Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
11-16-1992 Planning Packet
>! •y.:. mm -1 C C "i O n Council PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE // ' jt^ 2L PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) 1. C=^«, 7 DOit.ln\ hnhi-1 y ■A.'\ A /%a7t.cC<^o 7. yV. 8. ^ yi A.^ i'i^ (yiLj.P(tJs hcrkm r9 r "0^ /:^cC i. 9.fkf-.. ///u. ___Cy LILv l/!^' Pf U g ^^ pLiCv Cttt L E. u u/'■A /Ifiyi, ;i U Jh^ LtU ' ■-'C l~^ •:U-ZZZ£ amu n l1(-'m 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. « %p iiV>V f:.. piannhig oonmission nbbtiiig HONDAY, NOVBNBER 16, 1992, 7s 00 P.M, 1275 BBCMN ROM) SOCftH > GOONCIL CODHCIL RBPIIBSEIITATIVE - Gabriel Jabbour ATTBMDAHCB SKETCH PLAE REVIEMS 1. 7:00 p.ro.#1788 Department of Natural Resources, North Shore Drive, Maxwell Bay Public Access, Conceptual Review/Commercial Site Plan SCHEDULED POBUC HEARINGS 2, 8:00 p.m.#1778/1779 Andrew Goetten, 1385 Pox Street - Preliminary Subdivision/Variance 3. 8:30 p.m #1780 City of Orono, 1000 Old Crystal Bay Road - Preliminary Subdivision (to be continued at a later date) 4. 9:00 p.m. A.#1785 David Carlson, 600,610, 620 Big Island Preliminary Subdivision, Class III, Lot Line Rearrangement and Creation of Easement - Public Hearing B.#1781/#1782, 620 Big Island - Variance/ Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing C.#1783/#1784, 610 Big Island - Variance/ Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing ACTIOH ITEMS - Review of these items will commence prior to or between scheduled public hearings. Applicants presenting variance requests before the Coaslaslon are asked to nove to the podlmi at the front of the chanbers when their application Is announced by the Chairman. 5. #1762 Paul W. Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Continuation of Public Hearing 6. #1768 Dr. William R. and Rhonda T. Omlie, 1860 Shadywood Road “ Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing 7. #1786 Dr. William R. and Rhonda T. Omlie, 1860 Shadywood Road - Conditional Use Permit - Public Rearing 8. #1775 Robert D. Luesse, 3249 Casco Circle - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing 9. #1777 John Thiesse, 3845 Bayside Road - Variance Public Hearing A 1 4 ■---■******•I_ _ _ _ __ __ _ I t PIANNING COMMISSION ih;TING - NOV]16, 1992 PIANNING O •V I SSIOH COMMENTS 10. Report by Planning Commission Representative to Council Meeting of November 9, 1992 (Candace Rowlette). 11. Status Report by Lake Use Committee Representatives. 12. Other Issues ADDITIONAL imiS 13. Planning Commission approval of minutes of October 19, 1992 meeting. 14.Planning Commission to select a representative to attend the December 14, 1992 Council Meeting. ADJOOSHMBHT * I. ♦ ■ I hiMi ■ Nfillii 11 f I I I To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator I Fromt Date: Michael P. Gaffron/ Asst Planning 6 Zoning Administrator November 13, 1992 Subjects Concept Plan*Review, Proposed Maxwell Bay Public Access List of Exhibits A - Site Location Map B - Air Photo/Zoning District Map C - DNR Memo D ” B-2 District Standards Introduction The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources is proposing to construct a new public access on Maxwell Bay, to include a boat launch and fishing pier with associated parking area and amenities* While the DNR has purchased a 1*4 acre parcel immediately east of Lakeside Marina, at the City's request the DNR has conceptually considered purchase of additional property in the general area and developed concept plans for review* The intent of this concept plan review by the Planning Commission is to gain input from the Planning Commission as to P*J^ticular land use in the context of the B-2 zoning “istJ^ict* Recall that the B—2 zone exists primarily to accommodate marinas, although many of the B—2 performance standards will relate directly to the public access concept* A copy of the B-2 zoning standards is attached* Coneapts/Issues for Discussion As a basic guideline for your review and comments to the DNR, staff would offer the following items for potential discussion relating to each of the four plans: Use Compatibility (related to B-2 permitted uses) Fishing Pier Use Parking Capacity Hardcover Landscape Areas/Yard Requirements Lakeshore Setback Vegetation and Screening Sanitary Facilities Access Location Lighting Hours of Operation Sanitation Security Signage Maintenance Compatabillty with Existing Adjacent Uses Drainage and Runoff Control (Quantity and Quality) t r iiA'i I . * Concept Plan Review, Proposed Maxwell Bay Public Access November 13, 1992 Page 2 In reviewing and commenting on the various concept plans, keep in mind that while there are hardcover and setback variances to some degree with each concept plan, there is a clear opportunity to end up with a more conforming situation than currently exists in this area. Note for the record the air photo copy attached was taken in May 1989. Finally, note that although a sample maintenance agreement is attached with the DNR memo, such an agreement should most appropriately be dealt with by the City Council. Isv i ::f V * • .r- V " iNMMWUy^ MiMy :i'£'‘K5“ii!filigr t£ m I :: Cl ti „it^anaata iMc. V-of-' e V CI// t' \ k,^ • z -W K;f] .^fy “^>y " ' ' i> ri 3ft '. / • ■ ’** * •*^' r. ♦ J“i. /. f. ' • .‘r * ►'. • . •• • . ». ■ ‘ ‘% • •, •* ;■ ' ■,;J' •■ «:• Ay \ r ;V A • * ‘ ‘V •••ii .1' ■ ; \ ••'• . S-' . » •V#- ■•• V' k ?. ■ '.'v^ ft vt ’ ‘ ; ♦ A ^'i** •. I • '* * *1 ‘. -'X 'K' <■ -r--.' VI- i » , j- ' .k‘. i . . i'l^y ... I ■. , • f r.«> • . ♦ ’ • ’ -1 * ii "irr i.. b DEPARTMENT : DATE : FROM : PHONE : SUBJECT : r « Natural Resources Region 6 Trails & Waterways November 9» 1992 STATE OF MINNESOTA SF or-*^v6 Qb 14 set Office Memorandum TO : City of Orono Planning Commission ?r CITYO« C^ONC Gordon Regional Trails & Waterways Supervisor NOV 772-7935 PROPOSED MAXWELL BAY PUBLIC ACCESS CONCEPT PLANS Attached are 4 concept plans for your review and eommenC. I have also attached an example of a cooperative agreement that Illustrates how the state and the city can cooperatively manage such a facility. I look forward to the November 16 meeting. Attachments cc:Jo Ellen Herr Gene Stromnen* LMCD Ron Morse Stan Llnnell . I SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: PLANTINGS AND DRAINAGE LAKE MINNETONKA WATER ACCESS - MAXWELL BAY CONCEPTS A - D HENNEPIN COUNTY - IN ORONO NOVEMBER 6» 1992 BY:Scan Linnell Landscape Architect Plantings will be comprised of predominantly native species such as: Green Ash American Linden Sugar Maple Swamp White Oak Red Pine Black Hills Spruce Red Twig Dogwood American Cranber.-/ Grey Dogwood Sumac During the summer months, plantings will be at least: SOX opaque on the lake side, SOX opaque on any adjoining residential side and no more than 20X opaque on sides adjoining roadways (for security reasons). Final planting areas to be coordinated with city. Tree sire: 1'* - U” caliper, 8 - 12' height for deciduous trees, 4-6* height for evergreen trees Shrub size: 2-3* height Drainage: A detailed plan will be provided after properties have been purchased and surveyed. % m m % cjot\cepr PtANjlA LAK^ niNNglOMKA tV^[4^ &AY $6-60 16 4AYL 6-3 mWHA MOOO toiLcr i^oieeH pcrei^iKEp 6rflg. A«EA * AFPf*0)C. 3.070 /ppw^. 63% jJXionMA mvcx>i^r^ AW?(. 6^ % mfoseo HAfOUTV^HAl«P60VlS|t MrtHiM 76'OP tmmmmtk u»ummm o» NAiMUi MtotMKU So?55^S?!fW7l LAMTniHHt^K^ riAXMeU.iiAitawK OA«n_____n< •fBNO iij! *j*»» II AH2-4I I /•’, • » ' LfJ • 9 • » ' »..-.^»V«ilwi n-m‘- • AibB..a.*A iri6«frii'fciTimirtfi bibmAMe^ COHCrPX PLAN 'B lAK^ niHNBIONK^ riAd^H^ BAY i 70*76 0BV4&6 m£i r1^NNA 9JJ. WATEA Ki06l\in |V"^fSC3j i \ piahtika C tw^au ! fOHprifn^AU w^p toiLgr 66p^ u^Mir^off tffg.^ , fW -TP ge ^^wpp. NgiAHeo|t6 ^1*1 CKT^-^hL BvNY «AL6 4^ ^ AftA*AFPAOX. 4.6+6 AfTWX:4eP. H/WbV|^/^w)c 5&7. flw$ep mbtokJi^ ATPA ox «5% • ♦ wrrHN 75' <r ^ • MHMMOIA OWARTNUNf 0» MAtURAl MSOUKIl •UtfAUOflINGMHtINC >*» mrr STTAiulVW tT»Miu.*Ht A»f«A*7 n>H u*»«t LAt^e niHHe.TOMK^ flAVWgU- B'M'ngitanH iH o#0HO•— m Mm ••I*. ■ !• H7 H . i;a ----------------------- _ —-tMW |*«k — ~ * A II . «l t •• . f t ^ ^ A hJCttWtoft «=a^-g*et. r :n», ^ w \ r^iVAte , 4OH60^>r PLAN "C' LAK^ hlMN^TONKA WATKp. hWU^> riAyWaj^ &AY 50-5^ 15 0^ 5>FA4e5 6IT& AA^ *AfWcy 2.56 A^A|g6AfrtMK: -f5X»KW»A«A fWW WnWM 75* CFlMe rvl ^AT W03P tfliujr 60^ UAHt m} pntHncH fttipfrflVAL) PLANK* PArtf5C3j P0«;5ra) / rKlvAte \ I I I I I I I •-. I . r-rPK>44/i^laK Al«7 f ^ortiteHT OMut MiMI tuH^ IP? nwTE 5^ B fWitl iHore Dwve \ Cl'YSrM CAY \ V. •uif AU OMNCMfUNNC MIWmOIA MPAtllMMt Of NAtlMM MSOWKIt "ISM. W««f r lb C*M - ■ ■ - -■ trnm »•« . *. »*• *• ^. .—i. —» p- * #v» 41 « ^ *i«ojaf iXOHlUA K%r*<i Ji»i tr^' £4wteu ^■V 40N^ePT PLAN "D" LAKI5. ttlMN^tONKA WAm AOJ^ WKiCmi^ &AY 65-76 6^/nVJLeN 15 6M 5fi*^5 ^ IxU' 'v/ A-AffTO/. 5.05 A^5 66^1 52:? ffOR)607 FW^OV^ v\oo9 rauer KK)^ Xt /vrwx. rpcrww nr«AA/y^ . AnrMf 3|» 7S»w^ PWVATt xs mer fciwiv-v^ Rg!»ffW WHg(lYE> umianoff 1TO / pPlVAT^ m. 11 f M r. o '^6 I ml /.. i W''' ■. Pl^i^ ijacM)^ rui • i i i; l i I T I • •JONAHS, 03l» m4Y il I I i .A w/sessi iCH'f ^1 ^[5?TH SHOPt DRIVE io>' ■«?' ( <Y6fM \ llMAUClUMCIWBWWU rmtiftf**** —AiMiMt a§ MA1UM41 wtouaciiEPj^fsr ?;::i;:;.^>Atii4asF®r ttim » in uDirrb/irjr FAX 612 637 036S 12002/003 1 j VV. □ o umifiAMi ifecffiCATieM ^ Miufr-Hfj: @ HouiPia-Mi* ® Roucnm -M ^ mi © «Mnor-vJ»Ji. © 0 DOMFlUMt* 0 MOUWI10 ilWC«ir»i<wlJwnnill*lwO(>lil»Jwtf>. (i) r£coffTi0LiiieirrAcuEMio6H0imN«c»r ^ PXOafllMLBrQfNC».Ci*«aOKMM) Q] M •Mcmiqryipar H.MMttania □ l.lMMiNeMi MUMVA □□□□ -K ra If□20□1a1la ftac If «rtf* OMMfrClMrflMt A U mImIw WwwMr Mi tigfhtf 10;ff.fi.at.««r46 ti1UMpVMaii -V Imbp Ikoc MJIJ ar 1 aS ^ vSo Iwnlnflta IMlM NI«M m(M # Mi H im 1 MiOpiM ^• A & CM k . M i iiiiM-iiilimiirifflii r /I ACRBIMBNT Thl« •gr*«a«nt. Md* this "2^ dsv of i9St, bstwssn ths Stats of Nlnnssota, acting by and thfSbgh ths Cennissionsr of ths Ospartnant of natural Rasoureas. harsinaftor rafarrad to aa tha "Stata* and tha City of Oraanflald, haralnaftar rafarrad to aa tha "City*. NXTNBSSBTHi WHBRBaa, tha Coaalaalonar of Natural Raaoureoa haa tha authority, duty and roaponalbillty undar Mlnnaaata Statutaa. Section 97A.141, Subdivision 1 to provide tha public with free atata water access sites on lakes and rivers where access la inadaguata; «id NRBIIBAS, the City la authorised under Mlnaaaota Statutaa 471 to operate racraatlonal facllltiaa; and NHBRBAS, additionally tha 19S7 laws of •/flnnoaota, ^ Chapter 400. Section 8, Subdivision 2 (f). appropriated funds to tha Coaalasienar to acquire land and develop water access cites on lakes and rivers throughout the state: and NRBIIBAS. tha State and City have detemlnad that the present aecese alts to Lake Sarah la inadequate and la of "priority* for laproveaent: and NRBRBAS, the City owns property on Lake Sarah legally described as fellows; The east 73.8 feet of the west 8840 feet of Oovarnaent Lot 1. Section 34. Township 119, Range 84. Rennepla County. Nlnneaota; and the east 33 feet of the west 8888.S feet of Oovemaent Lot 1. Section 34. Township 119. Range 84. Hennepin County. Minnesota, aa shown on attachaent A. NON THBRSfORS. In consideration of the autual benefits to be derived by tha public bodies hereto and for the benefit of the general public, the parties agree as follows: ‘fc.t ! s ' fc- X. IMPKOVEMEMT AMP COST Th« Stata and City ahall Jointly eonatniet a public aceaas to Laka Sarah on tha City property aa legally daserlbad abova. Tha Stata ahall: A. Supply tha graval for tha parking araa. antranea road, and othar travel aurtaeaa. a. Supply and dallvar tha conerata planka. eonnaetlng l*nrdMara. and additional eonatruetlon aatarlala (graval, filter fabric.) aa needed for Inatallatlon of tha reap. C. Supply taehnleal aaalatanea and half tha labor naeoaaary la eonatruetlon of tha antranea read, parking araa, and raap. Tha City ahall: A. Supply tha agulpaaat and half tha labor naeaaaary to eenatruet tha aeeaaa. eonatruetlon ahall Ineluda. but la not Haltod to tha antranea read, parking area, and plank raap Inatallatlon. ■. Clear tha araa for tha antranea read, parking area, and raap. of bruah and traaa aa flaggad by tha Stata. II. ACCISS SITE opkhattoii Tha city agraao to operate the aeeaaa la tha following A. Tha City ahall eoaply with all local, Stata and fadaral lawa, ragulatlena, rulaa, and erdlnancaa which apply for aanagonant, operation and aalatananco of a public aeeaaa. 0. Tha City ahall be aolaly raopenalbla for tha aanagaaant. operation and aalatonanea of tha aeeaaa and keep tha oaao la good and aanltary order aa daaerlbad herein In eeapllanea with tha taraa of tha agraonaat. C. The aeeaaa ahall be free and raaaln open to tha public every day of tha year. 24 houra a day. 0. Tha aeeaaa ahall have no launch raatrletlona placed upon it. axeapt aa adopted through aurfaeo uaa aenlng ragulatlena applying to all uaara, and it la further undarateod that tha City will not undartaka any activity which will restrict tha i i I I iMi .. I r i;r ^ •» A'i->■ »?*• - »: i: ■ ..-?«■ launching or rotrlaval of watareraft in any way Mithout tha axpraaa wrlttan eonaant of tha State. B. Tha State raaarvaa tha right to Inapaet the aeeaaa at all tinea to Insure the City is in eonpllanea with tha tarns of this agraanant. r. Tha Stats shall pest a sign inferaing the public that tha aeeaas is ceeparativaly previdad by the City and ths Oapartaant of natural Rsoourees. 0. Tha City shall previds anfereansnt of tha accass Insuring ceaplianea with tha rulaa and ragulatiens of this >nt. XXX. Bach party agraas that it will ba rasponaibla for its own acts and tha rasults tharaef to tha axtant autherisad by law mit' aar ba raapenaibla for tha acts of tha othar party aivi «v.'^«ulta tharaof. Tha Stata's liability shall ba govarnad by tha previsions of tha Nlnnaseta Tort Claias Act, Hina. Stat. Saetion S.73S. and othar applicabla law. XV. TthM Tha agraanant shall eoaaaacs whan all signaturaa ars ceaplatad and ba parpatual. axeapt as otharwisa previdad. V. ALTBBATXOil AW BWfORCBMBIIT Any natarial altaration aftar coaplatioa of tha iaprovaaant and davalopaant nust ba apprevad in writing by tha Cennissienar of Natural Rasoureas. This prevision of tha agraanant nay ba anforead by tha stata in law or in aguity. and no ranady shall praeluda anothar. VX. tmi Tha books, raeerda. deeunants. and accounting procaduras and praetieaa of tha City ralavant to this Agraanant ara subjaet to axaninatien by tha Ceanissionar of Natural Raaouress and tha Stata Auditor. XN NXTNBSS MBBRSOF. tha partlas hava eausad tha Agraanant to bo duly axaeutad intanding to bo bound tharaby. tMi.i [■ OtPI^UtT OP KATVM^Ij■SOURCES Title ^S!STA.-.r CCVV:SSICNER pn-T arv •r.T^Tin.'j Date AONZNZSTRATZOll ■y ^fpdNnkMaAsJ Title AUGisiyra Date •ysOtrtUT. Joyee Approved Ao To Pora and Knoeutloa Httbort M. Ruaphroy zxz Attorney Oonorol Spec ini JfitmimtmSt Attorney Oonoral Oopartaont of Matural Rooenreoo Date •BOS'* AU6151988 t \ —. i . L . a', iir ^ k »..M M •'t . .. r f • ^ .1. i;' ■ lake SARAH \ S 10.40 3. No building or structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, tent or shack shall be constructed, placed or maintained upon the property except as accessory to and during the construction of permanent buildings. H. Drainage. No land shall be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing floods, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council for approval. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural water course, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be in compliance with the Surface Water Management Plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. I. Height. No structure or building shall exceed 2**l/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. SBC. 10.41. B-2 LAKESHORE BOSINESS DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The "B-2" Lakeshore Commercial District was originally intended to provide areas where limited commercial businesses could be located to service boats used for recreational purposes on Lake Minnetonka. However, many of the operators of the lakeshore commercial businesses have stripped the trees and vegetation from the shorelands and have expanded the operations so that now the "B-2 ” Lakeshore Commercial Districts adversely affect the lake water quality and the real estate values of adjoining properties. The purpose of this Chapter is to provide for additional reasonable regulations that require partial * restoration of the shoreland vegetation, that will serve to avoid pollution of the lake water and to insure protection of adjacent residential properties which have previously suffered from the unregulated expansion of commercial activities. Subd. 2. Application. All applications for a building permit in any "B-2'* Lakeshore Commercial District shall be reviewed by the Council and may be referred to the Planning Commission for review. Subd. 3. Permitted Uses. Within the "B-2'* Lakeshore Business District, no land or structure shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: A. Repairs. Repair and servicing of boats. B. Storage. Winter storage of boats. ' ORONO CC 336 (4-1-84) i § 10.41 C. Sales, Etc. Sale and rental of boats, motors, fishing equipment and sale of fuel, boats, boat supplies, bait and marine items. Subd. 4. Conditional Uses. Within any ”B-2" Lakeshore Business District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: A. Sale of cigarettes. w B. Sale of 3.2 beer or sale of "set-ups . (Subject to licensing by Council.) . ^ ..C. Sale of prepackaged food or food from vending machines. Prepackaged food includes only food which has been professionally prepared at a location other than on the and does not include "full-course meals" or any food preparation other than warming by use of an infra-red or micro-wave oven. Sale of food from vending machines is allowed. Subd. 5. Parking Requirements. Within the B-2 Lakeshore Business District the off-street parking facilities shall be sufficient to eliminate any traffic or parking congestion to be caused by the business conducted. The parking areas may not be paved. The minimum parking requirements shall be as follows: A. Six parking spaces shall be provided for each ten boat slips on water or on land. ,B. At least eight off-street parking spaces, plus one additional space for each 800 square feet of floor area C. If the proposed use is to include the launching hosts owned* bv the public for the day from trailers, ten additional auto-trailer parking spaces shall be provided for eac ramp. D. The required parking spaces may not by a public roadway from the dock, a storage space, mooring space, floor space, or ramp they are designed to serve. E. Required off-street parking space may not be utilized for open storage of goods or for the storage of boa , MC.Pt that erom October 1 to May 1 each year, the t^uired off- Hteet parking may be used for winter storage of boats Provided that 20% of the required parking spaces remain as a un parking area. parking may not be allowed in any required yard or landscaping area. Subd. 6. Yards. The minimum required yard areas for the district sfatl be landscaped Planted with ewer,„^^^^^^^^ deciduous shrubs and trees in accordance with a detailed lanasc p plan. ORONO CC 337 (4-1-84) I irt > mAT ■ § 10.41 I t- Subd. 7. Landscaping Areas, In addition to the landscaping required in the required yard areas for the district, the following landscaping areas shall be landscaped in accordance with the following provisions: A. The minimum landscaping areas shall be as ^oXXows•1, The lakeshore landscaping area shall be an area that is parallel to the entire lakeshore adjacent to the licensed marina operation and equal to 10% of the average lot depth, but in no case shall it be less than 10 feet nor more than 75 feet. Breaks in the landscaping area for access to the lake shall not exceed an aggregate width of 30 feet for each marina operation. side yard landscaping area shall be an area that is parallel to the side lot line and not within the lakeshore landscaping area or front yard landscaping area and shall not be less than 10 feet deep. . , ^ , «k.ii3, Front yard Xandscaping area snaxx oe an area that is parallel to the street or opposite the lakeshore JIndscaping aria and shall not be less than 10 feet deep. Breaks in the landscaping area for access to the public road shall not exceed an aggregate width of 50 feet for each marina operation. B. The detailed landscape plan for each landscaping area shall provide for a natural woods area containing primarily evergreen and deciduous trees not less than six ip heigh . the required landscaping and access roads. A Pf reauired in addition to the natural landscaping which has been planted to meet the requirements of this district. The fencing shall not satisfy the requirements of providing natural landscaping and solid visual screening. Mjy yar<3 area *^«^iting landscaping to meet the requirements of this district shall be planted with nursery stock, balled and bagged trees and ^rubs. All landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy growing condition. Q the required improvements in the landscaping will be completed prior to the w^iiTchevIrcertificate or as otherwise provider by this Chapter, whicnever date occurs first. following performance standards: A. Suitable sanitary facilities connected to Public sanitary sewer or to a private on-site sewage disposal system which commies with all applicable City Code provisions and other agency ORONO CC 338 (4-1-84)■i hrI*'- S 10.41 regulations shall be provided on the premises for men and women, and further, suitable facilities shall be provided for the disposal of wastes accumulated in boats docked or serviced at the marina. B. In^sofar as practicable, all means of access to the operation from any street shall be so located and designed as to avoid the routing of vehicles from the property over streets that primarily serve abutting residential areas. All access roads from the operation to any public paved roadway shall be paved for a distance of at least thirty feet adjacent to the public roadway to minimize dust and noise conditions. All access roads from the operation to any unpaved public roadway shall be treated to minimize dust conditions at least to the extent the unpaved public roadway is dust controlled. C. The lighting shall be shielded so that no direct glare can be seen from adjoining residences, from the lake or from th0 roddwdv*D. The hours for running engines or operating any A.M. and 6:00 P.M. E. The maximum hours of operation shall be 7:00 specifically granted by the Council. F. Persons in charge shall at all times keep the docks, sea walls, and premises in a neat and orderly manner and free from trash, rubbish, repair parts, machinery, equipment a debris of all kinds. G. Persons in charge shall prohibit the dumping or throwing of garbage, paper, bottles, cans, refuse or debris i^'to waterway. Persona in charge of mooring area shall Provide gar age cans of sufficient size to hold garbage or refuse to be collected. H. No commercial docks or boat buoys shall extend further into the waters of any lake than fSr*5lror Vessage^rbSy orwater withi^the ^b2 of the City^. The length of docks and location °^j?Y^®/^harves regulated by the City Code. All such commercial docks and wharves shill be constructed and maintained of or liklly ?o type of construction as will not render them unsa shaA be endanger public enjoyment of the waters. maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times. ORONO CC 339 (4-1-84) ^L, 1 S 10.41 I, If outside boat slip (1-vid) storage facilities are provided, the boats shall be stored in such manner that they do not create a fire hazard. Any outside structures for purpose of storage of boats ra^ay not exceed 15 feet in height. Dry boat storage areas may not be located in the required yards or landscaping areas. Any gasoline offered for sale or stored on the premises shall be placed in tanks or containers as may be required by the Council, and such tanks or containers shall be stored underground or such distance from the storage facilities so as not to create a danger to the community. The premises shall at all times be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. Subd. 9. Area, Height, Lot Width and Yard Requirements. A. Height. No structure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height. observed: B. The following minimum requirements shall be 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Lot Area - 2 acres. Lot Width Parallel to Lake - 200 feet. Lot Width Perpendicular to Lakeshore - 200 feet. Lakeshore Yard - 75 feet. Side Yard - 10 feet. Front Yard Along Street - 30 feet. Subd. 10. Regulations. Setback, Hardcover and Tree Removal A. Lakeshore Setback Regulations. The building setback from the shoreline shall be 75 feet. B. Setback to Residential. No operation or activities except for storage and parking may be than 50 feet to the boundary of an adjoining property line which property is used for residential purposes. C. Setback Along Streets. No activities except for storage and parking than 50 feet to the right-of-way of any existing street, road or highway. D. Lakeshore Hardcover Regulations. Within 75 of the shoreline there shall be no ®*cavating, temporary or permanent structures. Within 75 to 25 250 shoreline there shall be no greater 2^% hardcover.^ W 250 to 500 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater cnanjuj hardcover. Within 500 to 1,000 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 35% hardcover. ORONO CC 340 (4-1-84) S 10.41 [ E. Tree Removal Regulations. No trees within 75 feet of the shoreline with the diameter of six inches or more shall be removed without first obtaining a permit from the Council. Subd. 11. Drainage. No land shall be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing floods, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council for approval. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural water course, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be in compliance with the Surface Water Management Plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. Subd. 12. Non-Conforming Use. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Chapter, any non-conforming use of land not involving a structure and any non-conforming use involving a structure with an assessor's fair market value on January 1, 1975, of $3,000.00 shall be allowed to continue as a non-conforming use subject to the provisions as set forth in Section 10.03, except that the provisions of this Chapter relating to the eliraination of non-conforming use of boat slips, boat buoys, or overall ler^th of docks, their location, construction, and maintenance and boat mooring areas, shall supersede any other non-conforming use provisions of the City Code. A. Elimination of Non-Conforming Use of Boat Slips, Beat Buoys or Overall Length of Docks. Any marina operator increases the number of boat slips, boat buoys or overall length of docks beyond what he was previously licensed for by the increases are authorized by ordinances of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, shall first decrease an equivalent number of boat slips or boat buoys and eliminate an equivalent length of dock from that portion of his dock that is non-conforraing under the terms of Ordinance No. 1 of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District until the dock conforms in length to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District's Ordinances. Subd. 13. Variances. Variances may be granted to the provisions of this Chapter in accordance with the provisions set forth in Section 10.08. Subd. 14. Variances For Required Landscaping Areas. The ^!rn'=t\n,"7er’iod%o iraVcapln" ^ planting provisions hereof, to any applicant whoi ORCNO CC 341 (4-1-84) * :: I --- s 10.41 A. Otherwise meets all of the provisions of this Chapter B. Submits a detailed landscape plan showing sufficient planting and landscaping in each of the four years in order to provide at the end of the four years a natural screen that will not be less than 50% opaque during the summer months. C. Submits four year planting and landscaping plan which shall provide that in each year of the plan, at least 25% of the necessary landscaping and planting (as determined by the Council as of April 15, 1975) be planned, bonded and completed for each required landscaping area according to the other provisions of this Chapter. The Council may vary this requirement in order to allow a higher percentage of the landscaping and planting in any required landscaping area and credit the applicant for the landscaping and planting which otherwise would be required in other landscaping areas. Subd. 15. Regulations Relating to Location, Construction, Installation and Maintenance of Docks, Boat Mooring Areas and Other Fixed or Floating Structures and Objects on Lakes - Adoption by Reference. The City hereby adopts by reference and makes a part of this Chapter as if fully set forth herein^ the following: Ordinance No. 1 of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District as adopted on January 28, 1970; Amendment to Ordinance No. 1 as adopted on May 27, 1970 by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District; Amendment No. 2 to Ordinance No. 1 as adopted 28. 1971, by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. The city expressly reserves the right to deny any variance to the provisions of Ordinance No. 1 as amended, even though the same variance was granted by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. Ordinances are declared invalid by a court of jurisdiction, no marina shall have a or more boat buoys than what was permitted by the terras of that ordinance on the date it was declared invalid, or than was last approved by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, whichever is less The City expressly reserves the power to be mote^ restrictive in its regulation^ than the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Ordinances^ if the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Orono so requir:^s. ORONO CC 342 (4-1-84) l‘rI"r- Tos Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Pros: Dates Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator November 9, 1992 Subjects #1778 Andrew Goetten# 1385 Fox Street Variance ~ Public Hearing Xonlng Districts RR>1B, Single family rural residential, 2 acre minimum lot size Applications Request for lot area variance in conjunction with subdivision Application #1779 List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Application Applicant's Memo of Request MUSA Boundary Map Zoning Map Resolution No 1178 (8/11/80) Additional Pertinent Documentation from 1979-1981 Staff Analysis for Potential Rezoning to LR-IB In 1980 the Minnetonka Bluffs area was provided with municipal sanitary sewers. Part of that project Included construction of lift station at the easterly end of the Goetten property at 1385 Fox Street. The property owners granted said easement to the City at no charge. Related to the easement was a request by the property owners for a single sewer unit to serve their existing residence located generally in the east half of the property, and a request for the future ability to subdivide the property leaving 1 acre with the house and a 2 acre rural unsewered lot to the west. The City adopted Resolution No. 1178 entitled "Determining that One Sanitary Sewer Service Will Be Provided For The Property Located At 1385 Fox Street, And Determining Standards For Any Future Subdivision Of The Property". Further, on November 23, 1981 the City adopted Resolution No. 1337 to define the Metropolitan Urban Service Area Boundary for the Bluffs project area. The boundary was placed 330' east of the center line of Orono Orchard Road, clearly defining a portion of the Goetten property inside the MUSA boundary and leaving a larger portion outside. The questions for the Planning Commission to first whether these past City actions obligate the a lot area variance for the proposed Goetten (Application #1779), and secondly, whether circumstances and stated hardships are sufficient to grant a variance. consider are City to grant subdivision the unique justification i '■ j # l «i iL Zoning File #1778 November 9, 1992 Page 2 lot Area Requlrenents The property is ‘currently zoned RR-lB, Single Family Rural Residentialr requiring a 2 acre minimum lot size per Municipal Code Section 10.28, Subd. 5 (B). Municipal Code Section 11.10, Subd. 14 "Special Reqairements for Plata", states in Item A, toning Regulations^ "Every plat shall oonfoni to existing zoning regulations and subdivision regulations applicable at the tiae of final plat approval. Variances shall not he approved to increase the overall subdivision density above the einieua lot area requireaents of the applicable zoning district and this chapter." This code wording was adopted as part of the 1984 recodification. The subdivision code in effect at the time of Resolution No. 1178 listed the following policy: 39.140. General Requirements: Lots. 1. Residential lots, as to size and area, shall be governed by and subject to the policy of the City Council. Such policy, for the promotion of health, welfare, sanitation and the like, is declared to be in favor of relatively large lots so that problems Involving sewage, drainage and cess pools may be minimized and so that the healthy, open and uncrowded aspect of the City may be maintained. Further the policy shall be that all lots conform in area to the existing lots in the general area of the proposed subdivision, and conform to the minimum building sizes established by Chapter 32. Applicant proposes Lot 1 at 2.01 dry buildable acres (excluding existing roadways) and Lot 2 at 1.00 dry buildable acres. Soiling History Prior to July 10, 1950, the property was not zoned. From July 10, 1950 until September 14, 1967 the property was zoned "Orono District", a residential district requiring a 1.5 acre minimum lot size. From September 14, 1967 until January 1, 1975 the property was zoned R-IB, one family residential, again requiring a 1.5 acre lot alze. From January 1, 1975 to the present, the property has been zoned RR-IB, one family rural residential zoning district requiring a 2 acre minimum lot size. I 1 " - --- - I lip' i'T IV' Zoning File 11778 November 9, 1992 Page 3 Discttssion Staff advised 'applicant's agents that the proposed subdivision and variance would best be initially addressed as a sketch plan. Further» it was staff's recommendation that applicant and City proceed with a request to rezone the entire Bluffs neighborhood so that the lot area variance question could be avoided. Applicant chose to make a preliminary plat application and variance request without benefit of a sketch plan review. Adding complexity to the request is the City Engineer's recommendation for dedication of additional right-of-way» which would leave less than 3 acres in the main body of the property. Potentiallyr this results in one or both new lots being less than a 1 acre or 2 acre standard. Please review the documentation of dlscussionsr letters^ etc. surrounding Resolution No. 1178. Although I was Involved in drafting that resolution. City Planner Alan Olson and City Manager Dick Benson were main parties involved in the discussions, and their letters and memos may shed some light on the City's intent. Painfully lacking in any of the documentation is discussion of either the terms "variance" or "rezoning". In staff's opinion. Resolution No. 1178 ard the subsequent MUSA alignment leave absolutely up in the air the question as to which direction such a subdivision would proceed in the future. Staff believes that the City actions of 1980 and 1981 anticipated a rezoning of the newly sewered Bluffs area to 1 acre standards, which has never occurred. Only one subdivision occurring after adoption of the 1975 zoning code has been found in which the creation of substandard lots within a new subdivision was allowed. That case is the 1979 conversion of the Stubbs Bay Marina property, which had previously been zoned B-2, to three residential units zoned LR- lA, with variances to allow 3 half-acre lots and a half —acre outlot in a 2-acre zone. This was basically a contract downzoning, and variances were necessary to protect the investment of the property owner and avoid the issue of a "taking" as a result of the rezonlng. The Stubbs Bay Marina situation clearly is a distinct and unique case within the LR-IA 2 acre zoning district. There are no other properties with the identical situation as Goetten's, i.e. in a 2 acre zone, split by the MUSA boundary, and having a resolution on file that sets up a future 1 acre sewered/2 acre unsewered lot split. However, it might be interpreted that the effect of granting this variance is to set a * Zoning File #1778 November 9, 1992 Page 4 precedent allowing any large (2-f acre) sewered lot within the MUSa boundary and in g 2 acre zone, to be subdivided into 1 acre lots. There are a significant munber of such lots, mainly in the Stubbs Bay and West Ferndale project areas, a few in Crystal Bay, and a few others scattered about. It has been a longstanding City policy that to existing dense rural development is merely to problems, not to allow for the creation of development. The Community Management Plan (Page part that sewering existing residences is one solving a documented health problem, but "in no sewerage foster new development; it would only be existing deficiencies...” bringing sewers solve existing higher density 6-44) states in alternative to case would such used to correct Kesoning Potential A review of the Minnetonka Bluffs Sewer Project Area suggests that no increases in development density are likely to result from a rezoning to 1 acre standards. Only 2 of 25 sewered lots currently exceed 1 acre in area, those being 1.05 and 1.02 acres respectively. Further, there are no existing vacant parcels which could be built on without the need for at least a 50% variance, which the City would not necessarily have to grant. Although one might argue that with 5 building sites currently consisting of 2 or more uncombined parcels there is potential for those parcels to be sold and variances requested, that potential already exists under the current zoning, and a rezoning to 1 acre does not chanr e the parameters for granting area and width variances for buildability. The most compelling reason to rezone would be to allow property owners more freedom and flexibility in improving their properties. By having a set of zoning standards that more closely fits the existing character of the area, variances will be reduced. Analysis of Variance Request In analyzing whether or not to grant a variance. Planning Commission should consider the following questions: 1.Does the wording of Resolution No. 1178 and the City's subsequent placement of the MUSA boundary constitute an obligation and Intent to grant a future variance, or does it anticipate a rezoning of the sewered Minnetonka Bluffs properties to a 1 acre standard? j airri-d ii~ii ^ • “ ^»*>r** Zoning Pile #1778 November 9, 1992 Page 5 2.Are the hardships and unique circumstances stated in applicant's letter of request sufficient to justify a recommendation to grant a lot area variance associated with a subdivisionr in light of the strong directive of Section ll.lO, Subd. 14? 3.Has the City granted such a variance in the past? Are there other similarly situated properties which could make the same request? Would granting this variance set a negative precedent? Staff Re dation The subdivision code^ Section 11.10, Subd. 14 states very clearly and succinctly that a variance shall not be approved to Increase the density above the minimum lot area requirements. On this basis alone, staff would have to recommend denial of the requested variance. In light of the 1980 resolution and 1981 MUSA boundary placement, it is clear that applicant was relying in good f.*ith that the City would provide a means by which his subdivision could legally occur. Staff believes that a rezonlng of the Minnetonka Bluffs area is the most logical and appropriate way for this to occur. Such a rezoning and other possible rezonings of previously sewered rural neighborhoods should occur within the context and guidelines set forth in the Community Management Plan regarding development and sewering of the rural area. Isv 1 I J _ _ __ _ _ 10^22^92 10:42 THE CITY OF ORONO 612-473-7357 006 CITY OF OBOMO - VARXiUlCB APPLICATIOM £IJY Qf QRQ>^Q FiSmE OFFICE Initial Application Fae ^175.00 1350200000 ’(9S0.00 par aaeh additional variance) 175.0i Xanawal Varlanca Faa $10(l«00 . (no ohanga freei original mlJi miQ j , Varianca for non oonfezming uaa $200.00 ^iZ g ^ ./ Aftar-tha-Fact Faaa (Doubla applicatien^faa)^^^^^| ^ ^ nOFXRTY XMFORNATIGff Sita Addraaa Street, Orono, Minnesota 55391 #t» Y n 1 02-117-23 340001Froparty Zdantif. Mumbar (P.I.P.),, ■ ' Attach legal description to appll^tion »* iaclndad on raqniirad sorvay. (See Exhibit A) Date Property Acquired (month/yaar) 1 ^K4o not) «X.o OMI th. «d3.oMt p.re.l. o* Present use of property i ^^j^rasldontial ------pother (•pacify)--------------------- Boning nlaferieti RR-IB - ____________________ tfmCMIT (hone) ^73-6633 ------------ Haaa Andrew J» Coetten Phone tvarlt\ n/a MASrmmMt 1385 Fox Street _______ Cltvt Orono----- omSK (if different than applicant) Phone (***•• ^- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- Phone (worh)^- - - - - --- - - - - - - - Address I - _ _ _ _ _”.rf—-- - - - -- M^l-ated construction Cost $- - - - - - - - - - - Describe request in detail i See ExhibJ ________________________ ▼ABiAMCU mmamm « . RmpdeovAr IiOt; CoV#lTR9^__^ Lot Area Lot Width _ saracoYwi _4 naar Average Takeihor#___^Setbacks ___Front ____ side -----^ Other (specify)___________________________;______"Zi_____________ 1BZP/D8SCRIPTZ0W OF UM06UAI. P*OP«*ST COWDXTIOWS cenditlont prwTRntlng compli^tiem wirn ^ _______W Exhibft A —----------------------------------------------------- ••• « •• • .1 10/22^10:42 T>€ CITY CF OROMD 612-473-7357 007 • ♦' 01)^1 ShCCtB Igyim iBfox—tioo »g«^ be OTbaittad hy AmmAl *nm iB order for war >tip^«tioo to bo ^0 .1 < y lotOf 1 «# atmora within 150' (you must obtain2.^Cortifled Froporty Owners Uat of center “ this lift from Hennepin county Department of Finance A 6 348-3271). 3.iL^l«t Map (obtained with .^^^.yor) to include4, »o certificate of aurvey (algned by a lleeneeo aurve^ # ei,*xll" for coiiS^bardcover caleulationa as required (provide one (1) copy 8% xii 5. ^^"*^Kp*^jraphie survey (existing and proposed ***^ changes “~ln existing grade are proposed (provide mo c^y * 8fc"xll"). 6 X Sketches or A ana of floor s elevation views (provide 1 copy 8% xll ). « IS«SdS to thl. .ppllctlon, PX.... .tt.<* . Il.t of ----ray oth.r praran. you «l»h notifUta of thl. .ppllMtlon. »■ JXiaitleo»l Itra. ray b. pra«rat.d by City .toff. The Applicant and Property Owner nust *^9n^thl^p^ica^oru Please remember that vonr warlence syli«tion i« Infermati .,>... to ptouid. .11 ^"‘2;Ju^l”2«'Vt.« r^..t.d by th. .nl/2r oon.olt.nt .sp.n... rappxi.- i. ttu. raa _ Applicant*a Signature ONMBS SX The owner ss's&r authorises reasonable entry for purposes of investlga- agentar Commission m tion and verification rr. keat. — ^___Owner * a Signature bpplicrat ra.t hav. •! ff^^^e^iraira^MraUotV .rST*Mid on tb. jirs^s’o.^^or.?ch“Vop: outhoritra .prat attond in your plae. w Offie. of thl. ehrap. prior to th. nratinp. an Zoning t A I t.’n- • i ’ Exhibit A ii.v;•r »■ / 1 .1 7 :ji r t '■U VARIANCE APPLICATION OF . ANDREW J. GOETTEN Summary description of request The site address of the property owned by Mr. Goetten ("Property") is 1385 Fox Street^ Orono, Minnmota. The site is shown on Schedule 1 attached. The Property is legally described as; That part of Lot 3, Section 2, Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Princip^ Meridian, described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest comer of Lot 3 aforesaid and running thence East 720 feet to the Northerly liiiA on side of right of way of the Minnetonka Branch of the Great Northern Railway; thence Southwesterly along the Northerly line on side of said ri^t of way 827.05 feet to the West line of Lot 3 aforesaid; thence North 423.1 feet to place of beginning, the boundaries of which tract of land have been marked by three judicial landmarks placed at the most Easterly comer of said tract of at a point in the Southwesterly line and at a point in the North line where said lines are intersected respectively by a line parallel to and 33 feet east of the West line of said lot. Also that part of the West 33 feet of Lot 3, Section 2, Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the 6th Principal Meridian lying Southerly of County Road No. 7, the boundaries of which tract of land have been marked by four judicial landmarks placed at the Northwest comer and the Northeast comer, respectively, of said tract of land, and at a point in the Westerly line thereof 288.3 feet South along said line firom said Northwesterly comer, and in the East line thereof at a point 275.4 feet South of the Northeast comer thereof. The area of the Property is approximately 3.6 acres and is currently zoned RR*1B. The portion of the Property upon which the existing residence is located (the ’Residence Parcel") (approximately 1+ acre) is currently served by public sewer as a result of the City’s Sewer Project 80-1 and lies within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area ("MUSA ) line (See Schedule 2 attached). The remaining portion of the Property, approximately 2+ acres (the "Unsewered Parcel"), lies outside the MUSA Line and is not connected to public “j i i -----......— w 1 • > . «<#•/ > J J ‘'•j V * / .* :t *. :o’ ■ ’ • . %•—"V. V ') sewer, having been excluded from Sewer Project 80-1. Pursuant to Section 10.08 of the Orono Municipal Code (the "Code"), Mr. Goetten seeks a variance from the provisions of Section 10.28, subd. 5 of the Code which require a minimum lot area of 2 acres for property zoned RR-IB in order that the Council may approve his application to subdivide the Property into two lots corresponding to the Residence Parcel and the Unsewered Parcel. Mr. Goetten asks the Council to consider and grant his variance request because of the unique circumstances of the Property and because the granting of his request would not violate the spirit and intent of the Land Use Regulations for the City of Orono. Hardship/Description of unique property conditions A. Standard of review. The Council will hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning chapter in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of the circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Orono Mun. Code § 10.08, subd. 3. The Council will grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will not adversely affect the purpose and intent (the spirit) of the Zoning chapter and will not compromise the health or welfare of the public. Id. The Council will not adversely affect the spirit and intent of the Zmiing chapter by granting the i'equ’.^ted variance and allowing the subdivision of the Property into two lots corresponding to the Residence Parcel and the Unsewered Rural Parcel. B. The strict anfinrcftment of the 2 minimum lot area would cause Mr. Goetten hprdahip because of the circumstances unique to the Property. There are several facts unique to the Property which cause a strict enforcement of t-hfl 2 acre Tnininuim lot area to be an undue hardship to Mr. Goetten. Most importantly , the Council has already considered and implicitly approved the subdivision of the * J I .1 J f' .•*1 ') Property in the context of Sewer Project 80-1. (See Resolution No. 1178) The City of Orono initiated Sewer Project 80*1 in part to solve existing on-site sewage treatment problems in the Minnetonka Bluffs area ("housing cluster 5" as shown on map 12 of the 1980 Community Management Plan). The Property is part of housing cluster 5, but is the only property therein which meets the RR-lB zoning requiremenU. AD of the other lots in housing cluster 5 are substandard lots with respect to the lot area requirements of land zoned RR-IB. Granting the requested variance wiD not alter the essential character of the locality. Pursuant to Resolution No. 1178, the Council determined that one sewer service stub be provided to serve the Residence Parcel of the Property as part of Sewer Project 80- 1, as l»"g as any future subdivision of the Property leave at least 1 acre for the existing residence, i.e. the Residence Parcel, and any new building site created, i.e. the Unsewered Parcel, wiU fuDy comply with aU current zoning regulations of RR-lB, including on-site sewage treatment- By so quaUfying the sewer service extension, the Council de facto approved a subdivision subject to those guidelines contained in the resolution. Mr. Goetten relied on that de facto approval when he granted the City of Orono an easement over the Unsewered Rural Parcel of the Goetten Property to place a lift station which was necessary for the sewering of the Minnetonka Bluf& area. It should be noted that Mr. Goetten did not insist on monetary consideration for granting this easement, not only because he wished to provide real support to the sewer project in this area, but also as a result of his reliance on the spirit and intent of Resolution No. 1178. In addition, the Council extended the MUSA boundary line to include the sewer-serviced portions of housing cluster 5, the effect of which was to cut the Property into two lots corresponding to the Unsewered Parcel and the Residence Parcel. (See Resolution No. 1337) The de i I i 1 . \ rr .»t facto Council approval and the present location of the MUSA boundary line are conditions unique to the Property. Granting the variance request would be consistent with these unique circumstances. As discussed in part C infra, 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 Code. A strict enforcement of the minimum lot area of 2 acres under the circumstances unique to the Property would cause Mr. Goetten "Undue hardship." See Code Section 10.08, subd. 3(AX2,3,8,11) (Goetten ’s circumstances meet definition in Code). The feet that the Residence Parcel of the Property is sewered and the Unsewered Parcel is not, the implicit approval of the proposed subdivision and Mr. Goetten ’s reliance thereon, and the dividing effect of the current MUSA line are all circumsv^ces unique to the Property. In light of those unique circumstances, the strict enforcement of the 2 acre ■minimum would be au uudue hardship on the Mr. Goetten. c. nrmwBed lot area variAnce will not in anv wav adversely affect the spirit, purpose and intent t>iA Tnninir Chanter nor the hea lth and welfare of the public. The guiding principles of the land use regulations of Orono are the avoidance of excessive, intensive land development and the threat to public health which occurs with excessive crowding of private sewage disposal systems on substandard building sites. (See Code § 10.01) The City recognizes that the creation of larger lot sizes in unsewered areas is mandatory and that on-site disposal systems must not be allowed on any site of less fhftfi two acres. Juxtaposed on the concerns over private sewage disposal systems is the "Urbanization Spiral" that results firom the rapid extension of municipal sewer services into rural areas. The resulting "Development Paradox" is of paramount concern to the public is a primsuy factor in the formulation of land use policy in Orono. - ---itii__ V*' I)Z ih-\ s ’ /iftT;.».—» f / J J « • ^ >- • The Council would not adversely affect the spirit, purpose and intent of the Code and the RR-IB classification by granting the Mr. Gostten ’s request for a lot area variance. Granting the variance request would allow the Property to be subdivided (assuming approval of the concurrent subdivision application) into two lots which would correspond approximately to the Residence Parcel and the Unsewered Parcel. The resulting lots would be a 1+ acre lot for the existing residence and a 2+ acre unsewered lot. The only new building site, then, resulting from the granting of the variance request would be the 2+ acre unsewered lot. The new building site would meet all of the current zoning regulations of the zoning classification RR-IB, including all City on-site sewage treatment requirements. (Having stated thus, Mr. Goetten would support a proposal by the City to have the new building site connected to public sewer in the future.) Granting the variance request would not create any new, substandard building sites. The proposed subdivision which is based on the variance request also complies with the qualifications set forth in Resolution No. 1178 when the Council first addressed the unique to the Property and arguably approved a future subdivision. In fact. Resolution No. 1178 is entitled "Resolution of the City County No. 1178 Determining That One Sanitary Sewer Service Will Be Provided For The Property Located At 1385 Fox Street, And Deterniining_Stgnd^dsJqr Anv Future Subdivision of The Property. Resolution No. 1178 reads in pertinent part: 1 Any future subdivision of the property must leave not less than one acre for the existing residence. 2. Any new building site which might be created will comply with all current zoning regulatiora at tiie time of subdivision, the intent of this provision being that any new lot created in the future is not intended to be served by the 80-1 sewer project but is intended to fully comply with all City on-site sewage treatment requirements. ‘1•J i i i The residential lot and unsewered lot (the only new building site) which would result from granting of the variance request fully comply with the lot size conditions previouslya imposed by the Council. The fact that no new substandard building lots would be created by the granting of the variance request is significant. In an interoffice memorandum to the then city administrator Walter R Benson dated July 10.1981, it was pointed out that the Council had indicate•• they would look favorably on a future subdivision of the Property into one 1+ acre sewered parcel and one 2+ acre unsewered parcel. (See Schedule 3 attached) The memorandum reasoned that the subdivision of the Goetten property into two lots, because of its 3.6 acre size, would not violate the land use policies against increased density because the only new building site would exceed the required lot area size for land zoned RRrlB. In essence, the Goetten Property was used to highlight those circumstances where a variance and subdivision of property should be allowed. In conclusion, granting the variance request would not adversely affect the purpose niiH intent of the zoning chapter or the health and welfare of the public. Moreover, the variance would allow Mr. Goetten to subdivide the Property in a manner consistent with Resolution No. 1178, on which he has relied for more than 10 years. Due to the unique circumstances suzrounding the Property and the undue hardship that would result firom the City’s failure to grant the variance, the Council should grant Mr. Goetten’s variance request. MLWannr29299_l i j ■ Tf I mn ■ T r i LB1C\ i*. i»'r M'td**# .«'•*'; I, i*»> M tm*mt »f IM. l«. If'l >•••••<# !•« •».—•r# :t. ;»►• /ct, ::. >«•••«(«• .>'%. ». I*>0 9>4i«4M# hi . >!•«»# /». :«/i Or0(«a«4ff /K. ti, |l/« IM.0«0r*«»f II. I«t« Oi«w«««« IM I •• flue.. // /9SC ■ f , .<•■. S ' ■ N*v^ City of OROrV ji^lTY J -!?jcof •ORONOil L. - T^ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ _ _ _ _ DETERMINING THAT ONE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1385 FOX STREET, AMO DETERMINING STANDARDS FOR ANY FUTURE SUBDIVISION OF THE PROPERTY WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Miimesota} and WHEREAS, Sewer Project 80-1 has been initiated by the City to solve existing on-site sewage treatment problems in the Minnetonka Bluffs< West Ferndale area, within which the property at 1385 Fox Street, legally described as Government Lot 3 northwest of Great Northern Railroad right- of-way excluding road and the west 33 feet of Lot 3 south of Wayzata and Spring Park Road, is located; and WHEREAS, the property at 1385 Fox Street has an area of approximately 3.60 acres and contains an existing residential dwelling; and t^EREAS, 'it is likely that present and/or future on-site sewage treatment problems at 1385 Fox Street can be solved through the use of on-site sewage treatment systems, emd therefore the property*has been considered for inclusion in the 80-1 project at the owner's option;>and WHEREAS,: the owner has indicated a preference that, a single^ sewer service be provided for the existing house with any new lot created by future subdivision to be served by an on-site sewage treatment system. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, that one sewer service stub be provided to serve the existing residence located at 1385 Fox Street with the following provisions: 1. Any future subdivision of the property must leave net less than one acre for the existing residence. 2. Any new building site which might be created will comply with all current zoning regulations at the time of subdivision, the intent of this provision being that any new lot created in the future is not intended, to be served by the 80-1 sewer project but is intended to fully comply with all City on-site sewage treatment requirements. Therefore there is benefit to the property from the construction .of the sewer to the extent of one unit. PAGE 1 OF 2 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO._il2«_ day of Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on the 11 August , 1980. ATTEST: nson. City Admihxstrator The undersigned owner (s) of the above described property has read the terns of this Resolution and agrees to be bound by the terns thereof. Property Owner Date Property Owner Date PAGE 2_OF 2 ' 4 : ^ i r 4 '1^ ’I .-V-** m •« m0 - « • «a^ * ^ * * TOt FROHs OATBl RB: fOk« OAffroB S^pUe Sr«tM0 XBsp«etor John R# CAriiAPd*oii» Public Voric* Coordlactor October 2* 1979 mkA. muffs Ssnltsiy Stutr Project S.f3*SSTi^’2.'^-iJ^«2SS^b:2?tSrr^J^ I told nr.. OoottoB^t I ^d S.f?«53l»tthst be should brlBf this up st is iuplsusatsdd 1 • April 7, 1980 Mr. Alan Olson, City Planner City of Orono Orono City Offices 1335 S. Brown Road Orono, MN 55391 Dear Alan: This letter is an attempt to respond to the recent questionnaire on a sewer project affecting the Minnetonka Bluffs and Orono Lane areas. It is addressed to you in view of our recent discussions on the matter at your office and, subsequently, by telephone. We are in favor of a municipal sewer project to serve our residence ar 1385 Fox Street, but our approval of the project follows the lines of our discussion in your office. As you know, our total lot size is approximately 3 2/3 acres. It is divided with a portion of that area lying generally south of County Read 15 and running down to the lake with this area being a non-buildable lot site. The major portion of our lot lies in a triangular piece north of County Road 15 and is bounded by County Road 15 on the south and east, Orono Orchard Road on the west and Fox Street on the north. We understand that this triangular portion is approximately three acres. V7e understand that the present sewer proposal for the Minnetonka Bluffs area lying directly to the north of our lot envisions a pximping station to be placed on our main lot for which the Village is requesting a consideration free easement of approximately 85' x 50'. We estimate that our residence lies approximately 200 feet west of the proposed piomping station and easement site. As you know, we have proposed that our residence be included as a unit in the. proposed Minnetonka Bluffs area sewer project and this would require that our hookup would run the approximate 200 feet from the house to the pumping station site. Because of this private connection distance, we have mm m^m. •V -2^ i *! * »! • Apirl 7. Page 2 lyao Jes'ird\^?iL ”§rhridTo^l^ fbtSluce minimum and. obvilusly, that existing be unimpaired or accurately replaced. ^ believe Chat the road and sewer work along Orono Orchard Road this past vear has caused our southwest boundary Lrker to be buried). ^Iso because the piping station site is much closer to two of our neighbors than it is to us, we request that sufficient screen planting be included in the project so that the station is not noticeable. In addition, we propose that our triangular divided for the purposes of this sewer Pf®^®®^ the western two acres of the piece be acknowledged a buildable two acre sice without sewer connection. You know of our concern regarding ^^® written agreements "precluding any added connections" and we ass.ime, at this time, that an agreement suitable to both the tillage and ourselves can be worked out. However, let us reiterate that J-b ®eems to US that your concerns in this regard can be ___^--,lled bv the City itself in its zoning regulations aS3 we glneraUy fee^that ifs highly undesirable to be restrickve aereem-.nts on this ground which would be extremely difficult to remove under changed circustance at a future^time. Most noteworthy, as you know, the western portion of our main triangular lot ^-J®® trunk pressurized line is now in existence. We understana, also, that the City is not allowing seems to individual connection to this trunk line, but f®®®*^ iran obvious pUce where a variety of pressures could cause a different City position in the future. We think these wer< the main, if Hv^^ifcovered in our recent discussions. Needless sa>. you have any questions whatever, please feel free to me. Very truly yours. di(i Andrew loGoetten AJG:vad .«• .. ..«•» ii-U. m mm mpB ‘\r \ i: .•MINNETONKA BLUFFS QUESTIONNAIRE - SE\^R PROJECT The Duroose of this Questionnaire is to give you a chance to inform the CounHl of your‘position on the proposed sanitary sewer to serve your area. Please return this questionnaire in the enclosed envel p within 7 days.* Based on the estimated assessment of P__ and a total of /C per unit. OAJ units to be charged to your property, your total estimated assessment would be ^ 0, VOO "- - - - - - -* CHECK ONE (vQ : k OtCK£A/<On} i 1 z . 3 r •1 1 s r' 1 /11 ii j 1 8 1'. f=o% $r l.’t- $ j 2* i«>s,. 1 -A-& ( n 1 n ■> If /a < N lUm Di> 9> \0 d Bfe- -a-p 1 Auu fS 1 a II -9"n .■b- (0 •3 B <1 . -QQ- 1 S J PINS No. OZ-in-ZZ 3^/ Pool No. of units which would be . assigned to your property _/ Red outline is area considered as your building site. Approx, area of your building site is '^.UO acres. • If you have questions regarding the , extent or boundaries of your outlined building site, please contact Mike Gaffron or Alan Olson at the City offices as soon as possible. tIHtCl SEWER PROJECT ASSESSMENT DIVISION UUUNDARIES UP(»0.. TANAG For assessment purposes, the proposed sewer project has been divided into four separate areas based on the variable construction techniques required for each separate service area. - - -r-— fOmC€ MAIN CHAVlTr iCwCil CNMOCS MiP SCPftC lANK LOCAION lift SIAIlON NOTE: Project division boundaries are'the same for Alternates I and II. ALT. II SIIOIW rW--:;..; I li Wms ;5- To: Date: Subject: \ 1 Council From: Michael P. GaffrbnJ On-Site Systems Manager April 2l|., 1980 Mtka Bluffs - Orono Lane - W. Perndale - Co. Rd. 15 Sewer Questionnaire Returns Below is an update on the questionnaire returns for the proposed sewer project. A. Minnetonka Bluffs 21 of 27, or have returned the questionnaire. Of these 21, 1i| are in favor of sewer and 7 want to remain using on-site systems. Of the remaining 6, at least 1 is probably in favor and the rest are noncommittal. I recommend that we proceed by ordering the improvements and call for preparation of plans as soon as possible. The alternative course of action would be to proceed with hazardous building condemnations and attempt to repair, replace, or remove existing systems as necessary to ensure compliance with State and local codes. B. County Rd. 15 - Marina Area 4. of 7 have returned the questionnaire; however, we have had contact with all but Dave Duff regarding their views on:the_ project. Mrs. Gregory, owner of the parcel south of the railroad tracks which was not assigned any units, called to indicate she would not return the questionnaire since she was not really involved in the project. The property owners in the immediate marina area have all indicated objection to the high cost of the project and wish to continue with on-site systems unless a less expensive project is proposed. Holding tanks would bo the only acceptable method of on-site sewage disposal for these properties. I recommend that wo continue our efforts in getting MWCC pomnission to piamp directly into the force main. Based on our eventually obtaining this permission, we should then proceed with ordering the improvements and call for preparation of plans. C. Orono Lane , ^ ^5 of 10 have returned the questionnaire, with J in favor of sewer Alternate II and 2 who want to continue using on-site systems. While the response here has been scanty, I roust recommend that we proceed with a project since two-thirds of the Orono Lane area systems are non-conforming and in some cases are failing miserably. Making these systems conforming would be expensive and on some lots not feasible. D. West Perndale , ^ j „Of 17 properties which deUnitely would be assigned a sewer unit, 15 have returned questionnaires. Of these 15» 12 are in favor of sewar and 3 Of th.6 12 in favor^ 7 want Aa.t«II (pressure), 3 want Alt, I (gravity), and 2 will go either.way. In addition to the 17 definite units, 3 properties have extensive li Sewer Questionnaire Returns Page 2 wetlands which likely would cause the lots to be unbuildable unless variances were granted. Only one of the 3 owners has responded and was not in favor of sewer. I recommend that we proceed by ordering the improvements and call for preparation of plans. The responses seem to indicate that the lower first-cost pressure system is more desirable to the residents, and that they are generally in favor of going ahead with the project at this time. liiiiiiiMf-111 if 11 5 *• IN FAVOR OP SEWER /^ - NOT IN FAVOR OP SEWER LcTTe^.*^ - QUESTIONNAIRE NOT RETURNED if TO: Walter R. Benson, City Administrator FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, On-Site Systems Manager DATE: July 11, 1980 RE: Sewer Projects 80-1 and 80-2, Unit Assessment Determinations A number of properties within the boundaries of the proposed 80-1 and 80-2 projects require some decisions by Council and/or staff as to whether they will receive one or more sewer units or will be excluded entirely. Below I have listed briefly each specific situation with a description of what determinations must be made. 1. Thomas Carpenter - 480 Russell Avenue 1.80± acre lot according to plat maps. Originally we determined a unit was optional. Owner has indicated he would like either two units or to be excluded from the project. He has adequate room for future drainfield. Giving him two units would allow for future division into two .90 acre ± parcels in a 2-acre zone. I recommend no units, with owner understanding he will never be able to connect to sewer. 2. Edward Hamm - 1230 Dickenson Street 0.97 acre lot. Owner has indicated he would like one unit to serve this property. Project plans at this point include stub to serve property. I recommend allowing 1 unit. 3. Edward Hcunm - 480 Orono Orchard Road (Caretaker House) Owner indicated he would like this property to be excluded from project since it is combined with 15 acrei parcel to the north. I recommend excluding this property from the project. 4. ’Sears Imported Auto - Keene Avenue 0.52 acre lot: (3 combined lots) - no house on lot. Owner has requested one sewer unit to make this a buildable lot. I recommend this be referred to Planning Commission for review to determine buildability and/or whether stub should be allowed, based on restrictions set forth in the Orono Zoning Regulations 31.201 - 31.203, (lots of record not meeting zoning regulations). 5. Cedric Dettloff - 1255 Dickenson Street Currently has main house and small rental house on 0.31 acre lot. Owner indicates he would remove plumbing in rental unit and use as storage area, thereby requiring only one sewer unit. I recommend we go with one unit and require second building to have plumbing removed. I July Ilf 1980 Walter R. Benson Sewer Projects 80-1 & 80-2 Page 2 6. Leonard D. MacKinnon - 559 Russell Avenuo Currently has main house and rental house on 0.43 acre lot. Owner has not indicated a preference for either one or two units, I recommend we assess two units to the property. $ 7. Andrew Goetten - 1385 Fox Street 8. 3.60 Acres. Owner has indicated he would opt for one unit to serve existing house, with any future division to be under 2-acre unsewered I zoning regulations. I recommend this be allowed. _ _l| Douglas Sharp - West Ferndale Road review. 9. Marinas - Windward Marine and Minnetonka Boat Works co^ercial properties are based on 274 gallons per I recommend staff investigate further to determine whether the pjfoposed assessment distribution is eguitable. 10. David Duff - 1420 Shoreline Drive 2 90 acre lot. Owner has riot indicated preference for inclusion . . or exclusion from the project. I recommend that the Duff property be excluded from the project. 11. William or Stanley Gregory - 1410 Shoreline Drive 9 Acres This property will not be included in the project ! ) i* t REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, JULY 14, 1980 Glenn Cook, City Engineer, reviewed his letter of July 11, 1980 concerning Recreation Open Space Development Guide Policy Plan with the City Council. Letter - Page 11 Glenn Cook, City Engineer, reviewed the twenty- four hour traffic counts on McCulley Road, as of July 7, 1980, as follows: 6-19 — 6-20 2088 6-26 - 6-27 2117 6-30 - 7-1 2204 7-1 '- 7-2 2383 7-2 - 7-3 2152 Glenn Cook, City Engineer Council that McCulley Road is complete except fox minor cleanup. Buffalo bituminous expects to have all work done by July 17, 1980. The City is retaining $27,443.90 until all work is complete and $42,600 in liquidated damages. Glenn Cook, City Engineer, reviewed his letter concerning payment #6 for the McCulley Road, dated June 30, 1980, which states: "The construction on McCulley Road as been satisfactorily completed except for minor cleanup. The July estimate will be the final contract payment on the project with liquidated damages being the only major item remaining to be settled. "Payment request No. 6 reduced the retainage withheld on the project from ten percent to five percent as all major construction items were completed at the time the estimate was processed. "The City's final position on liquidated damages should be resolved at an early time to allow final payment to the contractor on the project." End of letter Michael Gaffron, On-Site Systems Manager, reviewed with the City Council the following memo, dated July 11, 1980: Page 10 OPEN SPACE POLICY PLAN TRAFFIC COUNTS McCulley Road MC CULLEY ROAD COMPLETION PAYMENT #6 Buffalo Bituminous McCulley Road \ 80-1 & 80-2 PROJECTS A number of properties within the boundaries of the proposed 80-1 and 80-2 projects require some decisions by Council and/or staff as to whether they will receive one or more sewer units or will be excluded entirely. Below I have listed briefly each specific situation with a description of what determinations must be made: (continued. Page 11 r- REGULAR meeting OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, JULY 14, 1980 7. Andrew Goetten - 1385 Fox Street Page 13 A 11. % s», 3.60, acres. Owner has indicated he would opt for one unit to serve existing house, with any future division to be under two-acre unsewered zoning regulations. I recommend this be allowed. 80-1 & 80-2 SEWERS (Continued) 8. Douglas Skarp - West Ferndale Road Three acre lot with 0.6 acre- dry. No house on lot. Owner has requested a sewer unit for the property. If sewer unit were allowed, buildable lot area would be governed under Orono Zoning Code 31.841 (wetlands credit). I recommend this be referred to the Planning Commission' for review. 9. Marinas - Windward Marine & Minnetonka Boat Works Preliminary staff recommendation was one unit for marina buildings and one unit for pumpout, i.e. two units for Windward Marine, two units for Minnetonka Boat Works, and one unit each for the three residences adjacent, for a total of seven units. However, SAC charges for commercial properties are based on 274 gallons per day per SAC unit. I recommend staff investigate further to determine whether the proposed assessment distribution is equitable. ) 10. David Duff - 1420 Shoreline Drive 2.90 acre lot. Owner has not indicated preference for inclusion or exclusion from the project. I recommend that the Duff property be excluded from the project. Willieun or Stanley Gregory - 1410 Shoreline Drive Nine acres -. This property will not be included in the project. Nature Conservancy holds tide deed to this tri angular parcel southeast of intersectidn of County Road 15 and West Ferndale Road. This parcel has one- acre of dry buildable land, but has title restrictions which prohibit development of the property. I recommend that the City Attorney review these restrictions and that no units be assessed. 13. Marie H. Hamm - Orono Lane 1.1 acre lot appears nearly all dry buildable. While not located in a choice location, this lot would probably be buildable if sewer were available. The owner has not indicated a preference to be included or excluded from the project. I recommend that this be referred to the Planning Commission for review. (Continued) 1 1 -ir ! ''i w ki. REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, JULY 14, 1980 14. George Rector - 2655 North Shore Drive Lot contains a small stuJio/guest cottage with plumbing that has not been rented previously, and owner indicated it will not be rented. I recommend that a single unit be assessed with the stipulation that the cottage may not be rented out. Council Meeting - July 14, 1980 Mayor Van Nest requested the City Council to act on each specific situation separately as a resolution for each to be executed by the individual property owner and reaffirm at our July 28, '1980 Council meeting. Butler moved, Hurr seconded, to draft a resolution to exclude the Thomas Carpenter property, 480 Russell Avenue, from the proposed sewer project. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to draft a resolution that onlv one unit be assessed for the Edward Hamm property") 1230 Dickenson Street. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). Hurr moved, Butler seconded, to draft a resolution to exclude from the proposed sewer project the property of Edward Hamm, 480 Orono Orchard Road. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). Mayor Van Nest moved, Butler seconded, to draft a resolution stating that the owner. Sears Imported Auto, Keene Avenue, combine his three lots to allow one unit. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). Mayor Van Nest moved, Hurr seconded, to draft a resolution stating that the owner, Cedric Dettloff, 1255 Dickenson Street, remove the plumbing from his rental unit, which will be used as a storage building One unit to be assessed for main house. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). Mayor Van Nest moved, Butler seconded, to draft a resolution that if the owner's preference is one^ assessed unit, then rental unit is to be discontinued and plumbing removed. One unit to be assessed for main house, Leonard D. MacKinnon, 559 Russell Avenue. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays, (0) . Page 14 80-1 & 80-2 SEWERS (Continued) THOMAS CARPENTER 480 Russell Avenue EDWARD HAMM 1230 Dickenson Stree EDWARD HAMM 480 Orono Orchard Ro : J SEARS IMPORTED AUTO Keene Avenue CEDRIC DETTLOFF 1255 Dickenson Stree- LEONARD D. MAC KINNOI 559 Russell Avenue (Continued) - -^ REGULAR MEETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, JULY 14, 1980 Page. 15 Mayor Van Nest moved, Hannah seconded, to draft a resolution for the Andrew Goetten property, 1385 Fox Street, stating that one unit to be assessed as ' one unit for existing home; existing unit shall not be located on less than one acre parcel. Any future created parcels will meet twc-acre unsewered zoning regulations. Motion, Ayes- (5) - Nays (0). ANDREW GOETTEN 1385 Fox Street Paurus moved, Butler seconded, to draft a resolution for the Douglas Skarp property. West Ferndale Road, DOUGLAS SKARP West Ferndale Road that one unit be assessed. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0) . Staff was requested to investigate the assessment distribution for the Windward Marine and Minnetonka Boat Works Marinas. WINDWARD MARINE MINNETONKA BOAT WORKS Mayor Van Nest moved, Paurus seconded, to draft a resolution that the property of David Duff, 1420 Shoreline Drive, be excluded from the proposed sewer project. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). DAVID DUFF 1420 Shoreline Drive Mayor Van Nest moved, Hannah seconded, to draft a - resolution that the property of William or Stanley N Gregory, 1410 Shoreline Drive, be excluded from the J proposed sewer project. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). WILLIAM/STANLEY GREGOI 1410 Shoreline Drive Mayor Van Nest moved, Hannah seconded, to draft a resolution that the property for the Nature Conservancy be excluded from the proposed sewer project. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). NATURE CONSERVANCY Mayor Van Nest moved, Butler seconded, to draft a resolution that the property of Marie H. Heiinm, Orono Lane, be assessed one unit. Motion, Ayes (5) Nays (0). MARIE H. HAMM Orono Lane Mayor Van Nest moved, Hannah seconded, to draft a resolution for the property of George Rector, 2655 North Shore Drive, be assessed one unit. Guest cottage to be used as an accessory structure only and not as a rental unit. Restrictions to be entered in chain of title. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). GEORGE RECTOR 2655 North Shore Drive mil r.-' ■ • %- 'p sr<'f April 13, 1981 Mr. Walter R. Benson City Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Dick: I am enclosing for your attention Certificate of Title No. 50555, dated May 21, 1974 certifying the ownership of the 1385 Fox Street property in Diann and myself as joint tenants. As you know, this certificate is needed to record the (sewer) easement which Diann and I granted the City last fall. As you j/jQ are troubled by the outcome of the sewer proceedings as it affects us and this transmittal has been held up by that as well as the fact that communication with the City's legal counsel has been impossible in our view. We have been addressed by letter (with copies to you and the City Council) on a mix or things which we do not understand, and what we do understand we don't like. On the part of their communications we don't understand, let me say that the easement we granted included the wording "under and over the premises". If two documents are required for recording in this regard, one for the under and the other for the over, then at this point it is our feeling that your counsel can draft the second docxoment in identical fotti to the instrument we gave to accomplish this recording need. We did not execute your ^fefndard city form" because we felt you and your contracting agents were responsible for exercising a reasonable degree of care while on our property for any purpose and this was stated in our grant, as well as the requirement for screen replanting of the facility upon project completion. We felt it would be obvious that if we did not care to execute one "standard city format", we would not execute a second for recording or any other purpose. In regard to their communications we do not like, let me say that we are both damn angry at insinuations of lack of cooperation in the totality of this project. It is true to say we are not happv with it at this time, but you know that we were supportive in all the early canvassing and public hearings on the matter. We have 9 Mr. Walter R. Benson April 13, 1981 Page 2 be better and that our participation might serve to reduce overall project costs in a small way. We ^ thrextenc'’of''chesl facilities which noHSIlude an above SouSS cl«ull iLd hive from the original descriptions^ E^lk-Sargl^irliirrdl^falt^IL^^ InSIa-li ^rlf^rwen'^fufinl^II =lly”lrlllge^lnts Having said the above and at the risk of being 1°"8. ilLTy Hclll' "?hf ^il^ Llif I r^iiroi irt^i pStiii i the sHiie'=d°bTieii?"^-iris “i^Sii IILIIII ^ the Minnetonka Bluffs area where the average lot size is close t one-half acre? Finally I have to say that we still really can’t believe an assessment outcome that fixedothers with unit assessments about 50/, in excess ot tnose rixeo ylimr?IIsr«l«nfence and by signing and returning the enclosed copy of this letter. yhMrs, Andrew J. poetten AJG:vad cc: Mayor Brad Van Nest I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED CERTIFICATE OF TITI.E NO. 50555: DATE 4^' / / \ JIL 1 CITY OF ORONO « y CITY of ORONO Punt Office Box 66* Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323* Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka April 23, 1981 Mr. Andrew J. Goetten 1385 Fox Street Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Dear Mr. Goetten: During my years of dealing with municipal sewer and water projects, • I have received raetny complaints concerning public hearings, assessments, and construction and cleeuiup procedures. Many of the complaints are valid and each and everyone has to be followed up. Your letter of April 13, 1981 is possibly one of the most difficult to understand, not because of not being able to separate out the problems you have had with your sewer project, but because of the apparent frustration and lack of communication you apparently have had throughout the project. If the City is guilty of wrong-doing, it is simply that we did 0verything in our power to communicate to each and every affected property owner attempting to keep them informed of what the City was doing. There has never in the history of any city, including Orono, where there has been so many public hearings and public informa tion meetings held, so many notices and letters mailed, and neighborhoo meetings attended attempting to resolve each and every concern. Yes, we did beat the project to death. One major problem occurs when legal matters dominate any public project, everyone becomes paranoid and attempt to cover all bases and, of course, this is impossible. Our City Council, legal and engineering staff, and last, but not least, our City employees do not like sloppy work or misunderstandings and, believe it or not, I admire their honesty. en“o?^JoSr^p?ojeot“areranS ^ou%hose°JSt^o 2^0*6 ol^S^appeuInts within the Minnetonka Bluffs area. was stated at the public meetings concerning your project. If the BUILDING A ZONING > 473-7357 « c«r ccis (• administration a finance - 473-7358 PtBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 1 • ♦ Mr. Andrew J. Gotten April 23, 1981 Page 2 total project cost is lower than anticipated costs, the City Council will consider reducing the remaining resident assessments. Keep in mind, each area is a separate project and stands on its own merits. Concerning' your concern regarding the City Council's apparent reluctance to split your neeurly four acres, it is obvious the City Council was not willing to create densities below average lot size when this below average lot size prevelant in your area was what was causing on-site problems in a rural area. The City Council did assess you one unit only, at your request, simply because any future subdivision requested by you was to create a lot that would be served by an on-site system, not municipal sewer, which was your desire when this question was asked of you at our public meetings. I enclose Resolution #1178 for your information. 4 I have requested Bruce Malkerson, our lead City Attorney, to address your other concerns regarding legal counsel matters. His letter to you should be received by you this week. My experience in these matters is that the City is always accused of attempting to avoid its responsibilities when a project as you are experiencing is constructed. We try to communicate and eliminate any possible miscommunications. Andrew, we tried to communicate with you, letters were sent, phone calls vere made, we attempted to contact you every way possible but until now, we never received from you any acknowledgement of our attempts to clarify these issues with you. Thank you for your Certificate of Title #50555. Call me when you are available and we can discuss these matters further. Sincerely, Walt^ R. Benson CitWAdministrator Enclosure t « TO: FROM: DATE: Walter R. Benson Alan P. Olson July 10, 1981 SUBJECT: David Duff, 1420 Shoreline Dr-’ve The Duff property apparently contains about 2.9- acres of land, enough for one residence in the rural area per RR-IB zoning. The MUSA line as legally defined by Resolution No.‘1134 in April 1980 excluded all the areas later approved for sewer in 1980 including Minnetonka Bluffs, X^est Ferndale and Orono Lane, not just the marina area. This exclusion was based on the existi'ng situation in April. It had no bearing on leaving the Marina or Duff property in or out of the project. That decision was based on the need for service and the potential for per manent on-site systems on each property. Mr. Duff is requesting 2 units. His existing house does have problems but they could be resolved on-site on the two + acres. With 2 units, the implication is service for a new lot to be subdivided off. This could not occur under the existing zoning because he has less than 4 acres. It would seem reasonable that sanitary sewer might be a cost- effective option to repair of the existing septic system. To provide it for that purpose would be consistent with our CMP. To provide it for new urban development in the rural area is not. To subdivide the 2.9 acres into 2 units would either require a lot area variance or a rezoning to LR-IB or some similar 1 acre designation. This has not been done for the other areas that received sewer in 1980. The Goetten property for comparison has 3.6 acres and was served with 1 unit for the existing house. In that case Council indicated they may look favorably on a future subdivision into one 1 acre sewered parcel and one 2 + acre unsewered rural parcel. This type of split is not possible on the Duff pro perty because it is less than 3 acres. Considering the zoning and the Duff lot area, if more than 1 unit is to be considered at all I suggest that we also include and study the adjacent Gregory property. This would include all land to the Railroad Road tracks. Gregory also has a lakeshore house with septic problems needing repair. 1 I • f r-tf'- ? >'V uux. - Page 2 N- biLJ The existing sewer project is•99% complete. There is no g0j»^j^Q0 to the Du££ property. There is a manhole xn the center of the Born lot. Service from here to the Duff house would require installation of a new stub into the manhole including a new easement from Born. If two units were provided, the main would have to be extended with (likely) several manholes and new easements. * Consistent with our CMP and past Council decisions on other projects I feel there are two options in this situation: 1. Leave the Duff property rural and repair the septic system on-site. 2.Provide 1 sewer- stub for the existing house leaving the designation as 2 acre rural': This would require prepayment of all assessments and refunding of excess shares (if any) to the other property owners in the project. ♦ I )... O'^ i t) CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices Post Office Box Cr}*sial Bay, Minnesota 55323-0066 October 19, 1992 Mr. T‘\ il W. Anderson Attorney ';t Law Messerli and Kramer 1500 Northland Plaza Bldg. 3800 West 80th Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 Re: Andrew Goetten Subdivision Dear Mr. Anderson: I was able to spend some time searching through our files and was able to extract a number of documents relating to the Goetten proper y n 1980 and 1981. Some of the documentation does not pertain directly to the subdivision issue. That which does may not add muen clarity to the situation. My recommendation is that you proceed with the concurrent subdivision/rezoning applications, the deadline for which is noon o Friday, October 23rd. As we discussed, your survey and septic testing would have to be submitted not more than a week after the applicat on deadline. Inherent in your request would be a concurrent proposal by the City for rezoning of the Minnetonka Bluffs area. Please feel free to contact me at 473-7357 if you have any questions. Sincerely Michael P. Gaffron Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator MPG/ch Bnc. •' TELEPHONE-473-7357 • KW - 473-051tt !. Poi^Mr/>u. • • • gA • tunu, F.fC) *• *^. -I {.•i>4r BJUAterT --------licit-. O.M y^ex. O.M *»12.0 S G..*iTL OMl 3.IZT^a ••ont —onh H.fz-ic II D.M —0.97 r.izrr m /^.3I —0.3| {i.IM5-K d.ii —O.ll ?.1300 /=io»r 5r;_0.V5 6-I3t/c #•d.ao -^.30 N 0 4/V p.i*/ *V l.ot l.OS-t 1390 I*a.itL.^ *o.w ii-5DD >/>(AIL0^1 f)JS A/r li._ f«o • M o.n d./i _ 52.1 II o.s^—o.sfi /f*Sho ••A./I —OAl J(r..^37 «A. 45 ^,-0.^1 s f7‘ri-r •1 AVr AVr j»S39 toeo^e 1.01.—L02. -jii «* 6^<k.)A S3 -0.S3 \tu 5bo O^MO ^ .A 0ft M-s^o ••A. SI —0. C7 SCO m o.s^ Sno ••^.59 •O. S9 j.f St%tusieiL.<9.^/4,O.Vt n.5W?^••O.H^-O.Hi f’‘\ 4 if Of' €xceei>/AJCM 2.0 Ac 0> (5iD (2^ ift.%1 > tM* / y 4^ i *M U y £K3I•»» w xioi 15. aooi ij * MUKIONU ai#FS t W' 11. !• : « iLiil :^»nTol reiziL * ii MCWEWaO*' 1 I ^ (4) • % i y* S3ISWm afea Ki^f^uilT ^LT, rrsasK^ ^JP:'WiC cSWi IM lt«MfUl SKt'WAt S BA^ #A/o/ue i -**>»i«Ai Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Ron Noorse, City Administrator From: Date: Michael P. Gaffronp Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator November 6, 1992 Subject: #1779 Andrew Goetten* 1385 Fox Street - Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB, Single family rural residentialr 2 acre minimum lot size Application: Subdivision to create a second building site from 3-plus acre homestead parcel List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey ‘ Staff Sketch ‘ Engineers Recommendations 11-3-92 - Basis for Right-of-Way Dedication Requirement ry of Request The applicant proposes to subdivide this approximately 3 acre parcel into a 1-acre sewered lot and a 2-acre unsewered lot. While the merits of the 2-acre/l-acre concept are discussed in a separate memo for Application #1778, this subdivision review is based on the premise that either through a variance or rezoning, the 2-acre/l-acre split is conceptually feasible. Property Data Gross Area North of Railroad - Less 33* Orono Orchard Road R.O.W. 3.42 ac - .31 ac Net Area North of Railroad: - Less Designated Wetlands: 3.11 ac - .10 ac Net Contiguous Dry Buildable: Area South of County Road 15: 3.01 ac 0.24 ac As Proposed After Recommended Fox St Dedications Lot Area (Net) Lot Width (Fox St) Front Setback (Existing House) Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 1 Lot 2 2.01 ac 1.00 ac 1.86 ac 0.92 ac 217* +470' +300’ +490' + mmmm 46.6*35' + i liiiniiitnrrt 'iifiii Zoning File #1779 November 6, 1992 Page 2 Lakeshore Strip This property is the remnants of the underlying "Government Lot 3" and contains a 0.24 acre, 33' wide strip of land leading to Browns Bay, and is separated from the main parcel by County Road 15 and the Dakota Rail right-of-way. Staff recommends that this strip be platted as an outlot, and be designated for ownership with Lot 1 or Lot 2. Alternatively, it could be designated for sale to an adjacent property only. In either case, the City will request additional right-of-way for a triangular portion of Orono Lane. Septic System Requirements Septic system testing has been provided to indicate that, absent any additional road dedications, primary and alternate drainfields can be developed under City and State codes to serve a 5 bedroom house on the 2 acre, unsewered parcel. However, if additional right-of-way for Fox Street is required (see discussion), this would result in a zero setback between the mound systems and the right-of-way instead of the required 20' setback. The applicant was advised of this as soon as the Engineer's recommendation was received, but chose to not provide additional testing to show how such a right-of-way dedication might be accommodated, on the basis that he opposes any dedication of additional right-of-way. The site evaluator has verbally indicated to staff that the right-of-way dedication would likely force the use of a site with slopes in the range of 8%, a variance from the septic code maximum of 6%. Staff would note that the applicant's surveyor was advised that if dralnfield sites required a slope variance, we would request topography of the entire parcel as a means to review all other possibilities. NDSA indary The MUSA boundary currently is located 330' east of the center line of Orono Orchard Road, placing the existing residence within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area, the westerly portion of the property being outside the MUSA line. Sewer Availability The existing residence at 1385 Fox Street was provided with municipal sewer as part of the 1980—1 "Minnetonka Bluffs" project, and is connected to the sewer. A municipal lift station serving the Bluffs area and Woodhill Country Club exists at the easterly tip of the property on an easement. The survey suggests that the control panel for the lift station may be encroaching past the easement boundary, although no dimension for such encroachment is provided on the survey. Applicant notes that the i ■i \ Wr •* >*• r\- ‘■Ml tr^ r-' h ‘zoning File #1779 November 6, 1992 Page 3 Judicial Marker at the east corner was removed when the sewer was installed and the City, should have it accurately replaced. City Council Resolution No. 1178 determined that only one sewer unit would be provided to the property, and indicated that a future subdivision would create a 1 acre sewered parcel with the existing house and a 2 acre unsewered lot to the west. The MUSA boundary was later placed (somewhat arbitrarily) to .eflect the directives of that resolution. There is no provision y'iw » • the project area for a direct service stubb for the west h>, the property. Provision of sewer to the west parcel would require a MUSA amendment and Council approval. The connection charge for the Minnetonka Bluffs Project is currently $8,991.00 per unit. The options for physically making such a connection would appear to be either a 300~400' long gravity line through the east lot to the lift station; an extension of the existing line up Barrett Avenue and west along Pox Street (would be extremely deep); or construction of an individual injector station into the MWCC forcemain in Orono Orchard Road (would require MWCC approval, would be expensive). Existing and Proposed Setbacks, Lot 2 Proposed Lot 2 contains an existing house, shed, and garage. The existing garage near Fox Street is intended to be removed. The existing shed technically is nearer the front lot line (Fox Street) than the existing residence. The house is 46.6' from the north lot line where a 50' setback would be required for any new construction • The proposed dividing line leaves the existing house approximately 48' from the side lot line (30' required). The ramifications of widening the right-of-way and providing a cul-de-sac are discussed below. Additional Right-of-Way for Fox Street Recoanended Please review the City Engineer's recommendation (letter dated November 3, 1992). Fox Street is a 30' wide platted corridor, containing a 20' gravel road surface extending approximately 320' eastward from the Orono Orchard Road right-of- way. Pox Street is not developed east of its intersection with undeveloped Barrett Avenue. The City Engineer is recommending that an additional 20' of right-of-way be granted from the Goetten property in addition to a cul-de-sac located mostly within the Goetten property. He is further recommending that the abutting and neighboring property owners who gain access from Fox Street (which is currently Sv. Zoning File #1779 November 6, 1992 Page 4 maintained by the City) be assessed equal amounts for the improvements which would include pavement to a 28' width and an 80' paved diameter cu‘1-de-sac. Impact of Additional Right-Of-Way Request Dedication of additional right-of-way for road and cul-de- sac has the impact of reducing the area of both Lots 1 and 2. Lot 1 reduces from 2.01 acres dry buildable to 1.86 acres dry buildable. Lot 2 decreases from 1.00 acre dry buildable to 0.92 acre dry buildable^ although credit for Flood Fringe might increase this to 0.96 acre. Further, the dedicated cul-de-sac as sketched by the Engineer would be approximately 35' from the existing residence on Lot 2, where 50' is required in the RR-IR zone, and would require extensive filling to the rear of the existing garage. Moving the cul-de-sac 15' west to yield the proper house setback would leave only a 10' setback to the drainfield sites. Finally, the additional 20* of right-of-way has a significant impact on the alternate tested drainfield site, which would now abut the new right-of-way rather than maintaining the required 20' setback. Additional testing has not been provided to verify whether drainfield sites could be developed while maintaining appropriate setbacks. The Community Management Plan considers Orono Orchard Road as a "Scenic Parkway", requiring a 50-66' right-of-way, and this portion of Fox Street as a "Local Street" requiring a 50' - 60' right-of-way. Since applicant's ownership is to the centerline of Orono Orchard Road, it was suggested that something less than 33' be dedlcataed for it. A 17' dedication would leave 16' x 410' > 0.15 acre within Lot 1, just about offsetting the Fox Street dedications (Engineer would have to determine whether City needs all 33', only 17', or something in between, although 33' would be a consistent requirement). Road Dedication Considerations Planning Commission should consider the following questions: Given the potential impact of development of a cul-de- sac and widened roadway, is there justification to rant area variances to the 1 acre/2 acre requirements n order that this property can be subdivided?! Absent an upgrade of Fox Street to City standards, should the City continue to maintain this section of Fox Street as a public roadway? y iA < Zoning File #1779 November 1992 Page 5 If in fact the proposed driveway access for the new Lot 1 is to Orono Orchard Road, is there justification to argue that since no new properties will be serviced by the existing Fox Street, right-of-way for Fox Street should be dedicated but the road improvements not be required? Are there any unique characteristics of this subdivision which suggest that road dedication and improvement would be inconsistent or inappropriate? Staff V.e datlon Clearly, for this subdivision to work will require trade offs, i.e. if full road and cul-de-sac dedication are required, lot area and setback variances may be necessary. Any recommendation for preliminary plat approval would have to include the following items: 1.Require right-of-way dedication for Orono Orchard Road: 33' 17' Other (staff recommends 33') 2.Require right-of-way dedication for Barrett Avenue:___20'_____O' recommends 20') Fox Street east to Other (staff 3.Require cul-de-sac dedication for Fox Street: Full None _ _ Other (staff recommends Full) 4.Require improvement of Fox Street and cul-de-sac: Yes No (staff recommends Yes) If no, should City continue to maintain gravel road? Yes No 5.Approval of variances to 2 acre/1 acre area and setback standards as necessary to accommodate required road dedications. 6. 7. 8. Flowage and Conservation Easement over wetlands. Standard Drainage and Utility Easements along lot lines. Park Fee for Lot 1 - Park Commission to review, determine if need for dedication of lands. 9.Lot 1 access to Orono Orchard Road at location determined by City Engineer, address to be XXXX Orono Orchard Road, Fox becomes a side street for Lot 1. •i Zoning File #1779 November 6, 1992 Page 6 10. City to proceed with replacement of Judicial Landmark at east end. 11.Removal of existing garage^ and advise applicant that replacement of garage in location north of north line of house will require a future variance. 12.Designate lakeshore strip as Outlet A: _ _ Attach to Lot 1 for riparian access _ _ Attach to Lot 2 for riparian access _ _ Declare only for future sale to adjacent landowner. 13. Dedication of triangular portion of Orono Lane A recommendation for preliminary plat approval would also have to address the additional septic testing/topographic survey work needed if all road dedications are required. Isv 1 CITY OP ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION ir f / _ I PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address_______1385 Fox Street. Orono, Minnesota 55391 . . V • i ^0 • I T*I ♦ property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 02-177-23 34^00]- Please check one - Property _ _ _ abstract or torrens? Oi Ctti CHECK Tl HECEIPT-THAHK YlA ^6330 cool ROl TlIV/^ Attach legal description to application. See Exhibit^ APPLICANT Name Phone (home ) 473-6633 Andrew J. Coetten Phone (work) n/a Address:1385 Fox Street_ _ _ _ _ __ Citv: Orono Zip: 55,391 ONNER (if different than applicant) Name_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: (attach list it more man one) EXISTING LAND USB Number of Tax Parcels 1 Development Size 3.6 3.6 Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check)Residential; no. of units Other (specify) 1 • ' %i0m Present Zoning District RR-IB PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites:Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density: *Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) see plat Units per 3.6 Acres Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land See accompanying Variance Application Residential Other (specify) lL MINIMOM MATERIAL NBCBSSARY FOR COMPLETE PRmiMINARY APPLICATION 2! p?2liSlnary^piat*information on Certificate Of Suwy. 3. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348*327X)• 4» As an addendum to this applicationr please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application* Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date- - - - - - - - -- 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. Title opinion. Easements, Covenants, etc. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ ___ _ _ _ _ Date- - - - - - - --— FEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Preliminary Review (Class I 6 II Subdivision) Preliminary Review (Class III & all non-residentlal) Final Plat Review (Class ITI) ♦(Plus any legal or engineering charges) Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application Renewal of Final Subdivision Application $200.00 300.00 300.00 325.00 + 25.00/Lot 175.00 150.00 100.00 The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all #tiaitlona^Tfees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Date l9\ Date JoOwner's Signature Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held ^ third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all schedu^lea 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 to advise the Building s Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. * • /- i ijr 7 \10T 15. ftOCH I? Utrt€T9flA aUFS ;i ‘.V •• DICKENSON mm a '^ 4 'il.4 _ (13) 1 ** ' (14) P R » 1 ^ * 0 R II '• s » a It ; " (<6) :S ; Q (I5)i ' i I* w ' i i * ( Ml »,.• ' LllU .‘ff 1 a IS "-(201-K •• ,g R" >(19) r" •»IM 1|M *' ISO* 4--------” r-' - 4' 3eoV-.- X 'V i«.<t _ 1 ' * " (»l^1 pan ^ > X f i-.-{ll j ;' < : 9 ■ 1 1 'KSrj'*'' ,r(»ii ^ • . 9 r (35) * r (34) * a l| " (33: ' R " ■Til "' •' JU'' '!J<4<h j :(/o) ^ < > f JLi£g * (41) ^ C- V •t r»MFLV MN DATE 10/14/n HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORNATION SYSTEH PROPERTY ONNERS LIST REPC»T NJ. PI435^01 PAGE A BATCH OOE PROP AODR OltlER NAHE TAXPAYER NAKE/ADOR SB 02-1I7-2S 31 OOOA 00550 ORONO ORCHARD RD LANRENCE E NELSON LAHRENCE E NELSON 550 ORONO ORCHARD RD S NAYZATA HN 55391 38 02-117-23 31 0007 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ROGER J HAWINSON ROGER J HAltaNSON 570 ORONO ORCHARD RD NAYZATA MN 55391 30 02-117-23 31 0000 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ROGER J HANKINSON ROGER J HANKINSON 570 ORONO ORCHARD RD NAYZATA m 55391 PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 30 02-117-23 31 0009 01300 POK ST - HERBERT D HEYER HERBERT D MEYER DON 12 NAYZATA MN 55391 30 02-117-23 31 01390 FOX ST EDHARD H HAMM EOHARD H HAMM AOO ST PETER ST ST PAUL HN 55102 0010 30 02-117-23 31 0011 00570 ORONO ORCHARD RD S ROGER J HANKINSON ETAL ROGER J HANKINSON 570 ORONO ORCHARD RD NAYZATA MN 55391 • PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 30 02-117-23 31 0015 00537 HANLON AVE R V A N E KOEHNEN ROBERT A NICHEL KOEHNEN 537 HANLON AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 30 02-117-23 31 0016 00565 HANLON AVE HADASSAH YEIIUDIT ZOHARA HADASSAH YEHUDIT ZOHARA 565 HANLON AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 30 02-117-23 31 0017 00030 AOORESS UNASSIGNED HADASSAH YEHUDIT ZOHARA HADASSAH YEHUDIT ZDIIARA 565 HANLON AVE ORONO MN 55391 PROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR M^oz-iir^EiniroBio 01300 FOX ST - R A K TSCHIDA ROBERT G TSCHIDA 1300 FOX ST NAYZATA MN 55391 S8 02-117-25 31 0019 013*0 FOX ST BETTY J STII BETTY J STII 13*0 FOX ST NAYZATA Ml 55391 3B 02-117-23 31 0020 0003B ADDRESS UNASSXGNEO H D NEYER ETAL H 0 HEYER BOX 12 NAYZATA Ml 55391 PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 30 02-117-23 31 0021 01300 FOX ST STATE LAND DEPT DRAPER M I MOLLY B JAFFRAY 560 BARRETT AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 30 02-117-23 31 0022 00560 BARRETT AVE D M JAFFRAY A M B JAFFRAY DRAPER M JAFFRAY 560 BARRETT AVE NAYZATA MN 55391 30 02-117-23 31 0023 00560 BARRETT AVE D M JAFFRAY A N B JAFFRAY DRAPER N JAFFRAY 560 BARRETT AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER * NAHE/ADDR 30 02-117-23 31 0020 00539 KEENE AVE 0 HARALD ERIKSEN 0 HARALD ERIKSEN 6219 ZEALAND AVE N MPLS MN 55620 30 02-117-23 31 0029 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED T A A G M FISCHER THEODORE A GERTRUDE FISCHER 2036 COttfERCE DLVO MOUND HN 55366 30 02-117-23 31 0030 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED JACK C BURCH JACK C A MARION BURCH 6572 NHITE OAK OR LINO LAKES MN 55030 ’».-.i A RUN DATC 10/l«/n HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PRWERTY OHNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI4S5401 PAGE 7 BATCH 002 PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR SB 02-117-2S SI OOSl OOOSB ADORESS UNASSIGNED JACK C A MARION BURCH JACK C A MARION BURCH 4572 NHITE OAK OR LINO LAKES MN 550SB SB 02-I17-2S SI 00S2 00050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO T A A G N FISCHER THEODORE A GERTRUDE FISCHER 2034 COMMERCE DLVO MOUND Ml 55344 SB 02-117-23 SI 0033 0003B ADORESS UNASSIGNED CEORIC DETTLOFF CEORIC DETTLOFF 1255 DICKENSON ST NAYZATA MN .45391 P - ir-JS PROP AOOR OWCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR SB 02-117-25 51 00S4 OOOSB ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO STATE LAND DEPT CITY OF ORONO DRAINAGE A CONSERVATION 2-10-09 ST DEED 0171093 SO 02-117-2S 51 0035 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO T A A G M FISCHER THEODORE A GERTRUDE FISCHER 2034 COtICRCE BLVO MOUND MN 55344 SO 02-117-25 51 0034 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO T A A 6 A FISCHER THEODORE A GERTRUDE FISCHER 2034 COItCRCE DLVO HOUND MN 5S344 PROP Al OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR SO 02-117-2S 51 0044 00540 BARRETT AVE B H JAFFRAY AMD JAFFRAY DRAPER N JAFFRAY 540 BARRETT AVE NAYZATA- MN 55391 SB 02-117-25 S2 0001 00405 ORONO ORCHARD RO 5 EOHARO H HAHN EDHARD HERSEY HAMM 400 ST PETER ST ST PAUL MN 55102 SO 02-117-2S 55 0002 01445 FOX ST SALUS REAL ESTATE INC SALUS REAL ESTATE INC C/O GRAND METROPOLITAN 200 4TH ST S MS 10N7 MPLS Ml 5S402 PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SO 02-117-2S S5 0010 01410 SHORELINE OR A HARRISON AIL HARRISON ALFRED A INGRID L HARRISON 1410 SHORELINE DR NAYZATA Ml 55391 SB 02-117-23 3S 0011 01401 SHORELINE OR EDHARD H A JEAN HAHN EOHARO H A JEAN HAIM 400 ST PETER ST ' ST PAUL FM 55102 SO 02-117-2S 34 01305 FOX ST ANOREH J GOETTEN A ANOREH J GOETTEN 1305 FOX ST NAYZATA Ml 55391 0001 . •.. I V) HIFE ♦ • PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR SB 02-117-25 54 0005 015B9 ORONO LA HENRY N SEE ETAL HENRY N SEE 1309 ORONO U NAYZATA HN 55391 SO 02-117-2S S4 0004 01395 ORONO LA NORHEST BK MPLS-NTL ASC TRST NORHEST BAM( MN TRUST REAL ESTATE 4TH A HARGUETTE MPLS MN 55479-0053 S4 0007 LA SB 02-117-2S 01S97 ORONO DANA H HELLS DANA M HELLS 1397 ORONO U NAYZATA MN 55591 j PROP AOOR OM«R NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOlMk SB 02-117-2S 54 OOOB 01S99 ORONO LA ELIZABETH N NORTON ELIZABETH N NORTON ' 1S99 ORONO LA' NAYZATA Ml 55591 SO 02-117-25 S4 0010 ' 01245 SHORELINE DR L S BUSCH ANA BUSCH LEONARD A MARGARET BUSCH 1245 SHORELINE OR NAYZATA Ml 55391 3B 02-117-25 34 0011 01325 SHORELINE OR TIMOTHY R OUOOS TIMOTHY R DUOOS 1325 SHORELINE OR NAYZATA Ml 55591 % MM DATt 19/U/n HEItCPXN COMTY PROPERTY INTORHATION SYSTCH PROPERTY OHNERS LIST BATCH 002 r.'" ■H' ‘ PROP AODR OltCR NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR SO 0E-117-2S SB 0012 01S5S SHORELINE DR DAN JOHNSON OOUOLAS D A NARY H JOHNSON ISS5 SHORELINE OR NAYZATA m 55591 m PROP AOOR OHNER NANI TAXPAYIR NAHC/ADDR TOTAL RATCN Ms#®': : H<r- 002 000S9 REPORT m. PIA55901 PAGE 0 SO 02-117-2S S4 0015 01505 SHORELINE DR N J POPP ATE POPP NILLIAH J A TERI E POPP 1505 SHORELINE DRIVE NAYZATA m 55591 SO 02>117>2S 41 0009 OOOSO ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO MCLEOD CNTY REG RAIL AUTH DAKOTA RAIL INC 25 ADAMS ST N HUTCHINSON Itl 55550 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEtMEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE BEST OF NY KNONLEOGE AND BELIEF. DATE P. 1 II * ' * r •; *» V . C'‘‘* /■/ -I.VCt) r #• s MM ■lOmm mm saim-'rfimmmsmm motmm Itei 1^^ Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Cno G Sooest^ PE Rccen W Ros<*ne PE * ;cveon C Anje^ik, PE \»4«'vn L Scfvaa PE Turrr' PE oe^n R Coo A PE E \Cy^\ PE Prc?'T Q Sc^ur'c-: PE Suwn M ECertm. C PA •Senior Consu«ant Engineers & Architects Howafd A Sanford PE Keith A Gordon. PE Roocrt R P^ffone PE R<ha»d W Poster P£ DJvkJ O LCSiiCtJ. PE Rcoert C Russek A (A Jerry A SoofOon PE Mafk A Harso'i. PE M<f\aei T Rjutmann PE Ted ic Field PE Thomas R Anaenon. A i A Donald C Borgardt. PE Thomas E Angus. PE ismaei Mamnca. PE M<hae< P Rau PE Agnes M Rirvg. A iC P Thomas W Peterson PE M<hae' C Lyrvrh PE Jarres R Matarvj PE Jerry D Penacr^ PE Kenneth P AndffSOn PE Mark R POifs PE Mark A Seip PE Gary W Monen. PE Daniel J Edgerron PE Daryl K Kirschenman PE Phihp J Caswe*. PE Mark O U/aikl PE Miiei*B Jensen PEPE L PhOip Grave! ai. PE Karen L W«emen PE Gary D <r«$:of 12, PE F Todd Fos:e' PE »^e«tn R Yaoa PS Shawn D Gusra^on. i CeriJo Ofive' PE Charles A E'Cison Leo M Pawetsky Hanan M O*son Janes F Enge*hardl November 3, 1992 V.** Michael P. Gaffiron, Asst. Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 iTi* NOV 5 '1092 Re: #1778 Goetten Subdivision File 139-1778 Dear Mike: We have reviewed the proposed lot division on the Goetten property, located east of Orono Orchard Road on Fox Street. The existing 30 foot wide right-of-way along the north side of the property is inadequate. Also, because there are three or more homes which have access to Fox Street, the road should be improved with a cul-de-sac at this time. We recommend that the aforementioned property dedicate an additional 20 feet of roadway right-of-way, ending with a 50 foot radius circle for a cul-de-sac just west of Barrett Avenue. The proposed right-of-way is shown on the enclosed half section map. The roadway and cul-de-sac should be constructed with equal assessments to all abutting properties which access onto Fox Street. The estimated construction cost of the road is $30,000. The westerly lot in the subdivision may be able to access onto Orono Orchard Road. The recommended location is 100 feet north of the railroad right-of-way. This location is 300 feet south of the Fox Street intersection. Additional site inspection will be necessary to verify that the access would have adequate stopping site distance. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. M Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. SDG:lk Enclosure 2335 West HIghwity 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 EXHIBIT G Basis for Right*>o£~lfay Dedication Requirement This request for road dedication and improvement is consistent with Orono's Subdivision Code Section 11.40, Subd. 2 "Widening and Realignment of Existing Roads". That section reads as follows: "Where a subdivision borders an existing narrow road or when the Comprehensive Municipal Plan or some other agency indicates plans for realignment or widening a road that would require use of some of the land in the subdivision, the subdivider shall be required to improve and dedicate at his expense such areas for widening or realignment of such roads. Such frontage roads and streets shall be improved and dedicated by the subdivider at his own expense to the full width as required by this chapter." Section 11.33, Subd. 4 requires that for a residential public street, the typical section serving 3 to 10 residential units is a 28' minimum paved width, with a 50' right-of-way. Section 11.33, Subd. 1 (B) Indicates the right-of-way for a local street shall be 50', with 50' radius for cul-de-sacs. The City has continuously and consistently required the dedication and improvement of rights-of-way when subdivisions border substandard roads. A partial listing follows: Year Subdivision Name Action 1977 North Arm Estates, 4th Addition City required additional 17' x 250' right-of-way to bring North Arm Lane up to a 50' standard 1778 Farm at Long Lake City required 33' additional right- of-way for 875' length of Dakota Ave/Long Lake Blvd 1981 Brenten Woods City Required additional 5' of right-of-way for 375' length of Togo Road 1982 Navarro City required additional 20' of right-of-way for a 400' length of Blaine Avenue 1982 Halcyon Hallow City required 5' additional right- of-way for 150' length of Togo Road 1983 Wood End Acres City required dedication of portion of cul-de-sac at terminus of future Lyman Avenue 1986 Beau Marais City required additional 15' - 18' of right-of-way for a 380' length 1 •4 4 of Fox Street r Exhibit G Page 2 1987 Woodhill Ridge As part of this 4-lot platr City required developer to dedicate additional right-of-way for a cul- de-sac and turnaround, and required developer to upgrade existing Woodhill Avenue with developer paying major share of the cost 1989 Loma Valley Additional 25’ - 30* right-of-way was required for a 400* length of Loma Linda Avenue 1991 Wildhurst Estates Developer was required to dedicate an additional 15' of right-of-way for a 240' length of Wildhurst Trail, dedicate approximately 1/2 of the area of a cul-de-sac, and was required to construct a 600' roadway and cul-de-sac at his expense, to serve 3 lots. The City has requited the upgrade of portions of substandard road adjacent to subdivisions in cases where additional traffic to such roadway will be generated by the subdivision. The City Engineer’s recommendation for 20' additional right-of-way and cul-de-sac and the improvement of Fox Street and construction of cul-de-sac is consistent with past City practice, and supported both in the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code. I § 11.33 i! . ^ . D Intersections shall be designed with a flat Stopping area shall- be designed to provide a maximum grade of two (2) percent. E. Where any street intersection will involve earth banks or existing vegetation inside any lot corner that would ccea?e a IraffIc^hazltd by limiting visibility, the »ubdividet shall cut such ground and/or vegetation (including connection with the grading of the right-of-way to the extent deemed necessary by the City to provide an adequate sight distance. F. The crown of all streets, including intersections, shall be three percent (3%) or less. Subd. 4. Typical Section. The typical section indicated herein is as determined for a Clay Subgrade (A-6 Soil Classifica tion) and may be subject to change. Soil borings may be required to be determined by the City. Private Street - Residential * Units 3-6 .• R.O.W.* 50' M.P.W.** 24' Section 8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Over 7 50'28'8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Pihlic Street - Residential * Units 3-10 R.O.W.* 50' M.P.W.** 28' Section 8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Over 10 50'32'8" Class 5 100% crushed 3" 2341 Bituminous Surface Maximum cul-de-sac length - 1,000' Maximum number of units on cul-de-sac - 10 Public Street - Commercial c3r Industrial Units 1+ R.O.W.* 70' M.P.W.** 32' Section ft** A 8" Class 5 100% crushed 4** 1341 Bituminous surface * Right-of-way Width ** Minimum Paved Width ORONO CC 462 (4-1-84) 1 I. I. i.>/n. M fl t.- to . I n U M k § 11.40 SEC. 11.40. ROAD DEDICATION AND RESERVATIONS. Subd 1. New Perimeter Streets. Street systems in new subdivisions shall.be laid out so as to eliminate avoid new perimeter half-streets. Where an existing half-street is adDacent ► o a new subdivision, the other half of the street sh?.ll be improved and dedicated by the subdivider. The City may authorize a new oeriraeter street where the subdivider improves and dedicates the entire required street right-of-way width within his own subdivision boundaries. Subd., 2. Wiiening and Realignment of Existing Roads. Where a subdivision borders an existing narrow ^°ad or when the romorehensive Municipal Plan or some other agency indicates plans for realianment or widening a road that would require use of of the land in the subdivision, the subdivider shall be or improve and dedicate at his expense such areas for realignment of such roads. Such frontage roads and bl imlroved and dedicated by the subdivider at his own expense to the fu?1 width as required by this Chapter. .r.iuV,,,r Chapter whether the land is to be dedicated to the City in fee simple or an easement is granted to the City. SBC. 11.41. DRAINAGE AND STORM SEWERS Subd 1. General Requirements. The City shall not approve any subdivision which does not ^ake adequate provision for storm or flood water runoff. Surface water Acrm w^?« be shown for each and every lot and “ock. The drainage system shall be separate and lr"JeP*"^«"J.°L*5Lioned by sewer svstem. Storm sewers, where required, ."®. "rme’tSS^as approved by the City, and a copy ^^'^rs^aTl ‘io°v"iVd''’si\h\\I:s::r,vrArv.v.^; intercept flow at that point. Subd 2. Nature of Storm Water Facilities. ORONO CC 464 (4-1-84) i < I■ TiST e^sTnirf V 11 rnU^-.r na« OdOldO /HAwA6r^<*ie*^T PMaJ - B^xcei^pr-^ [ 7RANSPQRTAT1ON JUNE, 1980 i I URBAN TRANSPORTATION POL?CIE§ 1. 3. 4 • LOCAL STREETS IN THE URBAN AREA WILL BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE CITY. Because the land use and street use density of the urban neighborhoods is relatively high, the City will provide public street access to all urban properties. City responsibility for proper maintenance levels will ensure passable, all”weather streets available at all times for emergency vehicles and for general public ingress and egress. I I I ALL URBAN PROPERTIES SHOULD BE DIRECTLY SERVED BY THE PUBLIC STREET SYSTEM. Urban density development is not appropriate on narrow or poorly maintained private roads. Significant exceptions to this rule are in the case of a planned residential or commercial development having private maintenance personnel, or on sensitive lakeshore lots where two homes could be served by one common private driveway to reduce hardcover and topographical problems. URBAN STREETS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO URBAN DESIGN STANDARDS. All urban streets will be paved and of sufficient width to accommodate the number of properties being served. Intersections and driveway aprons will be designed and regulated according to commonly accepted engineering safety standards. Street drainage will be designed to utilize existing natural drainage systems and to avoid d’rect runoff into the Lake. CURB CUTS AND DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS WILL BE LIMITED FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY. All new curb cuts and driveway locations will be subject to performance standards relating to sight distance, lot width and proximity to intersections or other driveways. All properties will be allowed access, but the number of access points and the location of allowable access will be limited for public traffic safety purposes. ON STREET PARKING WILL BE STRICTLY LIMITED. No parking will be permitted on narrow streets or at hazardous locations. All urban development must provide adequate on-site parking facilities. CMP 7-10 I ■■ 9vmwm>mirn*iP \ I I I I I a I i i I « 9 ■ 1 9 9 ■ II transportation JUNE, 1980 6.THE CITY WILL PURSUE*ADDITIONAL PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE-HIKE TRAIL FACILITIES. The completion of an interconnected ]gj[](e-nike trail system is important to the further ance of alternative transportation incentives. The City will encourage Hennepin County to speedily implement the planned bike-hike trail system along several county roads. Tne separation of bicycle and pedestrian traffic from vehicular traffic is of the utmost importance in accident prevention. 1 7.THE CITY WILL PROMOTE IMPROVED MASS TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS. Orono has established a Park and Ride Transit System. Orono encourages improved bus scheduling and improved service, especially at off-peak hours. Orono strongly supports the "Tonkamobile" program and encourages expansion to provide improved Excelsior-Wayzata service via Orono*s North Shore neighborhoods. RiiRAi transportation policies 1.PUBLIC STREETS IN THE RURAL AREA WILL BE PRIMARILY LIMITED TO THE EXISTING COLLECTOR AND ARTERIAI< GRID SYSTEM. The low rural land use density does not require nor can it economically support an extensive public street system. Rural lot arrangements have always been served by the existing grid streets and are capable of subdivision to ^He planned rural density without requiring additional public street investments. i 2.THE RING ROUTE CONCEPT UTILIZES AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE THE EXISTING RURAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM. The principal corridor for traffic from Minnetrista and points west utilizes Hennepin County Roads No. 6 and 19 and State Highway 12. The City of Orono has constructed a key link between County Roads 6 and 19. Additional ring route traffic uses the existing north-south collector roads to travel away from the Lake toward these principal travel routes. 3.THP CTTY OF ORONO WILL ENCOURAGE ALL NECESSARY ROAD SURFACE AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED TO ACCOMMODATE AND TO FACILITATE THROUGH TRAFFIC ON THE RING ROUTE. This will include cooperation with the City of Long Lake in accommodating traffic on Highway 12. CMP 7-11 f TRANSPORTATION JUNE, 1980 4. 5. 6. L m RURAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS WILL UTILIZE PRIVATE ROAD FEEDERS TO SUPPLEMENT THE EXISTING PUBLIC ROAD GRID. Because of topographical limitations, the historic shape of rural land divisions, and the low density of rural land use, most new rural residential lots preserved by short dead-end roads running off the existing street system. The low number of dwellings on each road, the dead~end configuration and the scattered road locations make public roadway maintenance excessively costly compared to any public benefit. Therefore, most new rural lots will be directly served by privately owned and maintained roadways. New public streets will be accepted where a "through" configuration provides a general public benefit and/or where the number of residences justifies public maintenance expense. PRIVATE RURAL ROADWAYS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO RURAL DESIGN STANDARDS. The City will regulate private road design standards to ensure environmental protection and adequate all- weather access to all properties. The type and width of road surface required will vary with the number of residences to be served and hence the amount of expected vehicle usage. The length of dead-end roads will be limited for public safety purposes. THE CITY WILL GUARANTEE REASONABLE MAINTENANCE LEVELS AND PUBLIC ACCESS ON ALL PRIVATE ROADS. In the process of appjfoving rural subdivisions, the City will acquire underlying public ingress, egress, and access easements over all private roads. These easements will ensure legal access of the public to all properties served by the private road. Development contracts backed by acceptable forms of financial responsibility will assure that all private roads are designed and constructed according to City- approved standards and specifications. The City will further guarantee that all private roads are maintained to reasonable standards at all times through required maintenance agreements and/or homeowner's associations, and that failure of the private group to so maintain their private road will be cause for the City to accomplish needed maintenance and to assess the benefitted properties for the direct cost of such maintenance. CMP 7-12 t I I I f i I I I I I I i I 1 i i i i 1 1 1 \ TRANSPORTATION JUNE, 1980 7. 8. 9. DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS AND RURAL STREET OR PRIVATE ROAD INTERSECTIONS WILL BE LIMITED FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY. Rural traffic speed is generally faster than that in urban neighborhoods requiring greater sight distances and a lesser number of intersection conflicts for the same degree of traffic safety. Joint use of carefully located private roads will generally be preferred over direct access onto public highways from separate properties. RURAL TRAILS ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE TOTAL ALTERNATE TRANSFORATION SYSTEM. Rural trails offer access to the Hennepin County Park Reserve Lands from all areas of the City. Rural trails offer horseback riding as well as walking and bicycle opportunities. The City will encourage completion of the planned bike-hike trail system and the private development of rural trails connecting the public trail system with individual rural properties. The City will continue to restrict motorized use of trails within Orono as inappropriate to the trail's basic purpose and as incompatible with adjacent residential properties. THE CITY WILL NOT PROMOTE MASS TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR RURAL ORONO. The planned rural land use density cannot economically support public transit services. Existing bus routes pass through the rural area enroute between Long Lake, Wayzata and urban Orono. These routes are sufficient to serve Orono's rural needs and will in fact provide additional rural service as the need for addit-onal urban service increases. No new route locations are necessary as rural residents desiring to use transit services will use the established park and ride locations in Navarre and Wayzata. CMP 7-13 JPANSPORTATION JUNE, 1980 TUF TRANSPORTATION PLAN Orono'8 location on the perimeter of the Metropolitan * has pretty well dictated that our Transportation Plan will be essentially a plan for streets and roads. Orono has no planning needs for airports, and has little planning requirement for mass transit. The principa ”®® is a plan to provide for local movement between residential neighborhoo and commercial centers, and for efficient commuter movement away from the congested, environmentally sensitive lakeshore. The principle components of Orono's Transportation Plan are as follows: 2.DEVELOPING THE SCENIC PARKWAY CONCEPT including parkways for slow-speed recreational access along the Lake Minnetonka shoreline and other scenically attractive routes. 3.DEVELOPING THE PRIVATE ROAD CONCEPT for access to low density rural residential properties. 4. commuter travel to the center o£ the Twin Cities region. nonun's ROAnwAY CLASSIFICATION SYSTEH A commonly accepted way to describe and analyze a is through a classification system which follows^smes^jinM fitfferent levels of construction standards. This Plan follows “rinssification system developed and adopted by the Minnesota Department Of Transportation as applied to the types of roadways serving Orono. . f MAP NO 14 INDICATES THE CLASSIFICaATION PLAN FOR STREETS AND ROADS IN O^NO Thirplan is consistent with the regional transportation plans and facilities of the Metropolitan Council, the Minnesota Transportation and the Hennepin County Department of This plan is consistent with the roadway systems of adjoining Ind w?tS Orono's urban and rural land use plans. .The « proviL det!^?ed explanations of each of Orono's roadway classifications. CMP 7-14 ■e iiifimfirrtii limMi % 3 I I i I I I I a V I I H i I 3 fl f 1i 1 transportation^JUNE, 1980 principal arterial a Principal Arterial *s a gi^^de-separat capacity, controlled access highway designed to move vehicles an area, not within a community. Principal arterials have access. The only principal arterial near Orono is that portion of State 12 that becomes limited-access east of Orono's eastern boundary with wayzata. INTERMEDIATE ARTERIAL An Intermediate Arterial is J, moderabel-yTTgr^^ity highway designed to move vehi^ ^nf^n ironin' ri^u^lL? belCeer^re i«e-standin, ,rowth centers and .out-state cities west of Orono into the metropolitan area. are limited and controlled. Land use access is intended maior traffic qenerators without direct access to residential properties. State Highway 12 is an Intermediate Arterial through orono although many acceU and intersection characteristics are typical of a minor arterial or collector. JURISDICTION: STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH; MINIMUM 100 FEET FOR TWO LANE HIGHWAY MINOR ARTERIAL A Minor Arterial is a controlled access, moderate capacit street of ^^way designed to move vehicles within planning subregions and bi^w^n Id jaLnt"subregions. The Lake Minnetonka arterial functioning to move, principally commuters and * - from the western Lake Minnetonka communities into the urbanized * the Twin Cities. The minor arterial route channels traffic away Lake Minnetonka to State Highways 12 and 55, and in the near a direct intersection with Interstate 494 in Plymouth. “ is intended to be limited to major traffic generators and local stree intersections without dirc':t access to individual residences. JURISDICTION: HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: MINIMUM 80 FEET FOR TWO LANE HIGHWAY rOLLECTOR A Collector street functions to collect traffic from local COLLEgpB neighborhood activity centers or to intersections w^tWinor o^ intermediate^rterials. Local land use access xs permitted but is regulated as to location and number with direct ?nt»rsectio avoided whenever alternative local street access is with other collectors are often controllea with sxgnals stop signs. Traffic usage is moderate. JURISDICTION: COUNTY OR CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: 60-66 FEET CMP 7-15 TRANSPORTATION JUNE, 1980 SCENIC PARKWAY Scenic parkway is a designation and classification used by the Cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul and applied by Orono to those roads which traverse especially scenic and environmentally significant areas of the City. The scenic parkway is typically a narrow, curvy, slow speed road which provides access to recreational areas and special vistas of scenic attractions. High volume through traffic and commercial traffic is not appropriate on scenic parkways because these users do not benefit from the attraction and because the physical nature of the roadway is not conducive to efficient through traffic movement. Because of environmental sensitivity, scenic parkways cannot be rebuilt into higher capacity collectors or minor arterials without adversely affecting the natural setting, the scenic quality of the road and/or the property rights of abutting landowners. Because of the natural topography of the area, scenic parkways also provide some of the traffic and local access functions of both local and collector streets. JURISDICTION: COUNTY OR CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: 50-66 FEET LOCAL STREETS Local streets are public streets that function to provide direct access to abutting properties. Local streets carry traffic within neighborhoods rather than through traffic between neighborhoods. Inter sections with collector streets are controlled by stopping the local street traffic. JURISDICTION: CITY __ _ _ RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: 50-60 FEET DEAD-END: LENGTH WILL BE LIMITED BY PUBLIC SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS PRIVATE ROAD A private road is a privately owned and privately maintained road, located in the rural area or within a planned development, that functions as a local access street. The City will require that private roads be constructed and maintained to City standards. The City will acquire an easement for public ingress, egress and access to all properties, but the City will allow the property owners to limit normal use of the road to the benefittiag landowners and their invitees. Private roads will be located on platted outlets intended for joint and several ownership by all the benefitted property owners. ■f JURISDICTION: HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WITH UNDERLYING EASEMENT TO CITY MAXIMUM SERVICE: APPROXIMATELY TEN REL;IDENTIAL PROPERTIES RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: 30-50 FEET DEPENDING UPON NUI.BER OF USERS DEAD-END: LENGTH WILL BE LIMITED BY PUBLIC SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS i CMP 7-16 0 iw ^ I Q] I i Q I 01 m m 01 m jpftNSPORTATlQN JUNE, 1980 • « owned and privately maintain PRIVATE DRIVEWAY A property. Private driveways vehicle path between the street -ecordino to^the classification of the shall be subject to access permits subject to any public abutting street. Private recorded private easements where easement or access rxgh , u between the residence served driveways cross an intervening p and the street. JURISDICTION: PROPERTY OWNER V r.tpe*Tnt*Kif'P typical* JOINT DRIVEWAYS ALLOWED WITH„aaihv « service . iJJLTJpEE^^ DRIVEWAY WIDTH : lLgTH BETWEEN THE RESIDENCE AND THE PUBLIC ROAD Jurisdiction over the only Intermediate Arterial in the City. The Hennepin County Department 5r is^i^^ctpitlld^^h^t the only Minor Arterial fut«« over the City- Hennepin County has Jurisdiction over ^:jrMCn:Jirha^anr?r?ounty3ntained 1^ tS:trs::nirptrRra:s ”thit%ierariror?h=^!Lediale laReshore. including the access road to the orono Golf Course. ^H'tSHoSal s?rn?s'w“ich“servt'airoronr«s?den^s.‘'°i«tain R^y s«ect :e,mSnts h^ie'brerdefignated for Municipal State Aid construction assistance, including: OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD from County Road 6 to FOX street. County Roud 84 _ _ m ^ ^ V« A WILLOW DRIVE from County Road 6 to State Highway 12 and from the Long Lake border to Fox Street FOX STREET from Willow Drive to County Road 146 McCulley Road uLfRouL iLr) between County Road 6 and County Road 19 ^te:^iLsr?iita“\rars“:^vi:r”irrherr^irdi"ruari::reri?:s!“'“°'’ CMP 7-17 # •J I i H- TOS Michael P. Gaffron From:Stephen Weckman, 0 Dates November 6, 1992 Subjects Subdivision #1779, Soil testing and system design has been submitted for a five bedroom home including primary and alternate drainfield sites for Lot 2 of this subdivision. Lot 1 is currently connected to City sewer. The soil testing and septic system design meet all Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and City of Orono standards based on the existing property lines. The depth of seasonal saturation (mottling) is between 18" and 24" requiring the installation of a mound system. Slope at both sites is 6%. Topographic location and site drainage is adequate. Alsor all setbacks meet City code. The Zoning staff has indicated that a 20* road dedication along Fox Street may be required as a condition of the subdivision. If the 20* easement is required, the alternate drainfield site will have less than a 1* separation from the new property line. Steve Schirmers has indicated that another alternate site is possible if a variance can be granted for the slopes up to 8%. Soil testing has not been completed for this alternate drainfield site. Staff can only approve the soil testing and septic system design if the 20' dedication for Fox Street is not required. If the 20* dedication is required, additional soil testing must be provided for a new alternate drainfield site. I1 .JUii -Hoa %x^r TT^-it TF«T»»^o u ^ ’■■'’"‘Tib3\ V*^'"^^ ■ r . ■^‘*/ ' -» >>-» ^1 ,. \\ V\ \ X tVcTO^O ^%0\\^ 1L^\i>us ^ "7-nV 1^ ¥fx0^xjt'yr> iv«v* at." V WoVoveo- • -«P7 V=ViV^VlMU £-X«nrr.^tC. •9tk Auv.- U^AVV ^visrx^ •♦ 6^hte- ?tJ •g.A^^tOOi3^ t-j.^i-H-*.v^ Avj uje^rT' iSu*— j _________________ SPvcokitkm Tests Borings ® Bench Mark Stole *J_* Note: This system is to be constructed the Mtonesoto Polluiiort Control A Chapter 7080 ( Local • Check all underground i PRCPCRTY OFt » V-0<* I'^.StE <?0/^ rrpotJiO vJ . \4 ^e-v-> S'P TESTING INC. Oesiyed By- 6Xlon- tS .-^-ci Oo!c:ll/il/32» PH.612-497-3! f .■ HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET (F^opos^a lor 2) Existing Hardcover in Zone A. House length o S- O B. 'Garage 2 V 5. 5 20. y X X c. Driveway ZV m D. SlDEWALK>^rV/<J CUsfUS E. Patio/ Beei^ F. Landscape_ _ _ _ _ _x areas UNDERLAIN PLASTIC SHEETING _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ X . /€. y srpr /. y 6. Other _ _ _ _ X ZC.3 WIDTH C- O 32.V 3. 2 /Z.3 3. «r /2.V € Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone 250-500' CSQO-lOOOi • ?S2 S.F. • /Z S.F. /7 S.F. S.F. 2S*p S.F. 3Y ZSi S.F. 3€S.F. • S.F. /9S S.F. 7S S.F. • S.F. 2YO S.F. 720 S.F. (~, s. Ja • ••• •S.F. Z03 S.F. 9 S.F. 2S5Y • S.F. Z22 VS.JOOti.r. m asgy ■;■ [T1 vs. 3ot^ x 100 -% y ^ (ssVo r 1J ■ 4 To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator 4. Prom:Jeanne A. M;bn<5th» Building & Zoning Administrator Date: Subject November 13, 1932 A. #1785 David Carlson, 600, 610 and 620 Big Island Class II Preliminary Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement Involving the Creation of an Easement for the Sharing of a Septic System - Public Hearing Zoning District: RS Pertinent Ordinances 1. Chapter 11/Class II Subdivision A. B. C. D. Section 11.02 > Definition 66 (A) - Creation of a private easement and lot line rearrangements involving properties that do not meet the standard of the RS district require subdivision review. Subdivisions of this type are classified as Class II. Section 10.31, Subd. 2 (A) - Seasonal dwelling. One family detached dwellings used for seasonal recreational use not to exceed 180 days in any one year and not to be owner's principal residence for homestead tax credit purposes. 600 Big Island per Record Lot inventory « .23 acres Approved lot area variance « Resolution No. 1536 610 Big Island per Record Lot inventory * .68 acres No resolution of record approving lot area but area variance has been officially recognized in record lot inventory. 620 Big Island per Record Lot inventory * .97 acres Approved lot area variance = Resolution No. 1998 All of the above have been approved for seasonal dwellingy4iiEach of the Record Lots has a seasonal dwelling. Lot area varainces have been granted in ordinance . Section 10.31, Subd. C (1) - Lot line rearrangements between abutting RS properties that do not create an additional building site will normally be approved. Section 10.31, Subd. 7 - No existing lot of record shall be reduced by any lot line rearrangement to less than 50* in width measured at the shoreline and at the building site. Lots 600 and 610 Big Island technically not lakeshore lots and measured at the 30* street setback as follows: \ o 4> )" I ' Zoning file #1785 Noveu’^ V r 13, 1992 Pag-3 2 Existing Proposed at 75 Setback 600 Big Island 610 Big Island 620 Big Island = 38* s 73' = 90'at 75* setback line 61' 57' 120' None of the lots are reduced to less than 50' result of the lot line rearrangement. as a E.Section 10.31, Subd. 12 - On-site sewage treatment systems required. A complete on-site sewage treatment system including plumbing fixtures, two sealed septic tanks and underground drainfield designed, constructed and maintained in full conformance with the on-site sewage treatement code is required on all properties in the RS district as follows......... "4. Serving all dwellings, buildings or structures containing a water activated toilet regardless of the type or duration of use or occupancy P.Section 10.31, Subd. 18 (E) - There shall be no setback exceptions permitted that reduce any required setback to less than 10'. 610 Big Island or proposed Lot 2's existing structure will be less than 10' from shared lot line between Lots 1 and 2. Applicant proposes new structure to be placed 10' from lot line. List of Exhibits - Subdivision Application A B C D E P Application Plat Map Property Owners List Weckman Memo Survey/Existing Property Survey/Proposed Discussion At the time applicant commissioned a survey of the property, it was discovered that 600 and 610 Big Island did not own their lakeshore. Each of the properties has a residential dock. Mr. Carlson, during the review of his variance application (#1745) earlier this year, also discovered that his property had no suitable area for development of an on-site septic system to serve his existing cabin proposed for major improvement. Members will recall that the application was tabled in June of 1992 and applicant was advised to consider relocating structure out of the 75' setback area. As applicant's addendum notes. Exhibit A-1, he has acquired 610 Big Island via Contract for Deed and now 1 : 1. Zoning File #1785 November 13, 1992 Page 3 proposes a realignment of all three properties whereby proposed Lots 2 and 3 will have lakeshore. The existing structure on Lot 3 will now meet the required 10' setback from the side lot line where structure had originally encroached into 610 Bi'^ Island approximately 1-2', The existing structure on Lot 2 is located approximately 4* from the newly proposed side lot line between Lots 2 and 3, Per Section 10.31, Subd, 18 (E), no setback can be reduced to less than 10'. The proposed lot line arrangment can not be approved unless applicant proposes the removal and replacement with a conforming structure. Refer to Exhibit F. Proposed Lot 1 provides applicant with higher and dryer elevations to north Increasing the building envelope. Based on lot widths, proposed Lot 1 will be required to meet a 30* interior lot line setback based on the 120' width measured at the Intersection of the side lot lines with the 75' setback line. Proposed Lots 2 and 3, because their lot widths are less than 100' in width, will be required to meet a 10' interior lot line setback. As proposed Lot 3 is located adjacent to a street at both the north lot line and the south lot line, a 30* setback would be required if new construction was proposed. The second part of the subdivision application involves the creation of easements for the purpose of sharing an on-site septic system. The drainfield area is to be located on proposed Lot 2 with tanks installed on proposed Lot 1. Please review Exhibit D, Weckman's memo, both Lots 1 and 2 are proposed for new construction with cabins having two bedrooms, bathrooms and kitchen sink. On-site sewage treatment is required. Test information confirms adequate area for a four bedroom mound system. A 10' setback variance will be required between the shared lot lines of proposed Lots 2 and 3 because septic tanks do not meet the required 20* setback from shared lot line. Each of the parcels will grant easements in favor of each other to allow the shared use and maintenance of the septic system. Weckman notes this is the only suitable area on both properties for septic use and that no alternate site is available but finds no problem as cabins are seasonal and would not be used to capacity for extended periods. The sharing of a septic system would not be in conflict with the MPCA or the City of Orono on-site septic standards. In fact, this may be a solution for several properties on Big Island where outhouses exist and do not conform to the required separation distance to OHWL - such as the outhouses on both of these properties. Staff has conditioned approval of this shared septic system based on the granting of mutual easements and subject to the limitation of the number of bedrooms to two for both properties. It is also suggested that covenants define location of test site on property in order to assure protection during construction and with future seasonal recreational use. r Zoning File #1785 November 13# 1992 Page 4 Staff has been advised that all three parcels have no Independent water supplies but are served from another property. Lots 1 and 2 will be served by individual wells at the time of new construction. ndation Any recommendation of approval must include the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. Applicant to execute a covenant/easement providing for the shared use of septic system and septic tanks located on both properties. Such document should Include the location of the septic system and tanks with special precaution to protect drainfield site during construction with the need to stake the area prior to any land alteration. Most important# the cabins shall be limited to two bedroom level use. Covenant/easement must be in a form suitable for filing against the Chain of Title of the properties. Applicant shall provide a removal date for the razing of the exlsitng cabin on Lot 2 as Section 10.31# Subd. 18 (E) will not allow a setback less than 10' from an interior lot line. The current cabin is located approximately 4'. All new construction shall meet the setback requirements for lakeshore properties and of the RS district. Applicant shall grant 5* drainage and utility easements along all perimeter property lines and along the shared lot lines and to be omitted at the shoreline. Note City is not asking for 10* along perimeter lot lines because of the substandard setback of seasonal cabin on Lot 3 where lot line has not been altered. -i Zoning File #1785 November 13» 1992 Page 5 Applications #1781 and #1782 620 Big Island - Variances and Conditional Use Permit Applications #1783 and #1784 610 Big Island - Variances and Conditional Use Permit Pertinent Ordinances 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Section 10.55, Subd. 4 (B) - Flood fringe district. The flood fringe district shall include those areas designated as floodway fringe in the Flood Isurance Study including without limitation the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka between elevations 929.4 and 931.5, the area between the floodway and the edge of the 100-year flood elevation. Review Exhibit S. Mote that new construction will be located entirely within flood fringe area. Septic tanks and drainfield areas are located above the flood plain elevation at 931.5 Section 10.55, Subd. 7 (B) - The regulatory flood protection elevation for Lake Minnetonka shall be 932.5 MSL. Section 10.55, Subd. 8 - Development restricted. No filling, grading, temporary or permanent structures 111 be allowed within the flood plain. Section 10.55, Subd. 10 - Permitted and conditional use permits. Only structures allowed within flood fringe area are listed under conditional uses. They are accessory structures such as open decks and patio or other accessory uses not specifically listed when approved by the Council but no use shall be approved which will restrict or obstruct any flood flow or which will raise the level of any flood flow. Seasonal structure use is not addressed. Sfection 10.55, Subd. 14 (B) - Conditions attached to conditional use permits. Flood proofing measures in accordance with State Building Code and Federal Flood Regulations - Applicant shall submit the plan or document certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the flood proofing measures are consistent with the regulatory flood protection elevation and associated flood factors for the particular area. This section suggests more intense structure than decks and patios. RS Standards - Section 10.31, Subd. 8 - Required setbacks. Refer to Exhibit F. Street » 30' Interior lot lines = 30' with lot widths at 100-199' Interior lot lines = 10' with lot widths at 1-99' JL r’-i tf t ‘f-'' W: I Zoning File #1785 November 13, 1992 Page 6 8. Lot 1 Required * 75' Proposed ■ 75' Required interior lot line Proposed ■ 30' = 30 Lot 2 Required ■ 75' Proposed ■ 75' Required interior lot line Proposed ■ 10' » 10 7. Section 10.31, Subd. 9 - Lakeshore hardcover regulations. 75-250* setback area Lot 1/620 Big Island Total area ■ 11,880 s.f. Allowed 2,970 s.f. or 25% Proposed * 1,926 s.f. or 16.21% Lot 2/ Total area ■ 17,280 s.f. Allowed - 4,320 s.f. Proposed r 1,409.25 s.f. or 8.15% Section 10.31, Subd. 10 - All structures limited to 30* in height. Lot 1 structure proposed at 28' height Lot 2 structure proposed at 23' height 9. Section 10.31, Subd. 11 - Building construction standards A.Foundations required. All new or remodeled seasonal dwellings or guest cabins and all principal dwellings shall be placed on a permanent frost depth (42”) solid masonry or treated wood foundation that completely encloses the entire perimeter of the building. Also consider Section 10.55, Subd. 11 which directs that no structure, temporary or permanent, will adversely affect the capacity of the floodway or Increase flood height. Permanent frost depth foundation would be in complete conflict of directives of flood plain regulatory guideline. All construction shall be subject to Section 10.31, Subd. 11 (A-G). 10, Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (B) - Average lakeshore setback variance required - 0 encroachment. Uuyi Zoning File #1785 November 13r 1992 Page 7 Lot 1 Lot 2 Proposed = 90' Prposed = 23*' List of Exhibits - Variances and Conditional Use Pemits G H I J K L M N 0 P QR S Application #1781 Application #1782 Hardcover Fact Sheets Planning Commission Minutes 6/5/92 DNR Letter 11/5/92 Elevations Floor Plan Application #1783 Application #1784 Hardcover Fact Sheets Foundation Plans Elevations and Floor Plans Staff Sketch Review of Application #1781/1782 Mr. Carlson has now located the new seasonal cabin out of the 75* setback area meeting the required interior lot line setback of 30'. The structure is completely located within the flood fringe area of Lake Minnetonka (929.4 - 931.5). The first habitable floor must be placed at the regulatory flood plain elevation of 932.5. The applicant has also applied for a permit from the MCMD to determine if compensatory excavations will be necessary. Staff has been in contact with the Watershed District and they have advised that they concur with the DNR directives. Review Exhibit K - Richter's letter reconfirms that fill will not be used to elevate structure and that cabin must be securely anchored by a foundation designed by either a certified architect or engineer which allows water to flow freely beneath the structure. Review Exhibit Q - the foundation plan for both structures has been designed by licensed architect and provides for frost depth footings with screen/mesh panels along perimeter. In order to meet the intent of the RS district, he is providing screening along the perimeters of the structure to prevent destruction by animals. A variance is requested to allow proposed foundation where RS district requires permanent frost depth foundation of either solid masonry or treated wood foundation that completely encloses entire perimeter of building. Applicant has filed a conditional use permit/variance application to permit foundation to be placed below the 931.5 elevation. In reviewing the survey prepared by Ted Kemnar of Schoell and Madsen, the shoreline has been shown on three dates. The darkened line has been confirmed at the 929.72 elevation on February 12, 1992. The 929.4 elevation would be out further somewhat slightly below the second lighter line shown at 929.5. L_ Zoning File #1785 November 13, 1992 Page 8 The applicant has the option to revise survey so that setback can be extended lakeward. The seasonal cabin has been designed with a loft area. Height has been taken to the top of the structure measuring 28* total height. The maximum height for seasonal dwelling proposed in excess of 800 s.f. with a water-activated toilet requires on site sewage treatment system. The existing cabin on Lot 1 is located within both the lakeshore protected area and the flood plain. Review of Application #1783/1784 - Lot 2 610 Big Island As applicant's addendum notes, he is in the process of purchasing property with a Contract for Deed. It is Mr. Carlson's intention to build a new structure within the proposed building envelope. Review Exhibits R and S. The existing cabin is located out of the lakeshore protected area but within the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka. Applicant must provide deadline date for removal of existing "now" non-conforming structure. Mr. Carlson has advised that the structure is not worth saving and must be demolished. The structure is shown at a maximum height at 23'. Foundation for the seasonal cabin on Lot 2 will be of the same type of design as the one to be installed on Lot 1. Once again the MCWD has stated that compensatory excavations will not be required as long as the design of the structure will allow water to flow freely beneath it. Any recommendation of approval must include the following conditions : 1. Upon application for a building permit, applicant must provide the following: A. Foundation design by either a certified architect or engineer. B. C. Permit from the MCWD. Topographic detail confirming elevation of first habitable floor (minimiun 932.5). D.Drainage plan to include erosion control. Such measures must be in place during the construction. Zoning Pile #1785 November 13, 1992 Page 9 2.In the case of the seasonal dwelling on Lot 2, applicant must provide a reasonable deadline date for their removal of the structure. 3.All building construction shall be subject to all pertinent standards as set forth In Section 10.31, Subd. 11 of the RS District. If Applications #1781, #1782, #1783 and #1784 are to be approved, the following variances must be recommended: 1. Variance to average lakeshore setback line. 2. Variance to allow excavations and structures where no such activities are allowed (Section 10.55, Subd. 8). 3.Variance to allow frost depth footing and not a solid support foundation (Section 10.31, SuM. A). and a conditional use permit for land alterations within protected area. Isv * • CITY OP ORONO - SUB PROPERTY LOCATION * PlO AiUfnbc^zS A- Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ____ Please check one - Property abstract or nn-XZ-Zi -tJbai a a-//7-^3-3> -0013 ^SiiT-^Z-3hC0lt ^ i- //7 --^31ni-23-3i - _ _ torrens? m, m l*ti: SK%%rtKyte,plutUti t^^U^ouck /P ---- /jzl " T' Attach legal description to __________3‘Jf:l:-27Jk___ Phone (home) ^^SID _ Phone (work) 9, ?V - APPLICANT Name t>AUfn Q.(?A^ISQf^ Address: iy^//)a-»^/g >^e_ City>v/y Phone C( home) Phone (work) ~44?/«3— AG tfo X PhyMpiA'^ _zip: .6>:S"yy^ ONNER (if different than applicant) _ N P>ii>fO P. C^eeAffavy Name C,tfaPle^s l^/ ^ Address. _______,(attach list it more tnan one) ESQSTING land USB mi ra / Number of Tax Parcels m ^ ^ Development Size A 9^ G Present Use (check)X nmoam Acres Dry Land vur-v ^ Acres Wet Land LnECil TL 1075»C Acres Total, all v>arcelsliECEIPT-THM YOU I .. _ ^ ^ m •i«aj M a I S ^ i O A^tl / _Residential? no. of un: Other (specify)_____ cm m T15:. Present Zoning District 'tOf23/9 PROPOSAL A Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites: Proposed Gross Density: Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) Existing Units New Units Total Onits Units per / ^^Aczes /S~Jl Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land ResidentialKOther (specify) fdBfttiiiirmn 2. 3. MIMIMDM MATERIAL HECBSSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form Preliminary Plat information on Certificace of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348—3271). As an addendum to this appllcationr please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 4. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is comple e. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date -i: « 1. I • 3. 4. 5. Payment of fees (park feesr filincj fee, sewer and water assessments). Signed Certificate of Survey or mylf^.r copies of formal plat. Title opinion. Easementsf Covenantsr etc. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $200.00 300.00 Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) Preliminary Review (Class III & all non-resldential) 300.00 325.00 + 25.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) *(Plus any legal or engineering charges) 175.00 Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application Renewal of Final Subdivision Application 150.00 100.00 The applicant hereby agrees to provide all Information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning C^nmission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature tsZ. Owner's Signature Date //)/IthT Date /0/^z iar Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are 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 agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 1 ^ ^ S $ zm -I m 2 < m o “o *3 < o I • *' ii O ^ ;| OcJ ’ ;'_^ji \i.*r.^‘.;\,-1 ii:Y- ■ • •f I U. ■•O Vj \ i 52^^ -< CTm oi * ^ s|%0 c o 7( O i } RUN DATI 10/20/92 BATCH 005 RRCP AODR OIMER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR !•» PROP ADOR ONNER KA»C TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNER NAIK TAXPAYER NA»C/AOOR PROP AOOR OIMER NAME TAXPAYER NAIC/AODR PROP ADOR OltCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP ADM ONNER NAIK TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OIMERS LIST 50 22-117r25 29 0001 00720 BIG ISLAND TRISTIN 0 ERICKSON ET AL TRISTIN O ERICKSON 2650 MARSIILANO ROAO NAYZATA NN 55591 50 22*117-25 29 0006 00050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO SHERYL RAHSTAO HVASS SHERYL RAHSTAO HVASS 12120 GOLDEN ACRE OR HINNETOIKA IM 55595 50 22-117-25 51 0010 00650 016 ISLAND DOUGLAS E PERSON ET AL N/L JEFFREY A PERSON 17595 9TII AVE N PLYHOUTH NN 55997 50 22-117-25 51 0015 00610 BIG ISLAND CHARLES LEROY PEGltLON CHARLES L PE6EL0N 12215 95TH AVE N HPLS ttl 55992 50 22-117-25 51 0016 00600 BIG ISLAND K0R6E^!*^tlA ADAHS 10512 TOLEDO AVE BLOOtUNGTON NN 55957 50 22-117-25 51 0026 00660 BIG ISLAND ELIZABETH FOSTER SALISOURY BETTY F PRINCE C/0 GNEN S HYERS 9705 BRIARHOOO CIR SUN CITY AZ 05551 50 22-117-25 29 0009 00600 DIG ISLAND H BRYSON A T BRYSON NILLIAH A THELNA BRYSON 5015 KIICERLEY LA PLYMOUTH NN 55997 50 22-117-25 51 0002 00560 BIG ISLAND DON HENDERSON ET AL BON HENDERSON 5010 NORMANOALE CT HPLS NN 55956 50 22-117-25 51 0011 00650 BIG ISLAND DOUGLAS E PERSON ET AL H/L JEFFREY A PERSON 17595 9TH AVE N PLYHOUTH HN 55997 50 22-117-25 51 0019 00610 BIG ISLAND CHARLES L PEGELON CHARLES L PEGELON, 12215 95TH AVE N PLYMOUTH HN 55992 50 22-117-25 51 0020 00590 BIG ISLAND J D FIE6ER A J H FIEGER JAMES FIEGER 5111 HOLIDAY RD MINNETONKA IM 55595 50 22-117-25 51 0027 00650 BIG ISLAND JAMES A R JOHNSON JAMES A R JOIRISON 2680 BENTON BLVO HPLS IM 55916 REPORT NO. PI955901 PAGE 16 ’I 50 22-117-25 29 0005 00670 BIG ISLAND H E BRYSON ATI BRYSON NILLIAH A THELHA BRYSON 5015 KIICERLY LA PLYHOUTH HN 55997 50 22-117-25 51 0009 00650 BIG ISLAND DOUGLAS E PERSON ET AL N/L E JEFFREY A PERSON 17595 9TH AVE N PLYHOUTH HN 55997 50 22-117-25 51 0012 00610 BIG ISLAND CHARLES LEROY PEGELON CHARLES L PEGELON 12215-95TH AVE NO HPLS HN 55992 f G5v fj ■ 50 22-117-25 51 0015 00610 BIG ISLAND CHARLES L PEGELON CHARLES L PEGELON 12215 95TH AVE N PLYHOUTH MN 55992 50 22-11 «'-25 jSl 0025 00620 BIG ISLAND PAULINE VANOERHOOF DAVID R A JAN N CARLSON 2290 DHIGHT LA MINNETOIACA HN 55595 . 1 I' I 9 ] J 58 22-117-25 51 0020 00650 BIG ISLAND JAMES A R JOIMSON JANES A R JOIMSON P 0 BOX 15265 HPLS IM 55915 RUN DATE 10/20/92 OATCH 005 ■ RROP AOOR OHNER NAIC TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR PROP AOOR OltCR NAIC TAXPAYER NMC/AOOR ’ i'* ■ V ■# .V »,-'4 MEItlEPIN COUNTY PROPERT>' INFORHATIOII SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST 50 22-117-25 51 0029 00570 016 ISLANO JOOIE R VARGAS ET AL JOOlf ROeO VARGAS A59 lATH AVE N GOODING 10 05550 TOTAL OATCH 005 00021 •a V/ i * * REPORT NO. PI955901 PAGE 17 50 22-117-25 51 0050 00690 016 ISLANO CLINTON KNUOSON CLINTON KNUOSON 1025 FRANKLIN AVE S E MPLS Itl 5S919 50 22-117-25 51 0051 00580 BIG ISLANO J 0 A J M FIEGER . JAMES D FIEGER 5111 HOLIDAY RO HINNETOIKA HN 55595 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE OATI IRTI^NyOF PROPER TYATK r.V5* ■1 r ■ -i To:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager Date November 2, 1992 Subject: Septic Review - Application #1745, David Carlson Both 610 and 620 Big Island have cabins which are not attached to on-site sewage treatment systems. Human wastes are treated by outhouses which are located very near lake level. The cabins have sinks which drain to the surface. Neither the outhouses nor sinks meet Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and City of Orono standards for waste disposal. The proposed cabin at 620 Big Island has two bedrooms, a bathroom and a kitchen sink requiring the use of an on-site sewage treatment system, however soil testing indicates that a 1' separation from the seasonally high water table is not achievable on this lot. The adjacent property, 610 Big Island, has been acquired by the applicant to provide a suitable area for on-site sewage treatment for both properties. The cabin at 610 Big Island is in poor condition and will be replaced with a ^bedroom cabin as well. Soil testing and system design has been approved for a Type 2. 2-bedroom home for each cabin (225 gal/day/cabin). The system meets MPCA and most City ordinances. A variance will be required for a 10* setback from the mound site to the east and west property lines of 610 Big Island. A 10* setback variance will also be required between the septic tanks and the lot line between 610 and 620 Big Island. The proposed soil treatment area is suitable for a mound and lies entirely within the redefined lot lines of 610 Big Island property. The proposed tanks lie within redefined lot lines of 620 Big Island. Therefore, easements will be required on each property for the shared use and maintenance of the septic system. Due to the site slope and water table conditions, the proposed sewage treatment site is the only area available for these two properties. Although no alternate site is available, the proposed septic system will provide a means of sewage treatment for both properties which will meet the new DNR Shoreland Regulations. As the use of these cabins will be on a seasonal basis and would not likely be used to capacity for extended periods of time, an alternate site may not be necessary. Staff will approve the required septic variances provided the easements for the use of the on-site sewage treatment system can be provided. A condition limiting the number of bedrooms to two on both properties should be included since no area is available to expand the drainfield area. Isv ! ) i-/ .1 -'jiilr I • iT-i ■ 5 < ±L CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION ?■ nr ? 0-..7 .J ‘‘ cJ> ''—^•.. \5 4 V. Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Pee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Pact Fees (Double application fee) ■i i cm OF QROtiQ rmiiCF OFFICE 1TCO2OQ0OO 01 QEH i 75. PROPERTY INFORNATIOH Site Address Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.)_^ y /rt* Attach legal description to application if “pkiSmtATMem'xnM' nn reouired survev. (month/year)included on required survey Date Property Acquired (do not) also own the Adjacent parcels of land Present use of property: Zoning District:,_ _ _ _ _ residential Sa/H/nv/t Q^herfspecify) dabf*i _ Phone (home) S""h^/ • Phone fworlc) APPLICANT Name 7^. I^oaJ AAAirmsaz CLty. ^ Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name < A/yi e.Phone (wor)c)1 Address:City:Zip: - a A/ 4ce Estimated Construction Cost $ ca.A/^ •DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describ.,request — i/j :n>jApfiAPS- VARIANCES REQUIRED , Lot Width _ _ Hardcover _ _^Lot CoverageLot Area Setback:Front Side Rear _ Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DBSCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS # (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All Of the following information must be submitted by the applicatj^on deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete; 1. 2. Completed Application Form _ _^Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150’ (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8J5'*xll'’ for 5. reproduction). Topograph!c survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%"xll )• 6. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8Ji’’xll”). 7. _^As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour variance application is not *coiplete if the above iii#or»ation has not been included. 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 paiTtient) and/or consultant expenses Incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and corrfc4:Jto the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature rrect to the Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification o& this request. s Signature —. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date /ol2.zl^'L —Owner* Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month.* Applicants must be present at all scheduled meetings of the Planning Ccamd.ssion 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 to advise the Building fi Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. * r • CITV op ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION " / O ^ ?.v. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -W'O OPROPERTY LOCATION Site Address _ _, 7^i ^ c/_ rtvI-*y- /r Property Identification Number (P.I*D*) “"^3 '^3/ Lcc>ah RBSERVEj PJess^/i'T Vieui af/^A/fe " Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name DA I///) R. ^J9 jv /sqaJ Address /ti3>yf-pJou3C^ AO'S. Phone (hone) S~^/ Phone (work) ^3^ '^3S‘3_ _ City Zip 3‘S3mS^_ OliNBR (if different than applicant) Name _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (home) Phone Address City Zip Date Property Acquired (montn I -<4^ (do not) also own the Adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) PENS - CONDITIONAL USB PERMITS - $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application 5 $125.00 Residential accessory Use $175.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more ' " Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75* of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule Renewal Fee - $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS $200.00 $250.00 $175.00 $ 75.00 $300.00 $300.00 $100.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) Vacation Easement Vacation Easement Vacation With Subdivision Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT OSE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property _ _ Residential * Other (specify) rf,) / Oy^:c^Uf/^<^ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST ^ ^ ^ Describe request in detail: ^c Su/nyn^K BuiLd A jOeu^ . P/QS y^c/^n A A^jaA&O^ei S^q-^t'C Oo</^ «> 2. "f^'€ ¥^i4i^k pt' REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. .^. . . ..u*..Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350 (you can obta this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Governme Center 348-3271). Plat Map. ^ ^ Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). » i a Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list or any other persons you wish notified of this application. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. YOU ARB REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE A WORKING COPY (ll* X 17* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOC I f, I :TS OR rrs 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 applic^ioi^ and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to tte/iywt of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date //) ONNBRS SIGNATURE j ..jThe owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and fi^tner authorized reasonable entry onto the property by <Uty staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and veriiflMtion of this request. Owner's signature Date - - - - Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are 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 agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. •t _jrM ’M HAfflCIVER CALCULATION H0RKSHET__ SETBACK ZONE! (ctRCLS ONE) 0-75' (7S-2S0 i)250-500' • 500-1000' J- Exis*riNG H ardc '/ver IN Zone • • Ai ■ Hrmsiv ' . X a • S a F • LENGTH • > •ze X WIDTH 8 r S.F. X 'T-<=^ • • . S.F. ti \-..........• X (2_“78 • S.F. \----------------- r**: • X • S.F. GT'.'., ) • B. C. (lAPAfnP ^ •• _ S.F. • HffTVPVfAY Y a S,F, '■ J •• • * V X 0 • S • F a 0.. < m • • ^ rncuM X ' X •S.F. Sctse-TvaCO a 1 L-a S.F. • • \ \'?. X 3U 4.52.S.F. E.Jatio / - IZ K f 14*S.F. \ • • e IAMncrADC X • S ■ Pf AREAS UNDERLAIN BV X • S.F. PLASTIC SHEETING • • S.F. • X • S.F. # • • 6. Other x . • •- • S.F. m Total Hardcover in Zone - Total Property Area in Zone \ laftc) .F. ^ .F. a S=- -r B n&Bo X 100 ■ *% m m • • •»*•• •tmm- -•••■ .1 J FT • • STATE OF DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ^RO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 55J.06_^ PHONE NO. 772-7910 FILE NO . t I J 2 November 5, 1992 MOV 1 2 5sse David Carlson 2400 Mayflower Avenue Minnetonka, MN 55305 • • RE: CARLSON CABIN, BIG ISLAND, LAKE MINNETONKA (27-133P, #5) , CITY OF ORONO, HENNEPIN COUNTY Dear Mr. Carlson: This letter is to confirm our discussion of September 28, 1992, concerning the construction of a cabin on Big Island in Lake Minnetonka (27-133P). The building site is within the floodplain of Lake Minnetonka, i.e. below the elevation of 931.5'. Therefore, the new cabin must be conistructed with the lowest floor at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation (RFPE), which is at least 932.5*. (Check with the city of Orono on the minimum elevation; they may be more stringent than the minimum state requirement.) You indicated that fill would not be used to elevate the structure. Therefore, the cabin must be securely anchored by a foundation designed by either a certified architect or engineer which allows vater to flow freely beneath the structure. In addition to the points above, the following DNR concerns should be noted: The vegetation and topography should be retained in a natural state in the 37.5' shore impact zone of Lake Minnetonka. 2.The ordinary high water (OHW) level of 929.4'(NGVD, 1929) for Lake Minnetonka should be noted in future plans and plats. It is not clear whether the shoreline indicated is at the OHW or not. The 929.4' contour shoiild also be shown since that is the critical elevation for building setbacks, limits of DNR authority, etc. 3.^ppj-Qpriate erosion control measures should be * ..ken during the construction period. The Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planning Handbook (Board of Water & Soil Resources and Association of Metropolitan Soil and Water Conservation Districts) guidelines, or their equivalent, should be followed. AM EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EVPLOYER MU r>.i "■.X . p» ^ pL !' H David Carlson November 5, 1992 Page 2 4.If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10,000 gallons per day or 1 million gallons per year, the contractor will need to obtain a DNR appropriations permit. You are advised that it typically takes approximately 60 days to process the permit application. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me or Area Hydrologist Ceil Strauss at 772-7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, Joseph G. Richter Hydrologist cc:Minnehaha Creek WSD, Mike Panzer Joe Yanta, USCOE Jeanne Mabusth, City of Orono City of Orono Floodplain File idlklMMI kiiiib 1“ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 15, 1992 («8) »1745 DAVID R. CARLSON, 620 BIG ISLAND - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 7:50 - 8:12 P.M. The Af f Idavi t of Pub I I cation and Cert I f I cate of Mai I I ng were noted. David Carlson was were present. Mabusth explained that a building inspection confirmed that the cabin is constructed on pier footings 16" deep, 7.5’ on center, and do not meet existing standards. The applicant has submitted an amended plan which maintains hardcover at the existing amount. A setback variance for the 0-75’ area would need to be approved. Chair Keltey asked about the condition of the cabin. Mabusth reported that it is not as bad as adjacent structures. The cabin was built in 1963. The applicant proposes to replace the roof, siding and windows. She explained that the applicant has withdrawn his request for a holding tank and has agreed to remove the sink,. The structure is under 800 s.f. in area, and per Code, would be allowed an outhouse if the outhouse is able to meet all pertinent standards. Chair Kelley said that if the building were being proposed in its present location today, it would be denied. He asked if the foundation can support the proposed Improvements. Mabusth stated that the inspector confirmed that the foundation is adequate to support the existing structure, but would not comment on any future upgrades to the structure. Bellows suggested they require certification of the foundation by a structural engineer. Carlson requested that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the application with the condition that it be inspected by a structural engineer so the project will not be delayed. Peterson asked if Carlson proposed moving the building If the piers are found to be inadequate. Carlson reminded him that this is on an island, and it would be very difficult to make a vertical move. Mabusth noted the structure could be located further back on the property, but would still require interior lot line setbacks. variance. T MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 15, 1992 ZONING FILE #1745 - CONT. BeltOMS said she would be more amenable to such a request. Chair Kelley said that because of building, he would not be willing approval to the Council. the structural needs of the to make a recommendation of Rowlette noted that the repairs being proposed appear to exceed 50* of the valuation. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Rowlette, to recommend denial of Application #1745 for David Carlson, 620 Big Island, for variances, based on the fact that the proposed alterations exceed the allowed 50* limit and there is available land to allow placement of a structure requiring less of a variance. Ayes 5, nays 0. Mabusth Informed Carlson that his application would now go to the Council with a recommendation of denial from the Planning Commission. She asked if he would rather have the application tabled to allow him time to revise his plan. Carlson asked that the application be tabled. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Rowlette, previous motion. Ayes 5, nays 0. to withdraw the It was moved by Bel lows, seconded by Rowlette to table AppII cat I on #1745 for David Carlson of 620 Big Island, to allow the applicant time to amend his proposal. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#9) CHARLES CUDO COMPANY, 2110 SUGARWOOO DRIVE - REQUEST TO REVISE DRIVEWAY ALIGNMENT Mr. Bonner was present. Mabusth explained that standards were developed at the conception of Sugar Woods. This Is the Cudd Company’s first time building In Sugar Woods. The lot In question Is the southern lot on the loop road with the retaining wall. There Is a large bass wood on the property. Portions of the drive exceed the maximum allowed width of 20’ within the 50’ setback area. The building permit was Issued with the understanding that those standards would be met. The house has been located as far to the rear as possible as there Is a sheer drop behInd it. I 4ft..mti ■ ii<niW iI ! CA.fiUt>oW C-AstolM L Av K B M t N N E.'T O Kl K We.-i>t \- \t> n-z.i/e»’'^0o'* • • nji -1-**^^ y • • %• • • • • l- K '.f'' r‘«. . hk s CAP>l-‘boM CL^t>\>sl Lav K e I'A i»in e-t c > n k*Av *b o«-»T H • 15 • ‘I't l/S'. i‘ • O’< / . m • • ^ L , t. K' ■ ^ i '■ r '■‘ * r CAvfiUsoM C^e)lu • 6ecokq Fvcc ^s LXKe MI Nh» tToMKA V?>'‘ =^o" 4 J r ■ r ; V- ,^i. , , ;. I r>i:» ,.><■ V-:' ' . . •fr • • Ci^Kor-2, . •«- !•••"V. I mm *■. vi? # * # !• • -» * •» . C/K.^V-'soVi 0#v^\Ki • bOlUOlNO Sb^C“T?OKI 1 •^l•n'L *■. ' ihi H i r "A f CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION 7r V * *N...J vv • H 01 OLHInitial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) /ja//liaeS ntOPBRTY IBKHdttTIOH C^/f ^/O. 17^/^ A, 17Ki « Wl Site Address Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) / lot IL - X2-H'T-U,3-3tI / 7 /7-c© lot-o«>/4 Date Property Acquired (month/year) I tfli0(do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. , Present use of property: ____residential ____other (specify) SuAiJffit C a B iH Zoning District:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ r ^ ■ ) I- APPLICANT Phone (home) ~ Name DAuin /?.Phone (worlc) 9 Address: A\Je. ONNBR (if different than applicant) City: Zip: S'S3*t ^ Phone (home) V ~ ^3^3 Neune J^* •Pc^e./otAj________ Address: /£■ -^S-^Aoe. Afo, City: Phone (wor)c) _Zip: DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost^'$ ^ Describe request in detail : ^ __ . , ^ j "-j:—. . ------- JL^t- (/JottK i*J p/ooci ^o~y-^/feA VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ^e/c^ X ot Width Hardcover Lot Covsraae ^ Setbaclc:Front Side Rear Average Lalceshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF ONOSDAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the follo%rina information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete; 1. 2. Completed Application Form __Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. _Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. _Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8%"xll* for 5. reprodu *:tion). _Topogra.yhic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%"xll'*). 6. _SIcetches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8%"xll'*). 7. _As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour variance application Is not complete if the above infonuitlon has not bean included. 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 consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct tP best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature rect ^ the be Date ONMERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorises reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga^ tion and verification of this request. 0%mer's Signature __Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month.' Applicants must be present at all scheduled review aeetings of the Planning Coaaission 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 to advise the Building 6 Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. m Ci"*y OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USB APPLICATION^- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -t-“f—f.:—?—-tisom^po - - * .••••••*PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address _ _ _^ ill mjx.rV\Ir /!{■ti.VV*vv ^0^ - JLjLV/T'-'t 3 'i»/ Property Identification Number (P.I.D. > i,*/- /r - jLz-fiy-•3.3‘Jt • i9 • //7”-2.^ • J/“ Please attach legal description to application it not included on required survey. t-ofs .tX>* f^/edSAtJ^ _ APPLICANT Name PAIf/D K. ^J»/tkc^__ Address Phone (home) Phone (work) *^^-6 3 City /yiw/ae^/<^M9. Zip SS~3¥3^ ONNBR (if different than applicant) P.j9)ss Cs'^/oujName Phone (home) 31S~*9 ‘ ~ Phone(^<g , ? ?J3 - Address y^!/& City zip Date Property Acquired __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ (month/year) I (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of lana. ^ fees • CONDITIONAL USB PERMITS - $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application $125.00 Residential accessory Use $175.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments ./ $130.CO Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 Commercial/Ind^iiitrial Use $200.00 Land Alteration /Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodpla^ Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. <>f Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule Renewal Fee - $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee on APPLICATIONS $200.00 - - - $250.00 ' $175.00 $ 75.00 $300.00 $300.00 ' $100.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) Vacation Easement Vacation Eas<^0n^ Vacation With Subdivision Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Appeals Other “ see fee schedule x-xu:iO£>4«X Ktatt iJJf JfH.VX'StA'l'1 Present Zoning District Present Use of Property _ _ Residential Other (specif y) I a<l DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Describe reqi^est in detail: Xt /?eP/Ac^ u>ti-k 6>JiO. a, A J\/eui C-BbtiO C Out^J/iAtC') ^qa}4»«c^ t*u P PA&ztvcf 2. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obta. this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-60 3 Governme Center 348-3271). Plat Map. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. TOO ARB REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPT (11* X 17* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS 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 supplied is true and correct to the/^b^t of his/her )cnowledge. Applicant's signature ine^o^t or n Date OWNERS 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 Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are 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 agent attend in your place and advise the Building fi Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 1^1 . Pfif(Ce. L. tele “/ !_ot 2.J HARDCaVES CALCULATION WORKSKEcT- SETBACK ZONE:(circle one )0-75' (n -zso;) 250-500' 500-1GGO' • • ‘ H ouse • X = ’ S.F. • ••LENGTH ' 26 Y WIDTH • • • • = rr^(^P>_Stri \-2. X = l4-4* S.F. • X = S.F. X — = S.F. B. C. Garage X = S.F. D riveway • X * - S.F. i#rV 4 a X «• • • ~ _ S • r 0 D.. • Sidewalk X • * _ S.F. 7 X ( W.c, ^2.= 57-T‘=- S.F. X ir^ • = (*=>0 S.F. E.’atio / D eck 3 X 1 (=..S • • a . 4^'.S S.F. • P-LANnSCAPE X _ • « ■ S.F. areas UNDERLAIN BY X » _ S.F. PLASTIC SHEETING •X — • • • * S.F. X • • = • ■■ . S.F. • 6. 0THE.R X .» S.F. "Total H ardcover in Zone Total PROPi=<TY Area in Zone I,'2JP S.F. >1.2-A^O S.F. B I I n 2.60 V/N 100 Sas '■% To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Michael P, Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator November 13, 1992 Subject #1762 Paul'Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Continuation of Public Hearing List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Revised Survey Exhibit B - Driveway/Grading/Drainage Plans/Topography Exhibit C Staff Sketch ** Outlots/Flag Lot Options Exhibit D - Planning Commission Minutes 10/19/92 Exhibit E > Memo & Exhibits of 10/16/92 Discussion This item was tabled at your October 19th meeting pending submittal of additional information. All required information has now been submitted. There is one minor revision to lot line locations since the October 16th memo, namely that the narrow "flagpole" driveway corridor for Lot 2 has been flared to better accommodate the driveway. Drainage Concerns Addressed Applicant's engineer has completed the necessary topography work and provided a grading and drainage plan that addresses staff's concerns. The driveway serving Lot 2 is actually beneficial to the extent that it redirects drainage westward rather than its existi-^g course southwestward across the alternate drainfield site of the neighbor to the south. Further, the culvert which currently directs drainage towards Lot I's alternate site will be angled and a swale will be developed along the north side of the new driveway to better protect the drainfield sites on Lot 1. In Lot 2, a section of culvert will allow for drainage to be redirected away from the neighboring property to the south and after crossing the driveway will be swaxed to the northwest, where it will daylight outside the 0-75' "no grading zone" established by the Shoreland Regulations. Proposed Driveway The flaring of the flagpole for Lot 2 has allowed placement of the new driveway to eliminate any significan;. filling adjacent to the south lot line. Coupled with a lowering of the existing driveway, the new driveway can be developed within Lot 2, although it is a tight fit. The 2' retaining wall could be eliminated entirely if the driveway entrance could be shifted further north, however, this would require either an easement over Lot 1 in favor of Lot 2, or creating a wider flare in Lot 2's flagpole which reduces Lot I's current 10' abutment of Out lot A (which abutment is necessary to establish the east line of Lot 1 as its front lot line for lot width measurement purposes). S * Zoning File #1762 November 13, 1992 Page 2 Please review Options 1-4, Exhibit C. To be consistent with past approvals, the front lot line is considered the line that abutts the outlot. Option 2 keeps merely a 2' Lot 1/outlot abutment. In working with the applicant and in absence of the Planning Commission's input, staff recommended the currently proposed 10* abutment as being wide enough to accommodate a vehicle while allowing some flaring of the Lot 2 flagpole. Perhaps a more realistic approach would be Option 4 using private driveway easements so that the driveway can be placed further north without jeopardizing Lot I's front lot line status. Baiergency Access Standards Wayzata Fire Chief Paul Klapprich visited the project site and indicated that in this situation they will not require any more than the standard driveway width but that a loop or turnaround at the location of the new residence would be appropriate. Klapprich indicated that his equipment is accessible to the "Lydiard Road” neighborhood at its current road width, although he encouraged the City to continue its requirements for wider standardized roads when new subdivisions are created. Staff Recosmendatlon Planning Commission is requested to consider the proposed lot line layout as it relates to the driveway, and give staff and applicant direction as to whether one of the alternative options can be used which will yield more driveway design flexibility. The gradlng/drainage/driveway issues have been addressed to staff's satisfaction. The proposed layout requires no variances to lot area or width standards, and all existing and proposed buildings meet or can meet the appropriate setbacks. The drainfleld sites and existing septic system will be suitably protected under the proposed grading and drainage plan. Staff would recommend approval of the proposed subdivision (subject to any revisions in the flagpole portion of Lot 2 that Planning Commission feels are appropriate) subject to the following conditions: 1. Lot 1, containing the existing residence, will have no riparian access to Lydiard Lake and is considered as a non-lakeshore lot. 2. Lot 2 shall have riparian access to Lydiard Lake and is considered a lakeshore lot. 3. Granting of a Flowage and Conservation Easement with description that incorporates the wetland areas between the OHW and the open water shoreline of Lydiard Lake. L. Zoning File #1762 November 13, 1992 Page 3 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Isv Granting of standard Drainage and Utility Easements along the perimeter and interior lot linesr excluding the wetlands* area. Lots 1 and 2 shall access via Outlet A to the private road informally known as "Lydiard Road". Prior to filing of the plat, applicant shall satisfy the City Attorney that newly created Lot 2 has legal access via private easements to North Ferndale Road, and shall be subject to whatever private road covenants exist before maintenance of said private road easement. Subject to private covenants for ownership and maintenance of Outlot A, to be shared by Lots 1 and 2. Subject to driveway construction for Lot 2 to conform to approved grading/drainage/driveway construction plan. Further, driveway on Lot 2 shall include a loop or turnaround acceptable to the Building Inspector at the time of residence construction on Lot 2. (Optional) Subject to driveway easements between Lots 1 and 2. Any buildings constructed on Lot 2 shall meet the average lakeshore setback as shovm on the preliminary plat drawings. Subject to Park Dedication Fee (to be determined by City Assessor). All existing and proposed dralnfield sites shall be adequately protected during private driveway construction. ■i ,r r;''Bt Ik j ‘ i •t • ••#■% •• V-7 . *\ « rPVO/<^ - OoiJ>ef^ /^eCi^OF Z. *^77? *^(S/U6^A.y \ \/ ? ,■S LJ T~/ i;i5§ /or a o^rtohis r i ■ >. * - ;.* f/ . .• • *• • •• • # • • .;• ;i; ••;;«} a ''■ • ^u-tuoT f^gST^Z-V Acco^r:>tcre •p^iueiOAcV ^f.HA^iGseS Zx>7- / ^ Fi«>*>JT' Z,or 2) 0PT7O^J •■ i-OT" / ^dC^O^OF L^OT" Awii --*»*«»■ ► MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD OCTOBER 19, 1992 ZONING FILE #1737 - CONT. Rowlette indicated she is fatnii>ar with the property and stated she can only remember the screen house being in that area of the property in the 1970s. Hollander stated after the storm, they did not replace any of the boards on the deck but merely put the deck uack. He stated his entire lot is considered non-conforming and indicated he has spent very much money in the maintenance of same. Johnson said he appreciates the applicant's situation, but noted the work was done without the benefit of permits. He felt to be equitable with others, the applicant should make some concessions. Hollander said he would be willing to concede the screen house to facilitate a vote, but asked that he be granted an extended time period for which to remove the buildings. It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Peterson, to recommend approval of Application #1737 for Richard Hollander, 680 North Arm Drive, for aftei—the-fact variances subject to the removal of the gazebo, 36 s.f. of decking, the plastic landscape areas around the house, the screen housa and associated decking by June 1, 1993. Ayes 7, nays 0. (#3) #1762 PAUL W. BOYKE, 793 NORTH FERNDALE ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION • CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:43 7:50 P.M. Paul Boyke was present. Mabusth stated that the application is to be tabled but that staff sought direction from the Commission on the issue of lot width. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Peterson, to table Application #1762 for Paul W. Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road, due to the lack cf required information. Ayes 7, nays 0. Weckman indicated the additional septic information raised questions regarding the outlot. He referred to options developed by staff. Cohen said he would prefer to review the options in writing and refused to discuss the application any further. CITY OP ORONQ P. O. Box 66 Crystal NN 473-7357 ZONING FILB #1762 55323 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: 10/26/92 TO:Paul W. Boyke 793 North Ferndale Road Wayzatar MN 55391 COPIES TO TYPE OF APPLICATIONS Subdivision BATE OF MEETING: 10/19/92 VOTE: 7 For 0 Against Planning Cosnlssion recoBnends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant to provide additional information as follows: 1.Complete the topography in the easterly portion of Lot 2 and the entire area of Lot 1. 2.Provide a grading/construction plan for the driveway that Indicates the extent of filling/cutting necessary and that addresses any concerns which may be forthcoming from the Wayzata Fire Chief. 3.Provide a concise and detailed grading/drainage plan to indicate how drainage will be directed to yield no impact on neighboring properties or existing and proposed drainfield sites. No action was taken regarding the various options for lot line layout. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional Information. Deadline for the November 16, 1992 meeting is November 6th. li you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. A i To Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator October 16, 1992 #1762 Paul Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Continuation of Public Hearing List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Revised Survey Septic Plans/Diagrams, Lots 1 and 2. Notice of Planning Commission Action 9/24/92 Planning Commission Minutes 9/21/92 Uniform Fire Code Excerpt Additional Exhibits from September Meeting Memo & Exhibits of 9/18/92 Discussion Applicant's surveyor has provided a proposed lot line schematic that appears to eliminate the need for any lot area, lot width, or structural setback variances. However, the septxc testing information, which was not received untxl Thursday, October 15, coupled with the proposed driveway for Lot 2, raises as many questions as it resolves. Lot Standards Applicant is proposing that Lot 1 not be a lakeshore lot, and has redrawn the lot lines at the west end so that no portion of Lot 1 intersects the shoreline. As a non-lakeshore lot. Lot I's defined width is measured at the front lot line (the lot line that abutts Outlet A, to be consister*+- with past City approvals of similar situations) and at the 50' front setback. The east line of Lot 1 therefore becomes the front lot line, and at that line as well as the 50' setback, lot width is 315', meetxng the minimum 200' width requirement. Lot 2 becomes a lakeshore lot, and by definition its width is measured at the shoreline and at the 150' setbac us ng e defined straight-line measurement. Lot 2 has a wxdth at tne shoreline of 520' and at the 150' setback of 350 , therefore lot line or its setback. Driveway/Standards As noted in the September 18 memo, the P*^c.P®sed drxveway for Lot 0 is an extension of the existing ^rxveway for Lot 1, and as oroposed in the current plan is approxxmately 500 in P , the existing driveway. A review of the Uniform Fxre Code indicates as follows: ■m % I •iiiliiii I i i i \ T . A J Zoning File #1762 October 16, 1992 Page 2 Section 10.207.A - Required construction. Every building hereafter constructed shall be accessible to Fire Department apparatus by way of access roadways with all-weather driving surface of not less than 20' of unobstructed width, with adequate roadway turning radius capable of supporting the i .posed loads of fire apparatus and having a minimum of 13' 6" of vertical clearance. Dead end Fire Department access roads in excess of 150' long shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of Fire Department apparatus. « Additional provisions of that code (see Exhibit E) modify this to some extent at the approval of the Fire Chief. Staff will be contacting the Wayzata Fire Chief and will be discussing the access issue with him to determine what standards may be appropriate. Septic/Driveway Conflicts Of additional concern is the proximity of the proposed driveway to a portion of the existing drainfield system for Lot 1, as well as a corner of the alternate site for Lot 2. Lot 2 has primary and alternate sites tested which meet all requirements except that one small corner of the alternate site may end up within 10' of the proposed driveway depending on its width and actual location. The grade is relatively level at this location and only a small fraction of the alternate site would ultimately be affected. This is a septic code variance which staff would have no problem approving. The existing drainfield is not failing and according to the test information provided when it was installed in 1987, it is considered as a conforming system. However, the end of the last trench will be 10* from the proposed lot line at the neck of Lot 2. Again this is not an issue except that staff questions whether the driveway can be developed within its 15' corridor at this location. Driveway Develojnnent No grading plan for the driveway has been submitted. However, it is clear that where the new driveway extends westward from the existing blacktop, the immediate drop in elevation will require a significant width of fill to accomodate the 9' wide driveway proposed, even more if additional width is needed for fire access purposes. Working on the premise that we won't allow driveway grading to occur within 5' of the south lot line of the subdivision, how wide should the neck of Lot 2 become in order to accomodate its driveway? If it needs to be 30' or more in width at the east boundary where it abutts Outlet A, then Lot 1 would no longer abut Outlet A, which would require a variance. As an alternative, if Outlet A was extended, the question then becomes, which boundary of Lot 1 is its front lot line, and does the defined width meet the 200' requirement? Zoning File #1762 October 16, 1992 Page 3 A final issue which the submittals do not adequately address is how drainage will be revised from the existing driveway and from the culvert that, drains the property to the east, given that these flows will now be constricted between the driveway and the existing drainfield. Staff Recommendation The combination of zoning standards, shoreland regulations, septic code requirements and fire access regulations have such an impact on development of this property that the City is forced (and obligated) to require a great deal of site planning that normally is not necessary at the subdivision stage. The late submission of septic information has not allowed staff to grasp the "big picture" until the very last minute, therefore staff would suggest that this item be tabled once again so that the applicant can provide the following information which now appears necessary to thoroughly evaluate this proposal: 1.Complete the topography in the easterly portion of Lot 2 and the entire area of Lot 1. 2.Provide a grading/construction plan for the driveway that indicates the extent of filling/cutting necessary and that addresses any concerns which may be forthcoming from the Wayzata Fire Chief. 3.Provide a concise and detailed grading/drainage plan to indicate how drainage will be directed to yield no impact on neighboring properties or existing and proposed drainfield sites. Planning Commission is further requested to consider the proposed lot line layout at this time, and give applicanu direction as to how much actual frontage on Outlot A is necessary for Lot 1 in order that its east line be considered as the front lot line. Isv V % _.;. • • ••• ATf'rwnfc ’x3>^’C\ u>< a .... t»cocy- iL • V— ^0«:" '. ■<«» t^>C. l^. VDCA-^Cx. 10*tv io’j-tV'l. mj»m, »*<r'o «.*< cr-cv*»»'— ffO-VviVti. THTAv^^tov* AV^U*<-y ■!»' LA>\y9n -:vv iic.u «\S i-iu. r-ir . ^ • USv- S • I ALL^^IiAlfy iQUl^H^Ptr o^ TMt TIftArHi nr AHAt 4UAN A^O A9r$A conixAQcriOij • COL 9nr \\ \\ jSi^ • \\ - ;■]■ •- /yt f* - i - V COO 4'^ *3 Mw., C pnOPtRTY OF>..PAUL.-AMtUL r 2 • r*#M K 7*^^ Pr t^rLt- ^jiP —kLU&CLA ______________ «« - •iC4i.i : i 9 riKCOLATiajJ risrXSoil Duings ^ Bench Mock Mete* T^tii sysleni is *o be constructed to meet the h^noesoto Pottotion Cootiot Agency Chapter 7080 l l^cal Ordinance J.OT! (I^aeie/ AAi/i^AAi//£^ AjMos lAtryt. { uo-r \ *) AAAua MtJ. CO. f L Note : Check all underground utilities j J/£ s-P TESTING U^yA . 0e}*gned OV « DoH«a/X/a, PM.62-497-3566 .*• •»«« • • • n T “ ------------- 1^ « • -. •••.- •• • ••«•.. ••. M •• ^ »■»• • • m- m • • « • • M. •• •• • ^ 1 M*yt. ,u» ^x*^M . . . io* f-ror»| W4»\1C-, X\-W • .. .. .. Ufc - ^TTfOfcMN-. w* <-lW • •• • • / • r ^ /IS'ir iv„:•tf io^ u- V«? Aw\- CAvl\VK\Vv^<'IWC- \se^py<!- n-fs-^vnr- ^i* drt^^^^ipvi. 7 “ “/ * /K 9^V ' /\ /\ / / ^ / ,V<OVO!^.V> -<l\AV-S . MVt v/ '' ,• \ 'i. iwi ------------X' i3 -' ^ I / W.'’ 1 Ur^ouii^ u < ^ Mu . o<s» Uei.< •»-L» .C ■:\-^/.lv-; ‘^c'vS IV • tK^\ A • f c. I1\ ^ y<crVoi»< V.-t(s'*vcWvv<' p*^Vrt SPercototim Tests XSoil Borings (B Bench Mark Sfoln i"y «t*0 Nole< This system is to b« censUucicd lo m«d the Mnnesoto MutioA Cof*n’ Agency Chapter 70B0 h T.^cal Ordinane •.\ toisp *N A •■l(k's''>'.>'' •'f> .»• 3VOl \ .‘^ Check all undergrourd ittilltic t % V ' X^ \ W<«RTY nr»i^ou -eo-<v.c-- ^^ •v •*' *« i^U’ei , L4^,.ll»t%lvi. •**\*.» tu OCi3V4Q K^t» . Ml*, do ^v. -, ^ ----I's,. 5-^ TESTING INC. Designed By-.^fc-. ^ ■ ^-- • tMvJV/niSf, PM.«-497-3566 . <i ^ ■In. ^Ii5'’‘ • • • M f CITY OP ORONO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 473-7357 ZONING FILE #1762 55323 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: 9/24/92 TO:Paul W. Boyke 793 North Ferndale R.iad Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES TO TYPE OF APPLICATION: Subdivision DATE OF MEETING: 9/21/^2 VOTE: 7 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Polling of the Planning Commission indicated lakeshore lot width variance was not likely to be granted. Application was tabled pending: 1. Submission of revised proposal requiring no variances. 2. Submission of septic testing information. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional information. Deadline for the October 19, 1992 meeting is October 9th. If the applicant has trouble obtaining additional information, please contact the Zoning Department (473-7357). If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. i 1. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - HELD SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Planning Commission Chair Charlie Kelley, Maureen Bellows, Charles Schroeder, Stephen Peterson, Ed Cohen, Candace Rowlette, and Jeff Johnson. The following represented the City Staff: Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron and City Recorder Terl Naab. Mayor Peterson, Ed Callahan and Gabriel Jabbour were present to represent the Counc II. Chair Kelley called the meet Ing to order at 7:00 p.m. (#1) #1762 PAUL W. BOYKE, 793 NORTH FERNDALE ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 - 7:15 P.M. The AffIdav11 of Pub I I cat I on and Certificate of Mai I I ng were noted. Paul Boyke was present. Gaffron ^'.^plalned that staff has not received septic testing for the lots and the applicant wishes to wait to submit such until after the meeting tonight. He referred to two additional letters received from neighbors, the Bergs and Higgins (Exhibit A). He explained the property is near Lydiard Lake. Previous subdivisions In the area have provided for land acquisition for a future cul- de-sac. Lot 1, with the existing house, has 2.12 acres of dry buildable land, and .25 acres wetland. Lot 2 has 2.57 acres dry and 1.36 acres wetland. The unique conf1guration proposed is due to the setback requirements, the need for 2 acres of dry buildable land, and the need for septic sites on the property. Lot 1 har 165’ of lakeshore whero 200’ is required, therefore a variance Is needed, and Lot 2 has 340’ of lakeshore. Chair Kelley stated the subdivision is in a 2 acre zoning district and this proposal does not meet the standards of that district. He stated he is not in favor of the proposal. Peterson agreed with Chair Kelley and added the additional hardcover for the driveway wiII also be a factor. All the members agreed with Chair Kelley. Johnson asked to hear any public comments J Im and Debbie Higgins, 259 Hoi Iander Road, stated their oppos1tion to the proposal, citing the preservation of wildlife in the area and privacy as reasons for their opposition. <* :v- 2 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 ZONING FILE #1762 - CONT. Paul Bruer. 275 Hollander Road, said he Is concerned with the proximity of the proposed residence to the lake. Jim and Judith Hunder. 265 Hollander Road, agreed with their neighbors’ opposing remarks. Mrs. Hunder noted the Issue of the need tor variances and felt the subdivision did not make sense. DAwira aynialned he first proposed this subdivision prior to the new :Vtrv^oprr^^ ^ ™ d-arsrrlr,Vte-th^;l°r?ali^ they do not have a desire for a dock or pier out ‘ ^7® * mSklnff? ^®laTe''s'hor‘'e® lot'.'He^addedl^'thli ? intent Ts" not to change the wlIdlife of the area. Johnson asked about the strip of property near the cul-de-sac, the ownership of which is In question. Boyke explained that the City approved a ® ® ‘ °[J; but It was not recorded at the County correctly. He Is in the process of trying to work that issue out. Chair Kelley felt that septic testing for the site may determine where the property boundaries should be placed. It was moved by Chair Kelley, seconded by Cohe^^^^^^ Application #1762 Paul W. Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Ro , p septic test Information. Ayes 7, nays 0. (#2) #1764 AUSTIN EVANS, 255 LANDMARK DRIVE - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION -PUBLIC HEARING 7:42 - 7:50 P.M. The Affidavit of Pub I I cation and Certificate of Mai I Ing were noted. Austin Evans was present. i r r r » \r 1 l'».j06-10.208 UNIFORM FIRE CODE Obt'trucllon ol Fire Protection Equipment See. 10.206. No person shall place or keep any posl, fence, vehicle, growth, trash,Storage or other nratciial or thing near any fire hydrant, fire department connection or fire protection system control valve that would prevent such equipment or hydrant from being immediately discernible or in any other manner Of hinder the fire department from gaining immediate access to said A rnjnjmum 3-foot clear space shall be maintained around the circumference of the Hr., hvtiranis eKeFnPtrwIwmiiir rrouired or approved by the chief. Access Roadways lor Fire Apparatus t\, t*\tr3 Sec. 10.207. (a) Required Construction. Every building hereafter con structed shall be accessible to Tire department apparatus by way of access road ways with all-weather driving surface of not less than 20 feet of unobstructed width, with adequate roadway turning radius capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and having a minimum of 13 feet 6 Inches of vertical clearance. Dead end fire department access roads in excess of 150 feet long shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of fire department apparatus. EXCEPTION; When there aie not more than two Ciroop R. Division 3 or M Occupancies as defined in the Building Code, the requirement of this section may ^ modified when, in the opinion of the r hief. fire-fighting or rescue operations would not be impaired. (b) Obstructing. The required width of access roadways shall not be obstructed in any manner, including parking of vehicles. NO PARKING signs or other appropriate notice, or both, prohibiting obstructions may be required and shall be maintained. (c) Extent. The access roadway shall be extended to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of any building. Where the i^way cannot be provided, approved fire jKotcction system or systems shall be provided u required and approved by tlie chief. (d) Fire-protection Alternate. Where fire-protection systems approved by the chief are provided, the above required clearance may be modified. (e) Ovcrslzing. The chief shall have the authority to require an increase in the minimum access widths where such width is not adequate for fire or rescue operations. (0 Bridges. Where a bridge is required to be used as access under this section, it shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the applicable sections t^rcihlses Identlllcatlon Sec. 10.208. Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and background. It snail DC consinivwu •MU -------------------------------------------- .. — of the Building Code and using design live loading sufficient to cany the imposed ^ loads of the fire apparatus. si TT T —T 1982 EDITION 10.209-10.301 Key Box Sec. 10.209. When access to or within a structure or an area is unduly difficult. because of secured openings or when immediate access is necessary for life saving or fire-fighting purposes, the f aief may require a key box to be installed m an accessible location. The key box shall be a type approved by the citief and shall contain keys to gain necessary access as required by the chief. Division III INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF FIRE- PROTECTION, LIFE-SAFETY SYSTEMS AND APPLIANCES Installation See 10.301. (a)’IVp« Required. The chief shall designate the type and number of fire appliances to be installed and nmintained in and upon‘all buildings and premises in the jurisdiction other than private dwellings, litis shall be done according to the relative severity of probable fire, including tlie rapidity with which it may spread. Such appliances shall be of a type suitable for the probable class of fire associated with such building or premises and shall have approval of the chief. Portable fire extinguishers shall be in accordance with U.F.C. Standard No. lO-l. (b) Special Hazards. In occupancies of an especially hazardous nature or where special hazards exist in addition to the normal hazard of the occupancy, or where access for fire apparatus is unduly difficult, additional safeguards may be required consisting of additional fire appliance units, more than one type of appliance, or special systems suitable for the protection of the hazard Involved. Such devices or appliances may consist of automatic fire alarm systems, automat ic sprinkler or water spray systems, standpipe and hose, fixed or portable fire extinguishers, suitable asbestos blankets, breathing apparatus, manual or auto matic covets, carbon dioxide, foam, halogenatcd and dry chemical or other special fire-extinguishing systems. Where such systems are installed, they shall be in Kcordance with the applicable Uniform Fire Code Standards or standards of the National Fire Protection Association when Uniform Fire Code Standards do not apply. ........... (c) VViter Supply.’ An approvcd water supply capable of sii’pplying required * fire now for fire protection shall be provided to all premises upon which buildings or portions of buildings are hereafter constructed; Wlicn any portion of the building protected is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public slicct. Iheic shall be provided, when required by the chief, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow. Water supply may consist of reservoirs, pressure tanks, elevated tanks, water niaiiis or other fixed system capable of supplying the required fire flow. In slitting the icifuircmeiits for fire flow, the chief may be guided by the slandj^rtl published •I t .* J/ J Rosene Anderlik& Associates Engineers & Architects Orro G Bonettoo PE Rccen sv Rosersc. P£* Jose:yi C Anoeruk. P£ Mjrvin L PE R<rjfd E Turrer PE Cifnn R. Cook. PE Tnomas E Noyn PE Rooea G Schuncnt PE Suun M EDfftjn. CPA •Senor Consultant HcNvaio A Sa^fortf. PE Ke*n A. Cofoon P£ Rcsert R. P?e ???'•?. PS Ricnatd W pQiisr Pc. Cavo O Los«ota. PE RoeefT C. Ruisek. A i A Jerry A Boufoon. P£ Mark A Hansoa PE M<naei T. Raucrann. PE Ted K F«id. PE Thomas R. Ancenoa A.i A. Donald C. Bui^anst PE Thomai E. An^ui. PE Oa'v f Ryianor PE ismae* Martinet PE M<*aef P Rau. PE A^nes W R‘ng. AI C P Thomas W Prcfson. P£ M<haei C. Lynch. PE jam« R Maiand. PE Jerry 0 Perusch. PE. Kenneffi P. Andenon. PE Mark R Rotfv PE. Marc A Se«L P£ Gary w Mor«n. PE Daoe^ J SdBerron. PE. Phri-p j Cas^. PE Mark 0 VLatki P£ M4es B Jfnsaa PE L. PhJiiO Gravel m. P£ Karen L Wiemea PE. P Tcdd foster. PE. Keim R Yaoa P£. Shawn O. Gsisurson. PE CecH« Oihncr. PE Charles A. Er<kson Leo M. PaweHky Hartan M Olson James f EngemM September 17,1992 Mr. Mike Ga^on City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: #1762 Paul Boyke Subdivision FUe No. 139-1762 Dear Mike: We have reviewed the proposed subdivision of Lot 1, Block 1, Lauranne Woods Addition on the Paul Boyke property, located to the east of Lydiard Lake. Subsequent to our site inspection, there are several engineering issues that should be noted. Lydiard Lake is a DNR protected water, identified as Basin No. 27-159P. The accepted ordinary high water elevation (OHWL) of the lake is 970.9. For setback purposes this elevation contour should be considered the shoreline of Lydiard Lake. The City's municipal code requires certain setbacks to shorelines and these have been shown appropriately on the site plan. The code also requires a 200 foot shoreline for each lot to have lake access. If Lot 1 is planned to have lake access, the westerly lot line of Lot 2 should be realigned to provide 25 feet of additional shoreline to Lot 1. If Lot 1 is indeed planned to have lake access by means of the 10 foot wide strip of land along the north property line, a grading plan should be provided to show any planned improvements in that area. We understand that the bituminous access road from North Femdale Road is a private drive which is platted as an outlot with joint resident ownership. To eliminate an undesirable "flag" lot with driveway easements, we recommend that the 30’ by 407’ "flag pole" also be platted as an outlot with joint ownership by both lots. This would be in accordance with the code requirements for a minimum lot footage of 200 feet. Drainage and utility easements should be provided five feet wide along both sides of the proposed lot division line. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D. Gustafson, P.E. SDGrlk 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 I • • • «• • « • mm m i CiOO.i.f^ O-'^cL . 2-Cyr>ir^_„Cc>0^r^x2^Si0r^ • mmm* «' SEP 2 1 1992 - . „ ...V^e^..Q.re .LOr.'rf-ina m Ye-^O^cl.____ ■fo b^ dK • * « ••.^e. 'rAen+itjoed pnp^-arftj c?n T^ cSdu-#\ cSJck- ___JnCuX^.. Oo_ C-b‘| eeis Dru "k/ . p^v pxScd itA* \jj\ slrv “Id :€^CouS(2 "jhc^ GoriS,\<^<^cc i(y\ he, rrctcio i ”W><^ 0-cc,4^ rD<3cl /So >G-_CLO<d. • « • . ;;■ m • • • ___. Cl/6ktn , nr=r{- oodk 0o>r 3-2p' ... dra(Aa^3p S'QvS'hs^ uJr\\eJr\ fun alonci Cur pap^jiJt^ Oo -/^4 “ .. ivlor-^K ^cL ........................ ^ voz^Aij uX<i. deu«Jcped u?^ cxJey^ piDpeAj a. .. O^frcL-^c^ ihof^. U^^Ll/'€.A2^ _(3jS»SLM^d ry->, oil, pilDiho L'''.’y <he..^Du4fJz __ ' be- <2Dn^(rt4td- Oo^ CboL^'l-ax^ • m mi^ • f • d O^-d" ..B tCOjuic, \o^hoix- C^V^ciLTr}” id er\COuro(^ WD'-. -fo fuz^ i 63^ nor rH\t, es-^tibi(sl^a<£ p;jS^'ha^ cr\ ^/s } .'' 41^ atb(^->=) Lu “b c;6-;ca-Ouitf Cons id^crhoos Qj\d{x4"-VA^ SGuri-'Krno- c2.><pra.is Cor ^ ' ‘ ^ •■ S aclt^ l n.» , c* n\.. ^ I i ‘^»>‘*** Ivir. Michael Gaffron Assistant Planning and Zpning Administrator City of Orono Orono, Minnesota m CITY 0= ORONC •) SEP 2 1 '1992' September 17, 1992 Re: Proposal ^1762 - Paul W. Boyke Subdivision Dear Mr. Gaffron: My husband Jim and I are concerned about Paul W. Boyke's proposed subdivision. We have lived at 259 Hollander Road for two and a half years and our property borders Mr. Boyke's lot. Our property and Mr. Boyke's are beautiful enamples of the natural wild environment areas that Orono has worked hard to preserve and protect. Lydiard Lake and its surrounding wetlands, located in the proposed subdivision area, is home to many types of birds, wildlife, trees, and plantlife which my family and I enjoy observing and protecting. One concern we have about Proposal ^ “’62 is that the proposed subdivision is quite close in proximity to Lydiard Lake and its surrounding wetland area. Does the City of Orono consider this proximity appropriate in meeting the standards set forth in the Shoreland Management Ordinance document? Will the subdivision proximity be appropriate in preserving this natural wetland/lake area and protecting it from decay? The building site, as proposed, appears to be placed on a sloping area of land or bluff with the house sitting below land on three sides. What effect will drainage or land erosion, resulting from removal of large mature trees from the building site, have on Lydiard Lake? What effect will a sewer/septic system, placed on a bluff impact area, have on the wetland area below, especially considering storm water runoff? We feel that the proposed new construction will have a negative impact on this beautiful natural shoreland area and that the proposed subdivision is not appr-'priate for the Lydiard Lake area. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, Deborah C. HiesDeborah C. Higgins James C. Higgins 259 Hollander Road Orono, Minnesota 1 L To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and Orono City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator September 18, 1992 Subject: #1762 Paul W. Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB, Single family rural residential, 2 acres. Application: Request to create an additional 2 acre residential lot from existing residence parcel. Note: As of this date applicant has not provided septic testing information. Staff has been advised that testing has not been commenced. Staff will request tabling of this application for review of septic information once it is submitted. However, this is a public hearing and has generated significant neighbor interest. Planning Commission should treat this as a sketch plan review, hear from the public and advise applicant of any potential problems with the proposal. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Letter from Neighbors at 265 Hollander Road Exhibit P ~ Letter from Neighbors at 275 Hollander Road % Pacts and Dinensions * ■ Variance Reqd. a I.Lot Area (Dry Contiguous) Lot 1(Existing House) 2.12 Ac. Lot 2 2.57 Ac. Retired 2.0 Ac. (Wetland Below OHW)0.25 Ac.1.36 Ac.- (Total 77TT Ac.3.^j Ac.2.0 Ac. II.Lot Width - At Shoreline (OHW)165* *342' +200' - At 150' Setback 12' *350' +200' III.Setbacks Structures to OHW 350' +150' +150'Nln. Septic to OHW 290' +(150'+)150'Min. L. Side Setback (S)135'~210'30' R. Side Setback (N)45'30'30' Rear Setback (E)54'52'50' Drlveway/HC to OHW 390'85'75' Septic to Lot Lines 20'20'20' Zoning File #1762 September 18, 1992 Page 2 Lot 1 Lot 2 Required IV.Abuts Public or Private Road NO *Yes Yes V.Hardcover 0-75*0%0%0% 75-250*0%-►20% As Proposed 25% 250-500'20% As 40%+30% Proposed Sumary Applicant proposes to split off a 2 acre building site from his existing residence parcel containing 4.69 acres of dry buildable land above the 970.9 ordinary high water level of Lydiard Lake. Issuea for Consideration 1. f The surveyor has defined two potential dralnfield sites, each 40'x90' in area meeting the required setbacks from the proposed lot lines and house, and the 150* lakeshore setback. It remains to be seen whether testing will confirm the adequacy of these sites. The system serving the existing residence was inspected on September 3rd and found to be in compliance. The alternate site for the existing reside .ice has yet to be reviewed. 2.Lot width. Because both lots are proposed as lakeshore lots on Lydiard lake, the lot width is measured ^ the shoreline and at the 150* setback, measured as a straight line between points at which the side lot lines meet the ordinary high water elevation, and similarly at the 150* setback. Lot 1 does not meet the 200* width standard at either of these locations, and in fact even if the proposed division line was moved eastward to Increase Lot I's shoreline width to 200', the 200' requirement at the 150' setback line could never be met. This begs the question as to whether a lot width variance will be granted for this lot configuration (which was obviously contrived to give the existing house lakeshore access as well as necessary dry buildable area). Note that east of the 10' corridor. Lot 1 contains approximately 1.5 acres. 3.As it currently appears on the plat map, Boyke does not own the 30'xl63.78' strip adjacent to his driveway, and until he does own this, the proposed subdivision would leave Lot 1 not abutting a public or private roadway. If he acquires this strip, then both Lots 1 and 2 will legally abut Outlet A (private road) or the adjacent parcel considered by Hennepin County as dedicated City right-of-way. If he does not acquire the strip, the 30* corridor of Lot 2 should be platted as an outlet. Zoning File #1762 September 18» 1992 Page 3 4.Because both lots are proposed as lakeshore lots« there is no lot width requirement at the road and therefore the flag lot nature of the proposal would not'technically require a lot width variance. In similar circumstances with a non-lakeshore lot, the City has consistently required that the narrow driveway corridor from a flag lot be platted as an outlot to avoid a lot width variance. 5.It should be noted that the City currently has a drainage easement (Conservation and Flowage Easement) extending landward to the survey line shown on the proposed subdivision. The surveyor is apparently proposing a new drainage easement merely over the wetland^ which suggests a revision to the existing C & F Easement description. Staff would note that quite often for the surveyor's convenience, drainage easements are plotted by metes and bounds description which does not necessarily follow the edge of the wetland, and setbacks are measured from the wetland not from the easement. Similarly, the dry land between the edge of the wetland and the easement boundary is considered as dry buildable land. 6.Under the current configuration, the new residence technically requires an average lakeshore setback variance. Because average setback as a matter of policy is defined by a line between the adjacent residence structures on either side of the subject property, the average setback for Lot 2 would be a line drawn between the house on Lot 1 and the residence to the south which is even further east than the existing house on Lot 1. Further, if Lot 1 was not a lakeshore lot and the northwesterly boundary of Lot 2 was at the northwest boundary of the property, the next adjacent lakeshore residence would be 445 Spring Hill Road and the average setback for Lot 2 would be barely lakeward of the proposed house. Because there is no full cul-de—sac within 1,000* of the house, the driveway serving Lot 2 should be looped or adequate turnaround provided for emergency vehicles. Additional Factors/Requirements of Approval 1.The Park Commission has requested a park dedication fee in lieu of land for this subdivision. 2.If the driveway becomes a shared outlot, its ownership must be shared. If not, appropriate easements must be granted. Staff nil I n—r mini Inn Please advise applicant whether the noted lot width, average setback and 250-500' hardcover variances are acceptable. The application should be tabled until septic data is submitted and reviewed. s i CITY OF ORONO - LUBOIVISION APPT.Tfi fefetM--------Ir - -PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ^ .*3 f-—a- 4 '/ r> ^t-/ bj ------------- ''Z3 AJ^^ ^ ------------ cmoFurm) Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) FifiAHCE OFFICE Bi ^ ^ ' ---- -------- 1350200000 Please check one - Property ____ abstract or torrens? 01 CEU 325.C CHECK • 7L 325mOAttach legal description to application. RECEIPT-THANK yA lllrrnlZ^ 7—mmo-Gooi^^iJozAPPLICANT Phone (home) ^13-^79 03/2S Name (^^uL fiJ. \/M^ T __________ Phone (work) 3VV'f3ll Address; 9^ //. City; 2^7A Zip; 2^ / m- I OWNER (if different than applicant) N^une Phone (home) Phone (work) Address; (attach rist if more than one) ” " ^ — EXISTING LAND USB /Number of Tax Parcels Development Size y.rf Acres Dry Land -y- <!Acres Wet Land • Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check)Residential; no.of units / Other (specify) Present Zoning District PROPOSAL >< Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites:/Existing Units New Units Proposed Gross Density: Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) Total Units _ Units per Acres Sq Feet Dry Bulldable Land X Residential " Other (specify) r I 1 . % •' NIMIffOM MATERIAL NECESSARY POR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271), As an addendum to this applicationr please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 2. 3. 4. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete• Zoning Official's Signature^_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Payment of fees (park fees* filing fee, sewer and water assessments). Signed Certifycete of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. Title opinion. Easementsr Covenantsr etc. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _. PEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $200.00 300.00 Preliminary Review (Class I ft II Subdivision)300.00 Preliminary Review (Class III ft all non-residential)325.00 + 25.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) *(Plus any legal or engineering charges) 175.00 Renewal of Preliminary Subdivision Application Renewal of Final Subdivision Applicartion 150.00 100.00 The applicant hereby agrees to provide: all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator# City Engineer# City Attorney# Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees^stabllshed by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature Date fUihi Date / ' fhih Applicant must have all submittals Into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are *!T -i 5 third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an appl unable to attend a scheduled meeting# please make arrang^ents authorised agent attend in your place and to advise the Building ft Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. MJN DATE Oa/21/fE HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONNERS LIST REPORT NO. PIAS5401 PAGE 14 DATCN 005 PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP ADOR CN€R NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR L - 36 25-116-23 34 0003 00445 SPRING HILL RO R J NIOON I M E NIGON RICHARD J A HARY E NIGON 445 SPRING HILL RD HAYZATA MN 55391 36 25-118-23 43 0004 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED J A C GOLINVAUX JEROME A CHARLOTTE GOLINVAUX 325 HOLLANDER RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 25-118-23 43 0013 00260 HOLLANDER RO LAD GILPIN LARRY A DARYL GILPIN 260 HOLLANDER ROAD HAYZATA MN 55391 36 25-118-23 43 0014 00315 HOLLANDER RD TAP HARBERTS THOMAS A PATRICIA HARBERTS 315 HOLLANDER RD HAYZATA m 55391 36 25-118-23 43 0016 00265 HOLLANDER RD J H HUNDER A J A HUNGER JAMES H A JUDITH A HUNGER 265 HOLLANDER RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 25-118-23 43 0017 00259 HOLLANDER RD J C HIGGINS ADC HIGGINS PHH US MORTGAGE CORP 55 HADDONFIELD RD CHERRY HILL NJ 08002 36 25-116-23 43 0024 00325 HOLLANDER RO J A C GOLINVAUX JEROME A CHARLOTTE GOLINVAUX 325 HOLLANDER RD HAYZATA MN 55391 36 25-118-23 43 0025 00275 HOLLANDER RO P F BRUER A L J MILLER PAUL F BRUER LINDA J HILLER 275 HOLLANDER RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 25-118-23 43 0026 00235 HOLLANDER RO K M MARINE A K I MARINE KONRAD M A KAY I MARI»€ 235 HOLLANDER RO HAYZATA m 55391 38 36-116-23 11 0010 00645 FERNOALE RD N RICHARD i STRAND ETAL RICHARD E A JOAN M STRAND 645 NO FERNDALE RD HAYZATA MN 55391 36 36-118-23 11 0012 00785 FERNDALE RD N ALLE6RA H PARKER PAUL L A ALLEGRA H PARKER 785 FERNDALE RO N HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 11 0017 00715 FERNOALE RO N RICHARD J LYMAN RICHARD J LYMAN 715 NO FERNDALE RO HAYZATA MN 55391 tJ 36 36-118-23 11 0020 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED P H BOYKE A V L BOYKE PAUL N BOYKE 795 NO FERNOALE DR HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 12 0001 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGI€D J A C GOLINVAUX J A C GOLINVAUX 325 HOLLANDER RO HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-116-23 12 0002 00725 FERNOALE RD N R A R MACLEOD RONALD C MACLEOD 725 N FERNDALE RD HAYZATA MN 55391 V •S' H ? {I v- ;:/ PROP ADOR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER. NAME/ADDR 36 36-118-23 12 0007 00745 FERNDALE RD N JOHN A BERG A NANCY C BERG JOHN A A NANCY C BERG 745 FERNOALE RD N ORONO m 55391 38 36-118-23 12 0008 00735 FERNDALE RD N MARGARET 0 PITTMAN ET AL E E A MARGARET 0 STRICKLAND 735 FERWALE RD N HAYZATA MN 55391 38 36-118-23 12 0009 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED JOHN A BERG A NANCY C BERG JOHN A A NANCY C BERG 745 FERNOALE RO N ORONO MN 55391 I • mJN DATE 08/21/n NErt€PIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST DATCN 005 PROP AOOR OHNER NAME TA)OPAYER NAME/AOOR I . SO SA-1IS-2S 12 OOlS 00701 FERNOALE RD N PAUL N A VIRGINIA L 60YKE PAUL H A VIRGINIA L BOYKE 70S FERNDALE RO N NAYZATA HN 55S9I PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR SO .A-110-2S 22 OOOS 00755 LONG LAKE RD E F NINSTON A E C NINSTON FREDERICK NINSTON 755 SPRING HILL RD NAYZATA MN 55S01 • id't ■m *r ‘ • .'t m REPORT NO. PI4S5401 PAGE 15 SO SA-110-2S 12 001^ 00795 FERNDALE RD N D R A D J FLATZ DOUGLAS R A DIANE J FUTZ 795 FERNDALE RD N NAYZATA HN 55191 10 1A-110-2S 12 0015 00010 ADDRESS UUSSIGNED PAUL N A VIRGINIA BOYKE CITY OF ORONO P O BOX 60 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55121 TOTAL BATCH 005 00022 X 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 DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION» TO THE BEST OF NY KNONLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATI lOPERTY TAXATIONt T • ■ ^ ^ 'Ik 4 f i September 11, 1992 ;i ‘ .• ««« « ■ : f -nvr <i ^ *»»v w ‘^y ' v^ » Mr. Mike C^’ffron Asst. Planning and Zoning Admin. Village of Orono Orono, MN SEP 1 4 iS52 Re: #1762 - Paul W. Boyke Subdivision Dear Mr. Gaffron; We are neighbors of Paul Boyke's living at 265 Hollander Rd. When we purchased our house, our understanding was that the lot behind us was long and narrow with a house on the street, but otherwise unbuildable. We considered the lot Mr. Boyke bought to be one of the most beautiful lots in the Orono area with many old oaks, wetland, a lake and many species of wildlife including a fisher, an animal not usually seen in this area. Upon buying the lot, Mr. Boyke immediately subdivided, putting a driveway through the existing property and selling off the house on the street and building a house behind. His present proposal would be to add a driveway onto the existing driveway and to build another house, making the houses "three-deep" on the lot. Then to add a little foot path(road?) to allow access to a forth lot to the back or lake side. We have been involved in comprehensive planning on the village level and have, as the owners of a small office building been involved in development and met with Plymouth's planning Commission on several occasions. Our experience has taught us that the two most important elements in determining whether a property de velopment plan fits into comprehensive planning is consistency and appropriateness. That is, is it consistent with the development in the village in plan and layout? Does Orono consistently allow developers to subdivide lots four deep without direct access to a thoroughfare or would this be the planning of 75 to 100 years ago? If Mr. Boyke had proposed such a development when he originally bought the lot would it have been approved as it is now, as a development ? Is this development appropriate to this area? Does it set back with other homes on the lake? i Page 376-4 of the Shoreland Management Amendment to the Zoning Code speaks to "sensitive resource management". The topographical maps show this house will be located several feet below the land on three sides. With hard-cover what does this mean d.n terms of run-off from the top house and surrounding drainage? Will this substantially increase pollutant drainage into the wetlands and ultimately the lake? Will this house have serious basement water problems - can it have a basement? Will it need a pumping system to the drainfield. Is this within the code for this area: (Page376-15 speaks to similar issues). Page 376-21 item "B" states "Each lot shall meet the minimum lot size and dimensional requirements set forth elsewhere"... Does Mr. Boyke have a 2 acre lot without the fourth lot on the lake. These are only some of the issues here# but we feel they are certainly sufficient to deny this request. As stated earlier, we researched that land before we bought this house and found it had no access and was low with poor drainage. This was not a legitimate 2 house lot. It is certainly not a 3 house lot. Thank you for your consideration ▼ Very truly yours. I James H. Hunder ■J Judith A. Hunder September 12,1992 rihr^r Mr. Michael Gaffrcn Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Orono, Minnesota SEP IT 2 Re: Proposal #1762- Paul W. Boyke Subdivision Dear Mr. Gaffron: M/ wife, Linda Miller, and I have resided ac 275 Hollander Road for slightly more than one year. Our property abuts the northwestern edge of the land proposed for subdivision. I have lived in the western suburbs of Minneapolis for forty years, and am quite familiar the beautiful wild areas which remain in and around the City of Orono. Lydiard Lake is a prime example of one of these few remaining areas. Obviously, the City of Orono, and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources appreciate Lydiard Lake's uniqueness, and have thus designated it a "Natural Environment", in its Shoreland Management Ordinance, and Shoreiand Overlay District Standards. One of the thrusts of the new legislation is to preserve and protect the fragile wetland environments. The natural beauty of Lydiard Lake, and the rural character of Orono were two of the main reasons we moved to 275 Hollander Road. We have reviewed the materials available concerning Proposal # 1762, and have many reservations about what we have seen. Our first concern is the concept itself. The mandate of the State of Minnesota through the DNR is to preserve and protect the existing "Natural Environments" by limiting future development. Proposal # 1762 runs counter to the idea of protection and preservation by proposing new construction on the very edge of this unique wetland area. Our second concern was one of appropriateness. The existing level and character of development surrounding T^ydiard Lake is not consistent with the proximity proposed in Mr. Boyke's plan. We also have concerns related to the actual suitability of the site itself for the proposed development. The bluff area to the north of the proposed building site is currently covered with many mature trees. What would happen to them? If the are removed, wouldn't the wonderfully varied bird population which currently uses the area be gone as well? How would the introduction cf more hardcover effect the run-off and drainage ecosystem already in place? What is the environmental impact of ever 600 feet of graded driveway, 300 feet of which borders the edge of the wetlands? Is the soil appropriate for a septic system? What would be the consequence of septic system problems on Lake Lydiard. Our questions and concerns are too numerous to pursue in this letter. Ia .1 The resources of the City of Orono Planning Commission and those of its staff will undoubtedly be used to address fully, not only our questions, but those of others, concerning this proposal. We feel strongly, that the proposed subdivision for new residential development on the edge of a designated "Natural Environment", runs counter to the concept and intent of protection and preservation of the unique Lydiard Lake area, and that it poses many questions concerning its appropriateness and feasibility. Sir^rely, / / '■ru/ t L. Paul F. Bruer Linda J. Miller 275 Hollander Road Orono, Minnesota 1 V U»^\’ \/^\\\> ''Jf 4^----------- •'... I, W4^^ r^ n 1^XL!1^ V* > t . .. • ••••••#• *% uo-r 3t g>>.OC.V- ^ , . . ^XNf,<ii\\> -to U^e-K* !•> vocA-tCx> 10* t=<.Dv>-i V1rov^^=*v^•< uiPti y cvr^ ccv^ \% ui>i4^ urr^ At*\'«ouAv-It Tktavi *-'op ^ca.-c^-V *<-7 uJ%^r -^v%l«Jc•a«^s wiu. r-r MSv- 6 nlFirpi-Hc^ S’U UDHU cuj,9igr cxwuo-< A —ki^JOOq________________ SCkkkX A**-So* XSoil BuioQS 9 Bench M jik 9 flKCOLATlOh/ Tczr \X Note- This system is *o be constructed to meet the KAooesoio Po«iul>on Control Agency Chapter 7080 4 Local Ordinance Note : Check all underground utilities \ \ KL€^ ALL^gUAlfy gS(/lAH£gir OAf OA rut TgBATHStrr AttAt 4lft^ A*»o Atrsm Ct>*itTgycft9$i - /72.fl - i - ‘^XtO H') z 0 »‘ i* \p.uriA^^O /u-lH-^Jk PROPERTY OPt.^AitL .MatJUL LOrt AlCCk! AAutiANN£ laJOAOS MAiryZ, C UO-T \ ^ OAf^AtCi HaJ. A/lA/Ai. CO. lJr€ S-P TESTING INC.^ PMiyixi By-. 6'fL>.^ 0'S. Oofc iL/XA, PH.6I2-497-3S66 li—:_ • •• •• >••••••» » «• « •••« •• - /-IS'r“tt“ Aw\- >A^AV*^ C^viW»^vv‘<' I 7“ “^' / 'V /\ t » k. , >itv«-.lf- ,\><OVOt^ Vi* <lf«>^^- s;V--4 \ x'<S'd___' / tv^wiriMu wHs>w^ • ^r\)tJ^ lO \^**^vA pi. %g*'^CraOij^ jri^jjii!!--ii-5lii*i* I r*^ u«^c - «H/to .U----------------------- ‘i "''"I.»<? .' I «1»*. >a_ I *••' \ I i*’ f«»i»'vv % —— RV% ^ . «•>- \"*i' \ I■r-s \ V \, .-ihc\ pc^\i\ SfWofiMTtsfi Scolt’-UILL^ Xsoil Borings • B«Kh MoHl I'- V’‘‘- V^T \ ^ • 4 \*A - jj "■:* ‘v# y*^ \ Check ell underground iitilitle •’X Ij^ ^ * ' \ • < V \ t h \SL-, \3Vi''' - 0t • -■ ^--------------------*4•HU .^.i 1 1 j^-:i ----sa- Nolc< TNi flyttm k tote consinictod to mato IteMwNioto Pdtolien Confcd AgwCy Chapter 7010 (> Local Ordinane fifOPeRTY OFifl^V^L oct^uo t^yi 3 5V^a%. rk^H%MP. Co- 5-/» resriNG uK. OtegnedBy- ^ ----- Oo!f:iy/I.'/:Z% PM.6 i2-497-35€€ ;it? •7^ O r CITY OP OROHO F. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay« NN 473-7357 ZONING FILE #1762 55323 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: 9/24/92 TO: Paul W. Boyke 793 North Ferndale Road Wayzata* MN 55391 COPIES TOs TYPE OF APPLICATIONS Subdivision DATE OF , 1.4 >TINGS 9/21/92 VOTE: 7 For 0 Against Planning Conaission re nds the following: Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AMD SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Polling of the Planning Commission indicated lakeshore lot width variance was not likely to be granted. Application was tabled pending: 1, Submission of revised proposal requiring no variances. 2. Submission of septic testing information. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional Information. Deadline for the October 19» 1992 meeting is October 9th. If the applicant has trouble obtaining additional information, please contact the Zoning Department (473-7357). If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Conunisslon. MTNUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Planning Commission Chair Charlie Kelley, Maureen Bellows, Charles Schr^eder, Stephen Peterson, Ed Cohen, Candace Rowlette, and Jeff Johnson. The following represented the City Staff: Assistant Planning and Zoning AdmlnIstrator Michael Gaffron and City Recorder Terl Naab. Mayor Peterson, Ed Callahan and Gabriel Jabbour were present to represent the Counci I. Chair Kelley called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. (#1) #1762 PAUL W. BOYKE, 793 NORTH FERNOALE ROAD - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 - 7:15 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Paul Boyke was present. Gaffron explained that staff has not received septic testing for the lots and the applicant wishes to wait to submit such until after the meeting tonight. He referred to two additional letters received from neighbors, the Bergs and Higgins (Exhibit A). He explained the property is near Lydiard Lake. Previous subdivisions In the area have provided for land acquisition for a future cul- de-sac. Lot 1, with the existing house, has 2.12 acres of dry buiidabie land, and .25 acres wetland. Lot 2 has 2.57 acres dry and 1.36 acres wetland. The unique configuration proposed Is due to the setback requirements, the need for 2 acres of dry buiidabie land, and the need for septic sites on the property. Lot 1 has 165’ of lakeshore where 200* is required, therefore a variance is needed, and Lot 2 has 340* of lakeshore. Chair Kelley stated the subdivision is In a 2 acre zoning district and this proposal does not meet the standards of that district. He stated ho is not in favor of the proposal. Peterson agreed with Chair Kelley and added the additional hardcover for the driveway wiII also be a factor. All the members agreed with Chair Kelley. Johnson asked to hear any public comments. Jim and DebbIe Higgins, 259 Hoi Iander Road, stated their opposi11 on to the proposal, citing the preservation of wildlife in the area and privacy as reasons for their opposition. r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 ZONING FILE #1762 - CONT. Chair Kelley reminded them that Boyke has enough acreage, but It !s the need for variances that he Is opposing. Paul Bruer, 275 Hoi lander Road, said he is concerned with the proximity of the proposed residence to the lake. Jim and Judith Hunder, 265 Hollander Road, agreed with their neighbors’ opposing remarks. Mrs. Hunder noted the issue of the need for variances and felt the subdivision did not make sense. Boyke explained he first proposed this subdivision prior to the new shoreland regulations, but was made to wait duo to the moratorium. He noted the "point" area of the property Is unbuildable duo to current regulations. He is hoping to protect their views of the lake and also realize the full value of his property. He stated they do not have a desire for a dock or pier out onto the lake. He Indicated ho would be willing to divide off a second lot without making it a lakeshoro lot. He added, their Intent Is not to change the wildlife of the area. Johnson asked about the strip of property near the cul-de-sac, the ownership of which Is in question. Boyke explained that the City approved a metes and bounds division, but It was not recorded at the County correctly. He is lr» the process of trying to work that Issue out. Chair Kelley felt that septic testing for the site may determine where the property boundaries should be placed. It was moved by Chair Kelley, seconded by Cohen, to table Application #1762 Paul W. Boyke, 793 North Ferndale Road, pending septic test information. Ayes 7, nays 0. (#2) #1764 AUSTIN EVANS, 255 LANDMARK DRIVE - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - PUBLIC HEARING 7:42 - 7:50 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Austin Evans was present. l^‘. J k L> 1 10.206-10.20e UNIFORM FIRE CODE Obstruction of Flio Protection Equipment the chief. AcceeeRoadwtye for Fire Apperatue See lt.2#7. (a) Reqelred ConitrucllOFi. Every building hereafler con- iinicl^ ahidl be accesaible to fire deparimc’U apparatus by way of access ro^- ways with all-weather driving surface of rot less than 20 feet of j width with adequate roadway turning rad.us capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and having a ru'.iimum of 13 feet 6 •^1'®* clearance. Dead-end fire department z^cess roads in excess of * be provided with approved provUions for the turning around of fire department apparatus. EXCEPTION: When there are not more than two Croup R. Occupancies as defined ii the Building Code, the reqmren-siT modified when, in the opision of the chief, fire-fighling or .i> nw • not be impaired. . . k- fbi OlMlructiiit. The required width of access roadways shall not be obauucted in any manner, including parking of vehicles. NO other appropriate notice, or both, prohibiting obstructions may be required and shall be maintained. sSseiSSSSS- provided as required and apprm^ by the chief. (d) Ftoa-pmcciloa AHernatc. Where fire-proicctiOT systems approved by the chief are provided, the above required clearance may be modified. of the Building Code and using design live loading sufficient to carry the imposed loads of the fire apparatus. PrwhiMt IdMitIlfcation IMF lllll|irTTFhilil niimhm itiill with their background ' f' •^T 1982 EDITION 10.209-10.301 Sec 10.209. When access to or within a structure or an area is unduly difficult because of secured openings or where immediate access is necessary for life saving or fire-fighting purposes, the chief may require a ki^ ^x to be an accessible location.^ckey box shall be a type approved by the chief and shall contain keys to gain necessary access as required by the chief. Division III INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF FIRE- PROTECTION. LIFE-SAFETY SYSTEMS AND APPLIANCES Installation ^ w. Sec 10.301. (a) TVpe Required. The chief shall designate the tVj« and number of fire appliances to be installed and maintained in and up<w all b“iW‘"gs nremises in the jurisdiction other than private dwellings. This shall ^ done St,7. s.«ri.y of to. locl^ji., to .ydity .Of which II may spre***- S>»'> oppli""' toll be of • lype class of fire associated with such building or premises and shall have approval of '***P^table fire extinguishers shall be in accordance with U.F.C. Stondard No. 10-1.1- I . ^ (b) Special Haxards. In occupancies of an especially hazardous nature or where special hazards exist in addition lo the normal hazard of the occupancy, w where Kcess for fire apparatus is unduly difficuh. additional safeguards may be Such devices or appliances may consist of automatic fire alarm ic sprinkler or water spray systems, standpipe and hose, fixed or extinguishers, suitable asbestos blankets, breathing maik covers, carbon dioxide, foam, haloge^ed and ‘*0^. “ T*.! special fire-extinguishing systems. Where such systems are in^led, th^^all bein accordance with the applicable Uniform Fire Code Stand^or stand^ of the National Fire Protection Association when Uniform Fire Code Standards do not apply. .. . • * • ^ (c) Whter Supply. An approved water supply capable of suppljmg r^uired fire flow for fire protection shall be provided to all premises upon whtch or portions of buildings are hereafter constructed. When any portion of tire building protected is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply <m a public stre^ there shall be provided, when required by the chief, on-site fire hydranU and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow. Water supply may consist of reservoirs, pressure Unks, elevate tanks, w«er mains or other fixed system capable of supplying the required fire flow, w »«>"8 the requiremenu for fire flow, the chief may be guided by the standjtrd published ■ i ) • I • 1 tttmuiTiwn j Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Cnr G ecr*fS[TSO PE Rctcrt W Poie^'f PE • yOieort c Anjer.4 Pc L Sor. j j PE Pi^^raE Turret PE Gf'^n R Cxk P£ Tromji E Noyfv P£ Pcsen G Scr»un<ni PE Sv^jn M E&f'iin C PA •Scncf Consuiurt Engineers & Architects Mcwa^ A Sar^flord PE <eih A Go<don PE Roc^ R Pfffftne. P£ R.crjra W Postr ’ PE Da\«d O lotitota PE >?cDfra C Puisck. AI A Jf'?> A BoufCon PE Mam A Hanson PE Mk.haei T ffautrnann P TfO 1C PE Thcmas R Anoerson. A DonikS C Btygaox. P£ Thomas E Ar^i PE Gary F P>i.injer pg ISrraH MjrT.ne; PE \<ichae« P Rau PE Agr^l M Rng. AiC P Thomas W P^f'P'Son PE M<hae< C Lyfxh PE James R Mauro PE Jffry O »^Pft«ch PE Kenneth P Anderson PE Mani ff Rdtfv PE Mark A Seo PE Gary W Monen PE Oanief j Edgerron PE Philip j CasAH PE Mam 0 Via IS PE M*tcs 0 Jensen P£ L Pn»i|.p C ni pc KaTn L Vi^ emf'j Pf F Tcdd FcstC' PE Ketn R Ya;?o PE Sha^vn O Gustafson I Ceciio Ow^ef PE Chares A Er<kson Lfo M Pawe'ik/ Hanan M 0»sm James F Ertge«hara September 17,1992 Mr. Mike Gaffron City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Re: #1762 Paul Boyke Subdivision File No. 139-1762 Dear Mike: We have reviewed the proposed subdivision of Lot 1, Block 1. Lauranne Woods Addition on the Paul Boyke property, located to the east of Lydiard Lake. Subsequent to our site inspection, there are several engineering issues that should be noted. Lydiard Lake is a DNR protected water, identified as Basin No. 27-159P. The accepted ordinary high water elevation (OHWL) of the lake is 970.9. For setback purposes this elevation contour should be considered the shoreline of Lydiard Lake. The City’s municipal code requires certain setbacks to shorelines and these have been shown appropriately on the site plan. The code also requires a 200 foot shoreline for each lot to have lake access. If Lot 1 is planned to have lake access, the westerly lot line of Lot 2 should be realigned to provide 25 feet of additional shoreline to Lot 1. If Lot 1 is indeed planned to have lake access by means of the 10 foot wide strip of land along the north property line, a grading plan should be provided to show any planned improvements in that area. We understand that the bituminous access road from North Femdale Road is a private drive which is platted as an outlot with joint resident ownership. To eliminate an undesirable "flag” lot with driveway easements, we recommend that the 30 ’ by 407 ’ "flag pole" also be platted as an outlot with joint ownership by both lots. This would be in accordance with the code requirements for a minimum lot footage of 200 feet. Drainage and utility easements should be provided five feet wide along both sides of the proposed lot division line. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly. BONESTROO. ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Shawn D. Gustafson. P.E. SDG:Ik 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 1 f. . • ^----------- ifU[lCeii3u\i^LllU p nnrviru, o.-'4 ZcC-zifNl SEP 2 1 1992 \\)e^ Qfe LOr* 3uioci*u\vS*Do ^1 Tr\ ftLc^C'it cl “fc) ~iht^ <OA>poSec] \xiL oc uoabU "tp bi +heAi. -fK*4 bu<^ CIcItXCK. mOe/M ’Coe ci «0rcn^*2-‘^ T^ ^Du-:K y cit.. 2 hctiX- Oo oIp (5 efs cvos. ~)^ ilv. p<x; pciSfecA det^tfiipzone.'cf' JouA" L)D\Sk4ly ■€/^CDur^^4_ ~H\34" 6ot^ic3<2ra.4icyN (oe, onEtdo ”}Ka. LCO>i ■^l\.rvA \^ dtr>c-4d build -ji^ Cicc^ nood '3o ■JfW- -'Kz. C^/Q^o0j^^'^cio(^ Fiob coldk CX»r (jLPci ,^V-^(juKieb fun Our |On:p2i2_-/t^(Pi(ci, (\aoj^ Swd. ,. Klor-Hr^ ck. *’... A4 "V^rvU. OU' p/'ttDe^dy uXii cleLteJcpcd uJeyv:^ (EZS'jdol PfDoed^ "fcr a Cccl-ck--s^o-jbof :c- !)t, G-^^UTc-A ouCxj-ld. ry>, c(i pAji^obi (<'-^ H€x^ bs. 10*^ cio rvo't' tOCiAf Cu-kdt> be- GDf»pUde.cd Our nelaWbocs b2(>«L. Cilu;0-i^^ \J^^ Coor'/-e£x>d Qy\«l ..._ VvocKi \r\ CXf^d 0^ Or'~H\l, '^&COUJ^ d^ux-b hc^j^ bee^ txicic jn cUr deAiuezhi^ Circ fe^* ckn-t” dbd' Cu(-cL-'S gc. rob \^Cedf^ 'fiv' o^iootj uebi d^. LOe_ Q,nQCXMiD Ui» KX>^r^Clir\-\\'^ (Qu<b^*4L CW}.'\^ 4i\c es-bibl/sKacr pctS'-hor^ c^ rk/s b L{^m. 'ior Lui dt) (Jo »C>- £X-m^ CC'AS ici^ <zi CrP CUA r\eicj{->bx'K<>:?<^ Pob a-l' -VA<-. ScltM^ "Prrv>- e :ri> 0 CorftdCXAGx-/ IfN " b- &A^I^S Cv ■ .ei r i ll^ Mr. Michael Gaffron Assistant* Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Orono, Minnesota CITYO® ORONCm____ llU[lE[iQ'5^ SEP 2 ^ 1092 September 17, 1992 Re; Proposal ^762 - Paul W. Boyke Subdivision Dear Mr. Gaffron: My husband Jim and I are concerned about Paul W. Boyke’s proposed subdivision. We have Uved at 259 Hollander Road for two and a half yeeurs and our property borders Mr. Boyke's lot. Our property and Mr. Boyke*s are beautiful examples of the natural wild environment areas that Orono has worked hard to preserve and protect. Lydiard Lake and its surrounding wetlands, located in the proposed subdivision area, is home to many types of birds, wildlife, trees, and plantlife which my family and I enjoy observing and protecting. One concern we have about Proposal ^762 is that the proposed subdivision is quite close in proximity to Lydieurd Lake and its surrounding wetland area. Does the City of Orono consider this proximity appropriate in meeting the standards set forth in the Shoreland Management Ordinance document? Will the subdivision proximity be appropriate in preserving this natural wetland/lake area and protecting it from decay? The building site, as proposed, appears to be placed on a sloping area of land or bluff with the house sitting below land on three sides. What effect will drainage or land erosion, resulting from removal of large mature trees from the building site, have on Lydiard LcUce? What effect will a sewer/septic system, placed on a bluff impact area, have on the wetland area below, especially considering storm water runoff? ’ - n- 'll A4 i'i I . We feel that the proposed new construction will have a negative impact on this beautiful natural shoreland area and that the proposed subdivision is not appropriate for the Lydiard Lake area. Thank you for your attention. Sin^'erely, Derorah C. Higgins James C. Higgins 259 Holl«^nder Road Orono, Minnesota To:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator From: Date: Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager October 15, 1992 Subject: Subdivision.#1762, Paul Boyke - Septic Review I have reviewed the proposed septic system testing and design for this property and would make the following comments. LOT^ BLOCK 1 - EAST ONE-HALF This lot has an existing residence with an on-site sewage treatment system. The system is a conforming system according to MPCA Rules Chapter 7080 and City of Orono Code. The system includes two 1,000 gallon pre-cast concrete septic tanks and approximately 1,000 s.f. of shallow drainfield trenches. The septic system was installed in 1987 at which time soil testing indicated a three foot separation between the trench bottom and the seasonally high water table as indicated by mottling and is presumed to be installed as designed. The existing drainfield is approximately ten feet from the proposed driveway for the west lot. Due to the elevation of the existing driveway, the proposed driveway for the west lot would likely require fill to be constructed which would impede the natural drainage and could adversely effect the function of the drainfield. Driveway specifications should be provided including a topographic map detail so the impact (ff any) may be noted. Soil testing has been provided indicating an alternate drainfield site for a 4-bedroom home to the east and north of the existing drainfield. This area would also be suitable for a shallow trench system. Drainage from the existing driveway would flow directly across the alternate drainfield site, therefore a drain tile or other method for redirecting the drainage must be incorporated at the time the future site is to be used. Specific alternate site details are included below: Depth of seasonal saturation (mottling) is 4* to 4'2", requiring shallow trenches. Slope is 4%. The percolation rate averages 7.9 minutes per inch at 12 inches. Drainage must be directed away from drainfield site. Subdivision #1762, Septic Review October 15, 1992 Page 2 LOT 1, BLOCK 1 - WEST ONE-HALF Soil testing and septic system design has been provided for a 5-bedroom home including primary and alternate drainfield sites. Both sites meet MPCA Rules Chapter 7080, however a 25' section of the alternate drainfield site encroaches within the 20* setback required for driveways. The proximity of the driveway to the alternate site cannot be avoided due to site limitations. Driveway specifications should be provided to show that drainage will not adversely effect this site. Due to the proximity of the access road to the septic sites, snow fencing will be required around both drainfield sites prior to the issuance of final plat approval. Specific septic system details are included below: Depth of seasonal saturation (mottling) is 1* 2* to 3' 6", requiring a mound. Slope at the primary and alternate drainfield sites is up to 5%. Percolation rates average 6.2 minutes per inch at 12”. A 10* driveway setback variance will be required for the alternate site. SUMMARY The site inspection revealed several concerns regarding drainage around the drainfield sites due to the existing driveway for the east lot as well as the proposed driveway for the west lot. Additional Information will be required regarding the proposed driveway to assure that a 10' setback from both the existing system for the east lot and the proposed alternate system for the west lot is feasible as well as to assure that it is possible to drain the driveway away from both of these septic sites. The alternate drainfield site for the existing residence will also be required to assure that drainage can be directed around this site from the existing driveway. Provided that acceptable information can be provided regarding these drainage questions, staff is comfortable with the septic plans provided. One condition of the subdivision must be that both the existing and proposed drainfield sites must be staked using snow fencing to prohibit any traffic from compacting these sites. The fencing must be installed prior to the granting of a final plat approval and any motorized travel across these areas. Isv I i «• To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusthr Building & Zoning Administrator November 10/ 1992 Subject: #1768 Or. William and Rhonda Omlie, 1860 Shadywood Road - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing Review of Application At your October 19th meeting, members acted on the side setback portion of applicant's comprehensive land use application. The Council approved the side setback variance subject to hardcover being maintained at the level approved with building permit (25.1%). Hardcover increases were to be considered with the future land alteration conditional use permit. Applicants have submitted a revised plan showing a decrease in hardcover from 31.4% to 30.7%. Pertinent Ordinances 1. Section 10.22, Subd. 2. Review of hardcover - amended proposal. 0-75' setback area Allowed - 0 s.f. Existing » 0 s.f. Proposed ■ 0 s.f. 10,200 s.f. 75-250* setback area *= 23,800 s.f. Approved with Building Permit l0/l/.9^ House “ 2,JO s.f. Garage “ 813 s.f. Driveway ■ 1,755 s.f. Sidewalk = 15G s.f. Steps « 39 s.f. Patio ■ 300 s.f. Deck 0.0 Retaining Walls « 0.0 Landscape Areas « 0.0 Original Plan 2,930 s.f. 951 s.f. 2.590 s.f. 226 s.f. 17 S.f. 547.2 s.f. 231.9 s.f. 0.0 s.f. 0.0 s.f. Amended Plan 2,930 833 2,026 195 33 436 208 238 410 s.f. s.f.* s.f. s.f. s.f. s.f. s.f. s.f. s.f. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE: 5,989 s.f. or 25.2% 7,488.1 s.f. or 31.4% 7,309 s.f. or 30.7% Area revised to reflect extenstion of garage addition along existing north side setback 250-500* setback area >> 5,300 s.f. Existing « 1,665 s.f. or 31.4% Proposed = 1,803 s.f.‘ or 34% Hardcover increase = 138 s.f. or 2.6% —*■- #• Zoning File #1768 November 10» 1992 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Hardcover Summary Analysis B-1-3 - Hardcover Fact Sheets C - Staff Memo 10/14/92 D - Revised Site Plan Roview of Amended Proposal Applicants' revised plan reflects reduction in driveway expansion resulting in a decrease of 564 s«f« or 2«3% and also shows reductions in the areas of the lakeside deck and patio. Applicants now propose an increase from 25.1% to 30.7%. The new hardcover facts reflect 410 s.f. of landscape area underlain with geotachnic fabric. The landscape architect advises that the fabric is to be installed in areas where erosion is of prime concern. These areas are shown as the shrub planting areasr review Exhibit D. Landscape areas designated as ground cover areas shall remain as natural ground cover. The following improvements result in hardcover increases: 1.Additional paved area over amount approved with building permit ^ 271 s.f. or 1.1%. 2. Increase in sidewalk area over that approved with building permit ® 45 s.f. or 0.1%. 3.Increase in patio area over that approved with building permit >> 136 s.f. or 0.5%. 4.Increase of 208 s.f. or 0.8% deck area where none was approved with building permit. 5.Landscape areas underlain with plastic shown at 410 s.f. or 1.7%. These areas were also not included with original hardcover facts submitted with building permit. 6.238 s.f. or 1% increase in hardcover for retaining walls proposed with land alteration permit. Brief Review of Hardships Applicant claims special parking needs and the need to provide Dr. 0mlie immediate and safe access from property at times of emergency. Applicant also notes the need for handicap access to residence from vehicles, noting that there have been three accidents in the drive as a result of the limited paved area. Applicant s consultant, Kendall Larson, has advised that there will be no appreciable Impact on the treatment of runoff because of the increase in hardcover. He has been advised to provide more detail on tnis claim. The proposed driveway upgrade will provide greater safety and accessibility for persons who visit the site. ♦ . Zoning File #1768 November 10, 1992 Page 3 Planning Commission members should review the conditional use permit in conjunction with the variance application. Please note the paving and retaining wall required by land alteration result in improvements that increase hardcover. Options of Action To approve as proposed, OR To approve as eunended, OR ? k L ■- William R. and Rhonda T. Omlie 1860 Shadyveed Road Waysata, NN 55391 HARDCOVER SUMMARY ANALYSIS 10/28/92 ♦all numbara repraaant square faat# Approvad par PROPOSED Bdg. Parmit PLAN 10/01/92 10/19/92 REVISED PLAN "0" Changa 11/16/92 ZONE #1 (O' to 75' from lakaahora)- No ground covar parmittad • TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE: TOTAL PROPERTY IN ZONE: 0.0 10,200.0 0.0 10,200.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10,200.0 HARDCOVER PECENTAOE:0.0%0.0%0.0% 0.0% ZONE #2 (75' to 25' from lakaahora)- 25% ground oovar parmittad. Houaa: Oaragm: O^lvavay: .f'.t^aiiralk: itapa: pat isai Ar.aaa: Daok: Rataining walla: Landaoapa Araaa: 2.930.0 815.0 1.755.0 150.0 39.0 300.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.930.0 951.0 2.590.0 226.0 12.0 947.2 231.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,930.0 (118.0) 833.0 (564.0) 2,026.0 (31.0) 195.0 21.0 43^ (111.2) 434 e (23.9) 208.0 238.0 238.0 410.0 410.0 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE: total PROPERTY IN ZONE: 5,989.0 23,800.0 7,488.1 23,800.0 (179.1) 7,309.0 23,800.0 HARDCOVER PECENTAOE:29.2%31.5%-0.8% 30.7% a*Raviaad hardoovar incraaai Also raquiraa Conditional I « 1,320.0 or 5. Uaa Parmit for 300 - 400 eu.yda. 5%** of fill. Zona #3 (250' to roO' or atraat)-30% ground covar parmitaad Caraga: Drivaway: TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE: TOTAL PROPERTY IN ZONE: HARDCOVER PECENTAOE: ♦♦Raviaad hardoovar incraasa 615.0 615.0 0.0 615.0 1,050.0 1,188.0 0.0 1,188.0 1,665.0 1,803.0 0.0 1,803.0 5,300.0 9,300.0 0.0 5,300.0 i 31.4%14.0%0.0%34.0% 138.0 or 2.6%** 1 i HARDCOVER CALCULATIONJORI^HEET SETBACK ZONE! (CISCLS ONE)Cj-7.5,D-^5"250 - UAon(*ovfa IN Zone ^lcxr\ " D r House B« Garaqe c. Driveway 0. Sidewalk Patio/Deck f.Landscape areasUNDERLAIN BYPLASTIC SHEETING G. Other LENGTH WIDTH S.F. . S.P. f % S.F f • Total Hardcover in Zone -S.F Total Property Area in Zone I'' 10.0.00 ».y. [L -O - 4 X100 - —O—^ * •• «•« aS^.._ _ _... .f5C«C<i KARDCOVER CALCULATiOfl HORKSHEET_ setback ione : (c.RCtB 0-75' 250-500' 500-1000' HARDCOVSa IN ZcNS 0\rkr\ O" A. Kouss B. Garags _as ‘*^ X •=A9-g3 «- A S.F."^ L5NOTH 3CJi0.x. )(;?• IQ X- WIDTH S.F. ] • ^3-k_ - _as'-^ -s.f/ • 5 — 3 X fe-O --S.F. f 2,‘?30 • \0-O X •as- fa w -o ... - b&O S.F.-^' S.F.^• =4'. 'i \i-4 X-i«<-o aia_833 c. DftivewAY . S.F. AccsuO^Vc; D. Sidewalk ^e.cVs S.F 3^12 S.F. «.\c^Jll 35 S.F. JaTIO/ fthrC VtCK ' X S.F :2qs_s.f S.F AREAS .UNDERLAIN J BY « —- -*FLASTIC SHEETING _ _ _ jj 4kn— S.F - S.F 6. Other Total Hardcover in Zone - Total Property Area in Zone X100 _ _ _ _S.F S.F k B 3SJ—^ . rs«rO j ■Mlltrffr': AMTVTA funtf ^ r yjt i ■ ri >i«nrra» i-v*.rv»r.«r-«-*yrA*irMACri-WMrd^rk.- r I . HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE! (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' ^(gQ-500^ Ejpmw Hardcover in Zone " 500-1000' k A. House B. Garage Cl Driveway 0. Sidewalk B. Patio/ Deck p .Landscape AREASUNDERLAIN BY plastic SHEETING 6I Other •V m S.P. length WIDTH • Y a S.P. X S.pV ••X fi S.P. X S.P. X S.P. 1 • X X ^ • • — s.i. X m S.P. X S.P. •X S.P. S.P SiPi SiP S.P. S.Pi S.P Total Hardcover in Zone \ f.p Total Property Area in Zone S.P E [T] isgoa ■4{T]_S.^5cO X 100 » \ - • ••.. m 4 - k. ' / C> To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Jeanne A. Mabusthr Building & Zoning Administrator Date: Subject: October 14,‘1992 #1768 Dr. William and Rhonda Omlie, 1860 Shadywood Road - Variances - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinances 1. Section 10.22, Subd. 2. Review of hardcover. 2. 0-75' setback area Allowed = 0 s.f. Existing » 0 s.f. Proposed « 0 s.f. 10,200 s.f. 75-250* setback area » 23,800 s.f. Approved with BuiIding PcCTit 10/iy^2 House " 2,930 s.f. Garage ■ 815 s.f. Driveway * 1,755 s.f. Sidewalk * 150 s.f. Deck Patio a 300 s.f. Concrete steps = 39 s.f. Total ■ 5,989 s.f. or 25.1% Allowed * 9,950 s.f. or 25% Proposed with Plan B Improvements *^2,930 s.f. 951 s.f.* /^2,590 s.f. ^ 226 s.f. ** 231.9 s.f. ^247.2 s.f. (total patio area 547.2 s.f.) ✓^12 s.f.*** 7,188 s.f. or 38:2% -7 'S'I Hardcover increase = 1,199 s.f. or 5% * also Includes 2* north side addition to existing garage ** based on 3' wide walk not 4* as shown on plan *** with 226 s.f. deck 250-500' setback area = 5,300 s.f. Existing = 1,665 s.f. or 31.4% Proposed = 1,803 s.f. or 34% Hardcover increase * 138 s.f. or 2.6% Section 10.25, Subd. 6 (B). for garage addition. Side setback variance required Required Existing Proposed Variance 10' 9' + 6'6" 3'6" or 35% i: Zoning File #1768 October 14, 1992 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Applicants Addendum C - Plat Map D - Property Owners List E - Building Permit 10/1/92 F - Omlie Letter 9/23/92 Submitted with Building Permit Application G-1-2 - Neighbors' Acknowledgement Forms H-1-3 - Site Plan, Hardcover Fact Sheets Approved with Building Permit 1 - Plan B Site Plan Improvements J-1-2 - Hardcover Pact Sheets K - Elevations Description of Request On October 1, 1992 the City Issued a building permit for improvements to existing residence consisting of a partial second story addition, two*-story addition to the south side of the residence structure and an addition to the two—stall garage. Review Exhibits H-1-3 and K, The letter submitted by applicants prior to the issuance of the building permit explains the need to proceed quickly with the structural improvements. The building permit was issued with all improvements meeting the required setbacks and hardcover maintained at 25% within the 75-250* setback area. The Building staff explained to the applicants that it may be very difficult to prove hardships after all pertinent ordinances were satisfied with the Issuance of the building permit. Please review Exhibit B, applicants addendum, submitted with the variance application. It was the intent of the applicants to submit two plans for consideration. Plan A consisted of two curb cuts at County Road and a loop drive layout requiring excessive amounts of fill and the removal of several mature trees on the property. Plan B, Exhibit I, involves the expansion of the existing drive adjacent to the residence providing a turn around also involving excessive filling. In addition, there is an expansion in width of the access drive within the 250-500* setback area. The application involves the installation of decks and patio areas along the lakeshore side of the residence. All of these improvements require hardcover variances. Applicants also seek a 3-1/2* variance to the required side setback for the expansion of the two-stall garage and the third stall addition. Review Exhibits I and J. The improvements result in an increase of 5% in the 75-250* setback area and a 2.6% increase of hardcover within the 250-500* setback area. There is no proposed encroachment of the 0-75* setback area nor will the land F Zoning File #1768 October 14, 1992 Page 3 alterations proposed encroach the lakeshore protected area. Note hardcover facts have only dealt with the comparison of improvements at the time of issuance of recent building permit and Plan B improvements. The driveway expansion proposed with Plan B proposes major filling and grading activities resulting in the installation of two tiers of retaining walls. Note also retaining walls and filling are proposed in the lakeshore yard. Any mature trees to be removed as a result of building permit or Plan B Improvements have already been replanted on property. There is a 50-75* wide grassed drainage corridor that runs along the south side of the property. The area receives the majority of runoff from the local watershed. The major filling required for Plan B improvements will call for a separate conditional use permit review as filling activities cannot be connected to the building permit as protection of frost footings or providing positive drainage from foundation. Please note retaining wall hardcover was not included in the hardcover facts. The City Engineer will be asked to review the filling and grading plan submitted with the conditional use permit to ensure there is no impact on the historic drainageway that serves the area. Prior to applicant submitting a formal CUP application, it is necessary for the Planning Commission to determine if variances are to be granted. Issues for Consideration Applicant proposes a 5% Increase in hardcover improvements within the 75-250* setback area. What improvements are acceptable and if variances are to be granted, what percentage is acceptable? 136 s.f. of garage expwnsion « .6% 835 s.f. increase in paving improvements = 3.5% 231.9 s.f. of deck to replace former deck at 168 s.f. 247.2 s.f. of additional patio area = 1.04% .97% Description of Hardship Refer to applicants' addendum. Exhibit B, specifically the paragraphs dealing with the hardship statement and findings for Plan B improvements. / ✓ r Zoning File #1768 October 14, 1992 Page 4 Options of Action Approval of an amended application limiting hardcover improvements within the 75-'250* setback area to the following improvements ......... If expanded drive improvements are accepted, table variance application until a conditional use permit is filed, Denial of variance application as proposed. Isv I To:Chairman Kelley and Planning Commission Members Mayor Peterson and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator 7. From:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:November 10, 1992 Subject:#1786 Dr. William R. and Rhonda T. Omlie, 1860 Shadywood Road - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance Section 10.03, Subd. 21 • Applicant proposes grading and filling activities in excess of 100 cubic yards that cannot be connected to building construction. Applicant proposes the filling of approximately 300-400 cubic yards. List of Bxhibits A - Application B - Property Owr.ars List C - Plat Map D - Gustafson Letter E - Topographic-Survey F - Elevation of Walls Description of Request Applicant has filed a separate conditional use permit to allow the filling needed to complete paving improvements proposed in hardcover variance application #1768 (review Exhibit E). The amended driveway plan will require 300-400 cubic yards of fill. The filling will result in 271 s.f. of paved area and approximately 238 s.f. of retaining wall needed to support newly defined earthen bank. The land alteration will require the installation of two tiered retaining walls adjacent to paved improvements to be installed at a maximum 3* height and to be constructed of decorative masonry block (review Exhibits E and F). Please review Exhibit D, the Engineer's report. Note that the improvements will not significantly impact or alter drainage in the area. Gustafson does ask that more detail of the wall design be provided with the application for a land alteration permit and at the time of construction to verify driveway grades and drainage elevations conform to the plan approved by the City. Staff would also ask that final grading plan also Include erosion control. Erosion control must be installed prior to applicant's contractor bringing in fill to the site. It is Imperative that grassed drainageway to south that drains directly to the lake be free from sediment or loose soils that may erode into the lower elevations of the drainageway. Zoning Pile #1786 November 10, 1992 Page 2 Options of Action Denial, based on need to Increase hardcover within the 75 250* setback area over the allowed 25%, Approval of the conditional use permit that would allow an additional 300-400 cubic yards of fill to be installed on site to allow for approximately 271 s.f. of additional paved drive and 238 s.f. of retaining walls to support earthen bank. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Upon application for a land alteration permit, final grading plan must be eunended to include the following: A. Type of erosion control. B. Detail on retaining wall. 2. Prior to installation of drive. City staff must confirm that elevations conform to final drainage plan approved by City. Cli-Y OF ORONO - GENERAL LA^;D USE APPLICATIQN;' JPi J . }) O _____________________________________---------------14-----—-r------ PROPERTY LOCATION // Ij ^ T^C~l \j^Cx.^-‘ ZT —w* w' w ^ I n - 11-7 - js .0-.I CCI9. Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. applicant Phone Thorne) Name I. ’r.-lig Phone (work) Wo~ Tcsa£ Address \^Un T.~g-^rr^ ____Zip_SSS2i OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Ncime Phone Address City Zip gndor.(igil°a;trown fees - CONDITIONAL USB PERMITS - $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application $125.00 Residential accessory Use ^_____ $175.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _______ $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _ _ _ _ S250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain - ^ « Mm 9 m ^ J______ ini _ OT^ RlOir6 CITY OF DFm FIHAHCE OFFICE 1250200000^ .01 GEM 200. i CHECK TL 200.C RtCEm-THAMK YOU M256SSC cool HOI Tl: 10/2: i ^ GSding,^seawail\^7etainAag^ SftMn%5‘ of lakeshora PRD/PID — see fee schedule .i Renewal Pee - 5100.00 (no change from Aft«-thc-Fact Fee - Double Current Applies .ion Fee OTHER APPUCATIOTS^ Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) - - - - $250.00 Vacation- - - - $175.00 Easement Vacation $ 75.00 Easement Vacation rt^crhedule) - - - - $300.00 Rezoning (PUU ®$300.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment $100.00 Appeals ^ ^ Other - see fee schedule ke._R. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning DistriCw Present Use of Property ■>(_ _ _ Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST 2>0C ^ tf00 Describe request in detail:. -a ----mr^------------------------------------- --------------- o r\OC^ ■_______________________________________________________ ^ To / «/2. >/3. 4. 5. 6. 7. UIRED SUBMITTALS Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350* (you can obta this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Governme Center 348-3271). Plat Map. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if lane alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. I YOU ARB REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A NORKING COPY (11” X 17” OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS 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 oi 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 supplied is true and correct to the /best of^^s/her knowledge. Date //>/c? / /9Applicant's signatur _______ OflNBRS 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, Council members for purposes of investigation and Owner's signature jion numbers, councix Date /c/q / / Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are 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 agent attend in your place and advise the Building s Zoninc Office of this change prior to the meeting. -w;^ 4^ RUN DATE OVOe/92 DATCH DOS <^1 \ t»' DROP ADOR OKNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR SS 17-117-2S 2A 0002 01075 SIIAOYHOOO RO CAN TIUOTSON GLENN R TIUOTSON 1075 SHADYHOOO RO NAYZATA NN 55591 (7^ PROP ADOR OHTCR. NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 30 17-117-25 29 0007 01055 SHADYHOOO RO NARK R SALDEN NARK n SALDEN loss SHADYHOOO RD HAYZATA HN SS591 ■>7c 1 PROP ADOR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 50 17rll7-25 29 0015 01020 SHADYHOOO RD TAP SCHERBER T L A P P SCHERBER 1020 SHAOYTIOOO RO HAYZATA HN 55591 PROP ADOR OlOIER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR 30 17-117-25 29 0010 01090 SIIAOYHOOO RD N R A R T OHLIE HILLIAH A RHQNOA OHLIE 1090 SHADYHOOO RD HAYZATA MN 55591 • V * • —»• • * ^ ‘ A * •P . . • * ' *.- •• • • ‘_ _ I . • • • . . • i% ,» •, • • HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 0IO4ERS LIST REPORT NO. PI955901 PAGE 9 F)50 17-117-25 29 0005 00050 ADDRESS IRIASSIGNED G R TILLOTSON/N A TILLOTSON GLENN R TILLOTSON 1075 SHADYHOOO RD HAYZATA W 55391 50 17-117-23 29 0009 01000 SHAOYHOOD RO OURHOOO A TAYLOR OLGA H TAYLOR 1000 SHAOYHOOD RO HAYZATA IW 55391 rp]50 17-117-25 29 0000 01095 SHADYHOOO RD D J CORPORATION GLENN TILLOTSON 1075 SHADYHOOO RO HAYZATA NN 55591 50 17-117-25 29 0019 00050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO COFFEE LAN01N6S COFFEE LANDINGS 9722 H FAIR HILLS RO MINNETONKA NN 55595 r , J 50 17-117-23 29 0019 /(O ■ 01090 SHADYHOOO RO " JOHN J BURKE ETAL JOHN J BURKE 1090 SHAOYHOOD ROAD HAYZATA MN 55391 (P)50 17-117-23 29 0017 01059 SHAOYNOOO RD NAD SEIFERT JR HILTON H SEIFERT JR 1B59 SIIAOYHOOO RD HAYZATA IM 55591 /! )''I / V rV. /•*• . 09)50 17-117-23 29 0019 01090 SHAOYHOOD RO. V J CASTACNA A N J CASTAGNA VANESSA J A NEIL J CASTAGNA 1090 SHADYITOOO RO HAYZATA Itl 55591 TOTAL BATCH 005 00011 OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLCDGE AND BELIEF.. . DATE % bhmmIh ■firrainiaKrarfi^ril ritf-MH'ifdirir •• r I Bonestroo Rosene AnderllkA |\J| Associates Engineers & Architects Otto G Bonettroa PE W Bosene PE • Josech c Arxierlfk PE V^*\ r L Scr.jj <»£ E P£ G ern R CoOK PE T**c'*'aj E Nc>^s **E RcCea G PE Susjn M Et)er'*n C P ^ •Sei^<y Consultant w<^va»d A Sanliord PE ice<h A Go'Oon P£ Rooerr R Pfeffene rs Rc^'arJ X ccsre» PE Oav<3 O LcsM:ta ®£ Rooe': C Russek A i Jerry A BocrsSon PE Mark A Hansen PE M*cnael T Rajtn-tjnp PE Ted ic E e« PE Thomas R Anderson. A l A Oorvlid C Burgardt PE Thomas E Angus. PE lynaei Mamnez. PE M<haei P Pau PE A^es V R AIC P Thomas W Petrson PE Michael C Urxh PE Ja'T'es R Va*and PE D Pp^sch PE •Cepneth P Anorson PE Mar^ R Rots. PE Mark A SetO PE Gary X Morifn PE Danifi j Ejgerton PE Daryl K Kaschcnman PE Philip j Ca$v\rfl PE Mark D Wa tis. PE M».es B Jensen. PE L Ph«ao G^ave ’ in PE kaTh t W/e'^n. PE Gary 0 KrTsroMz. P£ F Todd Fotfer PE Keth R vappL PE Shawn D Gusra^on i Cecto Okvief PE ChariesA E«<kson Leo M PaM^tSky Harfan M Ofsor* James F Engemardl November 4, 1992 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 I^OV 5 1992 Re: #1786 Omlie CUP Our FUe 139-1787 Dear Jeanne: We have reviewed the survey of the Omlie property on Lots 27 and 28 in the Shadywood subdivision. The site is located on Shadywood Road (County Road No. 29 & 51) along the west shoreline of Crystal Bay. The survey shows the proposed circular driveway and two- tier retaining wall. We have only general engineering comments that pertain to the improvements. An inspection should be made at the time of construction to verify the driveway grades and drainage conform to the plan. The retaining wall appears to be adequate but a detail of the wall design should be provided our review. The improvements do not significantly impact or alter the drainage in the area. Please contact this office if you have any questions. Y our very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. ii L-f * Shawn D. Gustafson. P.E. SDG:lk 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 I X r>| ------- J X 1 = ' CX CX 3 CD 3 r* XX >. O f\>CP o o o s V = » r rt <-»■ CD CD k c. '£ vi 3 Ut O)^ o* o o> H- — *0 O r¥ Ql 1rkerr /e t f . rf 3 rt -P 3 CX 3S: CD P T f“ rt cp CD O 2 3 1 O rf O CP:o 3 n rf • rV5 rf CXj 3 rt• . y ►— CP cn CO CX •— O H- -h P CD to c/> •—• p w« p.1 3 rt CP 3 O 3 3 O r- fD 3Ql fP • -! ;o rp t/) • C73 fiooo 3 O ►-•I-------h P- 3 Oi (P 3 3 -n rp o. 3 (Oto 0 </> r- r- rf c 01 -1 o o < • • o o on • • tA %J> IV O V. cn oi ‘S' Oo *T1 T| cn;oo 00m CTi o O CO rf 3* CO -5 oi a> c *0 Q. *-»• Ip C *< Ql n « Oj -00—3 O O U1 CDu n CX “*<-♦ - O (P O rf Ql (D 1 O 3 r-t* 1 CX IP l/l CT O 3 rt CP rf 0 3 »-•c rp 3 -1 lO CP Oh- *0 €-► O 3 -J 3 O CD P P Q» CP l/> 1 r** to CP • C 3 O n cH- 3 3 P Ql O CX rt O H-. O Ql O < rt 3 CP Ql 3 — -5 O CP H— 3 (O cH- CP 3 Ql in X r* (/) 0 00 Ql C 1 rt 3 -J ►-•CO < CP 3 •— CD 3 CO P ^ O to -J 3 O Ql ►-• -S O ►— O c-C* 3 CQ. 3 3 3 ►— CO CD 3 rt 3 CO 3 3 rt CO P O iA C, • Ql 3 3 3 O CX CX n CP rC* 1 Ql 3 ►— CD ■ .'V'..CX ►— CO ’ A '■■ k -41 .•^ ■ . V. 1 ►—3 0 s,- : •< P -h P 1 ro 73.2 j: n 0 X C 5’ 5 24.0 H 19.S ^3 <r 2C.0 45.0 49.0 :■■■ • . ^- tin- • • • • ■ » •• ••«•• *4 JlitUi<«kMLV.Mti>li^_____ » PTOPOSEp HCTAINING WAUS CROS^ SECTIONS * • • • • • »« •• •• •. •-• J4Z 2.0 pr. Att.Ufdki ?-</ • • • r S'..' If, U^all St SAn/tuyAf 'll I'""fJ9 at. tf/4^L 938 • • • •• •• <«#• .-• «*• •»«««••>*•«»• -•••.« «w «»«• • »• •• « • • «•••• •»«•• •• • < • • • w • • > . .4 . . , 2' SOA. • • . «• •Mi ' - 2.<? /=/: A<r, coall w 934 ; 93J • . • • ^4» • • • P • * M »• « 4« •« • 4 -------i^A^L...sr. SAr/p...^.• • ^ 4 >»^ • •• *• *i- « •»M*« •>•*• •'OTM 1 ■ — • W't — ■ auM •••• COFFIN A GRONBERG, INC. \ 4 1 t :<i ■J •f •fc-.,. f, • L TO:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Council . FROM: DATE: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator November 12, 1992 SOnJECT: #1775 Robert Luesse, 3249 Casco Circle - Variances - Continuation of Public Hearing Status of Application - At the October Planning Commission meeting applicant was advised to amend his improvement proposal with the specific direction to reduce the number and intensity of variances required. Applicant hvs submitted amended proposal showing major reductions in hardcover and proposed structural improvements. The following variances will be required: Section 10.3 Subd. 14 (D), Oversized Accessory Structure proposed at 1,273 sq ft subject to oversized accessory structure setback. A.Street setback required = 30' Existing = 30' Proposed = 19' Variance = 11' or 36.% B.Side street setback required - 30' Existing » 3' Proposed = 3' Variance » 27' or 90% Section 10.3 Subd. 9 (C)(2), Variance oversized accessory structure. to all owed Total area of property at Allowed Proposed Variance s 15,890 sq ft a 1,000 ./q f » 1,273 sq ft » 273 sq ft or 87.3% Section 10.3 Subd. 14 (C), Lot Coverage. Total lot area Allowed Existing Original proposal Amended proposal Variance or 1.3% 15,893 sq ft 2,384 sq ft or 15% 1,858 sq ft or 11.6% * 3,344 sq ft or 21% 2,604 sq ft or 16.3% 225 sq ft or 1.3% ♦ Structure described as dock storage structure has been eliminalted from lot coverage calculations os structure is classified as grade level platform located below 929.4 elevation. ,* •6 M- — File #1775 Robert G. Luesse, 3249 Casco Circle page 2 Section 10.22 Subd. 1, Average lakeshore setback required for proposed lakeside addition to existing residence that encroached into average lakeshore setback by approximately 15'. Section 10.22 Subd. 2, Review of hardcover facts. A.0 - 75' setback area Existing = 4,125 sq ft s 842 sq ft or 20.4% Note 168 sq ft of platform has been removed from hardcover as it is located below the 929.4 elevation B. 75-250' setback area s 11,200 sq ft Existing =26.25 sq ft or 26.25% Original proposal =4,164 sq ft or 37.2% Amended proposal -3,542 sq ft or 31.6% C. 250-500' setback area 568 sq ft Existing =184 sq ft or 32.4% Propsed =184 sq ft or 32.4% List of Exhibits A. Application B. Applicant's Addendum C. Amended Site Plan D. Survey E. Hardcover Key F. 0-75' Existing/Hardcover G. 7‘.‘-250' Existing/Proposed Hardcover H. 250-500' Existing/Proposed Hardcover I. Diegre Letter 10/28/92 J. Neighbor's Acknowledgement Forms and Letters K. Floor Plans - Garage and Workshop L. Elevations - Garage/Workshop/Principal Structure Addition Review of Amended Proposal The amended proposal consists of a 22 X 28' addition to be attached to the west side of the existing workshop structure and an 8 X 6' greenhouse addition to be attached to the southeast of the workshop. The original 15 X 36' lakeside addition to the principal structure has been reduced to 15 X 16 1/2'. Review Exhibits C and L. Please note the proposed lakeside addition is 2 story. Mr. Luesse has advised staff that the original 36 X 15' addition was also to be a 2 story rather than enclosed porch placed on post. J File #1775 Robert G. Luesse, 3249 Casco Circle page 3 The additions to the workshop will create an oversized accessory structure at 1,273 sq ft requiring the most restricitive of setbacks for the detached structure. The property at approximately 15,000 sq ft would have been allowed an oversized accessory structure of 1,000 sq ft. Applicant has reduced hardcover within 75 - 250' from original proposal and has also reduced lot coverage (original at 21%, amended at 16.3%). The issue now is the multiple variances requried to approve additions to existing detached workshop. The foundations of all additions to the existing workshop must be compatible and meet requirements of the building code. As structure is located 3* from side line and approximately 6* from the neighboring property's detached garage, the State fire code will call for special fire wall construction where necessary. Issues for Consideration 1.What existing structural or non-structura1 improvement may be removed within the 0-75' or 75- 250' setback area. Has applicant's amended plan reflected adequate removals? 2.Once again the question, has to be raised as to future use of workshop structure. Is it heated or is heating planned. Does structure contain plumbing or is plumbing proposed. Is this structure currently insulated or proposed to be insulated? 3.Can the oversized accessory structure be trimmed back? Can the 28' depth be reduced? - - minimizing street setback variance and area variance to oversized accessory structure. If garage addition is to be moved 7' to meet side setback of 10 applicant will have to plantings. remove several mature Statement of Hardship Please review Exhibit B, Mr. Luesse's written statement submitted with the amended proposal. Please note Mr. Luesse has also met with Mr. Diegre, the neighbor who voiced major concern with the proposed improvement of the workshop area. Mr. Diegre has viewed the amended application and gives approval of the project as long as the pitch of the roof of the workshop does not exceed 4 1/2 to 12 as proposed. File #1775 Robert G. Luesse, 3249 Casco Circle page 4 Options of Action Denial of amended proposal or approval as proposed or as amended. Any condition of approval must include the following: 1. Upon application for a building permit^ applicant shall provide an updated survey locating all structures on property. 2. All nev construction shall be subject to requirements of Uniform Building Code and Fire Code. 3. Workshop/garage/greenhouse addition shall be constructed at a 4 1/2 to 12 pitch. ___-___fi I laifiin Til nnii^iSi • i wWjJjW r t77i / - CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no chance from ori^i^^i application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 3^4 9 ClKCL£ Property Identif. Number (P.I.D.) 36 2.0- //7- Z3 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. i~oT fz SFKtNa FAkk Date Property AeaTiired^_SUWMg.i». (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X residential _ _other (specify) Zoning District MmxcKsn Phone fhome) Name _____ Phone fwork) ^73 - ^ Mdressi CA^CO Cie.Ci.&. Zip:_f£i!Z (if different than applicant>Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $. D..crlb« r.q«..t in detail! Z CAB- ~ '^7" CfF.seUMoOfE. To U)CK.K^Hof^ - 4- SCAS cn • VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width K Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback: K Front X Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) BARDSHIP/DBSCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual propert conditions preventing compliance with Zoning STcer SLOPS K£ou/pss stfoctofe to PRgfCNr lMPto\je.f^S BofLr PPfoe. To SerBACk. 4- f/MnPcouS£- AOP*T/ONAL l.ANr> Al/AILA^L£ 7'0 A*P COMPL^ ----------— ■—-------- ' t ( *7 V7^ // . / -y/ - ?/t M. &(attach additional sheets if necessary) All of the following infomation must be siabni tted by—the ap plicati on in order for yoar application to be considered CvJH|;>letes 1. X Completed Application Form ^ w*. • 2. y Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150 (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. X Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. X Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8%''xll for reproduction). 5. VA Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any chang in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8>s"xll''). 6. X Slcetches or olans of floor & elevation views (provide 1 copy 8*j xll ). irjJAfiS an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour variance application is not complete if 'the h«a not been included. APPLICIUrr'S SI6HATURE 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 consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her Icnowledge. Applicant's Signature (/<iHkH^^Date 7-, OmZRS SIGHATURE , . ^ The owner hereby aclcowledges and agrees to this application and rurtner authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. liU A ■ D.t.Owner's Signature___ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are he third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all ecnedu^l^ review meetings of the Planning CoBission aind Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please maJce arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building fi Zon g Office of this change prior to the meeting. c.r.' c= ] Uli c-c^.c__, L= L; 'V-'' !-^ IU Amendment to -.. Variance Application #1775 fHnw' '% R G. Luesse - 3249 Casco Circle, Orono fWOV O I akpshore Zone 0 - 75* This lakefront has a very steep slope to the water's edge. Access to the lake requires a continuous stair to a landing at the water’s edge which serves as dock storage in winter. About one-fourth of the way down the hill (hidden from neighbors' houses and lake shore) we have an open deck that is our only usable lakefront. This deck and the stair are elevated enough to permit plant growth beneath. All construction is surface supported. This avoids disturbing the soil that might trigger erosion. The entire steep slope has been treated to prevent erosion. A series of timber and/or field stone retailing walls hold tb.i hill in place. I continue to experiment with plantings that will grow in the shade, have aggressive root systems and serve to slow down the runoff. Our efforts have been very effective. We liaven’t had any visible erosion in the 38 years we’ve lived here. Properties immediately adjacent on both sides have each had two major mud slides during that period where large segments of their hillside slid into the water. The next propertes adjacent to those have each had one mud slide in that period - washing out stairs and covering the beach area with mud. All of the properties along this frontage of the bay, except ours, have an eartli shelf at the lake shore, created by the material that was cleaned up from the beach following mud slides. Because we have protected against erosion we Iiave no usable yard area at the lake. As a result of this unusual circumstance we find that our structural solutions are essential for reasonable use of the lake shore. B.nMah1pZnne-75'to250’ The hard cover on this area is already substantial. This circumstance has been mitigated substantially by the way the property has been graded. Starting at the top of the steep slope near the lake, the lot continues to rise another 15 feet to the street (Casco Circle). Before we built this was a continuous slope toward the southeast. By judicious grading, I have estabUshed three separate and nearly flat plateaus which are mostly lawn and plantings. This retards the fast runoff tfiat would otherwise occur. In addition, I am a proponent of organic gardening. I haven't applied fertilizer or weed killer to my lawn and garden for years. Instead, I use composted yard and garden refuse and sphagnum peatmoss to condition the soil and hand labor to control the weeds. I do not use plastic sheeting or fabric f r weed control in my landscaping. I am making a concerted effort to protect the • »ke and to enhance the environment. In response to the Commission's concern about hard cover, I have reduced the size of the addition to our residence from 382.5 sq. ft. to 82.5 sq. ft. and reduced the greenhouse addition from 80 sq. ft. to 48 sq. ft. We have also reduced the garage from 3 stalls to 2 stalls and moved the location of the garage from the south side of the lot to the north side where it will be attached to the workshop. This provides for direct access from the street and reduces the amount of hard cover on the unimproved right*of-way. It also has the added advantage of not obstructing hre access to the house should the need arise. Worksl In my original application I proposed a second story addition to the workshop. At the request of my immediate neighbor to the north (Mr. Diegre), I have removed that h:om my applicatioa Attached is a letter from Mr. Diegre stating that he has no objections to my amended application including the new roof for the workshop providing the pitch does not exceed 41/2 to 12. I have provided drawings of the proposed new roof at 41/2 -12 pitch to Mr. Diegre and enclose same with this application. I have also enclosed drawings of the other improvements proposed as well as letters of approval from other adjacent neighbors. We request that you approve our application as amended herein i»i -1 » fc » 'I L/ X ►- ft- m r St i PhoMt Ght«nweod.9*l3S2 ARLEIGH C. SMITH Re^titrtd Proietiioiial Engintar and Land Survayor 1I21S WayiatA Bpulavtfd Waytali* MIbiimpu PLAT or SURVEY OP PROPERTY OF, dtacrtbcd ts foUovs: ■ Cc- U-uns s fii-------trr X c -----Ljxa^—n. ■ Syp.tuT.. ----------------------- Scalt: 1 lff( h dUL CERTinCATE OP L0CAT20H OP BUlLDUia I htfcby certify that o n . {*V 1 made a survey of the propoead loeaiioa of ina building on the above descnoed property and that the location of tat4 buUdini i* correctly thown on the above pial. cmrtncATS or auayaY I hereby certify that on—---------- H-TV 1 eurveyed the property deecribed above and that the above plat if, a curract repraaantatioa of said survay. 7 ^ ^ A*"* » y -t • * ^ y y w fi eattdSiSicca.-. i • • ‘3a • C? S - ' Z-ONg. 75' X ffs' - AREA OP 75^- 2.5 '«A X »75 = AR%.A Cl*' 3 X f| I4-IZ5 ZLOMC.• 1 M, £. OO ■SF 1 Z.CXE •5<a&1 S/<f</C\/ isf V* ^ lltlilt iniiaiatii 1 P': k'- HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 7r (77S ~~ ^Af/5 7’-’/V/5> AytitfS-s:, S£T3AC:< ZONE:(circle one) {6-75') 75 -250' 250-500'500- Exis tins H ardcover in Zone A. H ouse _X • • • LENGTH WIDTH Y mm X «» «•» X X 3.Garage X 1 • c.D riveway X X 5 0.Sidewalk X s o ^ThtK To 33,S' _ / 5.X ¥•79 9.5 » 72 s (.Ake Z^.O 9.0 /Z9 X s s E. -J ©D eck X 72.» . 7^2 . s • •• F. Landscape X • 8 s AREAS UNDERLAIN BY X s. PLASTIC sheetins X • • s. X • s. /.^MO^CAFS. nFf9£es fot CON-TgOL ^ 6. Other X.. IS s.• S.F S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. T otal Hardcover in Z one 941 S.F.m Total Property Area in Zone 5rx 75" S.F. S4-Z -L m f X 100 iAtdb HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) (O-^ 75-250' Existing H ardcover in Zone -as^ /7/r - PPOPO^EO 250-500' 5C0-1CC0 A. H ouse LENGTH B. OARAGE c. D riveway © D. Sidewalk To _ LAKE 3 3. 5* / 3. O E. Patio/ D eck /6 p. Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN plastic ’ SHEETING Lahd ^^cape TIMUet For, CoNT«16*— Q G. Other _ _ _3^2. X X X width 5.^ •:.0 /a , 75- Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone *■ 75 r /59 72 /f Z- S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 5.^ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F S.F. S.F. FaS42 S.F. ri 8V2 4 |T| V/2»~ X 100 % #• r' HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET Ampmoeo fr-2^‘f2 SETBACK ZONE: (ciscLE ONE) 0-75' (T5-25^ 250-300' 500-1000' Existing Hardccves in Zone ©CHtMNer A. H ouse /V 36 X . 2. Z4 Z6 364-SiFi © • • POACM LENGTH X _ width /c ss •s.fI X _ • • S.Ft ©VVC>)K»C SHOP 3c.^ 6 X _ zS z o ^4*f. &0 S.F. X _S.F. a. Garage X S.F.• c. D riveway 2.4 _ X 7.0 4SO S.F. © © 1 ^MTtzr S.24 _ X (o • *7 S.F. • D. Sidewalk ./o 7 - X 4 4 26 sTf, 0 CihtOBH tzo . X //30 S.F. 0 AC. Rrt. wall 13 - X 3 .75 3? 36 S.F. ^E. PATIO/ ■Qz) D eck 24 . X S.5 2.04- S.F. @ R&T. WA4.L3 . - Z.O . X . 75" 3 Z •f /4 S.F. areas— UHPBn^^lfl ~ . X . S • Ft -PLAOT!€-• •X • S.F. X •• S.F. 6. Other X *S.F.• Total Hardcover in Zone S.^77 S.F. Total PROPERPf Area in Zone ■ 64X/7f //. z oo Zoii B X 100 27*'!7 A .F. |T % (9 ‘f.ti I iTTttiiliir I ■irt^Tn im i Mrr-’ HARDCOVER CALCULATIOfl WORKSHEET # /7/^- PROph-itzb amenoeI) Tf-z-^fz £T3Ac:< ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' ^-250^250-500' 5CO-1QOO' Existing Hardcover in Zone 6- @ A . H ouse . f4 5 4 X z .7 ze 2'6«/ s.P. • •LEtNGTH WIDTH ©Ex'^r'Hf, PsecH,/6. 5 X /£?35 S.P. 0 Po^CU AVP'TioN / 4. 5 X i^z.5 - \dVL/ 0 X / .5 C? S.F. 0 CrREGN H60 X (o B.f. ® B. ® =• ® ® 0. (7o) G arage 5 5 X ^ "7 S.F.^^-' D riveway /Z.6 X _ 3 57.5- S.F. . Entry X ^S.F. • Sidewalk _ 3c 77 X 2.7 4 Sf ^CS S.F. ' 'c 0 X P ' -r-O S.F. ©t>TM R.+ AC Rer. u Jaul ^ ' -5? X S.F. ©^•1 ?AT-IO/ - D eck ^ iL X i 1 lT S.F. (ip f^S.7. W^llS f.Landscapc .. Zo3 /X .75 3 / • /f- _ S.F. AR€A«~ UWgERUUtr ptAwe- ■SWEETfH©^ S* F • S.F. S.F. G. Other S.F Total Hardcover in Zone 354 z S.F. Total Property Area in Zone • 4*^ X n,zc^c^ S.F. 1 A 3542 -L bLjZl_E££_ X 100 /.6 % - nufinmiiiiillin t 77 ‘T ^ HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIHCLE ONS) 0-75' 75-250 Existing H ardcover in Zone AM£f/7£.0 //-7~f-Z 250-500'J 500-1000' A. House B. Garage . ® c. Driveway @ D. Sidewalk E. Patio / Deck F.Landscape areas UNDERLAIN plastic ’ SHEETING G. O ther LENGTH - X WIDTH Total H ardcover in Zone Total Property A rea in Zone -U K 8 S.F, S.F. S.F, . S.F, S.F. A ^B > /rz S.F S.F. » 32-S.F. S.F. S S.F. S.F. • _ S.F, S.F. • • S.F. « S.F. m S.F. (B4- • S.F. S.F. X 100 ■ •32-'.4'% i ' K L. HARDCOVER CALCULATIOfl WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' ,^50-50(^ 5CQ-1000' Existing Hardcover in Zone /77^^ AM£'WZP • • a . House •X _ • S.F. • •LENGTH X _ WIDTH as S.F. X . • • S.F. •• X «S.F. X _S.F. B.Garage X «a S.F. C.Driveway X _f9 S.F. — X S.F. D.Sidewalk X /»'c.*S.F. X S.F. _ X a S.F. E.?ATIO/Deck _ X S • P f F.Landscape . - _ X •m S.F. AREAS UNDERLAIN BY ,- X S.F. PLASTIC SHEETING•- X • • • S.F. _ X . • SftPt • 6. Other - X a _ S.F.• Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone 7/ X & £ .F, [a] .F. [il /8V -flTl X IQO -% ■r .0 1.a ■i 4 v_ ‘’-i .• ^ » ( • ' d'u ir (.W'O CoM^c^osuoi ^ t^Uff 'br. c.c;s i^ bfr. L .-■£ '-^ Af/?..« i-r,c.V/ A<m A,-.'D i b6 NtT -To THi ‘tv ”"'-''b'T6 ’rfle l-'i«'«-i' 1TK4 ^os^utlcu'.^ a<.r'ci<.t««K (/^Cr- (> V t - V ><54 /d.c ^. *■* ----------- ' ll^iii*-"‘^ *" "5 aiiP*ve>^<~c 6/^^j.<yU!d^ >^&vH •' fj^^AoA!^ 52.43 Ca<2/(io (Ha ■ (2,^'. QAByLA ^oihzH^ . 5^c^a-«fce- - - ........... ...32-44 (HA'------- 1 »•• • ■ ^ 6^*^ jl/^ij^bCyLAUL^ JXjua ..jQ^U©'p^<l<aJ?. LX3 jL pAe^QerO^. ------------------------- -------- -.f' ii ' i ¥ ^:>- •: i. yitkSJir ;*i<. fc? tv k y ■ *• /.yi /G, / L J /. J / /v' /^’i- //”T '^_- r Adjacent Property Owners’ Actoowledgement Porm I (we) r ^ ^c’✓v 7^5-0 ^/r [print name(s)][print address] ^eve reviewed ttie pXs'is for the proposed improvement or proposed use or the property located at 2^**/*7 ^^Vc/<.also rererred to as Land Use Application No. _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asJced to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Property Owner Date I (we) \ (print name(s) J m^lCIA of ^>^1 CA•SC^ Cl(2-G^ [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No. . Z (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to dec 1 are*^pproval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your commenrs to the Building 6 Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. Adjacent Property Ovraers* Ac3cnowledgement Form I (we) CaM^^ of (print neune (s) ][prin. address ] have reviewed property located Application No. _ the plans for the. proposed improvement or proposed use at also referred to as Li of the Land Use “e “prevement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council ap^oval. 9- Date Property Owne 9 - .:i 3 - ? -X Darre <7T > [print name(s)] of -'^^7/ />Afk>D r,i?cie [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed imprc^-ement or proposed use of the pllperty Toca«d It .f-/^^/f^lso referred to as Land Use Application No. » Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in . 4 iima iA’ I ii> :i Adjacent Property Owners' AcJcnowledgeaent Fom I (we)'A.'« cv*s < t Li (print neune (s) ][print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to is Land Use Application No. _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgemenz, I (we) am (are) not asJced to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neigubor's project or use requires Council approval. Date C'.I - Property owner Date 1 (we) [print name(s)][print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ also referred to as Land Use Application No. _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgements I (we) am (are) not asked to dec 1 are~«pproval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Applications please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. ♦ ■1^. If- i' '^ t.- WORK‘5HOr 4 OiR.C.LHHOOSC. FLOOR PLAN ^ CM.« AI/..r i NORTH 1* . .^ a linl ---------- PUOOR Pt^N ■4** ■V n. .'i GAR^6e WEST E.UEYATION :-A iv'. & > • l|Mrni|iiikiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiTi I Li 111.11 ' •5 jrihn , ij -m '-4 e e.L^VAT\OH ly M Ll' ^ V < lil Pi ■1 ■w itftti nrtrliniiiTiii I....(^fclliii iililrf aiii in*iM«iii^-|>ii nwTt-ri ■■ i—■*-**** v& y I • □ IMMitUi ] Rooh - e.KlMIH(> I o«f> - 1 RO«li^ CKPKHOKto POUR SRRSOH i I 1 1 1 — NftM Poon eewcw roRCM ■s1 \#• ROKCR ’f:j <* LU&55C. •Rfe-HPR.HCE. — B.K^T 6-\^e.VATIOK SCAt^ X " ■* ** .-». Ilfliail AlllrillillltlllmTl -Ifl lf»‘-'^^*—"^■***^**^***‘*- - Mill, mil Utamunirtlll iiHIrtBi ^MiViMIllfctlfell 111 ir lii nfcifMiai------- -4 LUtS^»t RtSiPtHCt — HORTH ettVAT^ON >. > * •■1 •«>cM.e /J*. \* mAAIMSAiA ftkaACXa .-a u i Mrtrtii ii iii 11 •. m k !• Hi TO:Planning Commission Chiarman Kelley Orono Planning Commission City Council FROM: DATE: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator November 12, 1992 SUBJECT: File #1777 John Thiesse, 3845 Bayside Road - Variances Public Hearing Pertisent Ordinances Section 10.03 Subd. 14 (C)(exception)- Lot coverage Allowed s 1,500 sq ft Existing 3 1,632 sq ft or 20.5% Proposed a 1,657 sq ft or 20.8% Increase =25 sq ft or .3% Section 10.22 Subd. 1, average lakeshore setback for slight encroachment by three season porch. Review Exhibit K. Section 10.22 Subd. 2 75 - 250' setback area Existing Proposed Hardcover reduction * Approved Res. #2812 a a 4,424 sq ft 2,230 sq ft or 50.4%* 1,997 sq ft or 45% 233 sq ft or 5.4%* Section 10.23 Subd. 6 (B) Zoning District - Required setbacks - LR - 1 A A. Street setback Required a 50' Existing garage a 7* Proposed entry =21* Variance a 29' or 58% B. North side setback Required a 50' Existing entry step 8 7'* Proposed a 10' Variance North side a 20' or 66% * Entry step to be removed? - hardcover facts, floor plan and elevations do not account for entry steps. File #1777 John Thiesse, 3845 Bayside Road page 2 C. South right side setback Required Existing Proposed Variance 30' 18.2' 18 • 2 ' 1i!8' or 39.3% List of Exhibits A. Al. B. C. D. E. Application Applicant's Addendum Plat Map Property Owner's List Existing Survey Proposed ‘Survey Fl-3 Hardcover Fact Sheets G. Harren Letter 11/2/92 Hl-3 Elevations I. First Floor - Plan J. Second Floor - Plan K. Aerial Map - Average Lakeshore Setback Description of Request The applicant proposes a second story addition over the existing 24 X 34' building envelope. A 12' X 14' three season porch is proposed in the northeast corner of the present lakeside deck area and a two story 5X5' entry addition is proposed to the street side of the existing residence. Refer to Exhibits F., Hl- 3f I and J. Applicant proposes a 5.4% reduction in hardcover by removing approximately 233 sq ft of non-structural hardcover. There is a slight encroachment of the average but because of the curved shoreline there neighbor to south's view of lake. lakeshore setback is no impact on Setback variances are required for the intensifation of the structure where ever a substandard setback is shown. This would include both north and south side yards and street yard. There is no hardcover within the 0-75' setback area. Please refer to ExhibitsD and G, the Barren's letter. It appears the side entry steps are located 7' from the side lot line rather than encroaching Outlet A jointly owned by both Martens and Evans. Outlet A is a riparian access outlet created in the Bayside Landing Plat for shared access for the owners of Lots 1 and 2. Mrs. Harren has advised both staff and the applicant of their concern for the potential liability as joint owner of r File #1777 John Thiesse, 3845 Bayside Road page 3 property. Staff has asked Mr. Thiesse to provide additional survey information to clarify the actual location of the north lot line. At a site inspection staff met with Mr. Thiesse who located the iron markers shown on survey. Mr. Thiesse advises he is in the process of reviewing the County's records to determine if there is any problem. Applicant has advised that he would be willing to purchase additional land from the owner. Staff has also advised of the limitations on such an acquisition because of the need to maintain specific areas of the property to allow for continued shared use of the riparian outlot. Staff has revi«<wed the preliminary survey prepared for the Bayside Landing application and note there is no encroachment of the Thiesse steps shown in the Gronberg surveys. Mr. Thiesse has also advised that he will agree that there will be no use or encroachment by builders of the odhacent outlot at the time of construction. The Thiesse residence will soon be served with sewer. A building permit can not be issued for any bedroom expansions until the house is connected to sewer. Statement of Hardships Please refer to applicant's addendum and application form Exhibits A and Al. ?i '}«I CITY OP ORONO — VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 •($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non conforming use $200.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application •4 I .ST-. J • V •• /;> t / 4*. Cr .1!/3 njTY #*/*f*Wi*II wi i.v\uitw^ c r ncc^TT t Wf J A U-. 2350200000 fee) if: RECEIPT-JHAS'K H256360 cool ROi : 10.- PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address BAYSlO^ ^AQ Pi^operty Identif. Number (P«1«^^ ^ ^ ^ CO^« Attach legal description to application if not included on required ^rvey. Property Acquired_ _ _7 “Date Property_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (month/year) I (do)^o not)Jal~80 own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property:' X residential _ Zoning District;_ _ _L ^ I ^_ _ _ _ _ other(specify) APPLICANT Neune Jr./-MUi/£25£ Phone fhomel ~ Phone (wor)c) ^"70’^0/0_ Address:JG,0 City: Zip OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ /clTO C.C.Cj OC.i Describe request in detail: V 70 :rncrJ -jo - - - VARIANCES required Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage ^Setback:Front Side Rear Average Ladceshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DBSCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty and unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code r^uiremCTts.. (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the followin<T information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be considered complete; 1« y Completed Application. Form 2. X Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. k Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. y Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required (provide one (1) copy 8%"xll" for reproduction). 5. _ _^Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed (provide one copy 8%"xll"). 6. y S)cetches or plans of floor & CjeTevation vlew^ (provide 1 copy 8*i"xll'*) 7. _ks an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. __^Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above infomation has not been included. 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 consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her Icnowledge. Applicant's Signature Date OMHBRS SIGNATDRB The owner hereby -acJcowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for pui^poses of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature __Date Z. Applicant must have ail submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the PlanndLng Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please maJce arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building 6 Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. Ak: BP ^~y '!]•- ^ w' Lha. U 9 d : ^iTM Tit ^ • \fOiAXOi/^(Ju Qa/mal^C^7Tt/yiU/U<U^ [tm 9 JLsge ^l^o^extum OJC 'bS'^S CO' Hok KjtAjb joi^^ae/ufe^ od^ (ju»X a/v^ h ch. %A^ irj^-tta ^hLOjpuJ^. ^ l^ct^Ua4. tWt\ tAt {Q mX U amIm. O^U a, j^Ju Ll 01^^ '-^aa. ^youat. b> -imO tlost idu. hUiUkii /\s>AidM\a .JitAji i Wi. p^jitru^ 'U -tXiuL AtdjL (Ust ''>HyK''d/AC(. U(£, f\f jhiku ~ym^i^AxiMy c*(^ •QutiL. witL "Iia- io (Xji^UAAi ~h u/^ tAl .XuhXAt JuAha ch. (w^^^aai^cahA^ et '~tn/lA*A- ^Ui o/vw^, yTjo/lmseA^ ihiM^—' Aiadk^ t^wui %JC M^. SS5S?P >■-■>■..W>WA. Vii t^fKt^kS*, ----------------------- «^ -■-inii ■ ■ iiirTjryii I CiTVCf crcmo ir^iu October 28, 1992 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 ;0CT 2 8 1SS2 RE: LAND USE APPLICATION NO. 1 777 Dear City Planners: In 1988, Sherri and I had been married for ten years and had no children. We purchased a house in Ghono that would satisfactorily accorrunodate our lives. Sitice that time our family has nown. Our second child is due in January. The house we live in has a little more than 800 square feet of living area on the main level. This area includes two bedrooms and the only bathroom in the house. Our family is very hrqrpy where we live, but our house is too small for us. Our lot is below present city standards for size^ therefore I believe that the only reasonable dhectioii for expansion is up. By placing a second stoiy over the existing die entrances, substantial reduction in hardcover can behouse and relocating , .... accomplished. Two areas of the vanance request pronose intensification of existmg hardcover. In both cases, I cite "life in Minnesota" as the hardship. The first mtensification of hardcover is a small entw over the tront step that acts as a combination air-lock to die outside/connecting link uom the house to the garage. This small entry would keep the north wind of wmter out of the main part of the house as doors are opened. The second intensification of hardcover is a porch covering half of the existing deck. This porch would allow us to enjoy the summer evenings without being eaten by mosquitoes. The remainder of the proposed expansion is adding another level under the existing roofline. I have discussed this request for variance with my two most immediate neijghbors, Ms. Peggy Peterson and Ms. Cindy Rowlette. Neither of these neighbors have objections to my proposal. I thank you for your consideration of my request. Please advise if additional information is needed. Sincerelv, John B. Thiesse 4*. *£)4r4 m t »a (21) SF777(T2) (23) (To N» 1 8 p ' r’-’» 2i X. kikt >f\ iii 5 5 18129) f 26) i a a it(28) a .,,/' <6 a o : its ia ; 15 (27) « * • 1 *, 1 V * .^- ____ - M67*» (12) N89'35'4I"i 575, ifr '-"t'i t N- ^E 50 130 (l6«) « - ft ^ (34) « 533.?? S .?9I 5?9 43 5 <«)/] 8 «)M X 4/^ ,:2 :.’) -s Ml •‘ 6 to\•/ 7 9 . •35 .e I3J •5 /•(115)' 14 .'2 13 / 1?i>LU) S V 15 ~ L.. 1(39) i — .X.I i *M4 3 • •• 13 . 10 (118)' 9 ll*) • !3? 15 /1 14/\ 2 « g3[/r ••:* 3 M * r\r (12) 5 yi.>s (13) 6 5ie.06 (14) T 514. ?r (15) e 510.48 ( 16) 8 506 ’ (17) '0 409 I II (16) 6' 463.6 (19) M 445 14 jlUBBS ^ RUN DATE 10/22/92 flENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 1 38 05-117-23 23 0006 PROP ADDR 3845 BAYSIDE RO OWNER NAME J B THIESSE & S A THIESSE TAXPAYER JOHN B & SHERRI A THIESSE NAME/ADDR 3845 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 r’-: 3^: V 38 05-117-23 23 0010 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME D & K DIANIS TAXPAYER DAVID DIANIS NAME/ADDR 579 N E PLANTATION RD #410 N STUART FL 34996 38 05-117-23 24 0111 PROP ADDR 3775 BAYSIDE RD OWNER NAME G R & CE ROWLETTE TAXPAYER GERALD L ROWLETTE NAME/ADDR 3775 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 k 1-/m 38 05-117-23 23 0007 3855 BAYSIDE RD PEGGY PETERSON PEGGY PETERSON 3855 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 23 0008 3865 BAYSIDE RD D & K DIANIS DAVID DIANIS 579 N E PLANTATION RO STUART FL 34996 #410 N 38 05-117-23 23 0034 255 LANDMARK DR A H EVANS & D EVANS AUSTIN H & DIANE EVANS 1405 KINGSVIEW LA PLYMOUTH MN 55447 38 05-117-23 23 0035 A H EVANS & D EVANS AUSTIN H & DIANE EVANS 1405 KINGSVIEW LA PLYMOUTH MN 55447 TW j J- I 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 DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF DATE ^^1 slkilu i.1 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ome) 0-75'(jS-TS^ 250-500' 500-1000 Existing Hardcover in Zone A. ■ House _34 X ,Z4 s • /..c, W:- ^ ■ %LENGfH WIDTH r 1 •£Ajmr X .a ‘ ZS ' s.F. /Z X ./4 a • /2>2 '/s.P. m X .s S.F. X 31 S.F. B.GAf^AGE 20 X 24 a 4SO /s.F. C.Driveway X 20 240 /s.F. —• X • • S.F. D..Sidewalk 2 X 4 S . S.F. 4 X 20 a ' S.F. ^;v/2ey . - X a s.F. E. ,?at I o/ Deck - X /z /s.F. p.Undscape _ X ._ S.F. AREAS UNDERLAIN BY X S.F. PLASTIC SHEETING •X • • S.F. X S.F. G. Other 2 X /2 ^ s.F. CW//rtAj^ i i Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone /*99 7 s.F. ^^2.9_ s.F.B 0—22iZ_4 B X 100 -is i% S-tCK ■ -m,. .lit 1 ihiiiiiMm-rtwiii-iJfirIff-firmitiriMiiT , ^ Z*' • *;.*. *•*:*7.'^rr v:*.* £A^(M4m> ^iC -5?^^. ^ , ^esc^,^26/z I •.*. ■•• % 21.-.-•••.•*•••«• • r 4«« •• •'«• ••►*. • ^ _ ,i. ... i. — . r* .— Z«/>w - i______ ----------------1 t*9u __ prcM. . . 7X'*Xb! »»•*<. ._.,M*A • ^yZ9 *^e. iOvjT/MC. ; zv^ay •Bit- tjj. P*«t /*■«» ... .• "iiC.______ . _______________H>»» . _j , !/• _________ -------------------------. ... ................................................................................. ------- .*!?!'• _y^A*>Ci;'^.___». Uo ________________________________J! |io ............ . __________________________? . IVO ... _____________fl*** fto ... . ----------•• I*. ____ H»*ir .......n>> »y ___-.e/c* . /tmOAOKi*___30FZ*/______*H6i> . ia.Aa.8 ivu. 2><* v»^^. c».'j Xkl6 0<> t>*w*u«t*f___(^y*20 COUC. < 'AM*l^<rTC ____P-V**1. ftwio^o-n- (Jwwr4>-(i»>fc/,'i. • zrr I^Sl —i2£i/<if<u^u.tftfy,. ^e*>»*no^4c » _. o' iTMCrtS AJk»/)QI*JT TO X, Jift« 0A TM# bibVMuAy <4tAOui MtMcC#-7B (O •WAU.V ujrrHi»i /tofgftry ; AJonr tjmt -rjm <4kfc;‘Al®Tr /to • P. TfAcoMVM. /fA tmfmtr, 00- M i»rtHA- 3.^ */• .__^____..... ,1.-' . • ~ 0. . “ yf ~.}: v::y~ fr-' . • ..i ••" • • • .'••5 *.1 . « • JTv * « .. .•■:I . • .4mI VJV... 8. ..xn ♦ • •• ---- ' •I • • • • A. •. ». • . , •« . ..-*.f V'<• -,•• H. « w i•:•» . <v^.: w;#.i '■"■* ^ ' «•**>* ■ »•• • •.... • •. • k .. r **,«**-■-» ^ • «rW**» ^4' • .r« .— . *•• *‘**7m-*^ : ;•■ ■ ' ’ T ■ ”* . •'• * •*•••■? ■»•'*««'l«w •« m t: Iff * V r:*--r- * • • • • «•»••■••• *r —r--» • *. 7^r?Sl?l 2«/^ .'.JS(cC9s«^ ib3£._/^jr_..............ayp-ay____r.6^ Airr.aujkbt ________________*^3a 09vtr/»tu ;. ------------ f*K*t0... sViPay • 8IU »Jf. P*wt ... ._• 14C.______ ----------------------... H>»» . _;. ;fi_____■, prcK. C mc . v.i«Mis.<rrc . ---------------................................................................ .......... — ..*!?!'* ____I. |ao . ------------------------------------------------ ! |l'> ... _ ------------------------------------------------ ? jvo _____.^. ---------- _r to ............■?*f*'>^n....».^(,______.*• la ZpC, y#*a. c».'> a"-w/y£w.i Sktt _____*® . - 211 llsn »£. ^mru^C ^ . # -.•r-iiqxr---.—- ' i*'-*’!' - •“. ■iP« V . • *»V.* ' '.•■ ■ . “ ■' ' ■ •*.••••................................. •* _.. -i;; • - --..i «. i-.-. : 7 . . ,..;,’'.«.i4* • ■* ■ ■ . . • 4 . "•.•.*«•, .- It .V .* .• ■ ^yuitusm-rfktn I _ • I^CCSl fMtC4AKm A^4Q»mT T» X. sifrv ^ *mx DAJVfUMiy /{LiOl^ \l0rKCM *70 -T6r4u-V fM€tutr^ UiitHlpJ ^fe^Lry ^ Aiorr 7M4T ;XU omt* /4^ /«s» AtniViry^ 3,t Vt.____________________ I#|B« w«Bn A irtrtTiir*fc rC*ir^T^ if t^amutea nMwr*^irr^nhur-iii r ii mH fgi f im ~>i-n Jnnftrillnil-ti-iTT' My' ______^ u •••:' ii^ • i •••*.. ..• vT.i IIID|iin[p55!W rn • ^6£yA7?Of^ *,■ -V“\' , w ■ ' ■ V.‘Hiiu; ■ i*tt-A- ‘r ‘•-a ...... n Jk 1 V ■ L"- ' . 'i*..» • -;:> ■• • ■'fif'ir^‘ti. * p ‘W- ■' ii#- '* ■ . •» *?’5 fmm -■ v^ ■ ’^- i» ^f^.\ ■ ,'jV^^ -:<- . !“ •• ■ • •. ■'^ j:?r ---^^ '* . A-5-^ •^<.\ (/ &3-^. f-r^-,, -ii.- ^ *ii^^ If/- T ^rai • /4‘ ^■- - ^3F^= >4^V-V i^.r... %>y^i(^,'■ 'v.y_* -i£.i .'.S*-.^ -f w^m ‘:fd . ,ii‘. ' If *• % >*?V^ ' ? ;* . •• , ^ '^7\^ '•. ,/;’^ ; .* • - '' 'V •\ r ^. . c \ . #.*>1. ;: •.? ^ ".'. * .V -•r^.25.^ . . -."i . \. ,, - # >^‘ ■* ■c**^» > ' V"*: • VK %3* -JSA^ *-