 4/15-VIV05 $099.06 PaldChki 0M690 E 613^1 4/26/2005 ALL AMERICAN OOLF M)95 Pro Shop llama For Ratala Total AU AMERICAN OOLF $135.90 03493 Golf Glovaa $135.90 t^aid didci 000691 4f2^f2005 ANASTASI, ANDREA FABIANA E 101-42110-319 OthafProMaskmalSafvioaa $90.00 054I326OPD Inlarpratar - 05-0326 ’.T.TrT->: Total ANA8TA8I, ANDREA FABIANA $90.00 ANCOi c 6mMUNICATIONS. INCPaidChki E 4^^8945-650 Automotive Equipmenl Total ANCOMCOMMUNICATION8.INC Paid^Ui# oeSm $363.62 63162 R-31 • AnIenne Installation $363.62 'T.^iT.ARNOLD 1 RYE PRINTING E 101-41900-352 Prlnlifio A Publiahing $2.006.3 4 Total ARNOLD A RYE PRINTINO 7405 Spring Nawaletter $2,006.34 PaU6k0 0694 4/26/2006 AUGNESliMILE CHEF E613-499004M3 Conoaaaiona For Raaala-Txhl Total AUOIES MOBILE CHEF $00.34 17043 Hot Doga, Cheeaeburgara $00.34 Paici ChMP 000095 4/25/2005 BEAUCHENE MANJNO E101-41900-352 Printino A Publiahing Total BEAUCHENE MAIUNO $360 10 506 Spring NawaMer $360.10 CM 060696 4/26/2005 BEST A FLANAGAN LLP E101-43290-600 Spadal Projacta. Contingancy Total BEST A FLANAGAN LLP $1.590 00 364352 CarlaonMiOolMattar $1,590.00 Paid ChMP (ioOO^ 4/25/2009 BUDGET PRINTINO E 613-49030-201 Offloa auppRaa E 601-49400-322 Poataga Total BUDGET PRINTING $550.90 $042 3724 3091 Punch Carda • GC Shitping Chargaa $559.32 PaMChki 06&d96 iSSSOOi CARGILL SALT E 601-49400-216 Chamicala and Cham Producia Total CARGILL SALT $2,116.72 1297904 Solar Sait tt.1 16.72 PaidChki 0606^ 4n5fi6oi CEAM E 101-4300CM33 Mambarahipa A Sybacflpbona Total CEAM Paid ChM O^Tod 4/i^/S5oS CLASSIFMDS E 101-41900-362 Printing A Publahlng $60.00 23465 2005 CEAM MbraNp - Gnipa 960 00 $74 07 937 AdyForEmp-SapOcSO T- s! f ■ CITY OF ORONO 04/22/05 10:47 AM Page 2 *Check Detail Register® APRIL 2005 Check Amt Invoice Comment £ 101-41000-352 Printing A Pubkshino Total CLASSinEDS 1145.13 937 Adv For Emp-Septic 2/26 1222.20 Paid bhki 0M>6l 4/2iV200S COUNTRY CAKE CUP60AR0 E 101-41110-439 Meeting Expenses Total COUNTRY CAKE CUPBOARD 112.50 134 Pie • Work Session $12.50 Paid CKki 000702 4/25/2005 COVERALL Of THE TWIN CITIES E101-42260-407 Janitorial Services $156.3 5 Total COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES 95011 Janitorial - 4/2005 $156.35 Paid cMdl oUMA 4SSS00S CULUOAN E 61349530403 Repalrs5yiaint-MNc. Equip Total CULUOAN $14 00 101-09053676-Softener Servico $14.00 fWdhkl 6i07O4 4^^^^ DAY DisfRIBUTN4^ CO. E 613499004)93 Concessions For Resale-Txbl E 01349900-092 S06 Drinks For Resale Total OAYOISTRmiTINOCO. $62.00 $61.00 307520 307520 Concessions for Resale Beer for Resale $123.00 PaldChki OUM 4/iS/20M DC A-WIRE ONLY G 101-21719 DCA/Spending Accounts Total DCA-WIREONLY $766 03 4/14A)5 Flax 4/14A)5 $766 03 PaUChhi 050706 4/250005 DELTA^ENTAL 0101-21709 DenMmeurance Total DELTA DENTAL $1 .523.50 37220072 Dental Insurance - 4/2005 $1,523.50 PakfChk# 050707 4/25/2005 DEMBOUSKI. JAY E 10142110437 Training A Development Total DEMBOUSKI, JAY $229.15 4/15A)5 MiteagenSeals PTO Training $229.15 Paid ChUi 0^706 4/25/2006 OOM*S E 10141110439 Meetin9 Expenses Total DOBOS $63 99 6754 Food - Work Session $63.99 P^£KUr5B576u 4/i^/ioo5 donald sali ^da a associates E 10141300437 Training A Development $600 00 Total DONALD SALVERDA A ASSOCIATES $600.00 ^aidcM6i0710 4^i^2005 ^ST SIDE BEVERi^ £613499004)91 Beer For Resale Total EAST SE)E BEVERAGE P-9505-5 Adv Effect Mgmt - Moorse $127.55 555395 Beer for Resale $127.55 PaldChki B.VBI SAFETY SUPPLY E 10142260404 RepakiAlaint-BldBaA^rounds Total ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY $49 59 240642-00 Calibrate Gas Monilor $4959 PaldChki 4^5/2005 ESCHiaON £ 101 42260-321 Telephone $354.51 6425507 Phone Service - Navarre Fire Total ESCHELON $35451 TWChki 050713 I I I — T I ' I I MESSENGER E 10141900-322 Postage Total EXl IS MESSENGER ____$34 32 5-344294 DeWery Service $34.32 PaldChki OsSTTT FLEXIBUI PTE TOOL CO CITY OF ORONO 04/22A)S 10 47 AM Page 3 *Check Detail Register® APRIL 2006 Check Amt Invoice Comment 0 602-16500 Fixed Asset-Const in progress Total FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL CO 120.461.02 9396 Remote Hose ReeL Vactor 120.481.02 Paid Chki 060715 4/25/2005 FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY E 101-42110-240 Smel Tools and Minor Equip $1,540.00 739461 Security Cameras Total FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY $1,540.00 Paid ChkrW716 4/2M005 OAPPA, OREO E10M240D-331 Travel Expenses E 101-41900-201 Ollloe supples Total QAPPA.OREO $96.37 3^)5 $17.00 3/9A)5 Mileage Mileage $115.37 'Paid Cfik# 0S0717 GENUINE PARTS CO. E 101-43000-221 E 101-43000-221 E 101-43000-221 E 101-43000-222 E 101-43000-221 E 101-43000-221 E 10143000-221 E 10143000-222 E 10143000-224 E 10143000-224 E 60249450-222 E 10143000-222 E 10143000-221 E 10143000-222 E 60249450-223 E 60249450-222 F 60249450-222 E 60249450-222 E 10143000-221 E 10143000-221 E 10143000-221 E 10143000-221 E 10143000-221 E 10143000-221 E 60149400-222 E 10142110-221 E 10143000-224 Equipment Parts A Accessories Equipment Parts A Accessories Equipment Parts A Accessories Vehicle Equipment A Parts Equipment Parts A Accessories Equipment Parts A Accessories Equipment Parts A Accessories VeMds Equipment A Parts Street Maint Materials/Supply Street Malnt MaterM/Supply Vehicle Equipment A Parts Vehicle Equipment A Parts Equipment Parts A Accessories Vehide Equipment A Parts Bldg/Orounds Maint. Supplies Vehida Equipment A Parts Vehicle Equipment A Parts Vehide Equipment A Parts Equipment Parts A Accessories Equipment Parts A Accessories Equipment Parts A Accessories Equipment Parts A Accessories Equipment Parts A Accessories Equipment Parts A Accessories Vahida Equipment A Parts Equipment Parts A Accessories Street Maint Materials/Supply Total OENUtNE PARTS CO. PM dhki 0607TS TSSSSSSS^ $4.76 621013 Fitting $26.17 624177 Supplies $26.70 624310 Bulbs $34.07 624372 Shop Supplies $17.00 624495 Switch $10.54 624666 Bulb $21.19 624757 Chain $61.46 624633 Brakes $43.64 624919 Creeper. Glove $4.99 624924 Shop Supplies $6.07 624927 Supplies • Vactor $35.94 825029 Fitters $6.36 625034 Chain $72.55 625125 Pads. Hyd Fluid $11.70 625126 Supplies $41.31 625167 Batteiy Cable. Temt $73.10 625166 Switch $1169 625328 Soidef $6.67 625622 Tape $7.22 825638 \Allie. Tenninai $15.94 626007 Castrol. Hose $55.87 626056 Fitters $7.37 826071 Filters. Washer Fluid $6.36 626137 Pwf Svc $17.66 626462 Wiper Blade $77.73 627193 Tape $27.20 $755 50 627764 Shop Supplies GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL E 60149400469 Other Miscoieneous Charges E 60249450-469 Other Mtsceilaneous Charges __ Total GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL $196.75 Chk# beo'rii 4SSSSS8 ONAFIXSHOf^ E 101-42110.660 AutomotlM Equipmmrt Total OftAFIXSNOm $96.37 S0306S9 $96 38 S03065S Locate* 30005 Locales 3/2005 $345 00 40628 Graphics - Squad 205 $345 00 Pate Chh^ 6o6>iO AUtBlibU HAMKINt CHOMCAL E 601.49400*216 Chamlcala and Cham Product*$768.71 694942 Chemical* ‘Kid 060721 Total HAVmiNS CHEMICAL 4/ii6/200r $788.71 HCNNEPM COUNTY tNFOft TECH OPT CITY OF ORONO 04/22/05 10 47 AM Page 4 Check Detail Register® APRIL 200S Check Ami Invoice Comment E101-41900-329 Other ConvTNinlceUons Total HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH DPT $78.72 25037172 Data Base Access 4/2005 178.72 PM Chki 080722 4/25/2005 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF G 231-20200 Accounts Payable __|5.uJ0.00 1/SA)S Total HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF WMOTF - 1st Half Assessmenl $5,000.00 Paid Chki 000723 ^5/2005 HINSHAW S CULBERTSON Q 101-20200 Accounts Payable Q 101-20200 Accounts Payable 0101-20200 Accounts Payable O 101-20200 Accounts Payable 0101-20200 Accounts Payable E101-43280-307 Legal-ConsuMng E 101-43280-307 Legal-Consulting E 101-43280-307 LegaM^onsulting E 101-41600-307 LegaM>)nsulting E 101-41600-307 Legat-Consulling E 101-43290-800 Special Projects. Contingency E 101-41600-306 Legal-Retainer E 101-42110-307 Legal4k)nsulling E 101-43280-307 Legal-Consulting E 601-49400-307 Legal-Consulting E 101-41600-307 LegaM:onsulUng E 101-43280-307 Legal-Consulting E 101-43290-800 Special Projects, Contingency E 101-41600-306 Legal-Retalnef E 101-42110-307 Legal-Consulting E 601-49400-307 Legal4k>nsulbng E 651-49910-307 LegaKConsullIng Total HINSHAW S CULBERTSON $1,175.00 $672.00 $1,435.58 $892.00 $1,812.00 $513.00 $462.50 $473.70 $313.50 $62.52 $22100 $1,300.00 $130.00 $1,212.00 $55.50 $138.75 $1,144.80 $707.00 $772.57 $561.66 $455.00 $910.00 10414318 10420228 10428228 10428220 10420230 10456251 10458251 10456251 10458251 10450252 10458253 10458254 10456255 10459281 10459281 10459281 10459201 10459282 10459203 10459203 10459284 10459205 MalyvaleApp-04-2971 Mace Carlson Emp Issues Pogonis Boat Dock Violation Nelson/Carlson Vacated Oak PI Mike Carlson Emp issue Lazniarz Creekside Johnson/Bryson-BI #2461 Application Resolutions Review Luzaich Clear Cut Trees Pogonis Boat Dock 2740 Shdywd Big Island Veteran's Camp Council Mtgs - Jan 2005 Mike Carlson Employment Issue AppOc/Resulatlon 2/2005 Wtr Tower Lease - Cingular Hennessey Land Exchange Lazniarz Creekside Big Island Veteran's Camp Council Mtgs 2/2005 Mike Carlson Emp Issue Wkter Tower Lease Changes BIrdi Lane St Swr $15,460.06 Paid Chki 060724 4/25/2005 J H LARSON COMPANY E 101-41900-223 BkfgA^rounds MekiL SuppHes Total JH LARSON COMPANY $187.51 4455764-01 Light BuBs $187.51 Paid Chkl^ 060726 4/25/2065 JEFFEMON FIRE S SAFETY. INC E 101-42260-226 Clothing S personal equipment $87.69 110036 Boots Total JEFFERSONFtRESSAFETY.INC $07.69 Paid Cidd bSbUA 4/25/2005 KENilEbY S GRAVEN, CHARTERED E 101-43290-800 Special Projects. Contingency Total KENNEDY S GRAVEN. CHARTERED $150.48 2/25/05 Borgert Condemnation $150.48 Paid Hdfii 4/25/2005 LABOR RELATIONS ASSOC E 101-42110-319 Other ProNsslonai Services __$1,236.00 4/1/05 Total LABOR RELATIONS ASSOC Pofica Labor Issue $1,236.00 PaidChir^W26 4/25/2005 LAKE BUSINESS SUPPLY E 613-49630-201 Office supplies Total LAKE BUSINESS SUPPLY $12 54 07600 $12.54 Date Stamp. Rons f>dd CMJ 0M7M E 101.42110-310 OHwr PnftuiOMl Swvlon Tow MAIIA4MiCLAK)NRELAHaMSSCf<V PoMChw 60f!B Sos/ioos HAilA4MIC LAi^ RELATIONS SERV $2,915 00 1/17/05 $2.0'l5.00 SubSwvic*V15-3/14AM CITY OF ORONO 04/22/05 10:47 AM Page 5 *Check Detail Register® APRIL 2005 ClMck Amt Invoica Comment E10M21 10-135 CHy Btfiem Contrt>ution G101-15908 Non-Emptoyee Health Ins 0101-21706 HospNalliatlofVMedical Ins 0101-21706 Hospitaiiialion/Medical Ins 0101-21706 Hospftalizalk>n8Me(Hcal Ins 0101-21706 Hospitalization/Medical Ins Toyil MEDICA $374.75 105121102552 Medica High 4/2005 $1,175.12 105121102552 Medica High 4/2005 $10,249.07 105121102552 Medica High 4A?005 $1,760.70 105121122565 Medica Low 4/2005 $11,724.10 105121125468 Medica Elect 4/2005 $731.11 105121134225 Medica Essentials 4/2005 $26,014.85 Pwkl Chki 060731 4/2^/2005 MET COUI^IL EwTr ONMEN^ SVC8 E 602-49450-383 MWCC-Cyrrent Charges Total MET COUNCIL ENVIRONliENTALSVCS $25,338.15 794556 Wastewater Charges 5/2005 $25,338.15 PakTChlii 060732 4/25/2005 MIDWEST COCA COCA BOTTUNO CO £613^99004)92 Soil Drinks For Resale $1.569.05 65254015 Total MK7WE8T COCA COLA BOTTUNO CO Soda fbr Resale $1,569.05 Paid Chki 060733 4^^005 MINNEAPOLIS OICYOEN COMPANY E101-42110-221 EquipmeidPartsAAcoessorias $22.45 RI03050833 Cylinder Invoice Total MBINEAPOLI8 OXYGEN COMPANY $22.45 Paid Chkf 0S0734 4^5^006 MINNESOTA UC FUND E 101-42110-142 Unemployment Beneftt Payments Total MINNESOTA UC FUND $2,105.00 7969286 UnemployemenI - Carlson $2,105.00 Ptid ChkS :WT. 0 601-20602 Due to govts-Slate Total MN DEPT OF HEALTH-CON FEE MN DEPT OF HEALTH • CON FEE $1,190.00 1270041 3/2005 Water Test Fee $1,190.00 Paid Chki ^736~ 4^5^o6^MN DEPT OF REVENUE R 101-34650 Po6oe Reports R101-34210 General Taxable Sales/Service Total MN DEPT OF REVENUE $15.00 $18.00 March 2005 March 2005 Sales Tax 3/2005 Sales Tax 3/2005 MPLSG E 101-42110-319 Other Professional Services Total MPLS DEPT OF HEALTHS FAMILY $33.00 i OF HEALTH S FAMILY i $64.00 2005328 Lab Analysis-054)212 $64.00 r^aU CMM OSSm 405/2005 NEXr&COMMUNICATtONai E 101-41900-321 Telephone $404.67 E 613-49630-321 Telephone $46.91 E 601-49400-321 Telephone $34.96 E 602-49450-321 Telephone $104 66 Total NEXTEL COMMUNICATfONS 3261804274)1 3261604274)1 3261604274)1 3261804274)1 Celt Phones Celt Phones Cell Phones CeH Phones $591.42 Paid Chki 060739 4/25/2005 0*SULLIVANS - HCXJDAY 646 E 101-42110-402 Repairi/Maint-Auto Equip Total O'SULLIVANS-HOLIDAY 646 $11.72 3/2005 Car Washes $11.72 0^740'O'SULLIVANS HOUDAY 647 i: 101-42110-402 Repairi/MaInt-Auto Equip $304.48 3/2005 Total O'SUUIVANS HOUDAY 647 Carwashes $304.46 Paid Chki 060741 4^5/2005 OFFICEDEPOT E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts S Aooeaaoriaa E 101-41900-201 Oflloe supplies E 101-42110-201 Oflloe supplies ($204.96) $141.87 $141.67 Office Supplies Office Supples OMoe Supples : a >^‘ CITY OF ORONO 04/22/05 10:47 AM Paged *Check Detail Register® I APRIL 2008 Check Ai Invoice Comment Tolel OFFICE DEPOT I7S.76 Ptu chia oedf4i old dutch foods me. £613-49900^3 ConoMsIons For R«Mle-Txbl Total OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. 128.98 104995 Chips for Resale $26.98 PaU ChM OaoV43 4/2B/2006 OlkNtO BASEBALL A8SOCUTION £402-48039-530 OttMT Improvamanta Total ORONO BASEBAU ASSOCIATION $135.00 9/14/04 Ballfield Trail - Damaged Spri 1139.00 PaidCtM 000744 4^8/2009 PMARO. CHRIS E101-42110-201 Office supplies Total PHARO. CHRIS PeiddMl offnr 121.29 4ffV05 Recordable OVD's $21.29 4SS2006 PHOEHIX TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIOHS. E 101-42260401 RepeIrsffEeint-Ofnoe Equip 1150.0 0 IVC00165 Total PHOEHIX TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS. Support-4/2005 1150.00 Paid Chk# 6liV46 PREI s A NE1NS PUBLICATIONS E 101-41900-392 Printino S PubisMno 1121.10 E101-41900-392 Printino A Publishing Total PRESS A NEWS PUBUCATKNtS 1121.10 2539133 2539133 Adv for Emp - Septic Adv for Emp • Septic 1242.20 Paid Chk# (M74f 4)i&/2009 PRUDENTIAL UFE INSURANCE 0101-21710 Life Insurance 0101-21710 Life Insurance Total PRUDENTUL LIFE INSURANCE $61.78 $650.40 4/2005 4/2009 Life Insurance 4/2005 Life Insurance 4/2005 $732.18 TOTCKHnasm rbeovendino £613-49900-093 ConoaMlona For Rasala-Txbi Total REEOVENOINO 4/^8^^ RICKS SUPERVALUE Soft Drinks For Resale $106.50 4742 Concessions for Resale $106.50 I"*/,''. ^ald 060749 E 61341 E 613490004)93 Concessions For Resale-1 jcbl E 10142110437 Training A Develo pment Total RICKS SUPERVALUE $7 01 $24.38 $106.80 4/14A>5 4/14/05 4/7/05 Concessions for Resale Concessions for Resale Food • Department Meeting $136.19 PaidChki 090790 4/25/2006 RUSSETH. KYLE E 10142110437 TraMng A Develop ment Total RUSSETH. KYLE $31.25 4/10X)5 Meals - Training $31.25 Paid Chk# 060791 4/29^005 SCHOENHOFF, JOHN E 10142110437 Training A Developme nt Total SCHOENHOFF. JOHN $19.62 4/1SA)5 Meals - Training $19.62 d Chk# oadrsi securint • account 6742 E 10142110-319 Other Protesslonei Services ___ Total SECURINT-ACCOUNT 6742 $6.00 5742-2005033 Credit Reports 3/2005 $6.00 PaidChki 096>5^ 4/ii/id6B startrisune E 10141900-352 Printing A PubUehlng Total STAR TRIBUNE $611.74 012757006 Adv for £mp • SapHc $811.74 ?3J'C!3ar365m 4/29/2005 S^ATE TRiAiURER R 101-39610 Mlioeile neous Revenue 0101-20602 Duelogovts-Slale ($221.52) $4,035.76 1260 1260 Slate Surcharge - 3/2009 State Surcharge - 3/2009 iL I CITY W ORONO *Chdck Detail Register® Q4/22J05 10:47 AM Pager APRIL 2006 Check Amt Invoice Comment Total STATE TREASURER 13.814.24 l^eid USfSS THE NOME DEPOT E 101-41000-223 «deA)rounda MaM. Suppliet 166.68 11/08A)4 SuppKes Total THE HOME DEPOT $66.68 PM Chhi 000750 4/2Sm05 THORPE DIST CO. ES134090(M)02 80SDfMsForResali E 013490004)91 Beer For Resale Total THORPE DIST CO. $37.50 368141 $153.50 368141 Water for Resale Beer for Resale 1191.00 Raid cm 090757 4/25/2005 TOEWE, KIMBERLY E101-42110437 Training A Development Total TOEWE, KIMBERLY $9.50 3/29S)5 Meal • Training $9.50 Paid CIM 090758 4/25/2005 UNIFORMS UNUMITEO E10142110-229 Clothing 9 personal equipmeni E10142110-226 Clothing A personal equipment Total UNtPORMS UNUMITED $523.44 266402 $236.87 266402 Shoulder Patches Mace, Holders $760.31 PaUCiiW (MRS SRooS VAUCY.mCHCO E 60149400406 RepeIrsSSeint-WMsrmaina/plant Total VALLEY-RICH CO $2,633.06 9348 WsterMain-WI)ow/12 $2,633.06 dhU Mfk6 W28S VOOTHEATINOSAIR E 10141900404 RepalrsAMnt-BldgsASroiinds $2,250.00 300712 Air Conditioner-CH Total VOOTHEATINOSAIR $2,250.00 Paid fihUI diSTTT 4^5M06 WAYZATA.CITYOP -387 Intargouemmental ServicesE6014» E 90249450-387 intergovernmental Services Total WAYZATA«CtTYOP $1,969.61 1st Qtr 2005 $592.97 1st Qtr 2005 1st Qtr 2005 Wtr/Swr 1st Qtr 2005 Wtr/Swr $2,562.58 PaUeiSrSIdW witivvoooMtOFCStiONALSEfivices E 101-43290-800 Special Projects. Contingency ____$23.75 503037 Demuth Reforestation Total WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $23.75 Pi^ cm 0SO7S3 4/25/2006 WtNOSINELD SPECIALISTS, INC E 10142110402 RepalraAtaint-Aiflo Equip $300.28 T03301 Windshied Repairs #205 Tetal WINDSHCLD SPECIALISTS, INC PaMCMJ oUIVi« 4MSSS $300.28 i VEUOWMOKUSA E 81349830-340 Owwral AdvwlWng 149.89 303866 Obvdofy Adv Total YEU0WB00KU8A $49.89 19100 PriiMfyCaah $134,476.88 cmr OF ORONO *Check Detail Register© 04/22/05 10:47 AM Pages APfULlOOS Chech/Unt Invotea CowWMiil Fund Summary 10100 Primary Cash 101 OENERAIl FUND 166.807.11 231 DRUGS^ONY FORFEITURE FUND 15.000.00 402 MUNICIPAL 8T AID ST CONSTRUCT $135.00 428 NAVARRE FIRE GTATION PROJ FUND $363.02 001 WATER OPERATING FUND $9,300.01 S02 SEWER OPERATING FUND $40,759.27 013 GOLF COURSE $3,133.05 661 rrORMWMTER UTILITY OP FUND 1910.00 1134.476.66 1S| iii*Ti '■H,'fii its f. V .. ti“:: ■ a;- a*,? >v: A'lAAisaiite > ... - ,^ ' ' ••• i ’v ' ■aa'aa,■a.7>'U| r " ‘..■ art% A t It* Mr ^