Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06-14-2004 Council Packet
! AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 14,2004,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MLNNESOIA (*) Asterisk items arc considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under Uic Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in tlic Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve''Amend JUN 1 4 2004 CITY OF OhOi^u RECOGNITION 2. Robert Searlcs - Resolution 3. Pauline Bouchard - Parks. Open Space and Trails Commission - Resolution APPRO\'AL OF MINUTES ‘ 4. Regular Council Meeting of May 24, 2004 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS Irene Silber. Repre.sentative PLANNING COMMISSION COM.MENTS - Jeanne Mabusth, Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT * 5. #01 *2671 Alistair and Karen Jacques, 645 Old Long Lake Road - Variances - Resolution * 6. #04-2971 Hickory Fine Homes Inc , 3220-3240 Watertown Road - Final Plat .Approval- Resolution 7. #04-2974 Reliance Development Company, LLP, Willow-Willow/12 (Stonebay Outlot A) - Commercial Site Plan Review, Concept Plan Approval. Preliminary' Plat .Approval, CMP Amendment Approval - Resolutions * 8. #04-2984 McCarthy Construction on behalf of Berkshire Properties, 2745 Kelly Parkway- Developers Agreement PUD Resolution * 9. #04-3003 George Stickney on behalf of Bruce and Kns Paddock, 3250 Fox Street Final Plat Appro\aI Resolution * 10. #04-3006 Aulik Company on behalf of Bartholomew and Fdi/abeth But/er. 2625 North Shore Drive Variance/Conililional Use Permit - Resolution 11. #04-3008 Steven Valck and Ralph Palmer. 4720-4750 fonkaview Lane Lot Line Rearrangement - Resolution 12. #04-3012 Roger D. O’.Shaughncssy. 1265 Bracketts Point Road VariancesConditional Use Permits Resolution * 13. #04-.30l4 1 imothy Powers. 3210 Navarre L.ane Variance Resolution * 14. #04-3015 Robert Lund on behalf of William and Bonnibel Bv ers, 1389 Orono Lane - Variance • Resolution 15. #04-3016 Henry La/niar/ of Way/ata Design and Development, 129 Brown Road South PRD Subdivision Preliminary Plat * 16. #04-3017 Spruce Hill Properties, 3775 Baysidc Road - Variances Re.solution AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 14,2004,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT 1 PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 17. Jacobs Mill Subdivision Refund Letter of Credit CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 18. Purchase of Golf Course Greens Mower 19. Establish New Polling Location Change for Precinct 1 - Resolution CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 20. LICENSES Garbage Hauler Special Event Permit * 21. BILLS I N3-UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 2004 06/14 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 06/21 - Planning Commission Meeting, 6:00 p.m. (Council Liaison - Lili ,\fcMillan) 06/28 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 07/05 07/06 07/07 07/08 07/12 07/19 07/26 HOLIDAY, Obser\'ance of Independence Day Park Tour and Council Work Session, Tuesday. 5:30 p.m. (Council Liaison - Lili McMillan) Planning Commission Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30 p.m. Council Work Session, Thursday, 5:30 p.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. Planning Commission Meeting, 6:00 p.m. (Council Liaison - Boh Sanse\ere) Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. i-*»f ^ Public A ttendance Meeting D ate -Q KC ouncii □ Planning C ommission □ Park C ommission □ Other Please filloij i the information REQtESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 2.o f pt Lj tL Lt^. /^/c y ^ Aif\- <> 3.^•/ec/e ^ ti Co c(l^ /) fk 1 J 4. e ^ O J Cj k'f ^C; ^ 2^ 0 z (^eKst -f4i:3. 5. 6. 7. 9. 10.. 11. 12. 13.. 14. 15. Wrt4i«iiiMfattta S^ppart ^FantlvPiiMR Alt—4ann tipd REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 11,2004 ITEM NO: ^ JUN 1 4 ^004 CITY OF OhUNO Department Approval: Name Ronald J. Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: Recognition of Robert Scarles-Resolntion Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Robert Searles, who played a key role in setting the vision for the manner in which Orono has developed, recently passed away. The attached resolution recognizes the outstanding contributions Robert Searles made to the City through his visionary leadership and distinguished service. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt the attached resolution recognizing Robert Searles for his visionary leadership and distinguished service to the City. 3 RESOLUTION NO. 00- A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING ROBERT SEARLES FOR HIS VISIONARY LEADERSHIP AND DISTINGUISHED SERVICE TO THE CITY WHEREAS, Robert Searles played a key role in establishing a vision for Orono that has guided the development of Orono for the past 45 years; and WHEREAS, Robert Searles has been a leader in protecting Lake Minnetonka as a unique and special natural and recreational resource; and WHEREAS, His vision for Orono grew out of his concern for protecting Lake Minnetonka; and WHEREAS, Through his distinguished service and visionary leadership, Robert Searles promoted the vision of preserving the rural character of Orono as a way to protect Lake Minnetonka; and WHEREAS, Robert Searles served as the Chair of the Planning Commission from 1958 to 1961, as a member of the City Council from 1963 to 1973, and as Mayor from 1974 to 1976; and WHEREAS, His leadership contributions have been memorialized through the Robert Searles Leadership award, which is given to Orono citizens >^4io have provided exemplary leadership in service to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orono City Council docs hereby recognize the outstanding contributions to the City made by Robert Searles through his visionary leader^p and distinguished service. ADOPTED by the Orono City Council this day of ^2004. ATTEST: . Chair , Administrator ;:ODMAM>CDOCSU.IBI\644635M I u oT A KKSOl.liHON KK( oc;ni/jn(; ROBKRT SKARI.KS FOR Ills VISIONARY I.FADFRSIIIP AND DISTINCLUSIIFI) SKRVICi: TO TIIK CITY RKSOUJ liON NO. 5183 WIIKRKAS, Kohcrl Scurics pluyco a key role in esiahlishing u vision for Orono (hut has guided tlic development ofOrono lor the past 45 years; and WIIKRKAS, Robert Searles has been a leailer in protecting l.ake Minnetonka as a unique and special natural and recreational resource; and WIIKRKAS, llis vision for Orono grew out of his concern for protecting Lake Minnetonka; and WIIKRKAS, riuough his distinguished service and visionary leadership. Robert .Searles promoted the vision of preserving the rural character of Orono as a way to protect I ake Minnetonka; and WIIKRKAS. Robert Searles serv ed as the Chair of the IManning C'ommission from I95K to l%l. as a member »»f the City (’ouncil fn>m 196.1 U) 1971. and as Mayor from 1974 to 1976; and WIIKRKAS. llis leadership contributions have been niemoriali/ed through the Rttbert Searles award, which is given to Orono citizens who have provided exemplary service ami leadership to the (’ity. NOW, TIIKRKKORK, BK II RKSOl.VKD. that the Orono City Council does hereby recognize the outstanding contributions to the City made by Robert Searles through his visionary leadership and distinguished .service. Adopted by the City Council of Orono. Minnc.sota at a regular meeting held this Nth day of June. 2(M)4. Airi.SI: Linda S. Vec, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, .\1avor I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACnON CO"**''" •'----•‘^iG DATE: June 11,2004 ITEM NO: J JUN 1 4 2004 CITY OF UMUrvO Department Approval: Name Ronald J. Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: Recognition of Paulim Bouchard-Rcsolution Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Pauline Bouchard has served on the Parks, Open Space, and Trails Commission for the past four years. She recently resigned from the Conunission, due to a planned move out of the City. A resolution is attached recognizing Pauline for her dedicated service to the City as a member of the Parks Commission. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt the attached resolution recognizing Pauline Bouchard for her dedicated service on the Parks, Open Space, and 'Trails Commission. A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO PAULINE BOUCHARD FOR DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE PARKS, OPEN SPACE, AND TRAILS COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.5184 WHEREAS, Pauline Bouchard has served this community with distinction during her four years as a member of the Parks. Open Space, and Trails Commission; and WHEREAS, her years of service have been marked by exemplary dedication to the best interests of the community; and WHEREAS, she has earned the admiration and Iiigh regard of those with whom she has worked; and WHEREAS, the performance of her duties and responsibilities as a member of the Parks, Open Space, and Trails Commission has been characterized by excellent and constructive contributions to the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono docs hereby express its sincere appreciation and thanks to Pauline Bouchard for her distinguished service to the community and docs also highly commend her for the manner in which she has carried out her duties and responsibilities. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council extends to her best wishes for continued success in her future endeavors. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 14th day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vcc, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor MINUI liS OF THE (/RONOCITY COUNCII. MEETING Monday, May 24,2004 7;00 o’clock p.m. COi•^'^PT/NG JUN t 4 2004 CITY OF OHOwo ROM T'hc Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present; Mayor Barbara Peterson; Council members Jim White, Jim Murphy, and I.ill McMillan; City Attorney Thomas Barrett; Representing staff were City Administrator Ron MtHirsc. Planning Director Mike (ialTron, Planner Melanie Curtis, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, Public Scmcc Director Greg Gappa, and Recorder Knsti Anderson. Council memlK’r Bob Sansevere was absent. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M C'ONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve/Amcad Items HA, 10, II, 12, 1.1, 14, 15, 16, and 17 were added to the Consent Agenda. Wkite moved, McMillan seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote: Aves 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *2. Reconvened Board of Appeal and Eqnali/ation Meeting of IMay 10, 2004 White Moved, McMillan seconded, .Approving the Minutes of the Reconvened Board of Appeal Meeting Minutes of May 10,2004 as presented. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *3. Regular Council Meeting of May 10.2004 White moved, McMillan seconded, to approve the Minutes of May 10, 2004, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Rick Rice Rice re|K»rlet1 that the Park Commission is continuing their budgeting process for 2()()4-2(H)5. lie invited City Council members to jt>in the Park Commissuin on its u|K«>ming park lour tenialncly scheduled for July 6. 2(KM. Rice asked stalT when the vacant Park Commission seal would be advertised. Moorsc stated that the v’acancy would be advcrti.sed the following weekend. Mtiiphy suggested that the I’ark ('ommission consider moniitiring the Excel iinergy and E>.NR tree trimming eflorts along the Luce Line trail Me indicated that it was the opinion of many tliaf the trimming had become more ot a nondiscnminalory mass cutting, in an effort to rid the trail of exotics, such as buckthorn While di.scu.ssu»ns with the DNR and Exeel are ongoing. Murphy- stated that no piogie.ss has iK-en made. McMillan suggestol that the Park lour mclude a visit to Saga Ilill to view the recent land swap. Page I of 8 Q> ■Mama MINUTI-SOFTIIIi ORONO CITY COUNCIL MnFTING Monday, May 24, 2(M)4 7:(M) o’cl(Kk p in. Pl.ANNlNfi ( < OMMENTS - Mark Fritzicr F'nt/lcr rcpiirlcd dial inosi of Ihc Manning ilcnis were eontaineil in the Coiisenl Agenda, lie fioinied out that the Park Commission and City Couneil would soon see a develo|K*r’s reigiest for 7 lots olf South Brown Road, m which the issue is the lack of access to Ihc I.uce Line. l,M<i> KEPOKT - IKIwira llaBorsoii No report was given, since represenlalive llalvorson was absent PUBLIC CO.MMEN'IS ^‘ormer Mayor I^d Callahan, 108 Oiono Woods Aparinienis. slep|H*d Ibrsvard stating that he had attended a recent meeting at the fatnaraek Center with the task force for the turnback of saving Highway 12. He wished to congratulate the City C'ouneil for having the foresight to prepare, attend, and lake an active role m the lurn-baek process. In addition, ('allahan eneouraged the ( ily Council to use Ihc same foresight and preparedness when addressing the problems created by the abandonment of the Vets Camp at Big Island A past controversy, he explained that this issue has Iven ipnel for many yeais and poses some erilical questions for the City. Callahan urged the City li> deler liirther de\elopment on Big Island and insieatl consider purchasing it. or partnering with the ( ounty to purchase the site to become a p,irk. He adviscil the ( ouncil to be concerned and invoBed in the abandonment of the \’cls Camp and future plans for the parcel. While an orgam/ed group of vets overturned a similar vote in the |y70‘s, Moorsc reported that the Board of (iovemors liad indeed voted to abandon the camp. He believed that public entities would be oflercd the first opportunity to make a bid for the parcel over the evuirse of the next year. Muiphy concurred with Callahan, stating that it would be m the Ctty’s K'st interest to stay on top of this issue to ensure that something ineversible does not hap|ien at Big Island with regard to development. He asked wliat Ihe plan for accountability at the camp was tiver the summer. NKhiisc iiiihcated that they ha«l contacted the Bitard to suggest they keep M>me level of security out there this snmnier. Attorney Barrett stated that, if the site l.us lieen oliicially abandoned, the person holding the title would be lesponsihle lot secuiity at the < amp. He indicated that they could iH^giii a title search. Muiphy stated that it would lie wonilerlul if tlur vets rose up again, as they did in the 70's, to overturn the Board’s dectsion. Mooise acknowledged that |M>sting ‘no tiespassing ’ signs may I h‘ waiianted. fieiiy I mini, 2N.ss (>'*■ Avenue North, asked whcUier any progrc.ss Iiad iHreii made lelaiive to their driveway zoning situation since the last month. 2 of h MINUTHSOI- rill* ORONO CITY COUNCII. MKf-TING Motulay. May 24, 2(M)4 7:(M) o’clock p in. IMIBI.IC C OMIVfK.NTS, < ontiniird Moorsc slated that slalT was in the puv ess olTcvicwiim an atnciuliiienl lo the 5 acre versus 2 aere /i»mii)» ie«|inrenieiit, which would Iw forwarded lo the IManiung Cmiunission for consuleiatiori, and then on lo ('ily < 'ouncil f«»r final approval While he felt the Ordinance lo Ik useful, Muiphy slaleil that lire City ('ouncil had discussed this ilerii rluiiiif' Its recent work session and recoinniended lhal consideration he piven lo lot si/e lie I'oinled out that Ihe lirnins were als«» encotiraped l«* look al alicrnaiive accesses and where the II lick sits on iIk * properly. He asked stall whether the l imim wrnild Ik loiced to do anythinp until an amendment could Ik marie. narietl stated that the City Council could nnprrse a moratorium on the statute if they were faced with a decision lo enforce Ihe statute. Mihiisc .staled lhal, if the City teccives a complaint, it would follow a foimal coin|rlainl pnKCss, which onenlinies lakes a month or nmte. This sh«-.iilrl he enouph lime lo allow a review of the Ordinance lo rKcur and resolution to Ik made. A.J. Clraunard. |y7.S ('enlial Avenue. I rmp I ake. slaleil lhal. as an employee r>f rirsl .Stuilent Hus ('ompany, he was crmcerned hy Ihe nunihers t»f |Kt»ple s|x*edmg, ignoring lire hus arm. and even passing the hus on the shoulilcr «*n his route within Orono. lie indicated that nuny of the drivets are concerned about this, and the fact that many of the bus slop signs posted on Orono roadways are not \isihle lo moloti.sls tiue to oveigiirwth or failing Me recomineiuled that many of the signs Ik replaced, or at nmumum ti miming lo unveil them On a separate matter. Mr 1 haunard slated lhal he had placed a ‘M I call oier a month eailicr and was told he would be contacted by an Otono police ollicer. He nuimlamed that he ntwci icccivcd the follow-up phone call he was promised and demanded lo know where Ihe failure iKctiiied. lie was concerned that other emergencies might Ik overlooked and lell he had done his pari niaknig the milial call, but a lack ot follow-through might also have serious conseipiences (iappa stated that the overgrowth of foliage is handled on a ('ity by ('ity basis, lie added that .South lltown Road aiiil ( ounty Koail 15 aie county loads and under their jiiiisdiction toi signage and oveigiowth ( haunard stated that he had alread> niadc contact with ihe long lake ('ouncil, who had also indicated that he needed to visit tlu* ailccteii cities lie iei|uesied that the Orono ('iiy staff contact the ('ounty on Ik IuiII o I he and oilici driveis conceined bv these malleis. On Ihe other iiiallci. Mayor Peterson slated that she could not aiiswci why Mi l haunaid did not get a response from his Ml I call. .She diiected st.iff to get his co;ii.ii t midrniation. mvesiig.iic die allegations, and icpoit hack to Mi. ('haun.iid. as well as the ( itv ( ouncil. Page 3 ofS J MINUTES OF THE ORONO Cl l Y COUNCIL MEETlNO Moiulay, May 24, 2004 7;00 o'clock p.m. ZOMNC; ADMINISTRATOR'S RKPOR I *4. #04-3002 C;&l, I,AND INVESTMENT, EEC, 740 NORTH ARM DRIVE - CONDHIONAE use permit - RESOEITION NO. 5182 White moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOEI TION NO. 5182, a Resolution denuiiK retention of the boathouse and approves the 0-75’ land alterations for the propertv located at 740 North Arm Drive. VOTE: Aves 4, Navs 0. *5. #04-3011 DANIEEEE SIEEEE, 4050 BAV.SIDE ROAD - VARIA.NCES - RESOEIJTION NO. 5176 White moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOEI TION .NO. 5176, a Resolution grantinK variances to construct a detached garage closer to the front lot line than the principal structure and 75' from the front lot line where a 100’ setback is ret|uired. VOTE: Ayes 4, .Navs 0. *6. #04-3013 c ;EOROE FUNK, 540 OED ( RY.STAE BAY ROAD SOETH CONDITIONAE USE PERMIT - RESOEETION NO. 5177 White moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOEETItIN NO. 5177, a Resolution granting a conditional use permit for piumbing in an accessory structure for C;eorge Funk at 540 Old < rvstal Bay Road South. 3 0 I E: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *7. #04-.30l8 KEVIN AND MK’IIEEE KROECZYK, 65 CYONET PI AC E - VARI ANC'E - RE.SOEETION NO. 5178 W hite moved, .Mc.3lilian seconded, to adopt RESOEETION NO. 5178, a Resolution granting a lot area variance in order to construct a new single family residence on a lot 1.17 acres in an area where 2 acres Is required. VOTE: Ayes 4. Nays 0. 8. #04-3021 C ITY OF ORONO, ZCEMNG ('ODE REMSIONS - ORDINANTE.S NO. 0, 10, 11,12 and 13 While queslionai vvlielher there were a number of current entrance nioiiumenls that might he atTecieil l»y this amendment requmng a 40’ setback. (iattion indicated lliat tliese nuinumeiils would be non-eonlomiing by this new standard. He pointed »»ul that it winiKi be the City’s inleiil to .allow the ability for 1-2 cars slacking at the cnlrancc tti Ik off flu* traxcicd road\^ay. McMillan asked if admini.strati\e ajiproval for lot aiea width variances would require additional fees. (Jaffton staled that they liad not established a separate fee for this aiul Iikelv w..nld not. as it involves minimal staff time. Page 4 of 8 MINU TliS OF TIIF ORONOCn Y COUNCIL MKF:TING Monday, May 24. 2004 7:00 o’clock p.in. K. #04-.102l nTV OK ORONO, /ONINfi CODK KF.VISIONS, C'ontinutd Wliilc moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt the foUowins ordinances: Ordinance No. 9 aiiiendinK /^uniiiK Code Section 78-72 ret*ardinK l,ots of Record: Ordinance No. 10 amending /.oning ('ode Section 78-281 through 78-.100 regarding l.akeshore Residential liisiricts; Ordinance No. II amending Zoning Code Section 78-1279 regarding Placenient of Structures on I aits; Ordinance No. 12 amending the City of Orono Zoning Code Section 78-1405 regarding Nonencroachments; and Ordinance No. 13 amending Zaining ('ode Section 78-1432 regarding lime of Construction. VO'I'K: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 9. PROPO.SKI) IIARIKOVER POl.K V - RK.SOI.U'I ION NO. 5179 Murphy questioned whether pi>Iicy #la should he revised to specify gaiagc storage of utiy \ehiele. to include hoals, in the aiiiendiiieiit. (iaffron noted that an attached garage may require an apron and driveway, but a stall on the back side of a house may not require such additions if used for lawn iiiaiiiteiianee equipiiieiil. etc. Murphy mosed. White seconded, to adopt RKSOl.l'l'ION NO. 5179, a Resolution establishing Policies regarding Minimum Hardcover Standards for (iarages, Uriveways, Sidewalks, and Similar Property Features. VO'I F: .\>es 4, Na>s 0. MAYOR/('H V ('Ol'Nf'll, REPORT While rc|iorteil tliat, he and Bob Sansevere. awarded an Orono High .School student with the ('ouncil's scholarship and plan to award a Mound sliideiil as well. He suggesied that Council members Ik * made uvvaie ol the ('oiiimtiiiily service that each student completed prior to delivering the awatd Murphy explained dial l ormer .Mayor Jabliour called him Sunday alnml water problems runtiing over the road on l onkawa due to construclion on a htmie site iheie tiappa indicated that a lakesliorc reilevelopnient project is undenvay and the contractor has failed to supply the city with a drainage plan or solution to this. Muiplis niamtaiiicil that this coultl cause a serious problem, since a |H>tential sewer back up could occur along lonkawa and be urgeil siatl to investigate iK'lorc the lilt station is allectcd. McMillan asked how the t'lty could icsolve these ledevelopinent plans with piior uppit>\als legaiding (M'ieiitial drainage ha/aids and demand that these plans be m place (iapp-. mdicaierl that they may neeil to pul a slop work order in pLce and take steps to be more proaetne until drainage plans arc put in motion. He suggested tlut the I'lty take steps to stop work until issues are resoUed. Mmpliy anil McMillan Ihii Ii agreed that a slop work order was necessary in this case. •*agc 5 of K fl MINUTES 01 THE ORONO d r's' COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 24. 2004 7:(K) o ’clock p.ni. MAYOR/CITY COUNni, REPORT, r«iiHnuid l•.nglnccr Kellogg slated that given (he vanefy of drainage concerns with new homes, the engineer should spend mure time on site, noting that applicant submittals do not always truly show all that is on a site. He felt that contours and surveys don't always supply staff with enough information. PI'RI.K SERVICE DIRECTOR'S REPOKI * 1 0. STONEB A Y STKEKIIJGII1 S AND FEE C REDH S White moved. McMillan seconded, to approve a Stormwater Trunk Fee reiiiiliuru-ment of $84,240 to Dahlstrom Development to be funded from the Stormwater I'tility Fund and approval of a budget adjustment fur the 2004 Stonima'iT I'lility Fund budget to reflect this expenditure. $’OTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. White moved, McMillan seconded, to approve a Water Connection Fee reimbursement of $44,92.^ to Dahlstrom Development to be funded from the Water Ctilily Fund and approval of a budget adjustment for the 2004 W ater I tllity Fund budget to reriect this expenditure. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. White moved. McMillan seconded, to approve the Excel Energy Agreement for Kelley Parkway .Streetlights in the amount of $91,787 to lie funded from the PIR Fund and approval of a budget adjustment for the 2004 PIR Fund budget to reflect this expenditure. \'OTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. White nnived, McMillan seconded, to authorize a Net Fee Reimbursement payment to Dahlstrom Development in the amount of $5,716. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. C ITY AD.MINI.S I RATOR'S REPORI *11. I.ONU LAKE FIRE REI.IEF ASSOCIATION PENSION White moved, IMc.Millan seconded, approving the recommended pension beneni increase to $2,375 per year of sersice for 2003; and to approve the recomiiiended pidicy guidelines that provide for future pension benefit increasc>s of 3% in the coming years, subject to the results of continuing periodic financial projections. \'0'l'E: Ayes 4. Nays 6. *12. MIII.TI-VEAR C'ONTRAC T FOR ASSESSINC; SER\ K E White moved. McMillan seconded, to approse the renewal «>f the contract with llennep’n County for assessing strsices for a four year period, ending July 31. 2008, subject to the two language revisions rc>garding indemnification and termination described within. \OTF: Ayes 4, Navs tt. *1.3. BI'DC;ET amendments for year 2003 White moved, .McMillan seconded, to approve the 2003 General and Special Revenue Budget Amendments. \'OTE: Ayes 4, .NaysO. |»4i^c (»of S • % % MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 24,2004 7:00 o ’clock p.m. •14. 1992 IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND CLOSE OUT- RESOLUTION NO. 5180 White moved, McMUlaa seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5180, a Resolution to Close the 1992 Improvement Bond Debt Service Fund to the 2003 ScHcr Refunding Bond Fund. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *15. 1998 SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND CLOSE OUT - RESOLUTION NO. 5181 White moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLUTIO.N NO. 5181, a Resolution to Close the 1998 Sewer Construction Fund to the 1999 Improvement Bond Debt Service Fund. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *16. REQUEST TO LIQUIDATE EXCESS PROPERTY (USED VEHICLES) White moved* McMillan seconded, to declare seven vehicles as surplus property and authorize staff to conduct a sale of the property to the highest bidder through a competitive bid process. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT Attorney Barrett had nothing to report. *17. LICENSES GARBAGE HAI1.ER 1. Blackowiak and Son, Inc. 1195 Sunnyficld Rd. N. Mound, MN 55364 COMMERCIAL KENNEL LICENSE 2. D. Brian Fulmer 3505 Wayzata Boulevard West MESIDENTIAl. KENNEL I.K'ENSE 3. Ca »'l BriH)ks 980 Femdale Road West 4. Robin Kilbane 495 Oxford Road 5. Don Lindall 666 Ibnkawa Road Page 7 of 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, May 24,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. *17. LICENSES, Continued SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT 6. Applicant: Sister Kenny Foundation Event: Second Annual Art Gala and Auction Location: Minnetonka Center for the Arts, 2240 North Shore Drive Date: Wednesday. June 2, 2004 Time: 6:30 p.m. -10:00 p.m. TEMPORARY ON SALE UQI70R LICENSE (I DAY) 7. Sister Kenny Foundation/John Greving Second Annual Ait Gala and Auction Wednesday, June 2, 2004 Minnetonlu Center for the Arts 2240 North Shore Drive While moved, McMUiau seconded, to approve all licenses. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *18. BILLS White moved, McMillan seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council .Meeting of May 24, 2004 at 8:13 P.M. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ATTEST: Linda S. Vcc, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor Page 8 of8 ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (*) Asterisk items ire considered to be routine items to be enicted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Content Item* on the igendi. Memos regerdiag etch of the Agendi iterot ire iviilible in the Public ^ Picket • locited on the counter near the sign in sheet ROLL CALL CONSENTAGENDA 1. Approve/Amend RECOGNITION JUN I s CIIYoohono 2. Robert Seirles - Resolution 3. Piuline Bouchird - Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission - Resolution APPROVAL OF MINUTES • 4, Regular Council Meeting of Miy 24,2004 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Irene Silber, Rcprcscntiiivc PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Jeanne Mabusth. RepresenUtive PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONHIG ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT * 5. #01-2671 AlistairandKarenJacques. 645 0ldLongLakeRoad-Variances-ResoIulion * 6. #04-2971 Hickory Fine Homes Inc., 3220-3240 Watertown Road - Final Plat Approval - Resolution 7. #04-2974 Reliance Development Company, LLP, WUlow-WilJow/1 2 (Stonebay Outlet A) - Commercial Site Plan Review, Concept Plan Approval, Preliminary PUt Approval, CMP Amendment Approval - Resolutions * 8. #04-2984 McCarthy Construction on behalf of Berkshire Properties, 2743 Kelly Parkway- Developers Agreement/PUD - Resolution * 9. #04-3003 George Stickney on behalf of Bruce and Kris Paddock, 3250 Fox Street - Final Plat Approval - Resolution * 1 0. #04-3006 AuUk Company on behalf of Bartholomew and Elizabeth Bu^, 2625 North Shore Drive - Variancc/Condilionl Use Permit - Resolution 1 1 . #04-3008 Steven Vtlek and Ralph Palmer, 4720-4750 Toukaview Lane - Lot Line Reinangement - Resolution 12. #04-3012 Roger D. O'Shaughnessy, 1265 Bracketts Point Road - Variaoces/CoDditional Use Permits - Resolution *13. #04-3014 Timothy Powers, 3210 Navarre Lane-Variance-Resolution * 14. #04-3015 Robert Lund on behalf of William and Bonoibel Byers, 1389 Orono Lane-Variance- ' Resolution 15. #04-3016 Henry Lazniarz of Wayzata Design and Development, 129 Brows Road South - PRD Subdivision Preliminary Plat * 16. #04-3017 Spruce Hill Properties. 3775 Bayside Road-Variances-Resolution AGENDA FOR COLNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 14, 2004,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA MAYORyCOUNCDL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT 17. Jacobs Mill Subdivision Refund Letter of Credit CITY ADMLNISTRATOR S REPORT 18. Purchase of Golf Course Greens Mower 19. Establish New Polling Location Change for Precinct 1 - Resolution CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 20. LICENSES / Garbage Hauler Special Event Permit %• 21. BILLS 1 UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 2004 06/14 - Council Meetmg, 7:0C p m. 06n I - Planniag ComitLition Meeting. 6 00 pm (Council Liaiion - LiU McMillan) 06/28 - Council Meeting, 7.00 p m. 07/05 - HOLIDAY, Observ'ance of Independence Day Date Application Received: 4-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 4-21-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 6-20-04 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COf ’MG JUN I 4 CiTy OF OhOrvO Date: June 7,2004 Item No.: ^ Department Approval: Name: Janice Gundlach^ Title: City Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #01-2671, Alistair & Karen Jacques, 645 Old Long Lake Road - Variance - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: RR - IB, One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre minimum) 1.022 acres (44,523 s.f.) 205 feet + List of Exhibits A - Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendation B - PC Action Notice 5-20-04 C - PC Memo and Exhibits of 5-2-04 Application Summary: Applicant requests a lot area variance to permit construction of a new residence on an existing lot which is 1.022 acres in area when 2.0 acres is normally required. ______ ______ ___________________ Stajf Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the variance request as submitted, subject to relocation of the proposed home and pool.____________ Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission at their May 17, 2004 Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the requested lot area variance with the following stipulation: • Subject to the house and pool to be more centrally located on the property to reduce impacts to neighbors and the Luce Line trail. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting a lot area variance for 645 Old Long Lake Road. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-420 (B) HLE NO. 01-2671 WHEREAS, Alistair Jacques and Karen Jacques, husband and wife, (hereinafter “the applicants ”) are the owners of the property located at 645 Old Long Lake Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City ”) and legally described as follows: Attached Exhibit A (hereinafter the “property ”); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-420 (B) to allow construction of a new residence on an existing substandard lot of record. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #01-2671. 2. The property is located in the RR - IB, One Family Rural Residential District, which requires a minimum lot area of 2.0 acres. The applicant ’s lot is 1.022 acres in area. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on May 17, 2004 and recommended approval of the lot area variance based on the following findings: a. The lot is an existing legal lot of record that contained a residence up until February of 2001. Page 1 of 5 >g1ri »• ra .a. - ■ ' .f L I b.Many of the lots in this immediate neighborhood were created prior to adoption of the 2.0 acre minimum lot size requirement, including the applicant’s lot. The lot is not inconsistent with other developed lots in the ncigliborhood. c.The applicant is unable to purchase any vacant property in an effort to reach the 2.0 acre requirement as the Luce Line trail exists to the south, existing residential home to the cast and west (both under 2 acres), and Old i.ong Lake Road right-of-way to the north. d. 'I he property is served by municipal sewer. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the FManning Commission, reports by City staff. Comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the pro|ioscd variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property, would not nieiely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive IMan ol the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby giants a variance to Otono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-420 (D) to allow construction of a new residence on the existing lot, subject to the following conditions; 1.Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants and aniiotatcil by City stuff, uttached to this Resolution as Fxliibit B. Any amendments to the site pl.in which arc not in conformity with City codes or Uie coiulitions of approval will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. Page 2 of 5 2. The house and pool shall be more centrally located on the property then shown on the submitted site plan, to reduce impacts to the adjacent neighbor and the Luce Line Trail, subject to City staff review and approval. 3. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (June 14,2005). 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5. The undersigned applicants have read, imderstand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants’ heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the U'” day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owncr(s) Page 3 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of 2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota _______y------------- ^ --------- ' " municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 State of Minnesota ) ) ss. County of Hennepin ) TTiis instrument was acknowledged before me this by Alistair Jacques, husband of Karen Jacques. day of 2004 Notary Public State of Minnesota ) )ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this by Karen Jacques, wife of Alistair Jacques. day of .2004 Notary Public Page 5 of 5 I I 1 I I I I MllMXA Thai pari of Ihv Weal Vi of llie Soiilhweatof Srcilon 36, Township I lfl| Range 23, drarrlhrd as follows: Cuinineiic lit| al Ihr point of Inlet iccllon of the Hast line of laid Weal Vi and the Norihri ly line of the right of way of ihf Minnesota Western Railway; thence North 211.46 feet along the Hast line of said West to the cenirr line of County Road 27; Ihrnce deflecting left 93 degrees and 21 minutes along the renter of said road, 239.IS feet to the point of beginning of the property being described; thrnce continuing Westerly alor / last described course and the center of said road, 90.6S feet; tlience Westerly on a tangential curve to the right with a radlui of 47S.2 feel a distance of 104.S3 feel along thv center of said road; thence Southerly to a point In the Noi dierly line of said railway right of way, which point Is 471.94 Ivet Westerly, measured along said right of way line, of the point of coniniencriiient; Ihriiie Hasterly along said right of way line 233.2S feet; thence Noiiheiiy to the point of beginning. ABSI RACT PRORKKTY I. •• nibOMklw.nMviasMis V' ' ikme J ! I! tv :v 6 I: ?.■ •I k 4 I I ?vW- OID U'^yO « ----_________—It-—'-'—*---------1 ----------------------------- ... H,EXHIBIT B I MCMMirtMl ^ I . n40 ,.:J: :-7 A • •• w • * I*. fv^ t tJ • i % ^ • • »1 ‘ ..$ ■ ,i * •• 1------------------------------ NEWUNIVfcWAy I ' . •' r •• • jr V. •1 # • \— ^ • . ‘ V -r ’••• ■ 1 • , ’•" - 7 •♦NM ———’rmiTMnH *br '* V t ♦ * now V House, /VTAOrtt <5ARA6e pool- TO 6E Mote ce/vfTli-m-V LOC-AfeP TO PJEPUC-e N6QATI'/? IMPACTS To ,rr AWACCA^T |.^ Meicjn&o^ A»oE> dj uv Ljpce u/Je - f Tp-mu. ©SPWEIIMINAWY snC PLAN 1:30 IM *t» «M Sk. Mi IM • M P«Ma««i M M • JACQUES RESIDENCE §«••!• tMtUMI OMM« Win 111 MW •IttPUM SITE ■-r. V.ie a CITYOFORONO 27S0 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 ZONING FILE #01-2671 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 DATE OF NOTICE: May 20,2004 TO: Alistair Jacques 2S8S Old Beach Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance DATE OF MEETING:May 17.2004 i Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approval of lot area variance, subject to house and pool to be more centrally located on the property to reduce impacts to neighbors and Luce Line. VOTE: 7 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confinned as: _____City Council - Monday, June 14,2004; meeting starts at 7;00 p.m. 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. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Gundlach at 9S2-249-4623. r I ifiiTtiiifti Him ^01-2671 May 17,2004 Page 1 of4 Date AppHcaiion Received: 4-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete; 4-21-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 6-20-04 To:Chair Mabusth and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Dale: Subject: Janice Gupdlach, City Planner^ May 2, 2004 #01-2671, Alistair & Karen Jacques, 645 Old Long Lake Road - Lot Area Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: RR - IB, One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre minimum) 1.022 acre (44,523 s.f.) 205 feet + Application Summary: Applicant requests a lot area variance to permit construction of a new residence on an existing lot which is 1.022 acres in area when 2.0 acres is normally required. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the variance request as submitted. ____________________________ Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-420. Area, height, lot width and yard requirements. (b) Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be observed; -I « Lot Area (acrei)Loi Widih (feet)Front Yard (feet)Side Yard (feet)Side Yard Adjacent to Street (feel) Rear Yard (feet) 2 200 50 30 50 50 List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applications Exhibit B - Hardship Documentation Form Exhibit C - Existing Survey Exhibit D - Proposed Survey Exhibit E - Elevation of Proposed Horne Exhibit F - Aerial Photograph Exhibi* G - Existing Topography Exhibit H - Property Owner’s List Exhibit 1 - Plat Map WJ-2671 May 17, 2004 Page 2 of 4 Background The applicant originally submitted the lot area variance application in eeirly 2001. However, septic sites could not be located and the applicant has been delayed until City sewer could be made available to the site. City sewer became available in 2003 and tlic applicant has subsequently requested that his application be activated again in an effort to move towards construction of a new home. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot Area/Width RR-IB Lot Area Lot Width Required '*7,120s.f. (2 .00 acres)200 ’ Actual 44,523 s.f. (1.022 acres)205 ’ Principal Structure Setbaclis RR-IB Required Existing Proposed Front 50 ’N/A - Vacant Lot 50 ’ Rear (Luce Line)50 ’.'4/A - Vacant Lot 61 ’ Left Side 30’N/A - Vacant Lot 96’ Right Side 30’N/A - Vacant Lot 30’ Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 44,523 s.f. (1.022 acres)Allowed: 6,678.5 s.f. (15%) Proposed: 3,341 s.f. (7.5%) Hardcover Calculations This property is not located within the Shoreland Overlay District and therefore is not subject to hardcover restrictions. Lot Area Variance The applicant has proposed to construct a new residence on an existing lot. The previous home was demolished in February 2001 in preparation for the proposed project. The property is currently served witn City sewer, however is only 1.022 acres in area. Zoning Ordinance Section 78-420 (B) requires that lots located with the RR - IB zoning district maintain a lot size of 2 acres. Therefore, a lot area variance is required in order for a new residence to be constructed on the existing vacant lot. M01.2671 Nfay 17,2004 Piig€ 3 of 4 The proposed plans indicate that all other zoning requirements will be met, including setbacks and structural coverage as indicated in the Lot Analysis Worksheet above. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis /« cottsldering applications/or variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anitclpated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property In the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code In Instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of rl.cumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be In keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code._______ ________ Staff finds that a valid hardship exists in that the lot is a legal lot of record, recorded at Hennepin County, and a house has existed on the lot for matiy years prior to the demolition of the previous home in 2001 . Several of the homes along that stretch of Old Long Lake Road arc under the 2 acre requirement and have existed for many years. Also, the applicant is unable to purchase any vacant property in an effort to reach the 2 acre requirement as the Luce Line trail exists to the south, existing residential homes to the east and west (both under 2 acres), and Old Long Lake Road right-of-way to the north. Therefore, staff is in support of the requested lot area variance as all of the above arc valid hardships. Site Plan Cuniiiieiils In most respects the site plan meets City requirements to allow issuance of building permits. However, in reviewing the site plan the Planning Director noted the following plan elements that need to be addressed before permits are issued, some ot which the Planning Commission may choose to address; 1. 2. The side-loading garage at a side setback of 30’ faces the neighboring property. It has an apron proposed at elevation 970'. 1 he topography drops 4 to the lot line, so a 2'-3’ retaining wall will be needed 5 ’ fiom the side lot line alongside portions of the driveway in order to maintain a functional, safe slope on the driveway apron. Note that the driveway plan eliminates the natural screening (3 or 4 trees) between the two properties. The driveway design will have to incorporate drainage control features to avoid adding excessive runoff to the neighboring property. 1 he two driveway accesses will require Public Services Director approval, as the City code allows only one driveway access per property. The westerly portion of the driveway encroaches the existing well, so either the driveway or the well will have to move. « • --■•i k c ‘ 4» ^ -tgb I UOUUIl Mliy 17,2004 Pagf 4of4 3. A 30 ’ X 18’ pool is proposed to be located 15 ’ from the east and south lot lines. The pool plan includes a terrace/patio that will require retaining walls ranging from 1 ’ to 6’ in height, 5 ’ from the lot line. There is a high likelihood that the property owners will want to place a screening or safety fence above the walls, resulting in the potential visu^ impact equivalent to a building wall as much as 12’ high, 5 ’ from the rear lot line and only 40’ from the traveled portion of the Luce Line Trail. While the City has not established special setbacks from the Luce Line right-of- way, and while the proposal would technically meet code, the proposed location of the pool and retaining walls is to some extent a direct result of the lot size. A case might be made that the Planning Commission could, if it chose to, condition lot area variance approval on establishing some greater setback or less-visual- impact location for the pool Issues for Consideration 1. Does Planning Commission find any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Approval of the plans submitted. TP^ i t V.t • i.rO ' •'« ^ t i f 0 of ? V L V/>fTil fOt City of Orono Variance Application EXHIBIT A Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Main: 952-249-4600 fax: 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: . P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Application # 0/ ” 7/ Date Received: ^ Qfi.l/O'-i Amount Paid: Staff: JAAJii^ Fee: 5600_______ Renewal: $300 After-the-fact: 51,200 Double Fee This application form must be completed in full. App'cant will be notified within 15 days^as to the status of the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: 64 6 “ d)l<< Z-orua l^oa.<A , Orono , KaJ , itinn Number fPlNI:'^ 'it. - ft K‘X'^%1.0 OOAProperty Identification Number (PIN):"^ 3C. it gx 31> Xo ooA___________________ (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year): 8 ybo □ Yes, I own the adjacent parcels. Present use of property: B Residential □ Other ________________________ Zoning District: g.g. - i6 _____________ APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal na.-es and marital status required for each interested party) Name: ^ |cft. D~AC(gugs Phone (home): AQt-Q^FiMO_________ Phone (work)^ f S) ~?~A4- - t ^<4. Address: 3.^?5 r> Lot P»g»Af_U . fLpoA. c>ro(\o ^ m»J , •5'3'39(______________ Email: <9 . c-ot^ Fax. ____________________ *v OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names a.'.d marital status required for each interested party) Name: _____________________________ Phone (home): Address: ___ Email: Phone (work): Fax: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: ' Estimated Project Cost: $ Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): _________________ 1 Ok CC^ ^reiAdorvfl.C P S'eLa. . 0 c\Ck ii\ d JL Ia /ic vj H r i#2671 fw^»-r¥ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be processed. □□□□ Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. “Jt - u Completed Application Form / /? / zi. Completed Hardship Documentation Form Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150’ of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance Government Center, A-603 300 South 6‘'’ Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-3910 Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meetirig all the ■'requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" X 17" for reproduction. ^ Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet). Topographic survey - including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" X 17" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17"). Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. • APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT; The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request ' denial of the request regardless of its potent*^! merit. □□ □ O Applicant's Signature: Applicant's Signature: OWNER’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT; The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of/^his request. A-, rOwner’s Signature; Owner’s Signature; into the Citv c Date; 4 /-^/c 4 Date: M Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. 1= rI City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form (This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting.*) Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Mailing Address P O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 For Office Use Only / City Planner; / C Meeting Date/Time; T»TlHA rr'\cf H /?/> Main; 952-2^0-4600 Fax: 952-249-4616 PC Date; /t'laj \ /7 T What is the purpose of a pro-application meeting? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal, inform them of the procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: Old ^ct - i| 8i-33tooo4-Property Identification Number (PIN): Zoning District; P• f(b Sizo of Property: / /I/, r' DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: □ Average Setback □ Side Yard Setback □ Rear Yard Setback □ Hardcover □ Lot Coverogo ^^^41ot Area □ Other: □ Front Yard Setback ;s('Lot Width Applicant ’s x HARDSHIP: Applicant has received the Hardship Documentation Form. Initials: understands it as it has been explained to them, and is aware that it muqt ^ be completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal varianco application. OTHER INFORMATION: •Ploaso note: Your variance application vvill f^T be accepted without a pre-application mooting during which this form will bo (^rhpleted by City staff. Applicant Signature Date: 4(2-/o4 EXHIBIT B Page 1 of3 HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City. Minnesota State Statue Section 394.27, Subdivision 7 requires that a hardship be demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted. The hardship must be unique to the property as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic situations are not considered valid hardships. In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated. HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP? This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding commun'rty. To prove a hardship, address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance is justified. The Information the City receives is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will not be considered. Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request (some may not apply): 1."The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls." 2."The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." 3. "The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." 4."Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." n P 0. Page 2 of 3 "Undue hardship also Includes, but Is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall bo granted for earth sheltered construction as defined In Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when In harmony with this Chapter.” 0. "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any uso that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone whore the affected person's land is located. 7. “The Board or Council may penult as a vari.anco the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-fumlly dwelling." 0. "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or Immediately adjoining property.'* Q. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." 10. "The yiuntiiKj of tho application is nocossary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the opplicant." 11. "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect bo contrary to tho intent of the Zoning /? .' A ;• ^ •% .s » ' • 1 r 40 •• I •I i iS 4i - - -------- Page 3 of 3 12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty." Hardship Statement Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be described in the above criteria, describe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements In the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary): ^ tV ttLa. __liL_2c.oi.20A } •£oc|vi;aSjja_aip ^ ar^—u ^ r^j^tAprxge, o/i 4h^S Jlire, r>j* (: glbL# r j rdu /2xSer^/t, o^^po^l-tc. arrom EXHIBIT C BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC SURV ALISTAIR AND KRISTIN JACC IN THE W 1/2, SW 1/4, SEC. 36- hennepin county, MINNESO i n M i^iiWm |> ■'i't'-S:'.*] sa^K 'V- -s* A v’ <•h: "“1 *''1 l^lli tt ■ •■•Wa I- wm;- 4.. .-■'. f .■'>>' .'• ■ ■ - jVv‘^ ', OLD L0'‘^0 »a K^ 'AL' ROW. jfT|^_ h------------ r=Jn '¥m. <•'•, v*^ i ;WJ. V ‘’^RAiiiur^ V . \*- ‘ J >:■■ ;>...................... *, ) * }.- -- . ••• -^-/•., ;r noncncroacmicni POOLURSACC--^ ,•...... /T\ PRELIMINARY SITE PlAN 1:30 DlK A0WI0rt«M/M«f MIMI«MM.M>IM MaUMfl JACQUES RESIDENCE MSASiOMUMI mpUH SITE 60 H iamdttt ■ ' . '■ ■ ' V •,'t I t ^.v'.lilUB H U - >- — '■ __-r.'.—. . . vrrr-.^ ^ t~ B>a I---------: I liij^iM mMm NORTH ELEVATION i/r-r4T M '• j- ■ • .*• • • • »DIE JACQUES RESIDENCE old long lake rd . oronq mn SCHEMATIC DESIGN 13 f rt 1-4 H I •• •:‘'. V-- • .• ^ —- •' ———fr:—r-, ^:t-"w ’ ^.. •. , -. x. f ‘ • <, ' f ^ I “?• - ^ • ■ * “.^^ *' • ’ . **^4 * ’ Jf**' * ^ 4 '• -'.? J-' *.* • il ' .*• -• . ;?• •/.- ■ *•> • "• ^ i^;-v Erd'^irC-' ir.v .r I i •-«.•■ ..-V /-;^v .v. "r->:^m. nm:-^ ' , '••. .' "S':?' '>■(%:. '.'iS;tS-a^#;4--:. < ♦' V »; •' ;>’' 2'•/• ■ W ^. .'• -\ • i.:««»r fi- r Ce •!.• .V* •' ■4^yX'}0 m v>A>r.¥i C^EXHIBIT G ^ •r ♦-*T» 31 36lll2})200(n OP ADDR 25® RUANN RD UIVADDR 350 RUANN W)A» WAV7ATAMN 53391 3« 3611823310007 "SSiSSi^TOOMSON STva DEANBASUSANDTHOMSON IHE/ADDR 685 old long lake RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 3611823330001 top ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIONED JPNHRNAMH STATE OF MINN VXPAYER DNR REAL ESTATE MOMT M4E7ADDR ATin DEBBIE CURTIN 300 LAFAYETTE RD ST PAUL MN 35155 tt >:£ h C'i ‘"^7\ 'SE: I . 38 3611823120003 PROP ADDR 625 OLD LONG UKE RD OWNER NAME M D SHEREK A A A SHERER TAXPAYER MATTHEW DA AMY A SHEREK NAME/ADDR 0*5 133NO lAKE RD NAME/A ^^y 2^ta MN 55391 PROPADDR OWNER NAME taxpayer NAME/AODR » 3611821110004 645 OLD LONG l>KE RD ADlACQUESKElACqUES ALISTAIR D JACQUES 2585 OLD BEACH RD ORONOMN 55191 31 361182)320009 PROP ADDR 360 RUANN RD OWNER NAME OSKNIOHTAM AKNIGHT ?Amm CERARDAMARYANNKNK3.it NAME/ADDR JM RUANN RD WAYZATAMN 55191 JR 3611823320010 PROP ADDR 150 RUANN RD OWNER NAME P A K STUDE8AKER taxpayer fault a KAY K STUUI-BAKER NAME/ADDR *50 RUANN RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 161182)330006 PROP ADDR 50 MVRTLEWOOD RD OWNERNAME SAMOIAMPLIN TAXPAYER STEVEN K CHAMPLIN NAME/ADDR 50MYRTLEWOODROAD WAYZATAMN 55)91 OFMYKNOWLl-DGEANDBEUEF.^^^^ V-BY ^ ^ EXHIBIT I nnepin Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department 1*^ Ditc of Preliminary Plat Approval: March 8,2004 Date Preliminary Plat Approval Expires: March 8« 2005 OO^ JON I 4 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: June 7,2004 Item No.: Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron^^ij^!' Title: Planning Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-2971 William & Roslyn Henderson/Hickory Fine Homes, 3220-3240 Watertown Road - Final Plat Approval - Resolution List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Final Plat Drawing C - Preliminary Plat Approval Resolution No. 5128 The applicant has completed (or will complete prior to release of the plat for filing) all requirements of preliminary plat approval as defined in Resolution No. 5128 adopted March 8,2004. The name of the plat is "MALLYVALE”. The plat results in the reconfiguration of the two pre-existing building sites and an access outlot. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends Final Plat Approval per the attached resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached resolution. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF MALLYV'ALE - FILE #04-2971 WHEREAS, the City ofOrono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter “City Council”) has adopted subdivision and land development regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the CityCouncil has considered the application by Hickory Fine Homes, Inc. (hereinafter the “applicant”) on behalf of William Henderson and Roslyn L. Henderson, husband and wife, for subdivision of property located at 3220-3240 Watertown Road and legally described as follows: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, and Outlot A, SENN ORONO ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, on March 8,2004 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5128 granting Preliminary Plat Approval for the proposed development of a tuo-lot replat for single family residential purposes; and WHEREAS, the Developer has completed or has agreed to complete all other requirements of the platting regulations of the City including: 1. Completion of all platting requirements of Preliminary Plat Resolution No. 5128. 2. Dedication on the plat of perimeter Drainage ar.d Utility Easements and Drainage Easements as required in Resolution No. 5128. 3. Designation and dedication on the plat of wetlands subject to City and other agency Jurisdiction, and granting of the standard Flowage and Conservation Easement over said wetlands. Page 1 of 5 I 9% \ 4. nstablishmenl of a 35' vegetative buffer and execution ofaconser\'ation casement over said buffer, along both sides of the creek within Lots I and 2. 5. Establishment by covenant of restrictions on tlic portion of Lot 1 containing slopes in excess of 18% to prohibit the placement of structures w ithin said sloped areas. 6. Provision to the City of evidence ofa private shared drivew ay c;isement and co\ enants for driveway maintenance over Outlot A in favor of Lots I and 2. 7. Establishment ofcovcn;mls for each lot for protection ofdrainfield sites w ithin each I ot, including protective language for alternate septic sites along w ith stte plans locating both primary and alternative sites; and including language alerting future property nwiiere of Uie need to protect sites on adjacent properties. 8. Submittal of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) pcimil approving the grading, drainage and stonnwater management plan for development of the Properly, including any permits necessary for the creek crossing. 9. Payment to the City of Slormw ater and DrainageTmnk Fee. final plat review fees and legal review and filing fees as identified within Resolution No. 5128, 10. Provision to the City of a title opinion for the Property and certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the Property. NOW, 1 lllCKKFOKl’^UE IT RESOLVED that ba.sed on the findings ofResolut ion No. 5128, theCity Council of the City ofOrono docs hereby approve the plat of.MALLY VALE, Hennepin County, Minnesota subject to the following declarations and conditions; 1. A hat dcovci variance for the drivew ay creek crossing is hereby granted, such variance allowing only tlie amount of hardcover w iihiii 75' of the bank of the creek that is necessary to accomplish the creek crossing, subject to approval of the planning Director. 2. A variance is heieby granted for filling within the floodplain to accomplish the creek crossing, subject to any rctiuircmcnts that maybe established by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for such work. Only the one proposed creek crossing shall be allow ed Page 2 of 5 t' 3. A lot width variance of 95' for Lot I is hereby granted. 4. 5. 6. 7. 10. The following special setback requirements shall be adhered to; a) Lot 1 is subject to 150% of the standard setbacks, per the staff sketch attached to Resolution No.5128. b) Lot 2 is subject to a 50' side street setback for the principal structure from the driveway outlot, rather than the normal 30' side setback. All existing “Utility and drainage easements" dedicated and shown on the plat of SEXN ORONO ADDITION are hereby vacated. The existing Flowagc and Conscrv'ation Easement granted to the City via Document No. dated is hcrcbv vacated. Approval is subject to all recommendations noted in the City Engineer’s letter of 1 -22-04, plus any drainage provisions deemed necessary' by City Engineer to accommodate drainage from the east. 8. The sloped area southeast of the creek witliin Lot 1 with slopes of 18% or greater shall be considered as non-buildable land. 9. Prior to issuance ofbuilding pennits, applicant shall submit a final dri\ ew ay design meeting the approval of the Orono Fire Marshal and the City Engineer. Lot 2 shall have vehicular access to Watertown Road via the private driveway to be established in Outlot A, and any existing access points fixvm Lot 2 to Watertow'n Road shall be graded so as to be unusable, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any home on Lot 2. 11. All identified primary and alternate sewage system drainfield sites within the subdivision shall be fenced offprior to any land alterations, and such fencing shall remain in place until such time that each Lot is developed. 12 . The City Clerk shall release the plat documents for filing only upon certi fication by the City Attorney and Planning Director that all requirements of the platting regulations have been satisfied. Page 3 of 5 i ' 13. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles Office on or before December 14,2004 together with a certified original copy of this resolution and executed copies of the easements and covenants pertinent thereto. The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the conditions of this Resolution have not been met or the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review Adopted by the City Council of Orono this 14th day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 4 of S u STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this___day of . 2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HEN’NEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of.,2004 by Lir-'^a S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the Citv. Notarv’ Public Page 5 of 5 1 MALLYVALE C.R.DOC.NO, \\* thomri u«ur iv: •'V. 10 i«^*d or^ S3^ lot lM«. ««i Mn« <0 m U« P*ol. to widUv •Uitrvto* Mk«l«d i£ALt M s envoe- c 32noe 8 \ ^ tlDjBO N as* ar V-%>.'1 1 o mi ■N tri*- • ■SJ **• *..• >•■ — ms*--------- h sow 15- • 32aO0 • ^ N A-;;x |. ;:0.!- '■ -■.i-X ■■• -V. \ KNOW U.L BtnSOKS •» this* PBtSEMtS tiot WTam H.Nl«r»«<l md ««hm L M.nd««on. hu.b.BlI »l>d »«•■ '« «•’’«* ® LOU 1 •»< >. •'~» 1. •"« O""®* A. »£NH OBONO AOOmOM, p*___________.»«i_- StGNEO yyiUUAM HttoOCasOH flOILVN L. HCMCiRSON^ |T»nOF»lNNE»OTA ^ w.. ..«.-l.d,«l !■.'*>. - COUMTY or . M«ld.tmw *nd Retlm I. H«nd.r.oo. tiu.M-d .nd *1 1. day of Noury Public.________ toy cocnfp«»%ion •■p*fcc Coufity. M»Ar>«»0U wf COfnfT3i««iofi vB|P««vto — I hereby certify the! I have eurveyed end planed the **'®^*'^ hu^drodthi^^a foot; the! e« monumenu ^eve beer*—~-r. ic; r.c;-'cv;%=rr; s;r^ i-., ------------- public hiobwtye to bo deeionotod on eeid pteL Mere 8. C»or^bo»8, Laf>d Surveyor er*d tngineer MinneeoU Lkertee Number 127»I COUNTY OP MENNEPtN) The foretiolna Inetrwmont wtt ocknowledood boforo me Ihli by bUfh 1. Cronbo»o, Lortd Surveyor ei>d trrglneer. .. _____■ Ce dey of ^230. NoUry Public. ________ My commiecdon eipuoe County. M.r%netotJ r ru-:.'. ...... „d ««p-d t. ^ cd, c«.cH .. .^ ir«":'j::ru'Vd* ~ Z\l thlo __________ <*•» ____________=------- r'o^v^ C.ty. Of the pro*crlbod JO day por«d fu» Commleetonof of TreneporUUon and pn»v*ood by MlrmoooU Statutoe. Socuon 505.0 J. Subd. 2, .up«- -u,~, ..c.^.. .U.K ^Zo. «m«soT* , Mayer ,Clor« day of ■■—» *®®—* PATRICK H. O CONMOR. MCNNiPlN COUNTY Al'OtTOR -----------------_Ooputy pu. m. ®«» .pp-..® »«. ^ AM r-v ■ aeo ■ o-iC A^haC OlU ^ ft LI .day of..^ 200_. WILLIAM P. aROWN, HthhEPtM COUNTY SURVEYOR By---------------------------------------------------— at o'clock M. MICHAEL M. CUNN1FF. COUNTY RECORDER day of .Oopuiy Otowtoo bin Mion oro to Melum ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS, PLANNERS \ j cz: CITY of ORONO aw RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __ 5“ 1 2 6 __ A RESOLU I ION GRANTING PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3220-3240 WATERTOWN ROAD - FILE NO. 04-2971 WHEREAS, Hickory Fine Homes, Inc. (hereinafter the "subdividers") on January 16. 2004, complete the filing of a fonnal subdivision application with the City for app.-oval of a two lot residential re-plat of property legally described as; Lots 1 and 2, Block I, and Outlol A. SENS ORONO ADDITION, lli‘niu'|iiii Cuiiiiiy, IMiiincsutii (hereinafter "the property"); and WIIEREA.S, after due published and mailed notice in uccutdance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq and the City of Orono's Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Conmiission held a public heating cn January 20 and February 17. 2004, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on .March 8. 2004 the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the subdividers noting the following findings of fact; 1.Tlic property is locateil within the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of two acres of contiguous drv' buildablc land within each newly created lot. 2.I hc property contains a total of appro.ximatcly 9.75 acres of land of which 7.57 ncrcs is dry buildablc land and 2.18 acres is creekbed and delineated wetland protected under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) and City of Orono regulations. 3.In August 1990, the City of Orono approved the plat of the property as "Senn Orono Addition", creating two building lots (3220 and 3240 Watertown Road) and an outlot adjacent to Stubbs Bay Creek for purposes of construction of a dnveway to serve the northerly lot. Page 1 of 9 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO 9 4.The plat of "Scnn Orono Addition" was approved two years before adoption of Orono ’s Shorcland Ordinance and one year pnor to enactment of the WCA. Neither lot has ever been built on, and the driveway approved in 1990 was likewise never constructed. Applicants are proposing a complete lot line rearrangement and re-plat of the property to allow relocation of the proposed driveway, which today would not be approved in its 1990 configuration due to Shoreland restrictions, and to allow for slight revisions i t potential house locations. The new plat is subject to ‘front lol/ljack lot' area and setback standards which were also not in etfect in 1990. 5 6. The proposed re-plat consists of two residential lots each meeting the minimum 2.0 acres contiguous dry ' aildable lot area requirement of the RR-IB Zoning Distnet. Proposed Lot 2 meets the 200' width requirement. Proposed Lot 1 requires a vanance to the minimum 200' lot width requirement as measured at the rear of the defined front vard The basis for the width variance is as follows; A pnmary issue for development of Lot I is access The proposed access along the easterly boundary of Lot 2 has impacts on the shape and development potential of Lot 2. The cunent proposal correctly assumes that variances would not be granted to allow the driveway to parallel the creek within the required 75' hardcover/giading .setback from the creek bank. Assuming that a wetland creek crossing within Lot I would ultimately be approved, then the proposed 30' corridor along the cast boundary of Lot 2 and skirling the hillside in the south half of Lot 1, is a reasonable driveway location because it avoids the 75' creek protection /one e.xcept at the point of actual creek crossing. However, in order for the driveway to skirt the hill and not encroach into Lot 2, Outlet A is shoitcned and Lot I extends southward pa.st the base of the hill. This is the hardship that supports the lot width variance tor Lot 1. '1 he proposed re-plat meets the "front lot/back lot" standards of the Zoning Code with regards to lot areas and with regards to placement of a residence structure on proposed Lot I meeting the more restnctive 'back lot ’ setback requirements. 7.Tuch lot will be served by private wells and individual onsite sewage treatment systems. Septic system site evaluation and design information has been submitted coiifinning that each lot contains suitable primary and alternate drainfield sites to serve the proposed residences. The elevation of the sites in Lot I is generally at least 1.5' or more above the 100 year flood elevation, and 3.5' above the delineated wetland elevation. Page 2 of 9 • K CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. or r r 8. 10, Beth lots will gain access to Watertown Road via a shared driveway in proposed Outlet A. Lot 2 shall have no separate access to Watertown Road. The property contains a creek which flows tlroJgh an e.xtensive wetland system upstream of the property. The Orono Surface Water Management Plan indicates that the Nonnal Water Level for the large wetland basin just to the north of the property is elevation 963.5', with the High Water Level (100-year flood level) at elevation 970.4'. The top of the barik of the channel at the consfiiction are.a in Lot I is at approximate elevation 96S.0 ’, and closely matches the delineated w-etland boundary. Per the recommendation of the City Engineer, the OHWL for setback a.id lot area calculation purposes for the property should be established at the wetland boundary elevation of 963'. The proposed dnveway cro.ssing will include a culvert which has been sized to meet all anticipated stormwater demands. However, to ensure that no upstream homes arc flooded if the culvert plugs, the City Engineer has indicatco i'..e top surface of the dnveway crossing should be lowered from elevation 973.0 ’ to 972' to allow for an open channel overflow that w ill be 2' lower t'nan the lowest floor of the upstream residences (974' min.). The culvert should be an arch RCP to allow this reduction in height. The RFPE, i.e. the minimum floor elevation for any building, should be established at elevation 974'. In proposed Lot i, based on the topography and site plan submitted by the applicant, neither the buildable area nor the septic sites will be impacted by floodplain and OHWL elevations. The creek driveway crossing will require filling within floodplain as well as within the wetland. A number of variances are required to allow the crec’ic crossing. The specific issues with the dnveway which require variances arc: Portions will be within 75’ of the OHWL of »he creek where no hardcover or grading is allowed e.xcept by variance per Section 78-1236; Portions will be within a delineated wetland or within 26' of the wetland, where no grading or filling is normally allowed. Grading and filling in or near a wetland, and crossing of the creek, arc also subject to WCA regulations administered for Orono by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Page 3 of 9 1 . f ] • •« I ii CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.Fi ' >if * mm ».» ..rf 11. Substantial runoff from the adjoining properties to the east flows westward over the property. Incorporation of drainage swales is necessary along the driveway to accommodate this drainage. 12. Because the property includes a signiflcant length of creek which flows to Lake Minnetonka, the incorporation of vegetative buffers for stormwater treatment is appropriate. The applicant has proposed a 35' buffer adjacent to cither side of the creek, which will be subject to a buffer casement. 13. The topography of the site indicates a steep hill at the south end of Lot 1, and the proposed driveway will skirt the base of this hill. Neighbors have expressed a contem whether this area might be buildable. The slope is approximately 40% in some areas, and portions of it may meet the definition of a bluff, which would be unbuildable area. The area southeast of the creek within Lot I with slopes of 18% or greater should be deemed as non-buildablc. 14. A park fee of $200 was paid for the existing Lot 1 when it was created in 1990 per the ordinance in place at that time, and no park fee was paid for Lot 2. on the basis that I.ot 2 had previously had a house on it. Because the current application is primanly a lot line rearrangement between two existing lots of record, no park fees should be due with the current application. 15. Because the subdivision is primarily the rearrangement of tw .' existing lots in order to make the northerly lot buildable, the argument can be made that only the newly buildable lot (Lot 1) should be subject to the 3tonn Water anu Drainage Trunk Fee which is charged tor land being developed. 16. Based on the above findings and appropriate conditions of approval, the proposed re-plat will result in two lots suitable for ihe construction of single family residences without the need for further variances. e f Page 4 of 9 r CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ^ • m NO. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Hickory Fine Homes, Inc. per the preliminary plat drawings by Mark S. Gronberg, a licensed surveyor of Gronberg and Associates, Inc, dated January 16, 2004, subject to the following conditions: 1. A hardcover variance for the driveway creek crossing will be granted upon final plat approval, such variance allowing only the amount of hardcover within 75' of the bank of the creek that is necessary to accomplish the creek crossing. Similarly, a variance will be granted for filling within the floodplain to accomplish the creek crossing, subject to any requirements that may be established by the Minnehah.a Creek VV.rtcrshcd District for such work. Only the one proposed creek crossing shall be allowed, 2. A lot width variance of 95' for Lot I will be granted upon final plat appro' al. 3. 4. 6. 7. Applicant shall establish a 35' vegetative buffer and grant a conservation casement over said buffer, along both sides of the creek within Lots 1 and 2. Subdividcr is hereby advised that the City will not grant final plat approval until the MCWD has approved all grading and drainage improvements on the property, and applicant has obtained the appuipriate MCWD and other pennits for the crcck dtiveway crossing for Lot I, and for stormwater management on the site. Applicant shall giant a Flo vage and Conservation Easement over all areas of the plat designated as wetland. The existing drainage casements and conservation and flowagc easements will be vacated by the City in favor of new such easements at the time of final plat approval. Setbacks; a) Lot 1 is subject to 150% of the standard setbacks, per the staff sketch attached to this resolution as E.xhibit A. b) Lot 2 is subject to a 50' side street setback for the principal structure from the driveway outlet, rather than 'he normal 30' side setback. Approval is subject to all recommendations noted in the City Engineer's letter of 1-22- 04, plus any drainage provisions deemed necessary by City Engineer to accommodate drainage from the east. Page 5 of 9 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL NO.- > 8. 9. 10. ll. 12. 13. 15. 16. Neither lot is subject to the Park Fee because such fee was paid with the prior subdivision. Lot I, considered as a newly buildable lot, is subject to a Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee in the amount of SI0,800. Lot 2 is an existing buildable lot and is therefore not subject to the Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee. The sloped area southeast of the creek within Lot I with slopes of 18% or greater shall be considered as non-buildable land. Applicant shall execute a covenant establishing restrictions on this portion of Lot 1 to prohibit the plactmcnt of structures w ithin said sloped areas. Applicant shall submit a final driveway design meeting the approval of the Orono Fire Marshal and the City Engineer prior to issuance of building pemiits. Applicant shall provide to the City ev idence of a pnvate shared driveway easement and covenants for driveway maintenance over Outlot A in favor of Lots 1 and 2. Lot 2 shall have vehicular access to Watertown Road via the private driveway to be established in Outlot A, and any existing access points from lot 2 to Watertown Road shall be graded so as to be unusable, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any home on Lot 2. All identified primary and alternate sewage system drainficld sites within the subdivision shall be fenced off prior to any land alterations, and such fencing shall remain in place until such time that each Lot is developed. Subdivider shall establish covenants for each lot for protection of drainfield sit' - within each Lot. Covenants shall include protective language for alternate septic sites along with site plans locating both primary and alternative sites. Applicant shall include language alerting future properf' owners of the need to protect sites on adjacent properties. Subdivider is hereby advised that preliminary subdivision approval will expire within one year of the date of Council approval, March 8, 2005. Should the subdivider fail to complete the filing of the finai plat application within the year deadline, it shall *'c necessary for the subdivider to file a new preliminary subdivision application with the City. Page 6 of 9 • r \ CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Final Plat Submittals: The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning .administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows: 1.Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for fi.e City’s records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to I" = 200'. Drawing to include: a.Lot lines platted per preliminary' survey by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin Gronberg and Associates. Inc. dated January 16, 2004, except as modified below. b.Dedication of drainage and utility easements 10' wide along the e.xtcrior boundaries of property and 5' along the internal lot lines. d.Designation and dedication of drainage easements over drainageways as may be required. Designat.^n of delineated wetlands on the plat drawings. c. Naming of the plat. 2. Legal documents required: a.Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein sh.ill sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c.Signed and executed Flowage and Conservation Easement to be granted over the wetlands and drainageways within plat. Page 7 of 9 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.? ' ^ 'r d.Signed and executed Buffer Easement over the portion of Lots I and 2 within 35' of the creek. 3. Fee.s to be paid: Total due; $11,330.00* a. Final plat review fee = $250.00 b.Legal review and f.Iing fees for subdivision and associated documents S280.00 c. Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee in the amount of $10,800 for Lot 1. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 8th day of March, 2004, ATTEST; Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 8 of 9 I • I \ 2004, by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of tlic City of Oiono, a Miimcsota municipal coipoiation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. 4.,I . .* • VT*,. .• I » . *'PVV. • * *J V. N > Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) .•» A , 1 he foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of I 1 i . , 2004, by Linda S. Vcc, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the Ctty. rv-'jpa cc?.:~ »;0T • • ( fc:jc • K '.r.. :** ?/ L«pifc) An ». >.'• ^ Notary Public Page 9 of 9 mm A »ci JKM %\ / • V ** ;y____________________i .; h. I ■^l I \ 't • It.****; "y*7‘J" * "*' .‘T ’ " "* ^* !=..V lonno-i:. ? ^ .......j j-;; j• ‘J^.r.Et’lTTYrtTl Q'IhMJ'«''y^*'-^''' T*1 k ^^-USaucB i ^ ......... f ttt t\u JXJOO A t Application Date: December 17,2003 loitla' '0-Day Review Period Expiration (Sit< 60-Day Extension Notincation Faxed on 2-13 120 Day Review Expiration (Subdivision): A; Aoditional 60 day extension granted by appli REQUEST Department Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron^^/^ Title: Planning Director Item Description: #04-2974 “S NW - Proposed Comm - Preliminar - General O - Comprehe List of Exhibits A - General Concept Plan B - Preliminary Plat Appre C - Comprehensive Plan A D - Draft PUD 4A Agreen E - Draft Rezoning Ordin? F - Planning Commission G - Draft Planning Comm H - Met Council Review ^ I - Applicant’s Draft Sign; J - Applicant’s Letter of P K - PC Memo and Exhibi Application Status: Planning C on May 17 and on a vote of "^-O revisions and conditions. Thest General Concept Plan Approva on June 14. The Metropolitan Council on N Amendment for Stonebay Outli A resolution formally approvin Application Date: December 17,2003 loltal 60-Day Review Period Expiration (Site Plan A PUD Reioning): Febnirr)-15, 2004 60-Day Extcniion Notincatioo Faxed on 2-13-04, Extension to: ApriilS, 2004 !20DayReviewExpiration(Subdivision):Apriil 5,2004 Additionai 60 day extension granted by appiicant April 12,2004 to: June 15,2004 JLN I 4 2004 ■^'NG CITY OK OhO.NQ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: June 10, 2004 Item No.: Department Approval: .Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron^^/^^ Title: Planning Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: it04-2974 “Stonebay Marketplace ”, Reliance Dev, Corp., NW Quadrant Hwy 1 2AVillow Drive - Proposed Commercial PUD Development: - Preliminary Plat Approval - Resolution - General Concept Plan Approval - Resolution - Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Resolution List of Exhibits A - General Concept Plan Approval Resolution (for adoption) B - Preliminary Plat Approval Resolution (for adoption) C - Comprehensive Plan Amendment Resolution (for adoption) D - Draft PUD 4A Agreement (for content review and acceptance) E - Draft Rezoning Ordinance (to be adopted 6-28-04) F - Planning Commission Action Notice 5-21-04 G - Draft Planning Commission Minutes 5-17-04 H - Met Council Review VVaiver/Letter of Approval 5-13-04 I - Applicant ’s Draft Signage Agreement J - Applicant ’s Letter of Request re: MnDOT Limited Use Permit K - PC Memo and Exhibits of 5-14-04 Application Status: Plarming Commission reviewed the current development plan proposal on May 17 and on a vote of 7-0 recommended approval of the commercial site plan with minor revisions and conditions. These conditions and revisions are documented in the attached General Concept Plan Approval Resolution which is presented for Council review and adoption on June 14. The Metropolitan Council on May 14 advised the City that further review of the CMP Amendment for Stonebay Outlet A is waived, and we may put the amendment into effect. A resolution formaliy approving the CMP Amendment is attached for review and adoption. I' L *04-2974 Stonebay Marketplace June 10,2004 Pace 2 Please carefully review the staff memo and exhibits of May 13, especially the site plans and elevation views of the buildings. Council should identify and discuss on June 14 any issues of concern with the proposal. I'laniiing ContiiUssioii Kccomim’”dalion 'Ihc applicant is requesting Council approval of the commercial site plan and development plans for this retail project. The review process fonnally commenced in December ?003 has resulted in numerous revisions of the site plan and building plans to meet City goals for this piopcrty. Planning Commission on May 17 unanimously recommended approval of the most current plans, attached to tlic May 13 staff memo. The planning Commi.ssion's recommendations have been incoiporated into a dctaileil Resolution Approving the General Concept Plan (lixhibit A attached) which is the most critical document for yom review. This resolution establishes the background for the approval and lists numcious conditions of approval which must be met in order to gain “General Development Plan Approval". Planning ('omini.ssion concluded that a majority of these conditions are met by the current plans, that the plans arc sulTicient to allow granting of Concept Plan Approval, and only minor tweaks and a variety of document submittals arc required in order for the City to grant General Development Plan Approval, which wiMild be a sc|)arate resolution likely presented for formal action on June 28. ,S I a rr R eco m III e II (I a t ion Staff IS satisfied with virlually all aspects of the cuiiciit proposal. The applicant has complied with the conditions established by the City in the C’omp Plan Amendment for this site, and has revised plans to be in confoimance w ith the recommendations of tlic City l-nginccr and the City’s Planning Consultant. Staff rccoinnieiuls adoption by individual motions of the following resolutions att.iched: 1) GcncraLCoiiccpt Plaji Approval Resolution (lixhibit A attaclieil) 2) treLiijnnary Plat Approval Resolution (lixhibit U attached) 3) Coni|uehcnsivc Plan Ainendmeiit Resolution (lixhibit C attached) Council should review the language of tiic drat) PI ’D -t.\ .Xviccment (Pxhibit D att.ulied) ,md advise staff of any issues or necessary’ revisions/additions to this document. A copy of the re/oiu.ig ordinance is also attacbal for your review. I hc following documents would be scheduled for Council action on June 28: 4) JMati Approyaljfcso (to be draftcil) 5) F-Uial Plat Approval Resolution (to be dratted) Re/oiiiiut Ordinance for PUD 4.\ (Exhibit F. attached) 1 > I «04>2974 Stencbay Marketplace June 10,2004 Page 3 StafT will follow up with MnDOT regarding the applicant's request for assistance in acquiring the necessary MnDOT 1 imited Use Permit for the tenace gathering area feature to be located on Outlot B (see discussion of this in May 13 memo). COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED 1. Motion to adopt "A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN OUTLOT A. STONEBAY - FILE NO. 04-2974". 2. Motion to adopt “A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELLMINARY PLAT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN OUTLOT A, STONEBAY - FILE NO. 04-2974". 3. I Motion to adopt "A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMEND.MENT H2 OF THE 2000-2020 CUT OF ORONO COMMIT in IH Y MANAGEMEN f PLAN REGARDING OUTLOT A, STONEBAY”. 1I • A A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN OUTLOT A, STONEBAV FILE NO. 04-2974 Draft ns 6-8-04 WHEREAS, Reliance Development Company LLC (hereinafter the "Developer") has an interest in the property legally described as Outlet A, STONEBAY, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the “Property") within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City"); and WHEREAS, the property is located in the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area for wliich the City has established special requirements for rezoning and development per Municipal Code Sections 78-1061 through 78-1067; and WHEREAS, the City of Orono Highway 12 Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinance (Municipal Code Sections 78-1001 through 78-1008) requires a multiple step approval process for properties developing via the PUD process; the General Concept Plan approval stage is the lust step in the process followed by the Development Plan approval stage; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested General Concept Plan Approval for Planned Unit Development of this 3.69 acre property. Proposed is a rezoning from PUD/RR-1B One Family Rural Residential District to PUD/B-6 Highway Commercial District for commercial retail and office use of the parcel. The intended use of the property is for 28,750 s.f. of commercial retail including a 4,9(j 0 K.f. rctail/officc building; an 8,9/0 s.f. rctaiL'office building; and a 14,820 s.f Walgreens retail building; and WHEREAS, the Orono City Council makes the following findings in regard to this application for rezoning and PUD General Concept Plan approval; FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File //04-2974. 2. Tlic property is zoned PUD/RR-IB One Family Rural Residential Zoning District The property consists of approximately 3.69 acres. Page 1 of 19 I 1 3.Rezoning of the property ISrom PUD/RR-IB One Family Rural Residential to PUD/B-6 Highway Commercial District commercial retail/ofTice use is in keeping with the intent, goals and policies of Amendment U2 of the 2000-2020 Orono Community Management Plan (CMP) which re-guided Outlot A from Commercial - Professional Office uses to Commercial • Retail/Office uses. Per Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1061, the minimum area for a rezoning in the Highway 12 Corridor is 5 acres. The property is nominally 3.69 acres in area; Outlot A was created in 2003 within the plat of STONEB.^Y specifically for future commercial use, and platted as an outlot w'ith the intent that its future development be via the PUD process. Because the site exists as a separate parcel with no abutting land available for acquisition by the Developer, and because the proposed use conforms to the CMP and the B-6 district, an area variance to allow rezoning of the site was anticipated at the time the parcel w'as created. Required lot area and lot width for the 3-6 District are 2.0 acres and 100 ’ respectively. The development proposal creates two lots; Lot 1 = 1.98 acres / 370’, and Lot 2 = 1.71 acres and 135'. Both lots are slightly undersized in area; however, the site at 3.69 acres is limited by having no additional land available, which serves as justification to allow the creation of lots smaller than the lot area requirement. Other properties abutting or near the Property are used for or planned for uses which are generally compatible with the proposed commercial retail/office uses. The Property is at the northw-est quadrant of Highway 12 and Willow Drive. The other three quadrants of that intersection are currently used for conunercial retail purposes, r0 the north across Kelley Parkway is the StoneBay residential development which will benefit from the neighborhood scale retail uses proposed for the Property. The applicant has provided preliminary plans attached to this resolution as Exhibits _ includmg site plan, grading plan, utility plan and landscaping plan (all dated 5-7-04) and conceptual building construction plans (dated ________) which the Council finds are sufficient to indicate the intent of the developer and the potential impacts cf the project. Page 2 of 19 8. Because the lots are each slightly less than 2 acres in area, they are subject to the 15% “lot coverage by structures” limit imposed by Zoning Code Section 78-1403. The proposed PUD development plan includes an 8,970 s.f. retail building and a 4,960 s.f. retail building on Lot 1 (86,268 s.f.) yielding a proposed structural lot coverage of 16.1%. On Lot 2 (74,428 s.f.) a 14,820 s.f. Walgreens is proposed, yielding a proposed structural lot coverage of 19 9%. Total structural coverage on the 3.69 acre site will be 17.9%. Approval of the e.xcessive structural lot coverage is justified eased on the fa>. t that the proposed plan will exceed the City’s goal of 25% overall green space for commercial sites (26% proposed); that the proposal is consistent with similar commercial development in the area; that if the site was not being divided to accommodate multiple ownerships the 15®/« limit would not apply, that holding to the 15®/o limit would underutilize the site, given the limited amount of land zoned for commercial uses in Orono; and tha* the available commercial land should be developed at a level that will maximize its potential while still conforming with the go als and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 9. The proposed site plan meets the general access standards developed for the Highway 12 corridor, in that primar>' access is directly to Kelley Parkway, with a secondary access to Willow Drive and no access to Highway 12. Trail links and sidewalks arc proposed, including an 8' wide bituminous trail along Willow Drive and Highw ay 12 which is part of the Orono comprehensive trail system. An easement will be required for this trail. Sidcwalks/trails within the Kelley Parkway and Highway 12 rights-of-way are subject to approval by Orono and MnDOT respectively. 10. Stormwater management w ill be provided by stormwater catch basins and stoim sew er lines w'hich will discharge to the existing regional stormwater pond located directly west of the property. This regional pond was sized to serv'c all development within the plat of STONEBAY and additional surrounding properties. In addition to the City of Orono, MnDOT and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District havv approval authority over the Developer ’s stormwater management plan. 11. The City Council finds that the development of this critical comer property for conunercial retail use must maintain the high standard of quality, character, context and compatibility of development desired by the City for Kelley Parkway. To this end, the City in reguiding this site to allow commercial retail use established a number of Page 3 of 19 12. specific parameters and design guidelines intended to result in development that is a benefit to the surrounding neighborhood while taking advantage of the amenities provided by its location adjacent to the regional stormwater pond. In order to ensure that development of the property will result in an expression of Orono’s open space character and image, and to ensure that the above noted goals are met, the City Council will herein establish minimum Concept Plan Approval conditions to be met by the developer in order to gain Development Plan Approval. The City Council finds that the proposed rezoning and proposed development of the site for commercial retail uses is appropriate for the property, will not have negative impacts on the surrounding properties when all Concept Plan Approval conditions arc met, and is in keeping with the goals, policies and philosophies of the City. CONCI.LSIO.NS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the General Concept Plan for development of Outlot A. STONEBAY into two commercial building lots for rctail/officc uses subject to the following declarations and conditions; 1 The City of Orono w ill approve rezoning of the property to PUD B-6 as described herein upon City Council finding of satisfactory completion of the Conditions for Development Pliui approval. Allowed uses for the property shall be only those uses specified in the Ordinance that rc/oncs the property to PUD/B-6. 2.Conditions for Development Plan Approval are as follows: A. Development Standards and General Conditions. 1) the Development Plan shall adhere to the following standards as required by the 2000-2020 Orono Community Management Plan as amended: .5. No individual buildings may be greater than 15,000 s.f gross floor area. Page 4 of 19 b. One building must be a pharmacy /convenience store. c. f. g- The remaining buildings shall have no individual tenant space greater than 7,000 s.f. The most westerly building on the site shall be oriented and designed in a manner that focuses on the regional pond as an amenity for customers or tenants. Buildings on the site shall be oriented with a goal of providing an inviting vehicle and pedestrian entry from Kelley Parkway without having negative visual impacts on the Stonebay residential development. Architectural design and details shall be carefully prepared by any developer of the site to ensure a high quality of design, compatible with the quality of the office buildings on Kelley Parkway, and shall be subject to City approval through the PUD process. Building materials shall be high quality and durable, shall be compatible with the quality of the office buildings on Kelley Parkw ay, and shall be subject to City approval through the PUD process. The Development Plan shall generally adhere to the B-6 Highway Commercial District standards except as modified specifically herein. Lot coverage by structures (exclusive of the proposed trash enclosures and exclusive of the drive-through canopies or roof systems) shall not exceed 13,930 s.f or 16.1% for lot I, and shall not exceed 14,820 s.f or 19.9% for Lot 2. The percentage of the property that is devoted to Green Space, i.e. landscaped areas incorporating live vegetative materials and being pervious to rainfall or stormwater shall be maximized to the greatest extent possible but in no case shall be less than 2S% of the area of Lots 1 and 2 combined, exclusive of the required trails. Page5ofl9 The site layout shall adhere closely to the Preliminary Site Plan attached hereto as Exhibit__. Critical features ot the site layout which must be incorporated into the final plans include the following; a. b. c. d. The primary vehicular access to the site shall be from Kelley Parkway at a location approximately at the midpoint of the north property boundary. Such access will have one entrance lane and two (right-turn, lefr-tum) exit lanes. An exit only lane shall be provided near the northwest comer of Lot 1. Secondary vehicular access to the site shall be a right-in'ri^t out access to Willow Drive as depicted in Exhibit___. The final design configuration of this entrance/exit shall meet the approval of the City Engineer, and this entrance/exit shall be provided with appropriate traffre control signage to reduce the potential for traffic conflicts between the right-in entrance and the Walgreen ’s drive-through lane. No other vehicular access points to the site will be allowed, and any existing curb cuts or access points to Highway 12, Willow Drive or Kelley Parkway shall be removed at the time of site development. Building orientations, sizes, footprint shapes, and setbacks relative to lot lines and to other buildings shall substantially conform to the Preliminary Site Plan (Exhibit__). For this PUD rezoning and use conversion, setback requirements have been established at 35' for buildings and 20* for parking, based on the B-1 retail standards which are more appropriate than the B-6 office standards for the proposed retail uses. Established setback requirements for this site are sliowm in the following table: Page 6 of 19 r Required Setbacks Front (south)Side Interior Side Street Rear (north) Required fropoMd Required fropoied Required Propoied Required Proposed West Buildinf Lot 1 35*85*NA NA (w) 35'(w) 20'35'42* East Building Lot 1 35*125*10*40*NA NA 35'49* Walgreens Lot 2 35*180'10*40*35'40*35*42* Parking* Lot 1 20'20'5*O'*NA NA 20'20' Parking* Lot 2 20'20*S' O'*20'20'-32'20'20* 'Includes driving lanes ’This 0* setback is a function of the shared driveway system Ii The only building or parking setback that is not required to meet the established standards is the west side setback for Retail Building A, allowed to be 20' from the west lot line of Lot 1 rather than 35*. This relaxed setback allows for a more intimate association with the pond while not resulting in a visual crowding problem to the west, as this west lot line does not abut a road or an adjacent building site. The parking lot within Lot 2 adjacent to Willow Drive shall meet a 33' setback from the east boundary of Lot I as depicted on the Preliminary Site Plan. e.The angular relationship of the buildings on the site, and the angular relationship and the separation between the Retail A and Retail B buildings, shall be maintained as depicted on the Preliminary Site Plan to visually break up the impact of what would potentially otherwise appear as a single 250 ’ wide strip mall. Additionally, the orientation of storefronts away from Kelley Parkway and toward the center of the property is a critical aspect of the site plan. The Walgreens store entrance shall be at the southwesterly comer of the building as dq>icted on the Preliminary Site Plan. This orientation reduces the impact of the main entrance to the site being at what is functionally the rear of the 3 buildings. Pagc7ofl9 f. L g< Interior site circulation shall be substantially as depicted on the Preliminary Site Plan, including the orientation and layout of interior driving lanes and parking stalls, parking lot islands, backup aprons, drive-through lanes, etc. The Walgreens drive-through may include a second drive through lane with a bypass lane as shown; however, the second drive-through lane and b>pass lane shall not be covered by a roof or canopy. Interior landscaping shrubbery at key intersection points shall be low level for traffic visibility. Appropriate Uaffic and parking signage within the site shall be installed subject to the Orono staff and City Engineer's review and approval. Required off-street parking shall include sixty (60) stalls to serve the Walgreens building based on the Walgreens model for parking needs; and one stall per ISO s.f. of net retail space for the two retail buildings (net being 90% of gross square footage). Based on this fonnula, required parking for the site is as follows; Required Stalls Walgreens 60 East Retail Building (8,970 sf x 0.9 / 150)54 \%est Retail Building (4,960 sf k 0.9 / ISO)30 Total Required 144 Suits The Preliminary Site Plan provides 145 standard stalls plus 5 accessible stalls. All required parking shall be provided at the standard stall width of 9' X 20', with accessible stalls meeting aDA and other pertinent requirements. Pedestrian access within the site shall provide for attractive and safe access and circulation throughout the site, as well as to trail and public sidewalk connection points. The sidewalks and pedestrian crossings shall be located as shown on the Preliminary Site Plan. An additional, more direct designated pedestrian connection to the Walgreens main entry from the Willow Drive shall be incorporated into the plans. This may Page 8 of 19 result in the loss of one parking stall.Sidewalk crossmgs of the paildng lot shall be of varied surface textures and colorings to identify crossing points. Tlie following building design standards shall be incorporated into final plans for all buildings on the property: a.Architectural plans shall be prepared by an architect or other qualified persons acceptable to the City and shall show the following for all structures: elevations of all sides of the building; type and color of exterior building materials; complete floor plans; dimensions of all structures; the location of trash and recycling containers and of heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Unadorned prestressed concrete panels, concrete block and unfinished metal shall not be permitted as exterior materials for principal and accessory buildings. This restriction shall apply to all principal and accessory structures. Building exterior materials, colors and architectural design features shall be substantially as indicated on the Preliminary Building Elevation plan sheets attached hereto as Exhibit ___, and the materials/colors palettes on file with the Orono Planning Director and described within Exhibit ___attached hereto. Final decisions by the Developer regarding colors, types and qualities of building materials shall be subject to City staff approval. (Note; / don’t currently have the darker palette for the Walgreens in hand,..) Accessory structures shall be architecturally compatible with principal structures. Accessory stmetures for trash and trash handling equipment shall be constructed of the same building material as the principal structure and be readily served through swinging doors, which shall incorporate substantial metal frames. Pagc9of 19 8) d.All rooftop or ground mounted mechanical equipment and exterior trash and recycling storage areas shall be fully enclosed or screened so as to not be visible with materials compatible with the principal structure. e. Underground utilities shall be provided for all structures. f. 8- No temporary buildings shall be erected or constructed on the property. Building heights shall not exceed the heights indicated on the Elevation View Plan Sheets EL-1, EL-2 and A2.1 attached hereto as Exhibit h.Final design plans for the two retail buildings on Lot 1 and the Walgreens building on Lot 2 shall incorporate a variety common arclritectural design elements to provide a degree of compatibility among the three buildings. Landscaping plan shall meet all landscaping standards established for the B-6 Distnet in Zoning Code Section 78-797(8). In addition, the Developer shall be responsible for sodding the boulevard of Kelley Parkway and any other areas outside the property boundary that may be disturbed. Landscaping of the site shall be at a minimum as shown the Preliminary landscape Plan. Sheets L2.1 and L7.1 attached hereto as Exhibit___. Irrigation of all landscape areas will be required and must be shown on final plans. A perfomiance bond (letter of credit) will be required for the landscaping. The City reserves the right to require ac ditional landscaping materials for trash enclosure or ser\ ice area screening purposes upon completion of site development if the approved plan proves insufficient to meet the screening goals established herein. 1 he property owner shall be responsible for installation and maintenance of the terrace or public gathering area to be located northwest of Retail Building A, partially within Lot 1 and partially within Outlot B. Stonebay, as depicted on Sheet . This pedestrian amenity that focuses on the pond is intended as an informal picnic or gathering area for the public. Because it is partially located within Outlot B, which is currently MnDOT right-of-way dedicated for regional stormwater pond use, the City will assist the developer in gaining agency Page 10 of 19 1 approvals for construction and maintenance of this feature. Assignment of maintenance responsibilities for the terrace area to the owner of Lot 1 will be allowed. A maintenance agreement between the potentially involved parties (City, Developer, MnDOT, Hennepii. County) shall be required. Lighting on the site shall adhere to the pertinent zoning code standards, and shall be subject to approval by the City Council. Site lighting shall be shielded and directed downward. Site ligliting along the ea^t and south boundaries shall be provided adequate to light the trails along these two sides of the property. Parking lot and building lighting shall be installed per the Preliminary Ligliting Plan, Sheet E2.1 attached hereto as Exhibit____. The plan indicates 20 “Gardco ” 400W luminaires at strategic locations throughout the site, on 20’ high poles. The * ght poles at 20' will be lower than the peak heiglits of the buildings. Any revisions to this plan will require City approval. Building mounted exterior lighting shall be designed in such a manner as to be downcast and shielded. Lighting of the service areas at the rear of the buildings shall be adequate for safety purposes but shall be of minimum necessary intensity to reduce impacts on the Stonebay neighboring residential development. 10) Signage for the site shall adhere to the following; a. The only allowed signage on the property shall include the following; 1.A single retail monument sign for each lot similar to those depicted on Sheet___(Walgreens monument sign) and Sheet SN-1 (Retail monument sign). 2.A single development identification monument sign near the intersection of Highway 12 and Willow Drive Sheets as depictcil on Sheet C2.2. Building wall signage only to the extent (locations, dimensions and square footage) as depicted on Sheet A2.1 (Walgreens wall signage); and Sheets ELI and EL2 (retail buildings wall signage); Page n of 19 J r 4. Traffic and parking control signage as necessary to manage parking and circulation on the site. d. Temporary signage may be allowed on the site via permit subject to the provisions of Zoning Code Sections 78-1466(8). The Walgreens monument sign may include an “illuminated reader board" as depicted on Sheet___. However, the message on the reader board may be changed only one time witliin ;uiy 24-hour period, and such message shall be stationary and shall be displayed continuously ratlier than scrolling, blinking, fla-shing or being shown on an intermittent basis. Tlic Walgreens and Retail monument signs shall be allowed a signage urea of 62 s.f. per face, shall bo limited to 10* in total height (including base, frame and signage), shall be completely framed by base materials rather than partially framed as depicted, shall be allowed a total biisc/framc width of 14 ’, and shall otherwise meet the monument signage requirements of the Zoning Code. Developer shall prepare and submit a signage plan and criteria to establi.sh more detailed signage standards for the property which shall become an element of the PUD Agreement for the property. The proposed pedestnan trail aK ig the Willow Drive, Highway 12 and westerly boundaiies of the Propeity shall be 8' wide, of bituminous surfacing atrd shall be located within the properly boundaries as depieted on the Preliminary Site Plan attached hereto as E.xhibit__. Tlic Developer shall grant to the City an casement for public trail piirpo.scs over the 8’ trail within the property boundaries. The Developer shall create agreements and cross casement.s between the tw'o Lots regarding the mutual use and maintenance responsibility for shared parking areas, driving lanes, utilities, etc. e. Page l2ofl9 f Trash handling facilities as shown on the Preliminary Site Plan and on the submitted cross-sectional views anached as Exhibit__, shall be fully enclosed from view via trash enclosures constructed of the same building materials as the principal structure and shall be further screened with 4-season vegetation. Such structures shall be readily served through swinging doors, which shall incorporate substantial metal frames. Applicants' architect shall submit final development plans to the Metro Council Environmental Services to determine the exact number of SAC units to be charged for each building at the time of the issuance of building permits. Stormwater Management . A stormwater management plan shall be submitted by the Developer which shall be reviewed by the City Engineer to confirm it is in compliance with City standards. All stormwater from the site shall be directed to the regional pond immediately west of the site which was designed with capacity for development of this site. Developer shall provide suitable evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) approval of the stormwater management plan before General Development Plan Approval will be granted. Erosion control shall adhere to "Best Management Practices for Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas". All erosion controls as required by the City and by the MCWD shall be in place prior to commencement of excavation on the site. B C. 16) This concept plan approval is based upon the known issues that may affect this project, but this tqiproval does not limit the City from revising or amending these conditions as the review process continues. Platting Process. Applicant shall complete all requirements for Final Plat Approval as outlined in a forthcoming Preliminary Plat Approval Resolution. Plans and Specincations. The following plans and specifications shall be submitted for review and approval by the City and other appropriate jurisdictions: Page 13 of 19 Final plans and specifications for all proposed utility lines and services, including any proposed revisions to existing service facilities. Proposed plans shall be provided to the City for final review and approval with the Preliminary Plan set. The Public Works Department shall review and approve all utility improvements. Final sanitary sewer and watcimain plans shall be provided and are subject to approval by the Public Works Department. Final grading, drainage and erosion control plan showing existing and proposed contours, building locations, elevations, stormwater facilities and calculations, utilities and erosion control measures to be used diuing construction. Development Plan Approval will not be granted until the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has approved the stormwater management plans. Final landscaping design plan with planting schedules including numbers and species, in accordance with the landscaping requirements of the B-6 zoning district. Final building construction plans, including: elevations of all sides of the building; type and color of exterior building materials; proposed floor plans; building dimensions; and the location of trash and recycling containers and of heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment. Parking lot construction plans, including confirmation that parking lots and driving lanes will be paved and provided with concrete curb and gutter, and that all driving lanes within parking lots shall Page 14 of 19 D. E. F. have a 9-ton minimum pavement section. A geotechnical evaluation of the soil shall be done in conjunction with the pavement design and shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. Detailed signage and lighting plans. Any additional plans and specifications deemed necessary by the City as review progresses. Development Agreement. Development Approval is contingent upon the successful execution of a Development Agreement between the applicant and the City. Such Agreement shall address all specific City requirements for the development. Financial Guarantee. The Development Agreement shall include a financial guarantee by the Developer to ensure the completion of site improvements. The City Engineer shall complete an estimate of improvement costs, including but not limited to landscaping, grading, erosion control, utilities, driveways and parking areas, trails, sidewalks, retaining walls and stormwater management facility construction, and the Developer shall provide to the City a financial guarantee of 150% of the improvement costs. Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee. The Developer shall pay a Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee as determined within Exhibit M of that certain document known as the STONEBAY PUD NO. 4 AGREEMENT dated _______. The amount of the Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee due for Outlots A and D, STONEBAY, was established at S46,S91 with the stipulation that if Outlots A and D are not developed at the same time, the acreage of the outlot being developed divided by the total acreage of both outlots shall detemiine the fraction of the total fee due. Outlot A includes 3.7 acres; Outlot D includes 3.5 acres. The fraction of the Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee due for Outlot A is 3.7 / 7.2 = 0.514 or 51.4%. The Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee for Outlot A is therefore 0.514 x $46,591 - $23,948. Page IS of 19 j. 4. G.Park Dedication. The Developer shall pay a Park Dedicatiorr Fee in lieu of land dedication as determined within Exhibit M of that certain document known as the STONEBAY PUD NO. 4 AGREEMENT dated . The amount of the Park Dedication Fee due for Outlets A and D, STONEBAY, was established at $98,970 with the stipulation that if Outlets A and D arc not developed at the same time, the acreage of the outlet being developed divided by the total acreage of both outlets shall determine the h^action of the total fee due. Outlet A includes 3.7 acres; Outlet D includes 3.5 acres. The fraction of the Park Dedication Fee due for Outlet A is 3.7 / 7.2 = 0.514 or 51.4%. The Park Dedication Fee for Outlet A is therefore 0.514 x $98,970 “ $50,870. Sewer and Water Connection Charges. The Developer shall pay sewer and water connection charges to the City as determined within Exhibit M of that certain document known as the STONEBAY PUD NO. 4 AGREEMENT dated ______ . The amount of the Sewxr and Water Connection Charges due for Outlets A and D, STONEBAY, was established at $101,486 with the stipulation that if Outlots A and D are not developed at the same time, the acreage of the outlet being developed divided by the total acreage of both outlots shall detennine the fraction of the total fee due. Outlet A includes 3.7 acics, Outlot D includes 3.5 acres. The fraction of the Sewer and Water Connection Charges due for Outlot A is 3.7 7.2 - 0.514 or 514%. The Sewer and Water Connection Charge due for Outlot A is therefore 0.514 x $101,486 - $52,164. 1 Iris General Concept Plan Approval resolution approves the development concept subject to the applicant meeting the requirements of this resolution and all other requu-ements of the City. This resolution does not constitute approval of the rc/oning. Such approval shall only be considered when the City Council finds that all “Conditions for Development Phut Approval ” as identified herein have been met. This General Concept Plan Approval shall be effective for a period of 6 months from the date of this resolution. If Development Plan Approval is not granted within that period, the terms and conditions of this resolution shall be null and void. The City Council at its sole di.scretion may extend this effective period. Page 16 ofl9 uiiuaiBii 5. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Covincil on this day of , 2004, ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Applicant (for Reliance Development Company LLC as Developer) Pagel7ofI9 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this__day of..2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this___day of 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 18 of 19 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of 2004, personally appeared before me, ____who is personally known to me ____whose identity 1 proved on the basis of whose identity I proved on the oath/afTirmation of ___________, a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed on behalf of Professional Properties of Orono, LLP. Notary Public Page 19 of 19 K 8 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN OUTLOT A, STONEBAY FILE NO. 04-2974 WHEREAS, Reliance Development Company LLC (hereinafter the "Developer”) has an interest in the property within the City of Orono Hiereinafter the "City") legally described as “Outlot A, STONEBAY, Hennepin County, Minnesota” (hereinafter the "Property"), and WHEREAS, the Developer on December 17,2003, completed the filing of a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a two lot commercial plat of the property in conjunction with a request for Orono Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval for commercial development of the Properly; and WHEREAS, the (PUD) ordinance requires a multi-step approval process for properties developing as a Planned Unit Development. Resolution No.______for Concept Plan and General Development Plan Approval was adopted by the City Council on____________, 2004. Preliminary Plat approval is required prior to the granting of Final Plat approval and is a condition of General Development Plan approval; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the General Development Plan approval, the Developer has requested Preliminary Plat approval for a two lot plat of the 3.69 acre Property to create two lots of 1.98 acre and 1.71 acre respectively, such Lots to be rezoned from PLT)/RR-1 B Rural Residential District to PUD/B-6 Highway Commercial District, and proposed for commercial retail and office use; and WHEREAS, the Orono City Council makes the following findings in regard to this application: FINDINGS 1.This ^plication was reviewed as Zoning Files #04-2974 for simultaneous review of the preliminary and final plat of STONEBAY ADDITION. Page 1 of6 The property is currently zoned PUD/RR-IB Rural Residential District. The property is 3.69 acres in area. 3. The City Council adopted Resolution No.on . 2004, making findings and conditions which support the proposed platting ofOutlot A into two separate Lots as noted herein, and approving the General Development Plan for development of two retail commcrcial/office buildings totaling 13,930 s.f. on Lot 1 and a 14,820 s.f Walgreens retail building on Lot 2. The findings and conditions of Resolution No.______arc incorporated herein by reference. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby grants Preliminary Plat Approval for Reliance Development Company LLC for a 2 -lot plat per the preliminary plat survey^drawing by Howard W. Rogers as depicted on the Preliminary Plat Sheet C5.1 dated May 7,2004 and attached hereto as Exhibit A, subject to the following conditions: 1.Plans and Specifications. The following plans and specifications shall be submitted for review and approval by the City and other appropriate jurisdictions, to ensure that the proposed plat will accomplish the intended purposes; Final plans and specifications for all proposed utility lines and services, including proposed revisions, if any, to existing ser\ice facilities. (Plans and specifications for service line connections around the pond. Final grading, drainage and erosion control pl.m showing existing and proposed contours, building locations, elevations, stonnwater facilities and calculations, utilities and erosion control measures to be used during construction. Final Plat Approval will not be granted until the Minnclialia Creek Watershed District has approved the stormwater management plans. c) Engineering details and design for any proposed retaining walls. Page 2 of 6 1f . I \ r d) Final landscaping design plan with planting schedules including numbers and species, in accordance with the landscaping requirements of the B-6 zoning district. e) Final building construction plans. f) Road and parking lot construction plans. A geotechnical evaluation of the soil shall be done in conjunction with the pavement design and shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval.. 2.Easements. 3. a) Drainage and Utility Easements shall be granted to the City of Orono over all public utility lines and rights of way. b) Drainage and Utility Easements shall be dedicated to the public on the final plat 10' along all exterior property lines, and 5' either side of the interior property line. c) All required stormwater facilities to be developed on the site shall be designated on the plat as drainage easements. Developers Agreements. Applicant to execute Developer's Agreement for construction of improvements in each of Lots 1 and 2 to ensure all site improvements arc installed to City's specifications and satisfaction. Said Developers Agreement may contain additional conditions not noted in this Preliminary Plat Approval resolution. No land alterations can take place until erosion control is established and the City is in receipt of a final grading and road plan. No improvements can begin until City Engineer has approved all improvement plans. A Letter of Credit must accompany a fully executed Developer's Agreement w-ntten to 150% of the cost of the proposed site improvements, including landscaping. Page 3 of 6 The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows: 1.Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City’s records and one for filing with Hermepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200’. Drawing to include: A. Lot lines platted per preliminary plat survey/drawing by Howard VV. Rogers ns depicted on the Preliminary Plat Sheet C5.1 dated May 7, 2004 attached hereto as Exhibit A. D.Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10' along exterior property lines and 5’ along the interior property line. C.Designation and dedication on the plat drawings of drainage and utility easements over all proposed sewer, water, and stomi sewer lines and facilities subject to review and approval by the Public Works Department and City Engineer. D. Naming of plat. 2. Legal documents required A. Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. n. Tlie applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. C. Signed and executed Shared Facilities Agrcenient aildressing maintenance and use of the shared parking areas, driving lanes, etc. of Lots I and 2. Page 4 of 6 N Mi ^■1 held this ATTEST: D. Signed and executed Developers Agreements for construction of improvements within Lots 1 and 2. 3. Plat approval fees to be paid: Total due: $ A. Final plat fee “ S B. Legal review and filing fees for subdivision and associated documents - S C. Park Dedication Fee: D. Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fee: Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Mirmesota at a regular meeting . day of_______________, 2004. Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page S of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this___day of 2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this__day of__________, 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 6 of 6 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT #2 OF THE 2000-2020 CITY OF ORONO COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT PLAN REGARDING STONEBAY OUTLOT 2 WHEREAS, theCity of Orono is a municipal coiporation located within Hennepin County and within the planning jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Council; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1976 and its amendments, and with Minnesota Statutes Chapters 462 and 473, the City of Orono in November 2001 adopted a comprehensive municipal plan known as the 2000-2020 City of Orono Community Management Plan (also referred to as the 2000-2020 CMP) to provide for the orderly development of the City. An integral element of the 2000-2020 CMP is the Land Use Plan which establishes alIov\ cd uses for property within the City; and WHEREAS, the City received a request from the property owner and a proposed developer of Outlot A, Stonebay to re-guide the property currently guided for primarily conuncrcial ofiice use, to additionally allow primarily commercial retail use of the site; and WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed legal notice to the affected and adjoining property owners, on January 20. 2004, February 17,2004 and March 15, 2004 the Orono Planning Commission held public hearings regarding the proposed CMP amendment, at which times all parties wishing to speak regarding this matter were heard; and WTIEREAS, on March 22,2004 the City Council voted 4-0 to conceptually approve a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to rc-guidc the property currently guided for primarily commercial office use, to additionally allow primarily commercial retail use of the site; and WHEREAS, on April 12,2004 the City Council voted 4-0 to approve the text of the 2000-2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment #2 subject to review' and comment by the Metropolitan Council, and directed staff to proceed with an application to the Metropolitan Council for approval; and WHEREAS, 2000-2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment #2 consists of text revisions and a map revision attached hereto as Exhibits A and B; and Page 1 of2 J r t \, »i WHEREAS, on April 30,2004 documentation for2000-2020 CMP Amendment U2 was submitted to the Metropolitan Council for t^iproval and written notice was sent to the cities of Long Lake and Medina, to the Orono School District, and to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as the only potentially affected neighboring local units of government, requesting written comment; and WHEREAS, no negative conunents were received; and WHEREAS, on May 14,2004 the Metropolitan Council indicated to the City via letter that the 2000-2020 CMP Amendment #2 - Stonebay Outlet A is in conformance with metropolitan system plans, consistent with the Regional Blueprint, and has no impact on the plans of other units of local government. The letter indicated that Metropolitan Council waives further review and the City may place the amendment into effect. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RFSOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby amends the 2000-2020 City of Orono Community Management Plan Part 3B, Land Use Plan by incorporating into the Plan revisions to the section entitled ‘Urban Commercial Land Use’ on pages 3B-37 through 3B-40 per Exhibit A attachede hereto, and by amending Map 3B-7 per Exhibit B attached hereto, finding that: 1.The amendment meets the intent of the basic goals, objectives and policies set fonli in the 2000-2020 CMP. 2. The amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, needs and desires of Orono residents. 3. The amendment is consistent with the plaruiing goals and objectives of Orono's municipal neighbors. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota this 14th day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vec, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 2 of2 II iiiimUrti >*04-2974 Stonebay Outlet A CMP Amendment Text April IS, 2004 Page 1 Exhibit A Resolution No. Amendment to 2000-2020 CMP Text as Approved bv City Council 4-12-04 Part 1. The text below is excerpted directly from tlie 2000-2020 Community Management Plan as an introduction to the proposed amendment text which follows as Part 2. Deletions and additions to the existing text are shown in bold strikeout / underline fonnat. Land Use Plan, CMP Section 3B, Pages 3B-37 thru 3B-40 ‘‘Urban Commercial Land Use Urban commercial development is limited to two areas wliich are provided witli all the necessary urban services and facilities. The major commercial center of Orono will continue to be the crossroads center ofNavane. This area will provide sufficient opportunity for neigliborhood retail and service businesses, plus adequate professional offices, to sci"vc the needs of most Orono residents. Accessory functions such as offices and owner-occupied living units or limited multi-family developments will be considered appropriate in or near theNavanc commercial area. The scale and type of retail uses in a pedestrian-friendly environment is the m.ost important development parameter for thcNavane commercial ai ca. The City will encourage redevelopment of individual commercial sites in Navarre to allow for an expanded range of neighborhood services and local small business opportunities. An additional commercial area is designated along Highway 12 where the availability of transportation and utilities as well as proximity to similar commercial developments in Orono and Long Lake, make commercial use appropriate. Orono will seek to coordinate its commercial development planning related to the Highway 12 area with the City of Long Lake to ensure the I.x)ng Lake downto\Mi area remains vital and viable, to focus retail development in a compact downtown retail area, and to prevent lirnit the extension of retail development west of Willow Drive in Orono. The retail development in the Highway 12 ar ea will be community/neighborhood scale rather than ‘big box’ regional scale development. Tlie types of retail uses will be those tliat focus on providing services to tlic residents andbusincsscs of Long Lake and Orono, while also drawing from the traffic stream that will be on current Higliway 12 after the Highway 12 Reroute is open. However, the retail development is not to draw substantial traffic from beyond Orono. The development plans for the Highway 12 area will encourage locally-owned and operated businesses that provide services to Orono and Long Lake residents. Additionally, the Highway 12 retail area will be a pedestrian-friendly area. This involves providing trails/sidewalks along the roadways providing access to the retail uses. It also involves providing public amenities that provide a sense of place and provide a gathering place for the public.”'■ .V « r i M' #04*2974 Stoncbay Outlet A CMP Amendment Text April IS, 2004 Page 2 ‘The two commercial areas along Highway 12 within Orono are identified inMap 3B*7 and include the following: 1.Property abutting the north side of existing Highway 12 (Wayzata Boulevard) from Brown Road North to Willow Drive. This area was reviewed as part of Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 in 1989, resulting in a guide plan calling for commercial uses abutting Highway 12, with primary access to a service read connecting finm Brown Road to Willow Drive, and elimination of direct access to Highway 12. The area is currently bounded on the northbyexisting residential development at densities ranging from 1 unit per 2 acres to 1 unit per 1.3 acres. The wcstemhalf ofdiis area has since been developed viaPUD "s a nursery/garden center with included leasable commercial spaces. The east half of this area includes a strip shopping center, a new 10,000 s.f. office building, aird a vacant 6.S acre parcel at the northwest quadrant of Brown Road and Highway 12. The City Council in February 1998 adopted a General Concept Plan for development along Highway 12 indicating that the Council's vision includes community scale retail development (as opposed to regional or ‘bigbox’ scale development) focused in a more compact area in or near downtown Long Lake (closer to Brown Road than to Willow Drive, at least in the short term) for the following reasons: 1.Focuses on downtown Long Lake remaining a strong retail area, and helps preserve owner-operated small service businesses in Long Lake which are vital to Orono and Long Lake residents. 2.Focuses on maintaining a vital downtown and "sense of place" for both Long Lake and Orono. 3. A compact retail area encourages pedestrian activity. 4 . It is easier to plan, coordinate and control the development o f a more compact retail area than an extended retail strip. 5.Focusing development toward Brown Road could strengthen the ability to obtain desirable development on tlie north side of Highway 12 east oftheOtten Brothers Nursery. » I I f #04-2974 Stoncbay Outlot A CMP Amendment Text April 15,2004 Page 3 i 6.Enables better control over the amount ofrctail development *hat occurs along Highway 12. 7. Provides the opportunity to generate stable jobs in office, high tech, medical, etc. 8.A more compact community scale retail area matches the design of new Highway 12 with no interchanges through Long Lake. 9. Limits the impact on north/south roadways (i.e. increased traffic and activity levels) as compared to the more intense "big box" retail uses. 10. Maintains a lower activity level in the area west of Willow Drive. 11. Would create less pressure for providing an access from new Highway 12 to the retail area. Atcordmgly, this area should be developed with a tnix of commercial uses including retail, service and office components. Access via a service road paralleling Highway 12 should still be required rather than direct access io Highway 12, since existing traffic levels along Highway 12 aic expected to remain at a level wliich makes direct all-way access difficult and dangerous. The Highway 12 re-route ("proposed Hi ghway 12") when completed in approximately 2007 will have a significant impact on access for this area, because cuncni Highway 12 traffic levels are expected to increase between now and 2007, then should drop dramatically when the Bypass opens. However, traffic levels on "old Highway 12" after 2007 arc expected to again creep upward, and the long-term need for a service road may again manifest itself For this reason, it is in the best interests of the City and the business community to preserve at least a partial service road corridor between Brown Road and Willow for friturc use, that will provide all properties with access options other than ducct access from 1 lighway 12. The City supports the development of a "mid-point" connection to Highway 12 directly across from Brimhall Avenue, such access to be at least a right-in, right-out configuration. Further, if and when the service road is constructed, all other existing accesses directly to Highway 12 should ultimately be removed." ^^2. Property abutting the north side of existing Highway 12 from Willow Drive to Old Crystal Bay Road, This area (shown on Map 3B-7 as the ‘commercial’ portion ofParccl Group 1) currently is vacant property, comprised of 3 tax parcels with some 2600 feet of Highway 12 frontage. As part of the 1989 Comprehensive Plan amendment, the City #04-2974 Slonebay Outlot A CMP Amendment Text Aprill 5,2004 Page 4 guided the portion of this area directly adjacent to the north side of High\^ay 12 for commercial development. At that time, the City was not clear about the type of commercial development that should be planned for this area. Through joint discussions with the City of Long Lake regarding development along Highway 12, the City has determined that the optimum development in this area would be office development. OfSce development can provide services for Orono residents, can provide facilities for businesses owned by Orono residents, and can provide quality employment opportunities. The development of this area for office use versus retail use eiubles tlie Highway 1 2 retail area to remain a more compact pedestrian-friendly retail area versus a non-cohesive extended strip of retail development. Access to all office uses will be via a service road connecting Willow Drive and Old Crystal Bay Road, with no direct access points onto Highway 12. Development of this service road began in 1991 with the extension of Kelley Parkway eastward from Old Crystal Bay Road. The City’s intent is to have a single tier of office uses between Kelley Parkway and Highway 12, with primarily residential uses north of the service road. Due to construction of a stormwater retention pond by MnDOT midway between Old Crystal Bay Road and Willow, and the City’s intent to develop the area north of the service road residentially at a density of 2-6 units per acre, the opportunities for large office sites are limited. As many as six 2-2.5 acre office sites can be developed along the Highway 12 frontage while still allowing the intended residential development to occur. This area is guided for office use with minor retail and service uses allowed only as accessory uses to the office use. “Big box" retail usesvill not be allowed within this area. Part 2. Tire above section of the CMP, along with Map 3B-7, will be amended to reflect the intended conversion of Outlot A, Stonebay from prinrarily office use to primarily retail use. The following amendment text was adopted by Council at its April 12 meeting: “The portion of Parcel Group 1 between Kellev Parkway and Highway 1 2 as depicted in Mao 3B-7 is subdivided into fovu-tax parcels for commercial development. Each of the four parcels abuts Hiehwav 1 2 on the south and Kellev Parkway on the north. The most westerly parcel, at the intersection of Hiehwav 1 2 and Old Crystal Bav Road, is 2 acres in area and has been developed for dental office use. The 2.5 acre parcel directly east of the dental site is currently being developed for medical office use '1 1 t 1 riMiMiiii I'l ^04-2974 Stoncbay Outlet A CMP Amendment Text April 15,2004 Page S The third of the four parcels is Outlot D of Stonebav. a 3.5 acre parcel likewise euided for office use and anticipated to be developed for office use during the period 2004-2006. These three abutting parcels are located across Highway 12 from the Orono Industrial Park which in the past has been used for processing and manufacturing. The industrial park has potential for redevelopment and is guided to encourage conversion to light industnal high tech uses, as well as oflice-showroom. The City does not intend to allow commercial retail or service uses within the industrial park. The fourth parcel. Outlot A. Stonebav. 3.5 acres in area, is located at the northwest quadrant of the signalized Highway 12 / Willow Drive intersection. Outlot A is remotely located from the first three parcels, separated from them bv a regional stormwater pond. The opposite three quadrants of the 12AVillcw intersection are developed with retail uses: the NE quadrant is a garden center with adjoining retail shops; the SE quadrant is an off-sale liquor store and coffee drive-thru: and the SW quadrant is a convenience store / service station. Outlot A and the three other parcels between Kelley Parkway and Highway 12 are currently guided for office use with minor retail accessory to the office use. The purpose of this guiding was to avoid creatine a substantial retail center with its attendant traffic and visual impacts, and to avoid the expansion of retail substantially westward from its current terminus at the intersection of 12AVillow. This goal has been to a great extent met bv the office developments completed, underway and anticipated west of the regional storm water pond. The Stonebav residential development immediately north ofKellevParkwav will eventually include approximately 160 residential units. That development was approved with the concept of walkabilitv in mind, including ample sidewalk and trail connections to the commercial areas to the southeast as well as to the City facilities and Orono Schools campus to the west. The Stonebav residential development will result in a mixed use neighborhood, with residential, office and institutional uses. This mixed use neighborhood would benefit from nearby neighborhood-scale retail uses that would serve the neighborhood. The retail uses that would most benefit the mix of residential and non-residential uses in the neighborhood, would be a neighborhood-scale pharmacv/convefiience store and neighborhood-scale food-oriented uses. This amendment to the 2000-2020 Community Management Plan re-guides Outlot A of Stonebav to additionally allow for neighborhood-scale retail uses, as an alternative to the office use for which it is Ci.'.rrently guided. The definition of “neighborhood-scale retail uses" for Outlot A includes the following parameters which must be adhered to for anv retail use developed and maintained on the property: ! i ......AHilialMi t ¥ W04-2974 Stoncbay Outlet A CMP Amendment Text April 15,2004 Paged No individual buildings greater than 15.000 s.f. gross floor area. One building must be a pharmacy /convenience store. The remaining buildings shall have no individual tenant space greater than 7.000 s.f. The most westerly building on the site shall be oriented and designed in a manner that focuses on the regional pond as an amenity for customers or tenants. Buildings on the site shall be oriented with a goal of providing an inviting vehicle and pedestri an entry from Kellev Parkway without creating negative visual impacts for the Stonebavresi^gntj al development. Architectural design and details shall be carefiillv prepared bv anv developer of the site to ensure a lligh Quality of design, compatible with tlie Quality of the office buildings on Kellev Parkway, and shall be subject to City approval through the PUD process. Building materials shall be hidi quality and diurable. shall be compatible with die quality of the office buildings on Kellev Parkway, and shall be subject to City approval through the PUD process F 1 Draft »2 6-10-04 CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINESOTA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 4A AGREEMENT FOR LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1, STONEBAY ADDITION DEVELOPER: RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LLC THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this___day of .,2004, by and between the City of Orono, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota (hereinafter called “City ”), and Reliance Development Company LLC, a Minnesota limit;: , liability corporation, its heirs, successors and assigns (hereinafter called “Developer”). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Developer has made application to the City Council for approval of a Planned Unit Development rezoning application (PUD) including a subdivision and a commercial site plan review, for the purpose ofdeveloping two commercial lots, to be legally described as Lots 1 and 2, Block I, STONEBAY ADDITION, Hennepin County, M’nnesota; and WHEREAS, on , 2004 the City Council granted Concept and General Development Plan Approval for development of nvo retail commercial/office buildings totaling 13,930 s.f on Lot 1 and a 14,820 s.f. Walgreens retail building on Lot 2 per Resolution No._____, including approval ofpreliminary design and site plans and establishing final approval conditions, on the condition that the Developer enter into this agreement to provide for conformance with the City ’s Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinances, to document parameters for the development and use of the site, and to provide for the installation and maintenance of improvements associated with the development. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, and of the actual promises and condkions hereinafter contained, it is hereby agreed as follows: A. Geoeral Terms and Conditions 1.Property Description. This Planned Unit Development No. 4A Agreement for Reliance Development Company LLC applies to the following described property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota: Outlot A, STONEBAY, Hennepin County, Minnesota (to be platted as Lots 1 and 2, STONEBAY ADDITION) (hereinafter the “Property”); and Developer Initial_____ City Clerk Initial_____ Page 1 of 12 i 2. Zoning . Per City ofOrono Ordinance No.________, Third Series, adopted by the City Council on ____________, 2004, the Property is zoned as a Planned Unit Development No. 4A under the Orono planned unit development ordinance with underlying B-6 zoning. 3. Permitted Structures. Within Lot 1 the only permitted principal structures arc a 4, 960 s.f. retail/office building and an 8,970 s.f. retail/office building, as depicted in the Preliminary Site Plan (attached hereto as Exhibit ___) and preliminary building plans and elevations (attached hereto as Exhibit __). Within Lot 2, the only permitted principal structure is the 14,820 s.f Walgreens retail building as depicted in the Preliminary Site Plan (attached hereto as Exhibit ___) and preliminary building plans and elevations (attached hereto as Exhibit __). The only accessory structures allowed within Lots I and 2 arc the trash enclosures and monument identification signs shown on the approved plans. No other accessory structures arc permitted on the Property except by amendment of this agreement. 4. Allowed Uses. The uses of the Property shall be limited to those Permitted Uses, Conditional Uses and Acce-ssory Uses established in Ordinance No.____, Third Series. Other uses shall not be allowed except by amendment ofthis PUD agreement. All users shall be obligated to conform to all applicable Orono ordinances and to the provisions of this PUD agreement. 5. Site Access. Internal circulation for the Property shall be via private driveway's and parking areas. Access to adjoining public streets shall be limited to one entrance/cxit access and one exit-only access to Kelley Parkway; and one riglit-in/right-out access to Willow Drive as depicted on the approved Preliminary Site Plan. OfF-site access improvements that are the responsibility of the de\’eloper shall itKlude construction of curb cuts and driveway aprons within the right-of-way of Kelley Parkway and Willow Drive, as well as the relocation of existing hydrants and storm sewer facilities, etc. if necessary to accomplish the required site accesses. All such off-site improvements shall be performed to City specifications and shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Public Services prior to commencement of such improvements. 6 • Building Design and Construction. All buildings on the Property shall be constructed according to final plans which shall first be certi fied by’ the Plaiuiing Director as being in conformity with the approved plans attached as Exhibit ___. The exterior of the building shall be of materials consistent w^h the preliminary materials proposal attached as Exhibit ____. Construction of all buildings shall be in conformance with the building codes and regulations adopted by the City of Orono. Any substantial changes to the gross square footage, footprint/wall/roof dimensions or defined building height shall require a prior amendment to this Agreement. Page 2 of 12 Developer Initial City Clerk Initial 7. 8. Landscaping. The approved landscaping plan attached to this Agreement as Exhibit__shall be strictly adhered to, with the following conditions: a)Landscaping plan shall meet all landscaping standards established for the B-6 District in Zoning Code Section 78-797(8). The Developer shall be responsible for sodding the boulevard of Kelley Parkway and any other areas outside the property boundary that may be disturbed. c) Landscaping of the site shall be at a minimum as shown the Preliminary Landscape Plan, Sheets L2.1 and L7.1 attached hereto as Exhibit Irrigation of all landscape areas will be required and must be shown on final plans. A performance bond (letter of credit) will be required for the landscaping. The City reserves the right to require additional landscaping materials for trash enclosure or service area screening purposes upon completion of site development i f the approved plan proves insufficient to meet the screening goals established herein. Ligllting . Site lighting shall adhere to the approved lighting plan attached to this agreement as Exhibit___. Lighting on the site shall adhere to the pertinent zoning code standards, and shall be subject to final approval by the City Council. Site lighting shall meet the following standards: Site lighting shtll be shielded and directed downward. Site lighting along the east and south bound;iries shall be provided adequate to light tlie trails along these two sides of the property. Piuking lot and building ligliting shall be installed per the Preliininaiy Lighting Plan, Sheet E2.1 attached hereto as Exhibit ____. The plan indicates 20 “Gardco ” 400W luminaires at strategic locations throughout the site, on 20' high poles. The light poles at 20' will bt lower than the peak heights of the buildings. Any revisions to this plan will require City approval. Building mounted exterior lighting .shall be designed in such a manner as to be downcast and sliiclded. Lighting of the service areas at the rear of the buildings shall be adequate for safety purposes but shall be of minimum necessary intensity to reduce impacts on the Stonebay neighboring residential development. Developer Initial City Clerk Initial Page 3 of 12 9.Sipiaee . Signage on the site shall be limited to the required traffic control signage, building wall signage, and to the three approved monument signs as shown on the approved Signage Plan attached hereto as Exhibit ___, subject to the conditions noted below. Parking and traffic control signage shall be installed subject to City staff and City Engineer approval. Site signage shall be governed via the following standards: The only allowed signage on the property shall include the following: I) A single retail monument sign for each lot similar to those depicted on Sheet (Walgreens monument sign) and Sheet SN-1 (Retail monument sign). 2) A single development identification monument sign near the intersection ofHighway 12 and Willow Drive Sheets as depicted on Sheet C2.2. 3) Building wall signage only to the extent (location.", dimcn.sioas and square footage) as depicted on Sheet A2.1 (Walgreens wall signage); and Sheets EL 1 and EL2 (retail buildings wall signage); 4) Traffic and parking control signage as necessaiy to manage parking ;uut circulation on the site. b) Temporary signage may be allowed on the site via permit subject to the provisions of Zoning Code Sections 78-1466(8). 1 he Walgrccns monument sign may include an “illumuiated reader board” as depicted on Sheet___. I lowcvcr, the message on the reader board may be changed only one time within any 24 -hour period, and such message shall be stationiuy and shall be displayed continuously ratlier titan scrolling, blutking, flashing or being shown on an intennittatt basis. The Walgreens and Retail monument signs shall be allowed a signage area of 62 s.f. per lace, shall be limited to 1 O' in total height (including base, frame and signage), shall be completely framed by bitsc materials rather than partially framed as depicted, shall be allowed a total base/frame width of 14', and shall otherwise meet the monument signage requirements of the Zoning Code. c) Developer shall prepare atid submit a signage plan and criteria to establish more detailed signage stand;uds for the property which shall become an clement of this PUD Agreement. Page 4 of 12 Developer Initial City Clerk hiitial B. Installation and Maintenance of ImDrovemeDtS 10. Improvements: In accordance with the policies and ordinances of the City of Orono, the following described public or private improvements (hereinafter collectively called the “Improvements") shall be constructed, installed and maintained by the Developer according to the terms and conditions contained in this PUD Agreement: (a) Site grading, driveways, curb and gutter, paiking lots, sidewalks, trails, retaining wails, and all necessary erosion control measures per the preliminary Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan attached hereto as Exhibit__(hereinafter called "site grading improvements”); (b) Construction of sanitary sewer and water coruiections (hereinafter called “sewer and water improvements") and construction of storm sewer lines and facilities (hereinafter called “stormwater improvements”) per the preliminary Utility Plan attached hereto as Exhibit (c) Underground natural gas, electric, cable and telephone service to be arranged by the Developer with the utility companies involved (hereinafter called the "other utility improvements"); (d) Landscaping and site revegetation improvements; irrigation systems; and other site landscape features per the approved Landscaping Plan attached hereto as Exhibit___ (hereinafter called “landscaping improvements"). (e) Traffic control signage subject to approval by the City Engineer and Public Services Director. (f) Lighting systems as shown on the approved Preliminaiy Lighting Plan attached hereto as Exhibit___. (g) Any additional improvements listed within the Site Improvements Cost Estimate attached hereto as Exhibit___. 11. Construction Plans: Detailed plans and specifications for the complete installation of the Improvements shall be submi tted by the Developer for the approval o f the City prior to issuance of appUcable City permits. The Plans and Speciftcations shall confonn to all current City standards for all applicable work and shall comply with the terms of this PUD Agreement. Page S of 12 Developer Initial City Clerk Initial r 12. Construction of Improvements: 13. (a) Commencement Date - The construction of Improvements shall begin no later than (b) (c) Completion Date - All Improvements shall be completed no later than Contractors - The Developer shall select, retain and supervise the Contractor(s) responsible for Improvement construction. The City reserves the right to require satisfactory proof of successful experience and adequate financial status of any such contractor. Where required by City ordinance, the contractor shall first obtain a license from the City. (d) Pre-Construction Conference - Prior to the start of any construction, the Developer and the Developer's Contractor shall meet with the responsible City official to review construction plans and schedules. Permits - Prior to the start of any construction, the Developer’s Contractor shall apply for and receive all necessary permits from the City and/or government agencies having jurisdiction. Required City permits relative to the Improvements include the following: Site Grading Permit; Utility Construction Permit; Sewer and Water Connection Permits. Developer is advised that an Erosion Control Permit must be obtained from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District before commencing any grading activity on the site. Construction - The construction, installation and materials shall be in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the City. (g) Insurance - The Developer will cause each person who constructs and installs any Improvement to maintain complete insurance coverage including Workmen's Compensation, Liability and Property Damage. Performance Deposit : For the purposes of assuring to the City that the Improvements will be completed according to the terms of this agreement, and that the Developer will pay or will cause to have paid all claims for work done and materials and supplies furnished, the Developer or his General Contractor will deposit with the C ity prior to issuance of site grading and building permits an irrevocable letter of credit in a form satisfactory to the City providing that the City is able to draw upon such letter of credit in its sole discretion to complete the Improvements if the Developer fails to satisfactorily complete the work prior to the completion date specified in Section 1 1 above. Page 6 of 12 Developer Initial, City Clerk Initial, mmait The amount of such deposit shall be 150% of the estimated improvement costs per the schedule to be attached to this document as Exhibit __. The amount of such deposit shall not be reduced before substantial completion of the Improvements. The letter of credit shall expire no sooner than six months after the completion date specified in Section 11 above. 14.Fees and Expenses: The Developer agrees to pay all City lees required per the current City Fee Schedule and further agrees to completely reimburse the City for all the variable additional expenses it incurs in regard to the review and approval of the Improvements including, but not limited to, direct City payroll and overhead, costs, and fees paid to consultants and other professionals, which arc not covered by City application fees. 15.Maintenance. The Developer shall be responsible for maintenance of all privately owned Improvements including roads, parking areas, sidewalks, and storm sewers, regardless whether easements for such improvements have been granted to the City. Developer shall permanently maintain site lighting, signage and land.scaping consistent with the approved Plans for said improvements. Developer shall be responsible for maintenance of all sewer imd water lines that are defined as “connections ” as indicated on the approved Utility Plan Developer shall be responsible for ensuring that the appearance and design of the building arc maintained per the approved building and consUuction plan, and shall be responsible for ensuring tliat the site amenities and features as shown on the approved site plan arc maintained per said plan. C. Ropresentations 16. Developer Representations and Covenants. The Developer hereby makes the following rcprcscnt.itions and covenants: (a) Tlic Developer has the legal authority and power to enter into tliis Agreement. Tlic Developer reasonably expects to obtain financial resources sufficient to enable the completion of the Improvements. riic Developer will, subject to the requirements of Sectio n D - Instalhati on and Maintenance of Improvements hereof, construct, operate and maintain the Improvements in accordance with the tenns of this Agreement and all local, state and federal laws ;uid regulations, and will construct or pay the costs of construction of any site improvements, utilities, landscaputg, stonnwater management facilities, roads, parking facilities which are necessary in connection with the construction and such improvements. Developer Initial City Clerk Initial' Page 7 of 12 1^ (d) At such time or times as maybe required by law, the Developer will have complied with all local, state and federal environmental reviews, licenses, and will be in compliance with the requirements of federal, state, and local authority. (e) The Developer will obtain, in a timely manner, all required permits, licenses and approvals, and will meet, in a timely maimer, all requirements of all local, state, and federal laws and regulations which must be obtained or met before the Improvements may be constructed. (f) It is intended and agreed that the covenants provided in this Section shall be covenants running with the land not the owner or developer. 17. City Representations and Covenants: The City makes the following representations as the basis for the undertaking on its part here in contained: (a) The City is authorized by law to enter into this Agreement and to carryout its obligations hereunder. (b) The City will, in a timely manner, subject to all notification requirements, review and act upon all submittals and application of the Developer and will cooperate with the effort of the Developer to secure the granting of any permit, bcense, or other approval required to constmct and operate the Improvements; provided, however, that nothing contained in this subparagraph shall be construed to limit in any way the reasonable and legitimate exercise of the City’s discretion in considering any submittal or application. (c) The Property is zoned for purposes which include the Development as proposed. The City has issued all necessary commercial site plan review approvals for the proposed development on the property. D. Administration 18. Compliance. At any time and from time to time the Developer may request that the City provide the Developer a certificate certifying that the terms and provisions of this Agreement have been complied with and that this PUD Agreement is in full force and effect with respect to the development for the purpose of facilitating sale, mortgage, insurance or other maners. To the extent that there be any bona fide defaults in such compliance, the Developer shall be afforded a reasonable time to bring the development into conformance, and thereafter the City shall be obligated to provide such certificate. Pages of 12 Developer Initial, City Clerk Initial. 19. 20. 22 23. Binding Erfcct: The terms and provisions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, representatives, successors and assigns of the parties hereto and shall be binding deemed covenantsrunning with the land. References herein to Developer, if there be more than one, shall mean each and all of them. This agreement at the option of the City shall be placed of record so as to give notice hereof to any subsequent purchasers and encumbrancers of all or any part of the property. Notices: Whenever in this agreement it shall be required or permitted that notice or demand be given or served by either party to this agreement to or on the other party, such notice or demand shall be delivered personally or mailed by United States certified mail (return receipt requested) to the addt esses set forth below. Such notice or demand shall be deemed timely given when delivered personally or when deposited in the mail in accordance with the above. Notice to City City of Orono Clerk/Administrator P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 NotjceJo_Devcloper Parties may substitute notice provisions upon notice to other pailics. bicorporation by Reference: All plans, special provisions, proposals, specifications and contracts for the Improvements furnished and let pursuant to this agreement shall be and hereby are made a part of this agreement by reference as fully as if set out herein in full. Disclaimer by City: It is understood and agreed that the City, the City Council, and the agents and employees of the City shall not be personally liable or responsible in any mamicr to the Developer or Developer's contractors, subcontractors, materialmen, laborers, or any other person, firm or corporation, for any debt, claim, demand, damages, actions, or causes of .action of any kind or ch.aractcr, arising out of or by rca.son of the execution of this agreement or the perfonnance and completion of the Improvements. Hold Hanniess and Indemnification: The Developer shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, the City Council, and the agents and employees of the City fiom and against all claims, damages, losses or expenses, including attorney fees, which the City, City Council and agents and employees of the City may suffer or for which it may be held liable, arising out of or resulting from the assertion against them of any claims, debts or obligations in consequence of the performance o f this agreement by the Developer, its emplo> ees, agents or sub-contrac tors, whether or not caused in part by a party indemnifted hereunder. Page9on2 Developer Initial City Clerk Initial By:. (Mayor) By: (City Clerk)I DEVELOPER • Reliance Development Company, LLC By: Reviewed for Administration: Date:By: (Planning Director) By:, (City Administrator) This instrument was drafted by: City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55356 Page 11 of 12 Developer Initial. City Clerk Initial STATE OF MINNF^ ’TA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instmment was acknowledged before me on this__day of .,2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this__day of ,2004 by Lmda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of .. 20_, personally appeared before me, ____ who is personally known to me ____whose id. ntity I proved on the basis of whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of credible witness .,a and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he-'she/they executed the same as hisilier/their free act and deed. Notary Public Page 12 of 12 Developer Initial. City Clerk Initial' i Exhibit C. Exhibit D. Exhibit £. Exhibit F. Exhibit C Exhibit H. Exhibit I.. Exhibit J.. Preliminary Utility Plan Preliminary Building Plans & Elevations Preliminary Landscaping Plan Preliminary Lighting Plan Preliminary Signage Plan Site Improvements Cost Estimate Shared Access and Parking Agreement Materials Proposal Depiction (Note: All Preliminary Plans subject to change; such changes will require City approval) Developer Initial. Page 13 of 12 City Clerk Initial. First Draft 5-24-04 ORDINANCE NO..THIRD SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF ORONO AND AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP BY REZONING PROPERTY WITHIN OUTLOT A, STONEBAY FROM PUD/RR-IB SINGLE FAMILY RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO PUD/B-6 HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND ADDING SECTION 10.53 SUBDIVISION 12 REGARDING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 4A - FILE #04-2974 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Reliance Development Company LLC, a Minnesota limited liability eorporatiun, has applied for rezoning and subdivision of the property within Outlet A, STONEBAY, Hennepin County, Minnesota, from PUD/RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential District to PUD/D-b Highway Commercial District, such properties being legally described as follows; Lots I and 2, Block 1, STONEBAY ADDITION, Hennepin County, Mirmesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the rezoning of said properties per the findings, temis and conditions of Resolution No._____adopted_________________, 2004, and the PUD No. 4 A Agreement between Reliance Developmctu Company LLC ar the City of Orono executed on_________ ,2004. .NOW.TIIEREFORE, THE CH Y COUNCIL OFTIIECITY OF ORONO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1 . ITic Municipal Ctnle ofOrono is amended by amending tlic official zoning map ;uul zoning distiiet boundaiies fur the piupcrty described .is follows: Lots I and 2, Block I, STONEBAY ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota Said property is hereby rezoned ftom RR-1 B Single Family Rural Residential District to PUD/"B-6 1 lighway Commercial L^istrict. Page 1 of 4 Sectionl. The Municipal Code ofOrono is amended by adding Section 78-1010 to read as follows; “Subd. 10. Planned Unit Development No. 4A - Reliance Development Company LLC (a) Legal Description. PUD No. 4A is legally described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, STONEBAY ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota.. (b) Incorporated herein by reference are the Reliance Development Company LLC PUD plans attached as exhibits to the PUD No. 4A agreement, on 61e in the OfBce of the Zoning Administrator under File #04-2974. Allowable Uses. The uses allowed in PUD No. 4A are as follows: (I) Permitted Uses: A. Retail and Service Businesses - The following neighborhood retail and service businesses supplying commodities or performing a service primarily for the residents in the surrounding neighborhood: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. Arts and school supplies store. Banks and insurance companies. Barber and be^>;y shops. Bicycle sales and repair. Books, magazines, recorded music/video shop. Drugs, candy, ice cream, so A drinks, cosmetics and other usual drug store merchandise. Dry cleaning and laundry pick-up stations including incidental pressing and repair. Garden supplies, florist shop (but not home and garden equipment rental). Gifl or antique shops. Hardware store, paint store. Hobby shops, camera and photographic supply store. Jewelry shops and repair. Locksmith. Music, radio. TV, appliance sales and repair store. Newsstands. Office supply store, office machine store, copy shop. Pipe and tobacco shops. Housewares, fumiUirc, carpet store. Postal substation. Real estate sales. Retail food of all varieties and heme supplies. Sewing center and yardgoods. Sporting goods store. Tailor shops. Page 2 of 4 25. Travel agencies, 26. Variety store. 27. Wearing apparel store, shoe store. 28. Off-sale Liquor Store B. Additional Permitted Uses. The following uses allowed in the B-6 District; 1. 2. 3. 4. Offices (business and professional). Banks and financial institutions. Libraries. Motels and hotels. (2) Conditional Uses: Restaurants (Class I). Food is served to customer while seated at counter or table, cr cafeteria in which food is selected by a customer while going through a line and taken to a table for consumption. Neither live entertainment nor intoxicating liquor sales are permitted in Class I Restaurants. B.Restaurants (Class II). Fast-food, convenience food, coffee shop, drivc-in, drive-through or liquor store restaurants, which is a restaurant where a majority of customers order and are served their food at a counter in packages prepared to leave the premises to be consumed; or a drive-in where most customers consume their food in an automobile parked on the premises, regardless ofhow it is served, or a drive-through where most customers pick up food at a drive-up window for consumption on or off the premises; or restaurants which serve intoxicating liquor or have live entertainment. C. The following uses when such use includes a drive-thru condition; 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Offices (business and professional). Banks and financial institutions. Libraries. Motels and hotels. Any of the Permined Retail and Service Business uses when such includes a drive-through facility. (3) Accessory Uses: A. Signs. Signs, as regulated in the zoning code for the B-1 District. Page 3 of 4 B. Temporary Buildings. Buildings temporarily located forpurposes of construction on the premises for a period not to exceed time necessary to complete said construction. C. Landscaping. Decorative landscape features. D. Fences. Fences, as regulated in the Zoning Code. E. Incidentals. Any incidental repair or processing necessary to conduct a permitted principal use, provided diat the incidental use shall not exceed 30% of the floor space of the principal building. F. Public Telephone Booths. Development Standards. Development standards shall be as indicated on the approved PUD No. 4A General Development Plan as documented within City Council Resolution No._____and the PUD No. 4 A Agreement on file in the Office of the Zoning Administrator under File #04-2974. Section 3. This ordinance shall be published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspaper and shall be effective upon publication. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the of___________, 2004 by a vote of__ayes and___nays. day ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 4 of 4 r F CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE ^04-2974 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 21, 2004 TO: John Trautz Reliance Development Co. LLP 1000 Rand Tower 527 Marquette Ave. S. Minneapolis, MN 55402-1327 COPIES: Frank Dunbar Dunbar Development Corp, 5000 Glenwood Avenue Golden Valley, MN 55422 Vicki Van Dell Landform 650 Butler North Building 510 First Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55403 TYPE OF APPLICATION:1) Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2) PUD Rezoning 3) Commercial Site Plan Review 4) Preliminary Subdivision DATE OF MEETING: May 17, 2004 Plaiming Commission on a vote of 7-0 recommended approval of the commercial site plan with minor revisions and conditions. Conditions of approval to be documented in PUD Rezoning Ordinance to be reviewed by Planning Commission at its June 2 work session, with Council review and action scheduled for the June 14 meeting. Applicant's next scheduled meetings arc confirmed as: 1) Planning Commission (Work Session) - Wednesday, June 2, 2004; meeting starts at 5:30 p.m 2) City Council • Monday, June 14, 2004; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available firom the City Recorder after review and approval by the Plaiuting Commission. If you have questions, please contact Planning Director Mike Gaffron at 952-249-4600. * MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Gaffron explained site drains issues arc reviewed when the applicant applies for a-building permit. He suggested the Planning Commission could add a condition in recommending approval of the lot area vanance that centrally locates the house. However, Gaffron noted that if the applicant were not agreeable to that condition, it would not be enforceabi V * Mr. Jacques stated that he was willing to a^ept the condition^/jTcentrally locating the house and pool. Chair Mabusth summarized that centrally locate^he house and pool location results in a larger setback than the proposed location at the 5’ side yard setback anh,l5' pool rear yard setback. Chair Mabusth called for further public comments w'ere none. \ 9 ^ Jurgens moved, Leslie seconded', to recommend approval of Application #01-2671, Alistair and Karen Jacques, 645 Old Long Lake Road, granting a lot area variai^e to permit construction of a new residence on an e.xisting lot which is 1.022 acres In area when 2.0.acres is normally required, with the y \condition that the^proposed house/garage/pool is more centrally located on the lot that shown on the # variance application. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. \ \ Fritzler inquired about a trailer that may be on Jacques' property. Mr. Jacques'ujdicated he was not aware of any. trailer behind his shed. Ms. Thompson responded that it was on her property. / ^ Gaffron advised Application #01-2671 will be scheduled for the June 14, 2004 City Council session 5. #04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLP, “STONEBAY MARKETPLACE,” NVV QUADRANT mVY 12AV1LLOW DRIVE, COMMERCLVL PUD DEVELOPMENT, CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING (6:28-6:59 p.m.) John Trautz, Reliance Development, Vickie Van Dell, Landform Engineering and Mike Spina, Amcon Construction, the applicant's representatives, were present. Gaffron reported the receipt of the Waiver of Further Review of the Orono Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the proposed Commercial PUD Development from the Metropolitan Council on May 17, 2004, completing Uiat part of the application. The Cottqjrchcnsivc Plan Amendment will be brought to the City Council for final action, ? I i-. p >•y. . Page 6 of 58 X ¥ B ' V *: * il: i.;Ttf MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONT)AY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Gaf&on advised revised plans were submitted to the City on May 7,2004 subsequent to recommendations made to the applicants by the Planning Commission on April 19, 2004. He outlined several facets of the revised commercial site plans, referring to the Staff Report, dated May 13, 2004: 1. Conformity with Comprehensive Plan - Staff believes the current pro"'Osal generally meets the parameters established in the CMP amendment for development of this site. 2. Coribrmity to B-6/PUD Standards A- Allowed Uses. The proposed buildings and site layout would reasonably accommodate many of the uses on the proposed list of allowable uses. B. Lot Area and Width, Required area and width for B-6 are 2.0 acres and 100'. The proposed preliminary plat creates nvo lots: Lot 1 = 1.9S acres / 370’, and Lot 2 = 1.71 acres and 135’. Both lots are slightly undersized in area; however, the site at 3.69 acres is limited by having no additional land available. Staff reconuncnds approval of the lot area and widths as proposed. C. Setbacks. Setback requirements and conformity were included in the April 15 memo, indicating that all setback requirements are met except for the west side setback for the westerly retail building, which is proposed at 20' rather than 35*. Staff recommends approval for this 20’ setback as discussed in the April 15 memo. The setback variance allows additional green space on the east end and also docs not cause the crowding effect because there are no buildings to the west to have visual crowding impacts. D. Draiitaae. The drainage plan is in place as part of the Stonebay subdivision with all drainage from the site going to the adjacent regional pond. E. Building Height. B-6 height limit is 30’. The Walgreens building has a roof peak height of 28'3" for the bulk of the building, and 32'6" for the entrance comer ‘parapet’ roof peak. Tne retail buildings have a basic height of 24*-8" with gable peaks extending to 33’-4.5" high. Staff recommends acceptance of these heights as proposed as they substantially meet expectations. F. Landscaping. Gaffron illustrated the building layout and referred to Exhibits L2.1 and L7.1, the landscaping plans and details for this property. These plans meet the general B-6 guidelines in terms of required information detail. The applicants indicated in their revised narrative that the proposed landscaping exceeds the requirements of the B-6 District. Gaffron stated the building layout accomplished a number of city goals, including improved landscaping areas inside the parking lot with a changed number of green spaces. He commented that a critical landscaping area is behind the buildings because of the existing and under-construction town homes across Kelley Parkway. The landscape plans were submitted Page 7 ofS8 r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY. MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. to Phil Carlson of DSU, Inc. for review and comment. His comments are anached as Exhibit K and are summarized as follows: 1. Plans appear to meet the B-6 landscaping requirements. 2. Irrigation of all landscape areas will be required and must be shoviVn on final plans. 3. Perfoimance bond (letter of credit) will be required. 4. Loading area screening at rear of buildings is adequate but could be beefed up. Gaffron pointed out boulevard trees as well as shrubbeiy, with substantial areas of low beiming and vegetation. He referred to the agenda packet materials containing cross-sectional views to give a sense of what the neighbonng properties to the north will view. 5. Ground and roof mounted mechanical equipment appears to be adequately screened. 6. Parking area island just outside Walgreens entrance doors should be vegetated (flowers or shrubs) rather than simply concrete. 7. Add sidewalk connection from Willow/l 2 intersection to Walgreens entrance. Gaffron e.xplained that while there are a number of vanable-pavement style connections, Phil Carlson of DSU. Inc. points cut the advantage of having a pedestrian connection that does not force movement across the Willow entrance but would bring pedestrians across the parking lot in a more direct path. It would result in a loss of one parking stall to make the pedestrian crossing but parking space calculations are actually +l parking space about the rcquitemcnt. Gaffron illustrated the additional detail prosnded regarding screening of trash facilities at the rear of the buildings shown in Plan Sheet L2.1 and the two Cross-Section Exhibits. He expressed that staff believes the screening looks adequate but it could be beefed up a bit. j G. Architectural Standards . Applicant has advised that he will work with the City to provide a face brick color acceptable to all parties. Applicant has provided samples of buildmg exterior material samples for review and approval, mcorporatmg darker colored brick. Revised elevations of the two westerly retail buildings have been submitted, and they appear to incorporate a variety of architectural features in common with the Walgreens building. Page 8 of 58 r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.ra. 3. Additional Site Plan Elements pedestrian Access. Gaffron reiterated the recommendation for a more direct designated pedestrian connection to the Walgreens main enrry from the Willow Drive and should be incorporated into the plans. Circulation. Gaffron reported that Sheldon Johnson, Orono’s traffic consultant with Bonestroo and Associates, reviewed the latest revisions and indicated to staff that the layout is acceptable and that his prior recommendations regarding traffic circulation have been incorporated into the plans. The right-in, right-out access to Willow has been refined to meet turning radius standards, and should function adequately. He recommends, and staff concurs, that signage be installed warning drivers entering the Walgreens drive-thru from the west to yield to, and watch for, incoming vehicles at the right-in, right-out. w/rerf Parking, Gaffron pointed out that in accordance with past Planning Commission discussions, the proposed ISO-stall number exceeds by one stall the requirements established for the site in terms of accepting Walgreens 60-stall need and the remaining reuil at the City requirement of I stall per ISO s.f. of net reuil space. Even if a stall is lost to provide the suggested pedestrian connection from Walgreens to the Willow/12 comer, the parking needs will be met. Staff recommends approval of the parking plan as designed. D. Lo t, Coverage. Gaffron referred to numerous prior Planning Commission discussions regarding where there is a substandard lot created and applying the 15% lot coverage requirement as required by Code Section 78-1403 which limits lots of 0-1.99 acres in area to 15% lot coverage by structures. The subdivision of the subject property results in the following: - Lot I (86,268 s.f. or 1.98 acres) is proposed with buildings totaling 13,930 s.f. or l6.l%covcrage. - Lot 2 (74,428 s.f.) is proposed with buildings totaling 14.820 s.f. or 19.9% coverage. - Overall coverage of the 3.69-acrc site is proposed at 17.9%, not including freestanding trash enclosures. w> Gaffron supplied information on the small number of developing or redeveloping commercial sites in Orono that were subject to the 15% lot coverage requirement These include: f 'Page 9 of 58 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY. MAY 17. 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Semcc 800 on Hwy 12 (0.96 acres, 26.1% lot coverage) - pre-existing site Culver ’s in Navarre (1.52 acres, 20.2% lot coverage) - pre-existing site Snyder's in Navarre (1.9 acres, 14% lot coverage) - pre-existing site Wagner Rental in Navarre (1.2 acres, 12 % lot coverage) - pre-existing site The dental ofTice on Kelley Parkway was a pre-existing 2.0-acre lot and not subject to the lot coverage limit. It has about 18% lot coverage. Gaffron stated that from staffs perspective the overage above the I S% is not an issue here and appears to be reasonable given the limited amount of site. He recognized the Community Management Plan references holding to the 15% limit but saw few potential problems as the City has so few sites zoned for commercial uses that he recommended maximizes rather than underutilizing the site. He spoke of a 'balancing act' and needing to have balance when applying requirements with the Community Management Plan's goals and policies. E. Green Space. Under the current proposal with the elimination of'proof-of-parking', green space on the site will be 26%, which meets the 25% goal. F. Loading Berths and Trash Enclosures. Location and details for loading berths and trash handling facilities, including cross-sectional views, were provided and shown on the plans. O. Sienase. The two primary monument signs are proposed at a dimension of 10' high and 14’-8" wide, exceeding the 10' width recently adopted for monum.ent signs (See Exhibit N, Ordinance No. 6, Third Series), including the pillars. The building wall signage appears to be consistent with what would be expected for a Walgreens and a small retail center and meets code standards. The Stonebay Monument at the comer of 12AVillow is acceptable to staff as designed. Message Board. Orono codes prohibit the use of illuminated scrolling or flashing reader boards such as that proposed for the Walgreens monument. Staff early on suggested to the applicants that the Walgreen signage not include a manual reader board, as they tend to be poorly maintained. Since then, it has been suggested that an illuminated message board such as that proposed, but with only one message Page lOof S8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. change per day and no flashing, scrolling, etc. would be more attracnve than a manual board. • Gaffron commented that the problem with allowing the illuminated board as proposed is that it could require ongoing monitoring, and that once it goes up, every other retail business in town will want one, but without the limitations. Approval of this one would set a negative precedent. He .^tJ^ed it would be an enforcement issue and potentially could see many other applications for an illuminated reader board sign from the Navarre area and Hwy 12. At this time staff recommends that the illuminated board not be allowed, and that if a message board is proposed that it be a manual board. H. Lighting.^ Gaffron referenced the exterior parking lot lighting plan shown on Sheet E2.1 in the packet. It shows the standard box-type, downcast lighting fixtures but does not specifically show whether any building-mounted lighting -s proposed. Staff recommends asking the applicant for this information. Also, Gaffron observed there is a fairly standardized lighting style for Stonebay Development and here at the commercial comer that there is a question of whether to have a more decorative fi,xnire given this is intending to set the tone for the Stonebay residential development. L Matters . City Engineer Tom Kellogg provided his comments in Exhibit G dated April 23, 2004. He has alto reviewed the May 7,2004 plan set and his comments remain unchanged. His recommendations relate primarily to matters that will be addressed during the final plan stages of development. 4. Preliminary Plat Gaffron illustrated the two-lot layout resulting from the lot subdivision with separate owtt.rships, Walgreens' parcel and the parcel with the other two retail buildings. 5. Rezoning Gaffron advised that the draft rezoning ordinance for the site has yet to be prepared by staff, but will be prepared for Planning Commission review at its June work session prior to final Council action. Gaffron stated the Planning Commission had about 8-9 remaining issues to address: Page 11 of 58 .. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY. MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. 1. Address approval of the lot area and widths as proposed, as well as the lot coverage issue. 2. Address approval of the west side setback for Retail Building A. 3. Address acceptance of the ISO-stall parking proposal. 4. Address any remaining landscaping issuer or co icems. 5. Address the signage issues and fle.xibility request. 6. Address height of buildings. 7. Address any concerns regarding facade coloration or materials. 8. Address whether buildmg-mounted lighting is proposed. 9. Any other issues for consideration. Gaffron recommended approval of the proposed Commercial Site Plan Review subject to the various recommendations in the text of the May 13, 2004 Staff Report Any motion to recommend approval should address the remaining issues, and provide clear direction to the oplicant. Gaffron believed the application is ready to be forwarded to the City Council subject to Planm ’g Commission rccom.Tiended conditions for approval. Chair Mabusth asked the applicant if there wer** any questions to staff, tt Shelley Johnson, Engineer or Phil Carlson, DSU. Mr. John Traulz stated they are in agreement with just about everything identified by staff as outstanding issues, lie accepted the 10' wide requirement for the monument signs and the manual reader board. Mr. Traulz asked the Plaiuiing Commission to consider not idcntifynng the space in front of Walgreens* entrance as a landscaped area but as a walkway to the building's access point. He indicated landscaping features would make it more difficult for patrons to enter the building and proposed some other treahnent, such as paintmg. Kempf asked if this area was raised above the par'idng lot level. Page 12 of 58 tmmtM MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Fritzler asked if a curb is proposed. Mr. Trautz explained the area is flush to the parking lot surface and could be constructed with colored asphalt or stamped concrete. It provides an easy way for pedessians to get the Walgreens front doors. !.•Fritzler asked for clarification that it would become a space for promotional ‘sandwich ’ boards. Trautz stated that there would be no signage in this area. Jurgens stated he assumed the area is not raised because of handicapped parking requirements, but a raised area could help guide traffic. He asked for information about how the transition occurs from parking lot to pedestrian walkway. Ms. Vicki Van Dell, Landform Engineering, explained the area is flush to the ground with vertical bollards at the front. Gaffron illustrated the Walgreens’ access point and the 20' x 20* area in question. Jurgens clarified the area will not be raised and will have no curb along the face of the building and questioned if there will be bollards all the way down the length of fne building. Ms. Van Dell e.xplained there would be two bollards in front of the handicapped stalls, another one on the ne.xt stall over, and transitions into a fuU curb along fne rest of the building length. Bremer commented that she had no problem with the prop jsed access area. Rahn concurred stating it makes it easier to traverse into the access point for Walgreens. Mr. Trautz exhibited the finished palette of exterior colors and distributed the samples to the Planning Commission. Mr. Mike Spina, Amcon Construction, explained their goal was to be consistert but not identical among the buildings. The brick will match the V/algreens building, fascia colors will be similar to Walgreens but the awnings will not niatch Walgreens. He stated their goal was to keep the building scale down to residential- type scale with the gable groot'es and some other buildmg features. Page 13ofS8 " MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.tn. Chair Mabusth summarized that the two retail buildings will have different exteriors than Waif eens. Mr. Spina agreed somewhat, clarifying they will look different enough but not identical so it would not look like one big broad development. Kcmpf asked where the blue color would be used. Mr. Spina tried to explain where the blue would be used and pointed out areas on the building elevation where the awnings are above the windows and doors. Rahn asked for information about if the brick extends up to the gables. Mr. Spina showed on the building elevation where masonry or brick will be used, pointing out the blue awning above the glass, clarifying roof and fascia colors, too. Chair Mabusth provided a copy of the Metropolitan Council letter, dated May 14, 2004. regarding the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Stonebay Outlot A - Waiver of further review to the applicant. Chair Mabusth asked for additional Planning Commission comments concerning the exterior. She asked for their opinions if it docs meet the established critena. Rahn and Kempf concurred that it docs meet the established criteria. Mr. Trautz referred to the issue of whether building-mounted lighting is proposed. He stated it is intended to have building-mounted lighting but had not provided the City with any samples. Mr. Spina interjected that it wm generically described in the submitted drawings/clcvations. It will be more a decorative lighting, it wall be completely cut-off and shielded with no projection of horizontal hght. Chair Mabusth asked the applicant if they heard Gaffron’s comments concerning the type of lighting proposed for the light poles as not being wrarm and residential as in the rest of the Stonebay L .• velopment Pa^e 14 of 58 r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Gaf&on clarified that the office area in the Stonebay Development does use box-type lighting. He brought up the matter for discussion of whether to match commercial lighting with the residential area, or to match with what is along the street or the site interior. Chair Mabusth asked for information on the approved lighting for Kelley Parkway. Gaffron described it a somewhat screened but more visible and decorative. Ms. Van Dell clarified the lighting is spaced every 15' which is more residential and uses smaller scale, residential-type fixtures. Mr. Trautz added that commercial lighting needs are different from residential and require more light intensity for safety. Because they want a higher light level in the commercial area, they proposed the box-type lighting as installed on the medical building. Leslie agreed with Mr. Trautz' comments, explaining his office is in a situation where lack of lighting create employee concerns. Jurgens asked if box-type lighting is proposed for the office buildings and suggested differe.nces in lighting Styles might be desirable. Bremer commented that with Walgreens being open 24 hrs/day there is a need for more light and perhaps different styles of lighting could be proposed, one for the residential side and one for the commercial. Kempf stated that function comes first and the box-type lighting is the most appropriate type throughout the parking areas. However, he asked the applicant if they could tie in the lighting style from the residential area along Kelley Parkway and possibly around the edge of the parking area. Kempf further commented u is not necessary for the office area to be similar to the retail area, as the office area is with the City Hall area. Ms. Van Dell observed that upon icview of the lighting plan that once building lights are shown on the ren- of the buildings and actually show the locations of the Kelley Parkway fixtures, rear lights may not be needed at all. She advised they would review this again. Chair Mabusth asked the applicant if it docs not work, did they have a problem with using a more complementary, residential-type light fixture on die north side of the property. Page 15 of 53 ■i f> •> I » MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Mr. Trautz pointed out that if the goal is to match what is on Kelley Parkway and it is a residential-type light, many more lights futtures would be necessary to get the correct light level. He commented he was not sure how to answer Chair Mabusth's question yet. Leslie pointed out there is a fair amount of screening between this development and the street, assuming the combination of the berm and taller trees, and he advised he will request more trees to be included, that there will not be a direct, visible conflict between box-type lighting and the Kelley Parkway lighting fixtures. Kempf asked staff where the lights are located on Kelley Parkway, one or both sides of the street. Gaffron confirmed the lights on Kelley Parkway are on both sides of the street with regular spacing. Fritzler asked for clarification that if the Kelley Parkway lights were sufficient, no new lights would be on the buildings. Ms. Van Dell clarified that building lights will remain but there may not need to be additional lot lights. Bremer asked for information about the location of employee entrances. Mr. Trautz explained the service entrances are on the rear of the buildings. Gaffron recommended that functional lighting is needed at the rear of the building but does not have to be nearly as intense as the parking lot lights. He indicated he expected to see downcast box lighting fl.xtures on the rear of the buildings. Chair Mabusth invited public comments at this time. Hearing none, she closed the public hearing at 6:59 p.m. She asked if the applicant had any further comments at this time; Mr. Trautz indicated there were none. Chair Mabusth diiected discussion to the Summary of Remaining Issues to Address as outlined earlier by Gaffron. 1. Address approval of the lot area and widths as proposed, as well as the lot coverage issue. Chair Mabusth indicated this matter had already been fully discussed in prior discussions. She extended a thank you to Ms. Van Dell who prepared tite Stonebay Marketplace Nanativc. Page 16 of 58 -7T7 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. 2. Address approval of the west side setback for Retail Building A. Chair Mabusth asked for confirmation from staff that the adjoining property to the subject property’s west side currently is owned by MnDOT and therefore is considered a side street requiring a 35 ’ building setback Gaffron confirmed this information and added that in the future the MnDOT property with the storm water pond may become Orono property, which would make the subject property line an interior side instead of a side street, reducing the required setback from 35' to 10'. Chair Mabusth asked who would be responsible for maintaining the sitting areas proposed for Outlot B. Gaffron replied that the applicant/property owners ultimately are to be responsible as it is actually a part of the Stonebay Marketplace development, even if the improvements are on public land, and recommended the responsibility be stipulated in some form of written agreement. Chair Mabusth asked the Planning Commission if there were any problems with the proposed 20’ side yard setback. There were no objections. 3. Address acceptance of the 150-stall parking proposal. Chair Mabusth stated she was satisfied with 144-staIls as the applicant has demonstrated they have met the B-1 standard of 1 stall per 150 s.f. of net retail space, acknowledging that one stall may be lost with the pedestrian walkway proposed by Phil Carlson, DSU. There were no Planning Commission member objections. 4. Address any remaining landscape issues or c-mcems. Leslie pointed out comments from Phil Carlson, DSU, including ‘beefir'g up’ vegetative screening oi loading areas. Exhibit K. Ms. Van Dell responded that there are existing deciduous trees along Kelley Parkway and where there are trash enclosures very large evergreen trees are proposed to screen from the street, both on the west and middle retail building, as well as for the back of the pharmacy. With the proposed screening, Ms. Van Dell stated they think tlus is adequate. Mr. Trautz indicated he did not oppose landscaping in the back to screen from residential. Page 17 of 58 • I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Leslie stated his principal cor.cem was to screen the residential from the commercial Rahn commented the goal is to 10o% screen Kelley Parkway from the trash dumpsters. Ms. Van Dell explained that are some smaller shrubs with smaller deciduous bushes with spacings of evergreens, and also some smaller shrubs with deciduous trees proposed. She acknowledged there would be a few spaces to see through but no in the areas of the trash enclosures. Chair Mabusth inquired what will be the finished elevation and how many feet will it be raised, commenting that the site is so level now. Ms. Van Dell explained that the ditch will be filled in and sodded, and building's final elevation will be about 24 ’ with a final elevation of about 19’ at Hwy 12. This will result some gradual rise in elevation. On the west side behind Retail Building A there is a drastic drop, down and around the curve and there will also be some retaining walls on the southwest comer. Chair Mabusth asked if there was still standing water in the ditch. Ms Van Dell stated there was and explained that the development proposal includes a storm water pipe to move the storm water faster to the pond. Chair Mabusth invited further questions, comments or requests from the Planning Commissioners. There were none on this issue. 5. Address the signage issues and fie.xibility request Chair Mabusth asked the applicant to explain their request for flexibility. Ms. Van Dell explained the request is for 62 s.f sign face area compared to the 50 s.f. maximum requirement in a typical B-l Distnet. It will allow their sign face to be 10’ wide and adequate space for up to three tenants on the retail sign and an illuminated message board on the pharmacy sign. Chair Mabusth confinued that 62 s.f. area request is the same for the Walgrcen’s sign with thi reader board. Mr. Trautz stated their signagt request is substantially below the total signage allowed. Chair Mabusth concurred. _______________________Page 18_of58 r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Chair Mabusth asked the applicant if they would reduce the sign width to 10’. Mr. Trautz and Ms. Van Dell agreed the sign width would be reduced to 10’. Gaffron pointed out the new sign ordinance allows a 10’ maximum width and also requires that to be framed. He asked Mr. Trautz how they proposed to design the sign within the 10’ maximum width. Mr. Trautz stated it was important for the sign panel itself to be 10’ x 6’and the sign cabinet itself could be mounted on a base, or framing could be added beyond the 10’ x 6’ area. Gaffron pointed out the new ordinance requires the framing and cap to be incorporated in the maximum sign width. Chair Mabusth asked the Planning Commissioners for their opinion on recommending approval of a sign width variance for the two monument signs, because the StoneBay sign, totally 40 s.f., meets requirements. Rahn stated as long as the sign proposals meet t’ne total aggregate square footage requirements he would rather see something more appealing like the proposed sign. He also stated he preferred the illuminated reader board as it is more modem looking as long as there is an agreement it will not scroll, blink or flash and only be changed once/day. Chair Mabusth asked if there had been an illuminated reader board approved in Orono for a church. Gaffron advised that there was no approval for a church to have an illuminated reader board. He expressed his concerns for allowing an illuminated reader change with capability for changing as an continual enforcement issue, as well as training needs for subsequent Walgreens’ managers, and that other businesses may seek to have this type of reader board, too. Gaffron stated, though, he believes an illuminated reader board does loo’x better than manual reader boards with loose lettering. Bremer asked Mr. Trautz if Walgreens would consider a manual reader board. Mr. Trautz replied that most Walgreens stores have manual reader boards currently. Jurgens conveyed his reservation with manual readers boards relates to vandalism, as the signs arc often low to the ground. Page 19 of 58 I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Gaffron and Curtis indicated in their concurrent review of the new sign ordinance requirements that the 14* width will be fine with expected revisions in the way it will be framed, the total of 10’ maximum to the top of it should be maintained, and the sign copy face can not be greater than 75% of sign square footage. He asked for direction on whether to permit the illuminated reader board and what conditions may be appropriate. Chair Mabusth invited public comments and acknowledged there were some audience members nodding in agreement with the illuminated reader board discussion. Rahn agreed with allowing an illuminated reader board with a message change once/day and not move, scroll, blink or flash. Chair Mabusth suggested a condition to add to limit its frequency of change or limits of lines of text. Fritzler questioned Gaffron if there is any problem to set a condition that permits an illuminated reader board in relationship to the square footage of the lot, such that a property may be too small to permit such a sign. Curtis confirmed that is how sign square footage per site is determined now by Code, but the prohibition is for changeable reader boards. Gaffron added that in Navarre there are large sites with multiple tenant buildings. He suggested that the condition of sign changes restneted to only one time/day could be added to subsequent sign approvals. He emphasized it would be a difficult cnforcem.ent issue if allowed. Gaffron mentioned the issue of visual impact, pointing ou: that currently in the Hwy 12 Orono/Long Lake area there is only one illuminated reader board and about 8>10 manual reader boards. Leslie observed that he saw a Walgreens store in Eden Prairie that had an electronic, illuminated reader board that seemed not to be changing so frequently as to unsafely divert drivers’ attention. He stated he would support an illuminated reader board sign but it should meet the new sign code. Mr. Trautz stated the 10’ x 6’ dimension was important and asked if it could be 4’ off of the ground. Gaffron responded that he thought it would be possible but asked the Planning Commission for direction if sign variances became necessary. Staff stated that witn a PUD application, flexibility could therefore be addressed. Chair Mabusth asked for information about plans for temporary signage and how this will be controlled. Page 20 of 58 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Gaffron explained there is a city code for temporary signage but it is difficult to enforce. He recommended that temporary signage condition(s) be added to the PUD approval documents. Mr. Trautz asked if a special permit is required to put up temporary signs, such as a banner. It was confirmed that a special permit is required from the City. Mr. Trautz indicated that after ‘grand opening' banners, they intend to not allow any other temporary signs in the retail cenu.r. Gaffron concluded the city concurred with that approach. Chair Mabusth asked for any further comments on signage. There were none 6. Address height of buildings. Chair Mabusth concurred with staff recommendation to permit the 32’6" height for the entrance comer •parapet’ roof peak, exceeding the B-6 height limit of 30'. as well as the retail buildings* gable peaks extending to 33*4.5” high. She acknowledged allowing such heights as an architectural feature may be done in a PUD and Orono has allowed similar height increases in the PUD for the office buildings. Fritzler asked if there is any mechanics housed in the gables. Mr. Trautz advised there were none Rahn pointed out the gables are a sloped roof design with shingles. 7. Address any concerns regarding facade coloration and materials. Chair Mabusth asked Gaffron to clarify if the final approved PUD application should refer to specific building materials. Gaffron indicated the final PUD documents would refer to the building materials shown this evening by the applicant. Mr. Trautz cautioned that the specific buildings materials showm might not be in stock or available when needed. By consensus, it was agreed to allow use of an ’equivalent ’ approved by a three member city committee. Mr. Spina stated that all shown buildmg materials are currently available. 8. Address whether building-mounted lighting is proposed. Chair Mabusth concluded the issue of building-mounted lighting was already addressed. 9. Any other issues for consideration. Page 21 of 58 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Chair Mabusth asked if there are any other issues for discussion. Kempf questioned if resolution was reached about requiring residential style lighting along the sidewalks coming up to Hwy 12 on the east side from Walgreens and along the pond area, as it is a more park like setting. Chair Mabusth asked what would be the function of such lighting and how much lighting the residences prefer across the street. Kempf stated a box-type fixture would not be wanted there and it would serve an aesthetic purpose, too. Fritzler stated he support additional or upgraded lighting along the pond area, but did not see a need for it on Willow Dnve. Ms. Vp.n Dell explained what is shown on the Lighting Plan, concluding there is no need for additional lighting as it adequately lights tne path along Willow Drive to Hwy 12 as well as the trail going around the pond. If the lighting fixture were required to be changed, it would be only for aesthetic purposes Chair Mabusth asked if there would be mounted lights on Retail Building A. Ms. Van Dell replied there may need to be for the potential patio area on the west end of Retail Building A and for safety reasons on the path going to Kelley Parkway. She pointed out there are two fixtures, both on the door and the southwest comer to well light the area. She stated it has upwards of 6-foot candles illumination and docs not go below 1.5-foot candles. Ms. Van Dell advised the lighting would go in as needed, depending the tenant. Chair Mabusth asked for any further comments. Rahn asked Gaffron to explain when structural coverage requirements apply to retail uses, given the dental oftice example. Gaffron indicated the dental office site is 2.0 acres and structural coverage requirem^'"ts only apply to sites 1.9 acres or less. Rahn stated that compared to the Culver’s site in Navarre at the 20.2 % and this application at 17.9% (combined), where Culver’s site is usually very crowded as an over utilized site, his concern is to prevent crowding on the subject site. Chair Mabusth noted the structural coverage issue is only being applied due to the subject site’s subdivision. Page 22 of 58 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17. 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Rahn replied that users will cross lot lines be^veen Walgreen’s and the other retail buildings and he sees it as more of a bulk and mass issue. In the structural coverage comparisons brought by staff, Raha expressed his concern that it would become a traffic nightmare. Kempf commented that the Culver ’s site has a gas station and Snyder’s drugstore to contribute to the traffic its issues. Rahn acknowledged the site layout contributes to traffic problems on the Culver ’s site. He restated he wanted to express his concern but may still be in favor of the application. Chair Mabusth pointed out the staff, consultant engineer and planner appear to be satisfied with the structural coverage issue. Chair Mabusth asked for final issues to b • discussed. Chair Mabusth moved, Fritzler seconded, to recommend approval of Application >2974 “StoneBay Marketplace," NW Quadrant Hwy llAVlllow Drive for proposed Commercial PUD Rezonlng, Commercial Site Plan and two lot Preliminary Subdivision of StoneBay Outlot A, acknowledging the application does not meet the underlying B-6 2.0 acre lot coverage requirements with certain approved B>1 allowable uses and accepting lot coverage as follows: - Lot 1 (86,268 s.f. or 1.98 acres) is proposed with buildings totaling 13,930 s.f. or 16.1%covcragc. • Lot 2 (74,428 s.f.) is proposed with buildings totaling 14,820 s.f. or 19.9% coverage. - Overall coverage of the 3.69-acre site 'is proposed at 17.9%, not including freestanding trash enclosures; subject to the following: • return of the application to the next Planning Commission work session for further review ■ return of the draft rezoning ordinance fo* the site to the June 2004 Planning Commission meeting ■ return of the signage agreement to the next Planning Commission work session • all resolved Issues outlined in the Staff Report, May 13,2004 and the preceding Planning Commission minutes. Page 23 of 58 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Ms. Van Dell questioned if the illuminated reader beard was to being recommended. Chair Mabusth concluded it was a consensus to allow the iMuminated reader board with no flashing, blinking or moving messages to be changed only once/day but must meet Code ’■equirements. Mr. Trautz asked for clarification of the continuing piocess and if the applicant will need to attend further Planning Commission meetings. Gaffron e.xplained the process, and that the draft PUD rezoning ordinance will return to the Planning Commission work session and to the June2004 Planning Commission meeting for final review and a.-oroval. Chair Mabusth asked staff to provide the Planning Commission with the Comprehensive Plan Am.endment text approved by the City Council. Gaffron clarified the City Council will review the Commercial Site Plan and Preliminary Plat subdivision, and that the dmft iczoning language will be reviewed at the Planning Commission and forwarded to the City Council for final soproval. Mr. Trautz suggested the city attorney should review the minute record, draft PUD language with staff and not to have the agreement returned to the Planning Commission for additional review. GafPon stated that if the Planning Commission is comfortable with reviewing the draft rezoning ordinance at the Planning Commission work session in June 2004, it could be forwarded directly to the City Council for their first meeting in June 2004. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0 6. #04-3002 G&L LAND INVESTMENT, LLC, 740 NORTH AR>I DRIVE, CONDITIONAL USE PERNUT, PUBLIC HEARING (7:36-7:45 p.m.) Mr. Tim Guilfoil, G&L Land Investment, LLC, 740 North Ann Drive, applicant, was present. Gaffron explained the applicants requested amending their original variance request, which was recommended for denial by the Plartning Commission on April 17,2004 and said denial r^" ...imendation was informally agreed to by the City Council on April 26,2004, to a conditional use permit to allow land alterations within 75’ of the 929.4’elevation of Lake Minnetonka. The applicants will remove the existing boathouse and restore tile existing slope, including construction of boulder retaining walls and vegetative cover. Page 24 of 58 Metropolitan Council Budding communities t^at work May 14.2004 Michael GafTron Planning Director City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 C!TV OF RE:City of Orono, Comprehensive Plan Amendment Stonebay Outlot A - Waiver Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 18392-4 Metropolitan Council District 3. Mary Hill Smith Dear Mr. Gaffron; The Metropolitan Council received the City of Orono’s Stonebay Outlot A Comprehensive Plan Amendment on May 5,2004. The amendment reguides 3.69 acres from Commercial Office to Commercial Officc/Retail to allow potential limited retail development on the site. At its May 24, 2000 regular meeting, the governing body of the Council identified certain types of local comprehensive plan amendments that may be reviewed by Council staff w'thout further fo-mal rc'dew by the governing body of the Council. Council staff applied the plan review waiver criteria established by the Council’s governing body and finds that the amendment is in conformance with metropolitan system plans, consistent with the Regional D elopment Framework, and has no impact on the plans of other units of local government. Therefore, the Council will waive further review and the City may place this amendment into effect. The amendment, explanatory materials supplied and the information submission form will be appended to the City's P.an in the Council's files. If you have any questions about this review, please contact Robin Caufman, Principal Reviewer, at 651-602-1457. Sincerely, \/lit. Phyllis Il^son, Manager Plannjng^nd Technical Assistance cc: Mary Hill Smith, Councilmember District 3 Robin Caufman, Sector Representative Cheryl Olsen, Rcfenals Coordinator • www.inetrocouAcil.orf Metro Into Une 001-laM 930 iMi Plfth Btroct • Bt. Foul. MinneootA SSiOl-lO^ • (B51) 609*l000 • PaJi BOl'lSBO • TTY 291*0904 A0 Bqmi Ofssfetmitf SIGN PLAN Sloficbay MarkcCpIace, Orono, MN Wall a.id free standing monument signs will conform to the B-1 zoning ordinance In adc tion, the following cnteriH will Hpply I General Requirements B All wall signs shall conform to city ordinance as well as the criteria provided herein. All f,ign transformers, ballast boxes and decals shall be concealed behind sign band wall. Manufacturer's names, stamps and decals shall not be exposed No exposed neon or incandescent bulbs or flashing, blinking, rotating or moving signs or makers shall be permitted. No Store Front Sign or other signing on the Premises shall be of a typo wherein the signing is housed or contained within an illuminated or non- illuminated sign can or box mounted on the exterior of the sign area, unless expressly approved by the Landlord in writing Small-scale signs stating store hours, which are neatly lettered on tne glass of the storefront, shall bo permitted subject to the Landlords approval Any non-customer door for receiving merchandise may have the name of the Tenant in two inch (2 ") block letters Address signs shall be composed of four-inch (4") high (maximum) Helvetica style white letters centered on the transom glass above the door No sign shall be painted on the exterior of the walls doors, windows or any other surface of the Demised Premises nor erected maintained or suffered to remain on the roof or parapet of the Premises No sign shall be erected until written specifications and drawings of such sign are first approved in writing by Landlord Such specifications and drawings shall show the si/e, construction, materials, colors, script, name of sign manufacturer and proposed location of such sign in conformity with the requirements stated herein and shall include a cross section drawing Each party's customary signature or logo, hallmark, insignia or other trade identification will be allowed w.thin the guidelines set forth 1 of 6 r I.All signs erected by Tenant pursuant to the provisions hereof shall be erected at Tenant ’s own risk and expense (including final electrical connections and time clock), shall be in accordance with applicable law, and shall concern only the business of the Tenant Tenant shall secure and pay any necessary permits and fees Tenant shall maintain said signs in a good state of repair and save the Landlord harmless from atiy loss, cost or damage as a result of the erection, maintenance, existence and removal of the same, and Tenant shall repair any damage which may have been caused by the erection, existence, maintenance or removal of such signs Upon vacating the Premises. Tenant shall remove all such signs and repair all damage cause by such removal The contractor, materials and methods for repair must be approved in writing by the Landlord in advance of the work M. N. O. All electrical hook-ups shall be performed by a licensed electrician, approved by Landlord and installed in accordance with all governmental requirements. Any damage caused to Landlord's work by signage installation shall be repaired by the Landlord and charged to the Tenant. Public safety decals or art work on glass in minimum sizes to comply with applicable code, subject to the approval of Landlord, may be used, as required by building codes or other governmental regulations. Paper signs, stickers, banners or flags are prohibited Window Painted Sign — need to be professional and pre approved by Landlord. Time limit of no more than 60 days Free standing, single tenant buildings will be allowed wall signs on 3 sides. Each tenant space in multi-tenant buildings will be allowed one wall sign. End cap spaces in multi-tenant buildings will be allowed two wal! signs - one on the street frontage and one on the adjacent side II.Specific Requirements B Type - 1. Individually lighted channel letters with translucent front mounted on exterior of building or mounted on raceway that matches the exact exterior wall color on which laceway is mounted must be approved by Landlord prior to installation 2. Can signs are only permitted if approved by Landlord Size - Subject to city ordinance and Landlord approval The tenants wilt be allowed exterior building signage based on the following the total area of all wall signs affixed to a building wall shall not exceed 10% of the total area of that wall or 200 sq ft., whichever is less. 2 of 6 c. D. Base line and center line of sign to be located by Lessor's Architect. Colors and Materials 1.Rohm A Haas plex facfts #7146 Ivory 2108 Green 2048 Red 3016 Yellow. 2119 Orange or other colors wlh Landlord's pre- approval with black trim caps and matt black returns. 2.Double neon tubing in color to match plex face, individually gas filled to ten (10) MM of pressure. 3.Sign letter shall be aluminum channel frame (minimum 090) with flat or molded plastic face and mounted with concealed fasteners Channel frame shall be painted to matt black. All letters shall be illuminated with neon tubes powered by normal factory transformers installed in the letter A conduit for electric will be provided by Landlord's contractor All letters shall be approved by Underwriter Laboratories and carry a seal of approval Upon sign installation, alj penetrations made to the exterior of the building must be caulked with a polyurethane based product called Sonnelastic 150 or Sonneborn NPl Any alternative products must be approved by Landlord Signs shall be attached to building with stainless steel bolts. 6.As part of Tenant's electrical work. Tenant shall install a seven- day timing device to control the canopy sign so that hours of illumination can be controlled in accordance with the overall shopping center policy. Three (3) completed set of full size sign drawings with detailed dimensions must be submitted to the Landlord for approval before fabrication. Tenant's sign drawings must include the following 1.Provide a complete listing and verbal descnption of every sign to be erected on the Premises 2.Provide elevation views of storefront showing all signs (drawn to accurate scale) with dimensions of heights of letters and length of signs I rovide a cross section view through sign letter and sign panel showing location of sign relative to the storefront line, mounting height, and the dimensioned projection of the face of the letter from the face of tfte sign panel Landlord shall not be rosponsiblo for the cost of refabrication of signs fabricated, ordered or constructed that do not conform to the sign criteria and the local sign ordinances. This sign criteria may be amended from time to time by Landlord. 3 Of 6 • r « i ^ 4 t t 4 Monument Signs A. Freestanding monument signs shall be constructed pursuant to the attached plans B. Manual reader boards are allowed and are included in allowable Sign area calculation. I I ^ 4 of 6 1 PROPOSED SIGN ELEVATION 5 of 6 MA AMCON Olll^ Cenl^r«<» ycno^f'ninl HO V l*KV 1J lM#*rA IfiMtwU ^ f)]-N0-Utl , fM ni-No-««« icvwa A- A •« A M A A- A.^ A-. :A.^ A A M* fO *M*«l Mf«4( M mmrnnu* • «• •imtutrnt m nmmu m4 « *«“ir.'=i»'s;r.sjr LUo < _J [L I H Z lU 2 . Q 0 tiJ• CO • O u oc < CQ LU Z . 0 •b H g 0) 0 1 lOCa. •* ** * •• • ••» I I scNAce . v^* - 1-0* . I 0A?C oe MAT 04 \ SN1 : I * I m.a «.* i I —I UU(x£gxeji'ic±, DRJVE-THRU PHARMACY ]r:-K] ■; y . »i ?7’/ 1 .?rv ^ ^ i ^•!• i Vi ; w, :• ,M.rrcr.->•••^ nj •\. s*'*» • ' I ‘ } h 6 of 6 1i ; • 3 Reliance Development Company • t • QVt'f May 18. 200-1 Mike Gaffron Ciiy Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 5532.1 Rc: Slonebay Commercial Dear Mike, I am sending this letter to request that the City of Orono pursue a Limited Use Permit for the construction work to be done by Reliance Development around the MN DOT pond directly adjacent to our future Stonebay commercial development. Please let me know if there is anything else you require from me. inccrcly. cc; Vicki Van Dell Reliance Development Company. LLP. 1000 Rand ToMCf 527 Marquette Avenue South Minneapolis. MN 55402-1327 Telephone (612) 338-1000 Facsimile (612) 33B-B971 Applioilon Ditc: December 17,2003 Initial 60-Day Rtvitw Period Explralloo (Site Plan & PUD Ruonlnf): February IS, 2004 60 Oay Ettenilon Notincatloo Fated on 2-13-04, Exicnilon lo: April 15,2004 120 Day Review Expiration (SubdIvUion): April IS, 2004 Additional 60 day exiention granted by applicant April 12, 2004 to: June IS, 2004 To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Mabusth & Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator Mike Gaffron, Planning Director /V / f May 13, 2004 ' K W04-2974 ‘'Stonebay Marketplace", NW Quadrant Hwy 12/Willow Drive - Continuation of Public Hearing for Proposed Commercial PUD Development: (CMP Amendment/PUD Rczoning/Commercial Site Plan Rcvicw/Prcliminary Subdivision) Current Status of Application: The Compreiiensi vc Plan amendment was ,iibmi tied to Met Council and to ncigliboring cities for comment on May 3. PUD rc/oningof the site will occur concurrently with final site plan and subdivision approval. The detailed conditions the City establishes for the development of this site will be incoqwrated into the PUD l e/.oning of the site. Pkuining Coinmis.sion renewed Uic commercial site plan and building designs in detail on April 19 ;md made a number of recommendations to the applicants, tabling the application for revisioius and fuilhcr review by stalfand consultants. Rev'ised plans were submitted on May 7 and ha.'c been distributed to the City Engineer and the City Planning Consultant for review. List of Exhibits A - Applicant’s l.eltct of Kc-Submittal, May 7, 2004 H - Revised Nanative C - Uenshool Parking Occupancy Survey D - Monument Sign Proposal I: - Proposed Lighting Fixtures !• • Applicant’s May 5 Letter to Shelly Johnson, F3oncstroo & Assoc. 0 - City Engineer Tom Kellogg’s April 28 Comments Letter II - Elevated Oblique Rendering of Site 1 - Retail ’’A" and *‘B’’ Renderings J • Landscaping/Uuilding Cross Section Depictions 904-2974 Stoncbay Marketplace May 13.2004 Page 2 K - Comments on Landscape Plan by DSU, Inc. Dated L - Staff memo of April 15 Including Commercial Site Plan Review Comments M - Revised Plan Set Dated 5-7-04 Including: Sheet CO. 1 - Titic Sheet Sheet Cl.I Sheet Cl.2 Sheet C2.1 Sheet C2.2 Sheet C3.1 Sheet C4.I - Existing Conditions - Demolition Plan - Preliminary Site Plan - Preliminary Sign Plan - Prelim. Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan - Preliminary Utility Plan Sheet C5.1 Sheet E2.1 Sheet L2.1 Sheet L7.1 Sheet A2.1 Sheet ELI Sheet EL2 - Preliminary Plat - Preliminary Lighting Plan • Prelim:^ ary Landscape Plan • Landscape Details - Walgreens Exterior Elevations and Signage Plan - Retail A Elevations - Retail B Elevations N - Monument Si^ Ordinance O - Sample signage agreement Updated Commercial Site Plan Review Following is an updated review of the various elements of the proposed commercial site plan, based on the plans delivered May 7. 1. Conformity with Comprehensive Plan Staffbelieves the current proposal generally meets the parameters established in the CMP amendment for development of this site, including the following; ■ No individual buildings greater than 15,000 s.f. gross floor area, Stajf Conclusion: This parameter is met. ■ One building must be a pharmacy /convenience store. Stajjf Conclusion: This parameter is met. ■ The remaining buildings shall have no individual tenant space greater than 7,000 s.f. Sta ff Conclusion: This parameter is not a factor in the westerly building, and can be met via appropriate leasing of spaces in the center building. The applicant has agreed to this parameter. ■ The most westerly building on the site shall be oriented and designed in a manner that focuses on the regional pond as an amenity for customers or tenants. Staff Conclusion: This parameter has been met via the elimination of roadway between the westerly building and the pond, and the addition of pedestrian amenities in this area. ?! ^04*2974 Stoncbay Marketplace May 13, 2004 Page 3 Buildings on the site shall be oriented with a goal of providing an inviting vehicle and pedestrian entry from Kelley Parkway without creating negative visual impacts for the Slonebay residential development. Staff Conclusion: This parameter has been met by the reorientation of the Walgreens entrance to the southwesterly corner of that building, and by designing the middle retail building (Retail B, east elevation on Plan Sheet EL2) to have a windowed front facade at its northeasterly end. Architectural design and details shall be carefully prepared by any developer of the site to ensure a high quality of design, compatible with the quality of the office buildings on Kelley Parkway, and shall be subject to City approval through the PUD process. Staff Conclusion: This parameter can be met subject to PC/Council approval of preliminary building designs. Building materials shall be high quality and durable, shall be compatible with the quality of die oflBce buildings on Kelley Parkway, and shall be subject to City approval through the PUD process. Staff Conclusion: This parameter can be met subject to PC/Council approval of preliminary building designs. 2. Conformity to B-6/PUD Standards A. Allowed Uses. Based on a compilation ofthc allowable uses in the B-1 and B-6 Districts, Planning Commission has produced a list of permitted and conditional uses that would be appropriate for this site as part of the PUD rezoning process. The proposed buildings and site layout would reasonably accommodate many of the individual uses on the proposed list of allowable uses. B. Lot Area & Width. Required area and width for B-6 arc 2.0 acres and 1 00’. The proposed preliminaryplat creates two lots: Lot 1 = 1.98 acres/370', and Lot 2= 1.71 acres and 135'. Both lots are slightly undersizal in area; however, tlic site at 3.69 acres is limited by having no additional land available. Staff recommends approval of the lot area and widths as proposed. C. Setbacks . Setback requirements and conformity were included in the April 15 memo, indicating that all setback requirements are met except for the west side setback for the westerly retail building, which is proposed at 20' rather than 35'. Staff recommends approval for this 20' setback as discussed in the April 1 5 memo. D. Site Drainage . The applicants have provided a drainage plan that includes catch basins and storm sewers discharging to the adjacent regional pond. The City Engineer’s letter of April 28 indicates the proposed plans are acceptable subject to a number of conditions to be met prior to final plan approval. #04-2974 Stonebay Marketplace May 13,2004 Page 4 E. Buildinf Height. B-6 height limit is 30'. The Walgreens building has a roofpeak height of 28'3" for the bulk of the building, and 32'6" for the entrance comer ‘parapet’ roof peak. The retail buildings have a basic height of 24'-8" with gable peaks extending to 33'-4.5" high. Staff recommends acceptance of these heights as proposed. F. Landscaping. Exhibits L2.1 and L7.1 are the landscaping plans and details for this property. These plans meet the general B-6 guidelines in terms of required information detail. Tlie applicants have indicated in their revised narrative that the proposed landscaping exceeds the requirements of the B-6 District. The landscape plans have been submitted to Phil Carlson of DSU, Inc. for review and comment. His comments are attached as Exhibit K and are summarized as follows; 1. Plans appear to meet the B-6 landscaping requirements. Irrigation of all landscape areas will be required and must be shown on final plans. Performance bond (letter of credit) will be required. Loading area screening at rear of buildings is adequate but could be beefed up. Ground and roof mounted mechanical equipment appears to be adequately screened. Parking area island just outside Walgreens entrance doors should be vegetated (flowers or shrubs) rather than simply concrete. Add sidewalk connection from Willow/12 intersection to Walgreens entrance. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. A discussion of the landscaping plan was held by the Planning Commission on April 19. Planning Commission generally determined that additional boulevard trees along the Highway 12 frontage are not strictly necessary due to the retail nature of this site. Additional detail has been provided regarding screening of trash facilities in Plan Sheet L2.1 and the two Cross-Section Exhibits. The applicants have indicated their discussions with MnDOT and Hennepin County yielded no apparent ‘roadblocks’ to the use of Outlet B for the terraced seating area. It was noted that the City will ultimately be responsible for the Outlet as the turnback of Highway 12 occurs a few years hence. G. Afchitectnral Standards. Applicant has advised that he will work with the City to provide a face brick color acceptable to all parties. Applicant has provided samples ofbuilding exterior material samples for review and approval, incorporating daricer colored brick. Revised elevations of the two westerly retail buildings have been submitted, and they appear to incorporate a variety of architectural features in common with the Walgreens building. 3. Additional Site Plan Elements Pedestrian_Acce§^. In general, pedestrian access and circulation has been refined to a level acceptable to staff however, an additional, niore direct designated pedestrian connection to the Walgreens main entry from the WilUnv Drive has been suggested and should be incorporated into the plans. This may result in the loss of one parking stall. r *04*2974 Stoncbay Marketplace May 13.2004 Pages Vehicle Circulation . Sheldon Johnson, Orono ’s traffic consultant with Bonestroo and Associates, has reviewed the latest revisions and has indicated to staff that the layout is acceptable and that his prior recommendations regarding traffic circulation have been incorporated into the plans. The right-in, right-out access to Willow has been refined to meet turning radius standards, and should function adequately. He recommends, and staff concurs, that signage be installed warning drivers entering the Walgreens drive-thru from the west to yield to, and watch for, incoming vehicles at the right-in, right-out. Required Parking. Based on Orono codes the proposal requires a total of 173 parking stalls. The site plan has been revised to eliminate ‘proof of parking’ which yields a final parking proposal of 1 SO stalls. Staff has discussed parking numbers for this site at length with Sheldon Johnson who recommends that the 150 stall number be accepted. He suggests that our ordinance is excessive for retail uses; the extra parking required by our code serves no real purpose and results in excess hardcover and runoff. In terms of our past PC discussions, the 150 stall number exceeds by one stall the requirements we established for the site in terms of accepting Walgreens 60-stall need and the remaining retail at the City requirement of 1 stall per 150 s. f of net retail space. Even if a stall is lost to provide the suggested pedestrian connection from Walgreens to the Willow/1 2 comer, the parking needs will be met. Please review the applicant’s revised narrative in regards to the rationale for the parking numbers. Staff recommends approval of the parking plan as designed. Lot Coverage. Code Section 78-1403 limits lots of 0-1.99 acres in area to 15% lot coverage by structures: - Lot 1 (86,268s.forl.98acres)isproposcd with buildings totaling 13,930 s.f. or 16.1 “/©coverage. - Lot 2 (74,428 s.f.) Is proposed with buildings totaling 14,820 s.f. or 19.9% coverage. - Overall coverage of the 3.69 acre site is proposed at 17.9%, not including freestanding trash enclosures. Only a small number of developing or redeveloping commercial sites in Orono have been subject to the 15% lot coverage requirement. These include: Service 800 on Hwy 12 (0.96 acres, 26.1% lot coverage) - pre-existing site Culver’s in Navarre (1.52 acres, 20.2“/o lot coverage) - pre-existing site Snyder ’s in Navarre (1.9 acres, 14% lot coverage) - pre-existing site Wagner Rental in Navarre (1.2 acres, 12 % lot coverage) - pre-existing site The dental office on Kelley Parkway was a pre-existing 2.0 acre lot ard not subject to the lot coverage limit. It has about 18% lot coverage. Please review the applicant’s narrauve regarding lot coverage. Planning Commission should reach a conclusion whether the proposed overall lot coverage of 17.9% is acceptable. Note that hardships given for the Service 800 and Culver’s variances included consistency with surrounding #04-2974 Stoncbiy Marketplace May 13, 2004 Page 6 development; that holding to the 15% limit would undcruf ilizc the oitc, given the limited amount of land zoned for commercial uses in Orono; and that the available commercial land should be developed at a level that will maximize its potential while still conforming with the goals and policies of the Comp Plan. Green Space Under the current proposal with the elimination of ‘proof-of-parking ’, green space on the site will be 26%. Loading Berths. The location and detail of loading berths for the Walgreens and the easterly retail building have been shown on the plans. Trash Enclosures. Details for the trash handling facilities have been provided, including cross sectional views to show how they will be viewed from the residential parcels and Kelley Parkw ay. Signage. Proposed signage appears on the current plan set, Sheets C2 .2 (Stonebay monument atcomerof 12 and Willow); Sheet A2.1 (Walgreens wall signage); ELI and EL2 (retail buildings wall signage); and Exhibits D (Walgreens monument sign and Retail monument). Please carefully review the applicant ’s narrative, including their request for flexibility in terms of individual sign size. The t\^'o primary monument signs are proposed at a dimension of 1 O' high and 14'-8" wide, exceeding the 10' width recently adopted for monument signs (Sec Exhibit N, Ordinance No. 6, Third Series). The building wall signage appears to be consistent with what would be expected for a Walgreens and a small retail center. Tlic Stonebay Monument at the comer of 12AVillow is acceptable to staff as designed. Staff would suggest that a signage planagrecment similar to the example attached as Exhibit O be prepared for this PUD. Message Board . Orono codes prohibit the use of illuminated scrolling or flashing reader boards such as that proposed for the Walgreens monument. Staff early on suggested to the applicants that the Walgreen signage not include a manual reader board, as they tend to be poorly maintained. Since then, it has been suggested that an illuminated message board such as that proposed, but with only one message change per day and no flashing, scrolling, etc. would be more attractive than a manual board. The problem with allowing the illuminated board as proposed is that it could require ongoing monitoring, and that once it goes up, every other retail business in town will want one, but without the Imutations. Approval of this one would set a negative precedent. Despite what the applicants niight sec as ‘waffling ’ on the part of staff, at this time staff recommends that the illuminated board not be allowed, and that if a message board is proposed that it be a manual board. 1 f *04-2974 Slonebay Markctplact May 13.2004 Page? Liffhtinf. The exterior parking lot lighting plan is in Sheet E2.1. The plan in iicates 20 “Gardco ” 400W luminaires at strategic locations throughout the site, on 20' high poles. The light poles at 20' will be lower than the peak heights of the buildings. Details on the Gardco fixtures have been provided for review. Applicant should address whether any building-mounted lighting is proposed. Engineering Matters. City Engineer Tom Kellogg provided his comments in Exhibit G dated April 28. He has also reviewed the May 7 plan set and his comments remain unchanged. His recommendations relate primarily to matters that will be addressed during the fmal plan stages of development. 4.PreHmloarv Plat Plat approval will include die establishment ofdrainagc and utility easements, as well as payment of park fees and stormwater & drainage trunk fees (both established as part of the previous Stonebay PUD approvals), etc. Preliminary plat approval will be concurrent with site plan approval. The two-lot layout and separate ownerships do not pose any formidable considerations. Shared parking, site maintenance responsibility and similar agreements will be established as a matter of course. 5. Rezoning As noted previously the rc/.oning goes hand in hand with the Comp Plan Amendment, and will provide for a greater level ofdetail than the Plan. Planning Commission identified a specific list of allowable or unacceptable uses for the site in February, and refined that list in March. The list of uses will be incorporated into the PUD rezoning for this site, as will a fairly detailed set ofconditioiw related to the specific site plan approval for Outlot A. Staffintends to incorporate into ilie rezoning ordinance conditions of approval that clearly document the approved site layout, building design and materials, signage lighting, etc. The PUD approval for this site becomes the governing ordinance for the property. A draft rezoning ordinance for th.; site has yet to be prepared by statT, but will be prepared for your review prior to final Council action. ^04-2974 Stonebay Marketplace May 13, 2004 Pages Summary of Remaining Issues to Address 1 . Address approval of the lot area and widths as proposed, as well as the lot coverage issue. 2. Address approval of the west side setback for Retail Building A. 3. Address acceptance of the 1 50-stall parking proposal. 4. Address any remaining landscaping issues or concerns, 5. Address the signage issues and flexibility request. 6. Address height of buildings. 7. Address any concerns regarding facade coloration or materials. 8. Address whether building-mounted lighting is proposed. 9. Any other issues for consideration. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the commercial site plan, subject to the various recommendations contained w ithin the text above. Any motion to recommend approval should address the issues noted immediately above, and should provide clear direction to the applicant. Staff believes this application is ready to be forwarded to Council, subject to your recommended conditions for appioval. Staff had planned to draft a PUD rezoning ordinance for this meeting; however, time constraints have delayed that draft. Out intent is to have it available for your review in the next two weeks, for final review and approval at your June meeting. A LANDFORM MIMNfAPOLIl PNOCNIX May 7, 2004 Michael Gaffron City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway PO Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 RE: StoneBay Marketplace Re-Submittal Dear Mr. Gaffron, On behalf of our client, Landform is pleased to submit this revised narrative and plans for PUO concept stage plan, PUD general plan, commercial site plan, preliminary plat, and final plat for Outlot A. StoneBay, located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Willow Drive and Highway 12. We are proposing a commercial planned unit development with 28,750 square feet of retail/office development on this 3.69-acre outlot. The StoneBay Marketplace narrative is attached for your review. We would like to request for you to give some examples of commercial projects in Orono or Long Lake that have 15% building coverage and that approach 20% building coverage for them to compare the difference between the two. It is my understanding that this item will be scheduled for Planning Commission review on May 17, 2004 and City Council action soon after. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at 612.252.9070. Sincerely, LANDFORM COPY: John Trautz, Reliance Development Company, LLP *Landf(xm EnginMrtog Company doing business as Landform iSO Iu TlCI n OIITh aUilOiNd SiO rHUT ^Xnu I mouth MiNND^OUi. m ii401 orfict: 252 0070 Faj C: 012 2S2 0077 wwurJondform.nel STONEBAY MARKETPLACE NARRATIVE We are proposing PUD concept stage plan, PUD general plan, commercial site plan, preliminary plat, and final plat for Outlot A, StoneBay. Lot Area & Width The required minimum lot area for a B-6 district is 2 acres and the minimum lot width is 100 feet. We are proposing to create two lots with this subdivision. Walgreen's will then own their own lot, which is preferable to both the developer and Walgreen's. Although we have three buildings we are only proposing to subdivide into two lots instead of three to keep the lot sizes as large as possible. Setbacks A month ago we brought a site plan to meet with City of Orono staff that complied with all of the setback requirements, while maintaining our current building area. At that time, staff suggested that they would rather have us provide additional green space on the east side of the property then meat the setback on the west side of the property. Therefore we made the change to our plan to accommodate staff comments. The adjoining property currently belongs to MNDOT and therefore is being considered a side street, requiring 35 ‘ building setback. However, in the future it is believed that this pond will bocomo property of tho City of Orono, which would make this property lino an interior side. If this was an internal side property line, then wo would only bo required to have a 10-foot setback. Site Drainage We are proposing to fill in the ditch along Highway 12 and install storm sewer to convey this water to tho pond. This will allow us to sod from the south edge of this development to tho right-of-way and create a very aesthetically pleasing commercial development. Building Height Tho majority of tho retail buildings are 24 -8" high with the gable peak extending to 33’« 4.5" high. Tho Walgreen's building has a roof elevation of 28'-3" with the gables extending to 32'-6". The majority of both buildings meet tho 30' maximum requirement, with exceptions at gable peaks. Landscaping We have had discussions with MnDot and Hennepin County regarding the gathering space. They have both stated that they don’t see a problem putting the gathering space on adjacent MnDot land. The idea being that the City will eventually own this land anyway. The landscape plan that we have provided for this site was designed to exceed the City's minimum requirements in order to provide a sense of place for neighboring residents and customers of this future retail development. The Orono Zoning Ordinance states that the minimum "Landscape Value" is to be $37,500 for a site with total project value between $3-4,000.000, plus 0.25% of the total project value in excess of $3,000,000. Wo estimate a total project value for this site at $3,250,000. The minimum required “Landscape Value" would then need to be $38,125. This minimum value does not include the cost for irrigation. Wo have provided sufficient screening along any potential site lines between the trash enclosure and public streets. We have also added various shrub and perennial beds throughout the site to keep ordinarily long expanses of sod to a minimum. The approximate value of this landscape is $52,000, which does not include irrigation. Tfiis does not fully include the landscape amenities our client has agreed to provide on the adjacent MnDOT property. Architectural Standards The design of StoneBay Marketplace will offer a rich, warm material and color palette, which responds to the site's Immediate context, including City Hall. The buildings have been designed with pitched roofs and pitched roof elements to reflect Oiono's residential nature. Buildings will be constructed with brick and integral colored block and will receive equal treatment on all sides of the building. Wo have received comments that have stated a darker colored brick would be more desirable and wo are open to working with the planning commission and staff to confirm what that color will be. Site Plan Pedestrian Access Wo have designed the project to be sensitive to the surrounding residential and create a cohesive StoneBay development. Kelley Parkway will form a buffer between the neighborhood to the north and StoneBay Marketplace, but trails will provide connections around tho perimeter of the site with sidewalks providing a&O UUTLEH NORTH DUILOINO 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MlNNEAROLIS. MN 5540J OFFICE 81? 252 9070 FAX: 812 252,9077 wVMJwtdtofm.nvt internal connections. Bike racks are planned near each building and a gathering area with benches is provided in the northwest portion of the site. Vehicle Circulation We have reviewed Shelly Johnson’s comments with staff and have made the following changes to address his site plan comments. a) We have modified the right in right out to allow for a straighter access into the site from Willow. We have also modified the radii for cars entering the Walgreen ’s drive-thru from Willow. We have run AutoTurn and large cars are able to make this turn without a problem. The automobile path is shown on the site plan. b) We would like to clarify the trash enclosure access as well. The commercial garbage haulers are front-loaded. They pull up to the trash enclosure and the dumpster is picked up and dumped over the front of the truck to the back. This works very well with the way we have designed the trash enclosures. For the retail building, tho roar drive aisle is one way; therefore we have angled the trash enclosures to ease the trash pickup. c) We have revised our plan to show the turn around stall in the southwest corner of the site. Even though there will be cars parked there at times, we agree that having the turn around stall is better than not having it. d) We have revised the coniferous plantings at the northwest corner of Walgreen's to be 3’ high arborvitae instead of the 15’ tall evergreen that we previously showed. This will allow a vehicle exiting the drive-thru for Walgreen's to see vehicles heading northbound through the site to the exit. e) Regarding the two drive thru lanes for Walgreen ’s. This is very important for them. They don’t have a lot of drive-thru traffic, but having two separate drive thru lanes allows them to serve two customers at once. Tho additional by-pass lane is to ensure that vehicles can get through if customers are at both drive thru lanes. This is especially important for fire trucks and garbage haulers. Lot Covorago Wg are proposing 16.1% building coverage on Lot 1 and 19.9% building coverage on Lot 2, for an average of 17.9% for the both parcels. The ordinance requires Building lot coverage not to exceed 15%, but it is common for commercial parcels to exceed 15% building coverage and other commercial developments in the City have been approved at 20%. Nonnally, commercial developments are restricted by a percentage of green space required, in this case 25%, which is being met. If we wero required to pond on-site, approximately 5-6% of the lot would be covered by pond. 6S0 BUTLrn NORTH BUiLOiNQ 510 FiHST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN SS403 OFFICE 612.252 0070 FAX: 612.252 9077 www landrorm.n*! f • Therefore, if we did not have regional ponding and were required to pond on-site, we would meet the 15% building coverage requiroment. The StoneBay mixed use development was designed to have a compact commercial area to support the StoneBay development and other Orono residents. We would ask for PUD flexibility since we meet the 25% green space, have provided 8 foot trails throughout the sito, have provided extensive landscaping and this density would match what has been done in other commercial developments in the City. Loading Berths We are required to have a 25' long loading berth per ordinance defined the location of the required loading berths on the site plan. We have Trash Enclosures Trash enclosures are constructed with the same materials as the principal building and will be heavily screened to reduce their visibility. We have provided cross-soction drawings through the trash enclosures to give you an idea of what the trash onclosuros will look like from Kelley Parkway and the adjacent residential parcels. You will see that the extensive landscaping along Kelley will completely screen these enclosures from view of the residents. Required Parking Current city ordinance requires one parking space per 150 square feet. For our development that translates into 173 stalls. Our development provides 150 spaces, which we believe, are more than adequate. We offer the following reasons to justify this position. a) WalgrooiVs is required to have 89 spaces per ordinance, but needs about GO. I have enclosed a parking study dono by Walgreen's for their busiest storo in the state that is located at 70th and York in Edina. The peak parking requirement indicates that 48 spaces were filled. If the two remaining retail buildings were parked per the city ordinance, 84 parking spaces would be required. Add the 60 spaces for Walgreen's for a total of 144. This Is less than the 150 we are providing. b) Most cities in the Twin City Metro area require 1 parking space per 200 square foot of floor area. This is not to suggest that the City of Orono should endeavor to bo like other cities, it is meant to suggest that the citizens of Orono will drive to. park and patronize the businesses in this development just like citizens in the rest of the Twin Cities. As a long- 650 BUTLER NORTH DUILDINQ 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55403 OFFICE: 61ZZ52.9070 FAX: 612.252.9077 term owner of retail properties, I can attest to the fact that this parking ratio works very well. If we use a parking ratio of 1 space per 200 of floor area, the required parking would be 144 spaces. Again, this is less than the 150 the development provides. c) If a sit-down restaurant use wanted to go into the retail building, they would have to apply for a Conditional Use Permit with the City. The parking situation can then be re-evaluated. Therefore, the City isn’t putting themselves at peril for a lack of parking spaces due to a future use. These lines of reasoning lead us to the conclusion that the parking we are providing is adequate for the type of development we are proposing. Previously we had shown proof of parking on our plan to get us closer to the City’s requirement of 1 stall per 150 square feet. We did not believe we would ever need the proof of parking stalls, but felt we could show them in an effort to more closely match the City’s requirement. Since that time we have obtained more compelling information regarding Walgreen ’s parking demands (see attached research study). This has prompted us to remove the proof of parking on the site. There are some developments that have the 1 stall per 200 square feet such as Peony Promenade at the Northwest corner of Highway 55 and Highway 101 and also in Champlain at the northeast corner of 114*" and Highway 169. Signage We have prepared a master sign plan and are requesting PUD flexibility for the proposed signage. During our early discussions with Planning Director Gaffron, we noted that the there were no sign standards for the new B-6 district. Director Gaffron indicated that we should use the B-1 standards as a starting place, which we have done. The B-1 district standards would allow a total of 1,454 square feet of signage for this development. Our proposal would have a total of only 952 square feet of signage, which is 502 square feet less than allowed by ordinance. While we are not proposing to maximize the signage on site, we are requesting PUD flexibility to allow some signage in excess of the 50 square foot maximum individual sign area allowed by ordinance. Specifically, we are requesting approval of wall signage on the pharmacy with individual signs up to 66.6 square feet and two freestanding monument signs totaling 62 square feet each. We are requesting individual monument signs with tenant space on each of the two lots. These signs would also be internally illuminated signs with brick and block base to match the building materials. These monument signs are proposed at 62 square feet in area to allow adequate space for up to three tenants on the retail sign and an illuminated message board on the pharmacy 650 BUTLER NORTH BUILDINO 510 RRST AVENUE NORTH MiNNEAPOUS. MN 55403 OFFICE: 612.252.9070 FAX: 612.252.9077 www.l«Kltorm.n«l sign. The illuminated message board will be changed a maximum of one time per day and would not flash or scroll. One development sign is proposed to identify the development with no tenant space. A monument sign totaling 40 square feet is proposed as the entrance monument at the southeast comer of this site. This monument sign would simply read “StoneBay” and would be part of the landscaped entry feature on the comer. This feature will help to reinforce the identity of the entire mixed-use StoneBay development. The sign would be brick and block bases to match the building g materials. While this development sign does not provide any advertising for the tenants, it does provide a sense of place and an attractive entrance into the development. We have included the area of this sign in the total sign area calculations. The freestanding signs are important to the retail tenants who require visibility from Highway 12 and Willow Drive. Signage is key for all retailers. Tenants require the freestanding signage and we believe the impact of the slightly larger individual signs (62 feet where 50 feet is allowed) is mitigated by the fact that the total sign area is less than the ordinance allows. We have worked to integrate the signage into the landscape plan with design features that are consistent with the rest of the development. We have proposed less signage than is allowed by ordinance and are requesting PUD flexibility to allow individual signs to exceed the 50 square foot maximum allowed by the B-1 district. Retail areas in the B-3 district are allowed up to 100 square feet per sign; therefore, we believe the proposed signage is consistent with the intent of the ordinance and would meet the needs of the developer. Lighting We are proposing 20 feet high light polos through out the parking lot with a more modem shoebox typo fixture (see attached cut sheets). The light poles at 20 feet high will be shorter than the proposed buildings at approximately 28 feet. Engineering Matter; We have reviewed engineering comments with staff and agree to make the changes requested with our building permit plans, as they do not affect the approval process. Preliminary and Final Plat We have prepared a preliminary plat and final plat for approval. Outlot A will be replatted as two lots, which is consistent with ^e original PUD concepts for this 660 SUTLER NORTH BUILOINQ $10 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55403 OFFICE: 612252 9070 FAX: 612.252,9077 WIMJAndfCMm.n«l parcel. Cross access agreements will be prepared to allow the two lots to share parking and access. Summary On behalf of the developer, Landform is pleased to submit this application for approval of StoneBay Marketplace. We request City Council approval of the PUD concept stage plan, PUD general plan, commercial site plan, preliminary plat, final plat, community management plan amendment and rezoning. S90 BUTLER NORTH BUILOINa S10 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS. MN 56403 OFFICE: 612 252.9Q70 FAX'61ZK2.9077 wwwJvxiofflUM 04/20/04 18:27 FAX __________NET,|,E as B/WH INV ^002UOl — . - — • •• V<“ r BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, IMC i March ,8,2002 * memorandum Rcfo’loFilc; 02-15 J 1 miM:• • R£) Jatnea a . Bcnsho^of^ Ara%ind Gottwn>iiAcila PKVbig Occupancy Survey to Record Peak P*rk!r.a lr>r V/alcntcrtf Store at TO** Street ww5 York Avenue in Hdina I • pTjRPOSE ANT> APPROACH The piinjow ortius mcmcranduniis to prcaentthcrcsuJti fioir. W>l»r«na store located in the nonhewt comer of 70'^ Street and Voex Averruo in the City of ]Bd(na. Ktcic occurs aiuund noon and aTOund 5:00 p.m. on^crkiiays. iLwc ou.y ^ - k.-m Ainre imj\«Kcr oonsJjtcat wl^h roimtfi at tt difTctrut Walitrcciu store. Datcil on this iiifonsation. we have surveyed the parkinx usago on J0ver.H ikiys during those busy lime pcaodt. • * RKSm.TS J.The rJsulls of the parkinn sujvcy arc prtsaned in the following table by date :md time. A^ luBhUj^ted in the table below, the peak demand (48 occuptod spects) occuiiuJ at 15 0 p .. Fiid»5|. March 08,2002. JlllSUX-TS OF PARICTNG OCCUPANCY StTtVEY FOR WAUGREEN i STORE AT 70 STREET AND YORK AVENUE IN CTTY OF ED1T«'A Wfi^esday. March 06, ?.002, 12.IS ;i.m __ We<ll^(Uy, Match 06 . 2002, 1 :1 hate ANii time NUblRElToFyARklNC; spa >5Ls occupied WediiBSiUy, Much 06. P.tlO?.. 4:S0 p.m. Jhtu'ridf y, Marrh"07 . 5002 . 12:10 p n»- IhiirVdav. March 0 7 . ZOO/, 1:13 p.nv Thursday. March 07 , 2002, 5jlS_pja.__ I huMday, Mamh 07720 0?., 6:1 s'p.tn. Thuraday, March 07 . 2002. 6:35 p.m. 1 nday, March 08 . 2 002, 12 :00 noon Itildby, Mnt rh OH, 2002. 12 :S0 p.m._ 40 46 • Peak parking d^nd 1 I I nrf4L ^.B2 iMia i>-r m * ■ *'// U2J<x£aKiZjZ'*c4^ DRIVE-THRU PHARMACY r ------------------s 1 1 1 1 1 1__1__1 I 1 [H 1=—1——ri I® Ti'h^iUtfc (W .1 4.’-: rj,-.'*.-i ,■ •: 'A Vteil l-M 0 I pm ,. ■ ■ iiX* '.?i \t '■ ■ " y^'-'- r^t^M' irv U?;/' V "fl /'-. G ^\i- Mi i ink pi Kt' V.:.‘->>i’V-.'.|r t--^-iJitr * -^ it *s. '-HI'S X rs ..-■-r-.. /w- •;■: ^4#? '-..:,p::y; X ■ , ^ -' '- V- .m. ^ . ■ '^'14 Mr. Johnson Page 2 Re: StoneBay Marketplace ________l^y 5. 20C4 5. Regarding the two drive thru lanes for Walgreen’s. This is very important for them. They don’t have a lot of drive-thru traffic, but having two separate drive thru lanes allows them to serve two customers at once. The additional by-pass lane is to ensure that vehicles can get through if customers are at both drive thru lanes. This is especially important for fire trucks and garbage haulers. Planning Commission Concerns 1.The planning commission has brought up some concerns regarding green space that can be alleviated if we can gel your positive feedback regarding the parking for this development. Current city ordinance requires one parking space per 150 square feet. For our development that translates into 173 stalls. Our development provides 150 spaces, which we believe, are more than adequate. I offer the following reasons to justify this position; a) Walgreen's is required to have 89 spaces per ordinance, but needs about 60. I have enclosed a parking study done by Walgreen’s for their busiest store in the slate that is located at 70th and York in Edina. The peak parking requirement indicates that 48 spaces were filleo. If the two remaining retail buildings were parked per the city ordinance, 84 parking spaces would be required. Add the 60 spaces for Walgreen’s for a total of 144. This is less than the 150 we are providing. b) Most cities in the Twin City Metro area require 1 parking space per 200 square feet of floor area. This is not to suggest that the City of Orono should endeavor to be like other cities, it is meant to suggest that the citizens of Orono will drive to, park and patronize the businesses in this development just like citizens in the rest of the Twin Cities. As a long term owner of retail properties, I can attest to the fact that this parking ratio works ve^ well. If we use a parking ratio of 1 space per 200 of floor area, the required parking would be 144 spaces. Again, this is less than the 150 the development provides. Both of these lines of reasoning lead us to the conclusion that the parking we are providing is adequate for the type of development we are proposing. Hopefully, you will agree. 2. There are some concerns from the planning commission that the cross traffic for vehicles entering off of Willow into the site would conflict with those entering the drive-thru for Walgreen’s. Our position is that there isn’t a lot of traffic making Uiese movements for a conflict to occur. 650 BUTLEH north BUILOtNG 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MNNEAPOLtS. MN S5403 OFFICE: 612 Z52 9070 FAX: 612.2S2.9077 i • Mr. Johnson Pag# 3 Rs: StonaBay Markatploca May 5.2004 In conclusion, we appreciate your feedback on our plans and believe that your professional opinion will go a long way in assisting us with the approvals for this development. We would appreciate your written response regarding these items on or before Tuesday May 11, 2004. This will assist Mike Gaffron in putting together his staff report. Please feel free to call with any questions at 612-252*9070. Sincerely, LANDFORM* Vicki J. VanOell, P.E. vjv COPY: Mike Gaffron, City of Orono John Trautz, Reliance Development File 6S0 SUTLER NOATH SUIU)iNO 510 RAST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOUS, MN 55403 OFFICE; 512.252.0070 FAX: 512.252.0077 « . ,.^ .. .................... ^ M ««••. .M MM •• —•• •- ■• • ••♦-» •• - ”** **” ”* a ^ ••»• —• •• • •■• •»•.•# M .••• MM4I ««.<•.•»•••» «>»•«•• «M M •«••*•• •*«»••« «K a a™ »« • ^ . »•• I »•» **«tMM« • •••atsat »».* >••»• aa-M-* ■•i • • r* a *• »Mi I • •••• «#*4 |p^M ta« •••• ><•.« <M »•» fl |. M«.« *•••«—• •••••«• M -•« •-•••• •- vj5^- cr.^ feibT'sS-'*— —............... a*.»^.aatM^««aa • ••<»•-• —.-a.* •• ^ a. -*.••• ••» .•#4..^ ••••-4 ................................. • • • M*! «• •• i *M «« 4^• a.MM. *• M . •* • MM44 *M *M .MM# •«•• I* ^ • -M*t M a.» *•.•••-«• • • •. «»«. •« .aaM • M«M • • •-•. •• ..4^ ^n... ^..» • MW. . • a*-. .. MM MM«4. .MM 4. «. ..MM# 4 4«M «• •• M. M« • M •>•». • • • •• MM. .. (M* M M«a. a »*M «mM a.aa .*M • 4 M a MM. M. ..•4M.4.4«MiaMa44MM4M r—. M.M...4 • . .MMM« • M*. 4M M *• •• • 4 • MM. -aa .• • m MM* M.4MA.4M4M -•♦ «• • *a*M • a^ « » M ••-.• .«...<»« mmum&Tkpu KQumcMtirfi JTaM'5!'* M M .a.a MM4 4 4 —wa ... w4 • w« m« • »a.* m at« aa>a .a* «.». 4 m wa m. Ma • 4M4 at. mm a Mata. yf? MM t .wa.a ....»*■ MM.M 4 .MM MM*. M* a. iwjiduli ■ I* •iV£‘C.v;yct7:1 UlfMlUVUiiUlV I^JUif KHIMlirSa^t -_ Jm 1 - ISlLw l?r^ ■«• ——m ________ __ 0 ■* j O'- OMtmut *«■«•________ 1 |i> ' i- • • F> •• '■•' M M at E) *4 E> .44 a, u • :i.. _ . . J *____.. MLattft «am • *M 44 . »a M4 MM «M *M •- •« iO f a *M •« a* ^ .Maw 00 so • #«. «• a# .. Ia». aw Mt aata- — * *• F> • 4 r. .•• aa ta .« 4. . tt E> a ** • a.a* i4a-Mt .a .a a. a E)U> ••• ** a.4M»M< «a .a a.M >m a > a.M.>4». iM a* •■ ■ •« CX3 .a .4• a».• • ..-.a .» \ ..a* • WM. a* a. «a ff •*. . • t.XD *a ►. #• S a. • »• »a j .4 .t a-a EiHl) . ♦• If Matt ttaaat O a VAm •• - • •• EX> • • war M «»..^Mt- ,a M.** n>C^ ..-Mfc • - •• •• — (T)0 • «•» ^ • • A a* «• a. — a. t- CXO - — .•a «a a *a IlJO • • aa •/* * • ». ** • " .» ta a ». PXO fvi lUMniMvawv^uf •V MM nt aMM MM M44MM matM — jQKinjKAiaNDtf^tir r#ff.4uM( ' lK^tlw|>mia« Cm.in.4mi. I 1.1* ^ iSv ri MS"' ‘jr^zsTs: Cl nr OUDMITTAL MMrl.aOIM STONKDAY MARKETPLACE OMOMO. MIXNWirH A LANDFORM n.M4t4#at.t »a»*afM ftaMwrt UMMUNV AM L2.I « m4 M. ///t7/ni) n tumamuMBSvacgaaMBMom I *«4 ft* «*•%•« isiTf KAH xofivncBBErarprTWW sv.-rr.r^r.v.-.M^::* • * - •• • ‘*- •»«•• •,•••••» .•»• • •• ■ 4 ••* • • ••• • •* •» PN*. ■■•••■ ••4^ -P.*.* ^ *•____ ft-'* p«p » •PMV.P ••• • •4»»p» .*•• •* »4** anr«noi« «piiNAiirracrxsnKKBn;« •• t«.tw A##* tp* :;. r.*iM?Y.Tr 4-. - .«• # ^ « *r • •• /m:;: ••T..-M..4 - -•■ I^AIItA IIHWIJItMWWtkMRi ft* n: WM< » «••• nuKinwcvani.u/ uTa** »•« MTft* aft-W «P«P ^P •« WSPIXP I «* ppp»*«* jGHivTuauKiHnc^ijr •*«u««r<ai*4 ^^Rcla«.r f I i.r T' ~z^rr^i B'R VtftA«« rirra;:.*r cirv euok-ArrTAU MATI.aODft SrONICBAY MARKHPLAO: omjNO. Miwwrsni A LANDFORM MIfUW C2.I r p» Rpr 28 2004 7:53 BOliESTROO ROSEliE RNDERLIK 6516361311 i/|J Bonestroo g^Rosene Anderlik & f \1^ Associates Cngin««rf A ArcNItBCts 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul. MN 55113 Office: 651-636-4600 • Fax: 651-636-I3II www.honestroo.com P- 1 Mr. April 28. 2004 Mike Gaffron Planning Director City of Orono Post Ofnce Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Stonebay Marketplace File No. 139-04-000 Plat No. 04-2974 Dear Mike: We have reviewed the preliminary grading, drainage and erosion control plans for the Stonebay Marketplace site. The site is located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of T.H. 12 aod Willow Drive. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters; A geotechnical report, R-value recommendation and pavement design should be submitted for review and approval. Parking lot grades should be revised to not exceed 4%. The utility plan identifies utility crossings in three locations. Final plans should provide the S2une information for the other 4 utility crossings. Plans should include insulation between the utilities where the separation is less than 3-feet. Storm sewer calculations should be submitted for review and approval. We strongly recommend that an additional wye be installed noith of the existing sanitary MH 1 to provide a separate service connection for the proposed middle building. Final plans should include construction details. Tne following changes pertain to erosion control notes (sheet C3.1) Add under note 14, “or as directed by city inspector.” Add under note IS, “conrqily withgll local ordinances.” Add note 19, All NPDBS phase II construction permit regulations will be followed, and a completed SWPPP will be provided to the city and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District upon submittal to the MPCA. Add note 20, rock construction entrances will be maintained as appropriately requested by city inspector. Add vegetation protection to existing vegetation that is to remain untouched, and indicate on plan set. Add note 21, stockpile locations will be on non conveyance areas and enclosed with silt fence until removed Also, any open soil stockpiles will have temporary cover, if inactive fyr^Wi6l?ll!*V?<4/H!f%och«ster. Wlllmar. MM • Mllvwaokee. Wl • pucaqo. »L ArrifmmivR AcilRf^BqudR OpportyfUty Impioyr fntflPiplRfM OnffM . I- ' MUM. npr 28 2004 7:53 BOMESTROO R08ENE RNDERLIK 6516361311 P-2 I • Provide detail drawings for rock and block inlet protection ■ Provide detail for drop in curb type inlet protection • Provide detail for silt fence Ctypical) - should be as previously indicated machine type sliced with metal T posts. If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly, e BOMESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERUK & ASSOCIATES, INC. /o>f Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono T ^ • ref t ^ 1 t'M r.v< • »*v* :-. AVj. r^es'f^x* tf.’UM r. '■5^- ^/CjAV>H‘w i. *’ c V-? ; :*.! ;:► v:«?s<;*i^ j*? : , -■ • ?;^*:^.-:;;.?r';;i ju? v*i ~r • f •W ' •« • • J» ^ • ;*.* k 'I*- •* I t a^W SIGNAGE JtUi «/-. wiT :.- Enlarged Retail “A” - 4 »• ' w * *• w m .« « . . *5 *. . . i4 * «'* • »• . • ' ^4 '- •'..•«• •* - .V « ■ ' I . ■ «■.•.. -■• . • ». % < a < # •• « k ."*• *,T• w •' ! L. • r •.* • • r* .* •; »/i*.. Retail “A” * i 5 • ' », » % • « •»** «. it >V- :: ' * • A#> ‘3i^:r •• f.. • - ♦ • . « 1 - « .»» «• •* . , *4 ** ^ . .• • • • * . i •• 4 *»•••* .«’ •*»• ' * • A • « * # • # 4ft* - - , . .4*• • • r ** % , •« ^ » • ' ** . • -a** 4 r»* ’ *! w ? A .t 4 vr"«* ^ 4 **i**«V m a ■ X >at.V W.JP.. A 4^*%* • ‘ t • • *4* * »• *•* • Retail “B” tonebay Marketplace rono, Minnesota AMCOIM I • - ■* **•« ■—rf -* \iwr . K^.-wte)" ;1 9f SIC NAG . •* . N MkJM, >■ L * ✓ ^ M ' ■ \ > '««« ^ •' V .-A."? SION ACESIGNAGE ..... SIGNAGE A igSiMliii! -A Iliiiil i^iiiiiie^^ « . • • ^2% • . ' ' «* . • SIGNAGE fo: i jfi • »«4; •» V nt SIGNAGE • W> *k>«- ■* .•- I , ■ •> • •••• * M»« ..-J t. /“-I. »•. ’.;■ - r-.- W- irSv:: ^ Enlarged Retail “B” \ . .» » fi. -IJ , • , • I *• -• •*; •• t ' m ■•* . • i- »* •V.x 1 S; ' •/■■■-'-5 ^.-r'4 i 'E^J.---'' r'-:^N.’:, X A' ■. I -.u}- 4 . • .*. .* i‘ .V 2^Gr/CE C'" • Jf Retail “A” I - »:u • * • •» •• •• 9 tm §■ /rn: ^ '*«Aw* • (mm* • » »p • f*—• » ♦ • • ••—»♦» ••■ • •* r • ».••.•••.• .• «• ti- *A.'v‘ -Vj »T i,t:5’ • Vir -V •'*’"i -v,,v .. -T»» , t aPk* ' « • . ' • .r * ? • ‘ * ‘4 "9 ^ ,.• »■ # ♦* *• • * . '• • i tr-t ( -* ••»•» •' # IM » lT*', «C'V-'<! <.-. / *, - r •^:fA :rC: ( . -n* .i- l ’ 4 # > ' • ~ ‘ • • ? f» ■ * i " « >— 4 ■ . . «H • ^ ’-'w . . , .w - 5.'um*''•'C***' 4 il.Sv .’viA '/^ ^ 4 w:-l 4 4 J V ^ » 4 . ^ 4 *-♦••*• 4 v-.‘ 9^* * .'*'*’* . . ., . • . •^' ••vS, ; ; •>:> : iO NA o,v': r </Gv •*-. Retail “B” Dnebay Marketplace ano, Minnesota MEi. AMCOIM \Oltlll 1.0 X \n IN HU Jj. .;-4 _____:/;L^ <■.«£• •«^<__' 2. = /-” /~v V/—> wO nm^ -V DFOKM • i ‘ • 1 • CROSS SECTION EXHIBIT 2 5"C\E3AY W«'■.r.'^ *’LACH ^EC5C15 Oc/C'7/04 L-------- 3 area UJCATIOM MAPC ORONO, US STONEBAY MARKETPLACE OMtOFtt/AmCAMT mtiamamoiffi'ifm 1000 Town sr MAHourm »utm wx'CUouiMv^CiOTA i»«oa rtumii m>m ruMmw CO-OMmMXO-AmKAMr JOHN TERRANCE HOMEiliC f UMV aAMtJllOM atOKCLLlY OOII1»ATOMOMX MffMJcnA mm :DRAWING SYMBOLSC cavtv’vo DimUTY SYMBOLS czz:CZ:SITE/UTILITY CONTACTS Reliance CD CT a DBREVI a TIOKSC p. 4 f 5^ A* ^ •««««• »• A«r«• •• »r>«». M« 4 — !■ •»VA .-Wt ©o A 4ni ««*«cvtfA A*«u< t*ik4 CA»< 4A«a ti«o* a*«4 • AOD iuilw «*c •««ia oi* iii« MUii r CZSITE SYMBOLSC •«4AC< 4’**, C*f Uwr.i*« « »• 4* t»ai ««r«« AtoMK* U*«* •> iMr V ■'—« *«(••• LL»r <A» 4**«> A m-* f^m*0 C^*4^» •«M » •m4'*M4«» *«a> kibaur »#>< *W» Va»* <M Aw. A •mmm. Aw* v*4«* A*a» ^ >»«•• Aw. 0 •0S00 A*w*.a A«li W« A-« •»• Owi t*w« lw.at(u*w i:w«* 5^4------- • «W»**4Srzr-..^ Umtmmp to a ww> > Kate tf tew CKK <«»'«>• C«>itaJK •tA.VC lAte«**teC ► •.••CKJ A»*w. c«.«* *44^ r«K<f«>» »KiC*C CLAKT t*4 rvtAAA ataaoc teteu. •.^AnK U'MteaS TCUK/MiJn Mte »C»< t*#«« 0l«M tKM**AV 0i«M>teA»»l A0«ft mm ««0K PiJM *«• it* OMMAlfl AK» n»*M|f*te1 **>«*r*«»i MAt«»r •*(•« Cat««t K !<• *A« 'te'M CAl 4*« tOK •4.«r«M. i«* «te K«C ’« -i*«l«*4i\A* <•« 4Ate« «A«M4M %Mat ••te vm sjicte*** SCR41CC COMPANTCt CO NT ACn »»{•» nm90 UM«t«< MM« a • A««t flA 0>^ 7*97 IKUA* Aa«a«t« AC ttft M C«*rAi Kaf •tea M7?7 Cn< CAAAt At 0«. 0* ^ tKI •»7-?AA-AW0A*a Ka7.;aA«aK« w -4 4 —W —■. • * — •« •a.'tfc ' *Ok AC wt tte««tms ftea »**» IATK ««iA •»^'•t0>77^ . ~. ffteH* teCW«H kA4« #C« A.W\-V*A *te. 9^*; «lL« A*tCtM«te ’til ’tj-?>*4jn ■«<jita &49 ti.te4A »aitc< *»mk ;«k » •JC 4«»aaU tifacK AC r*« mc» •teMtAJi* w. M«9«>CCM •#.A tC-9J.-tea7» »*• tj-l.*-?f? Developmenc Company. L.L.P. KcvrsotHonxr CTDSURVEY SYMBOLSC CZDEWSTINC LEGAL DESCHIPTIONJ vK».<;i A «*4te4K«f ecu*** •»#«>;<» DEROSION CONTROL SYMBOLS; V? teCM •« • m:- mtm «*c *teA#H) •••« • #4teKnc C*A kite ior M PK^"*t •Xt«' «*>< C va CI^ tV»* Kte tetvt' AAt *»»»« A/« teO 9*«h « iO<v l*4A«teJte# act MMtM> «K«« MAM<M CA»Co AAJW Ci*l «i4«« Hm 0^mi> tei*t« «Aw<v# VUTf u«« itct«£cnt«> K»C*»C iMPMCSAAC ««.*AaO* tMteKCKOkOC C*« ttct«x«aa* :tiit/*» teA*>«r«M VA** CZDPROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONC iCn I 7 OkAA I ftCMCK* aOP*«ki CAAif* rM*SCTA M0T««« t4X*t0i tt*»*<*{** IK9r»t# CJti^SA *«teCi Mt#' fli'tl Ki7a *t€ 9MX turm! H'tt CIDBENCHMAHKSC i *a» w* v» *«t »»'teiw»» af A^ajiaw* .» •.« ^tewnoa .te MM me «%*.«ai | ■>* «• a* «• ^•w ( !i 4'w*t »M, » AM 5n. CITV SUBMITTAL MAY7.2004 ptairr SrONEBAY MARKETPLACE ORONO. MINNtSO I A LANDFORM HtMNeAPOl tl *MOE««tX rvajCTMa YOU DIG <« aMVIH coommato TITU5*«ET co.i m1t11 & / / V / '^l •hint, t»»»; , Ltt4>> • • • •5r;s/ ,o iZ FKAR-IACY ’4a:c y r* 4 mMO ) >o:jt *•«»« i««:u^uti © ‘7 ■=?.V* ■ ^eo^u mn «*A1^ 49*0 ft* f*: »ac.’ *pf c:4c ftft-C ft* *5«>ie > "*c c:ift V © 89^2 ^ sarsrtz^E fC«« »4I». »4}««<<«« ««<«.*U o ®--i^ L\*»* if»• 1, M4f«« © 0 ;--------------si IPU_______________V»________ ^l\J^TT * ^0 M------- © n . •*vT*«X/t >444 ti » j, !• j. ?? o <»r») ^t^t ?.© f wot 1^ *5> ~-A~ <o S8y05*t0"F 458 48 *..40i*> k«4 9 *M0i4 ir« na ««cc ■«>•> s» ••• -•»^nH«K* r-f»........................................'' 48.47 'I CDNOTES i •4nflM»i* i»o*n4*T04 f4^ wMn »a»oc«*»< wwtm^s wt vM«Kan tMna* h» ^ «a04O 4S9t»M •#0»>4TO< »CV*i V4S ««04«i9 V TI« 0M«C. rrr 9» «O0 «iC rtt 4iMcmf«» ixxwfom *o m •4'X x«mo mc* *o••C4«4TV«/eM^«urr04 » 4iff p4jCjM»w<»» 4» ««**0. f*«MMM MU0 M rwOk^li* «OT»«e KS twio^^nem. jSITE plan N0TES( 1 praaMMi imom oh *•« ^4 h mm to »4C« m cm »tc aitMoi 4*a 0» MAC U>0«» •C«tO 9V<CViM» 3 #4fluc •«4u.» »o M 91VIO cfH 4 •* *01 «Mn a*«r»t9 i*m 4C£tfMu *c<tn a*4S •• m wwtmo 4#*- 4 •• ici hici *44^10 trwm •* 0» CiiMM 4IC 4t •» 0»C«H 4 hC4« «0 «*44. 4 'c cj«*c O0*4i HJ C4CW c*H m mirntc **<r ^ »c«m«• »C • UMO •0« M COHTiMTOi r«U4 wcn0t%% w 4 h» 0«aM4<M «rwMH M«4 41* v<« 90Ai. Kl 4(5*•**»<• wmtmm •«■ atwu^o« t.« ma«^cenwte 4| A«HH OH T>« 4V4M 4C OM 0C*4i Kt VMu TO rc nm. »taucfuu4 ^4«* otet to |T4 uc wc*wm% $ MO rocMti euvi 4.* £.^tm o mgwomo >ot 4u. oMatt pr^*M» 40 «4»r»* •••••c COCMt* c*0 40 w*»»i * i«40riM TO otOOCMO MC CUM 40 C;T*M. OK*Ti» SIM*. *44CI CDPARKIKC SUUMARYC M*44 »« «T4i; 4M 90 9» 9» '•T *1000 4lt4 M*4i M04C JW »• AOtS 4VO0* 404 44' 4..X9 4M4 • earn *.cca 4«i4 • *% • :ir m CJJT 04/90 • 04 $t*u4 hO»0 * CSC«« HOat 4414 Kool ct4 • (toM HJC9 4414 . • am s» 0f¥ii0*iXMmcMfr IIQJMKf[UMKTCaffAKT.LLP. tvoamo 101401 w iMooucm Aifivc sfxmi Mt^.nArauiMwuorA sms TU4««»NH faSiOJMatt Cft-OMtp/co-AfncAwr JOHN TERRANCE HOMES LLC TOai4 OA»ft5T90M aMRCUCtOOKWAT onoNo Mii*rjcn4 jsn Reliance Dc\’clopmcni Company. L L P. aMk9Mcr*M0o r.' »• (•9 -se 4«»« !1JJ9( 14/»10 •44 »'4^* r^it, atojuo 4*<Uii; s*44*s • its s*44>s 440040 44«4*C KCVIttON iRtn*'' j-i^CaO 1*4a*1 la.lffl 1 f A IM 4M»M«4 acrtlic* V4».% »4. TCTC 44«aMC r'4U.S A40VC40 97 lA JAKKA SUMMAKTI_____________"l -wrcw*4:74 t»MX maoo •••7? »•n«i AJLX ?one s*r?0; TH44 tao* 4fl 40AO 14 *07H fnoccr MAMOU RCYOv a«i*CAnoN >• «•••»*•*•* • >•»»■«• m»hw ;« CITY 3U&MITTAI- MAY7.2004 mcjia STONEBAY MARKETPLACE ORONO. MINNtSOTA HIGHWAY 12 LANDFORM niNNCAOOC It ^HOCNI X SCALE FEIT 4UNMtC ODTOftMO ntojtcriNO ftEUMMAEY ftOE PLAN C2.1 3NOTES SCALE IN FEET i>- nxce fuif «*T>< lot SMC COLOt 10 -UfC*. WtCHTKTU«v i tAacwuc t0am>»w itum ••of •o»oaux iutv«»____mmmwc »• icttMi* •o* »•« «a»*r* aovisim»OM «•• W^cto r* *>• 9«n«c P*-* 0»_g»»C M0 prro 4tS0OftTtl .nrt itfcanoc tc » NU VM»t9 MOt «aC*v4*«H/CPC««tft04 » *«p Oi iCm 1««PMM »«A« • ft«a4m.r ctmp mi m%en/n^ DSICNACE REQUIRM£NTS( wm«i ». Mtict ^ tccmc^rt MUM» Mrr*C» 0» K m S»«ci IM kOT 1^ ict itTMD *•« «r r» M MtMt Mpr 9 AAP mC IuS M MfUl MCr »0i |40> M»rT MOT Ifft tO"ocamo »y * m»c •c »owcu«. »ew tmx hcmo m mumi Nif M KM »««u ••ewe « ••CMt o» ««c •wf ••»<• rMA«tOI ««a 01 «4l4nv e» Mr KMCeai KkX ISICN SUMMAHYC I rn MSMfaa •kww uui^ »•«(«*« • m w m M»r«et *k>c 0 • ro 1C*tk k«t » • Kl f» b«t ? MilTMl A.WC UUJ* MWV*« • rt » JM OM • w* we« MWraei 4bP< 9 • >• W TTM u» i • t» w MWO Mi %an I • f • t«K w MHI re MUMrKMM Mi*l »jl MM RJ»4*eM 4<m « O ’© * '"^ '*’ ■ ^' * ** ** O'© <e i» • 71 • «e !► ©C-r • 4 • 47 W w#« > • re w ©« • 4 • 40 » to>4k eiwioMfw 104 • 40 w • Ml W 9‘kCl wo C*»* Au/ver U'Ttt»C 04w«'»C-vA.J« ro furCM, OC>«*tcrk«l S*X IflUrTtO ^0 SUKAACt »ACf AftCI WLOM CAm» TM ma 'C m mo oevs *9eoucw ‘ y^ione^gj/ I ‘ PH* ,>■. I • .'’■■>, • ’■•i: MO to mtfi^* V .mrtA %Ot MO«7IC?Jtt 0 C- --aV-V • '.n./ :x ’7 tOCt »Mt iLOCk CaOi tM* TO »W'Cr ENTRANCE MONUMENT S\CsK tic* ro u»u il.. tiLU. OlVfXPIX/AmXAMT itmANC[DEm()R0Tcotfiim;ii^^ MHAAHOlimi nr MMOMTHi AvtHuc nnii MiH.'«AraiAwi«iJ9rA ii4a tCUMMlM lAAMMMt cooMgiicD-AWwm JOHN TERRANCE H ’rmroAMLSTioM an KUiit hawwav OAOHO MAsrsp A XM »,',IX ■ ««*•> ql 1-4" Reliance Development CompanVi L.L.P. OMLSMniNOO «M4 Mt< •MW W*Mk Aa» — M^i4‘ KCvaO<H0TOKV mm mmm <m>m HlOJia AAAMAOKt Kivnw coraacAnoN CITV ©U^MITTAU APT1L14.2004 *caaaT STONEBAY MARKETPLACE ORONO. MINNKSOTA LANDFORM HIMWCAHOUit PHOfNIM nXlAAMt Maacrm taove PKEUMMAKY StONflAN C2.2 ft P M 0 C M 1 « >« »i ■ ■ »11 ■■ Mn Mv Vi •rntmmtm *»»<*«> mj.HMdKL C40KUUMO fVijKrm UOMM fitEUMNAjrr UnuTYflAN C4.1 »■**«■ >i—»— *«•«« n* «Mi« <MM «• mjmNm,CBMtteOW fXajKT MO KaOKW ftCUMWAKY rtAT C5.1 CZDLUMINAIRE SCHEDULEl { l«*Ma iMM C«*a.aC i«/MM oncv««»14»M urMM u» •C A €A«0.*« ti«U »«M« <0 M CUA0 «9 >4009 «•19 CD LUMINAIRE STATISTICSC I OlKWn 4MC4CI m%ns%mir** AA0UC ie • •• 1 *c 4a$ 1 CDCENERAL NOTES! US Itft t4*0 >«44 9i jti^*• w«M Ai «.« «w«n -Vf* » a^wto •• atCMt- i *<VI »w' M MI’Vut? C*. C»C1|U *•*» « t*- •*>« .t*« wC-^ MItS »; « •* 1 »>M rj M 01»C*«C f »*CWC«Ui«l «l 0N94M • M •«CI Oi> *i« MM » * nMVi M f «i*« t.« MA <• » mjm M» «r Mauc* ««U. <MMOO lUtX tAai« . «>*»« highway 12 pfyttflfn/AmjCAMT UUi)XIDEm(MI(Ta]tfA!IT.LliiRRS lurairmoi jtr MMoibTiv 4nm« svni ^MUHAFOut. Mi»mjarA iMi >iu«*«aAiMi »4u»i>a»aM O^OnmMKO-*fr\tu>m JOHN TERRANCE HOMES, tic turt OAHLsmoM aOPHCUXTrAKKWAT ony»Q Mi^Afsri A xju Reliance Dc\clopmcnt Company, L.L.P. CMWS*iUTMODI P»% »u *••• hmmjmrnak** m* mnm <aw«a* km WfcK I* V^« ICV^iON M4T09V •*« 4«i» ntCLTCr UAMAOU «cv«M cr*nrcAT»N CITV ©UI3MITTAL MAY7.2D04 iTcmcT; STONEBAY MARKETPLACE OKONO. MINNESOI A A. LANDFORM MINNCA^OLIt MHOCMtM ^mm^m na *kAA«tao«t%cMO fVCJKTiA nUUMNAKY UGHTtOflAN E2.1 • 1/ . Lv : •• • • -r-.a-.-.......' cV'^’ ys r«tl« !*• • ^ '( \d > f LOT : <> \S> ‘ o. . V-Xv 3> w> (!> „ g> _ M*N>* •ju.nr«» «»»• r W9 .«S!tW C3UNDSCAPK NOTKSl” * »m ^«w • « w.t *-•. ««« u* • « tr m.\9n • tKi *«• 0*t*«'<lt fc*<u« •<«»t *u *•!«•* w9C»*K> •«*« *• «<» Ma% kn^*#! f—-_t rcraMrt •(>’•***’'1^ «•*•• <.I«A4*« t«****»i '»• t M. %••••• • r«M W Mtf ••%4 M <» mM9« »€M »«^ «•••• C«»^* •*« • •>•« • i t»tv»- •« >*rmt '» A «•« ui* mc 14 ai^Vt^ iM •• #v*». W9W^ n^«u »■•>• »r« • M«»» v*« «i 4«t K» • *rt ««•» acieM. i*m» »•>**<' m x»tg*>g ui <mi ♦••• *^’ • MM ^«wn« MV • »<V« •* •«>•♦ MMCW »Mr»Ar #•*• »\4i> J*M ••.'X' 1.4 'Ml X ••<•4 •»:•< • MA««V •»*- <«M« X' •• M.* NO {•*•«<»«• M% ••t * #*• •» *n w,* M -»'.. *« •’*‘1*4 »■« «^4 M ,'«4«.«r •• •■• ««m.»»x*. iix^*****.* •*« Ml*'*'-* • >a %m»» >-v» .<*<r>« > «4c*tv^ ,^*xt «»r 4X...4*v<m* »<4| t»>«« •• k***.** *** •«.••'•, ’ ■•W* •’ •«••«, •r«a4<««i v>**«*4 -.<i • *,• axt »’«•« ^ r^n. iJW^ •<« «*.XW4>^'t «>■• H *t\« • •«•• •*•* <^.>- M 441 M.' *«l ‘1 '« •• 'X -«•• .r • «■•«« v«MiMr' ■■XMM*' *«M ‘vxf*- « 4^4 ■*«tiiiim mm *.44 *UM ««*• M'UMMi •’ v4M«au.‘«li nmm • *tm *MrM M •• k*MP •« «MU« «• »r«4 XMTM* tVI CI>rC4<*M • *• atcMM V i**A* wM* aVilMt V«««t Mi* Xca'IC MT *^iV 9 MCil MWi Mii—«— 0m 00m0 m 0.00 MiM*** « Mm«M IiM m 90% H*mk 00,-0*. ••• fc*ii Ct»<M« M ‘.MiX *? WMO* mt mt» •»*«’ -M* >« *4XMM .* i.-MMii*. KtHiiM 4« I 1 ’M c* ••»• .\»\* m aM. ««*; • •■. Mr M4« M ♦.» MiM« # <» ^ M*** IkX #MM V 4 m«'%. aM c.ai ’aai •;» • *e c*-«*44 •.•» ••Mai •«•• ila.!* Ml •«* •« v% »♦,• 0.0 Mt ►*•' i‘l •f «<« I4MM *M I M’tM *^<« • •• •<*.M Ml kMM m m*0* •« «Mt*« .♦« w»tr m *k00 • ♦#• • •< *M»X M. IXM •« tiA’M *«tr MM* 0*00*% m *M M MMt MtV mtJM U ITMat? M rt00* Wtlfm *MMM MW • Ml •>•'«■ tMMMi'CM*«Mta MMl MB i« IBTIBB M •»« «MB 00 "MMB IB * MHAM 00m* M«M CT3UK0SCAPE REqL'iggyi:wTst""'~":r:rr^jr~--—1-......-:-.■ ■■•;.:■ ' " . ____1;-—:-----------------:------, MB •-• fMMk »i iMB* IV M M MB MM MM* IB iMVBCiMB MM MMM iMltBMr BMMB t>W t B lBM»» M *••#• M |B*|« *MM MV.BB* 0 00 \00 MB* WMi • »»B*Mf IM* MMi It DNOTESC • BaCICBAM) iBOri*»IM IMM MV* *0*OCB*«MC BtBvl» MMOBMC B* ilXKiB* •mBBMM* •« MBBC* aOB^MM MBBWflM Wwi »*t MCVtVB t* fut 9»Mt C»*» C* atiM? •<« C**C 4MdO*‘»t i/n.*** IBCHOM *B BB *B l9 VMBBO BBO* »B • Ml VKMMMCtt MM XftO TM tOVM V<LtB Bl rTBO«*M* *0000 m MMUrr«M DPRELIMINARY PLANT SCHEDULEC MIMA lAAMf 1 eVflMNM*1 lOMBBC tBBB ^MBte 1 0OOf ' "‘.S' iffsa._*5^_ DECIDUOUS mets 0 evit* nfijru, 1kX»S •nt BMXX/* CtM* »*flUi’4*. IS* CM BAB SV . tfm •Ml eaoB . • “I •ixti •1 4 artrxKiA f* CU.•4B •M • 49*1 •M* exat ©■*.000 •M 4T»««:4M 4c *1.^. MVB.l I V CM AAf ♦,>.. X0 [7^*4.1 :ac« CORirCBOUS TREES M.Ja**«• Ml B <0 A&ff *.V . 7J0 f7^ Ml *-• **•••vc^Ajtir Mx^>« * •“AAt s-. w ««t<au»4i ’x-• •• •vMf« •V14 • 4‘ • MO* « M AAt M-. !?•t»IC^«4. oknamcntal TItCCS )an.*n.4*^ •Mi'll • S’BCt Kk« I ?t«E>• iJMBaM 1 V***, •«?« co« •M.4*s#^BC->v». ?a*0 HCMtaC • 1»X4 ♦•♦•••1 0V.0^>0t iM.Mt* •S'BBT ?V • B»E>•4*1 fA*Ti )**^ac* (•■V* ••»•»«» CJV4* 44 'l«a*A'4 ly •CT •• . TV*E>»Mi CAai OiaOUOUS SHRUBS •rr CA.i'CvX M«»» *4au4 ..vtrnx 7 A4|0^J4 . 9*E>I>♦Ml CAM r«4*i .1 Mait x-v* •v,»*’n* %iM 9 CM 0C*V . ••E>E>• M. CC.9* >•r*4t» MM •OB‘A.vli« Cvtvxia «4*i«;i«4 > AM 00*4- . fm tD!I>• Ml i'Anr «'?T i»*CC ra*«i* »••»•BBB4«4 A^>*.'4 '*|,.V i4*r*‘,♦ CM-.%> . .‘W (D2>•Ml CAC* M lia,."! v\" tiM •iM4 tiMMI } CM BT *• . fm EXL> CONIFEROUS SHRUBS U *.*1*44 iCt.BC‘4 ®»<V**4*4 B M*0f*« • 4k E>S>IMCCBIM ♦N nxx «•BtaM Af%C ? ;•*.0C*A> I M ZXD |vta:tM« tB «B G,m iBBvn-M ♦MM BTCtM’MB >i.ldV«44BI > ••*4.->• • ««E>E>1 m 3A»*« PERENNIALS R grasses •rj •14‘M* «»T t 4k4^4^«.***t 4.1, ••.\4 144,< AM BC*>• • M c5e>OB* CB4B9 .•iM ll»«»*t« •«?*M4«*« «4M •****.'1(4^* M44'« ••«•• CM > . •**..***#4k; •«|4 •* 41 ..4 n ••;••• 4 < AM •*•► . M [D[l>4.|*itMM •f B.W.» C >*44l'M« • /-4MX4 •1W.BM • AM Bfft M 1 t0 DS>•.VMBMt y RCAIJI IN FEET DEvium/AmcAifr ilEUAICIinEm€KTCDM?m t««BR*i^)'iawiii MT MABgumv ATcwit vxrni ^4IB.'BJkKUlMI^BU01A Ml C»OBA€glCO»AfnXAKf JOHN TERRAHa HOMES, LLC TtWIT OAtCSTBOM aiO KCUXT babkiiat aB0BQMi5MiJ0lA JU4 Reliance Development Company. L.L.P. CJW >**11 MOO irvi»<MM8r3KT BBOJia WAMAOtX ICV«W aB'vcAnjt CirV ©UOMITTAL V1AY7.2004 STONEBAY MARKETPLACE OKOiNO. MINNtSOI A L \NDFORM M I •»»•£ ABOL IS BtOe*« I « *rnm»00m BUMABB kjnuexMo BvcLCCTMa ntELMMAKY LAHOdCATE fLAN L2.1 •tmm^rnhm -m li****^ immoNO ftdjKTNa uom ir • ^t'*r '* ■^' \ •— ‘ *T‘ *• r^w ^ r^ ^il “ir-*--. "»-j ms r/^-JK^’-^x ■PT:£r::r'‘. x, xrV ■•>fff/ilnr|/aii' I -nitt rfia>i'rf^r ©i <j>/<^rT<^r\i® » fJ V /r .* . ,V>. ' I. - &L ■4^4£? NORTHWEST CLEVATION Bn7I*"^TT^ (:2>^ ir-« »/r 'Ii.iuc -o'* 0. © /^ / (j^'oy EIFVATION -r-!l !!l ! ©' W BWt » to WB S^3P-r^ f:!h 0-^01S''Vt-ijjTT* ^■ wfl* r-/^ ^ ^ !;..:!3r-‘r tVATlON gJ OrttlM UIVATXMS (CYC9 NOTtS 0 race mu Murui MtiDMs • *co^or 10 fta mm mo caioi - ooa *nua»‘ 0 «xv<a un • auH *ur |0 ICT UKS 0 ONB.T »«aia - ramnum • ca« Matbokb woof |0aoMou% iro «oi 10 maOM XRTT 901 |0 MU-MOUWID UO(t MX QinVOk. OMMi 0«MI MLfi 0GUIMC rm 0 m Kwim • caoi num ©ctoN* on ©tuMwer M 0 »BU«t CSMCKH HQMiiOM 0109 oo nri 09ua > st^ois - rHMJC caoi ‘WA’HiC «xt* 0 moic ttM «rai 09 • vM-cx ca9> 1 ’vmrnxxs c«a>* 1© wi •utto <1* MonutOM noM ••uj |0 wwa haWi («* miomjsm fwow wu} 0 M«m»c3 «cui C9MC • \Mucue COM yfjm tw* I© WOIKA nc» «:% MC. M» CUO caoi i«r '0 »oj» Mnat am coop to m*o* ^ Muiun i*w« Miw 'comw ’ 0 «oMHc om I© tXUO JMO •IfDAMiy ~ *9 ri>m*it«« PBOUCT ^ypw OfUMMCMPtCPOnoit tr □ •BU.OBff ICO (mtUTMiT g] JMCkONOO CdOU-TMit «U.OONOT«UCrO*«mK.«PiLtAS MOTDOnmVBOCOT Q «MHOBtt«rOOOMr%CTtM jg UM»»OlOWOOCOi«TlWC^OWffU»i(tTCO><t%<:TO>i| •»rB.- ejumwa . BffW OmOu OH.T rOfkMTT MiUMX/T TMt»«ia«CT »B4Mt»ocooi«o TO r«4 row.OBi*« »wwqiu»» 0 cwTtit* was 1 CiTv«PMIOWt0lil««*O<»SM«»0CAL JOB«CA n»A ION p>rru««PUM> oftscBM ••atft woumnt^ mtrfttn nMn tnunct ft trmwoAOL^'vmyjor oy ««m Hwt UM two f9 nn iBCJCT PRr:i.iK/iNARY; NOT FOR CCNSTRUC'ION I i____. .4._ I _I I !i i r- ' ^ ■_ ____I >»-0»,n i L__ _ ! L _ •O i OAt i ^nr«rft<iAB ICO^f- CfUTFCAtlOf* WO 5€Al 'WccCpJLC.e^H^ ft*CWC *lO 00000 STONt^AV MAfUCTTPcACE CMONO. WnNNESOTA o«iB»9*iornj trrtflKM CLCVATlOMt OATf lOTWtf NO OAAMNOV 1 X30MO OOOODftOO G»€oarc av AiLftASf 0 TO Cd^ftTnuCTOA MA9 OAAMtNCNO A2.1 VK VMir) I Vliry ^ iti PRtrWSHCO M€7M CiNOfif-^JkSfiMLT IfOOr COlOffr mCH Blue SMMUrS- COLOB: BeATHCBeO WOOD an COLOR /I oecomrr^ /un curorr light fixruBe •PB£nNt5HC0 HCrAL /XSCM- COLOB: SCM« UN •5CB€O€0 LOUVCB HIGMtST mOC€ X an oeTABBLG- W*- ioh^ ^ COtOW §2 ■•■MwaifliT^iitalbts* w^HMimmvuiaaBu 1*1 t in ■VtMwi l■«nw■^ln aiMa iMinicawaraaii ai Biwiraiiiaav>• ma i«rr nr^i»a»mi am«' Ai*atT«a*ii« ainui PMPej 7si6N/KiEi^SlMCE \ n 24 ’^B tfip^jaszL^ ♦6SHSSL ■IIJWIiMMitllB ^ PETNL a - 9CXIW BP^ATiQii rosyg BBTCABT COHCBCTt ueOBLLiOM ALUmnMi STOBCrBOHT 0-0 BOOCfACt CHU OMSr-cotoo;: rome rACt BBIOC- roLOB: CMOicorr HCOmU IBON5POT §27 CM«Uon lOP w. Naik f J Mmtmt SAUl Hmm fm «l-m-0QM fcvmis iaa aM aM»4B ii»«niaa n»aiM»««ta«t« ajwa itaaMMamca-ata inamaiWaifiawiiaiwriaia»n>r<Mg i«««a<*«aaniu amaa’tM a ««• a«nan*f Mi»arH( a«>Mai*«*^ t« a n« aMvaaua>t«« a>tiaaiMaa>t*aait>»a mi'M awrat«M a.i<i aHi« ai)i ^ttawi’iait* aHitaaiaaniaraniaaffinaiii a aii a na»4iiK«Miaaaia a Ma«:iM amtati) »a4 ca>m a naa naa l•«*tMa<a•l aaii a'l i a»aapr^'>«iaa f>i a'ina n«»Mf vi»aa Ma«»»Maiai»«'»iri vri •aa*i'i« wt«itii a Ml b im a«i« ain r n«a it« a«u *.^^.'H«iaaM«aii a uaa msiwi a^tii atm v>i«a a mi aaiti|i« a'l »a«)ra>ti»B«it»f naa mi ataiaa M«a<Hiat' VM4 9 at»f VM#a iH aawa r*a.a«M«ii^^I arMta rtf atm aunaWtia naa riiaimaaii laawt atiM a naaMtawm a mi a<f*ra>Mi «ia«'«if a ttaa itaa tif aaia atura<na a a«ita»rti a ft»a>Maaafl aa n« a Ma aMiaautf 14>aa waaim »i>i w a iMVitawAi aati atariWMia-Miv^^fl^H itaaiita a«M anit ruaai rt«.a ••• a>i*«a"m'%Mt« a-m a^m aatagattM aaitfa an amaattn mmmvaMaan a uaa m safi attii atm via a mi aait ^'taa’iM B«i« a i»cajuaa«»*«attiia«i«aiM«aaMV»i ^W'aaaa a inamf a'laaaatavtMi awaa iiaatman a III a itaMaaaait aaa a itiattaMia^ K%^«a >11 anwa iiiWfcnaawatairaiaiia Mrawaa iirwMi aaiiPta an«a ui amaa uraai a nrvni a m a^tfva j« a<m auiaaa am ••ma itrvuaailti»iiaaH>aia ina m«MMa maiina Mtaiaaviic Kwi an»a«’Maa>maiiiaai»wa'M aMt«jan*a at*'* aiMi aawvMM aa a>tia«>tif a t« awi amra .s ‘ \ l!lHii)!ii;ihiiii| laiiliiliiiil RETM. A- EAST ELEVATION HIGHEST Race J. J2'-f0h ~ jamraOTawia iiaiy a V ^a»*f a maa amvau ^ainavi ai, .„^„i,-^a«a»a»a»»>vnifanvaiaaMa aauMra*'. Wa airaaif aiM^iavatrva*a«vM«aN«atirvaM>aa«av> aHiaa*w»»r»ania>Hivawivaiwaaviaai—iaBiv>^ lanraivw M>a M>a viraaMrvvi^aN Id^^an a amvaM aoj* mtimtfmmimmm ^r;r;..*v rSSS; ' /V*. -/* 1 • •• . S. •» • *. V SSt BAfUfln 24^-a^ UBPEB somr LOWEB somr 14-4 * ♦ xyiNiy: ^6 rxL^ 0-0 n*Xn*M$" ITCH TRASH rMa.- mrcH bubobig msoMBT mTtfm.s TO' war TRASH €NCL. CATC- COUPOSiTt OeCBtNC BOARDS CNtB STEU num- 0-0* TQ TOP (^mMkAzJmi!AE!K PABEfiO HB scmsce OOOB •^CUTOfT SeCUBBr LlCHTBiC sor (BEAR 5BA) nONf TBMH&OLT EVATI0N8 [At. V \ VWw L0« 1 -*111111111 m 111 ntTMLASnERJtN retail a CLCVATIONS 1/8* - r-0* 06 MAY 04 EL1 noAaMQL ORDINANCE NO 6 .THIRD SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ORONO ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1466 AND SECTION 7B- 1568 REGARDING SIGNS The City Council ol Orono ordains as follows: Section 1: Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1466 is hereby revised as follows: (10) Pylon Sign. A sign suppociecLbY a post or posts so that the sign and sup ports are finished to grade by encasing the posts in a material consistent with the sign and where the base width dimension Is a minimum of 10% up to and including 50% ol the greatest width of the sign. (11) Monument Signs. One rngm*. ment sign, limited to Iwq. (2).Jaces_i3 allowed per frontage oer property, with a maximum of two (21. The areas of sign base, the supporting bacKgrouDd._5lruc: lure, and the sign copy .atiulLbe.c^nibincd for determining the total iouarejoclaae and the heigtit of thejBOPuineni sm a. The total allowable square_fQCilage shall riol.eACCftCU ftCLsauaLeJtfiipeJLSide. ;i he _ba50_aad_5upcpfling. raateoaLshali C0n5!i,tyie.aLlfiASlilLpflii:enl^lAheJtei3l square Jpptag&. b. .Ihe_ base. widttulinieiisio.DJsJiQ.% or. more_flj IhjeLgrealQsLwidthjoLthe jjgrv. c. J-hO-Sioa copy jirea_5haJLhavfi_fl miDimumjclearance. j?l -20. iDChea-ahoyfi grownd leyeL. d_TM-5'an-Copy..afea_shaiL be_c5m; p!etely..eQclosed.-wjthin_ihe .fEiPQument fl’jltyrjjilS. Cj NoPQMion oUho^igrLcr_5jgn 5lruC: ture level rnongrnenJ_5! gn__ba5e..s]vaLLbe constructed of materials_sjmi!ar initppga.r.: pr^CO to those of ttie_i?rjngjpaL §1_ructU/0 stucco, le^rtufedLjcasLsitORe.- ql .int»2gr.aiiy PQlorcd concrete .masoriry^ units._ItlQ SlrwclUie surrounding ihcJace of the.sign ftom.thcJbase lo-lhQ.lQp ofJiie s'anjriesi be.sojid_conlinuou5. eod. consisl. oLthe base mateiiais.or. complcaiODlfliy cateii; als IhaLtralclj the ap&ejarancQJind.jLQicr ettliej2rjocipaL building. . 200 sauarpJeeL_cl.-flr-QUDd atfifiLaround. lhCLJ?asQ.j5f the jDODumfini 6lgn_AbalLbcJ[imdacoocd-WiLh_5feijd2iLi2i pe[fiQOial& The following drawing is included for illustrative purposes: A '«■ B = maximum 100 s.f. per face (including sign copy & base*). A = sign copy, where 75% of A ♦ B is the maximum allowed sign copy. B = base* (where 25% of A ♦ B is tho minimum provided base*). •The sign base (B) must bo con structed of materials consisting of brick, natural stone, stucco or materials consis tent with the principal structure so long as the exterior wall finishes of the principal structure meet Ifio requirements of Section 78-646(q)(1). Section 2: Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1468 is hereby revised as follows: Sec. 78-1468. Signs In B and I dis tricts: Within the B and I districts, nomo pi oto -eigwo . wall and JDOiUjinieDL5!g.a5«*»d buoinooo signs are pormittcd subject to the following regulations: Section 3: This Ordinance shall be published in THE PIONEER and THE LAKER newspapers and shall become effective upon approval and pub lication. (Note: The otriohon language is delet ed; tho underlined language is inserted) Adopted by the City Council of Orono on this ?6th day of April, 2004 by a vote Of 5 ayes and 0 nays. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: Linda S. Voe, City Clerk (Published in the Laker and May 8, 2004.) DAI ii,c;ri:\' SI L'M^I )I.()\V /V\'D I 'HAN iNt.tjiiroiiAf 10 CONSULTING PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCMITECIS ,»0U fIRST AVENUL NORTH SUITE 210 MINNEAPOLIS. MN SS40I 612 1.MH) MEMORANDUM DATF,: May 14. 2004 TO: Mike Gaffion, City of Orono I'ROM: Phil Carlson, AICP; Dahlgrcn, Slraitllow, and Uban, Inc. KE;Stonebay Maikctplacc, Highway 12 and Willow Drive, Oioiio Introduction At your request we have reviewed the latest materials submitted for the Stonebay Marketplace PUD, and offer the following comments for the Planning Commission at their next meeting. Recommondatlon Uased on our review ol the Stonebay Marketplace plans 1 would recommend that the Planning ('ummission appiove the PUD with the following conditions: 1) Plans for the irrigation system aic to be submitted uccortling U) the /oning code and approvctl by the City Plaimcr and City Engineer before building penmts arc issued. 2) Adejpiate perfoimaiicc bond is to be proviilcd per code bcibre building pcmuis arc issued. 3) riic paikiiig lot "island " at the front entry of Walgreens (see sketch below), off the southwest comer ol the building, is to he a laiscd landscaped island smrouiulcd by concictc curb, not simply paiiitcil and sliipctl on the pavement I.aiidsc.iping should at a niinimum include sluoibs and llowcnng plants with a variety of scasunul color uiul interest. Ovcrstoiy or imiamentul trees wmiltl be »lcsii.il»Ie but iml rcipiired if there are conceins by Walgreens about visibility to the front entry. 4) A more direct sidewalk connection needs to be provided fiom the Highway 12-Willow Duse iiilriseclioii to the front door of Walgreens, as suggested in the di.igram below. This will require Ulc conversion of one paiking space to a peninsula for the sidewalk, and of a portion of uiiotlicr island to .sidewalk Mike Gaffron, City of Oivno May !4. 2004 Comments The Stonebay Marketplace PUD has undergone numerous revisions and the current version appears to be a reasonable compromise on the many issues discussed. All provisions of the landscape code appear to be met with the exception of the items noted above under Recommendations. The screening of parking areas, loading areas, and service areas from residential areas is required by code and is handled adequately in the latest plan. Tliese are not screened completely, but considering the distance across Kelley Parkway, the change in grade, and the landscaping provided, the screening is reasonable. The ground-mounted mechanical equipment appears to be adequately screened by landscaping, and the roof-mounted equipment appears to be screened with a parapet. The trash dumpsters arc within enclosed structures. As noted above in the Recommendations, the parking lot island immediately in front of Walgreens entry should be raised with curb and landscaping. If any place on the site should have a raised landscaped island to provide a green, welcoming presence, it is here - yet it is shown as just painted and striped. I understand that the developer may not want tall overstory trees there blocking visibility, but there should be flowers and shrubs. This is a small but significant piece of the site plan character that I suggest be revised. -2. Also noted in the Recommendations, 1 have a concern with the sidewalk connection (or lack) between the Highway 12-Willow Drive comer and the front door of Walgreens. A person crossing at the intersection going to Walgreens simply will not follow the trail up Willow Drive for 230 feet then cut over on the crosswalk - they will cut through the parking lot at an angle. I have indicated on the attached sketch one way to do this with a planned sidewalk, with a new peninsula into the parking lot at an appropriate point. Other than these comments I believe the developers and con.sultants for Stonebay Marketplace should be commended for their hard work and patience as the City has worked with them to try and achieve an outstanding development for this important comer of the City. . AppUcttion Date: December 17,2003 Initial 60-Day Review Period Expiration (Site Plan A PUD Rexoning): February 15,2004 60-Day Extcniion NoUllcatlon Faxed on 2-13-04, Extension to: April IS, 2004 120 Day Review ExpiraUon (Subdivision): April 15,2004 Additional 60 day extension granted by applicant April 12,2004 to: June 15, 2004 L To; From: Date: Subject: Chair Mabusth & Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Mike Gaffron, Planning Director April 1 5, 2004 r/c -r-Q #04-2974 “Stonebay Marketplace”, NW Quadrant Hwy l2AVillow Drive - Continuation of Public Hearing for Proposed Commercial PUD Development: (CMP Amendment/PUD Rezoning/Commercial Site Plan Review/Preliminary Subdivision) Cu rrent Status of Application ; The Comp Plan amendment element of this application was reviewed at the March 15 meeting, at wl» jh time Planning Commission via apoll vote of 6-1 recommended denial of the requested amendment to re-guide Outlot A to allow primarily retail use rather than primarily office use. On March 22 the Council reviewed the requested Comp Plan amendment and voted 4-0 to grant conceptual approval of the amendment, directing staff to draft text to be inserted into the Comp Plan for implementing the amendment. That text was brought to Council on April 1 2 and with minor revisions was adopted subject to Met Council review and approval, directing staff to make the appropriate submittals to Met Council. The text of the amendment as approved by Council is attached as Exhibit A. The amendment will be submitted to Met Council and to neighboring cities for comment within the next week. PUD rezoning of the site will occur concurrently with final site plan and subdivision approval. The detailed conditions the City establishes for the development of this site will be incorporated into the PUD zoning of the site. The ne.xt step is for Planning Commission to review the commercial site plan and building designs in detail to ensure they meet the goals and standards established in the Comp Plan, the B-6 District ordinances, and other pertinent regulations The applicants on April 14 submitted a revised site plan set for review, but have not submitted revised building designs and elevations. List of Exhibits A - Comprehensive Plan Amendment Text Approved by City Council 4-12-04 B - Applicant’s Letter of Transmittal and Revised Plans: Sheet CO.l Sheet Cl.1 Sheet Cl .2 Sheet C2.1 SheetCM - Title Sheet Sheet CA. I - Existing Conditions Sheet CS. i - Demolition Plan Sheet E2.1 - Preliminary Site Plan Sheet L2.1 - Prelim, ending. Drainage Sheet L7.1 & Erosion Control Plan - Preliminary Utility Plan - Preliminary Plat - Preliminary Lighting Plan - Preliminary Landscape Plan - Landscape Deuils r W04-2974 Slonebay Marketplace April 15. 2004 Pige2 C - United Properties Letter to Applicant - Property marketing discussion D - 60-day Extension Letter 4-12-04 E - March 26 Letter from Applicant re: Revisions Addressing March 1 Staff Letter F - Compilation of Appropriate Uses Reflecting March 15 Revisions G - Council Minutes 3-22-04 H - Draft PC Minutes 3-15-04 Commercial Site Plan Review Following is a review of each element of the proposed development of Outlot A. The attached set of detailed plans was received on April 14, althougli staffhas had numerous discussions with the applicants on an ongoingbasis regarding the site plan, and the current set is veiy similar to Revised Plan U23 which staffhas had since late March, and U24, which airived about a week ago and resolved a number of issues of concern. A few general comments as a starting point: The current plan includes a 14,820s.f. Walgreens,aii8,970s.f strip rctailbuilding, and a 4,960 s.f. retail building; total of all 3 buildings is 28,750 s.f or 17.9% of tlie site. Green space exclusive of the trails is 26%. The site will be platted into just hvo lots - one for Walgreens, one for tire retail buildings. Shared parking & site maintenance agreements will be established by the two owners. Hie building orientations have been revised to create a much friendlier entrance from Kelley Parkway, while maintaining the front facade visibility to the 12/Willow intersection the applicant feels is critical to the success of the site. At the same time, primary facades and parking areas are not aimed at the residential portion of Stonebay, in keeping with the request of the developer of Stonebay. The site circulation is vastly improved from earlier plans, and although the angular nature of the overall layout leads to slight inefficiencies, the layout manages to provide adequate building separation from the intersection to maintain an open feel, while proNidmg substantial green islands within the parking area. - The westerly building has been oriented to take advantage of the stormwater pond as an amenity, and applicant is proposing a landscaped public terrace area near Kelley Parkway that will overlook the pond. This amenity is within Outlot B, dedicated to MnDOT for pond use; this may be a potential issue. Staff supports the slight encroachment of the westerly building on the westerly required setback (20‘ where 35' is the standard) wliich allows for a more intimate association with the pond while not resulting in a visual crowding problem to the west, as this west lot line does not abut a road or an adjacent building site. 'nic site will have only tw'o "drivc-thru’s" - one for Walgreens, and one serv ing die westerly space of the middle building. #04*2974 Sloncbay Marketplace April 15.2004 Pa{c3 1. Conformity with Comprehensive Plan Please review the Council-approved language of the Comp Plan amendment (Exltibit A). The applicant’s letters ofMarch 26 and April 14 demonstrate how die applicant believes this plan conforms with the Comp Plan goals and standards for this site. The parameters of the CMP amendment include the following: No individual buildings greater than 15,000 s.f. gross floor area. Staff Conclusion: This parameter is met. One building must be a pharmacy /convenience store. Staff Conclusion: This parameter is met. The remaining buildings shall have no individual tenant space greater than 7,000 s.f Staff Conclusion: This parameter is not a factor in the westerly building, and can be met via appropriate leasing of spaces in the center building. The applicant has agreed to this parameter. The most westerly building on the site shall be oriented and designed in a manner that focuses on the regional pond as an amenity for customers or tenants. Staff Conclusion: This parameter has been met via the elimination of roadway between the westerly building and the pond, and the addition of pedestrian amenities in this area. However, the terrace is not within Outlot A, which is a potential issue... Buildings on the site shall be oriented with a goal of providing an inviting vehicle and pedestrian entry from Kelley Parkway without creating negative visual impacts for the Stonebay residential development. Staff Conclusion: This parameter has been partially met by the reorientation of the Walgreens entrance to the southwesterly corner of that building, and will be completely met by designing the middle retail building to have a windowed front facade at its northeasterly end. ArchitecUiral design and details shall be carefully prepared by any developer of the site to ensure a liigh quality of design, compatible with the quality of the office buildings on Kelley Parkway, and shall be subject to City approval through the PUD process. Staff Conclusion: This parameter can be met subject to PC/Council approval of preliminary building designs. Building materials shall be high quality and durable, shall be compatible with the quality of the office buildings on Kelley Parkway, and shall be subject to City approval through the PUD process. Staff Conclusion: This parameter can be met subject to PC/Council approval of preliminary building designs. I ^^04-2974 Stonebay Markctplacf April IS, 2004 Page 4 2. Conformity <o B»6/PUD Sfandiirds A. Allowed Uses. Based on a compilation ofthc allowable uses in the B-1 and D-6 Districts, Planning Commission has produced a list of pennitted and conditional uses that w'ould be appropriate for this site as part of the PUD rezoning process. The list is attached as Exlribit F. The proposed buildings and site layout would r-asonat^ly accommodate many of the Lndividual uses on the proposed list of allowable uses. Planning Commission should again review the list to ensure it reflects your intent for this site. B. t^ofArcaJk }t’idi_h. Required area and width for B-6 arc 2.0 acres and 100'. The proposed preliminary plat creates two lots: Lot 1 =*1.98 acres/370', and Lot 2 **1.7 1 acrc.sand 135'. Both lets arc sliglitly undersized in area; Itowcvcr, the site at 3.69 acres is limited by having no additional land available. Staff rcconiniends approval of the lot area and widths as proposed. C. Setbacks . Setback requirements and confonnity are shown in the following table. Note that for this PUD re/oning and use coiivcision, staff early on established setback requirements at 35' for buildings and 20' for parking, based on the B-1 retail standards which arc more appropriate than the 13-6 office standards for the proposed retail u.scs. Required Setbacks frunt (south)Side ItUctior Side Street Rear (north) West Building Lot 1 Itrqutrfil frepAirtl Rrqulrrsl ffopotrd flequirril fropatrti Rrqulrfd fropn%rtl 8S*NA NA (%%) 35*(w) 20*^IS* 42* Last Ruilditifi Lot 1 35*125'10*40*NA NA 35*49* Walgreens Lot 2 35'180*10*40 ’35*40 ’35'42* Barking* Lot 1 20*20*s*0**NA NA 20*20* Parking* Lot 2 20*20*s*0*>20*20*.32‘20*20* 'Iiictudci di'ivlnu lanes ■This O' setback It a function of the shared driveway system ’Staff suppui ts a ZO'svcst side setback fur the westerly buitdInK. The altcruativc would be to reduce the overall leiiKth of buildiiiKS on Lot 1. D. Site^PrMfta£e. The applicants have provided a drainage plan that includes catch basins and storm sewers discharging to the adjacent regional pond. Approval is subject to City Engineer review and .acceptance ofthc proposed plans. I904-7974 Stonebay Marketplace April 15, 2004 Page 5 E. Btiildiitp Heieht. B-6 height limit is 30'. The proposed designs submitted to date for the Walgreens indicate a roof peak height of 28'3" for the bulk of the building, and 32'6" for the entrance comer ‘parapet’ roofpeak. Staff recommends acceptance of these heights as proposed. The retail buildings are expected to be similar or slightly lower, to be detennined once plans arc submitted. F. Landscaoins. Exhibits L2.1 andL7.1 arc the landscaping plans and details for this property. These plans meet the general B-6 guidelines in terms of required infomtation detail. Staff has not had the opportunity to have tlie pljm reviewed in depth to determine whether the required valuation of plantings is met, based on the project valuation (range is from I % to 2% of project value) although it appears likely that the requirement is met or exceeded. Because the total parking (including proofof parking) exceeds 150 stalls, parking lot landscaped islands are required. Three distinct islands are designed within the lot, each meeting or exceeding the 180 s.f. minimum size. One tree is required for every 15 stalls, and tliis number is incoiporated into the plan in well-spaced locations. Substantial landscaping including coniferous and ornamental trees is proposed along Kelley Parkway, in addition to the required boulcvardovci-stoiy trees. The grading plan suggests that tlic north side of the westerly building will be about 2' below the access drive way paralleling Kelley, and a 2’ retaining wall is proposed between that drive and the building. Additional detail is required regarding screening of trash facilities. The code requires that they be citlicr witltin the building entirely, witliin an attached structure accessible from within the building, or be completely screened from eye-level view from public streets and adjacent residential property. The ciurent plans provide no indication that any of these three options are complied with. The westerly buildings appear to have separated trash areas with no enclosure; the Walgreens has a minimal wall extension to begin to hide the service area of that building from the primary entrance to the site, but much greater detail is needed to show how this area will be hidden from public view. The borders of the site abutting Willow Drive and Higliway 12 have sigm ficantly less landscaping proposed. The applicants at the request of staffhave moved the parking area west to meet more than the required 20' setback from Willow Drive, as the traveled portion of Willow is very close to the lot line. This will provioe a green buffer 35' in width adjacent to Willow, with the 8’ trail meandering through it. The parking lot will be approximately 50-55* from the traveled portion ofHighway 12, leaving a substantial green lawn area. Landscape beds are placed at the S W and SE comers of the site, and at the midpoint along 12. The two proposed retail sign bump-outs are also provided with landscaping beds. The comer feature highUghted by a STONEBAY monument sign has been retained in this plan. #04-2974 Sloncbay Marketplace AprillS, 2004 Paget 3. imi It appears that the onlytrccs to be planted along the 500'length ofHighway 12 frontage are those few in the parking lot islands. Whi le it may be to the retailers’ advantage to maintain unobstructed views of storefronts, there should be some trees planted along both the Willow and 1 2 frontages. Note that staffhas encouraged the applicants to create a pedestrian amenity that focuses on the pond. They have provided a terrace seating area at the northeast comer of the pond, although it is primarily within Outlet B of Stonebay, not on applicant’s site. This may ultimately be acceptable, and staff would support this concept as addressing the intent of the CMP amendment and the City’s goals for this site; but further review and discussion is necessary to ensure that this location is acceptable to MnDOT, as this feature on Outlet B is technically in MnDOT right-of-way. We believe that Outlet B is subject to easements for the trail, but we need to confirm that the terrace area will also be allowed. Given the variety of concerns noted above, staff would recommend tliat the landscape plan be addressed by Planning Commission and provide applicant direction as to what specific revisions arc necessary. Applicant is advised to take a close look at the B-6 landscaping standards, especially regarding screening and buffering of trash enclosures. G.ArchitecturalStandards. Applicant has advised that he will work with the City to provide a face brick color acceptable to all parties. Applicant earlier provided aboard with building exterior material samples for review and approval, tliis will be available at the meeting - staffhas suggested a darker color brick should be used than those proposed to date. Since revised elevations of the two westerly buildings have not been submitted, staff would suggest that this be further reviewed upon their submittal. City expectations as expressed to the applicant to date have resulted in a high-quality design for tire Walgreens; we would anticipate similar arcliitcctural styling for the other buildings. Additional Site Plan Elements Pedes trig it A ccess. hr general, pedestrian access and circulation has been refined to a level acceptable to staff. Pedestrian access has been revised to provide for attractive and safe access and circulation throughout the site, including three primary connections to the Stonebay residential development, as well as logical trail and public sidewalk connection points. Sidewalk crossings of the parking lot appear to be proposed with varied surface textures to identify crossing points. Vehicle Circulation. Shelly Johnson, Orono’s traffic consultant with Bonestroo and Associates, has indicated the layout is generally acceptable in regards to traffic circulation, with a few minor revisions and conditions; The right-in, right-out access to Willow is better than prior plans but should be further refined to allow for easier turning access into the Walgreens drive-thru. Shrubbery at key intersection points must be low level for traffic visibility. i( \ #04*2974 Stoncbay Marketplace April IS, 2004 Page 7 Shelly has suggested an alternative nimaround layout for the dead-end parking lot at the south^^est comer of tlie site. LotCoverace. Code Section 78-1403 limits lots of 0-1.99 acres in area to 15% lot coverage by structures: - Lot 1 (86,268 s.f or 1.98 acres) is proposed with buildings totaling 13,930 s.f or 16.1%coverage. - Lot 2 (74,428 s.f.) Is proposed with buildings totaling 14,820 s.f or 19.9% coverage. - Ovciall coverage of the 3.69 acre site is proposed at 17.9%, not including freestanding trash enclosures. Planning Commission should detennine whetlicr there is sufficient reason to allow the excessive lot coverage for this property and the proposed uses. Overall lot coverage of 15% would yield 24,104 s.f as compared to the 28,750 s.f proposed. Lnadhtp Berths. Code Sections 78-1536 thru 1542 provide standards for the require:nent of loading berths for various t>pcsofbuildings. Anyretail/officc building greater than 6,000 s.f floor area requires a loading berth 75' in length. Applicants should define the location and detail of loading berths for the Walgreens aitd the easterly retail building. Trash Enctosu> es. As noted in the landscaping section above, trash handling facilities must be fully enclosed from view cither within a building or in a detached structure. Applicants must provide detail of how trash handling will be accomplished on each site. Required Parking . Based on Orono codes for a strictly retail site, and using a standard 10% reduction from the gross floor area for stall calculation, the proposal requires a total of 173 par king stalls. The site plan provide.s 167 stalls, including 145 staiuku ds stalls, plus 5 HC accessible stalls, and 17 'proof of parking' stalls. Required Stalls Proposed Stalls AddtM. Parking’ Total Provided (by Lot) Walgreens (14,820 sf *0.9/150) 89 (60)*-60* (54 on Lot 2) 10 Proof 2HC I.ot 2: S4 ^ 12 *66 East Retail Building (8,970 sf* 0.9 /ISO) 54 84 85 (91 on Lot 1) 7 Proof 3HC Loti: 91 ^10-101 West Kriail Building (4,9to0 tf xO.9/ ISO) 30 Totals 173 (144)*14S 22 167 •City consultants have indteated that tt would be reasonable to accept the Walgreens model for a 60-stall requirement. Walgreens has substanttal expenence tn detcrmtntng their parking needs The 'proof of parking’ stalls are located in landscaped areas where it would be preferable to not construct them until/unless they arc needed. W ith proof of parking, the site is short only 6 stalls based strictly on Orono code. It should be noted that if all proof-of-parking stalls were constructed, overall green space would reduce from 26% to 24% of the site. W04-2974 Stonebiy Maikclplacc April IS, 2004 PagtS Signage. Proposed signage docs not appear on the cun ent plan set, with the exception that the location of two monument signs has been shown along H i ghway 12 - one for the Walgreens and one for the two retail buildings - as well as the comer STOKEDAY monument. Detailed, dimensioned elevations views for all monument signage should be submitted. Since all three buildings have changed in character since earlier reviews, new plans should be submitted for building signage. Staff early on suggested to the applicants that the Walgreens signage not include a manual reader board, as they tend to be poorly maintained. Orono codes proliibit the use of illuminated scrolling or flashing reader boards. I.if’htine. The exterior parking lot lighting plan is in Sheet E2.1. The plan indicates 20 ‘‘Gardco’’ 400W luminaires at strategic locations throughout the site, on 20 ’ high poles. The light poles at 20' will likely be lower than then peak heights of the buildings. Details on the Gardco fixtures should be provided for review, and they must be a boxed downcast lighting with recessed bulb.s Applicant should also provide a plan for building-mounted lighting for review . EnfimcvrUtii Matters City Engineer Tom Kellogg was provided with acopyofthc revised plans on April 15 th, and it is highly unlikely we will have his comments for the April 19th meeting. It should be noted that the previous conunents of the City ’s engineering and planning consultants have been taken into account by the applicant as the plan revision process has moved forward. AdiHtional Gcttcral Commcitts . The applicants have been responsive to the City ’s recent requests for incremental revisions to the site plan. It maybe fair to say that the current plan is the best proposal provided to date from start’s pcr.spcctive. 1 lovvever, I would al.so offer the following as items for discussion in considering this proposal; « The chai actcii/alion on the pUuis of the non-Walgieens buildings has changed from a 5,000 s.f. ’’BANK" and 10,000 s.f "OFFICH/RHTAIL’’ to two buildings totaling 13,930 s.f. shown as “RETAIL". The potential office element oftltis site may have been subtly lost, and while the Comp Plan amendment does not prohibit the total conversion to retail, it put jHiscfully included language that the iunendment “...re-guides Outlot A of Stonebay to 3d.ditjbnaUy allow' for ncigltborhood scale retail uses, as an alternative to the office uses for w'hich it is currently guided...’’. The possibility for either retail building to contain office uses still exists. It should be further noted that because of the parking limitations imposed by the overall square footage of retail space on the site, certain elements ofthc City ’.s hopes for this site will not be met. While the .site plan will support one or hvo ‘fastcasual’ food users (coffee shop, sandw ich shop, etc.) the parking needs for a family sit-dow-n restaurant cannot be met The applicant has providctl information (Exhibit C) sugj’csi ing that such a restaurant wouldnotbc attracted to Uie site due to lack ofthc ncccssaiy demographies. It maybe K (»04>2974 Stontbay Marketplace April IS, 2004 Page 9 4. areasonablc assumption that construction of the level of retail square footage proposed will slam the door shut on any future restaurant opportunities should demographics become more favorable as the Orono-Long Lake-Medina area reaches build-out. Because the retail is split between two buildings separated by a drive-thru, Planning Commission should carefully review whether tire 20'-40 ’ separation of the buildmgs, and/or the building design detail, is adequate to break up what migltt be seen from certain angles as a single 250' wide strip mall. From staffs perspective, this is a critical factor in tire visual impacts of this site. Preliminary Plat Plat approval will include the establishment of drainage and utility easements, as well as payment of park fees and stormwater & drainage trunk fees (both established as part of the previous Stonebay PUD approvals), etc. Preliminary plat approval will be concurrent with site plan approval. Tlie two-lot layout and separate ownerships do not pose any formidable considerations. Shared parking, site maintenance responsibility and similar agreements will be established as a matter of course. 5. Rgzoning As noted at your February meeting, the rezoning goes hand in hand with the Comp Plan Amendment, and will provide for a greater level of detail than the Plan. Planning Commission identified a specific list of allowable or unacceptable uses for the site in February, and refined that list in March. The list of uses will be incorporated into the PUD rezoning for this site, as will a fairly detailed set of conditions related to the specific site plan approval for Outlot A. Staff would intend to incorporate into the rezoning ordinance conditions of approval that clearly document the approved site layout, building design and materials, signage ligjtting, etc. The PUD approval for this site becomes the governing ordinance for the property. Summary of Issues to Address 1.Planning Commission should again review the list of allowable uses to ensure it reflects your intent for this site. 2. Address approval of the lot area and widths as proposed, as well as the lot coverage issue. 3.Discuss whether the 20 ’west side setback for the westerly building should be accepted instead of 35'. The alternative would be to reduce the overall length ofbuildings on Lot 1. Also review whether the pedestrian terrace amenity is acceptable at its proposed location in Outlot B, assuming MnDOT has no problem with it. #04-2974 Stoncbiy Mtrkctplacc April IS, 2004 Page 10 4. The City Engineer has not had adequate time to review engineering matters for this new plan set. 5. Does Planning Commission have any problems with the proposed height of the buildings (all expected to meet the 30' limit except the Walgreens comer feature). 6. Applicant must address the enclosure and screening of trash facilities. 7. To what extent are additional trees needed along the Willow Drive and Highway 12 frontages? 8.Applicant must submit revised building elevations and should also provide perspective/oblique views to help PC assess the building proximity/lack of separation impacts. 9. Applicant should provide options for facade coloration for review. 10. Applicant should further refine the right-in, right-out access and the dead-end parking turnaround per the recommendations of the City Engineer. 11. Applicant should address the loading berth issue. 12 . Planning Commission should consider whether the 6-stall parking shonage (based on City Code) is acceptable given Walgreens history of parking needs, the proof of parking available, and the current mix of uses that does not include a free-standing family restaurant, which would have greater parking needs than can be accommodated at the proposed level of retail space (1 stall per 80 s.f. rather than I stall per 150 s.f.).. 13. Applicant must provide a detailed signage plan for all buildings and for site monument signs. 14. Applicant must provide a plan for building-mounted lighting, and confirm the design of the parking lot fixtures. 15 . Planning Conunission .should consider whether the combination ofbuilding proximity visual impacts, the pedestrian terrace amenity placed on the adjacent NlnDOT parcel, tlie overage in lot coverage, and other site factors suggest the need for further building down-sizing on the west lot. 16. Any other issues for consideration. r #04-2974 Stoncbty Markctplicc April IS, 2004 Pt|cn Staff RecomincDdatioo The current plans appear to meet the general conditions established by the Comp Plan amendment ^proved by Council on April 12. Planning Conunission should give careful consideration to each of the points noted above, and provide direction to the applicant as to what further revisions should be made to the plans. Given the lack of certain critical information as noted throughout this memo, this application is not ready to be forwarded to Council. Staff recommends that after providing the applicant with direction. Plarming Conunission should table this application to allow for submittal and review of lacking information, for revisions to the plan as necessary, and to allow adequate time for City Engineer review. Staff will also draft a PUD rezoning ordinance for this site, to be considered at your May meeting. t Malkerson G illiland Martin LLP 1750 PiLLtauRv CcNTCR South 220 South Sixth Strict MiNNCAPOLIt, MiNNCBOT* SS402 Tclcphonc 6l2'344>t 1 1 I Facbimilc 612-344-1414 Michael A. Putnam, Etq. Direct Dial (612) 344-1280 June 11,2004 John C. Trautz Reliance Development Company, L.L.P. 527 Marquette Avenue Suite lOCIO Minneapolis, MN 55402 BY FACSIMILE AND F-MAII Re:Orono Project Proposed City Resolutions and PUD Agreement Our File No. 7278.117 Dear John: Per your request, we have reviewed the proposed draft documents described below which you received form the City of Orono in connection with your proposed development: 1. Resolution Approving the Preliminary Plat of Outlet A. Stonebay (undated draft); 2. Ordinance Amending the Municipal Zoning Code of Orono relating to Outlet A, Stonebay (5-24-04 Draft); 3. Resolution Approving General Concept Plan for Outlot A, Stonebay (6-8-04 draft); and 4. Planned Lii’i development No. 4A Agreement (5-25-04 draft). Each of the foregoing documents contain many blanks, which will all have to be completed in a manner satisfactory to you. We do not have a basis to comment on how the blanks must be substantively completed. 89003 Jolin C. Traulz June 11.2004 Page 2 i We have the fulluwing coiimientK; A. Resoluti on Approv ing the Preliminary Plat. 1 . The name "Reliance Development Company, L.L.P." slu)uM be changed tlin)Ughout the tcholulion to "Stonebay Commcicial U.C," whicli is the proposed name of the entity which will acquire and develop this property. 2. In paragraph I, we suggest that you change the name of the plat from "S I ONHHAY ADDIHON" to "STONEBAY COMMERCIAL" to avoid future confusion with the existing "STONEBAY" plat. 3. Section 2(b) of the "Conclusion.s. Order and Conditions" portion of the icsolulion requires that "all lequircil slonnwatcr facilities to be developed on the site shall be designated on the plat as drainage easements." First, this i.s inconsislent with .Section 1(c) of the "final subinittal.s" Section (we suggest that a heading be added betbre the list of final submittals to separate it from the Conclusions, (Jrders and Conditions portion of tile re.solulion, since the nuinbering .scheme between the two poitions is the same, and theiefore, confusing) which requites the designation and dedication on the plat of drainag.c and utility easement over all proposed utility lines luid facilities (not just stoiniwatcr). Second, there is no need for ea.semcnts on the plat because you will have a cr»)ss-eascmcnt agicement which will allow either propel ty owner to enter the other*.s property to fix utility problems. I bis cross ea.sement agreement is a requirement of plat approval. 4. The portion of the ic.solution lelating to final submittals requires that the list of documents included therein be submitted at least 2 w eeks before the regularly scheduled Council meeting (w hich occur on the first mid third Mondays of each month). Unless this reipmcmeiit can be shortened, this w ill mean that you will likely not liavc approvals until sometime in July. 5. Item 2. A of the final submittals requires a title opinion. It would be preferable and casici to piovidc the City witli a title commitment as evidence of ownci.sbip. A title opinion will lequire you to have an abstiact created, and then reviewed by an attorney who does title opinions (hanler and hanler to find given the increasing use of title companies m commcicial transactions). 8900) f John C. Trautz June 11,2004 Page 3 6. Item 2.B requires certified copies ofall recorded easements. While we can obtain certified copies, we are already in possession of and can immediately provide uncertified copies. 7. Item 2.C requires a “sign and executed” Shared Facilities Agreemenl addressing maintenance and use of the shared parking. This document will not be signed until you acquire the property. We can provide a draft once it is fully negotiated between you and Net Lease (purchaser and developer of the Walgreens site). 8. Item 2.D requires a “sign and executed” Developers Agreement. Similarly, you would not sign and deliver this agreement until you have acquired the property, since you cannot agree to the matters therein if you do not own the property. 9. The fees are not listed (the documents calls for them to be but this draft contains blanks). We assume you will enure that the listed fees are acceptable. 10. Section 2.d references General Development Plan approval. We w ere not provided with the resolution that provides this. When will this be obtained ? After the other resolutions are approved ? We expect that it is necessary before construction can commence. In any event, this approval must recite that the development plan as approved meets the Development Standards and General Conditions as set forth in the General Concept Plan ^proval and the ordinance for PUD 4A. I^- Ordinance Amendine the Municipal Zoning Code 1. If it can be done correctly, the name “Reliance Development Company, L.L.P.” should be changed throughout the resolution to “Stonebay Commercial LLC.” In this case, the second recital references an application which was probably filed in the name of RDC, so this may be correct to change. Perhaps a new recital indicating that RDC has assigned its rights to Stonebay Commercial LLC could be added Similarly in Section 2, under the proposed Code Section 78-1010, subd. 10(b), reference is made to RDC in connection with plans. If the plans are not reUtled, this reference may have to stay. The reference in the title of subdivision 10 should definitely be changed. 2. In resolution Section 1, and in subdivision 10(a), the name of the plat should be changed as indicated above. 89003 John C. Traulz Jane 11,2004 Page 4 3. In resolution Section 2, Code Section 78-1010, subd 10(c)(1)(A), an additional permitted use should be added: ‘29. Ollier non-food retail uses.’ C. Resolution Aoprovina General Concept Plan. 1. The name “Reliance Development Company, L.L.P.” should be changed throughout the resolution to “Stonebay Commercial LLC.” 2. In the portion of the resolution entitled “Conclusions. Order and Conditions,” the first sentence of section 1 should be revised to read: "The City of Orono will approve rezoning of tlie properly to PUD/BO as described herein, provided such rezoning shall subject the properly to the Condition.s for Development set forth lierein “ 3. In Section 2.A.4 of the portion of the resolution entitled “Conclusions, Order and Conditions,” the words “maximized to the greatest extent possible but in no case shall be” must be replaced with “not.” The standard as currently written is too high and vague. 4. In Section 2.A.7 of the portion of tlie resolution entitled "Conclusions, Order and Conditions,” the words “ the words “where adjacent to the Property ” should be inserted after “Kelley Parkway.” 1 expect this is what is intended, but it shouUI be made clear so that your obligation in this regard is not expanded to more of Kelley Parkway ’s boulevard. 5. In the first sentence of Section 2.A.9 of the portion of the resolution entitled “Conchisirtns, Order and Conditions,” the words “and shall be approved by the City Council" should be deleted. As 1 understand it, they are approving your lighting plan, and no additional approval should be necessary. 6. In Section 2. A. 10(a) of the portion of the resolution entitled “Conclusions, Order and Conditions,” a subsection 5 should be added as follows: “A free-standing men sign in comicction witli any approved drive-thru use.” This t\pe of structure will be necessary in the event of an approved drive-thru, and while it could arguably be included under one of the otlicr categories, it should be made clear. SWO) Jolin C. Trautz June 11,2004 Page 5 7. In Section 2. A. 10(d) of the portion of the resolution entitled “Conclusions, Order and Conditions," the dimension “14'“ should be changed to “14'8"”. Hic latter dimension is what the sign plan you submitted and they reviewed calls for. 8, Section 2.A. 16 of the portion of the resolution entitled "Conclusions, Order and Conditions" should be deleted in its entirety. It is questionable whether this is enforceable, but in any event you need to know with certainty what requirements you are obligated to comply with. This provides an open-ended ability to impose additional requirements. In addition to providing uncertainty for you, it may be objectionable to your lender, for the same reasons. 9. Section 2.C.7 of the portion of the resolution entitled "Conclusions. Onler and Conditions" should be deleted in its entirety for the same reasons as 2.A.16. 10. In Section 4 of the portion of the re.sohition entitled “Conclusions, Order and Conditions," 6 months should lie changed to 24 montlis. I was not provided a resolution granting Development Plan Approval and therefore am not sure when this will be obtained. To account for potential, unexpected delays, and to avoid the possibility of having to re-obtain general concept plan approval in such event, the period must be extended. 1 also believe that your lender will feel the same way. D Planned Unit Develo pment No 4A Agi cement. 1. Tlie n.une “Reliance Development Company. L.L.P." should be changed throughout the document to “Stonebay Commercial LI.C." 2. In Section 3, the word “approximately" should be inserted before each of the three square footage ngmes. 3. In the second p;u agraph of Section 5, the words "as well as tJic relocation of existing hydrants and storm sewer facilities, etc. if necessary to accomplish the required site accesses." It is my undeistaiuling that none of this will be rcquireil 4.The paragraph numbering is off, starting with paiagraph 10 (Ihcic arc 2 paragraphs lO’s) and should be coucclcil. S.I he language in Section 15(0 niu.sl be ihiplicated in Section 14. Maintenance obligations should run with the land and be the obligation of each KU(K)I John C. Trautz June 11,2004 Page 6 successive owner, rather than stay with the developer or prior owners. The word “developer" should be capitalized in this sentence as weU. 6. In Section 16(c), the words “and properly guided under the City’s Comprehensive Plan" should be added after “zoned.” Also in this Section, the following sentence should be added: “The Development as proposed and as described on the exhibits attached hereto conforms to and meets the requirements of the Development Standards and General Conditions as set forth in City Council Resolution No. Approving the General Concept Plan for Property Located in Outlet A, Stonebay, and the City Council Resolution No.__Approving the General Development Plan for Property Located in Outlot A, Stonebay." This will “close the loop ” with regard to the conditions of the rezoning (i.e., compliance with the development standards in the General Development Plan Approval). Finally, we understood from conversations with you that the City’s Comprehensive Plan must be amended before the property can be rc-zoned. We were not provided with any resolution or other document which accomplishes this. We (and you) will need to be provided with written evidence that the Metropolitan Council has approved the amendment (a requirement under statute) and a City Council resolution accomplishing the amendment. If you have any questions regarding the foregoing, please let me know. Sincerely, 89001 Date Applicitton Received: 1-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 2-11-04 60'Day Review Period Expires: 4-ll'^4 extended to 6-10-04 COM*—• i JUN 1 4 2004 CITYOFOHONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: June 10,2004 Item No.: ^ Department Approval: Name: Janice Gundlach^^ Title: City Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: /^04-2984, McCarthy Construction on behalf of Berkshire Properties, 2745 Kelley Parkway - Commercial Site Plan Review Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: B - 6, Highway Commercial District/PUD, Planned Unit Development 2.56 acres (111,308 s.f.) 376 feet List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - PUD Agreement C - Review Period Extension Letter dated 4-8-04 D - Council Action Notice dated 3-10-04 E - Letter from Plaiming Director dated 4-8-04 regarding Required Fees Application Summary: Applicant requests a commercial site plan review in order to obtain a building permit to construct a 36,000 square foot medical office building. Planning Commission Recommendation Approval of the plans as submitted with a unanimous 5-0 vote. Staff Recommendation Approval of the commercial site plan review incorporating the Fire Marshall ’s comments. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Approve the Resolution and PUD Agreement granting a commercial site plan approval for 2745 Kelley Parkway. r 1 t A RESOLUTION GRANTING COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 4 FOR ORONO PROFESSIONAL CENTER II FILE #04-2984 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter “City Council”) has adopted land development regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, Berkshire Properties (“the Applicants") owns the property located at 2745 Kelley Parkway and legally described as; Lot 1, Block 2, City of Orono Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application by the Applicants for development of the Property by the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process; and WHEREAS, on March 8, 2004 the City Council granted Commercial Site Plan Approval for the proposed development consisting of a 36,000 square foot medical ofTice building; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have agreed to execute Planned Unit Development No. 3A Agreement providing for the installation of certain improvements as a condition of site plan approval for the construction of a Office Building on the Property, and which agreement documents tlie general and detailed conditions for use and development of the Property; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have agreed to grant public easements to the City over existing and proposed trails and sidewalks within the Property. However, it is specifically noted that it is the City’s goal to locate the proposed trail along Highway 12 within the Highway 12 right-of-way, and will only make use of the easement along Highway 12 if placement of trail in the right-of-way is not possible; and Page 1 of 6 WHEREAS, the Applicants have completed or have agreed to complete all other requirements of the Zoning Code and related Ordinances of the City including: 1.Submittal of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) permit approving the grading and stormwater management facilities plan for the development of the Property as proposed per the “Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plan”, Sheet Cl dated 2-10-04 of Exhibit A. 2.Payment to the City of Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fees for the development of the Property in the amount of 516,588.80 based on Trunk Fee of 56,480 per acre and gross acreage of Property at 111,308 s.f or 2.56 acres including those portions subject to trail and sidewalk easements. 3.Payment of Sewer and Water Connection Charges in the amount of $37,427.20 based on per-acre connection fees for 1989 Highway 12 municipal sewer & water project per 2004 City Fee Schedule of $14,620 per acre and gross acreage of property of 111,308 s.f. or 2.56 acres including those portions subject to trail and sidewalk easements. 4.Payment of Park Dedication fee to be confirmed with the County Assessor. The fee would range between $32,000 and $35,520 as discussed in the memo from Planning Director Mike Gafiron, dated April 8,2004. 5.Granting to the City of public easements over existing and proposed trails and sidewalks within the Property and construction of trail along the south boundary of the property as shown on the “Landscaping & Lighting Plan”, Sheet LI dated 2-23-04. WHEREAS, City staff and consultants have reviewed the plans for this PUD application and hereby specify approval of each attached plan and identify them as part of the official record for Planned Unit Development No. 3A: 1.Approval of site plan per “Site Plan” Sheet A1 dated 2-11-04, subject to potential relocation to a location within the Property of the trail currently proposed within the Highway 12 right-of-way. 2.Approval of “Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plan” per Sheet Cl dated 2-10-04, subject to the additional requirements of the MCWD and subject to Page 2 of 6 3. the additional requirements and conditions specified by City Engineer Tom Kellogg in his letter dated February 26,2004. Approval of “Landscape & Lighting Plan ” per Sheet LI dated 2-23-04, subject to the following additional conditions; a) City reserves the right to require revisit.'t to the tree species and tree locations proposed along the Kelley Parkway frontage to ensure tlieir compatibiiuy with the final Kelley Parkway streetscape plan yet to be approved by the City Council. b) The trash enclosure shall be further screened by vegetation to minimize direct view of the opening by westbound Highway 12 traffic, subject to City staff approval. c) The Applicants shall be responsible for construction of the public trail along the south boundary of the property as noted herein. 4. Approval of floor plan and facade elevations for the Office building per Sheets A2, A3 and A4 by Lampert Architects, dated 2-11-04. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono does hereby grant Commercial Site Plan Approval for Planned Unit Development No. 3A, subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. A >• Commercial Site Plan Approval is granted subject to conditions established within the Plaimed Unit Development No. 3A Agreement and other pertinent documents. Upon the final approval and execution of this resolution and the Plaimed Unit Development No. 3A Agreement, the City Council shall formally amend the Orono Zoning Code by adding language establishing Planned Unit Development No. 3A (PUD-3A) to include the Property. Upon approval of this Resolution the City Council shall direct the Mayor and Clerk to execute other documents required by this PUD rezoning, including but not limited to the “Planned Unit Development No. 3A Agreement”. Minor changes in the location, placement and height of structures may be authorized by the Development Review Committee if required by engineering or Page 3 of 6 other circumstances not foreseen at the time the final plan was approved and filed with the Zoning Administrator. 5.Changes in uses: Significant changes in the location, size, or height of the Office structure, and any other changes to the approved final development plan deemed by the Zoning Administrator to be significant may be made only after a public hearing conducted by the Council. Any changes shall be recorded as amendments to the recorded copy of the final development plan. 6.If substantial development has not occurred within one year after approval of PUD No. 3A as set forth in the Planned Unit Development No. 3A Agreement, the City Council may declare the approvals granted within this resolution and within said Agreement as null and void. 7.The approvals granted in this Resolution shall become effective only when all concitions of approval requiring actions by the Applicants have been satisfied. Adopted by the City Council of Orpno this H"* day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Developer (On behalf of Orono Professional Center II) Page 4 of 6 i i i I n STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this__day of June, 2004, by President of Berkshire Properties, a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public Page 6 of 6 EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO.____ATTACHED PLANS Sheet A1 Site Plan dated 2-11 -04 Sheet A2 First Floor Plan dated 2-11-04 Sheet A3 Second Floor Plan dated 2-11 -04 Sheet A4 Elevations dated 2-11 -04 Sheet C1 Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plan dated 2-10-04 Sheet C2 Plan/Profile Utility Plan dated 2-10-04 Sheet LI Landscaping & Lighting Plan dated 2-23-04 1 't i i 1 i 1 i 1 r i ■»• 1 rIi”1 Mlt 1 i i:r • I- > kI »r’ ! S i 1 1 > 1 r L_.. i- (g)yHfj.ncfaTfifl«n«L i * • » c • • Atcaitietf tmm m nmm «m |K■■1 y^*f* y* i ^ s ^ O I•o uS 5S to ^igi§-i« O O ifcuAa^ BBHI■■■1 ■■■■pimuIPHPIPI■■■IBHPMP■m ■PBIPBIIHH rmi aOOi flAN A2 Mb. 4 . y- { 1^r {i ; i ! 1 r 1 i! ■r i i!1 1 i U1 \ I 1 i 1 !i1-■\ i 1 i f i !i' e-.i. wMi ii ''P *-!f' sapk. ii- ; W f: ¥/- : li '» j’AiK imm ■■la :,' ■:■=;' si t I nc gcom noai pun ., i « i I 4 ^ ____ i A H r r • f *■c■ 11c e f• fMtf «Mn^«Ma| 1X1 «>§ ^ —I ® I XI 0)«/)o CLo o Qdo ssnsnr frmrnrryr. KCOMI noot riAM A3 Mil aiHifcttrjilpAiiip^icn -------- --- r « _ » *v ^ ' ) i • * ' I * • '* A . . ,vfc=^ •. Z Rl B9 1 II II i B9SH B III — - BgBa ATIQN CVAnON t I I 5 ? I • I f J I. • ’ i I. (g)^V,Q|[Y»"o»t - rmi aawn____ ' . li i A M » c t r ABCMItCCtS l»lti« UMi tMlfr AM IM.. mm %tm ril •«, •rn.mtmMm* cd LUh- 2 bO H C U '•B mj = ^ “ Q "O Ql toS “ Q.O2^ “• o z ooeo AlpUAiA 45 g1g^ afVATtONS A4 P»*M «A OMOl».«, i ♦ ' * 7 — GRADING. DRAINAGE. EROSION CONTROL, AND UTILITY PLAN ORONO PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL BUILDING ORONO, MN VICINITY MAP r-f— “V kelu :y parkway W' V •' ^ »• V ^ _ N.% * "VV * ' -Vi),:m » m-.— • r IN mrm tmmm rm ««l m» ••« Imm* tM M«ar r a«n % mm m> ir «ntr« camitssr,SL PAVEMCNT SECTION %;>' i > —. . . —. . . —. . . —— <W ^ T . rr-.y ^ ----------------- t—----------------------^.,.,-.,..y-----------,____ _____^ _____ ____ i •*a*'-'* V»**'*Lj* 1* **\A/ A n /** ‘ fvl • /^ * •' *jr r*.‘.ry ' “rTrt'N 1 a«« A^m.no$$€ matmoma mc •« mrnam »t m tmm0 mma m am»» ttM n*m t tROSON CONTROL NOfCS ja‘ai*3aLTa.“JLr5i.T-rst MSMn* rr-im • & :^nnr-''=75.--^; nrt r!-, irCCND *) 1) 0»w«aa BvwUa ■< ■O—la» r««i* Jl — — —0WM«#« fa«l» .)— t-"0—i»a %m r««« t) • m»$ Omit— Spal C1 m«i«i OmM— 0 —1 at faiMtNf %m^mf — • - O—t«« CiMint anna iirti . —- O—IM C«*iAin« Si— 10) _ • 0 —(at ^»«r I0»i —> (Waiaa ^ ID- cume wciiM I • «*• I IM« ■ a LMJTm AlOfTECTR litj/ M <«ctnr si«rrr «a«M tMf, tm SUM M«Mr ^/SJU mt i»n i : umk i *• :V i 1 r • I . I ru ^ u . tib aswf —‘v f PLAN/PROFILE UTILITY PLAN ORONO PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL BUILDING ORONO, MN iSSpS*®Ml----------- nnrrn i I I I I M L/ . iy f§mll^piSI. s stiss Ptt 'jW l»U » ^mSr srsis-^ mL 4n > < >\Lff . I I k % I V, IS. I \ ! M »»•!« mrtm m^trmrt V >•----- itrm os ----Qd 019 n[ ----1 iQi9 Ti%-s insr•1 N iQlO "“1 If !i 13^N----- US ST ar«:xj9 y»tt ottHut W*- ‘".jag(t) wirv 1 }■{ir ----f'—L IQ75 1 r —r 1 I0?0 iTl mO 2tr* iraiT 1019 -ML.i 1010 T CAt A4M e»# AlOMF I HiTry iti«r» •».M «n •# mmm ^ ifc — o««pinc kaui uiMfev MOfrecTB Mtj/ AC uKoc smr $muumr. m jmn iM»r //tjrw-ifM 9CCT C2 i il ^ \ Ui Li - Vs «•;*• !! i 'jjli I j* (?». 1 •. V . - ------ KBLLEY ROAD :7—^rr-w [T^l 0 -<•V ■J • i LfT ; iiinTii^rirmTiiii-^ / ",ss.-N V \ i r /' 1c^^TTi CkSUJ dO ^c U ^ -J 2 ^ ^ 8 “ Q| « S2 rf « " Io Im ^ o 2:o O i» •m" LAMMCM A ilCHTtiC fVAN LI HA CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINESOTA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 3A AGREEMENT FOR ORONO PROFESSIONAL CENTER II TO BE LOCATED AT 2745 KELLEY PARKWAY DEVELOPER: BERKSHIRE PROPERTIES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of 2004, by and between the City of Orono, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Mimiesota (hereinafter called “City”), and Berkshire Properties, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, its heirs, successors and assigns (hereinafter called “Developer”). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Developer has made application to the City Council for approval of a commercial site plan review under a PUD zoning that was approved under Planned Unit Development No. 3, for the purpose of developing a 36,000 s.f. office building on property located at 2765 Kelley Parkway; and WHEREAS, the Developer for 2745 Kelley Parkway is required to enter into this agreement to provide for conformance with the City’s Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinances and Plaruied Unit Development Agreement No. 3, and to provide for the installation and maintenance of improvements associated with the development; and WHEREAS, on March 8, 2004 the City Council granted Commercial Site Plan Approval for the Office Building per Resolution No.____, including approval of design and site plans and establishing final approval conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, and of the actual promises and conditions hereinafter contained, it is hereby agreed as follows: A. General Terms and Conditions 1.Property Description. This Plamicd Unit Development No. 3A Agreement for Berkshire Properties. Office Building applies to the following described property located in Hennepin County, Minnesota: Page 1 of 10 _____- r 2. 3. 4. 5. Lot 1, Block 2, City of Orono Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the “Property”) Zoning. The Property is zoned as a Planned Unit Development under the Orono planned unit development ordinance with underlying B-6 zoning. Permitted Uses. Within the Property the only permitted principal structure is the 36,000 gross s.f.. Office Building as depicted in the site plan (attached hereto as Exhibit A, Sheet Al) and floor plans and elevations (attached hereto as Sheets A2, A3, and A4). The permitted use of the Office Building is general medical office uses which may include business and professional offices of a general nature, and a clinic for human care on an outpatient basis only. The office building shall not be used for general retail use, except that retail uses customarily accessory to the general medical office use may occur in no more than five percent (5%) of the office building gross floor area. Other uses shall not be allowed except by amendment of this PUD agreement. Within the Property the only accessory structures allowed .shall include a monument identification signs per approval of a sign permit, and a trash enclosure as shown on the site plan referenced herein. No other accessory structures are permitted on the Property except by amendment of this agreement. Users shall be obligated to conform to all applicable Orono ordinances and to the provisions of this PUD agreement. The foregoing uses are permitted pursuant to this PUD agreement. Site Access. Internal circulation for the Property shall be via private driveways and parking areas. The only accesses to adjoining public streets shall be onto Kelley Parkway. Additionally, the shared access constructed under PUD AGREEMENT No. 3 provides for full entrance and exit movements and serves both the Property and 2765 Kelley Parkway. One additional access point to Kelley Parkway is allowed for the Property. Such access location shall be constructed per the approved site plan (attached as Sheet Al). Off-site access improvements that are the responsibility of the Developer shall include construction of curb cuts and driveway aprons within the right-of-way of Kelley Parkway, as well as the relocation of existing hydrants and storm sewer facilities as necessary to accomplish the required site accesses. AH such off-site improvements shall be performed to City specifications and shall be reviewc ^ and approved by the Director of Public Services prior to commencement of such improvements. Building Desig n and Construction. The medical office building on the Property shall be constructed according to final plans which shall first be certified by the Planning Director as being in conformity with the approved plans attached as Exhibit A. The exterior of the building shall be of materials consistent with the Page 2 of 10 exterior elevation attached as Sheet A4 of Exhibit A. The trash enclosure shall bt constructed of materials consistent with the principal structure on the Property per the approved plans. Construction of the medical office building shall be in conformance with the building codes and regulations adopted by the City of Orono. Any substantial changes to the gross square footage, footprint/wall/roof dimensions or defined building height shall require a prior amendment to this Agreement. 6.Landscaping. The approved landscaping plan attached to this Agreement as Sheet LI shall be strictly adhered to, with the following conditions: a)City reserves the right to require revision to the tree species and tree locations proposed along the Kelley Parkway frontage to ensure their compatibility with the final Kelley Parkway strectscape plan yet to be approved by the City Council. The trash enclosure shall be further screened by vegetation to minimize direct view of the opening by westbound Highway 12 traffic, subject to City staff approval. 7.Lighting. Site lighting shall adhere to the approved lighting plan attached to this agreement as Sheet LI. 8.Signage. Signage on the site shall be limited to the required traffic control signage and a monument style sign, which must receive a separate review and pennit prior to construction. Parking and traffic control signage shall be installed subject to City staff and City Engineer approval. B. Installation and Malatenapce of Improvements 9.Improvemen ts: In accordance with the policies and ordinances of the City of Orono, the following described public or private improvements (hereinafter collectively called the “Improvements") shall be constructed, installed and maintained by the Developer according to the terms and conditions contained in this PUD Agreement: Site grading, driveways, curb and gutter, parking lots, sidewalks, retaining walls if required and all necessary erosion control measures per the Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plan attached hereto as Sheet Cl (hereinafter called "site grading improvements"); Construction of sanitary sewer and water connections (hereinafter called "sewer and water improvements") and construction or relocation of storm sewer lines and facilities (hereinafier called “stormwater improvements ”) per the preliminary Utility Plan attached hereto as Sheet Cl anJ C2. Page 3 of 10 -***----1 (c) Underground natural gas, electric, cable and telephone service to be arranged by the Developer with the utility companies involved (hereinafter called the "other utility improvements"); (d) Landscaping and site re-vegetation improvements per the approved Landscaping & Lighting Plan attached hereto as Sheet LI (hereinafter called “landscaping improvements”). (e) Traffic control signage subject to approval by the City Engineer and Public Services Director. (f) Any additional improvements listed within the Site Improvements Cost Estimate attached hereto as Exhibit B. 10. Construction Plans : Detailed plans and specifications for the complete installation of the Improvements shall be submitted by the Developer for the approval of the City prior to issuance of applicable City permits. The Plans and Specifications shall conform to all current City standards for all applicable work and shall comply with the terms of this PUD Agreement. 11. Construction of Improvements: (a) Commencement Date - The construction of Improvements shall begin no later than ______________. (b) Completion Date - All Improvements shall be completed no later than (c) Contractors - The Developer shall select, retain and supervise the Contractor(s) responsible for Improvement construction. The City reserves the right to require satisfactory proof of successful experience and adequate financial status of any such contractor. Where required by City ordinance, the contractor shall first obtain a liccns j from the City. Pre-Construction Conference - Prior to the start of any construction, the Developer and the Developer’s Contractor shall meet with the responsible City official to review construction plans and schedules. (e) Permits - Prior to the start of any construction, the Developer's Contractor shall apply for and recei^'e all necessary permits fi’om tne City and/or government agencies having jurisdiction. (0 Pemiits - Prior to the start of any construction, the Developer’s Contractor shall apply for and receive all necessary permits from the City and/or government agencies having jurisdiction. Required City permits relative to the Improvements include the following: Site Grading Permit; Utility Construction Permit; Sewer and Water Connection Permits. Developer is advised that an Erosion Control Permit must be obtained from the Page 4 of 10 • • • ¥ The Developer has the legal authority and power to enter into this Agreement. The Developer reasonably expects to obtain financial resources sufficient to enable the completion of the Improvements. The Developer will, subject to the requirements of Section B - Installation and Maintenance of Improvements hereof, construct, operate and maintain the Improvements in accordance with the tenns of this Agreement and all local, state and federal laws and regulations, and will construct or pay the costs of construction of any site improvements, utilities, landscaping, stormwater management facilities, roads, parking facilities which are necessary in connection with the construction and such improvements. At such time or times as may be required by law, the Developer will have complied with all local, state and federal environmental reviews, licenses, and will be in compliance with the requirements of federal, state, and local authority. The Developer will obtain, in a timely manner, all required permits, licenses and approvals, and will meet, in a timely manner, all requirements of all local, state, and federal laws and regulations which must be obtained or met before the Improvements may be constructed. (1) It is intended and agreed that the covenants provided in this Section shall be covenants running with the land not the owner or developer. 16.City Representations and Covenants: The City makes the following representations as the basis for the undertaking on its part here in contained: (a) The City is authorized by law to enter into this Agreement and to carry out its obligations hereunder. The City will, in a timely manner, subject to all notification requirements, review and act upon all submittals and application of the Developer and will cooperate with the effort of the Developer to secure the granting of any permit, license, or other approval required to construct and operate the Improvements, provided, however, that nothing contained in this subparagraph shall be construed to limit in any way the reasonable and legitimate exercise of the City’s discretion in considering any submittal or application. (c) The Property is zoned for purposes which include the Development as proposed. Tlic City has issued all necessary commercial site plan review approvals for the proposed development on the property. 17.Compliance. At any time and from time to time the Developer may request that the City provide the Developer a certificate certifying that that the terms and Page 6 of 10 laaiii r 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. provisions of this Agreement have been complied with and that this PUD Agreement is in full force and effect with respect to the development for the purpose of facilitating sale, mortgage, insurance or other matters. To the extent that there be any bona fide defaults in such compliance, the Developer shall be afforded a reasonable time to bring the development into conformance, and thereafter the City shall be obligated to provide such certificate. Binding Effect: The terms and provisions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, representatives, successors and assigns of the parties hereto and shall be binding deemed covenants running with the land. References herein to Developer, if there be more than one, shall mean each and all of them. This agreement at the option of the City shall be placed of record so as to give notice hereof to any subsequent purchasers and encumbrances of all or any part of the property. Notices: Whenever in this agreement it shall be required or permitted that notice or demand is given or served by either party to this agreement to or on the other party, such notice or demand shall be delivered personally or mailed by United States certified mail (return receipt requested) to the addresses set forth below. Such notice or demand shall be deemed timely given when delivered personally or when deposited in the mail in accordance with the above. Notice to City Notice to Developer City of Orono Clerk/Administrator P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Parties may substitute notice provisions upon notice to other parties. Incorporation bv Reference: All plans, special provisions, proposals, specifications and contracts for the Improvements furnished and let pursuant to this agreement shall be and hereby are made a part of this agreement by reference as fully as if set out herein in full. Disclaimer bv City: It is understood and agreed that the City, the City Council, and the agents and employees of the City shall not be per.sonally liable or responsible in any manner to the Developer or Developer's contractors, subcontractors, material men, laborers, or any other person, firm or corporation, for any debt, claim, demand, damages, actions, or causes of action of any kind or character, arising out of or by reason of the execution of this agreement or the performance and completion of the Improvements. Hold Harmless and Indemnification: The Developer shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, the City Council, and the agents and employees of the City from and against all claims, damages, losses or expenses, including attorney fees, which the City, City Council and agents and employees of the City may suffer or Page 7 of 10 j F for which it may be held liable, arising out of or resulting from the assertion against them of any claims, debts or obligations in consequence of the performance of this agreement by the Developer, its employees, agents or sub contractors, whether o>' not caused in part by a party indemnified hereunder. 23.Remedy for Default: Default by the Developer of any of the terras of this agreement shall automatically result in the suspension or withholding of all permits, licenses, occupancy certificates or other authorizations issued by the City in connection with the property included in this development. The remedies afforded to the City under this Section shall be in addition to any other remedies to which the City may be entitled by law or other agreement. Default by the City shall entitle the Developer to seek injunctive/mandatory relief through the courts, together with other relief as the law may provide. 24.Right of Entry. The Developer hereby grants to the City, its agents and its employees, the right to enter on the property for the specific purpose of constructing or completing any and all of the agreed upon Improvements should the Developer not complete those Improvements by the date specified in Section 11. 25.Controlling Agreement. To the extent that there is any difference or ambiguity between this Planned Unit Development Agreement and other agreements between the City and the Developer, this Planned Unit Development Agreement shall control. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and the Developer have caused this agreement to be duly executed on the day and year first above written. CITY OF ORONO By: (Mayor) By: (City Clerk) DEVELOPER - Berkshire Properties By. Its: Page 8 of 10 ••• • • •- Reviewed for Administration; Date:By:. (Planning Director) By; (City Administrator) This instrument was drafted by: City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55356 Page 9 of 10 • ««» «I • •• • ••mt • - ,• JlklllWfeiJilliiiiiiMtftiirriii imriMfinai huMiyaAtffeaa STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this __ day of 2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUMTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this __day of 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of .,20. personally appeared before me, ____who is personally known to me ____whose identity I proved on the basis of ____ whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of , a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/shc/they executed the same as his/her/lheir free act and deed. Notary Public Page 10 of 10 m ^ m. ^ ■ IT ri 11 iTiiWlfciirrrarilK mat it- i f I EXHIBIT A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 4 ATTACHED PLANS Sheet A1 Sheet A2 Sheet A3 Sheet A4 Sheet Cl Sheet C2 Sheet LI Site Plan dated 2-11-04 First Floor Plan dated 2-11-04 Second Floor Plan dated 2-11-04 Elevations dated 2-11-04 Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plan dated 2-10-04 Plan/Pro file Utility Plan dated 2-10-04 Landscaping & Lighting Plan dated 2-23-04 r j 1 ORONO PROFESSIONAL CENTER II AlCNIVCCf C I trtL Llgimil Q O oa < B) •-I I- o> OS o o o r ■ - X '-Ml*'SSSSim ImEm 1 ‘ . t « M r C • f ARCNItICtt IMf «mrnm». m mm Ml Q< UJ dO ^ c U 2^53 ^ I“ il ^ to Ic 01 to3! ^UJ o o ^ S oS^OS ^ Ozo od O art PLAN A1 r t ! *1r 1 rXI >i i V- ■i lr \s sr .i. rrvycy^nc fwsr fuxM ham . ft i» «. r.V L i « M r c • t * 1 C N I t c c I f • M*f m tMaM toMt IBf to W »MM Ml 85 bo ^ c U S -j fl•== “ Q “O tn fti to ^S ^ p 20 I 2£ o zO 0£o to* •» m aarpggr msT H.CXM fLAN A2 r ts \s' A s-s; 1 { X s 1s' ■ s s s i s 4 tsS's: m-w m^r m-€m-ir m-0 »-r y-yr rr1 9-^y r y-r • ■yr /J 1 1 ryr 9-m y-r 1 ifi 1 r-r y <r r-^ 1 y»r r y*» ‘^1t y^.y-r y ^If 1 y^y-r y-y y-yr y-^ 1 1 1 1 I 1 _______C.___A. t^—mA ji»a t OS L i P-=-m\„CZL P«--1 —epi fe-u -'•Mrf:LWr~Mlin~ (^JPflJlltXaWUUWLIML f ri" f, ■ > ■■^' i-1 > JL it-- i a M f C • f A « C « I t I C t t Ss5irjS.5 Qi: UJ 2 -j 2 ’3 z “ Q “O tn 01 tog Si; I0^3 0-2 6o a 2 s; o o 0£o n*«3cr UCOND fioot ruN A3 U m I ■5 ii M n ---------------- t ♦nwf .•:J«^1 LULVAUgM JMML I A « r f • t A • C M I f C C f t Z c ^ *0^2r: «< o “ O c T3 5 Ql ^ , o “ Sgo e O 2 o O iCo Or: O #»»•.< uA<* Im..^ tftfyY 0^,M±aC. nrvATioNS A4 • ;v-„ PLAN/PROFILE UTIUTY PLAN ORONO PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL BUILDING ORONO, MN u------ ^ ur—1!' j rnirrn • I m It 1/ :• A ■ •> K i»UW| »• '- • 1 I II ’! *:v;y .Mn r-tr. VJ;': pif5|i30^V ’ -22I -T?i^.{! fii •MMi M» -V • ( MM Xy .In “t. n 1 fp^piS jr LX.L/TT"^ Piilii i 9 ! M* «* n ----- I lil mmp^hm li —i L ton -X 1 1010 •ri Mi 'U1 1015 JEK...JE...i.n {1010 "T niNmiri:4ff.«-»--i i<r « jr CAW*»i c>* A»AM c«# . • ! ,M. • • ijm/ «r umam %mn nm umt SSJN mtam rMV /u-nn *€n •a S:iUS3*^* iiii C2 .nil I r »k KELLBY ROAD U*ST.r^r««c mm • Mi iMM Qd ULis ^ _l fl ‘3 Z S “ Q i “O to 5 OJ ^ * O o o ooc O >•» *■rsvuM9 ■it asMa lOjer LAICMCAfC A UCHTMC PIAN LI • t MHii: m m t'^v-•^^r.^.:,.v^ »o. jr*\ A J JJ ntwi: iimrt rtHt]•It ME* •1^1 fit [•^iE« kli%T*ll|fl€i^wnr*i C ". - * CITY OF ORONO PROFESSIONAL PROPERTIES II COMMERCIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAT FILE NO. 04-2984 SITE IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATE: 'M'::S;l is!:;: ITEM UNIT EST. QUANTITY UNIT PRICE Mobilization Site grading Common excavation Select granular material Aggregate base, Cl. 5.100% crushed Type 31 bit. base course Type 41 bit. wear course Bituminous material for tack Concrete curb and gutter Landscaping Concrete walk 4" DIP 8" DIP 4" gate valve & box 8" gate valve & box Connect to existing water main 12" RCP storm sewer 15" RCP storm sewer Storm catch basin w/casting Storm catch basin MH w/casting 6" PVC sanitary sewer Sanitary sewer cleanout Connect to existing sanitary sewer Silt fence LS LS CY CY TN TN TN GL LF LS SF LF LF EA EA EA LF LF EA EA LF EA EA LF Estimated Construction Cost +50% Security Deposit Total Security Deposit Required 1 1 3200 1900 1900 790 480 300 1500 1 2560 145 140 1 1 1 257 197 2 2 140 1 1 700 $5,000.00 5.000. 00 5.00 16.00 11.00 32.00 35.00 1.00 8.00 25.000.00 3.00 18.00 25.00 600.00 1.000. 00 1,000.00 25.00 30.00 1,200.00 1,5GC.OO 23.00 30f .00 1.000.00 3.00 EST. COST $5,000 5.000 16,000 30,400 20,900 25,280 16,300 300 12,000 25,000 7,680 2.610 3,500 600 1.000 1,000 6.425 5,910 2,400 3.000 3,220 300 1.000 2,100 $197,425 98,713 $296,138 j m Bonestroo Rosene Anderiik & Associates 2335 West Highway 36 • St Paul. MN 5SII3 Office; 65I-636-4600 • Fax; 65I-636-I31I wwwi)onestroo.com Engineers & Architects . April 27,2004 Ms. Janice Gundtach Planner City ofOrono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Re; Professional Center II File No. 139-04-000 Plat No. 04-2984 Dear Janice: We have revised the estimated cost for site improvements to include the construction of the proposed bituminous trail. The new estimated cost for site improvements is S206,800; a copy of the estimate is attached. The applicant should provide the city with a financial guarantee for 150% of ihis amount or S310.200 prior to any work on site. The financial guarantee should be in the fomt of cash or a letter of credit. If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly, BONESTROO. ROSENE, ANDERLIK. ct ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg Attachrr.ent Cc: Greg Gappa. City of Orono • • p • • St. Paul. St. Cloud. Rochester. Willmar. MN • Milwaukee. wi • Chicago. IL Arfirm«tJvt AcUofV'l9u«l Op^oftyhiiy and fmployv* Ownttf 1 CITY OF ORONO PROFESSIONAL PRO! ERTIES II COMMERCIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAT FILE NO. 04-2984 SITE IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATE: EST. UNIT QUANTITYITEM UNIT PRICE EST. Mobilization Site grading Common excavation Select granular material Aggregate base, Cl. 5,100% crushed Type 31 bit. base course Type 41 bit. wear course Bituminous material for tack Concrete curb and gutter Landscaping Concrete walk Bituminous trail 4" DIP 8" DIP 4" gate valve & box 8" gate valve & box Connect to existing water main 12" RCP storm sewer 15" RCP storm sewer Storm catch basin w/casting Storm catch basin MH w/casting 6" PVC sanitary sewer Sanitary sewer cleanout Connect to existing sanitary sewer Silt fence Estimated Construction Cost •^50% Security Deposit Total Security Deposit Required LS LS CY CY TN TN TN GL LF LS SF LF LF LF EA EA EA LF LF EA EA LF EA EA LF 1 1 3200 1900 1900 790 480 300 1500 1 2560 375 145 110 1 1 1 257 197 2 2 140 1 1 700 $5,000.00 5.000. 00 5.00 16.00 11.00 32.00 35.00 1.00 8.00 25,000.00 3.00 25.00 18.00 25.00 600.00 1.000. 00 1,000.00 25.00 30.00 1,200.00 1,500.00 23.00 300.00 1,000.00 3.00 COST $5,000 5.000 15.000 30,400 20,900 25,280 16,800 300 12.000 25,000 7,680 9,375 2,610 3,500 600 1.000 1,000 6,425 5,910 2,400 3.000 3,220 300 1.000 2,100 $206,800 103,400 $310,200 mm -- CITY of ORONO & Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 0066 April 8,2004 Robert Ritter 3260 Bohn’s Point Lane Wayzata, MN 55391 R£; 60-Day Review Period Extension for Commercial Site Plan Review of 2745 Kelley Parkway Dear Mr. Ritter: 60-Day Review Period Extension. State law provides that Cities shall make decisions on zoning requests within 60 days from the date of application, and that this review period may be extended by notification to the applicant. Your application was received on January 21, 2004 and considered complete on February 11, 2004. The 60-day review period would end on April 11. 2004. The City Council granted approval of the commercial site plan review on March 10, 2004 and directed staff to draft a Resolution granting approval and a PUD Agreement. You are scheduled to be heard at the April 12, 2004 City Council n ceting to formally adopt the Resolution and approve the PUD Agreement. Because this falls after the 60-day period, the 60-day review period is hereby extended an additional 60 days to June 10, 2004. Again, your application is scheduled to be before the City Council for final approval on April 12,2004. Sincerely, City of Orono Janice Gundlach City Planner friepbODC (952) 24M600 • Fax (952) 24Mlli www.cLorofiojiiii.as CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 ZONING FILE: #04-2984 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: March 10,2004 TO: McCarthy Construction Attn: Dave McCarthy 11100 Bren Road W. COPIES: Robert Ritter 3260 Bohn’s Point Lane Wayzata, MN 55391 Suite 200 Minnetonka, MN 55343 Lampert Architects Attn: James Berthiaume 13837 NE Lincoln Street Ham Lake, MN 55304 T\TE OF APPLICATION:Commercial Site Plan Review DATE OF MEETING: March 8,2004 VOTE: 4 FOR 1 AGAINST Motion: To approve per the plans submitted and revised prior to Council review. Staff will draft a PUD/developer’s agreement for approval at the first available City Council meeting, which is tentatively set as April 12,2004. Staff will be in contact with you regarding the content of that agreement and any materials that must be submitted prior to review by Council. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available li'om the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. f To: From: Date: Subject: Janice Gundlach, City Planner Mike Gaffron, Planning Director April 8,2004 Application #04-2984 Professional Properties of Orono - Medical Office Development Fees Analysis Site address: 2745 Kelley Parkway Legal description: Lot 2, Block 1, City of Orono Addition Lot area: 2.56 acres I. Park Dedication. This lot was originally platted in 1991 by the City in order to effectuate the purchase oftlie City facilities site north of Kelley Parkway. The plat created Lot 1 north ofKelley Parkway, Lot 2 south ofKelley Parkway, and the 60' road corridor separating the two lots. Lot 2 was not purchased by the City but was retained by the seller of the site. Bill Gagne. Lot 2 was expected to be developed commercially under the B-6 standards. Although the 1991 City Fee Schedule required an 8% dedication of land (or fee equivalent) for commercial development, 1 can find no mention of park dedication or equivalent fees in the 1991 subdivision file, for either Lot 1 or Lot 2. My assumption is that since Lot 2 was not immediately being developed and was created merely as a remnant parcel for future use, no park fee was charged. The current 2004 City Fee Schedule establishes a Park Dedication requirement of 8% of the land or equivalent in fees, and establishes a minimum/maximum fee of S8,125/$ 13,875 per acre. The County has assessed this property at a value of $541,000 although the purchase record indicates a January 2003 sale at $400,000. Using the lower value of $400,000 the park dedication fee requirement would be 0.08 x $400,000 = $32,000. The range of min/max park fees for the 2.56 acre proper.y is from a low of (2.56 X $8,125) = $20,800 to a high of (2.56 x $l 3,875) = $35,520. If the $541,000 taxable market value is used, the parke fee would be 0.08 x $541,000 = $43,280, which exceeds the fee cap, so the fee would then be $35,570. The City Assessor should be consulu J to determine the Fair Market Value of the undeveloped laud to determine the actual park fee amount due. II. Sewer/Water Units & Con ection Charges In 1967 when sew erai. vatcr was initially brought to the Highway 12 area, this property was part of an undivided 76 acre parcel stretching from Willow Drive to Old Crystal Bay Road. The 76 acres w as assessed for front footage and three (3) sew-cr and water umts. In 1983 a sewer system upgrade project was completed (1983-1 Orono-Long Lake-Medina project) which provided some additional capacity for properties in the Highway 12 area. In 1984, at the time the Dental Office site on the comer of 12/OCBRd was created for a library site, the owners formally gave 2 of the original 3 units to Hennepin County as part of the sale of that site. About that same time. Highway 12 area sewer capacity of 116 units attributable to the 1983-1 upgrade, was reallocated by parcel, and 17 units were allocated to the 76 acre parcel. These 17 units were not assessed for that project since the parcel was vacant, but the costs of that excess capacity would have been due upon development. f' > fl Development Fees - PUD #4 April 8,2004 Page 2 In 1989, as a result of the 1987 CMP amendment, water and sewer facilities ’• jre constructed in the Highway 12 area to provide capacity for the expected development north of Highway 12. These sewer and water units were not assessed to vacant property and are due as a unit connection charge upon development. Up to and including2000, this S&W connection fee was charged on a juu! basis, and for 2000 was $3,645 per unit for sewer and $5,050 per unit for water. In 2001 the fee was restructured to be an acreage charge, based on gross acreage (including wetlands). For 2004, the sewer connection fee is $5,510 per acre and for water is $9,110 per acre, for a total S&W connection charge of $14,620/acre. The Sewer and Water Connection Charges that will be due for Lot 2, Block 1, City of Orono Addition, are calculated as follows: 2.56 acres x $ 14,620.00 per acre = $37,427.00 III. Stormwater Drainage Trunk Fee The clinic development will be subject to the City’s recently enacted Storm Water Trunk Fee. At the current 2004 Fee Schedule commercial rate of $6,480 per acre, the site will be charged for 2.56 acres or a total fee of $16,588.80. '.-i is.'■ -J.... Agenda Item Number 8 Revision Zoning Application 04*2984 'I >•I i Development Agreement for Berkshire Properties, 2745 Kelley Parkway Kelley Parkway street lights consistent with ihe approved street lights for the other developments on Kelley Parkway need to be installed by the developer on this project. Additional language to be included in the Development Agreement is listed below. A. (General Terms and Conditions 7. Lightintt Public street lighting along Kell»*y Parkway adjacent to the property .shall be provided by the Developer and shall be of a style, number, height, and location consistent with the other developments along Kelley Parkway. Public .street lighting along Kelley Parkway shall be installed and maintained by the Excel Energy through a standard agreement between the City and Excel Energy with the co.sts for installation paid by the Developer. The City will then be responsible for payment of tlie operation and maintenance costs to Excel Energy per the terms of the agreement. \ ?\ (> Dale Application Received: 4>14<04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 4-14-04 120-Day Review Period Expires: 8-12-04 CniiM/'u a/fcrriNG JUN \ 4 2004 CITY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: June 10,2004 Item No.; ^ Department Approval: Name: Janice Gundlach^^ Title: City Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-3003, Bruce & Kristine Paddock, 3250 Fox Street - Final Plat - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR- lA, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acre minimum) 14.830 acres (645,995 s.f.) Approximately 834 feet List of Exhibits A - Final Resolution for adoption B - Final Plat drawings C - Preliminary Plat Resolution No. 5169 Application Summary: The applicant is requesting final plat approval to create 3 lots on one block to be known as Maxwell Bay Estates. The plat consists of three lake-.hore lots meeting all district standards. The applicants have completed or have agreed to complete all requirements for final plat approval We anticipate mylars will be available for signature at the June 14'" meeting. A copy of the final plat drawing is attached. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached resolution. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF MAXWELL BAY ESTATES FILE NO. 04-3003 WHEREAS, The City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter “City Council”) has adopted subdivision and land development regulation for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application by Bruce Paddock and ICristinc Paddock, husband and wife (hereinafter the “applicants”) for subdivision of property location at 3250 Fox Street and legally described as follows: Tract E, Registered Land Survey No. 1358, files of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the “property”); and WHEREAS, on May 10, 2004 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5169 granting Preliminary Plat Approval for the proposed development of a three-lot plat for single family residential purposes; and WHEREAS, the applicants have completed or have agreed to complete all other requirements of the platting regulations of the City including: 1. Comoletion of all platting requirement of Preliminary Plat Resolution No. 5169. 2. Dedication on the plat of perimeter Drainage and Utility Easement as required in Resolution No. 5169. 3. Designation and dedication on the plat of wetlands subject to City and other agency jurisdiction, and granting of the standard Flowage and Conservation Easement over said wetlands. Page 1 of 3 4. Submittal of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) permit approving the grading and stormwater management plan for development of the Property. 5. Payment to the City of Park Dedication Fee, Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fee, final plat review fees and legal review and filing fees as identified within Resolution No. 5169. 6. Provision to the City of a title opinion for the Property and cetlified copies of all recorded easement currently affecting the Property. 7. Execution of a developer’s agreement and provision of a letter of credit covering the stormwater dry-ponding improvements. 8. Submittal of any grading plan revision that may be required by the City Engineer. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that based on the findings of Resolution No. 5169, the City Council of the City of Orono does hereby approve the plat of MAXWELL BAY ESTATES, tiennepin County, Minnesota subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicants shall comply with all conditions of Resolution No. 5169. 2. The City Clerk shall release the plat documents for filing only upon certification by the City Attorney, Planning Director, and City Engineer that all requiremen's of the plaiting regulations have been satisfied. 3. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles Office on or before December 14, 2004 together with a certified original copy of this resolution and e.\ecuted copies of the easements and covenants pertinent thereto. The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the conditions of this Resolution have not been met or the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Page 2 of 3 r Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 14** day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrumeiit was acknowledged before me on this 14*** day of June, 2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota tnunicipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HEN’NEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this_day of _______, 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public i Page 3 of 3 r %w- >"3 m CITY of ORONO mm.RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 5 1 ^ A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A CLASS III SUBDIVISION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3250 FOX STREET FILE NO. 04-3003 WHEREAS, Bruce Paddock and Kristine Paddock, husband and wife, with George W, Stickney (hereinafter the “subdividers”) on March 17, 2004, filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a three lot residential plat of property legally described a.<:: Tract E, R.L.S. NO. 1358, Hemiepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter “the property”); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono ’s Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Plamiing Commission held a public hearing on April 19, 2004, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on May 10, 2004, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the subdivider noting the following findings of fact: 1.The property is located within the LR - lA One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 2 acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2.The property contains a total of approximately 14.830 acres of land; 0.13 acres of which is delineated wetland. 3.The proposed plat consists of thiee residential lots each meeting the minimum lot standard requirements of the LR - lA, One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, each meeting the minimum 2 acre lot area requirements and each having over 200 ’ in defined width at the shoreline and 75 ’ lake setback. A single family residence currently exists within proposed lot 2, served by a septic system straddling the boundary between lots 1 and 2. Page I of 5 J 6. 7. 8. GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. All lots will be served with septic systems and private wells. Lot 3 will be served off the existing drive access from the public portion of Fox Street. Lots 1 and 2 will be served off private driveways accessed from the private portion of Fox Street. Several pnmary and alternate septic sites meeting all pertinent standards have been identified for each of proposed Lots 1,2, and 3. It would be appropriate to establish a single average setback line for all 3 lots to avoid having an average setback line that changes each lime one of the lots is built on. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Bnice and Kristine Paddock and George W. Stickney at 3250 Fox Street per preliminary plat drawings by Mark Gronberg of Gronberg &. Associates, Inc., dated March 1, 2004 and revised 4-12-04 and 4-14-04, subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer shall grant to the City 10 foot drainage and utility easements along penmeter property boundaries and 5 foot drainage and utility easements along all interior property boundaries, 2. Proposed lot 3, at the time of construction, must gutter drain the roof and direct the drainage to the west and to the proposed dry pond. Also, proposed lot 3 front yard, sidewalk and side and back yard drainage shall be routed to a new swale along the cast side of the property. 3. Payment of standard Park Dedication Fee for Lots I and 3. 4. 5. Payment of standard storm water and drainage trunk fee for the property. For proposed lots 1 and 2, the developer is encouraged to utilize the septic sites on the street side of the proposed house pads rather than the lake side sites, to reduce the potential for negative lake impacts. Page 2 of 5 i Mi CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.____y> 1^ 6.The average lakeshore se;back line shown on the preliminary plat shall be the line used to define the average lakeshore setback for all 3 lots. 7.If the existing mound on lots 1 and 3 is proposed to remain in use during the interim period, a temporary easement, expiring at the time of site grading for proposed lot I, may be permitted but only by approval of the City. 8.The subdivider shall implement all currently provided or forthcoming recommendations of the City Engineer regarding grading, drainage, stormwater management and site improvemens. 9.The developer shall comply with all requirements of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. 10.Subdivider is hereby advised that preliminary subdivision approval will expire within one year of the date of City Council approval. May 10, 2005. Should the subdivider fail to complete the filing of the final plat application within the year deadline, it shall be necessary for the subdivider to file a new preliminary subdivision application with the City. Final Plat Submittals: The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled City Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows: 1.Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City’s records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1” « 200 ’. Drawings to include: a. Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Mark Gronberg of Gronberg & Associates, Inc., dated March 1,2004 and revised 4-12-04 and 4-14-04. b. Dedication of drainage and utility easements 10 ’ wide along the exterior boundaries of property and S’ along the internal lot lines. c. The naming of plat. Page 3 of S CITY of ORONO 4. RESOLUTION OF THE Cl TV COUNCIL NO. ^ B Si 2. Legal documents required: a. Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b. The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c. Sigjied and executed Developer ’s Agreement and letter of credit required for site improvements. d. Signed and executed Drainage Easements to be taken over drainage way and detention areas within plat. 3. Fees to be paid:Total due: S530.00 a. Final plat fee « $250.00 b. Legal review and filing fees for subdivison and associated documents = S280.00 c. *Park Dedication Fee: amount shall be determined as soon as City Assessor has placed a fair market value on the undeveloped land at the time of preliminary plat approval. The subdivider shall be advised as soon as Assessor ’s report has been filed with City. d. Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee - $ 32,400 [12.0 acres (maximum of 4.00 chargable acres per lot @ $2,700/acre] Stonnwater plan approvaL'pemtit from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Page 4 of 5 ianriariiiaii m GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^ ^ ^ Adopted by tlie City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 10*" day of May, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk ^iA <>d Barbara Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10'" day of May, 2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. •f // Ml' (t t< —Vf]^^tary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN MARCIA JO WMIMQFORD NOTARV n«X-MMMOU .................... The foregoing insU-ument was acknowledged before me on this of . 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota munimpal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. V BARBARA 0.8ILUS notary AMJC-MieesoTA My ConiMen Upku Jan. 31, SOM Cj Notary Public Page 5 of 5 r i X. lb Date Application Received: 4-2I-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 4-21-04 60-Day Review Period txpires: 6-20-04 CAiim/'k ■xrrT’lfgQ JUN 1 4 2004 CITY UH CHONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: June 10, 2004 Item No.: I 0 Department Approval: Name: Janice Gundlach^ Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Title: City Planner Item Description: #04-3006, Bart & Betsy But/cr, 2625 Nortlt Sliore Drive - Variance, Conditional Use Pennit - Resolution 7>oning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - 1 A, One Family Lakeshorc Residential District (2 acre minimum) 1.97 acres (86,129 s.f.) 268 feet @ shoreline, 259 feet @ 75 ’ setback List of Exhibits A - Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendation B - PC Action Notice 5-20-04 C - PC Memo and Exhibits of 5-6-04 Application Summary: Applicant requc.sts the following variance in order to construct a new detached garage with recreation room: 1. Hardcover variance to permit 30% hardcover in the 75 ’-250’ zone when 25% is normally allowed and 33% currently exists. 2. Conditional use permit to allow plumbing in an accessory building. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the plans incorporating the following stipulation; 1. fhe applicant agrees to the filing of the covenant regarding the conditional use permit for plumbing in an accessory building (as noted within this report). Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission voted unanimously at tlieii May 17, 2004 nicctiiig to approve the plans as submitted. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting a conditional use pennit and hardcover variance for 262S North Shore Drive. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-282 AND 78-1288 AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 78-418 (16) FILE NO. 04-3006 WHEREAS, Bartholomew Butzcr and Elizabeth T. Butzer, husband and wife (hcrcinaflcr “the applicants”) arc the owners of the property located at 2625 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City”) and legally described as follows: Attached Exhibit A (hereinafter the “property”); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance and conditional use penuit to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78- 282, 78-1288 and Section 78-418 (16) to allow the existing detached garage to be replaced and relocated which requires a hardcover variance for the 75 ’-250’ zone and a conditional use permit to allow plumbing within the new accessory building. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: 1. 2. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File /I04-3006. The property is located in the LR - 1 A, One Family Lakcshorc Residential District, which requires a minimum lot area of 2.0 acres. The applicant’s property is 1.97 acres in total area. 3.The IManning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on May 17, 2004 and recommended approval of the requested variance and conditional use permit based on the following findings: Page 1 of 7 i U: i# '4 a. The existing house was constructed within the 0-75’ /one prior to adoption of the current hardcover standards, causing this hardcover to be counted towards allowable hardcover within the 75’*250’ zone. b. Over 1/3 of the existing property contains a wetland with a required 26’ buffer where no hardcover is allowed, making the lot virtually 50% unbuildable. c. The existing detached garage lies within the required 26’ wetland buffer where the new garage is proposed to meet the required 26’ setback. d. The existing detached garage lies within the required 30’ side yard setback where the new garage is proposed to meet this setback. e. A 337 s.f. sandbox within the required 26’ wetland buffer will be eliminated. f. A 40 s.f playhouse within the required 26’ wetland buffer will be eliminated. g. Existing bituminous driveway located within the required 26’ wetland buffer will be eliminated. h. The total reduction in hardcover for the site as a result of this approval is 1,590 s.f or 3.67%. i. Approval of a variance to the 2.0 acre standard for a plumbing in an accessory building CUP is justified based on the total lot area of 1.97 acres and no potential negative impacts to neighboring properties. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance and conditional use permit on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of? i 0 m \ m i 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property arc peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance and conditional use permit would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance and conditional use pemrit to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-282, 78-1288 and Section 78-418 (16) to allow the existing detached garage to be replaced and relocated which requires a hardcover variance for the 75’-250’ zone and a conditional use permit to allow plumbing within the new building, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. Hardcover in the 0-75’ zone shall not increase above the 19%. The applicant is advised that this non-conforming hardcover is counted towards the 75’-250’ zone hardcover allowance when detennining allowable amount per zone. Hardcover in the 75’-250’ zone shall be limited to 9,075 s.f. or 21% per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit B. Applicant is advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. 3. Applicant shall remove all plastic oi fabric liner material from the decorative landscape beds on the property to ensure their permeability as non-hardcover surfaces. Page 3 of 7 +• I i 4. Required removals of structure and hardcover shall be completed by the fooling inspection for the proposed detached garage. 5.The City Council recognizes that the property is 0.03 acres short of the required 2.0 acre area requirement for plumbing in an accessory building and a variance is granted to this acreage requirement based on no additional land available and no potential negative impacts on neighboring properties. 6. The applicant by executing this resolution and covenant that the property will be bound by the following conditions: a.The accessory building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the City or if allowed by City Code; b. The accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained (site is not large enough to qualify); and c. The accessory building will not be rented, leased or otherw'ise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. 7.Authorities granted by this rc.solution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance and conoitional use permit will expire on that date (June 14, 2005). 8. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 9. The undersigned applicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants' heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 4 of7 Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 14'" day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 5 of7 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this_day of __, 2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. F« Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this __, 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota day of municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 6 of? State of Minnesota ) ) ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this __day of .2004 by Bartholomew Butzer, husband of Elizabeth T. Butzer, husband and wife. Notary Public State of Minnesota ) ) ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this __day of .2004 by Elizabeth T. Butzer, wife of Bartholomew Butzer, husband and wife, Notary Public Page 7 of7 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Pored 1: Thol pofl of Covemmonl Lois 4 ond 5. Stclion 9. Townsh’»p 117. Rongf 23. described as commercing ol Ihe Norlh Ouorlor comer of said Stclion; thence on a beoring of Soulh (the norlh line of Ihe Norlheoil Ouorte^ of sc»d Secl'on being osevimed to hove o beoring of Norlh 86 degrees 51 minutes Wesl for Ihe purposes of l^** J dlilonce of 2876.55 feel; thence Sooth 70 degrees 37 minutes 31 seconds Eosl o distance of 838.42 feel; Jhence Soulh 67 dertea ^9 mlnules 23 seconds Cost o distonce of 266.25 feet; thence South 59 degrees 05 mmules 30 seconds Eost o distonce of 300.00 feel to the point of beginning of the property being described; thence conImi^ng Soulh 59 dertts 05 minutes 30 seconds Eost o distonce of 159.15 feet; thence South 26 degrees 36 m.nutes West to the shore of Loke Minnetonko; tfience Northwesterly olong sold shore to Its Intersection with o line drown South 32 degrees 16 minutes 30 seconds Weil from the point of beginning; thence North 32 degrees 16 minutes 30 seconds Eosl to the point of beginning, occordlng to the Government survey thereof, ond Porcel 2* Thot port of Government Lot 4. Section 9. Township 1*7, Ronge 23. dtfCfibed os follows: Comm*-ring ot the North Quarter comer of sold Section; therce on o beoring cf South (the north line of the Ncrthcc?* Ouerter of so»d 5ect*on being ossumed to hove o beoring o' North 66 degrees 51 minutes West for the purposes of this Cescriplion) o distonce of 2870.55 feet' thence South 70 degrees 37 minutes 31 seconds Eost o distonce of 836.42 feet, thence South 67 degrees 19 mlnutee 23 seconds Eoit a distonce of 266.25 feet to ‘Point A‘, sold "Point A bemg the po*nt of beginning of the property being described, ond olso the point of beginning of ‘Line A ; thence South^32 degrees 16 minutes 30 second! West dong *\lne A* to o point on the shore of Loke Minnetonko. ^ond fo^d Line A there ending, thence Southeoeterly olong told ehore to o point 300.00 feet southeoslerly from soid^ Line A , sold 300.00 feet being meoeured on o beoring of South 59 degrees 05 minutes 30 seconds Eosl from sold L*ne A ; thence Nyth 32 degrees 16 minutes 30 seconds Eost o distonce of 37C feet to on intersection with o i«ne drown South 59 degrees 05 minutes 30 seconds Eosl from told ‘Point A‘; thence North 59 degrees 05 minutes 30 seconds West to sold Pont A* at the point of beginning. EXCEPT thot port of loid obove described property lying northwesterly of the foiiowmg described line: Commencing at told ‘Point A‘; thence South 59 degrees 05 minutes 30 seconds Eost o d^tonce of 246.74 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described: thence South 34 degrees 54 minutes 30 seconds West to the shore of Loke Minnetonko ond there ending. 1 r APPROVED HARDCOVER 0-75'Zono 75'-250 ‘Zona EXiinm It House - 2,970 Driveway - 94 Sidewalk - 204 Palio/Deck - 466 Other - 26 Total « 3.768 s.f. (19%) 0-250'Zone House - 3.311 Garage - 1.000 ' Driveway - 6,080 “if,- Sidewalk - 404 Patio/Deck - 466 Retaining Walls - 750 Other 20 Total - 12,843 s.f. (30%) %• 'N. House -- 333 Garage - 1,000 Driveway - 6,792 Sidewalk - 200 Retaining Walls - 750 Total = 9.075 s.f. (21%) / /CO C") ( (r) irlO flfl a'nnn aSninr) ia»in8\'l s CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE #04-3006 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 20,2004 TO: Bart & Betsy Butzer 2625 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: GaryM. Aulik 6401 Wayzata Boulevard St. Louis Park, MN 55426 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance / CUP DATE OF MEETING: May 1 7, 2004 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approval of the plans as submitted, subject to the execution of standard covenants regarding the plumbing in accessory structure CUP: A) The accessory building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by City or if allowed by City code; B) The accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained; and C) The accessory building will not be rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwe'ling under any circumstances. yOTE: 7 FOR 0 AGAL\ST Applicant ’s next scheduled meeting is confimied as; _____City C-'ouncii - Monday, June 14, 2004; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m._______________ If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they arc available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Gundlach at 952-249-4623. i W04-3006 May 17, 2004 Page 1 of 6 Date Application Received: 4-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete; 4-21-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 6-20-04 7 To: Chair Mabusth and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Janice Gundlach, City Planner^ Date: May 6,2004 Subject: #04-3006, Bartholomew & Elizabeth Butzer, 2625 North Shore Drive - Hardcover Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - lA, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acre min.) 1.97 acres (86,129 s.f.) 268 feet @ shoreline, 259 feet @ 75’ setback Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variance in order to construct a new detached garage with recreation room: 1. Hardcover variance to permit 30% hardcover in the 75’-250’ zone when 25% is normally allowed and 33% currently e.Kists. 2. Conditional use permit to allow plumbing in an accessory building. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the plans incorporating the following stipulation: 1. The applicant agrees to the filing of the covenant regarding the conditional use permit for plumbing in an accessory building (as noted within this report). Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-282. Lakeshore hard cover and huid alteration regulations. In any LR-IA, LR- IB, LR-IC or LR-lC-l district, within 75 feet of shoreline, there shall be no excavating, filling, hard cover, temporary or permanent structures except as permitted under section 78-281. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Within 250 feet to 500 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 30 percent hard cover. Witltin 500 feet to 1,000 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 35 percent hard cover. (Code 1984, § 10.22(2)) Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (a) No hard cover or impervious surface shall be placed, located or constructed witliin 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of any lake or tributary, except for stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in this Code. (b) Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OHWL, there shall be no greater than 25 m-3006 May 17.2004 Page 2 of 6 percent hard cover. Between 250 feet and 500 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 30 percent hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 35 percent hardcover. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(L)), 2-24-1992) List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applications (Variance and CUP) Exhibit B - Hardship Documentation Form Exhibit C - Applicant’s Narrative Exhibit D - Existing Survey Exhibit E - Proposed Survey Exhibit F - Hardcover Calc^ation Worksheets Exhibit G - Hardcover Calculation Survey Exhibit H - Elevation of Proposed Detached Building Exhibit I - Floor Plan of Proposed Detached Building Exhibit J - Photographs Exhibit K - Property Owner’s List Exhibit L - Plat Map Background The applicants recently acquired the property in November of 2003. The appliceuit and his architect have met with staff to discuss construction of a new 1,000 s.f. detached garage/rccreation room to include plumbing for a V* bath and hot tub. The existing detached garage has become run down and sits within the 26 ’ required wetland setback. The applicant wishes to remove the existing building, rather than renovate it, and construct new within all setbacks. The applicant’s proposal includes a reduction in hardcover and removal of several structures that currently lie within the wetland setback. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot AreaAVidtb LR-IA Lot Area Lot Width Required 87,120 s.f. (2.00 acres)200 ’ Actual 86,129 s.f. (1.97 acres;268 ’ @ Shoreline, 259’ @ 75’ Setback Setbacks LR-IA Required Existing Proposed Front 50’N/A N/A Rear 50’ 296 ’ - house 193.5’ - garage 185’ - playhouse 240 ’ - proposed garage \ 13 ^040006 May 17. 2004 Page 3 of 6 Left Side 30 ’107’ - house 22’ - garage 35 ’ - proposed garage Right Side 30 ’55’ - house NO CHANGE Lakeshore 75’39 ’ - house 162’ - garage 39 ’ - house 100’ - proposed garage Average Lakeshore Less restrictive than 75’ setback Compliant NO CHANGE Structural Coverage Total Lot Area 86,129 s.f. (1.97 acres) Total Structural Coverage Allowed: 12,919 s.f. (15%) Proposed: 4,941 s.f. (5.7%) Hardcover Calculations Hardcover Zone Total A'^ca in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75 19,880 s.f.Os.f (0%) 3,768 s.f* (19%) 3,768 s.f (19%) 75-250 43,247 s.f.10,812 s.f. (25%) 10,665 s.f* (24.6%) 9.075 s.f (20.9%) 250 - 500 23,002 s.f.6,901 s.f (30%) 500 s.f* (2.2%) 0 s.f (0%) After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds 0-250 ' Hardcover Calculations When hardcover exists within the 0-75’ zone, staff has consistently transferred that hardcover back to the 75’-250’ zone. This allows staff to regulate total hardcover on the property even when work is not being conducted within the 0-75’ zone because that hardcover is technically not allowed. This also prevents the property from getting unregulated hardcover within the 0-75’ zone as the intent of the haidcover ordinance is to regulate hardcover on the entire property. Currently, hardcover levels are in compliance within the 75’-250’ zone when the 0-75’ hardcover is not transferred back. The following chart shows the hardcover level within the 0-250’ zone, or when the 0-75’ hardcover is transferred back (using only the allotted area from the 75’-250’ zone): Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-250’ 43,247 s.f (only area within 75’- 250’zone) 10,812 s.f (25%) 14,437 s.f (33%) 12,843 s.f (29.7%) M04.3006 May 17,2004 Page 4 of 6 Hardcover Variance Hardcover within the 75*-250’ zone is at a conforming level of 21.2%. The need for a hardcover variance arrives because of the non-conforming hardcover that lies within the 0-75' zone. This hardcover amounts to 3,768 s.f. and mainly comprises the existing house. The applicant’s proposal is for hardcover changes within the 75’-250’ zone amounting to a net decrease of 1,590 s.f. Although a net reduction in hardcover is proposed, a hardcover variance is still required due to the transferring back of the 0-75’ hardcover bringing the total proposed hardcover to 29.7%. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in E.xhibits B & C, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis_______________________________ In considering appiicaiions for variance, the Pianning Commission shaii consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the heaith, safely and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in Instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it Is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds that a hardship exists in the fact that this house was constructed prior to adoption of the hardcover standards, which allow no hardcover within the 0-75’ zone. In addition, over 1/3 of the property contains a wetland with a required 26’ buffer of which no hardcover is allowed. This means that, short of rebuilding, any improvements will require a hardcover variance and less than 50% of the lot would be buildable when the 0- 75’ zone and wetlancL'wetland buffer areas are taken out of buildable area. It should also be noted, that the applicant is proposing to eliminate several existing non conformities with removal of the existing detached garage. These non-conformities consist of the following: • Detached garage within the 26’ wetland setback • Detached garage within the 30’ required side yard setback • 337 s.f. sandbox within the 26’ wetland setback • 40 s.f. playhouse within the 26’ wetland setback • Driveway within the 26’ wetland setback With the proposed detached garagc/recreation room all of the above non-conformities will be eliminated and hardcover will be reduced 1,590 s.f. or 3.67%. The applicant has the option of renovating the existing detached garage without needed variance approval. Lastly, this property contains a shared driveway with the neighbor to the east extending 250 feet from County Road 51. A turn-around of some type, existing on the applicant’s property, is needed. Currently, a circular driveway encompasses access to the attached garage and detached garage. Possible reductions in hardcover may be achieved by eliminating the circle and constructing a small back-up apron. This option has been r ^04-3006 May 17, 2004 Page 5 of 6 discussed with the applicant who has stated that due to the restricted access to the detached garage (tuck-under that slopes down) elimination of the circle would not net much hardcover reduction due to the need for a back-up apron. The conditions of the attached garage create the need for a detached building to store vehicles of today’s size. Conditional Use Permit Analysis The applicant is also requesting a conditional use permit to allow plumbing within an accessory building. The applicant has proposed a recreation room above the 3-stall garage, which will include a Vi bath and hot tub. Section 78 — 418 (16) establishes a number of conditions that must be met to receive approval of a conditional use permit for plumbing in an accessory building. Approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met: a. The council finds that the proposed use of the accessory structure with plumbing will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. The applicant's property is of sufficient size to support the recreation use proposed with the detached building without the residential character of the neighborhood being compromised. It should also be noted that the property to the east also has approval of a CUP for plumbing in an accessory building. b. The council finds that the plumbing fi.xturcs proposed are in keeping witli the intended use of the accessory building. The applicant is proposing a % bath and hot tub within the upper '/: story of the detached garage. These fixtures do not indicate any significantly intense use of which cannot be supported within the detached 3~stall garage. c. The property is 2.0 acres in area or larger. The applicant's property is 1.955 acres of which approximately 0 7 acres are wetland The Planning Commission has consistently granted CUP's for plumbing to properties which do not meet the 2.0 acre requirement. d. The accessory building is conforming in location, size and height. The existing detached garage meets all setback requirements, is in conformance with size restrictions of the accessory structures section of the Zoning Ordinance, and meets the 30 ‘ maximum height restriction. c. The property owner agrees to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that the accessory building will not be: 1. Used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the city or if allowed by this Code. 2. Used as a dwelling unless a guest house conditional use permit is obtained. 3. Rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. The applicant must agree to the filing of this covenant in the chain of title on the property. k #04-3006 Miy 17,2004 Pigc 6 of 6 Therefore, it is staffs opinion that all of the above criteria are met and that the condition^ use permit should be granted, pending the applicant’s agreement to filing the above mentioned covenant. Issues for Consideration 1. Is the Planning Commission satisfied with the level of hardcover reduction? 2. Should the applicant attempt to reduce hardcover by eliminating the circle driveway and constructing a back-up apron instead? 3. Is the need for the 3-stall detached garage/recreation building reasonable due to the constraints of the property and that a hardcover variance is needed to support it? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Approval of the plans as submitted incorporating the following stipulation: 1. The applicant agrees to the filing of the covenant regarding the conditional use permit for plumbing in an accessory building (as noted above). ' ' ■- . ■ -‘K City of Orono Variance Application EXHIBIT A Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Main: 952-249.4600 fax; 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 ApplicaUon# Oq - jj/c-P Date Received; <4-is oM Amount Paid: _____ Staff; ' j \ ct. Fee: (IK Se-T S600 Renewal; $300 After-the-fact: $1.200 Double Fee This application form must be completed in full. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of tho application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: _ i js,______ Property Identification Number (PIN): _o«i \\T2. Zooo a--------•'.................—-w.. V' ii^/. -2. ?.H Z.OQO (Attach legal desciiption to application if not included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (mon^th/yoar); n /o □ Yes. I own the adjacent parcels Present use of property: ^TResidential □ Other /Zoning District; LjpjL/k___________ ——--------- APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Corr.pleto legal names and marital status required for each interested party) Name: _ ^Ag.*< FA Aouik ( Ao>_irt Pfione (home):____________________ Phone (work): 5^i-»goo Address: ic^o\ 'W^v;yAr*> feL___________ Email.-----. c.n<v-w Fax: Igsz.') .S^l- ifeoo OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names and marital status required for each interested party) Name: g ^ je gi. Pfione (home): _________ Address: •2.c> 2.5* StVog-e. T^tz-vt/g. ^*^^**‘ -----to ALT, r Pa- P,-TT«flu:.cr. Phone (work): [toX'iS ^oa-8woo Fax: Estimated Project Cost; $ IZO.0OO Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): * ^ ----------------—AfTTyy<LtV-cr=> ______________________________ /ff rf^- €% T'- •■'«> .'j V. r/•. M A Kr cr ‘ -•if ."J V.. ♦V t * \ }.■ .7 "• * A •V i REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date In order for your application to be processed. % S' Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. Completed Application Form Completed Hardship Documentation Form Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150' of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance, Government Center, A-603 300 South 6"’ Street, Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 M Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 1 r X 17" for reproduction. ^ Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet). H Topographic survey - including exisUng and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" X 17" for reproduction. ^ Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17"). Co Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. * APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject It until It Is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regar$Uef^ of its potential merit. Applicant's Signatory _ Applicant's Signatuf^ Date: Date: : ^//y/ OWNER’S ACKNOWLE0GEMEN.. The owner hereby agkhowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's Signature: Owner's Signature: Date: d ^ Date: Applicant must have all submittais into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your prefect. / r w » ♦ f' r.' Application# . • i- ^ i Date Received •• ? ' l Amount .^aid • * • ^ CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address "2. -V--- « ^ •» r.r«A Type of Application to be Filed «; .. /•< Property Identification Number (P I D ) . .V >. : ____ Ac.V >•>"' APPLICANT Name Cur>,r.:i ___ Phone (home)_____________________Phone(work) Address v»'-ib!-.vp City tS>r Zip__.S.T i >__ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name__5i,r-jfrM_.«; vtr..*.-.________________________________ Phone (home) (.7 ^... - 'I.h '■< \__Phone (work) _____ Address_._._.2.;tji__t*♦ -nCity__________________Zip__w-_.'.;;.. .. Date Property Acquired _____________________________________(month/year) I (do) (jJpTiot) also own the adjacent parcels of land FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _ S600.00 Residential Accessory Use _ $600.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) S600.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _$600.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg __ $600.00 Commercial/Industrial Use __$600 00 Land Alteration + Permit _____Grading and filling • designated wetland or floodplain ____Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd or more _____Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshoro PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule _ $250.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee • Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS ______$600 00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) ______$600 00 Vacation ______$600.00 Easement Vacation ______SI 00 00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ______$600.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ______$500.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ______$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule t i ^ *.4 ft t.. ■ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. * ^ 5 6 7. 8. 9 Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance. Government Center. A-603 300 South 6*'’ Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). , List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). _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 YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 3 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS AND 1 COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require scaled drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted ) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff: ___ Date APPLICANT S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required o.' 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 isjAx^/and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s signatu Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE^ / The owner hereby gwl^nowledges^nd 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 Tr\^ I I ^ ♦request 0^ . • Owner’s signature *■— T. Datel Applicant must have all submittals ipto 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 f 1 r City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form (This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meet'ng.*) Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 For Office Use Only: City Planner ^A1\J I C.G Main: 952-249-4600 Fax: 952-249-4616 Meeting Datc/Time: _____ PC Uate: l~I, What Is the purpose of a pre-application meeting? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal, inform them of tho procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address; AJoy H"^ Qi'/fl Property Identification Number (PIN): __________________ Zoning District: Lfi-"IA Size of Property; 2-W 3 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: □ Average Setback □ Side Yard Setback □ Rear Yard Setback □ Front Yard Setback .^Hardcover □ Lot Coverage □ Lot Area □ Lot Width □ Other: 'in■l-aJ HU i 0 f •/1 /■/1 n ( 00-" _______ / ' y! /t ^0 V f. I'___________________________________________________________________ Applicantts"^^f'S/, HARDSHIP; Applicant has received the Hardship Documentation Form. Initials: _____■' ^ understands it as it has been explained to them, and is aware that it must , be completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal variance application. OTHER INFORMATION: *Please note: Your variance^plication will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this joi^rwill be complet§jW^y City^t^ Applicant Signatu Date - •; ;iI 1 I U \ ^<J O EXHIBIT B Hardship Documentation 1. “The property in question can no; be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls ’* N/A 2. “The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner.” The existing home and tuck under garage are located within the 75 ’ setback from the shoreline. Due to the descent of the driveway and condition of the existing tuck under garage, it is impossible to park a targe vehicle in the tuck under garage. The existing detached garage and portion of the driveway leading to this garage are located within the setback of the delineated wetland and the side property setback. The wetland located on the Owner’s property reduces the allowable area to build by more than half. Due to the wetland, the property owner in question and adjacent property owner share a driveway. The majority of the driveway, located within the 75 ’ to 250 ’ setback, is on the property in question. This increases the hardcover and decreases the impervious area to the property in question. 3. “The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.” The character will be enhanced by the removal of some existing shucrures, net decrease in hardcover, elimination of structures in side setback, and total elimination of structures and hardcover in the delineated wetland setback. Per the re^uest, the net hardcover reduction would be 3.41%. The aesthetics of the new staicture would also be enhanced compared to the existing detached garage. The addition of the new structure would also allow for all vehicles and recreational equipment to be housed within die garage and not be stored out on site. 4. “Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of tlie Zoning Chapter.” Economics do not play a role. The cost of renovating the existing detached structure would be less than building a new structure and removing the existmg structures. 5. “Undo hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Sectionll6J.C6, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this chapter.” N/A 6. “The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.” N/A 7. “The Board of Council may permit as a v.uiancc the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling.” N/A uif f « i/ H f -\ -C' TT “ a I't EXHIBIT C Description of Request The Owner is requesting a variance and conditional use permit to build a new detached garage/recreational building with space for storage, parldng for three vehicles, bath, hot tub, and recreational room. There is no intention of creating a guesthouse. The request is described as follows: The Owner is requesting a new structure in order to store all vehicles and recreational equipment, which currently does not fit within the existing structures. Tlie requested I'/j story size of appro.\imately 30’ by 40’ is the minimum size required to accommodate all vehicles and recreational equipment. The structure will need to be located on the side property setback to allow for full use of the tum-around. The turn-around will still be required to allow for access into the garage, for safety by eliminating the need for vehicles and recreational equipment to back into traffic on Northsuore Orive, and for access of emergency vehicles. The request will solve some existing nonconforming issues by removing the existing invading structures from the side property setback and the wetland setback. For the property in question, the hardcover allowance within the 0’ to 2S0’ setback is 10,700 sf. The existing hardcover within the O' to 250’ setback is 14,437 sf, or 33.37%. The request will remove all existing hardcover from the delineated wetland setback and all c » sting hardcover from the side property setback. Included in the hardcover reduction are the existing garage, playhouse, planter, sandbox, and a large portion of the driveway. Including the new construction, the net hardcover reduction is 1,478 sf. The current hardcover percentage is 33.37%. Per the request, the new hardcover reduction percentage would be 29 96% for a total reduction of 3.41%. 5*N.\ • ' / * \ ) '^ '* 7//■I-Jin ‘V-A /ji/- / •/JhJ m gli 2 CL r L'EXHIBIT F HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE 75-250'250-500'500-1OUO' A. House X ••S.F. Length Width X a S.F. X ri S F. D. Garago X ■G.r, C. Driveway X a S.F. X r S.F. D. Sidewalk X a 'JL0<^S.F. X B S.F. E. Patio/Oeck X a S.F. X m S.F. F. Landscape X m S.F.Undorinin X m S F. By Plastic X m S.F. O. Retaining X m S F. Walls H Other X 9 '2Ji>S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE •S.F.A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ♦ n H Stbc- m {‘i.sso S.F.B A 3 X too ■18.95*% PROPOSEDIJAITOCOVCI^ IN ZONE f 6*Uy,0<-jn. XA. House e S.F. Lsngth w»dth X a S.F. X e S.F. D. Garage X m S.F.CO C. nrivi?way X m S.F. X m S.F.v,^ D, Sidewalk X a S.F. K .? X m S.F. E. Pnlio/Dock X 9 S.F. X 3 S.F. F. Landscape X a S.F.C- Underlain X ■S.F. By PInstia X a S.F.V ■* * *• j 0. Retaining X m S-F. • o^» Walls H. Other X m S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE m S.F.A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE m S.F.BA♦ B - -X100 ••% HARDCOVER CAL SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-7S* EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE TION WORKSHEET 250-500' 500-1000* A. House _X B S.F.Length X Width S.F. X * * * S.F. B. Garage ^X s Cr»'>S.F. C. Driveway _X a • • • S.F. X s S.F. D. Sidewalk _X s -2-<3 0 S.F. X B __S.F. E. Patio/Deck X s S.F. X 8 * * * S.F. F. Landscape X at S.F.Underlain _X B • • • S.F.By Plastic X 2* * * * S.F. G. Retaining ^X B '75T> * * * __S.F.Walla H. Other m X S»H08 __S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE __S.F.A 7M1 -2.H7 SF.BA^ D X too =% PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House m X ^33 S.F.rr »» Length X Width S.F. m X s S.F. B. Garage X B 1,000 __S.F. C. Driveway X --------1------- (0 712 S.F.-y .X m -------—s= S.F. .. • ' D. Sidewalk X n 7^00 S F M-'* •f *• X m S.F.V E. Patio/Oeck X S.F.• •- , X 3 S.F. 'W?:-F. Landscape Underlain X S S.F. X a S.F.By Plastic X a S.F.LjG. Retaining X S 75"0 S.F.Walls H. Other X s R P TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ▲ A «♦ B m S.F. •■' 1 A B ___a,i gz......XlOO TpiaM.%f • fQ Birr ' 5 i, f0 « SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET {^5* 75-250^ 250-500’ 500-1000' Length Width X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Oeck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Retaining Walls H. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE • - i TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE TS -2.^0 ♦ B i.t/7 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length Width X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck X X X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Retaining Walls H. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE , , , TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 75 A \“L ♦ B M3,Zh7 =S.F. S.F. mm S F. mm S.F. mm 8 WS-5 S.F. n S.F. s S.F. S.F. a S.F. s S.F. 3 S.F. s S.F. mm S.F. ISO SF. s S.F. S.F. A -S.F. B X 100 =.^.‘7 % • SE ■■■ % i>\\______S.F. a S.F.f f "‘1■S.F. s ^.000 S.F. a 0,S.F. S.F.^e*V ^ mm S.F. * d •_#• • • s S.F. SF. \ • V' •.» • • • • B SF. /.••••/; a S.F. f* .s - - m S.F.h: J il.. a S.F. s ■750 S.F.5 • B 'LL S.F. S.F. A m N \ i'i i S.F. B xioo s 154^ % t^|Br uoObC^\D«J ' F w # , / /v; f ..V F '- /// -4 0't • : L X'y'l ./-----' X r X 1 IIJ ^ ! ^Mr->—T\ ^JiiiiillMM''- jv,\" “.r-----!!• • . . M ‘t»—s_'.... _ .-.•ji.,^ *r?i1 1.:fi •’n K—' •*• ■•. ..•• ■■••••.•. ^ . -i# •# ! l t.i )H ; I IS •#* • *• ' ♦ ‘ 5 I »•■•• V' I •%• 0^ ■Mr. • ••• * - *— • • • ■% t C' i i I# .............‘ j- *■ i ♦ - I • j CS;y^' H » VV-*‘< / 'to //I ••• ' '•'•• 1 irt)S;:M 5^IO^ :> V. .J- m/. 6.SS04 iZi4?m PULIk ft PSSOC NO.P.Z/Z EXHIBIT I o PRELIMINARY UPPER FLOOR PLAN MiNAffy LOWER PLOOR PLAN \\ • » •• •k N « •V ; I ■ * -%.*'. I. 1 •• ^ • ••V I ; V*. /.' • V . , V.' .'••>/. ..• - t'. • •.•]/ '* . ' '/ ‘ t ’ k/ Vu'Hfe Vv' i&&a« ’ ii..'. ■; .gk : >*•*^ MikIc ^ ‘ Hh '-J'l .f. iln. L# K* \ f vT* /i ^ • ^ <rj m• ......... F: 41 * i ‘ * *• •r ^ ' w • ‘ ■•# • * : I* I • >«'• !* •• .. .* ♦ ;• i *.. *• V, • ‘ * r^' • \> • : .;• •'. ■♦. '. , . • -■ ■ r .•' •*M . * \ • * . aJ mm ■%. '.. - ,' • r* J*‘ *• • ■ ' »'•*• .' •’ V. '• ■ T\\' .. «• .- w •oj^ ^4' - • / ■•. • * •.«• * . . • '*i . V*'. # * '5 • * • / f ' ’... ,, W •* • \ '•a t •• ji*** i.':* ■ ■' ' . .............::^ .. : , ;S*'.**' __________________- . •— *'V •■ ■».«.‘* —•.. \ &£i -f •' ^ M -- ’■ ’mm. ■■ I ■. •‘t’’‘ 'y -—w • •■': -. V--:' '.•■• ; . ; . .Vi •'■ '''■%■•'■- ■~'r’'''''s\i' •- .*r^?v* s >• /'"S’riv• • .; i». ‘V : s >1 rt '• .. .i • . ^•v:' ..•.' ^ t* ^ ■ . -kv.. *• *•• • \ . . -N .‘•''^ SV*'‘' V ' 7" -" * • / * • * I ‘. •'•♦- •• • .f- ^ H,^ % • •• v; - •• .. -•r » • 4* • • ' ..j<-r\ ■ •• ♦ Y* • • i• , f C!V*5; ‘■'B 4 f Vr “ Vv' . \ .■’ > V.v- . ;V' 4)fiE ' i' l^ r.- *j / \. \ ^ I I • • ••, i ' »‘w . ,r • •• • •• V ' •/ •*: ■i* • V:'Y\*rf.7';'4 ' . . * * 4 ’.W** • ^ * • , ' •* “ 4*v ■ • * *'>' I'N;. ‘ •l^\ '• lO...’JLfcv ^ ' / ' ' ,r>:*. X ■ ■. ^. » i • • r-r^i r W % •«*■ jf' ii’''-' > « ^ i I } '.Hrv # ir^'^4 IT y-v w • ■'-.,'V..A^V K.. W; . • \ ’ I,. ^ t V? f-..'9^ t^x • a•'t ■ . . •*!< Ui' ' /^ ‘ ^ •>r V ■ «•*• ' **•?»> »*r # ■ -iriiiiWS^<-•' ^ RUNDATE-.V; 38 0911723130009 ROPADDR 2M0 NORTH SHORE OR IWNERNAME KHHODDER*IBHODDER 'AXPAYER KENTHAAJDITHBHOOOER IAMB/ADDR 2640 NORTH SHORE dr WAYZATAMN 55391 38 09»1773410003 ROP ADDR 2545 NORTH SHORE DR IWNERNAME EDWARD J CALLAHAN JR •AXPAYER EDWARD J CALLAHAN JR IAMEJAOOR box 72 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 0911723420001 HOP ADDR 2655 NORTH SHORE DR IWNERNAME CAUNDELLAJJLINDELL •AXPAYER CRAIO A * JENNIFER J LINDtLL IAME/AOOR NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0911723420007 HOP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED IWNERNAME J A WALKER * S S WALKER JAMES A A SHARON S WALKER 4AME/ADDR 2685 NORTH SHORE OR ORONOMN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPER' TORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTYOWN. ulST '5GE; I * 38 0911773140007 PROP ADDR 1130 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RDS OWNER NAME THOMAS 0 & PHYLLIS D COLWELL TAXPAYER THOMAS G A PHYUlSD COLWELL NAME/ADDR C/O COLWELL INDUSTRIES INC 123 3RD ST N MPLSMN 55401 38 09II7234I0OC2 PROP AD'-R 2515 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME MARY DALE JESTER TRUSTEE TAXPAYER MARY DALE JESTER NAME/ADDR 2515 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 55)91 38 0911723410004 PROP ADDR 2565 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME J LMARTINEAU A M LO3TIN0ER TAXPAYER JEFFREY L MARTINEAU NAME/ADDR Ml .ISSA L OTTINOER 2555 north SHORE OR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0911721410009 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME CHARLES A UIRGITTA SCIIOEN taxpayer CHARLES a DIRCITTA SCIIOEN NAME/ADDR 2«0 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 55)91 38 0911723420002 PROP ADDR 2605 NORTH SHORE OR OWNER NAME JD JEROME ASK JEROME TAXPAYER JO*^N D A SANDRA K JEROME NAME/ADDR NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 091172)420003 PROP ADDR 2625 NORTH SHORPs DR OWNER NAME D BUTZER A E T BUTZER TAXPAYER BARTHOLOMEW/ELI/>BETH BUTZER NAME/ADDR 2625 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 55)91 OFMY KNOWLEDGE ANDBEUEK. DATE / r.w,iV o sH EXHIBIT L I ^nnepin it Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department (S) STRICT Parcel Information •i'•• arcel ID 0911723420003 House NumlMr 2625 Street Name NOIOTH SHORE DR fit • C ' •:> ' TNa la not a legtHy noorded map. It rtpnmnti § compilation of inftxmaVon and data from CHy, County, and Stata road authofltioa and otharaourcaa. ' - Dale Application Received: 04-20-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 04-28-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 06-28-04 r.ni iMCfi MFFTING JUN 1 4 2004 CITY OF OHONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: June 8,2004 Item No Deparlment Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Melanie Curtis Title: City Plaiuier Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-3008 - Steven Valek & Ralph Palmer, 4720/4750 Tonkaview Lane - Re-Plat - Resolution Zoning District: LR-1B, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, Required Lot Area: 1 acre Required Lot Width: 140' Lot Area & Width:Exisfini’ Area Exlslinc Width Proposed Area Proposed Width 4720 Tonkaview Ln 1.3S acres 200 ’1.20 acies ■■ NEW Lot 3 165 ’ 4750 Tonkaview Ln 0.7 acre 170' 1.0 acre = NEW Lot 1 245* OLD Lot 4 0.46 acre 80’ OLD Lot 3 NEW Lot 2 0.49 acic 90* 0.8 acre 132* TOTAL 3 acres 3 acres List of Exhibits: A - Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendation B - PC Action Notice dated May 18.2004 C - PC Memo & Exhibits of May 13, 2004 Application Summary: The applicants are requesting re-plat approval to create 3 lots where 5 lots (4 tax parcels) currently exist. The application consists of the following; 1. The creation of 2 lots which meet or exceed the lot area and lot width requirements for the LR-IB zoning district. 2. The creation of one lot which meets 80% of the lot area and lot width requirements for the LR-1B zoning district. _____________________________________ Planning Commission Recommendation On May 17, 2004, Planning Commission voted 6-0* to recommend approval of the re-plat as proposed with the following condition: 1. At the time when New Lot 2 and New Lot 3 (4720 Tonkaview Lane) are owned by separate parties the driveway access to 4720 Tonkaview Lane will have to be abandoned and relocated to a conforming location entirely within the 4720 Tonkaview Lane property. *Coniinis&ioacr Kempf abstained. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached resolution. ll> m A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAl. FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4720 & 4750 TONKAVIEW LANE FILE NO. 04-3008 WHEREAS, Steven F. Valek and Joan Valck, husband and wife and Ralph W. and Lydia Palmer, husband and wife (hereinafler the “subdividers”) on April 20. 2004, filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a three lot residential re-plat of property legally described as: Attached as Exhibit A (hereinafter “the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono ’s Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 17, 2004, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, .at their regular meeting held on June 14, 2004, the Orono City Council censidered the subdivision application of the subdividcr noting the following findings o.'fact; 1.The property is located within the LR-IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 140’ in lot width and 1 acre of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. 3. 4 The piopcilics contain 3.0 acres of land. The proposed re-plat consists of tluce residential lots. Proposed Lot 1 and Lot 3 will meet the minimum lot area requirement of the LR-IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District meeting a minimum of l.O acre contiguous dry buildable land and the minimum lot width of 140’. 5.Proposed Lot 2 will be of 0.8 acre in area which meets 80 percent of the lot area requirement and 132' in width which is over 80 percent of the lot Page 1 of 4 width requirement of the LR-IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 6. Standard S’ interior and 10’ perimeter drainage and utilities easements will be granted along the new lot boundaries. 7. Because the subdivision is a re-plat consisting of combining 4 tax parcels into 3 tax parcels and is not creating a new buildable site, no park fees will be due. Additionally, because the subdivision is primarily the rearrangement of 4 lots into 3 the properties are not subject to Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fees. 8. The property in total was assessed for 3 sewer units as part of the 1970 LS-1 sewer project, hence no sewer connection charges are required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Cou..cil of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Steven F. Valck, Joan Valek, Ralph W. Palmer and Lydia Palmer at 4750-4720 Tonkaview Lane per preliminary plat drawings by Gronberg & Associates of Long Lake, Minnesota, dated April 20, 2004, subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer shall grant to the City 10 foot perimeter drainage and utility easements and 5’ interior drainage and utility easements. 2. The driveway serving 4720 Tonkaview Lane shall be removed and relocated to a conforming location entirely within the 4720 Tonkaview property prior to sale of 4720 Tonkaview Lane and Proposed Lot 2 into separate ownership. 3. Subdivider is hereby advised that preliminary subdivision approval will expire within one year of the date of City Council approval (June 14, 2005). Should the subdivider fail to complete the filing of the final plat application within the year deadline, it shall be necessary for the subdivider to file a new preliminary subdivision application with the City. Final Plat Submittals: Page 2 of 4 The following list of final submittals mu»t be submitted to the Zoning Administrato two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled City Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows; 1.Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City’s records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1 ” - 200’. Drawings to include: a. Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Gronbcrg & Associates of Long Lake, Minnesota, dated April 20,2004. b. Dedication of drainage and utility easements 10 ’ wide along the exterior boundaries of property and 5’ along the internal lot lines. c. The naming of plat. Legal documents required; a. Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b. The applicants must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. Fees to be paid: Total due: $530.00 a. Final plat fee = $250.00 b. Legal review and filing fees for subdivison and associated documents = $280.00 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 14^ day of June 2004. Page 3 of 4 i i f - r ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor i STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14 day of June, 2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 4 :>Q+l&lT A PROPOSED SUBDIVISION FOR STEVEN F. VALEK 8c RALPH W. PALMER IN LOTS 1-5, BERGQUIST It WICKLUNDS ADDITION TO BERCQUIST tt WICKLUNDS PARK. VACATED ALLEY. AND IN THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 7-117-23 N trsr , 1 AC AC CirtPl9« ,POAO La Ua CmI y V'N v\ uj#- — N I'. 11\ 1 j 'VV ”* ' 1'7s'Wv\\ u i h i In I exisTwc 1 F HOLlSt < Owi^p^ SUvO*» vAilr UOTI I. a. J k t€ fAWClL) 4 *:0 tO^*>A /t « I A*< 0«0»WD MH ^^VA4 WALPM « OA.aR (in*\ 4 & 9) 4 »V) » ># 4V<« iAMi n«f40-> 3/ C/ ■'j / J •V»Ai 4»|A.| l©^*. *C ifCAi ocv:»«pt«o»* l»l« • 2 3 4 or-J 9. a«'9qw t! «*«d ».CA twntft A^0>I>O«I I9 04«9awtl 0«»d « r. Com*'I t Minr «iol | A'.V* I>e»l ol ih* *4o'M»«4tl 0vo»1«r o> f Tr»*«4** p M7 ;3 wt»i pf |4« 9(h A. , .(, |< .g I V • r 9 «t 1 1 • * < v « ^ »>^Av C» (••• l.nf 6» 0«fl W.cA-wndA 444 «.«n (4 0«r9()u*«l *<lAiwnd» «»qr. r*«ntp r courtly Al nxftolO |rd to%(«i!y p»ufO4C0l*04 p* ^^# 1 . rf o> ^bOl P9M.04 o» 1 h« «<:#/ 9% a»* PAtf ediQintn^ i»»f of loi 9 * * ^ •l90 '> «• 4 Adi. I .00 fnoi part Ul l^# vocolti u'*r.Tn#J «|il«y lo<» J 3 * 9»‘I| 9 04.C.|J.»« o»*(» W Cfc' 4«(]•<••«» lU •»*<? M«n«»op<A Courtly M rtf'tfelo lA.t td'«»y t^C«« r»nw^<Sc«>4« 0» I4« QbO«4 9*4 P«opt'ly 0rtj *ocOl 0«* Of top t« »(>rtrt 'Irtp d V^td tb#»*«jrt l| dOCt ^Ol #w# POf I lo Vf^OO Orty olrtpr r n«drron 1 f nf • rti, * occbrvortl • p I > Ort mo* At' f'»P€»9*op**f lokort f» cm 0'Qrto C'ly '»wi>» St0' • t*'0«rt «r« bottl wpoP 04> o«t>d^d tfolid«l P.tA'-<3- •4t| iitei MNOt*«ti — GRONBERG k ASSOCIATES, INC » 4|4>»» URMIM liCMIVt !«• WMIHPI W ««3 b «0a O« op I0»4i .4t| i« ♦1A-4»y-«**. ■ H***' ’<0% ••« t« >4 Ot IMK4 «rt >>d4—•*« •• • tU« »43-4ft «• •0«>« «M4 <0 .MO • *4 4*«1 • MMH>« t - iMt » .«4«a «4««it y/ yj-j! - I CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 952.249.4650 ZONING FILE 04-3008 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 18, 2004 TO: Steven Valek 4720 Tonkaview Ln Mound, MN 55364 COPIES:Ralph Palmer 4750 Tonkaview Ln Mound, MN 55364 TYPE OF REQUEST:Subdivision of a re-plat DATE OF MEETING:May 17, 2004 Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposal with the stipulation that at the time when New Lot 2 and New Lot 3 (4720 Tonkav'cw Lane) are owned by separate parties the driveway access to 4720 Tonkaview Lane will have to be relocated entirely within the 4720 Tonkaview Lane property. The vote was as follows: VOTE: 6 FOR Commissioner Kempf abstained. 0 AGAINST Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confimied as: City Council - Monday, June 14,2004; Meeting starts at 7:00 pm 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. If you have questions, please call City Planner, Melanie Curtis at 952.249.4627. O' «fl4-.1008 May 10, 2004 Pae* t of 3 Date Application Kvccivccl: 04-20-0-t Date Application Considered as Complete: oO-Diy Review Period Eipirrs; 06-28-04 4-28-04 lo:Chair Mahusth ami Plamiiti}; Coiiiinission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator Fro in; Dale: Siihjcet: Melanie Curtis, City Planner ^J\H/ May 13. 2004 «()4-3008, Steven Valek & Ralph Palmer, 4720 & 4750 I'onkaview l.ane and I.ots 3 & 4 - Subdivision of a Rc-PIai - Pul)hc IIealm^ District; I.U-I ll, Sinjilc Fnmily Lakcsliorc Residential, 1-acre ttiiniiitum l.ot Area: 4720 Tonkaview Lane 4750 'l onkaview Lane OLD Lot 4 OLD Lot 3 NF.W Lot 2 rOTAI. F.xistiiiii: 1.35 acies 0 7 aeie 0.46 acre 0.40 acre l*roi>os e<i 1.20 acres - N!;\V Lot 3 1.0 acre - NF.W I «)l I 0.8 acie / 132’ of width 3 aeies 3 aere.s Application Sinnmnry: 'Hie applicants ate reipiestiiijj re-plat approval lo create 3 lots \slierc 5 lots (4 ta.s parcels) cnncnlly exist. I hc application consists of the rollowing: 1. 1 lie cieatioii of 2 lots wliuli meet or exceed the lot area ami lot widlli icnuircincnls for the I.R-IH /oning district. 2. Ihc creation of one lot which meets HO"!) of the lot area and lot width ie(|iiiremeiits for the LR-IB /oniiig district Staff Kccommctulation: Stalf recoiiiiiiemis appioval of tlie le plat with existing driveway fiom 4720 Tonkawa Lane lo he ahamloned and iclocatcd in a confomnng [ location within the property. _____________________ I'el lliieiiC /.uniilg Oi diliaiicc Sccliuiiv Sec. 78-330. Area, licighL lot widlli and yard icquiicinciils. It) / o/.v 'I he following inimimiin lei uirenients shall he ohseived • 1 ot Atfii I III Wiitih (Ircl)Ktonl Ynul Su!r V ai O Aiijdi cn! to Hr At VftiO Side V4fci Adjaceni If”')............Anolhcf 1 ot ^fcct]pcci)Sti' -I (Ifcl) 1 ..............140 IS 10 35 pr04 3008 May 10, 2004 Pa^e 2 of 3 List of Exhibits A. Application U. Existing and Proposed Survey C. Aerial Photograph D. 1970 Sewer Assessment E. Prop-:rty Owners List F. Plat Map Riu'kground Steven Valck and Ralph Palmer arc the applicants and the owners of 4720 and 4750 Tonkaview, as well as the two separate tax parcels between their home sites. Ihc applicants arc requesting to rearrange tw'o of the existing lot lines in order to make 3 lots where 4 cuiTcntly exist Lots 3 and 4 are substandard in both area and width however a single family home could be constructed on both lots - with variances to lot area and lot width. 'I'he applicants are requesting to combine these lots in such a way to make their home sites confonniug to the Zoning District requirements and make one buildable lot between their home sites Platting Proposed Due lo the complexity of the legal descriptions, this rearraiigeinent is being structured as a re-plat of the property, which will result in simple descriptions [Lots I, 2, and 3 of Hergquist Wicklunds Adrhtion to Rergquist & Wicklunds Park. Vacated Alley and in the NW 'A of section 7-117-23) aiul will also result in the establislnncnt of standard drainage and utility easements along the new lot boundaries. No existing easeincnts exist along lot boundaries, and the City did iiot retain any easements when the alley was vacated in 1999 (Ref Zoning Pile W2503). Because this is a rc-plat that results in a reduction in the number of lots rather than creation of additional lots, no park fee or stormwater trunk fee will be required. Otiiforinaiice with /oiling Ordinance CtiiTcntly, out of the lour existing lots only one meets the area ar.d width requirements of the LR-IB Z.oning, District. After the re-plat, two of Ihc three lots will meet Zonmg Ordinance regulattnns with re.spect t<i area and vidMi. New Lot ? will mc"t 80% of the lot area aiul over 80“i> of the lot width ia{uircincnl. I hc following table lists the new lot s|»ei ifu alums pioposcd by the applicants: IR in District Kt-quimnciiis 4720 Toiik;iw:i 4750 Tonkawa New Lot 2 l.ol Arm 1 0 acres 1 2 anrs 1.0 acres 0 8 acic 1 Lot Widlh - - ^ 140' 1 165*245'125* #04-3008 May 10,2004 Page 3 of 3 Muoicipal Sewer Available Per Exhibit D, the two lot comprising 4720 Tonkaview were assessed one sewer unit in 1970; Lot 5 (4750 Tonkaview) was assessed one unit; and Lot 3 was assessed one unit while Lot 4 was assessed just frontage. The proposed division/recombination action is consistent with this total of 3 units assessed, and no further sewer assessment is necessary. Issues for Coosideration 1. The Planning Commission should discuss whether or not the re-plat should or could result in 3 lots which meet all of the area and width requirements or is the Planning Commission satisfied with the proposal as it was presented by the applicants? 2. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the subdivision of the re-plat with the following stipulations: I. The existing driveway at 4720 Tonkawa Lane should be abandoned and relocated entirely within the property boundaries of this lot. City of Orono A Subdivision Application Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkv iy Orono, MN 55356 Main: 952-249-4600 fax: 952-249-4616 Renewal: Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 This application form must be completed in full. Application # 0^ - Date Received L/IZ^IQH’ Amount Paid. Staff: Fee; ^no on «■’ C'- HTS PROPERTY INFORMATION: iv > J Site Address: V'TjtQ HiSO \!L-h.__________________________ Property Identification Number (PIN); e'7 - I n • -oojn QO>0 oo 11 &o < (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year): ________fS' Abstract or □ Torrens, please check one Present use of property: M Residential □ Other______________________________________ Zoning District; ______________________ NFORWIATION: (Complete |«al.names and marital status required fer each interested party) ^/-d t/e>^ P Pc<lwii>r~______ft:;7h /H«.>rr>ecl APPLICANT INFORMA Name; ._____ Phone (home); Address; *-/ T ciP ^ 7^0 T* r Email: ____73. ^ . [jl _Z. n Fax; OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names and pantal status required for each interested party) Name: if-€“ HrKfjoIrt ijj'/rcxly tYp.r-_______0 c~tt-i f'ur-'i/is AP(■*>’/'>'li' Phone (home); Address; ^hr/o Email; H'O. Plyjne (work); Iricuf Lt-n Fax: EXISTING LAND USE: Number of Tax Parcels: Development Size: t|- 3 .C3S Acres Dry Land p_>_0 7_Acres Wet Land 3. /c>S Acres TOTAL, all parcels Present Use (check one) Present Zoning District .0 Residential; Number of Units: □ Other: (Specify) ZA-J6 Proposal: □ Division for Tax Purposes S Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) □ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Site Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) S Existing Units New Units Total Units Units per Acres Square Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential □ Other (specify) __________________ -10-Pi I; i.7 // 'A /; '^4*7 fv < H sm.■fet-'?' ». • '■>» •*' '■'' ’\'-i UJ?K7 IP sag iT- • ^ '.-*v • L...1 •.•‘C )Ssr?C'^^■:J‘?: <-Aj '"si- OJvSl!-'I, i; mwm ( ^•>*. •*^ U mmMm Vv==Tii;.' - ■ v'lii'T: •-! sS>f - «C' •rj:-a V'- mimm X^ . - ^ V**yi| * *rsu^ J0a i^#l i-- 9r -3 rSfC3<’^ VClv.*-^.* •• ■^ ■ ■-■ ■ • Jh'■‘* • \^- 4-''ft ‘sVi' •^■‘ •••*'\ '■■>■ v r-v. ■* . : -* ’ f-m. i^‘V-T< ''- ;•■*' > 1' " • . .1. - . •. <<■»/ k ^ '4rn X \ t * ^fe I aft# r > * 5. |c^S T 1 "■••'5tir * ^ ■y -'Tglpwp'^ '• P3afc • -1 ‘Paroel' i No'iJ’o Aiii« :K( ■ ! * .1 I ;»,• • *. fipQnnnabl.a NOp of 1 ‘OotaKe Ccjnn, 41960 ' ; ' 1500'^ ;• • ‘000^ -000-^ 15000^ *‘•6000^ '■ 7000’^ 419B0_;' >“1000 *^^2000 »JLI . X, . 41 • 'f >«3000^ , ^:4ooo^ • • ^ISO ^’iOOO . .V -*. > . '.6000^. : j.!, '200^ V-tilr42000 •■ ' ! .400-1'•! '■• i i607*^- •'• '■ ' '.009'^ ‘•1000' ; i: 1200'*, i 1400'- ■ ■ ; 1600^ ASf?rf;.qroent for Units • ' • i;.' • j ' »»Vi. -AsseBsment !•: • •> I',; i‘''lv v!i-/;!5 Jjii KiiSAsse-ssment 12?0e00 1270000 1270<.00 1270^00 0 1270 H. for Footago IConn,‘r;i.’ • ■ r; ;,■ •!« frr • - = •; • ••440.70 ;-;|: r ^ t225o00if?^r.':i'r '*• - 27S.00 468:225l63'5:oo'“‘*" ”'602;50”‘"{fonw <1!f• P•r’T • 1270.00 0 1270.00 ;; ; o 1^.1800- , ; -a^> H221 O'" • ' •..vOi = ;4^24f40< !.. ; -1/3 Li^PAoo ‘ I > r/'\■2600 M’.> r/3 ’-1^-2800 • •': •. 3100- i •,*• ’ 1 • • ‘0400 I 1/2 5 ; 3600''^ -1! 1/2 . 4910 '1 ••r *1 «• 4930"* • . 4950*" ; I : .kv-. 5ooo*^ ; . <;‘ i/2 (• ■ : V .;»5400 : Vi-!; 1/2 :('‘"5600 • :' Vrl/2! . ;i. ,?;?i64i5'" • ,V >,1: : f A* 4 ,», > I. ^ 1 . > ’•! •6420-^ ; 'J-O *c-- .;? !:»1 Iv i -.ii 6600-^ j . i h*.v'a; ,:,i;.. .jjl^eoo- I,‘if i'-i t!‘i ■ i .:.'l • ■' V.; .. ■ 5 !-.fc .y 56.4 56c0 53.6 61.0 63o3 55.0 50.0 50.0 .■50.0. (ICO. 0 . • 50.0>., 62.5 73.75 ■ 120.0 50.0 50.0 100,0 107.5 186.5 55.2 55.5 54,4 54.2 165.65 36.0 50.0 50.0 1/2 1/2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1270.00 1270.00 0 635o00 635.00 -5086 00-^‘5“o« -508„00-3^'‘-°'=‘ 423,34 1270.od 635.00 635.00 1270.00 1270.00 1270.00 635.00 635.00 635.00 635.00 1270.00 0 1270.00 1270.00 •if 0U75:25/;:.!- 936 " 390 390 780 ‘ 838 1454.70 .:[< . 430.56;:!:.^ ' 432.90;;*, : 424,32^^4 : 422.76 ;v 1292.07/' ii 280,80 1. , ...... - 390.00 •I?!;--/;';.'225 mm f • V *.•■» \ f |;<> }•' fjj4 I : * i- .Vf • •. • Z 390.OOfii lj?5^|?f/225,.00h<*-’•-:•:•;/:■•;rj'j; • • • t. • , i !■;. •■MiJ j; • •*•(4 fir I,-'|i .. ■ -’f". 'V., ii'-)•!».•< «l If 3 -r •♦WiC.J *.’li ttOiuii RUN DATE: 3/17/MM 38 0711723230004 PROP ADDR 1100 NORTH SHORE DR W OWNER NAME BRIAN E PETERSON TAXPAYER BRIAN A MARNIE PETERSON NAME/AOOR •' NORTTI SHORE DR W MOUND MN 35364 38 0711723230007 PROPADOR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME FAIRVIEW COVENANT CH TAXPAYER FAIRVIEW COVENANT CHURCH NAME/ADDR 1175 COUNTV RD 19 mound MN SS364 38 0711723230012 PROPADOR 47S0 TONKAVIEWLA OWNER NAME RALPH WINTON PALMER T/OTPAYER RALPH WINTON PALMER NAME/ADDR 4750 TONKAVIEW mound MN 35364 38 0711723230020 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO OWNER NAME CTTYOFORONO TAXPAYER CITYOFORONO NAME/AOOR POBOX66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 0711723230030 PROP ADDR 4720 TONKAVIEWLA OWNER NAME S F VALEK A »VAI.EK TAXPAYER STEVEN F A JOAN VALEK NAME/ADDR 4720 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 33364 38 0711723230033 PROP ADDR 1140 CARDEN CT OWNER NAME Ci R NELSON A P C NELSON TAXPAYER GARY R A PATRICIA C NELSON NAME/ADDR 1140 GARDEN CT MOUND MN 55364 "ennwn 38 0711723230005 PROP ADDR 1120 NORTH SHORE DR W OWNER NAME lAY ALLEN LEZTR TAXPAYER lAY A LL/ER NAME/ADDR I >20 NORTH SHORE DR WIST MOUND MN 55364 38 0711723230010 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIONED OWNER NAME STEVEN F VALEK TAXPAYER STEVEN VALEK NAME/ADDR 4720 TONKA VIEW lA MOUND MN 55364 38 0711723230013 PROP ADDR 4760 TONKAVIEW lA OWNER NAME FAIRVIEW COVENANT CHURCH taxpayer FAIRVIEW COVENANT CHURCH NAMFML'DR 1175 cord 19 MOUND MN 55364 38 0711723230027 PROP ADDR 4765 TONKAVIEW LA OWNER NAME D A & P E AFFELDT TAXPAYER DWIGHT & PATRICIA AFFLI.DT NAMTJADDK 4765 TONKAVIEW la MOUND MN 55354 38 0711723230031 PROPADOR 1180 GARDEN CT OWNER NAME DAN LANG HOMES LTD TAXPAYER dan LANG HOMFS LTD namwaddr 221 eastmyrtlest STIIJ-WATER MN 55082 38 0711723230034 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER N/ME BRIJ^SHEUDEVELOPMENTCORP TAXPAYER BRENSHEa DEVELOPMENT CORP NAME/ADDR PO BOX 125 MOUND MN 55364 38 0711723230006 PROPADOR 1130 NORTH SHORE DRW OWNER NAMF WALTER HOiyER ET AL TAXPAYER WALT ER HOI ZER NAME/ADDR 1130 NORTH SHORE OR W MOUND MN 55364 38 0711723230011 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNCD OWNER NAME RALPH WINTON PALMER TAXPAYER RALPH WINTON PALMER NAME/ADDR 4750 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 38 0711723230019 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRISS UNASSIGNEO OWNER NAME CITYOFORONO TAXPAYER CITY OF ORONO NAME/ADDR POBOX66 CRYSTAL MN 55323 38 0711723230029 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIONED OWNER NAME HENNEPIN FORFEITED UND TAXPAYER CITY OF ORONO NAMI7ADDR 2750 KEIJ-EY PKWY POBOX66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 5532J 07ll72323tX)'2 PROPADOR 1150 G ARDEN CT OWNER NAME JAMES ROUX A MINDY M ROUX JAMES ROUX A MINDY M ROUX NAMDADDR 1020 BAYSIDL LA MINNETRISTA MN 5S364 38 0711723320003 PROPADOR 4725 TONKAVIEWLA OWNER NAME EATCHRISTTANSON TAXPAYER EARL A TERRY CHRJSTIANSON NAME/ADDR 4641 TONKA VIEW LANE MOUND MN SS364 PAGE.; I •• . •• a RUNDAT!1;VI7/2(D4 31 0711771120004 HOP ADDR 471J TONItAVUiW IWNBK NAMI-. S V WIUIMAN A M C WIII1MAN AXPAYliR S I HART V WHH MAN IAME/ADOR <' TONKAVinW LA MOUND MN 55164 31 071172)320011 •ROPADDR 4757 TONKAVII.WIA )WNI-.K NAME JA(X2UliS* 1)1 110RAH HAON IAXPAYI.R 7ACQUI-S A 1)1 IIORAII HAON NAMI/ADUR 475710NKAVHWIA MOUND MN 5Mt4 IK 071172)320014 PROP ADDR 47 W TONRAVIhWCI OWNI RNAMt 1>RRYA0RH NIIA0I NM Al. LCRH'NHAOI N A V liRLLNllAOtN 47)9T0NKAVII../CT MOUND MN 5M64 TAXPAYER NAMC/ADim 11 07I172J17002K PROP ADDR 46M IONKAVILWLA OWNER NAME UI NNIS AMEYI R taxpayer OI'NNIS a MEYl'R name /addr 4610 north shore dr mound MN M3M )B 0711721)20046 PROP ADDR 1240 OARDl N < I OWNER NAME DIROWiARUASMlRONOARD taxpayer III a NASUSANMTRONOARD NAMI7ADDR •240(iARI)INCr MOUND MN 55164 31 0711723120057 PROP ADOR 4755 TONKAVIFW IA OWNER NAME KIM (1 A HONI1. MARONDll taxpayer K»4 0A OONII MARONOB NAME7ADDR <755 TONKAVlfcW lA MOUND MN 55164 HI NNEPIN COHN l-Y PROPERTY INrORMATION SYS li:M PROI'liRTY OWNERS I.IST PAGE; 2 )g 0711721120009 PROP ADOR 4716 NORTH SIIOHI DR OWNER NAME lONO VANO A ANJOR X YANG TAXPAYER 1 VANO NAMI7A0DR 47)6 NORTH SHORE OR MOUND MN 55164 )l 0711721170012 PROP ADDR 4251 TONKAVIE.WC T OWNER NAME. S A SCIIADER A E E KOUHSKV taxpayer SAS( HAUER a EEKOUnSKY NAMI^DOK 475,TONKAVn.WCT MOUKDMN 55164 )R 0/1172)120026 PROP AUOK 4629 lONKAVlEW lA OWNER NAME J R AIIRAHAMSON/I) AHRAHAMSON 1 AXPAYER JAMES R A DAWN AHRAHAMSON NAME/ADI )R TONKAVIEW EA MOUND MN 55164 IK 02M721120029 PROP ADDR 1* AODRE-SS UNASSK jNEO OWNIJt NAME DENNIS A MEYER TAXPAYER DINNISAMEYER NAMEVADDR 46R0 NOR III shore DR mound MN 55)64 It 071172)120047 PROP ADDR 4690 TONKAVIE.W IA OWNER NAME WASIUME. taxpayer WII I IAM A HUI I. NAME/ADDR <690 lONKAVII W lA MOUND MN 55164 16 I2II724I400II PROP ADDR 1175 CO RUNG 19 OWNER NAME SWEDISH E.Va N TAXPAYER FAIRVIEWCOVI NANI < HURI H NAME/ADDR • * 7^ COUNTY RD 19 MOUND MN 55364 IK 0711721)20010 PROP ADDR 4745 lONKAVILWCT OWNI R NAME JAMES R THOMSt)N FI Al. TAXPAYFR JAMFSTHOMSON NAMI/ADOR 4745 TONKAVIFW ET ORONOMN 55)64 it O/ll721)200i) PROP ADOR 475) TONKAVIFW < T OWNI R NAME'. T OKOOPMAN * J A K(K)I’MAN taxpayer troy d a )i nn .hr a KOOPMAH NAMI/ADOR 475)T0NKAVIIWCT MOEJNDMN 55IM PROP AlK)R OWNER NAMI TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR IS 0711/21)700// 46)5 IONKAVIKWIA MAKKIIHOON mark II tlOON 46)5 lONKAVIEWLA MOUND MN 55)64 31 071172)120045 PROP ADDR 31 ADDRESS UNASSIGNFD OWNER NAME J D 1X)LFZAI A IA ROSIAD IAXPAYI-R j D 1X)I I /Al a j A ROSTAD NAMI/AOUR 5046nAKIt.l I E lll.VD MOUND MN 55)64 )K 0711/21)20050 PROP ADDR 46R0 NORTH SHORE DR OWNI R NAME DENNIS A MEYER DENNIS A MEYFR NAMI/AUDK <6*0 NORTH SI lORE DR mound MN 55164 I2II7244IOOOI PROP ADDR 4101 MINNE APOUS AYE OWNF.RNAME CS TIK)MAS A t M IKAEIER taxpayer C s tekimas a t m traejer name /addr 4101 MINNEAPOLIS AVt mound MN 55164 -i ;( P'V' t. Hennepin Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department ■- --••• V • y -Crir i' Parcel Information V . i’arcei ID 0711723230010 House Number 38 ^ *•. .. • • • -V-. street Name ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ; * ■' This Is not 'a legally recorded map. it repreaanta a compilation oflnformatiotj -is anddatafromCity, County, and State road authofitfas and other sources ' to P * i -ij Date Application Received: 04-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 04-28-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 06-28-04 COlf^rr^ MPrrfNiG JUN 1 4 2004 CITY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: June 1, 2004 Item No I 7 Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Melanie Curtis jhl^ Title: Citv Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-3012 - Roger D. O’Shaughnessy, 1265 Brackett’s Point Rd - CUP & Variances - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR-IA, Single Family Lakesbore Residential, 2-acre minimum 144,491 s.f. (3.3 acres) 650’+ {measured at a Une parallel to the shore) List of Exhibits: A - Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendation B - PC Action Notice dated May 19.2004 C - PC Memo & Exhibits of May 11, 2004 Application Summar>’: The applicant is requesting the following: 1. A hardcover variance to allow 438 s.f. of hardcover within the 0-75’ zone in order to construct a 4’ wide boardwalk to the shore ending with a 177 s.f. landing. 2. A lake setback variance in order to construct a wire mesh fence along Brackett’s Point Road within 75’ of the OHWL extending to the northeast 5o’ 3”. 3. A conditional use permit and variance to allow grading, filling and retaining wall construction within the floodplain. 4. A conditional use permit in order to construct chimneys 40’ 8” in height where 30’ is allowed and a 50% height increase is pennitted by conditional use permit. Planning Commission Recommendation On May 17, 2004, Planning Commission voted 5-2 to recommend the following: 1. Approval of the conditional use permit to allow chimney heights of 40’ 8” where a 30’ maximum is normally allowed. 2. Approval of the variance and conditional use pennit for construction and fill within the floodplain incorporating the recommendations of the MCWD and the City Engineer. 3. Denial of the hardcover variance for hardcover within the 0-75’ setback zone. 4. Denial of the variance to allow a fence within 75’ of the lake. The two dissenting Commissioners felt that the proposed floodplain restoration was a valuable project however; they wanted to support approval of the hardcover variance for the boardwalk within 75’ of the OHWL for the floodplain restoration project. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. Council Action Requested Adopt or amend the attached resolution. -4 A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-1114 SUBDIVISION 2, 78-1117 AND 78-1366 AND VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1112 AND; DENYING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-282 AND 78-1288 FILE NO. 04-3012 WHEREAS, Roger D. O’Shaughnessy, a single person (hereinafter “the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1265 Brackett ’s Point Road w ithin the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City ”) and legally described as follows: Attached as Exhibit A (hereinafter the “property"); and W'HEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a conditional use permit per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1 114 Subdivision 2 and a variance per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1 112 to allow grading and filling within the flood fringe; and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a conditional use permit per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 7S-1366 to allow chimney heights in excess of 30 ’; and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-282 and 78-1288 to allow hardcover within the 0-75 ’ setback from the OHWL; and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 Subdivision B to allow a fence within the lake yard; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: Page 1 of6 1. 2. 3. u FLNDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #04-3012. The properly is located in the LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential District, which requires a minimum lot area of 2 acres and minimum lot width of 200’. The area of the property is 3.3 acres (144,491 s.f.) and defined lot width is 650’+. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on May 17, 2004 and recommended approval of conditional use permits and a variance for chimney heights in excess of 30’; grading, fill and a retaining wall located within the flood fhnge based on the following flndings: a.The applicant will conduct grading and filling below 931.5 MSL within the flood fringe, consisting of construction of a retaining wall, excavation and mitigation as depicted on Exhibit B approved by the City Engineer. b. The applicant will comply with the recommendations of the City Engineer and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Rule C permit # 04-210 regarding floodplain filling and mitigation. c. The applicant will comply with Municipal Zoning Code Section 78- 1117, standards for floodway and flood fringe conditional uses. d. The chimneys at a height of 40’ 8 ” will have no negative visual impacts within the neighborhood and as an architectural feature will not be out of character within the neighborhood. The Plarming Commission reviewed the application at a public hearing held on May 17, 2004 and recommended denial of the request for a hardcover variance within 75’ of the OHWL and denial of the fence request within 75’ of the OHWL based on the following findings: a. The applicant’s request for a hardcover variance within the 0-75’ setback for construction f a wooden boardwalk and deck all on level ground should be denied as there is no hardship to support the variance. Page 2 of 6 b. The applicant’s request for a lake setback variance for a fence within 75’ of the OHWL sliould be denied as there is no hardship to support the variance. 5.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recoimnendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Tlie City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are pcciih.-ir to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely scr\e as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is neces.sary to prcscrx’c a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCl.USIOiNS, ORDER ANI» CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby denies variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-282, 78-1279 Subdivision B, and 78-1288 for a fence, wooden bo.irdwalk and deck within 75’ of the OllWl. of l.ake Minnetonka, and hereby grants a vari.ince to Orono Municipal Zoning Code .Sections 78-1112, to allow grading and filling below 931.5’ MSL, and a conditional use permit per 78-1114 Subdivision 2 for grading and tilling below 931.5’ MSI. and a conditional u.sc permit per Municipal Zoning Ordinance per 78 1366 for the constniction of chimneys up to 40 ’8 ” in height, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by tlic applicant and iiiinotaied by City staff, attached to thi.s Resolution us Exhibits B and C. Any amendments to the sue plan which arc not in confonnity with City codes will require further Planning C'ommission and City Council review. 2.Hardcover in the 0-75’ zone shall not increase above 0%. Hardcover in the 75- 250’ zone shall be limited to 23,855 s.f. or 25% per the proposed plan and lianlcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit B. Applicant is advised Uiat any future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of Page 3 of 6 I J existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. 3. The applicant shall conduct grading and filling below 931.5 MSL within the flood fringe, consisting of construction of a retaining wall, excavation and mitigation as depicted on Exhibit B approved by the City Engineer. 4. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the City Engineer and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Rule C permit # 04-210 regarding floodplain filling and mitigation. 5. The applicant shall comply with Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1117, standards for floodway and flood fringe conditional uses. 6. The chimney heights shall not exceed 40’ 8 ” in height. 7. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (June 24, 2005). 8. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 9. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicant and the applicant’s heirs, successors and assi.cns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 24''’ day of June, 2004. Page 4 of6 m ATTEST: Linda S. Vcc, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owncr(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14 day of June, 2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of _______, 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 n STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this __day of by Roger D. O’Shaughnessy, a single person. .2004 Notary Public Page 6 of 6 mwTA LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES (from City of Orono records) A tract of land comprised of port of Lot 10 ond port of the accretions of Lots 9 and 10 all in Rearrangement of Orono Point, which land is particularly described as beginning at 0 point on the North line of Government Lot 3, Section 11, Township 117, Ronge 23, distant 431.8 feet East of the West Quarter corner of said Section 11; thence East along said North line to its intersection with the extension of the westerly line of Lot 3 in Rearrangement of Orono Point; thence southeasterly along the extension of the westerly line of said Lot 3 to an intersection with o line drawn parallel to and 20 feet westerly, measured at right angles, from the westerly line of Lot 1 in Rearrangement of Orono Point; thence southwesterly along said parallel line and its extension to an intersection with a line drown parallel to on 20 feet westerly, measured at right angles, from the extension of the westerly line of Lot 3, in Reorrangement of Orono Point; thence southeasterly along said last described parallel line to a point thereon 583.95 feet northwesterly from the northwesterly corner of Lot 5 in Rearrangement of Orono Point, as measured along said parallel line and its extension; thence southerly and southwesterly oIong o tangential curve to the right with a radius of 221.17 ^eet, a distance of 169.38 feet; thence southwesterly along o line tangent to said iast described curve a distance of 5 feet; thence southwesterly along o tangential curve to the right with a radius of 4^5.72 feet a distance of 119.25 feet; thence southwesterly along o line tangent ta said last described curve a distance of 107.3 feet; thence westerly, deflecting to the right 44 degrees 42 minutes, a distance of 79.3 feet, more or less, to the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence northerly along said shore to its intersection with a line drawn south, parallel to the extension of the West line of said Section 11 from the point of beginning; thence north along said lost described parallel line to the point of beginning, according to the recorded plat thereof. The boundaries of which are marked by Judicial Landmarks set purusant to Torrns Cose No. 13819, as shown by the plot of survey on file in the Office of the Registrar of Titles cs Doc. No. 560982. -.1 F^d/\ibi ^ 6 r ©<Hl&lT C' FILE #04.3012 May 3.2004 Page 1 of 5 Date Application Received: 04-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 04-28-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 06-28*04 To:Chair Mabusth and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Melanie Curtis, City Planner May 11,2004 04-3012, Roger O’Shaughnessy, 1265 Brackett’s Point Road - Variances & CUP - public hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acre minimum 3.3 acres (144,491 s.f.) Application Summary: The applicant is requesting the following: 1. A hardcover variance to allow 550 s.f. of hardcover within the 0-75’ zone in order to construct a 62’x 6’ boardwalk to the shore ending with a 205 s.f. landing. 2. A lake setback variance in order to construct a wire mesh fence along Brackett’s Point Road within 75’ of the OHWL extending to the northeast 56’ 3”. 3. A conditional use permit and variance to allow grading, filling and retaining wall construction within the floodplain. 4. A conditional use permit in order to construct chimneys 40’ 8” in height where 30’ is allowed and a 50% height increase is permitted by conditional use permit. Sta/f Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends the following: 1. Approval of the conditional use permit to allow chimney heights of 40’ 8” where a 30’ maximum is normally allowed. 2. Approval of the variance and conditional use pennit for construction and fill within the floodplain incorporating the recommendations of the MCWD and the City Engineer. 3. Denial of the hardcover variance for 550 s.f. of hardcover within the 0-75’ setback zone. 4. Denial of the variance to allow a fence within 75’ of the lake. Pertinent Zoning Ordinanee Seetions See. 78-11 12. Development restricted; prohibition. Sec. 78-1114. Flood fringe district. Sec. 78-1117. Standards for floodway and flood fringe conditional uses. Sec. 78-1279. (5) Fences, docks, retaining walls. Sec. 78-1282. Stairways, lifts, and landings. Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. Sec. 78-1366. Height of structures J FILE #04-3012 May 3. 2004 Page 2 of 5 List of Exhibits A. Application B. Hardship Documentation Form C. Existing Survey & Proposed Site Plan D. Zoning Ordinance Sections E. Proposed Plans and Elevations F. Submitted Hardcover Calculations G. Floodplain Mitigation Calculations prepared by Gronberg & Associates H. Grading & Drainage Plan I. Property Owners List J. Plat Map K. Letter from City Engineer, Tom Kellogg dated May 11,2004 Background The property is located on the western side of Brackett’s Point Road and has over 600’ of lakeshore. The property owner has removed the existing home and is planning a new residence on the existing 3.3 acre lot. The applicant has proposed a home which meets all setbacks, hardcover within the 75 ’-250 ’ zone, and is not limited on structural coverage. As part of the redevelopment of this property, the owner is proposing to replace the existing lake yard with native floodplain shrubs and grasses. Included in this, the applicant is requesting a hardcover variance within the 0-7S ’ zone in order to construct a boardwalk to the lake through the native vegetation. A fence is also proposed to be erected within 75 ’ of the OHWL; the applicant has indicated that this wire mesh fence is necessary for security and privacy. A number of retaining walls and grading are also proposed as the result of stormwater inundating the southern part of the property. This work will result in retaining walls, drain tile, and a swale to direct the stormwater away from the property and also to provide infiltration to the restored native floodplain vegetation area prior to reaching Lake Minnetonka. A portion of this work is proposed within the floodplain and the applicant will seek the necessary approvals from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. In addition, the applicant has proposed a unique architectural design for the home, which consists of a one-level residence with a height of approximately 20 ’ with several chimneys reaching heights of 40 ’ 8”. The chimney heights require a conditional use permit. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET LR-IA Lot Area Lot Width Required 2 acres (87,120 s.f.)200 ’ Actual 3.3 acres (144,491 s.f.)650 ’+ {measured at a line parallel to the shore) i r ■' riLO #04-3012 May 3. 2004 Page 3 of 5 Setbacks: LR-IA Required Proposed Rear 50’60’+ South Side 30’90’+ North Side Street 50’200’+ Lakeshore 75’80’+ Structural Coverage: The lot is 3.3 acres; therefore the 15% structural coverage limit does not apply. Hardcover Calculations: Hardcover Total Area in Allowed Proposed Zone Zone Hardcover Hardcover 0-75 49,071 s.f.1550.1 s.f (1.1 %) 75 - 250 95,420 s.f 23,855 s.f (25%) 23,188 s.f (24.2 %) Lake Setback Variance I'he applicant has proposed a wire mc^h fence within 75’ of Lake Minnetonka. The Shoreland Zoning Ordinance prohibits any fence within 75’ of the OMWL. Hardcover Variance The applicant has requested a variance for a 62 ’x 6 ’ boardwalk and 207 s.f. landing in order to have access to the lakeshore through the proposed native floodplain vegetation and transition from boardwalk to a dock. Flood Fringe District 'I hc applicant has requested a variance and conditional use pennit in order to construct an retaining wall and to fill within the flood fringe. Retaining walls, grading and a drain tile system have been designed to assist in managing the storm water which inundates the site from Brackett's Point Road. These updates require a variance and a conditional use permit under the Shoreland Overlay District. Conditional Use Permit Review Application of Section 78-1117 (Stand.mls for floodway and flood fringe conditional uses) to tliis request. 78-1117(a): All uses. No structure (temporary or permanent), till, deposit, obstruction, storage of materials, equipment, or other use may be allowed as conditional uses which, acting alone or in combination with existing or reasonably anticipated future uses, adversely affect the capacity of the floodway or increases flood heights. FILE M4-3012 May 3.2004 Page 4 of 5 1. No fill shall be deposited in the floodway, and any fill deposited in the flood fringe shall be no more than the minimal amount necessary to conduct a conditional use. Generally, fill shall be limited to that needed to grade or landscape for that use and shall not in any way further obstruct the flow of floodwaters. a. The fill proposed for this application is the minimum amount necessary. 2. Spoil from dredging shall not be deposited in the floodway nor in the flood fringe. a. Not applicable. 3. All fill shall be protected from erosion by vegetative cover in the form of grass, natural ground covers, shrubs and trees as determined by the council. a. The area to be filled and graded will be vegetated with native floodplain shrubs and grasses. 4. All filling and grading activities shall be performed with only clean fill. a. This requirement will be monitored by the City Engineer. Hardship Statement Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In considering appiicalions for variance, the Pianning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger offire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property In the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when It is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. The Shoreland Overlay District allows stairways, lifts and landings in favor of major topographic alterations on steep slopes and bluffs and the City views the hardcover from such structures to be allowed within 75’ of the lake. However, Planning Staff finds that this property is very flat and does not require any topographic alterations for which to access the lakeshore and an alternative path could be designed which would not be considered hardcover. Additionally, the Shoreland Overlay District prohibits fences from being constructed within the required lake yard. As this property is a rebuild situation any existing fence would be required to be removed as it would have a nonconforming status and all nonconforming buildings/stnictures are required to be removed at ^e time of the demolition of the existing principal structure. Staff does not find a hardship for granting the variance to allow a fence within 75’ of the lake. r FILE 004-3012 May 3.2004 Page 5 of 5 Staff does find a hardship by which to grant the request to fill and construct retaining walls within the floodplain. This is due to the low nature of this property and a signifleant portion of ^e south half of the lot is within the floodplain rendering it unbuildable. The retaining walls and alterations are in part to allow the property owner access to the property during wet periods and to control the stormwater run off from the street. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that a hardship e.xists due to the flat lot to justify granting the hardcover within the 75 ’ lake setback to allow the boardwalk and landing? 2. Does the security issue justify the 0-7S* fence request, or are there other options for demarcation and/or limiting pedestrian or traffic onto the property? 3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends the following: 1. Approval of the conditional use permit to allow chimney heights of 4C’ 8” where a 30 ’ maximum is normally allowed. 2. Approval of the variance and conditional use permit for construction and fill within the flc'‘dplain incorporating the recommendations of the MCWD and the City Engineer. 3. Denial of the hardcover variance for 550 s.f. of hardcover within the 0-75 ’ setback zone. 4. Denial of the variance to allow a fence within 75 ’ of the lake. F’ Application#.. CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION Date Received Amount Paid r i PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 126S Bracketts Point Rd . Orono MN 55391 Type of Application to be Filed cup chimney height Property Identification Number (P l.D.) 11-117-23-32-00 lo APPLICANT Name Roger D. O'Shaughnessy Phone (home) Addresst0S62 Estate Drive Phone(work) (952) 935-1722 CitySden Prairie Zip 553A7 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Roger O'Shaughnessy i Phone (homo) Address same Date PjopfifJy Acquired ____May 20035 PjopaiJv _______________________ I (do)(^o np())also own the adjacent parcels of land. Phono (work) (952) 935-1722 _ City_________________Zip (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $600 00 Residential Accessory Use $600.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $600.00 Guest House/Guost Apartments $600.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $600 00 Commercial/Industrial Use $600 00 Land Alteration + Permit ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more _ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75* of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $250.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) Afler-the-Fact Fee • Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS ______$600 00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) ■ $600.00 Vacation _ $600.00 Easement Vacation ___ $100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ___$600.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ___$600.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ___$100.00 Appeals ___Other - see Fee Schedule . f I! 0 r' Urn ' a i-Vt HU mm • • • •• V required submittals 1. 2. 3. 4. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' of the subject prooertv labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepi- county Department of Finance. Government Center. A-603 300 South Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910). Cerfifiratfl nf Qui^av / ______i 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. "sJiCeyfnLmfton'''' ® ‘ ^'andout for _ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey _Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterafons involve changes in elevation (grades). - th? of all persons with an interest in owner(s?^^^ ^ include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, piease attach a separate list of anv o‘he' persons you wish notified of this application. y 'J- '«■ c2o ™ required to supply 3 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS AND 1 COPY suTmTtSf drawings of r°d''ofum^nt°s!'p'^^^^^ to be The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour application is not complete tf the above information has not been included. ^ fnScf °aerica?lS' Applicafen is ccmptete. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE agrees to provide all Information required or requested by the Svmpnn rpay additional^^s (staff time not covered by original fee 2^® application, and cert^es thatthe information supRUe^is^^e and Mr^j^,^jhe best^is/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE r / The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable ent^ onto the properly by Cih, staff. cSsgItants agenrcoriSn request'"’ T" v.-s„ation of this Owner's signature~ ^ ^ ^ ^ Dafp M # M ^ ^ Applicant must have all submittals into thc^itv offices TStiau^ J— • iT -■*. *.---------— • # •, •V Ij u 1 Ir* .ervt, • -> /T. • i k ■Bib 1 CONDTTIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST APPLICANT: Roger D. O’Shaughnessy RESIDENCE: 1265 Bracketts Point Road, Orono, Minnesota The subject property is located in Zoning District LR-l A, Section 78-305 of the Orono Code requires that no structure or building in the LR-l A District shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or 30 feet in height, except as provided in Section 78-1366. Section 78-1366(a)(9) provides that the height of a chimney may be increased by conditional use permit by 50%. Under these regulations, the height of a chimney in the LR-l A District may be increased up to 45 feet in height. The applicant seeks to obtain a conditional use pennit that would permit construction of several chimneys at the Bracketts Road premises, none of wliich would exceed 40 feet, 8 .nches in height, all as shown on the side view elevations. See, specifically, the height limit diagram. a29S6464\l /* / 9mm • *I *J u it City of Orono Variance Application Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkwcy Orono. N'.N 55356 Application # / 2^ Date Received ' U*-l 7^lOQ Main: 952-249-<5C0 fax: 952-2494616 MsiUng.Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN SSazS-COes Amount P?id;> ! 2^uJ iuiVUht^Staff: Fee:5600 Renewal: S300 After-the-fact 51.200 Double This application fo,m must be completed ip lull. Appicant v.ni be r.ol,Hed within'15 days as to th- s-a- ,s of ih» application. Incomplbte applications will not be placed on Planning CommiLion Agendas PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: 1265 Bracketts PointtRoad Property Identification Number (PIN): ii-.i i7-?^,32-ooiq (Attach legal description to applicstion if not included on the surv'^'v ) Date Prooertv AenuirpH ^monfh/v/o^rN Mav r-i . 7/*' ' ---------r'—•• -w II uui muiuuea on me survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year):«ay 2003 □ yes. I own iho aHincnm ra.„i. Present use of property: Q Residential O^er ) centpa.cels. . . Zoning District:LR-IA Phone (home): _______________ Address: 10562 Estate Drive, Edon PrairiejMn 55347 Email: c t racy0cardtnalcorp * com Phone (work): (952) 935-1722 Fax: (952) 935-5538 OWNER inform AT,fCcmptela le^a, names erd mahla, status repuirad for each Infarasted Pany, «uresf°'^°^'------ " Phone fworP'. Email: L^®cdbrmL°fepu:s?fn°d e,^ addil'iona, sheets if nece's ® :rh e_Applicant seeks a_yMi.ance_.from the City of Oronn^ T.f^kpchorf Hard Cover and T.and ^ylationLlQ roRQ .CitY Code at Section 78.2^2)^hat Ordinance prohibits mit. Ksel li^arY or petTn apernsLaLCjur ^j^t^^ feet of the shoreline. The Aonlica nt requests a vari'a^ce from rh^c r^uiieptent to p ^Tmt construction of 1) flatted ^idwjdkjojermit access from lhe hom^ tn th^laW unf sh ore Jand vegetation thu. enrt- ,.nr. , feag^rajld^ Point ,Road at the south endjDf7he;^e^In addition, the Applicant . ypnanr-r. gradini^ an^cgnp]jct^^ the floodplain to facilitatV^-site rnanagemfi^^TT^ gtomi^r^run of f front Bracketts Point Road and the Applica nf s pro^^and to er^nr^ thnr rhf. Ann^er-e ..-.n h3ye_access to hi s property dunn^ wet periods.______________ ^ ~ i O X ^1 \ mm % t • • • required SUBMITTALS: All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be processed. □ Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner.. □ Completed Application Form □ Completed Hardship Documentation Form □ Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150’ of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance Government Center, A-603 300 South 6“' Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 □ Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5” x 11” or 11" X 17" for reproduction. Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet). Topographic survey - including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" X 17" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17”). Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. " APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely responsible for submitting a completeaD^cation being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to rejecrTltXjntrl It i^/9omplete or to recommend the request for ..........................................‘^‘gojpn'tialrrie'rit. • Applicant’s Signature: Date: 't/ 2® A ^ Applicant's Signature: ^ ^ Date: *~~r---------- □□ □□ OWNER’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and a^ees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff./tonsultar^ agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of inve stigation and verif^fi^bf this ^uest. Owner’s Signature: _______ Date: ZjO Ic ^ Owner’s Signature: ^ / / Date: ^--------- Applicant must have all submittals into the City offifces 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the Citv Planner assigned to your project. ^ u u i O 1 i IL 0ch ‘tk?i4' ^ Page 1 of 3 HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City. _ _ Minnesota State Statue Section 394.27. Subdivision 7 requires tnat a hardship be demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted. The hardship must be uriique to the property as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic situations are not considered valid hardships. In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated. HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP? . This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a hardship, address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as pcssible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance is justified. The information the City receives is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will not be considered Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request (some may not apply); “The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls." See attached. _____________________________ 1. 2. 3. 4. "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." The variance is niade necessary by the unusual configuration of lot especially at its southern end together with elevation and route of Bracketts Point Road.__________ "The variance, If granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." The variance, if granted, will be consistent with the character of the locality. __________ "Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." See attached. ____________________________________________________ #3L• A -rv i 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. • • f • f • • f* I * I .*4# • ^ • •• • • Page 2 of 3 "Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter." Not applicable. “The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located." Use is appropriate to applicable zoning. “The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling." Not applicable._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ “The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property." See attached. “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." Seg attached. “The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." The variance, If granted, will provide access to the lake, ensure driveway access during wet periods, aanage stormwater effectively, and will provide for safety, security, and privacy._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ “The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning The variance, if granted, will enhance environmental conditions and will provide for safety, pecurlty, and privacy._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ vV. nf % *. *V t logitatimmm Page 3 of 3 12."The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty." See attached. ___—----------------- Hardship Statement Should you feei the hardship cannc* fully be described in the above criteria, describe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary): ecHiE>fT ^-lARDSHIP STATEMENT 1265 Bracketts Point Road Boardwalk: The Applicant intends to replace the sodded lawn cuiTcntly lying within the 75 foot shoreline set back area with a meadow consisting of native floodplain slmibs and gr asses. The restoration of the shoreland setback area from sod to native floodplain slirubs and grasses will provide a buffer bordering Lake MinnetorJea that will help protect water quality, stabilize the lakeshore bank, prevent erosion, and also assist in filtering out nutrients, sediments and other pollutants from entering the lake. The Applicant also seeks to maintain access to the lakeshore from his home. For that purpose, the Applicant proposes to construct a slatted wood boardwalk. The boardw'alk will be suspended above the ground surface. The ground surface beneath the boardwalk will be stabilized with erosion control fabric to prevent erosion in those areas where vegetation is not c.xpccled to survive. For most of its extent, the boardwalk w'ill be no greater than six feet in width. Near the lake, the width of the boardwalk will be incieased up to 15 feet, to help facilitate transition to a dock, which is to be constiaictcd in the future, and further protect the restored natural vegetation from “staging” activities near the lakeshore. If the variance were not granted, the Applicant would be unable to access the lakeshore without damaging the native floodplain grasses to be planted in the shoreline set back area. The variance is necessary to preserve the enjoyment of a substantial propeily right of the Applicant, i.c., access to and enjoyment of Lake Miimctonka, while encouraging the voluntary restoration of the lakeshore area to native floodplain grasses and shrubs. Given the substantial benefit that Lake Miimctonka will enjoy by this voluntary restoration, granting the proposed variance will not impair the public health and safety, but rather will seiwc to encourage such values. Fencing 'I hc Applicant proposes to construct a wire mesh fence along the portions of the properly that fronts Bracketts Point Road and County Road 15. The piuposc of the fence is to provide the Applicant with security for his property, privacy and safety for Applicant's grandchildren wiio will play on the propcity. Only that portion of the fence that parallels Bracketts Point Road will encroach into the shoreline set back area. This area is at the southerly end of the property and runs for a distance of approximately 56 feet. At the property lines that are “peipendicular" to the lakeshore at both the north and the south ends of the property, any necessary screening from adjacent roads and properties would be achieved through relatively dense plantings of native shrubs and trees, rather than with a fence. The requested variance is made necessary only as a result of the unusual configuration of Bracketts Point Road. To the south of the Applicant’s property, Bracketts Point Road encroaches into the shoreline setback area and closely follows the lake shore. To be effective, tire fence should not stop arbitrarily, but rather should be allowed to follow the entire length of the property as it follows Bracketts Point Road. Granting of the variance application is necessary „rr... I V" • < r • ■• • t • 0 > . f ' to provide the Applicant with substantial enjoyment of his property by providing privacy, security and child safety. Retaining Wall and Grading. As shown in the topographical survey, the elevation of the southern half of the Applicant ’s property is below the surface elevation of Bracketts Point Road. As a consequence, street stonnwater has traditionally drained onto the site. To provide stonmvater rate control and water quality control, the Applicant proposes to construct a retention area (i.e., an infiltration area) in the southerly portion of the property. On the easterly portion of the infiltration area (i.e., “upland ’’ or towards Bracketts Point Road) a stone retaining wall will be constructed to enliance the capacity of the infiltration area in a relatively flat portion of the site. A swale will be constructed to direct stonnwater runoff from Bracketts Point Road and the property to the infiltration area. Because the topography in this area is extremely flat and only slightly above the Ordinary High Water Elevation of Lake Minnetonka, drain tile will be placed under the swale and retaining wall to provide minimal gravity flow (at 0.4% slope) into the infiltration area. No outlet directly into the lake is being proposed. The retaining wall will not encroach into the lakeshore setback area, althougli the grading to create the infiltrati-n area will encroach. The infiltration area and swale will be planted with native floodplain species and it is expected that the vegetation will provide some degree of water quality treatment. In addition, it is necessaty to elevate the area of the driveway in the floodplain so that the Applicant may access his property during wet periods or when the elevation of Lake Minnetonka is higher titan nomtal. The mean high water level of Lake Minnetonka typically rises by at least 7 inches during the spring and summer. The elevated area of the driveway will be held by two retaining walls on either side of the driveway entrance from Bracketts Point Road. A culvert will pass beneath the driveway entrance and through the retaining walls to allow stormwater to continue to flow througlr the swale into the infiltration area. As shown by tire attached Site Grading and Drainage Plan, the volume of fill in the floodplain will be compensated by the volume of the cut into the floodplain. The holding capacity of the floodplain, thus, should not be diminished, as demonstrated in the enclosed floodplain volume calculations. The topography at the southerly end of the site together with the configuration of Bracketts Point Road as it travels south necessitates that stormwater handling be addressed in this single family residential development. The proposed variance will not impair public health or safety; but rather is expected to advance environmental concerns by handling stonnwater runoff from Bracketts Point Road in an environmentally responsible manner. Finally, by constructing the infiltration area together with the retaining walls and elevation of the driveway entrance, the Applicant ’s access to and enjoyment of his property will be enabled by treating and handling stonnwater from the adjacent street in a controlled and environmentally responsible way. #29S6S4tU 1o . .• 0\'1 1 I H O 1 1 W• Exhibit D Page I See. 78-1112. Development restricted; prohibition. Sec. 78-1114. Flood fringe district. See. 78-1117. Standards for floodway and flood frin^’c conditional uses. See. 78-1279. (S) Fences, doclcs, retaining walls. See. 78-1282. Stairways, lifts, and landings. See. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. Sec. 78-1366. Height of structures______________________________ Sec. 78-1112. Development restricted; prohibition. Except as specifically permitted, no filling, grading, dredging, excavation, hard cover, temporary or permanent structures, obstructions, septic systems, well or other construction shall be allowed within the floodplain and wetlands conservation area; nor on any lands within 26 feet of such area; nor on any land within 75 feet of the ordinary highwater elevation of .any lake shoreline, nor on land abutting, adjoining or affecting the area if such activity upon those adjacent areas is incompatible with the policies expressed in this atliclc and the preservation of those conservation areas in their natural state. (Code 1984. § 10.55(8)) See. 78-1114. Flood fringe district. The following uses have a low flood damage potential and do not obstruct tlood flows. These u.scs shall be permitted within the flood fringe district to the extent that they arc not prohibited by any other provision of this Code and provided all permits or authorizations arc received as may lie required by other provision of this Code or regulation of other governmental agencies having jurisdiction, inchuling without limitation the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, and the I-.ike Minnetonka Conservation District. In addition, no use shall adversely affect the capacity of the channels or tloodways or any tributary to the main stream or of any drainage ditch or any other ilrainagc facility or system, and no use shall adversely affect the quality or quantity of groundwater runoff or the quality of the natural cnviionment. (1) Permitted uses, when in conformance with this chapter, arc: a.Agricultural uses, such as pasture, grazing and wild crop harvc.sting. b.l-'ish .ind wildlife sanctuaries. c.Recreational uses, such as fi.shing accesses, unpaved hiking, biking, horseback or nature trails, and pienic areas. d.Residential uses, such as lawns and gardens, provided no filling, grading or hard cover is involved. e. Seasonally installed residential boat docks for single-family Exhibit D Page 2 dwellings. f. Natural stone riprap shoreline protection. g. Sand beach blankets meeting the requirements of the department of natural resources regulation 6MCARI5021B. h. Agricultural uses, such as general farming, outdoor plant nurseries, horticulture, truck farming and forestry. i. Recreational uses, such as golf courses, tennis courts, driving ranges, archery ranges, parks and nature preserves. j. In areas other than wetlands, grading, filling or excavating of ten cubic yards or less, and subject to the appropriate permits as regulated elsewhere in this Code. (2) Conditional uses, when in conformance with this chapter, are; a. All other forms of shoreline protection, including wood, metal, mortared stone or concrete seawalls. b. All dredging or excavation of material from any lake bed, pond, or wetland or from adjacent land thereto. c. All permanent boat docks or other similar structures. d. e. f. g h. 1. All multiple boat docks, including residential or commercial structures, whether seasonal or permanent. Water control structures such as dams, culverts and weirs. Brdges and abutments. Utility lines. Other similar uses not specifically listed when approved by the council and other regulatory agencies, but no use shall be approved which will restrict or obstruct any flood flow or which will raise the level of any flood flow. Residential accessory structures, such as open decks and patios provided the structure meets the setbacks required by section 78- IIP. C om aercial storage of boats and marina equipment in the B-2 k. Exhibit D Page 3 district, provided all storage meets the requirements of the B-2 district. 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. 1.All structures constructed as conditional uses shall be constructed in accordance with the state building code. (Code 1984, §§ 10.55(9), 10.55(10); Ord. No. 171 2nd series, § 3,4-4-1998) Sec. 78-1117. Standards for floodway and flood fringe conditional uses. (a) All uses. No structure (temporary or permanent), fill, deposit, obstruction, storage of materials, equipment, or other use may be allowed as conditional uses which, acting alone or in combination with existing or reasonably anticipated future uses, adversely affect the capacity of the floodway or increases flood heights. (1) No fill shall be deposited in the floodway, and any fill deposited in the flood fringe shall be no more than the minimal amount necessary to conduct a conditional use. Generally, fill shall be limited to that needed to grade or landscape for that use and shall not in any way further obstruct the flow of floodwaters. (2) Spoil from dredging shall not be deposited in the floodway nor in the flood fringe. (3) All fill shall be protected from erosion by vegetative cover in the form of grass, natural ground covers, shrubs and trees as determined by the council. (4) All filling and grading activities shall be performed with only clean fill. (b) Structural work for flood control. Structural work for flood control, such as dams, levees, dikes and floodwalls, shall be allowed only upon issuance of a conditional use permit. In addition, any proposed work in the beds of public waters which will change the course, current or cross section of the waters shall be subject to the provisions of all applicable statutes. (Code 1984, § 10.55(11)) Sec. 78-1279. Placement of structures on lots. When more than one setback applies to a site, structures and facilities must be located to meet all setbacks. Structures shall be located as follows; (1) Structure and on-site sewerage system setbacks (in feet) from ordinary high water level: Public Water Structure Exhibit D Page 4 Setbacks Sewered Sewage Treatment System NE 150 150 ri50 RD 100 75 75 GD 75 75 75 Tributary 100 75 75 (2) Additional structure setbacks. The following additional structure setbacks apply, regardless of the classification of the water body: Setback from;Setback (in feet) Top of bluff 30 Unplatted cemetery 50 Right-of-way line of federal, state or county highway and local public and private roads 30^ * Except for detached garages on lakeshore lots as regulated in section 78-1435 and except for structures subject to less restrictive side yard adjacent to street setbacks as regulated in the various zoning districts. (5) Fences, docks, retaining walls. No fence shall be placed within the shore setback zone. Portions of dock located landward of the OHWL shall be considered as a landing, subject to the regulations for landings per section 78-1282. Retaining walls shall not be placed within the shore setback zone. See. 78-1282. Stairways, lifts and landings. Stairways and lifts are the preferred alternative to major topographic alterations for achieving access up and down bluffs and steep slopes to shore areas. Stairways, lifts and landings shall be allowed in the shore setback zone and must meet the following design requirements: (1) Stairways and lifts must not exceed four feet in width. (2) Landings for stairways and lifts shall not exceed 32 square feet in area. (3) Canopies or roofs are not allowed on stairways, lifts, or landings. (4) Stairways, lifts and landings may be either constructed above the ground on posts or pilings or placed into the ground, provided they are designed and built in a manner that ensures control of soil erosion. (5) Stairways, lifts and landings must be located in the most visually inconspicuous portions of lots, as viewed from the surface of the public water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditi.ons, whenever practical. (6) Facilities necessary to provide shore area access to physically handicapped persons shall be allowed, provided that the dimensional and performwee 9 Exhibit D Pages standards of subsections (l)--(5) of this section are completed in addition to the requirements of the Minnesota Regulations, chapter 1340. (7) A building permit shall be obtained for construction of stairways, lifts and landings regardless of whether such improvements are constructed above, at or below grade. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(F)), 2-24-1992) Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (a) No hard cover or impervious surface shall be placed, located or constructed within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of any lake or tributary, except for stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in this Code. (b) Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OHWL, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Between 250 feet and 500 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 30 percent hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 35 percent hardcover. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, § 1(10.56(16)(L)), 2-24-1992) Sec. 78-1366. Height of structures. (a) The height limitations imposed by other provisions of this chapter may be increased by conditional use permit by 50 percent when applied to the following structures: (1)Church spires. (2)Belfries. (3)Cupolas and domes which do not contain useable space. (4)Monuments. (5)Water towers. (6)Fire and hose towers. (7)Observation towers. (8)Flagpoles. (9)Chimneys. (10)Smokestacks. Exhibit D Page 6 (H)Parapet walls extending not more than three feet above height of the building. (12) Cooling towers. (13) Elevator penthouses. (b) Heights in excess of those allowed under subsection (a) of this section for the uses enumerated in that subsection may be permitted only by conditional use permit granted pursuant to the procedures as set forth in article V, division 2, of this chapter. . V: L'L >' •• ■ '■' --^ •^•'' •' ^■' ^i» 'T'^b ^ - W< i • V " -■i v.',’- J-.,,' ^ ;i5;:p ^ A J *■" ■^‘»N’.4<iv: • • »T. Aii T -A '!Ki ^ 4.' • * • . t Mi rr- ;-. -\iv"A>C.<r-**r *• V--:.- •••’'''•.•Vo' V ; ; / , ,\ ■ ■.:> r '*>? vt -N ^'•_ 'i? ^ ^ -Vi.', -i?''.? * » t ,*i3^ 1. . r^-AT,.V<UjC^r T - •" ‘'r: .’*'! •V • V2:' 4 — 'J5'L«5fj (fr • ' K"'; S'...' ■ »T~'^'r r "’I ■^i j V -iL. / . '; i* ■; ^ ■€%jrrBk • ■• 1 •v>- -I - ■" 1265 Bracketts Point Rd.Conditional Use Permit 4.21. 2004 .... -T!- tiiMOCMli C^XUrni snucv«IM»V) tIOMa MS •a* I4n. n -g- B- «0Ql tgu □ AT >Ui 4IP □ HOC wuS liM □ ouA/rtn J34 □ oaw MM □ *Ct«. • 21IH tt/l -*> wMi rif.4Td.«ir S' MnWTn o>> gr mm,vpmmx* 9 mm * mm tTIt aaiP MNMM 9*tUi m m mn tm ui-iA • M«wu«MH am «o» 1 • vm% m M m mm «umo tm$ M Ls 11 • i *ttmm HEIGHT LIMIT DIAGRAM rk------------------------------------- mmm \m «* I too (m mm mmm u)f at (aa «/.) uMMi trao n fmt mmm m mm i mm no. v mma mmm ^9 m 9m imcn m mm me siaoi m me tmm jMitfm »amc m mm m iomsi. acico «im iiomm smcQ s lo »c NOCi 9 MFT ^ *■*>* •< 0OMMM on M («WD laiiwi uM9«ariKi8iira^«i PM •W’Riai UMiDi P« uK Ml ftlhi ■ tttS ML' It • 1C U«M« Kao nsi aMH * MM aniM • a CMW M«AiaiMMmaivnc oiMfli « M mt/m M^^Mgjijj^iMnog ^ »aue»M. iCUM ««i Mfm IMMIS fli M- M JWK HaDcoo emm ocm as m kmu kua « k if «! 44 wos IBI MMMOia MU ■ MO OUOP ML M « iM K. MM • 4 »» mOi K It MI8. # M ■ raoi#«ir mmm mmm • tuM^ ma mimmanm p«i m vti • si' • ml im k onsM kmmo o« • a om* a sc pm lai m so sc PMOilMiM1Mt1MlCKt««IMMPmDMK « iMtf CM ■ casA « tC m S€ Ult M t!Un4LiC«Mi«^ VICINITY MAP ■; if V... - 5; A0.02 - ------- —, -■ -^-'cV-v- ....•'■T vv. ,■/; •r“:'-V, ?. - ’ • A-" . - / ' . * * ^imOTAI / X •'■^« .» I:*; w 'v * • ?.•'•'• ' V ¥* : I V \ ▼ \7 ■ ■■ '^ ■ ‘ * ■■*'■■— \Y * V-"‘ \ iA-^' t f Nr^ \ ■ \ .,A-.r •■ .. • t: •\\\\\V\ V’/ ’ ■ ^ vv ’v^^, v''‘. • • ••: ''A " t',' ,-••■ V . / I • V >' • ®r fv ~r* i«i’yvY*^^^ ..f “V. _ y«* ---------(.:.A-- ...._...._. _ ■ '.. *1. : ^ ' ---!•■ ^‘•S.<v • t \. X. .•y t —• *'4^>U"N't»' V yi*- ^ / •A' :■■■ '7.' . * * / Wi.W' •'-"r^i 'r>,.--js-7 ■V X V ’V-.'< \\X T' lV >r -A ' SK _______________yyr ------------- \ X \ ^ ■ i J .V -• X - V'X.‘^cA \. ifi i ......■' '' ■ A "'‘tji J * sA'^rL. ■ ?■'-. ... <<<r =l!_i„ ^ J-X- =-, ' -—[k=iMI-l-Y_j------=^^.,.,_4 ________ •, , • ■; ■ 'ir i.:('t.'-. «____________ ' •• *‘• 'v'►..;:c ’A.p. -.1; • .» \j.;:.-‘—•: a . •, *■ ; ‘* ** ' * , :u'" '. A ^ A'X I.' .-y v i-'XjL.-^ "/\tA t,.y;A. ..• . -A.' a VV av '- ■ .- • V'r . V- > * \ X ■n ;''.'X V- ji >x riCV- •■*• -■ ~1A :■• -1 iV ------------------------' i \j»-■' A. -'v. r ■ r . JV ^ X- t \-~:>x —-tr-- •*«..'■ ------------------------------------------- t'f' j VC -• A. /» '“* \-. A- ;Sr v:^_- .y % ^X- ,.‘-- ■^40 'v cpoxieiTi I St UMSOi#l mmmcs f9 U»CSC«#C VO 2 Srfildit 6M> «<S tOI fliMCIM.fm avi^owi tooM ox>» hi: »>jm ©PARTIAL SITE PLAN vs* • r^“ AlCHlTlcri t It l•••h llBlk Pl««» • ••III*. WA ftt«4 ¥»m f«« 414 t«ft !•■ at* 414 i/at CySHAUGHNESSY Residence Inks Minnetonka Minniioto litaA __ i» Ir PARTIAL SITE PLAN A1.01 \ A* ^ v:;v^;.'W r . • -r. i'-' \ii; ^Mtmi NORTHEAST ELEVATION wi-iT-r m ilB :>7*r.*, • ; .'^ • • *» «•^ :v. . i . . . J - iiiitt« V - r»» — * fjr'A 9 r • * r I* . .* * -, ^. • » • ... ’ .‘.-J*-*-,-* •• .v» • » •■ -. »••. ^1..* . V .jr* •..? ;•<: y- y:':l-: __BT7. .• .*' " *. •*•'•.' •_j YC • .• . • - V .i : ,■ .:/iS .!'3.:-'-''-''.♦., l>4'. ... • ... '/i ■'■\Ml' /i - - •s»3«i c»wKrs ............................. !•?':' .•'*j^'‘ . ''-I • ! T y ::-W^'‘‘ ' ' *■ gma}m tut iODi cam* toen^ . irat cue 'toOD M00A«^ . «oo * <tf6ac»^V ‘ f*?*' BT»l Ib/AA jr xi' •/ * •• » 4 ! ^'lit .-■*. -i A* . Y.T'4-..-.:‘,iv jL'j — '' f r- ’.iB jM.It 4 . ^ 1^n: Ilf Sttllb iiflik »!••» |•••ll•. WA 9t104 • •■ !•« 494 1470 !•■ ao4 4S4 s/ao aSHAUGHNESS^' Residence tokeMifw>Blonko Mifinesoia ’ : - SOUTHWEST ELEVATION vr «r-r /• oJl • ■■ I-" ity Al 0» '** 'v% * *. .V, .... ^- \. ■ r . . . • . • ^ «, —I r . . . . — ‘ ., •«Jv^ . . , ^ -MTT- . .• -i-. ■r..\r--xv ;• ••■■'•■■■: • T ii.'r ■*i .iiwv..*:.*."y-.- -t :.i . r' •. •* * r ..%• ..T.- • ..y- ifcat >■ • >v 'V - Tv : . . •••*■ . • _ . .»*■ •*• \}'l• ■• %-i.-.■ ■ * V • •>- A * . . ■■ " « n”. ..i?**! ■'/•••Vi -k.e , ■•• i • .- • t: —* •:*•• ' •' •’*•.'* '. .<>»4 - f • ^ A. .fc ^ ^ 'V»* ■ » ./r ►V r • •* ^ r. r V ; ©eAimAlNOeTHWESTEiEVATlON vTif-r 7._ ‘' “. * “!;:*,r * *• -*• .* >*T .*.•-•. — - . - .i - ' V... '.•—T,; •*- I .**• .V ,.'-^ . - _ V ••■ -. .- . •- ..V vT^->< ..*t, . - , - -* Z \ , — . A..V..•' .• '.:..VV /A V-^:: V*’* .f.... V .r.‘: • .'•'•'r.ri-- ] ‘ • Vr^ r:.T^ - . Tr/ V>^\ ©PARTIAL vrir4- «biL cars •V / ykm. oaexa «« Am Nr 1 - • B£VAT10NS ..■EXTEMOR A3.01 / 4 "t) L SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) ^0-75; EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House______________ Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Palio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE *1. B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _______________ Length X X X B Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck X X X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other 75-250*250.500*500-1000* Width s mm c s s 22 xlOO = WiOth S B 22 S s 8 a S s S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. A S.F. B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. 550.1 S.F. S.F, S F. S.F. S.F, TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A 550.1 _______ + B 550.1 49071.0 49071.0 XlOO 1.1 S.F. A S.F. B _% M o n 7"" (.' 1 1 '5 I • .V ----------- SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0r75’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ___________ -- Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck X X X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZOHE A. House - Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck X X X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other 75-250’250-500*500-1000* Width a S.F. S.F. S.F. 2 S.F. s S.F. s S.F. a S.F. 3 S.F. s S.F. S.F. S.F. 8 S.F. m S.F. s S.F. a S.F. S.F. A S.F. B X100 = Width TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A 23168 _______ B 95420 M % 8 main 8703.7 .S.F. a shed 675.6 S.F. a S.F. a SF. s S.F. a 6911.2 S.F. a S.F. m S.F. B S.F. a hot tub 417.5 S.F. 3 terrace/steos 3279.4 S.F. 8 wails 2107.8 S.F. S.F. 8 S.F. 8 pool 1092.8 S.F. 23188 S.F.A 95420 S.F.B I a 24.3 % u fULc^-',r..-, •,/v;> ry 9 i ■ •CRONBERG & ASSOCIATES. INC 445 N. WILLOW DR. LONG LAKE. MN 55356 _______ US--------------------------------------------- i At/T/OAr/if^ Cyiicr. ______ _______------------------------------------------------------------------------ _____AA€AS ................................------------------- _ ___U>AU- ua. / . SC 'x .2' X O./ Ai^C. . .... Ajo. 2. ... ST. >*T. \ x c.S At^S. ...... S7'xi*xa./.'a us. ...........zr'x 2'X os' ^us. S'X 2' "X O. 2.5'/US. .... -Cv*:______^----------7 C-/^> rarAL •■*» • • —t • . 4 •' •*. t • *- .i sy.c.r..... //. c.r^ ._ /.? CF.... y c.r,... ..*44 . 4^«. .. • •• « • • • . ...IAAALL. AAO. ? ./s'X 2 X O.T A UP. I t Z*/'x Z'x o.C'aup . ^3'x 2'X 0.2s 'aup . t* - . T . /'x 2' X O./S'au S.• • • • 9/ c./:_ S . cx..... 9/ C.A. Total . . • 4 • • • * # I ^9 C.F. 2Z c.r. / c.r . • I i SB C.^SB, C.F. Total __ I • • r • \ Ia AA<,L AX>. Y /S 'X / ' X 0,2^ 'AUP - ... .COAt-t. AAO. 5 YC X 2' X S. ZS A up — ..................SSA/UI A J^'X y/x u.t'/us. •= _______z . 2s'x 3' X o.Vaus ._ ^ Y C.r. ---- 2 ‘T C.S. /B c. X. .. /2 C./-,______ y C/*". /-OTAL Z Y C.x. r^rxL // C.s TifTAL /Z C.A^. Total .....S^A/U€ AAfA a a 6a • » . .V* . m • - • ( /a UCA . UOL ------- o'... Jao O S.S. -p, JyS C.c. ___\j(2.S/.... SSS SS. /4?2J r./*=;r ~ ‘ yb ■ c. A. /V TA L M • •• . • • 4 I • — * /Z3 7 C.S. TOTAL / SC -C. r......- - A • ^ CUT /ASA Co^rcN aata ) A patx taa :a . uol r YCOor.x. ^ /2J7 ^ ;r 7.f«9 r. X. /Z37 X-/- rsfAL cu>. y-r r K Jl JTi—^ ■7''M'V" 1 > ArN7 T ' i CRAOING NOTES ^-aiim’::'3i-pr-.‘V3 ^Ufm imt littifnt i mMii MvMi kma h fmi 1 ]>• ncw'iwt ¥ «tfCM mm mm 0m m mmmm*. IN ttmmm iMt tm 0S|*Wi« ta m9f m prnim maUm 0 ¥ 0mn m-m mm Miasuf t$m¥m> acMKm mt rttad aiMMi ¥Mm mrnitm hj ¥»n i—Hi< »f amfirntm mikrm a* It mmt if m tmmm «i n» cm la im amm. & MatHa iiiwptM If atauMa rMtat l» wt tr lat »a«t« ^ m ifiiaiM MMad. «A*i| III tapMl. 0am<% m. ant pa»amattt. WWMt iiraMaa aula'I rawaiN la anaMwaaait mm cMlfwita* «ai it •ta« tt ik waioitf mmo ta in aaaiai* af ■« UaiKtpt ArcMtcL fai tan nmm «ar upwi mi la traMM if ■« naaaciar Paaa|a iBt iia«vtf| 0 Mawacaaitiu tal itaiaf iaiaMa»y. 4 l»w atiy im9f fta Itaatrati trcMact tf amaada* m¥^m0ima caaMawa. CMtarttt la aai |raia HaNa »aa^ Uat aai dxi'aKt Nr raiiaa anf aMra*al it tta Uaaacaaa tnMUd ariar «a »M"» 1 Pwtarw woaiVu atjacaol ir t. fapMl la aa caaraciaMc tf | tf tMaaa c^ Nr I caairad iMt tf CaraUrwaUan. rtaalaa araatk It ata tfiNitfaa, liMa. n NtftaM. ^atfN aninti M«tcca aafaca faiak Pratfli wiaa« ttMi •aaa anti aaar mia imtNaaa a*a la f aaoMU tf Mttfr tnt li atfar laraifi •aHar. Da aal || mr mmrnm. taaa lari* a< Nr tfaa anan aaa 12* aa ttfur'at irtfcatai aa »a k pMira v^atat ar«m f*«« Itf <« mm wmm Paaa ifat tf ima aaa ailrN^ Nnat mm »»-aaHtttf fniat N MMNAjraaN. ana tamafat araat. fM^t cantfctai araaa an •r>nn<a ar eaw>»<aiian tmmUmm m rntmum mmrnm. acaraf. n*iaaaa. ana ca^Md to m¥mt taaat;. I. uaa*tf awa»Mn catfnci f«iU. raaian latfc ana tfar. data, kmm tf aatoN. aai a tor Itftoar tfc aad (1 N GRONBERG k ASSOQATQl DIG • mmm ccant mt an tfcetcaian aa apaar a«a ragrf a* «c at maa «r aaacr 'tJica nai «• tMtot a«tf at ma a at vaipMcai^ Kni urk 4/I€J04 y aaSM. MiOa OA i»c uaC. 0L IU3t m m 04-/a< ID Cdtfiaa tag pmmti fntat an taaai an Wnr Ir Crwaaf * toaaaanaa anal l«J»^ aaaatoa 4>lS-«4. II. Dniaafa Wamtftoa anriaat If CnrDarf * Wtattoitt. Caaitft rataa an nn lai to Ma ana. mm atfr titf»a> aton an Drtfaary Ktfi DHtf Oaaitr tf Ltfa Itfnntoata. fton. toan ntf at i«at mmm aator nana iaary aaawfi IM tfatoaft tattoa an tfatf Cnm. inat'iiii tftoa uta iSnMnaa to toiaar toaa aamtfi mSm JT«SStoa'nn"" 44«ar O’SHAUGHNESSY RESIDENCE STEPHEN STINSON ASSOCIATES • LAN06CAPE AACHITECTS. INC (lOVOTAMNUi NtotfOUTH HMMOANim tfianaMSaaini %i Mamma aaat Om •a—ar 1*air AfNiai •CACtf SITE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN L2.0 RUN DATE :4/l4/20M )8 IOII723MUOI2 PROP ADDR 38 AODRKSS UNASSKJNbU OWNtR NAMb R P BURWEbLABE UURWELL TAXPAVUR ROONEY P BURWEU. NAME/ADDR ’«>l XERXES AVE S «20l MPLSMN 35431 38 1111723230000 PROP ADDR 1480 SIIOREUNEUR OWNER NAME R K NEWKIRK A N 3 NEWKIRK TAXPAYER RKNEWKIRKANJ NEWKIRK NAM E/ADDU I WO SHORELINE DR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 II11723230016 PROP ADDR 1480 GREEN TREbS KD OWNERNAME C&SPI^TOU TAXPAYER CARL A SUSAN PLATOU NAME/ADDR 'WOCEEN TRI ES RD WAYZATAMN 55591 38 III1723320016 PROP ADDR 38 ADORESS UNASSIGNED OWNERNAME G M DANKO A N R DANKO TAXPAYER GEORGE M A NANCY R DANKO NAME/ADDR IS'O GREEN TREES RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 IIII7233200I9 PROP ADDR 1280 BRACKETTS POINT KD OWNER NAME JAMES V NYCEAlEVbRLY II NVCE TAXPAYER JAMES V NYCrE/UEVERl.Y H NYCE NAME/ADDR 'MO BRACKETTS POINT RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 IIII72J3200U PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNF.D OWNERNAME JOHNC^KWEETRUSTEE TAXPAYER JOHP^^U NAME/ADDR IMO BRACKETTS PT RD WAYZATAMN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LISP FAGS: I 38 I0II723I400I5 PROP ADDR 1100 MIUSTON RD OWNER NAME R P BURWELL A E E BURWELL TAXPAYER RODNEY P BURWELL NAME/ADDR /W XERXES AVE S 4201 BLOOMINGTON MN 55431 38 II11723230014 PROP ADDR 1520 GREEN TREES RD OWNERNAME DDRYERSEJR&M LRYERSE TAXPAYER DORANCE 0 RYERSE NAME/ADDR 1520 GREENTREES RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 IIII7233200I0 PROP ADDR 1265 BRACKETTS POINT RD OWNER NAME ROGER D OSIIAUGHNI SSEY TAXPAYER RfXJER D OSI lAUGHNbSSbY NAMIZADDR 10562 estate dr EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55347 38 II11723320017 PROP ADDR 1300 BRACKETTS POINT RD OWNER NAME GEORGE S PILLSBURY FT AL TAXPAYER GEORGE S PILLSBURY NAMF2AODR 901 MARQUETTE AVE #2630 MPLSMN 55402 38 IIII723J20020 PROP ADDR 1400 BRACKETTS POINT RD OWNERNAME JAMES RA MARY JJUNDT TAXPAYER JAMES R A MARY J JUNDT NAME/ADDR '<00 BRACKETTS POINT RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 IIII72332000I PROP ADDR 1200 BRACKETTS POINT RD OWNERNAME JOHNCte^CETXUSTEE TAXPAYER JOHNC/MO^E N/5MI-yADDR 1200 BRACKETTS PTRD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 III1723230008 PROP ADDR 1491 SHORELINE DR OWNERNAME JANETCKIERNAN TAXPAYER JANET CKRIER NAMI7ADDR '<91 SHORELINE DR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 III1723230015 PROP ADDR 1510 GREEN TREES RD OWNI.K NAME G M DANKO A N R DANKO T AXPAYLR GEORGE M A NANCY R DANKO NAME'ADDR 1510 GREEN TREES RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 IIII72J32U0I5 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO OWNERNAME D D RYERSE JR A M LRYERSE jyO(PAYER DORANC'E D RYERSE NAME/ADDR '570 CRI CNTREES RD WAYZ.ATAMN 55391 38 III1723320018 PROP ADDR 1220 BRACKETTS POINT RD OWNER NAME JULE M HANNAEORDIV ET AL TAXPAYER JULE M HANNAEORD IV A NAME/ADDR ELIZABETH A HANNAEORD 1720 BRACKETTS POINT RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 IIII72332002I PROP ADDR 1700 BRACKETTS PT RD OWNER NAME. JOHN C NOBLE TRUSTEE TAXPAYER JU"N C NOBLE NAME/ADDR ' 700 BRACKETTS PT RD WAYZATAMN 55391 ‘ ; 7XU ■••i- !j I •• o ^ • R0PER1Y IN^OKMA I lON SYSTEM YOWNIUIS Lisr ID i M BURWr.l.L ILL :S»20I IN 5543! \ LbRD M L RYERSE RSE SRD 5391 ) i POINT KD IGMNFSSI Y K'iHNLSSLY I N SJ347 i POWT RD iURYETAL SURY AVERC30 SK)tNrRD YJJUNUr V J JUNDT 5 POINT RD S539I JB 111172)230008 PROPADDR U9I SHORELINE DR OWNER NAME JANET C KIERNAN TAXPAYER JANET CKRIER NAMI7ADDR I«1 SHOREUNE DR WAYZATAMN S539I 38 III1723230015 PROP ADDR 1510 GREEN TREES RD OWNER NAME G M DANKO & N R DANKO TAXPAYER GEORGE M A NANCY R DANKO NAME'ADDR 1510 GREEN TREES RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 IIII7233200I5 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME DD RYERSE JR A MI. RYERSE TAXPAYER DORANCE D RYERSE NAME2ADDR '520OREENTREES RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 IIII7233200I8 PROPADDR 1220 BRACKETTS POINT RD OWNER NAME JULE M HANNAFORDIV ET AL TAXPAYER JUEE M HANNAFORD IV A NAME/ADDR EIJZABETIIA HANNAFORD 1220 BRACKETTS POINT RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 I m72332002 1 PROPADDR 1200 BRACKETTS PI RD OWNER NAME JOI IN C NOBIE TRUSTEE TAXPAYER JOHN C NOBLE NAME/ADDR 1200 BRACKETTS PTRD WAYZATAMN 55391 PAGE: I j I. ^ • V B ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS’ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM I (we) -■ -•/ \ '■ ' of__' - • •.......................... (print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans foLihe proposed Improvement or proposed use of tM property located ilso referred to as Land Use Application No.Q5r*>30/iL. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. ,*> / Property Owner Date I • Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. I L S POINT RD RUSTLE 5 PTRD 55J9I 4 IS r received M’aV 0 V I 1 (we) ADJACENT PROPERTY^WNERS* ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM ^ITY OF OftONQ [pimt name(s)] (print address] V'*ov | cr have review^ the pla^foc^e proposed improvement or proposed use of the prope<ty located at ^^^I^TC^fl^lso referred to as Land Use Application No.Oir # I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. nIf you have any Infc mation that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the sctieduled meeting date. i I e i ii pavtt>tTcr 1 Hennepin Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department Nam» BECKETTS fOjKT . -ThiM iB not 0'iogBfy rticonM map!'It npraaoiita a compilation ofMornwHon- . and data IromOtf, Couidy,.and.Stata road auPKidtiaa andoOmaourcaa. ^ nail 11 2004 9:31 J/IJ Bonestroo ^^Rosene AfxierlM(& Associates Cnglnctrs & Architects BOtiESTROO ROSEtiE RNDERLIK 6S16361311 2335 \X/lest Highway 36 • St. Paul. MN 55113 Office: 651-636*4600 • Fax: 651'636-I3II wwwboneicroo.com By;HifoiT Y- p. 1 May 11.2004 Ms. Melanie Curtis Planner City of Orono Post OfiTice Box 66 Ctystal Bay. MN 3S323 Re: 1 262 Bracketts Point Road File No. 139-04-000 Plat No. 04-3012 Dear Melanie: We have reviewed the proposed site plan for 1 26S Bracketts Point Road. The proposed improvements include (he construction of a new home including site grading and :etaining wall installation. We have the following commt'its with regarda to engineering matters: • The proposed site plan includes a storm sewer system that promotes infiltration. The system includes drain die and an infiltration area. The project nairaiive describes the creation of a native floodplain shrub and grass buffer along the shoreline 7S-foot setback. These improvements are environmentally friendly and follow recommendations set forth in the City’s Surface Water Management Plan. We would encourage the city to promote this concept on this site and wherever else possible. • The plans should include the sanitary sewer stub location to the property. • Retaining walls that exceed 4-feet in height require a separate engineered design submittal for review and approval. • Plans should be submitted to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Disaict for review ard approval. If you have any questions please call me at (621) 604-4863. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Oappa, City of Orono • St. Paul. St. croud. Rochester. Wfilmar. MN • Milwaukee. Wl • Cnicago. IL AmriiiBrrw Aato«vifu^ O^iiorfwnlty t 4Mntll N naa 11 2004 9:31 J/ijBonestroo ^^Rosene Anderlik& Associates cnainam & Arcnittcts BOMESTROO R08ENE RNDERLIK 6516361311 2335 Vitest Highway 36 > St. Paul. MN 55113 Office: 651-636*4600 • Fax: 651-636-I3II wwwboneslroo.com p. 1 Bxm fo It \c- May 11,2004 Ms. Melanie Cunis Planner City of Orono Post Ofince Box 66 CiysUl Bay. MN 55323 Re: 1 263 Bracketts Point Road File No. 139-04-000 Plat No. 04-3012 Dear Melanie: We have reviewed the proposed site plan for 1 26S Brackett« Point Road. The proposed improvements include the construction of a new home includmg site grading ant* retaining wall installation. We have the following conune its with regards to engineering matters: • The proposed site plan includes a storm sewer system that promotes infiltration. The system includes drain die and an infiltration area. The project narrative describes the creation of a native floodplain shrub and grass buffer along the shoreline 7 S -foot setback. These improvements are environmentally friendly and follow reoommandations set forth in the City’s Surface Water Management Plan. We would encourage the city to promote this concept on this site and wherever else possible. • The plans should include the sanitary sewer stub location to the property. • Retaining walls that exceed 4-feet in height require a «eparate engineered design submittal for review and approval. • Plans should be submined to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for review and approval. If you have any questions please call me at (631) 604-4863. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Torn Kellogg Cc: Oreg Oappa, City of Orono • St. Paul. St Cloud. Rochester, wmmar. ASN • Milwaukee. wi • Chicago, IL ^rfmmmt¥9 Opp^rttfiKty fmfMvyvr awtf implrayt Own«4 i mnw M ... __-X ' sSlA"?.' ,r xf , 'i \ \ \ \ \ \ REMOVE EWSTINC DECK 490 SF r ........................ >- NADVE FIOOOPIAIN SHRUBS. lYP. / i i iL. / -» \% \ \ Jl' k \ \%s. 'mOtNG ij/'Sr- "y V //' :/7 1 I \ 1 \ \ /✓ / / / 7 \"/ / / BOARO^ \HALK / / REPlAd ESSriNG LAIVN */ NATIVE FLOOOPlAIN GRASSES AND SHRUBS rLA \ \ /' ■A- V /•7 \\ / C7 lAKC^ORf^BurrCR .'S? Or /■<xj' Cv Cj6A rL EF»OT AVENUE IOUTH J?5A0 S48 BII9 6G9 7718 »CiM>t.C0« rf----SrONC RETA.NING flkil \ ^'■ 36 -7-..... /I 3'' a: \ \ \ O'SHAUGHNESSY RESIDENCE SCALE 3/32*= 1-0" DRAWN KB BOARDWAI.K OPTION S-14-04 L1.0 0 ^ mo P^jwrw2 »um ■y :• .0'.^ ■ WV-VVM ► Date Application Received: 4*21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 5-5*04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 7-4-04 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JUN I 4 2004 citvoforono Date: June 8,2004 Item No.: / Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Janice Gundiach^^ Title: City Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-3014, Timothy Powers on behalf of Campo Bellow Partners, 3210 Navarre Lane - Variance - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - 1C, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (Yi acre minimum) 0.36 acres (15,720 s.f.) 126.5 feet List of Exhibits A — Resolution psr Planning Commission Recommendation B - PC Action Notice 5-20-04 C - PC Memo and Exhibits of 5-6-04 Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variance in order to construct a second story above the existing first story, and add two garage stalls: 1. Rear yard setback variance to allow a rear yard setback of 24.5 feet when 30 feet is normally required and 24.5 feet currently exists (existing shed will be removed). Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission at their May 17,2004 meeting voted unanimously to approve tl.e plans as submitted, subject to removal of the existing shed located in the rear yard. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting a rear yard setback variance for 3210 Navarre Lane. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-350 (B) FILE NO. 04-3014 WHEREAS, Campo Bello Partners, a corporation (hereinafter “the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 3210 Navai re Lane within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City”) and legally described as follows: Lot 65, and that part of Lot 66 lying southeasterly of the northwesterly 20 feet measured at right angles to the northwesterly line of said Lot 66, all in WALLACE’S ADDITION 10 THE VILLAGE OF MINNETONKA BEACH, uccuiding to the plat thereof on file or of record in the Office of the County Recorder, in and for Hcrniepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the “property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a rear yard setback variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-350 (B) to allow a renovation consisting of construction of a second story above the existing first story where the existing rear yard setback is 27 feet where 30’ is required and the addition of two garage stalls at a rear yard setback of 24.5 feet when 30’ is required. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Miimcsgta: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #04-3014. 2.The property is locate»l in the LR - 1C, One Family Lakeshorc Residential, which requires a n.ininiuin lot size of Vi acre. The applicant ’s property is 0.36 acres in total area. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on May 17,2004 and recommended approval of the rear yard seth.ick variance based on the following findings; Page 1 of 5 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the t^>plicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Plaiming Commission and City Council review. 2. The existing shed must be removed prior to isstiance of a building permit for the addition. 3. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (June 14,200S). 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. S. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicant and the applicant ’s heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 14 ‘" day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 5 I STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of __, 2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instilment was exe uted on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 State of Minnesota ) ) ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this__day of 2004 President of Campo Bello Partner, a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public Page 5 of 5 CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 _______ TO: Timothy Powers ZONING FILE #04-3014 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION PATE OF NOTICE; May 20,2004________ COPIES: #04-3014 Miy 17, 2004 Page 1 of 4 Date Application Received: 4>21>04 Date Application Considered as Complete: S-S-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 7-4-04 To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Mabusth and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator -y. Janice Gundlach, City Planner ^ '• Mike Gaffron, Planning Director \ ^ May 6,2004 #04-3014, Timothy Powers, 3210 Navarre Lane - Rear Yard Setback Variance - Public Hearing sr* ■ 7-0 Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - 1C, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (Vi acre min.) 0.36 acres (15,720 s.f.) 126.S feet Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variance in order to construct a second story above the existing fust story, and add two garage stalls; 1. Rear yard setback variance to allow a rear yard setback of 24.5 feet when 30 feet is normally required and 24.5 feet currently exists (existing shed will be removed). Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the plans as submitted. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-350. Area, height, lot width and yard requirements. (b) Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be observed: Lot Arci (acre)Lot Width (feet)Front Yard (feet)Side Yard (feet)Rear Yard (feet)Side Yard Adjacent to Street (feet) 05 100 30 10 30 15 List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applications Exhibit B - Hardship Documentation Form Exhibit C - Survey - Existing Conditions Exhibit D - Proposed Site Plan Exhibit E- Hardcover Calculations (Revised Calcs Reflecting Garage Addition Pending) Exhibit F - Proposed Elevations Exhibit G- Proposed Floor Plans Exhibit H - Photogr^hs Exhibit I - Property Owner’s List Exhibit J - Plat Map Exhibit K - Opinion of ^>plicant’s Structural Engineer #04.30] 4 May 17.2004 Pag<2or4 Background The applicant recently acquired the property and has met with staff to discuss plans to renovate the existing structure. The applicant was versed on the differences between a renovation and rebuild in terms of the Planning Department review process. All conversations centered on the project being leviewed as a renovation, bearing in mind no formal plans were submitted until the actual variance application. The applicant was advised that the existing house has a non-conforming rear yard setback of 24.6 feet for the attached garage and 27* for the existing house, where 30 feet is normally required. The applicant has proposed a second story to the existing house, plus a two-stall addition to the garage, requiring approval to maintain the existing 24.6’ and 27’ non-confonning rear yard setbacks. This property applied for a rear yard setback variance in the summer of 2001 for constmction of an additional stall to the existing garage. That variance was never acted on as a current survey and hardcover calculations were never submitted. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot Area/Width LR-IC Lot Area Lot Width Required 21,780 s.f. (0.50 acres)100* Actual 15,720 s.f. (0.36 acres)126* Setbacks LR-IC Required Existing Proposed Front 30*41’NO CHANGE Rear 30* 24.6’ - garage 27’ - house 4.8 ’ - shed 10 ’-deck 24.6’ - garage add’d, house - no change shed - removing deck - no change Left Side 15 ’39’NO CHANGE Right Side 1Q‘ 42.5 ’ - garage and house 64’ - shed 63.5’-deck garage-22.5 ’ house - no change shed - removing deck - no change Structural Coverage Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 15,720 s.f. (0.36 acres)Allowed: 2,358 s.f. (15%) Proposed: 1,623 s.f. + 460 s.f. (gar)» 2,083 s.f. =» (13.3%) •04.3014 May 17, 2004 Page 3 of 4 Hardcover Calculations Hardcover Zone 250-500 500-1000 Total Area In 7 jne 2,655 s.f. 13,065 s.f. Allowed Hardcover 796.5 s.f. (30%) 4,573 s.f. (35%) Existing Hardcover 300 s.f.* (11.3%) 2,598 s.f.* (19.89%) Proposed Hardcover 148 s.f. (5.57%) 2,592 s.f. (19.83%) • After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds NOTE; These proposed hardcover numbers do not include the two additional garage stalls nor additional driveway to sei-ve them as shown on the proposed site plan. Applicant was advised to provide updated calculations prior to the meeting to confinn that hardcover limits are not exceeded. Rear Yard Setback Variance The applicant has proposed to construct a second ztoxy above the existing first story. The existing home maintains a rear yard setback of 27 feet when 30 ’ is normally required. The existing garage is 24.6 ’ from the rear lot line, and is proposed to be expanded eastward at that same setback. In order to increase the envelope of structure in the non- confomiing setback a variance is required. The applicant has proposed to remove the existing shed in an effort to decrease the non-conforming rear yard. It might be noted that a two-stall detached garage could be located 10 ’ from the rear lot line, so the attached garage actually is less intrusive than a detached garage would be. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. In considering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping %vith the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds there is a hardsltip in the layout of the lot. This lot is a comer lot. In the case of a comer lot, the front lot line is dciennined by the shortest dimension on a public or private street. The shortest dimension on a public street is cuirently acting as the front. The rear lot line is opposite the front lot line. Due to the location on the home, as it relates to its required front yard, the rear yard amounts to approximately the last 25 feet of the lot. The adjacent lot to the north is the neighbor most affected by the non- conforming rear yard setback. However, the applicant’s rear yard is acting as that neighbor ’s side yard, where a 10 ’ setback would normally be required (see the attached photographs). Therefore, a hardship exists due to the layout of the ^applicant’s lot and its orientation to the neighbor ’s yards. Hi «04*30I4 May 17.2004 Page 4 of 4 Issues for Consideration 1. Will the most affected neighbor be negatively impacted? 2. Do the submitted plans reach the level of a 'total rebuild’? Tlie applicant has submitted an opinion that the existing foundation will support the 2"^ story addition. 3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Approval of the plans as submitted, including removal of the existing shed. 'I s . i , ua&B City of Orono Variance ADoIication A street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Date Received. UlZl iPt-/ jid; Main: 952-249-4600 fax: 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: . P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Amount Paid _____ Staff: . Fee: 5600 ______ Renewal; 5300 After-the-fact: 51,200 Double Fee This application form must be completed in full. Applcant v/il! be notified within 15 days as to the status of the appiicaTon Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address; ______--------------------------------------------------------------- Property Identification Number (PIN); ____11 .... tt ____M I i ^ t(Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year): '-j Iq4. □ Yes, I own the adjacent parcels. Present use of property: Q( Residential ' □ Other - ------------------------------ Zoning District: __________ APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal na.T.es and marital status required for each interested party) 4ame; rw crWcJ ______ Phone (home): 9'"i Address: j ->o hUi IHoa. —r..^o (tr.* Tt\<v ----------------Email: ___Phone (work); (A? -ZU-S •• A\-S‘*-/-0 i vic-.t^TCvVt.^ rt\r\ .1^) t --------------------- Fax: OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names e.*.d marital status required for each interested party) Name; *T>wv.crli\v4 ______________________________;---------------------------_ ----- Phone (horneV. ^ ^r - 0 Phone (work)y __4-^17 ----- Address: ---------------------------------- Email: g.g..<or—--------------------------------- ----------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost; $ . QC Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): QcW 0 ^.ccc\>lV___ Q MX \ . «« I AdL . ^ ---- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for yr application to be processed. Gi> esr (& Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. Completed Application Form Completed Hardship Documentation Form Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150' of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance. Government Center, A-603 300 South 6*'* Street, Minneapolis, telephone 6j2-348-59.1 Q, □ Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or ir X 17" for reproduction. □ Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet). //pn Topographic survey - including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8 5" x 11" ' or 11" X 17" for reproduction. O Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (prov ide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17") □ Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. * APPLICANT'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, t' staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request t denial of the request regardless of Its potential merit. Applicant's Signature: Applicant's Signature; OWNER’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigation and^erification of this request. Owner's Signature: Owner's Signature: -ijAWsfi Date; Date: f /10, (C‘ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Mee ing. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. ^ .«. V- ni A 1 /■o,. OL 1^, City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form (This form Is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting.*) Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Main; 952-249-4600 Pax; 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 For Of?ice Use Only: . City Planner: _____ Meeting Date/Time: __ PC Date: Mo'f'>y< What Is the purpose of a pre-application meeting? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal, inform them of the procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION; , Site Address: 0 /V '/ f C Property Identification Number (PIN); ________ Zoning District: LQ.-'iO Size of Property:Nt 'L n fc: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: _ □ Average Setback □ Side Yard Setback Rear Yard Setback □ Front Yard Setback □ Hardcover □ Lot Coverage □ Lot Area □ Lot Width □ Other: _____'fO 7 * <,-k>rz/, r /t>.y ~ Uff j y ir i' Applicant’s Initials: HARDSHIP: Applicant has received the Hardship Documentation Form, understands it as it has been explained to them, and is aware that it must be completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal variance application. OTHER INFORMATION: *Please note; Your variance app ication will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this form^vyrn be complet^by City staff. Applicant Signature:r Date: 14:- \* Page 1 of 3 B HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM This form Is a required submittal for ALU variance applications. An application will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City. _________________ • • Minnesota State Statue Section 394.27, Subdivision 7 requires that a hardship be demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted. The hardship must be unique to the property as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic situations are not considered valid hardships. In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated. HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP? . ^ u- This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a hardship, address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance is justified. The information the City receives is what Is used in deterrnining a denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will not be considered. Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request (some may not apply): “The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under corjditions allowed by the official controls." a i P . -Q n r» AsjfC/ Af-m va.U\ O C.C/>'^ysCA-.JO:£------ An f 0 V.U. \U UL»..iyi:=:- 1. 2.“The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." a '-kj, iLunOx (t.y------- \/ tr t-ti! _______________ 3. 4. "The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." •-•TO cr.lv..^LC .vrV- Wn AV CvAVirtO •■do C Vo .W— ' vC? .V ft «lLv) y CC^OTV’S 1 ^ -------------- “Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." r ¥ •. At V.' %k jilt Page 3 of 3 12.■The granting of such variance wiil not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstraWe hardship or difficulty." ^ cvS6. Vo:^ JtC^ . I /s. ^ . L ~ . w*- * #- I ‘f\oc: Y^ Vt'»^ * C.-<Cr.Ce*./. Z‘\-IV\£ Hardship Statement . . ^ u *u Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be described in the above cntena, descnbe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary): , i . <X- A 3- Vs>vK.\^ \\.CyvC ■ i\Tjk.-^vy.-gNC*'n^V 4 w? 11 *b~W» —K*J v (Sa Xjt.'y Cfc^vCp^-h ■ ■ LV_».v^_*V^-— *■ V*~* \vf<Sr^ ----- tLVr>L.-.Jk^a-<-ir<^ g_.\ *T-V^ ^.’.f O t\ ccyj. <^y-VCs-^-h ■ -yi'i ^povt.. ^ ’4 r - I 1/ •yi^ 6' -" • ■". -"H I\ ? - « "3 « K.. r I • •• # l IMflrrHy -^-2 e*a4 HARDCOVER CALCULATIOM WORKSi; SETBACK ZONE: (CERCLEONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____ 0-75‘ X LcngOi X X X B. Gtrage m • C. Drivcwiy X X D. Stdewtlk X X E. Ptlio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Of Fabric X X X 0, Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ____ B PROPOSED FLUIDCOVER IN ZONE* A. House ______ X Lcngih X X 0. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other ttmm •TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ♦ B 75-250' CSiiEJET Width X 100 Width / • xlOO - 500-1000* *• /jtA Z______SF.-Mtft»5C ISZ. 17 Z1 \Ob 3r& 26Sr H .!(? in i:b. IDk? S.F. 'SHj TD SF. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. s F •s'TtfHir j S.F. sF.-oecki:. S.F.- SF S.F. SF. R£r4iM(NCT t«A S.F.-HOlifH oi- 5h S.F. A S.F. B SF. SF. SF. SF. • sr. SF. SF. SF. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. SF. \ SF. Hg SF. 'bi/==F^ SF. % A B r ./ / IlMOTWy hOw£«5 SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 0-75* X Length X X X B. Ovige C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk •X X E. Piiio/Deck F. bandsc^ By/wuc q/Ft^c X X X G. Oiher TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ^ B PROPOSED K^RDCOVER IN ZONE' A. House ._________ X Length X X B. Garoge C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X G. Other total HARDCOVER IN ZONE total PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____________ -► B 75-250*250-500* Width X 100 Width a a a a X 100 Ooo-ioo^ 162f s.F.-Hi>t>se 266 \3B 2SJ8.. lX.o€S 2^ \'b1f n ! T^. Dfe S.F.-5fcFO s F-g p ^^ETAintht& w/ i NtX7 Tlf S.F. . _ c(>NCi-nr S.F.-C<’^1 H S F - SF. S.F.-C^MCiJeTi: SF.-Orc;^ S.F. _ _ cc’MCtfFTE S.r. - 9oftce>ii S F- p‘ _^MC,int espouw i\j>c\> S.F.- S.F. A SF. B y. 5.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. SFr- S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. ___S.F. __________S.F. ^ S.F. ST. S.F. - A S.F. 3 y. ESICN STUDIO 4706 Nicollet Avenue S. MINNEAPOUS. MN 55409 t l [::VATI()^ •oCAli. 7^ O- co; 7^ O-o- (T- O O (DESIGN OEVELOPMEN VtAY 12, 2004 i TIMOTHY POWERS JEFF OXLEY RESIDENCE 3210 NAVARRE LANE ORONO. MN 55391 A3 • * •• • • waMaa aMaaa ai EXISTING HOUSE SCALE 3/16"-r 1 \ Inc.M 4706 Nicollat Av«nu« S. ilINNEAPOUS, MN S5409 PESIGN DEVELOPMENT! MAY 12, 2004 TIMOTHY POWERS JEFF OXLEY RESIDENCE 210 NAVARRE LANE ORONO, MN S5391 EXISTING HOUSE LOWER LEVEL SCALE 3/16"-!' OeSICN STUDIO *706 NIcotl«t Avanuc S. MINNEAPOUS, MN 55*09 ................. 1 --- CJ ct: 1 — CO rr___ f \ rv Ll. 1 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT MAY 12. 2004 TIMOTHY POWERS JEFF OXLEY RESIDENCE 3210 NAVARRE LANE ORONO, MN 55391 LOWER LEVEL PLAN FIRST LEV SCALZ 3/16"-l T- TL lx inc.M 4706 Ntcollat Av«nu« S. MINNEAPOUS, MN 55409 1— O' -j Qc'":........ 1— CO -p' o ___ Ll. I _ _1 CJz: DESIGN DEVELOPMENT WAY 12. 2004 IMOTHY POWERS EFF OXLEY RESIDENCE 32J0 NAVARRE LANE ORONO, MN 55391 FIRST FLOOR PLAN SECOND LEVE SCALE 3/16'-t’ ee A inclV DESIGN STUDIO 4706 Nicollat Av«nu« S. CJ or._ 1— CO ro _ r > UL. 11 :z. DESIGN DEVELOPMENT MAY 12. 2004 TIMOTHY POWERS JEFF OXLEY IRESIDENCE 3210 NAVARRE LANE ORONO, MN 55391 SECOND LEVEL PLAN A ; * • ;v * f j t . • • 5 •.» .••.;•. i • * *r • .* • . * •• I • .1' *,% r.*' t ,Wv’ rr r Wu-Vi/ ; ,'i\>r' ^ ^'--- life#'-'-"' . hU iti'\^' ^."*''*i. ‘ '-t i*i'^ iV?. I* T ' \. ! •• I' 'm ! V ■{ §u .V ,».:. Wmm A kh"' mim v: •V.V S •1 :.'i. I'i 'iV -l!I A If0f: fO I."WJ SaB^r, ' ■: «?, ‘• Wi • : l« • V-l\ ' • rJ-r.vV/i .,<•■ •' ‘ .I-L.l. V.V '/Tf/ s. il v"!. .■ W‘■ •» i k; ijr.' -,y^< iC:-. .? 'S<v ^ . '¥ SP' ■mt' [; 'I •iN'i. l/ J I ) ^ •> * 3 »l I. i f.m 4>r- c - V >1 ^ ■> /.\>y • A* M. ^ /»\>o r'i) ■w S' ■■’/^'^• 4li%'i A' ' ^ ■•‘.2 .1 iti< -;^;‘;^fe^ Shi^B -h:-1 li toC-* fo!^-■^ ■ lit-,;«^S • • ( . % . jf’l' iWA Wm « * It . ^ *. 'f • ^ r- .V T’kVN U I • ‘ 'IZT'! M“*u K, . ^:-i __Z! H 2Sm§ ' p5 ,^'i' Iff y4l^. mmmm^ • •* ij 1 \«r*N;!wvu, ^V^'/ t fe-v^ T "im tkt.'i! - r ^ r ^ . . c*».. .WR- . u*>--,/>«^?46« .i '^jnSB WS>i ii„.'.•'5'>y«»\.» ' -vtJjl V % *• • • ------------------------------------- »•- Z' t« i •»vs ' -.• •: . • . Oi • *.mm^tiiiW'^i •. ''• - ►Hr • ' * r.t"' : w. r.''‘ • i ' < ., f*. • . 1 \-.i *■• .• ■■ ■■ ■.:-^.v- ■ ■M'^: • ;, t V ^ ^ I •4 VV}--• . *• * : (•»■!•» » , t ■ * >■- *• ,\v'. ..!• -•■■'.•. - -,\ : >- • • ^ ••' .* »- * f. . .* ' .• ' - • y, «r * > ' I / v/-;r •-/ - * -A r ' ' *). ”" •• -1\ i ■ ,< / ! I ■-■1 • ; 1 1 » 7m *' V * 'U i^*:: • ^ ^ #O.W' --iwwBnnBt-. rC^W kUNDAT *2<W 12 1611723120024 PROP ADOR 3110 OID COUNTY RD JwNBRNAMB ° ^ ^ TAXPAYER D SWANSON AAA SWANSON NAME/ADOR 3130 old county RD WAYZATA MN «19I •2 1611723130004 PROP ADOR 3167 UFAYETTE RJDGB RD OWNER NAME MARY M FAULKNER TAXPAYER MARY M FAULKNER NAMWADDR 3167 UFAYETTE ridge RD NAME7AD ^^y2^tA MN J5J9I 18 1711721410002 PROPAODR 2140 KENWOOD WAY OWNER NAME CARLS JOHNSON tavpaVER DONNA U KAOANUK NAME/ADDR 12329 TIMBER lawNAME/ADDR 55369 31 1711721410005 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIONEO OWNERNAME CLAIR T ROOD TAXPAYER CLAIR T ROOD NAME/AODR 1280 NAVARRE la WAYZATA MN 55391 38 1711723410027 PROP ADDR 3210 NAVARRE LA OWNERNAME USA MARIE MARTIN TAXPAYER lisa MARIE MARTIN NAME/AODR NAVARRE LA WAYZATA MN 55391 38 1711723410010 PROPAODR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIONEO OWNERNAME DONNAKABANUK Y^OCPAYER DONNA E KABANUK NAME/ADDR 12129 TIMBER LA W MAPLE GROVE MN 55169 • •**«•*• • • * • 82 1611721120059 PROPAODR 3128 OLD COUNTY RD OWNERNAME RARABDO TAXPAYER ROBERT PA ROBERTA LADDO NAME/AODR 1I260LDCOUNTYRDI5 WAYZATA MN 55191 82 I6II7233100I9 PROPAODR 82 ADDRESS UNASSIONEO OWNERNAME LAFAYETTE RIDGE HOMEOWNERS taxpayer LAFAYETTE RJOGE homeowners NAME/ADDR POBOX4I MTKA BEACH MN 55361 18 1711721410003 PROPAODR 2150 KENWOOD WAY OWNERNAME IAYNEMARIEPAASCH TAXPAYER JAYNE MARIE PAASCH NAME/ADDR 2 150 KENWOOD WAY WAYZATA MN 55391 18 1711721410006 PROPAODR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIONEO OWNERNAME CUIRTROOD TAXPAYER CLAIR T ROOD NAME/ADDR 7280 NAVARRE LA WAYZATA MN 55)91 38 171172)410028 PROP ADDR 2180 KENWOOD WAY OWNERNAME JULIECOPEIAND TAXPAYER JUUE COPELAND HAME/ADDR 2180 KENWOOD way WAYZATA MN 55J9I 38 I7II7234I001I PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSICNED OWNERNAME DONNAEKUBANIK taxpayer donna KABANUK NAME/ADDR 12329TIMBERLA W MAPLE GROVE MN 55)69 82 1611723)3000) PROPAODR 3171 LAFAYETTE RIDGE RD OWNERNAME DA* BJ ARNDT TAXPAYER BRENDA J ARNDT NAME/ADDR 3171 LAFAYETTE RIDGE RD WAYZATA MN 5)191 38 I7II7214IOOOI PROP ADDR 2130 KENWOOD WAY OWNERNAME DONNAKABANUK TAXPAYER DONNA KABANUK NAMF/ADOR 12)29 timber law MAPIE GROVE MN 55169 38 I7II7214I0004 PROP ADDR 2160 KENWOOD WAY OWNER NAME P M ARKUSEN * J ERICKSON TAXPAYER FAUL MARKUSEN/JEAN ERICKSON NAME/ADDR 2160 KENWOOD WAY WAYZATA MN 55)91 38 171172)410026 PROP ADOR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIONEO OWNERNAME CLAIRTROOD T/UCPAYER CLAIRTROOD NAME/AODR 7280 NAVARRE LA WAYZATA MN 55)91 38 171172)410029 PROPAODR 2170 KENWOOD WAY OWNER NAME DONNA E KABANUK TAXPAYER DONNA KABANUK NAMC/AOOR 12)29 TIMBER la W MAPLE GROVE MN 55)69 38 1711721410013 PROPAODR 38 ADDRESS UNASSICNED OWNERNAME D R SWANSON * A A SWANSON taxpayer D R SWANSON AAA SWANSON NAME/AODR 3110 OLD COUNTY RD WAYZATA MN 5)391 .J-* •« ...Vi (! ' tK If i.’S. •• * 4*. 4 r . ' •• • C |p |T^ RUN DATE :40V2004 31 17117234400)7 ntOTADOR 2215 KENWOODWAY OWNERNAME OAKOWCAALQICUYKA TAXTAYBR DAVID KUHCA A LUANN KUPKA NAME7ADDR 2215 KENWOOD WAY WAV2ATAMN $JJ9I 31 17II72J440KH PROPAODR 3240 NAVARRE LA OWNERNAME CLAIRT ROOD TAXPAYER CLAIR T ROOD NAME/ADDR 3210 NAVARRE LA WAYZATAMN 35391 UtNNIiPfN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPER TY OWNERS USr 31 I7II7234400SS PROP ADDR 3220 NAVARRE LA OWNERNAME ROBERT I RITCHIE TAXPAYER ROBERT 1 RITCHIE NAMEIADDR I*®! BEACH LA WAY7ATAMN 35391 II 171172)440093 PROP ADDR 31 ADDRESS UNASSUNED OWNERNAME LAFAYETTERIDOEHOMEOWNERS TAXPAYER LAFAYETTERIDOBMOMEOWNERS NAME/ADOR POBOX4I MINNETONKA BEACH MN 55361 OFTHR HENNliPIN PAGE: 2 JUl __ w “ H. ^ • >) ■' ‘)^ *. •> •• -^si? t*. . • Hennepin * • *’*. V. . V >’ ' ^ J Hennepin County-. '::0:StW0iWi Taxpayer Services Department a OLD COUNTY RD fM cx/Tioro^ouriofA 9 ^8) 5 r>w fJO \ ' ovaore 16-117-23-33- r* ..f f.A*J a '5 c “■v, t” M rr-»- t I —• • •• •• • • • • i 05/10/^04 05 108pm P. 001 0940 TtCQNOeROOA TRAfU COCN PRAIRIC, M1NNC0OTA 00340 PHONC I OSa-934>Q3S1 FAX : 9S2-9a4-QaS2 C*MAIi.l Maitfll0KNO@pWCaT.NCT Davjp B. Morris P.A. • ,!s i • * V ‘ I- ETtf^u^TURAL, ' *•' '*>* ^•* $,)* M • . *. y I . MAY 1 a. 2004 CITY OF ORONa P.a. Box #66 C ryrtai . bay mm 56323 A ttkntion! Janicc COPVt TIM POWCRS ® 1703S BRAYS BAY BOULCVARO* Wa YZATA AND WAUO Cl. H indi @ Room Inc., 4700 NicoLi-CT avcnuc , MiNNCAPaLts PRaJCOTt aaia Navarrc l.anc , Oronq ON TUeaOAY, APRIL 27, I MET MR. POWCRS AND Mr . CL H iNOI AT 32 10 Navarrc Lanc , for thc purpqsc of visually inspcctino thc cxistinq RUIloino structurc . a sct of the prdpdbco rcmdoclino orawinqb wcrc RCVieWCO ONSITC AND CDMPARCO TO THC CKISTINO FRAMINO. A oCQUATC INFORMATION ABOUT THC KXIBTINO FRAMINO WAS OATMCRCO IN OROCR FOR MC TO. CONCLUDC THAT, IN MY DPINIDN, THE CXISTINO BUILDING FaUNOATIONB WILL IN CCNCRAL BC CAPABLC OF SAFELY SUPPORTING THC NEW ADDITIDN. SPECIFIC and MDRC complete FRAMING INFORMATION WILL OF COURSE BE SHOWN ON THC ORAWINOB THAT ARC IN PROGRCSS. PLCABC CALL IF THERE ARC ANY QUCSTIONB. SlNDCRELYf D avid Morris P.C. strictly STRUDTURAt. Date Application Received: 04*21>04 Date Application Considered as Cottipicte: 04*29-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 06-29-04 COf/Ai REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ' 4 m Date: June 7,2004 "VG Item No /'■/ Deparlmeol Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Melanie Curtis Title: City Planner i^ Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-0315 - Robert Lund on behalf of William & Bonnibcl Byars 1389 Orono Lane - Variance - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR-IA, Single Family Lakcshorc Residential, 2 acre minimum 1.0 acre (43,713 s.f.) I40'± List of Exliihits: A - Resolution per Planning Commission Rccoinmciulation B PC Action Notice dated June 8, 200-t C - Revised Plan for 25“/o hardcover D - PC Memo «& Exhibits of May 13, 2004 Application Summary: The applicants arc proposing shoieland alterations to repair ami re- vegetate an ice ridge, an extenor remodel, roollinc alteration, driveway relocation and attached garage resulting in the following: 1. An average lakcshore setback variance in order to alter the existing roofline to change an existing low pitched roof to an increased pitch and incoqiorate a “witch’s hat ” feature within the average lakcshore setback. 2. An average lakcshore setback variance to remove an existing deck on the lake side of the home and replace it with a garden and a much smaller deck. 3. A side yard setback variance and aveiagc lakcshorc setback variance in order to add a balcony on the second story in place of a pitched roof set back 26.4’ from the side lot line where 30 ’ is required and 26.4’ currently exists. 4. A conditional use pennit for j'.rading and filling within 75’ of the ()11WL in order to repair an ICC ridge and create .sediment ca tchn11> ram gi udens. IManniug i^ommission Recommendation On May 17,2004, PLinning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval ofthe average Lakcshorc setback, side setb.ick variances and conditional use pennit. Additionally, the Planning Commission denied the applicant ’s initial rcquc.st for a hardcover variance for 28.3 “/o hardcover w ithin the 75’- 250’ setback, the applicant has since revised the plans to rctlect 25“/'o hardcover as pennitted Staff Kccuiiimendaliou A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-282,78-305 SUBDIVISION B, 78-966,78-1286, 78-1279 SUBDIVISION 6 AND 78-1288 AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-966 AND 78-1250 FILE NO. 04-3015 WHEREAS, William V. Byars Jr. and Bonnibel S. Byars, husband and wife (hereinafter “the applicants”) arc the owners of the property located at 1389 Orono Lane within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City") and legally described as follows; Lots 5 and 6, Homes on Brown’s Bay. Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the “property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-282 and 78-1288 to allow hardcover within the 75 ’-250’ setback of 28.31% where 25% is normally allowed, and; WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-305 Subdivision B to allow a side setback of 26.4 ’ where 30 ’ is required, and; WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 Subdivision 6 to allow an average lakeshore setback variance for a balcony and a roofline alteration including a “witch’s hat” within the average lakeshore setback, and; WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a conditional use permit per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-966 and 78- 1250 in order to repair an ice ridge on the shoreline of the property and to construct a rain garden within 75 ’ of Lake Minnetonka. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: Page 1 of 6 1. 2. 3. HNDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #04-3015. The property is located in the LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning Di.>trict, which requires a minimum lot area of 2 acres and a minimum lot width of 200’. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on May 17, 2004 and recommended approval of the conditional use permit, the average lakeshore setback and side setback variances based on the following findings: a. The property has 43,713 s.f. (1.0 acre) in lot area and 140’ of lot width. b. No additional land is available for acquisition by tlic applicants to make the property conforming in area or width. c. The property is served with municipal sewer. d. The property is similar in size to many of the lots in this neighborhood. e. The applicants’ initial proposal included a hardcover variance within the 75’-250 ’ setback zone which the Planning Commission voted to recommend for denial and has since been revised to meet lot coverage and hardcover requirements. f. The average setback variance will have no impact on lake views enjoyed by the neighboring property owners. g. The side setback variance will allow revisions to roofiinc a the same setback as currently exists and will have no negative impacts on the open space or character of the nei^borheod. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 6 5.The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a conditional use permit per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-966 and 78-1250 in order to perform grading, and filling within 75’ of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka and variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-282, 78-305 Subdivision B, 78-966, 78-1286, 78-1279 Subdivision 6 and 78-1288 to allow a side yard setback of 26.4’ where 30 ’is required, an average lakeshore setback variance in order to reorient the rooiline, add a balcony where a pitched roof currently exists and to add a witch ’s hat feature within the average lakeshore setback subject to the following conditions: 1.Council approval is based on the site plans submitted by the applicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibits A & B. Any amendments to the site plan which arc not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2.Hardcover in the 0-75’ zone shall not increase above the level of 0.6%. Hardcover in the 75-250’ zone shall be limited to 6,635.3 s.f. or 25.0% and hardcover within the 250’-500’ zone shall be limited to 1,700 s.f. or 30% per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit A. Applicants are advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. Page 3 of 6 r 3. Applicants shall remove all plastic or fabric liner material from the decorative landscape beds on the property to ensure their permeability as non-hardcover surfaces. 4. Required removals of structure and hardcover shall be com.pIeted at the time of footing inspection. 5. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (June 14, 2005). 6. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 7. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants’ heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 14*'* day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 4 of 6 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this __ day of 2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this by Bonnibel S. Byars, wife of William V. Byars Jr. day of ,2004 Notary Public Page 5 of 6 ifi iiiiii'itttliliili iiii STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this__day of by William V. Byars Jr., husband of Bonnibel S. Byars. ,2004 Notary Public I Page 6 of6 EWBiT a LOT COVCRAGg CALCULATIONS (ftOPOSCO RCNOVATION A«AdJ O' - 73’ ZONf: “ V 0 6% NOCnANOe 75' • 25C ZONf House 2319.0 w. e»»mrr PotCH sos CAK. CON^eCT. HiCK 65.3 e. GUJOiNG POilCH S9.S GAKAOe 529 O SOUTH OeCA 240.9 5GAMDtUWKl 51.5 /lAgA/lF gPT WALL t A ^ MINNETONICA BROWN5 BAY If 4 corouA IMS extSTiMC COI^OUAS MOOlAfO COitfTOuAS *«wcoMrouts ruriMTla Iilii Mitril CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 952.249.4600 ZONING HLE 04-3015 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 8,2004 TO: Bob Lund COPIES: William & Bonnibel Byars 4829 East Lake Harriet Pkwy 1389 Orono Ln Minneapolis, MN 55409 Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF REQUEST: Variances DATE OF MEETING: May 17,2004 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approval of the conditional use permit, setback variance, and average setback variance and denial of the hardcover at 28.3% within the 75’-250’ setback.4 VOTE:7 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, June 14,2004; Meeting starts at 7:00 pm 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, If you have questions, please call City Planner, Melanie Curtis at 952.249.4627. ' Jt, r f ■ EkHI&ITG ROBERT LUND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS. LTD. 4II9 EAST LAKE HARRIET PARKWAY. MINNEAPOLIS. MN SS409 (612)927-0610 FAX (612) 927-0}(2 BYARS RSIDENCE 1389 ORONO LANE WAYZATA. MN May 24. 2004 SETBACK ZONE: 0’ - 75 ’ EXISTING HARDCOVER; A. LAKE ACCESS STAIRS TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE: TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE: A/Bx 100- U. LAKE ACCESS STAIRS TOTAI. MARPCOVF.R IN ZONE; 1 () l AL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE: A/Ux 100- 72.5 S F. 72.5 S.F. (A) 7,582 S.F. (B) 0.6% 72.5 S.F.U nchanged 72.5 S.F. (A> 7,582 S.F. (B) 0.6% r 9^9 I % BYARS RSIDENCE 1389 ORONO LANE WAYZATA. MN May 24.2004 SETBACK ZONE: 75’ - 250 ’ EXISTING HARDCOVER: A. HOUSE B. GARAGE C. DRIVEWAY D. SIDEWALK E. PATIO/DECK F. OTHER G. OTHER ELEMENTS NOT ON SURVEY TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE: TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE: A/Bx 100- PROPOSED HARDCOVER: A. HOUSE B. GARAGE C. DRIVEWAY D. SIDEWALK E. PATIO/DECK F. OTHER TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE: TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE: A/Bx 100- 2,602 S.F. 38 S.F. (wood area near NE corner) 60 S.F. (r.r. ties and wood edges) 83 S.F. 2,813 S.F. (gravel drive w/ wood edge) 314 S.F. (brick walks & stoop) 141 S.F. (stone walk) 811 S.F. (rear deck & steps) 167 S.F. (front steps & deck) 267 S.F. (cone, walks and stoop) 76 S.F. (stone walls) 31 S.F. (wood steps @ NE corner) 179 S.F. (patio block: patio and walk) 321.3 S.F. (see attached amended survey) 7,903.3 S.F. (A) 26,545 S.F. (B) 29.77% 2,519 S.F. 80.5 S.F. (west entry porch) 65 3 S.F. (garage connecting neck) 89.8 S.F. (E. grilling porch) 529 S.F. 2,921 S.F. 120 S.F. (pavers) 240.9 S.F. (S. deck) 51.5 S.F. (S. garden wall) 18.3 S.F. (garage retaining wall) 6,635.3 S.F. (A) 26,545 S.F. (B) 25.00% BYARS RSIDENCE 1389 ORONO LANE WAYZATA. MN May 24. 2004 SETBACK ZONE; 2S0’ - 500’ EXISTING HARDCOVER: A. HOUSE B. GARAGE C. DRIVEWAY D. SIDEWALK 635 S.F. 1187 S.F. (gravel drive w/ wood edge) E. PATIO/DECK F OTHER G. OTHER ELEMENTS NOT ON SURVEY TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE: TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE: A/Bx 100 = 1,882 S.F. (A) 5.667 S.F. (B) 32.15% PROPOSED HARDCOVER: A. HOUSE B. GARAGE C. DRIVEWAY D. SIDEWALK E. PATIO/DECK F. OTHER 1,654 S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE: TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE: A/B X 100“ 1.654 S.F. (A) 5.667 S F. (B) 29.18% p t - EXHtB>IT D FILE »O4.301S May 5. 2004 Pago 1 of 6 Date Application Received: 04-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 04-29-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 06-29 04 io:Chair Mabusth and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Melanie Curtis, City Planner May 13,2004 04-3015, Robert Lund for William & Bonnibel Byars, 1389 Orono Lane, - Variance & CUP • public hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IA, Single Family Lakcshorc Residential, 2-acre minimum 1.0 acre (43,713 s.f.) AppUcaiioit Summary: The applicants are proposing shoreland alterations to repair and re-vegetate an ice ridge, an exterior remodel, rooflinc alteration, driveway relocation and uttuched gar «gc resulting in the fuilowing; 1. A hardcover variance to reduce the existing 29.48% hardcover within the 75’- 250 ’ /.one to 28.31% where 25% is normally allowed. 2. An average lakeshorc setback variance in order to alter the existing roofline to change an e.xisling low pitched roof to an increased pitch and incuiporatc a “witch’s hat" feature within the average lakesh— .: setback. 3. An average lakcshore setback varia ice to remove an existing deck on the lake side of tiie home and replace tt with a garden and a much smaller deck. 4. A side yard setback variance and average lakeshorc setback variance in order to add a balcony on the second story in place of a pitched roof set back 26.4’ from the side lot line where 30’ is required and 26 4’ currently exi'.ts. 5. A conditional use permit for grading and filling within "^5 ’ of the OllWL in order to tepair an ice iidge and create sediment ca'chmg ram gardens. _ ________ Staff Recommeudatiou: Plai ning ncpartniciit Staff rcconinienJs approval of the conditional use permit for graui.ig within 75’ of the 'ake, and approval of the side setback and average lakeshorc setback varianc/s in order to change the roollmc and add a teirace, and denial of the hariicover variance for hardcover within the 75’-250 ’ setback in excess of 25%. Hani.shtp; There ts a hardship in the existing location of the home to justify' granting some oj the variances such as sulc setback and average lakcshorc setback, however, staff does not find that a hardship is present to allow over 25% hardcover within the 75 ‘-250' ’.one. FILE 004-3015 May 9, 2004 Paga 2 of 6 Perllmtit Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-305. Area, height, lot width and yard requirements. (b) Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be ob Lot Area (acre)Lot Width (feel)From Yird (feel) Side Yard (feet)Side Yard Adjacent to Street (feet) Rear Yard i (feet) 2 200 50 30 50 50 See. 78-282.1.akeshore hard cover and land alteration regulations. In any LR-1 A, LR-IB, LR-IC or LR-lC-1 district, within 75 feet of shoreline, there shall be no excavating, filling, hard cover, temporary or permanent structures except as permitted under section 78-281. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Within 250 feet to 500 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 30 peicent hard cover. Within 500 feet to 1,000 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 35 percent hard cover. Sec. 78-966. I^nd Alteration; Prohibited. It is unlawful for any person to build, alter or repair any seawall, retaining wall or otherwise change the grade or shore of lakeshorc propert) without a conditional use pemiit issued by the Council. Sec. 78-1250. Conditional uses. Conditional uses allowable within shoreland areas shall be subject to the review and approval procedures and criteria and conditions for review of conditional uses established in this chapter. The following additional evaluation cmeria and conditions apply within the shoreland overlay district: 1. Evaluation criteria. A thorough evaluation of the water body and the topographic, vegetation and soils conditions on the site must be made to ensure: a) The prevention of soil erosion or the possible pollution of public waters, both during and alter construction; b) The visibility of structures and other facilities as viewed from public waters is limited; c) The site is adequate for water supply and on-site sewage treatment; and d) The types, uses and numbers of watercraft that the project will generate arc compatible in relation to the suitability of public waters to .safely accommodate these watercraft Sec. 78-12tn>. Topographic alteralioDs/grading and fllling. (b.) Grading, filling or excav ating of more than ten cubic yards is prohibited w ithin 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of the public waters enumerated in section 78-1217. Grading, tilling or excavating of ten cubic yards or less shall require city staff review' and permi! and be subject to other pertinent sections of this chapter. Sec. 78-1279. Placeineiit of structures on lots. When more than one setback applies to a site, structures and facilities must be located to meet all setbacks. Structures shall be located as follows: (0) Average lakeshorc setback. No principal or accessory structure shall be located closer FILE Iir0<-3015 May 5. 2004 Page 3 of 6 to the lakcshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots; except that this does not apply to stairways, lifrs, landings and lockboxes. Further, the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (b) Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OHWL, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Between 250 feet and 500 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 30 percent hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 35 percent hardcover. List of Exhibits A. Application B. Hardship Documentation Form C. Existing & Proposed Survey D. Existing & Proposed Elevations E. Photos F. Hardcover Calculations G. Existing & Proposed Floor Plans H. Lakeshore Alteration Plan & Detail I. Lakeshore Alteration Cross Sections J. Property Owners List K. Plat Map L. Aerial Photo Background William and Bonnibel Byars arc the property owners at 1389 Orono Lane Currently, a 20’ X 40’ detached garage exists 4.5’ over the rear property line into the right-of-way. The applicants arc remodeling the exterior of their existing home, and as part of this project, the applicants would like to remove this nonconforming garage, construct an attached garage to their home, and reorient the driveway to serve the proposed attached garage. A considerable portion of the existing .home is located within the average lakeshore setback. The applicants arc proposing a roof redesign to eliminate a low-flat roofed portion of the existing roof on the southwest portion of the home and replace it with a v.itch ’s hat style comer feature. The witch ’s hat would encroach into the average lakeshore setback and by design will increase the height of the roof on this portion of the home. The eastern side of the home is currently situated at 26.4’ from the property line where 30’ is required. This project will not consist of removal or further encroachment into the nonconforming side setback; rather the applicants are proposing to put a ba'cony above their existing sitting room and screen porch thus, slightly increasing the building envelope at the nonconfomiing setback. Finally, the applicants are requesting a conditional use permit to allow lakeshore alterations to repair a built-up ice ridge along the shore, install rip rap boulders, and create rain gc*-dcns to facilitate better sediment reduction into the lake. K i FILE #04-3015 May 5. 2004 Page 4 of 6 LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET # »■ ▼▼ LR-IA Lot Area Lot Width Required 87,120 s.f. (2.0 acres)200’ Actual 43,713 s.f. (1.0 acre)144’ LR-IA Required Existing Proposed Rear 50’- 4.5’ existing garage 140’ existing home 115’ proposed garage East Side 30’26.4’26.4’ West Side 30’54.6’54.6’ Lakeshore 75’75’ deck 92’ house 95’ Average Lakeshore 113’ to 173’ from East to West 44’ (on east) 66’ (on west) 33’ (on east) 60’ (on west) Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 1.0 acre (43,713 s.f.)Allowed: 6.556.9 s.f. (15%) Proposed: 3,594 s.f (8%) Hardcover Calc Illations: Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75 11,501 s.f bs.f (0%) 72.5 s.f • (0.6 %)No Change ”75 - 250 26,545 s.t.6,636 s.f (25%) 7.826 s.f* (29.48%) 7,516 s.f (28.31%) 250 - 500 5,667 s.f A • A • 1,700 s.f (30%) 1,822 s.f* (32.15 %) 758 s.f (13.3%) Conditional Use Permit Analysis A thorough evaluation of the water body and the topographic, vegetation and soils conditions on the site have been made, and are addressed by the following: The prevention of soil erosion or the possible pollution of public waters, both during and afler construction; Steps will have to be taken to address possible soil file #04-3015 May 5. 2004 Page 5 of 6 erosion during and after construction. • The visibility of structures and other facilities as viewed from public waters is limited; Visibility of the steps will be minimized by vegetation plantings which will provide screening. • The site is adequate for water supply and on-site sewage treatment; Not applicable. • The types, uses and numbers of watercraft that the project will generate are compatible in relation to the suitability of public waters to safely accommodate these watercraft; Not applicable. The City Engineer has not had the opportunity to review the plans; however the Engineer’s recommendations should be incorporated into any approval language. Hardcover Variance The property currently has 29.48% hardcover within the 75-250’ zone, this is above the normally allowed 25% for this zone and also is at 32.15% where 30% is normally allowed within the 250 ’-500’ zone. The applicants are proposing changes to the hardcover consisting of removing nonconforming hardcover for a total of 13.37% within the 250 ’-500’ zone and making a slight reduction within the 75’-250 ’ zone for a total of 28.31%. The proposed 75’-250 ’ hardcover consists of 3,242 s.f. of house and garage, 3,667 s.f. of driveway and turnaround, and 606 s.f. of miscellaneous patios, walls and terraces. A total of 880 s.f. is the difference between 25% and 28.31%. Side Setback Variance The existing eastern portion of the home encroaches 3.6 ’ into the required 30 ’ side yard setback. The applicants are proposing to change this part of the home from pitched roof to a balcony. Portions of the balcony and railing will be higher than the existing edge of roof, thus slightly enlarging the building envelope within the substandard side setback of 26.4 ’ where 30 ’ is required. Average Lakesbore Setback Variance Approximately 75% of the existing home is located between 44 ’ and 66’ into the average lakeshore setback. The proposed changes to the structure will improve on the encroachment, however, the proposed balcony on the eastern portion of the house and . witch’s hat and ruofline change on the western portion of the house will increase structural envelope within the average lakeshore setback. Hardship Statement Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exliibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In considering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shail consider the effect of the proposed VC nance upon the health, safety and n eifare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, i »ht and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in FILE W4-3015 May 5. 2004 Page 6 of 6 the surrounding urea. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in Instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration^ and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions wilt be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds that there is not a hardship to justify granting the hardcover variance for 28.31% within the 75’-250’ zone. The existing garage is located at the road and the existing driveway hardcover is excessive as it is not necessary to access a garage and serves as a parking area. Therefore as the property is currently over in hardcover within the 75’-250’ zone and the proposed driveway could be reconfigured to meet the required hardcover limit of 25% by removing 880 s.f. or potentially the turnaround, staff cannot support the hardcover variance. Secondly, regarding the average lakeshore setback and the substandard east side setback, staff does find a hardship in the current location of the home on the lot, as this project is merely an exterior remodel. Technically, the railing and the comer planters for the balcony are increasing the building envelope within the side setback however, as the applicants are not proposing to add enclosed living space as added square footage to the second story and the balcony will remain open, staff feels that this will not add to bulk and massing within a substandard setback. Issues for Consideration Arc there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends the following; 1. Approval of the average lakeshore setback variances in order to add a balcony to the second story of the eastern side, and to remove the front deck, change the roofline and add a witch's hat feature to the western portion of ihe lake side of the home. 2. Approval of a side setback variance in order to construct an open balcony over an existing sitting room where roof currently exists 26.4’ from the property line where 30 ’ is required and 26.4’ setback currently exists. 3. Approval of the corHitional use permit for lakeshore alterations. Heavy duty silt fence with steel t-posts should be installed along the shoreline once construction begins to protect the exposed slor* The silt fence should be maintained throughout the construction proc and remain in place until the slope is stabilized and vegetation is cstablic; .. •. Implementation of the recommendavions of the City Engineer. With respect to the hardcover variance to allow 28.31% where 29.48% exists and 25% is allowed Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny this variance and ask the applicants to reconfigure the proposed driveway (or other hardcover) to meet the 25% hardcover requirement. F City of Orono Variance Application p<ni6ir A street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Main: 952-249-4600 fax: 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: . P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 Application # 0^1" 3^ Date Received; 7)dHJdMK Amount Paid: (J> UJ. Staff: A.( > Vd Fee: rs^O') Renewal; S300 After-t!ie-fact. SI .200 Doub ’e Fee This application form must be completed in full. Applcant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION; Site Address; _______________________________________________ Property Identification Number (PIN); ^ - g.3 ________________________ (Attach legal description to application if not included on the sun/ey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year): u/^3 □ Yes, I own the adjacent parcels. Present use of property: I? Residential * □ 0*iher _____________________________________________ Zoning District: ___________ APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal names and marital status required for each interested party) Name: Ag»^£v>e7^ ^__________________________ Phone (home): C^iz^ Phone (work). Address: ^ cJr.. f^<Y. AT/V Email: rerans . Fax: OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names a'd ma.ital status required for each interested party) Name: ^ _________________ Phone (home): _________Phone (work): (^rZ.) • -^<^53 Address: /3 VA ■ / Email: f^/y/5 . <Sg?A-y Fax: 4-^' F?2-// DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost: %^OOCcC, Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): ftte: £>t<y/^ /yrg GXr^r ArrAtrzH^y^<^ /A cg.jv€>4cg-g T<> TT~tG ’SiDG <pg nhg 3TTrcjcjro/tJC.. TffC a w/>*gn z.eo*~£r^' ZGkJG is PEBr T^fG. psK^f:>GftJrY 3G 77<^ Fn>A. T7f^ 9^*~ 9,3‘^Z S. F: yfRe r/c^/>o5et>_____ P^kto MT/o'^ fje-pucLe- <Z£> r&t^a^er rfa y-fUT/C^ ’S.p,. Apc>iT74^'^AZL.'r a a^F ntG ^AsnzKy^ f/gye €>p. r*m OvBzj^/^c, a>AJ r^rG 3<r>' 5/^g!£■?>^^€^ ^FrSAtr^. F/€c>Fe?seo P^^gFATto^ gaJ FHA-r AiCeJ'i /ve>r /4A>y F-S)C>F KV<U-//~ /=^/€7Ve:e;, /AJT<:> FttG. St£>eYA<^ O) iT\ 1/^ * I ' } * • • • %1 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following Information must be submitted by the opplication deadline date In order for your application to be processed. □□ Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. O Completed Application Form Completed Hardship Documentation Form Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150 ’ of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance. Government Center, A-603 300 South 6'*’ Street, Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 □ Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8 5" x li" or 11-x 17" for reproduction. □ Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet). □ Topographic survey - including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one coov 8 5” x 11" or 11" X 17" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x11"or11"x 17"). Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. * □□ APPLICANT'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the t«jst of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/sho 1s solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of tho request regardless of its potential merit. Applicant’s Signature: Applicant's Signature: Date: Date: OWNER’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. _________________ Date: , Date: ‘jr-.'/ Owner’s Signature: Owner’s Signature: /i bh 7 Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting, Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. yt aIB B^Hieirg. Page 1 of 3 HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application will not be considered complete or placed on any met ting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City. _________ Minnesota State Statue Section 394.27, Subdivision 7 requires that a hardship be demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted. The hardship must be unique to the property as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic situations are not considered valid hardships. In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated. HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP? This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a hardship, address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance Is justified. The information the City receives is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will not be considered. Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request (some may not apply): 1.•The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls.' TWe* r~<f> nte The th^ LA'/Victr “The plight of the landowner is due toplight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner ’ "The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." r^/g «gy<vfc^<s.g 4."Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." rv< .________________________________________________________________ *#r.--' ‘ / « •.* 5. 6. 7. 8, 9. 11. { • .•9 • i Page 2 of 3 •Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined In Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter.* A/. A, •The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.* “The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-famiiy dwelling.* AV. 4-. “The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.* - i?rc,rArcn:> o~r rtte -A “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located.* rt^Y n? THts t^r 10. “The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial properly right of the applioant.* —,———T-T- a- . “The granting of tne proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, Code°^’ respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning y'£>^ 'tP^sz-c-/A-'iU. ^ __________ Cr^'^ • T i .* Page 3 of3 12. “The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty." >^5 feg 7~o y^<g». __________________________________ Hardship Statement Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be described in the above criteria, describe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary); \ ' r- •I ------ Tb ^WlfelTiOi C!!»^TiriCATc or 5vfivty rcK WILLIAM BYAR.5 * or L0T5 5 # •;. MON/C5* OM DPvOV.7J*5 6AY MtNN'JpIN COUMTY. MINNESOTA .\Y%.:'x '-j — !\\\ ‘■^ • \ '■x \ V \ \1 's \ __\.«Jv \ IS ' V I II II M 1 \ ™ n — . ■) If &M oncntrr^ or rtruivs l0U 9 H0NIM o» filtfiMt 8«ir 7/ I • tfmoUt #on fto# S) 4«nOU« «ai«^ f«H •*««•(««. •MMA t0» «wgl dMifM ®5i; V. I -• 8 c««Dvr fe««. m«»m M« t«vr 4J1 m« (WrA^t •'9 Utd «roM "JClSTiNG T^t •^.t» t« i^ow ®K* O* tM ««*cr^ locM^ * M»«« 4|*'»^ •>« « O* N «»«<»•« in«rcan k *>«• *411 t0 akoM 0fw "'X \ \ X3 /• »■•• \ \ V—____V N • t4i5TiSG rC/JtZ \ \ -------\ I\ xx-''‘"-Crs^X'-=% ^ ^ V V.V I\ \ >. ''-x\X \'^Xc<v "-----~-»x LAK£ MINNETONKA BROWN’S DAY M • wOktOu* L«< wum TJ«r3i“ G*>ic?ns < A5SXI-TC3. Ill: . mt * »»» tfOiXI “i&r « M UMSUM« MIM M« «*»«•• 4 >4?4 } • .'4 >t (existing Site Plan Scale. r=» 30 tr Byars Residence 1389 OcDoo Lane Wiyxttai, MN e/*'. •• '• ‘ <■ FtLA Ardiitects, Ltd Apdl21.2004 >1 CCRTirtCATC or SURVEY rOR WILLIAM BYARS or LOTS 5*6. HOMES ON BROWN'S BAY HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA AQgfOwAi n<^tocoyw-»^ 3.»ao« c ♦ “yi KX fptento 711 CO mC AMO«000 9TAJit9*«iC. #IT ry 2>o • few fWTwc •oonputi 14 Ct^ft ao9 tnii reNce ANo«.t tckt . wAu-ta If lM|ii.f«iaAM0t4r« vr wMi.fj 7 0MU ST0Me«mu..#4 44 0 M CONC PAVm • #9 Pe*Cf A»iO «fT «MaMCl4«#2 •#(' ^rcfANOMT MLa nci M #5-r? iIOm^ «0O0PO9T«n «MU3 #6 CCO m^ CONC9LAS.49 10.0 M (I 07OMC Mvra . fio 5T0MCfAVC«SMaM«l| . #11 0A 0 M ^ ytoNc fAvm Alio «muq »a >9 . #< i sroNepAvcasAciMfia . fu 7 f mA 0TONC ^At^iO AIK) MVAUWAyf . #1 f fai 3 M^ AOOrroiAL6«XA0COvtt total wisro SWUNG covtt ry. toa jonc • 7909MH ♦ 3ai 3 M^ 70IS J M^ 0^39 40% COVnAfiC — N OOCA ipton Of MfMtyo wAlt 9 «M4 S n«NiM OriMWt 0^ 0 > 44<«o««« von tfOA It <wMM 4PP« »4»4Ugl. M4 IMI AMiRN •• ft'»-*-#«<«««§ —Am CAnlOir Nl«. *«•<« MR lAMl arm* B tAHM* •'< P4M^ M0OP «R MAAAAA A«M«. TN« NRWy mIam Aa to lAnw tM 7owM«n«« cA IM ACACrM# fOM'% IM lOtMOR (A M AMAm 4mm MA 444 W WKJt0M •I it >oroCMr* Aw«m 4 Mm am fMfOA to «Ao*i AV Mver MINNETONICA BROWN'S BAY 10 4 CONTOUK UNI ■■ T^ ----------r >1 ^ GONOeKt; 0 A550CATeS. »NC MAPMMMMMMM—MMMfNAMjm • *••17 {-f1111i1i11!1101•M « *I0«V M *«• atMJRM MOUMMt tUM M«A ^ «> ANMMIN1 04 • •! wOlCATO OnST. CONTOUR UNt3 iMO»CAT» DOST CONTOun UN» TO DC RCGAAOCO tfwcvt vecK fruwrtA »T(»t w«u3 MlNNETONMi BROVN5 BAY Proposed Site Plan Sale: I **= 30.(T S£3S£SM «29 4 CON*(Xt LAC DfJST^VG CCSIQM MOO^fO COflTOt!^ WCONTOm^ ^ ■' /•••': X • C--‘. Byars Residence 1389 Ocoiio Laae Wayaca,MN RLA Architeas, Ltd. Apnl21,2004 V> \/lEW OPoNo LAf^E Kxisting NurUi 1 elevat ion Sc ale i"- r o " N or til Elevati on Scale l/h”-l'A)“ ---------__♦ -n•lU - --1 i;:.. Wl •’* ' ■' . ■» S ' '-i ^.v-*''c:*.- viv • j •vJiP : <j/.: -:.. *i. »»- ■ • prv.. ^an ir- ^7«.^'WW>w*.r' I d ir Pi. •-r ■ :K^inr-^sv —k»* • r'^' < 1 ir ^;-I '*•-r A * i * .' y»^f ■■■f.-j^04;. ■•f= rrr]• 4 .1 n ,«*..«- .i^. , ) : - • ( xJ..X^,:~iJL » J,.~.:v, J > ‘ ‘ I ■*.■•«, • I • * * , ' ' <* , <8 ,-r ' (?A ♦f'M'.. SWM r 5? 2 ^ • Exisung East Elevation Sisle.l"- I' O" East Elevation i/R"-r O" ['.Si'-’ 't-. < ::i(r. (u'vATi: fi - c .. >*T /» .. k 4.•>>-.• -Tf- * . • ••.»:.v‘wii (p m. >!i' ' ’ • *• -tT’' v^'ir^v -rr *-y:r«7T '•>!*• V ,*, 4 ‘rrv/,, 1 r*» , ^. . i 'r-i'*’ *. l-.j !2sa£3iny■y^PBMWifcgPT^ yy WSM *i V **:j ^ % ri- • •!'» ?•’rr 4*^ - •« Aa. ••• >v' r?!v # / ;y '■< lUU, 2^1 •V4 ',%■' I* W S8»" • # ••> ,.V 'd •v *. ■c . •* • .A '-tx'-' .'«a-. : • • . •’ ^ '.. .1. ■ .4;<.''tf' '-.V.> ' ■. ¥■, • .•'V v.V' ' » e ' /W, #t.' ^ .*-vv.Vr. I u *v^' I • *#%• ,^* *^**V ** ^ -:^r - • ■ ;- WWPPI 'Wi V . ' •>■•’ i'^ r t*?*K :i' • m ^V ■ ■^ •■ ■ .•^* v'!f9V ••:••■ Vr *'<!-<'• V'- • '«' 'V- * »,;• v'WP » » * ■* \v 1 fn ' »ir> ' : ' '. hv AWt If is r i «• • \m. M • ‘/7l ' : J| ■%.i; vJ'*“;•■•; -i^ 'Si: • '• m/i ’ '* •' ■f : •■ H*' /;' ‘s<i.. •‘-r\ i.! %. «r* wwwi>l ^ ^ -» - ' *T< . ». r r , . JV :• •.- s >' ✓ \.t M. , I V'": ./u .-•'KV ’V-' '-. •' ', 0 -.u-'J 'V .;*•<*•. Ml • >•■ jr-'j r ♦. V V. .\ .Hw.%ftrvt^i-^-»^y^,«^*W8ft/f ... ^ > •,.. J-- U ,#•.m. rw * / f ^ %m i • • >v ■ \ r . .*# f ^ '• • • ■•* * 1 %iVi .‘X ^;'ks n A-'V-.-% 'i- r.*.-i»o f >. -* I ^ ^Jt ^ I i - ' ^ ■ :-^ V •' ' Vv.^ I »» • ‘ iatH':>S'’ V . An CX-HlftlT ^ V B\ai's Resilience 1389 Of Olio L;iiie - \N;i>/;il;i. MN M l'. 10. :004 1 I la II 0 f C'l2|2f^p^fipT6 rK^t(blT Ct^ ( peVl-pH) PXlCHM^i ?LAT0 > • n \ i^ ^ m m. Photo 001 t:V*.{ : -l:.r tr ' , Photo 002 Photo 003;:™i* r •»-' •V X ^r.. V "■ * ' ^ V ' ^ s,- ■ "."~i,.-r' ■ ■■-^--'.r r-.' Photo 004 11 i Photo 005 -A- ,r. * . • I »% 1 . • .,u\'\\t\ I I • \i m^m Photo 006 v\^', iV A^' \ \ \t 1^Vv^vH'v; : t\\\n\W .u\ lil *iX ‘ 'S»*Sj; ^^iSi! ■iv Photo 007 ft * ‘ "• »'** V ’’i y 1^' ll* . . .t) }' :■•L ^ Ph(jto 008 53 '•i. • ‘4 f i.'i rtii \ji" * Photo 010 Photo 009 * i/» - ^ I' . • 5^*-' .■^- »A ^ i^<N»-.-.4.c: - A Photo oil Photo 012 ^-Vv 'N , ^ ♦ x.« X- ' •A. • ' KjlMtKK I _ I I NJL ASSCH lAIKS \K( Mill < IS.___LIIL iK'V I \SI I \M M\KKIM I'VRKU \\ \I1\SI \Pl)| IS \1\''4uv ,(.i:»V27.«M,ko I \\(t.l.'i *07 i>,;s7 I* (> HO\ II U W \|\Sl ()| (. \> ||>»'> ,,.;| ( <*.7>'<H> 1 \\i(.'.|» 7:^i4*S r i Bvars Residence 13*9 Orono Lane ~ \V*yz«m. .'IN Mav 10. 2004 • i 'f ■ J v', «'-f ' V. V^, aka • W. -j£.. Photo 013 Photo 014 Photo 015 -: 'N '•tsf r'_ 'a «>I —^11 (ai;“.M k- , • - - ..................; 4 ••• t. •• ^ Photo 016 Photo 017 ROBKRI ’ U Al> ■\SSO<’ I VI i:s ARrHITF.rTS. LTD. 4»2yFASri AkI MARRIITPARkWA' MIWKAPOLIS. MS l(.i:t‘C/JWiUK FA.\ »f*I2» 927-0.'!*: P () B()\ II.M. W MSSCOl r. W ll')7* th.M t FAX (6.A|J 7:<‘-M7X 1 BYARS RESIDENCE 1389 ORONO LANE WAYZATA, MN SETBACK ZONE: 75’-250 ’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE (as per calculations by Gronberg & Associates, Inc., Land Surveyors, dated 9-10-01) A. House B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E, Patio/Deck F. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A/Bx 100 = 2602 S.F. 38 S.F.(wood area near NE house corner) 60 S.F. (r.r. ties & wood edges) 83 S.F. 2813 S.F. (gravel driveway w/ wood edge) 314 S.F. (brick walks & stoop) 141 S.F. (stone walk) 811 S.F. (rear deck & steps) 167 S.F. (front deck & steps) 267 S.F. (concrete walks & stoops) 76 S.F. (stone walls) 31 S.F. (wood steps at NE house comer) 179 S.F. (patio block: patio & w’alk) 7,582 S.F. (A) 26,545 S.F. (B) 28.56 % A. House PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE (as per calculations by RLA Architects; confirmed by Gronberg & Associates, Inc., Land Surveyors, dated 4-21-04) 2519 S.F. 109 S.F.(west entry porch) 47 S.F. (garage connecting neck) 676 S.F. 3667 S.F. 62 S.F. (entry walk) 243 S.F. (s. deck and steps) 104 S.F. (cast terrace off kitchen) 51 S.F. (stone wall south side) 38 S.F. (garage retaining wall) B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A/Bxl00 = 7,516 S.F. (A) 26,545 S.F. (B) 28.31 % ^ .r ^ ‘ ‘r***s f!17 3 5 r •.4 • '■r>; >■AfXl \[2 tS> RlJV Architects, Ltd. April 21.2004 10 'v:„ ; ' j• • • •Si u'o t . » f.' - warn h 1^ I L*%-r:.rr---- Cl JV'Uvl Jl^ i tJ-. Jf 1\1 a /' i.> i •| f J.i. 1. J M ./V J Y II' m / / ■m— Existing Second Floor Soilr: i"= I* 0" ,-_X Byafs Residence m<M)rotto Ijmr Wayi4U, MN )• • c*; V . < K1j\ ArchiUxMs. Lid. April 21, ffiCM r <£> £ uf '• OA.“<r\Cle& ‘-1 prz^^^rmr. First Floor Plan Sc«lc: l/8"=r-0" Bvars Residence 1389 Otono Lane Wiyxa», MN RlVS Architects. Ltd. Apnl2l,2004 -•-I ,■ V ,3 * iT^ r W £ £ ) -- ^ -r * mm l=‘>n:ii'!l;^P - pfi";; I •, I !• . •\rr=z'g Second Floor Plan Scale: I/8*=l' 0" Byafs Residence I3H*J Oifmo Lnne W^y/.au, MN Rl^ Archii(x:is. Ltd. Apnl2l,2tXH ;■) . % Rctti&ir Lakeshore stabilization for Byars residence The situation at the Byars residence is that the ice has created a very sharp ice ridge at the shoreline. We would like to renovate a natural shoreline in a manner that will be stable over time. The attached section drawings describe the existing conditions and the actions we will take to achieve that end. The lake and the shoreline will be protected from erosion and sediment throughout the entire process. When complete, the project will provide a hybrid native solution to assure protection from wave action and ice pushes in the future. To do this project we will need to add large boulders to the bank to stabilize the shore. These large boulders will be buried deeply in the bank and spaced about eight feet apaii in two staggered rows. When the plantings get established, there will be little evidence of the large boulders, as the native plantings will cover them. In addition to the naturalization and stabilization of the shoreline, the client wants to redirect all the runoff that could enter the lake into the “Rain Garden" area where it will be held and allowed to reinfiltrate into the soil to replenish the ground water. Construction process: The first step is to protect the lake with the installation of a floating silt curtain in the water. As materials are moved, they will immediately be stabilized and protected from runoff by erosion mats. This process of protection will continue throughout the project Steps illustrated by the attached drawing: Figure 1: Typical shoreline Figure 2: Effects of the ice push on the shoreline Figure 3: The existing “sharp" ice ridge will be re-graded to a more gentle slope. The soil from the lop of the ridge will be used behind the existing ridge to be a more gradual slope. No materials will be added or removed with the exception of the large boulders that will be used for "Toe Stabilization". Figure 4: Stabilization and creation of rain garden infiltration basin. Figure 5: Completion of re-vegetation with native plantings. This project will provide a naturalized shoreline with stabilization over time and the development of the Rain Garden concept will assure that the runoff from the site will be collected and reabsorbed into the soil. Dale A. Gustafson Gustafson Design. Inc. ? = ; BCH-IB’lf «Tyi»cal Landscaped Shoreline with Rip Rap Figl Before Effects Of Ice Push Ice Ridge Fig 2 Grade Changes at Shoreline ice Ridge Fig 3 • • - A « • •*• « #*•*•*#*•*#*• # ♦*•*« * •**'e*#*^*< • • m • ^ 0 m m » m • *«■••.%*••• Stabilization and Creation of Raingarden Eidsling Gree# E0)ir Rom SieMtzilion Wave Break Fig 4 ai .............. *>M .'-* .*•**. *-* Ji:«u0»d«iArra Coiir^, *.*.***-\*-**VI*.***.'X'. *>X*>‘*.*I* ^eotf RcialUififa» RiAufI ft**##* #*A *-■«*««»*#•#•##•••••#•*••#•. •••**«• *•« ft#.###*##, • *»#••*#•••##••#»..«•*•## ^•ft^ftft**^*- # *•#«#### *ft#aft*«#eft###«ftft#ft##ftft#eft#ft#ft##,• eeft#ft#ft##.ft##/*# •#• « Restored Shoreline UpiendPtofiiinQs EjBsitf^ Grade Emrgent PlanU (dwlruih) Fig 5 '■ rr>xx - ri-.’•’SllAnL"* •’• Ar<aColkfii /••! “{rf/ I*.*".’RtfiOtUxraua RunoT i »#•*••#•# *.«*af\jein waUkiru Aica v.ciuc¥is • ft*ft«»«##ftr -'• » # ft# •-•••#------ e • #*###«••* •#«#*• ft ^.•r*X I*/'‘^2ooe'* > M'.% Final Planting Toe Stabaietion Boutdert Ice Ridge Forming & Lakeahore Restoration CftPVrteMlOOS Gurtrtioa Oealgn me Gniss i*iP ^Bvi v"’:- ^V!'^'A'^V''V 'Mm ' ? ;v T'' ■■' ,i •' '/i" ',1 ■; V A' ■ ,r " ' •’-.•■••f.; •',; i/<?•:•'>;• • . ■ ■ ^ ^ .i ;■ ^ I i 'i*/ ■: v>, ;• >i" t‘ V^ i.V'= l'^/-'vV■;V ‘'\V^H■:v it'';'v-:'V' .* * , •• * •■ * ••*^‘. • >-mLS f''.' .-y.H:';. ■' m.mtm’i* petetanidtK(|g][nt ¥''4 tfMb Wisconsin Av« No GokJon Valley, MN b^27 Td. (763)544*421b [^(seOdliBijnsB 1iS®9 ©min® OdiiirD® ©iraxriKS), MN. Scale: 1 inch = 10 feet May 11,2004 ^ .-. t * \ ^» .. < - * * ' • :*( • ■r I lOUSE LAKE MINNETOlsSy m wmi BROWN'S BAY RG & ASSOCIATE INOENGiNCCRS, LAND SURVEYORS. SITE PLANlIt I • AM A DULY UCENSEO PROFESSIOkAi. ENGINEER AN4 AM A DULY UCENSEO PROFESSIONAi. ENGINEER ANO^CANa I ^YOR UNDER THE LAWS Of THE STAIE Of MINNESOTA. 445 N. WILLOW DR. LONG I AKb. MN 55356 952 473 4141 DATE MN LICENSE NUMBER $ Fig. 1 I Typical Landscaped Shoreline with Rip Rap Bank loe Expansion Push *1 r" ' Fig. 1 Lawn Area , •*»»... ... , . s . .... ♦ , .« A • 0*0, , 0^ ■' A # • • ^ • • • r* • • . . ^ ^ • % % ^ ^ ^ A ♦ A ^ - A % «, . •. ^ ,. A % .. ■' e •■ ■■ « * A ^ .. A .. •. / .... • » A. • • .. •» % A •. IV < A A . / •« A • •« * .* ,1. . ■• A f .».•■«.".» ..«*.» .« ». • .« •. A A .. V . . > ^ .•.<*.>■...%• V •■..... V ^ A . • •• A ■• V t • •. A A A •« •» ..... .... % . \ .1 « . .. A .. *» A *• .>A a %A«Aa*.■•••.• aa%A.»A.. A • . .» A ^ .. • . .V . . . V ^ \ V • ^ ./ ., a«.V ... A.. •.• 'AaAa a a , . . ^ , .. V .V A A A ‘ a » aa • • % A a A A a .a A a .a . aa A >V A -a . a aa a# A a. .a A Before •« «' ,0 0% % A . a • ^ -*W#• » -• \ I • ^ Stabilized Zone Fig. 2 IS* After Ice Push r • a^irw • - S- . '■r ■ • Fig. 3 Regrade & Protect Emeigert Plants (bulliush) Fig 4 Fig. 4 UplatTj Plantings Rain Garden Zone Stabilized Soil Zone Final Planting Wet Area Plantings Ice Ridge Forming & Lakeshore Restoration Toe Staltilization Bouldere IL % ♦ a '■**i RUN DATC: 4/11/2004 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE: I 3S 0211721140001 PROPAODR 11I5 0RONOLA OWNER NAME NICOLE MARIE R THOMAS T/OCFAYER PETER M A NICOLE M THOMAS NAME/ADOR • 3M ORONO LA WAYZATAMN SS19I II 0211721140004 PROP ADDR 1117 ORONO LA OWNER NAME DOUGLAS C MOEN ET AL DOUGI AS A JUDITH MOEN NAME/ADOR ' ORONO lA WAYZATAMN 5J19I 38 0211721140003 PROP ADDR 1189 ORONO LA OWNER NAME W V BYARS JR A BS BYARS Yl^^y^YER BONNIBELS A W V BYARS JR NAME/ADOR • J*’ ORONO LA WAYZATAMN 55391 II 0211721140006 PROPAODR 1395 ORONO lA OWNERNAME NORWESTBKMPLS-NTLASCTRST TAXPAYER THOMAS«E0010297 NAME/ADOR POS/TAX SERVICES 1301 BOWEN RDS mil ARUNGTONTX 76011 38 0211721140007 PROPAODR 1397 ORONO LA OWNERNAME DANAM WELLS TAXPAYER DANA M WELLS NAME/ADDR 1197 ORONO LA WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0211721340012 PROP ADDR 1380 ORONO LA OWNERNAME D&MJOHNSON TAXPAYER DOUOIAS D JOHNSON NAME/ADDR 4194CENTER BOARD LA S E STU/UITFL 34997^176 OFMYKNOWl£DGEANDBEUEF. yL/JLg/ gy DATE 10 s E sSi * iMiutt Mi {xHifrir J ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS’ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM I (we) D<cVil4- TTcvoC of 1 '^9“T Crco:: (print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at 1^.9*) Cv^O'-v g Lgi»T€.,also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. til's 'roperw Owner ^ fS V Y/i\A Y V\ Date V Y U r-4 Property Owner Dd te r*WW*«**Wi I (we) "ry.v.cVM KNo^iO of ka . [print name(s)] ’ [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the properly located at I C also referred to as Land Use Application No._________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement. I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor’s project or use requires Council approval. If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. I “f . • ■ 0 • ^ j Hennepin Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department • • i O’ o , ^Parcel Information ^ T :•/ ■ ■ ' V.tVri f A|r'V'-parcel ID .0211723340005 ‘^ ^ iand.dtital^ (Xy^ StM ro»d auV^kfi$'9nd^j0i6[ I i*^*> •'.r.'-i/j. ■*-* '•'^>v« ^v-.^ ^.i- ^ ’ ' " .'. • 1 ' - . >^4 *« ^ ^ ^ % • ,»V • "“^gTr ilMltM Date Application Received: 4-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 4-21-04 120-Day Review Period Expires: 8-20-04 COl IKinif REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ' 4 mi ‘^"■''OFOHC vo Date: June 9,2004 Item No.: /5 Department Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron Title: Planning Director Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-3016 Henry Lazniarz/Wayzata Design & Development -120 Brown Road S. - Preliminary Plat - Planned Residential Development (PRD) Zoning District: Lot Area: RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential, 2-acre min. 20 acres Total, 14 Acres Drv Buildable List of Exhibits A - Notice of Planning Commission Action 5-21-04 B - Staff Sketch C - Draft PC Minutes 5-21-04 D - Memo and Exhibits of 5-14-04 Application Summary: This is a proposed 7-lot residential plat (PRD) of property abutting the Luce Line Trail and Long Lake Creek. The developer, Henry Lazniarz of VV'ayzata Design and Development, is purchasing the property from the Van Eeckhouts The proposal includes development of a private cul-de-sac road accessing from Brown Road South. The property and those adjoining proerties along Brown Road are in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area . The proposal includes obtaining municipal water and sewer from the City of Long Lake. The site is wooded and contains an existing single family residence. This property was the subject of extensive reviews by the Planning Commission and Council during the period 1999-2001. A variety of schemes ranging from 4 lots to 7 lots had been proposed, but the ultimate result was denial based on the lack ot suitable access to the site. The developer has indicated he is nearing an agreement with the owner of the access outlot (Mrs. Dunn) which connects this property to Brown Road. Staff has not been provided with a copy of the agreement document as of this writing, although the developer indicates one of the terms is that the Dunn property will be provided a sewer stub. The City Attorney advised that if the developer ultimately cannot meet the conditions imposed by the City for final plat approval, final plat approval will not be grantel. #04.3016 June 9.2004 Page 2 Please review the memo and exhibits of May 14, and the Planning Commission draft minutes of May 21. <0 I# A Planoing Commission Recommendation Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed subdivision on a vote of 5-2, based on the following findings or subject to these recommended conditions: 1. Planning Commission finds that the Planned Residential Development (PRD) subdivision approach is appropriate for this property based on the various environmental factors present including steep topography, creek, wetlands, etc. 2. Planning Commission accepts the proposed 7-lot plat on 14.0 dry buildable acres and accepts the proposed lot sizes, configurations and setbacks. Planning Commission concludes that the slopes of greater than 18% in the area to be developed are of relatively short length and they should not be excluded from allowed land alteration nor should they reduce the acreage of the developable area. 3. The areas to be preserved via conservation easements or similar open space dedications may be in the form of easements covering multiple individual properties rather than within one or more platted outlets. (***Scc staff discussion below***) 4. No formal or joint access to the Luce Line should be provided; any individual access points should be informal. 5. Approval is subject to the standard Park Dedication Fee, subject to recommendation of the Park Commission. 6. Approval is subject to the standard Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee. 7. Approval is subject to provision of the standard Road, Drainage and Utility Easements to be granted over the new road outlot as well as over the 40’ easement access to Brown Road. (Note: Staff has been advised by City Attorney Tom Barrett he is discussing the 10' Kallestad Acres easement with Mr. McCuskey, and / have been advised by Mr. Van Eeckhout that an appeal will be filed regarding the latest ruling on the 40' easement), 8. Road to be 28' paved width, not 24'. 9.Subject to recommendations of City Engineer as noted in his comments dated 5-7-04, except that the 40' access corridor need not be platted as long as it is covered via the required easements. I #04-3016 June 9,2004 Page 3 10. Subject to MCWD approval and permits as required. 11. Subject to standard Conservation and Flowage Easement over wetlands and creek, and subject to some form of conservation/preservation easement over the defined conservation areas, such casement or dedication to be in a format acceptable to the City Attorney and City Council. Summary of Minority Position; Mabusth - the areas to be preserved should be in the form of an outlot; this is not the normal PRD format the City has used in the past in terms of being able to credit total area for individual lot area variations... Kempf - neighborhood responsibility for the preser\ed areas would be greater if they were owned in common as an outlet... Park Commission Recommendation The Park Commission reviewed this application on June 7 and recommended that no public dedication for trails nor for park lands is required, and the standard Park Dedication Fee should be required. Park Commission suggested that no more than one neighborhood access trail to the Luce Line should be allowed. Park Commission did not indicate a strong preference regarding the method of dedication of open .space (outlot vs. individual lots). Staff Perspective on Open Space Dedication As proposed by the applicant, the lots would be continuous to the boundaries of the property, creating wetland and conservation easement lands within each private ownership. This is how Orono has commonly preserved wetland and steep rjope areas in standard plats. However, in PRD’s such as Painter ’s Creek (1984, the old Ski-Tonka property off Bayside Road) and Willow View (2000, west of Willow Drive south of Co. Rd. 6) the areas to be preserved as private open space have more typically been established as outlets owned by a homeowners association with easements or covenants that provide permanent protection of the open space.. How does this difference in preserved area ownership methods affect the individual homeowner and the City? From staffs perspective, outlot land that is owned by an association may be perceived by individual lot owners as ‘ofTlimits’ in terms of the various uses that might occur, and such land is probably ‘policed’ by the neighbors as a group. Because it’s not perceived as ‘my property’, there is a reduced risk of an individual owner encroaching into the preserved area with accessory buildings, fences, or other uses. Individual ownership of open spaces also reduces the likehhood of neighborhood recreational use of the preserved open space. Hiking and similar activities are more likely monitored by the individual landowner, who may perceive such recreational use by his neighbors as a trespass, whereas the common outlot gives the sense that this is ‘our area to protect’ rather than ‘my area to use*. Staff strongly recommends that the open space be preserved as an outlot, per the sketch attached. #04.3016 June 9,2004 Page 4 Issues for Discussion 1 . Does Council agree with the use of the PRD subdivision method for this property? 2. Should the areas to be preserved via conservation easements, be in an Outlot, or merely as an easement within each individual property? 3. Does Council have any problems with a single Luce Line access to serv'e the neighborhood? 4. Does Council have any concerns about the proposed lot sizes, configurations and setbacks? 5. Has the applicant satisfactorily resolved the access issue? 6. Any other issues or concerns? Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed subdivision as a PRD, subject to the following general or specific conditions: 1. Acceptance of the proposed 7-lot plat on 14.0 dry buildable acres and acceptance of the proposed lot sizes, configurations and setbacks; e.\cept that the areas shown on the preliminar> plat drawing as “Proposed Conservation Easements” shall be platted as an Open Space Outlot for ownership by a homeowners association. Rear setbacks shall be re-established for the affected individual lots and depicted on a revised preliminar>' plat drawing to be provided by the applicant. 2. Applicant shall submit for Council review and acceptance a draft “Conscr\'ation Easement” specifying the proposed conditions and limitations to be placed on the Open Space Outlot. Such easement may include provisions for the existing wood creek crossing bridge to remain on the property and address potential liability issues for use, maintenance or replacement of such bridge. Such easement may include provisions for the construction of a private trail with no more than one (1) connecting point to the Luce Line Trail, subject to approval of the MnDNR. 3. All areas shown as wetlands on the preliminary plat drawing shall be subject to the standard Flowagc and Conservation Easement. 4. The PRD is subject to the standard Park Dedication Fee requirement. 5. Approval is subject to the standard Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee. j r m-3016 June 9,2004 Pages 6. The portion of private road to be created on the property shall be within a platted outlot as shown on the preliminary plat drawing. The portion of private road to be created within easements extendingto Brown Road South need not be platted as an outlot. Approval is subject to provision of the standard Road, Drainage and Utility Easements to be granted to the City over the new road outlot as well as over the 40' easement access to Brown Road. Applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Attorney that the 40' easement over the Dunn property and the adjoining 10' easement over Lot 1, Block I, Kallestad Acres, are sufficient to provide the City with the intended underlying public ingress, egress, and access easements to ensure legal access of the public to all properties served by the private road. The developer shall establish the necessary road maintenance agreements, etc. to ensure that the private road will be maintained to reasonable standards at all times by the homeowner's association, and that failure of that private group to so maintain tbeirprivate road will be cause for the City to accomplish needed maintenance and to assess the benefitted properties for the direct cost of such maintenance. 7. The private road shall be 28' paved width, not 24* as shown on the preliminary plat drawing, and if feasible shall be centered on the 50' corridor established via outlet or easements for such use. 8.Approval is subject to recommendations of City Engineer as noted in his comments dated 5-7-04, except that the 40' access corridor need not be platted as long as it is covered via the required easements. 9. Approval is subject to MCWD approval and permits as required. Upon Council direction, staff will draft a detailed Resolution for Preliminary Plat Approval for review and adoption at your June 28 meeting. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Address the issues for discussion. Motion to direct staff to draft a resolution for preliminary plat approval. Li. CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE #04-3016 A NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 21. 2004 TO:Henry Lazniarz COPIES: Charles & Sue VanEeckhoul Wayzata Design & Development 120 Brown Road South 1117 Marquette Avc. South. Suite 2509 Long Lake. MN 55356 Minneapolis, MN 55403 Tom Goodrum Schoell & Madson, Inc. 10580 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 1 Minneapolis, MN 55305 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Preliminary Subdivision / PRD DATE OF MEETING: May 17. 2004 V'utc: 5 In Favor 2 Against Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed subdivision, based on the following findings or subject to the.se recommended conditions: 1.Planning Commission finds that the Planned Residential Development (PRD) subdivision approach is appropriate for this property based on the various environmental factors present including steep topography, creek, wetlands, etc. 2.Planning Commission accepts the proposed 7-lot plat on 14.0 dry buildable acres and accepts the proposed lot sizes, configurations and setbacks. Planning Commission concludes that the slopes of grcatci than 18% in the area to be developed arc of relatively short length and they should not be excluded from allowed land alteration nor should they reduce the acreage of the developable area. The areas to be presets cd via conservation casements or similar open space dedications may be m the fonn of easements covenng multiple individual properties rather than within one or liioic platted outlets. 4.No formal or joint access to the Luce Line should be provided; any individual access points should be infomial. 5.Approval is subject to the standard Park Dedication Fee, subject to recommendation of the Park Commission (will be scheduled for review at Monday, June 7 Park Commission meeting). 6. Approval is subject to the standard Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee. I i i ‘ii Notice of Planning Commitsion Action May 21, 2004 Page 2 7. Approval is subject to provision of the standard Road, Drainage and Utility Easements to be granted over the new road outlot as well as over the 40' easement access to Brown Road (Note: Staff has been advised by City Attorney Tom Barrett he is discussing the 10' Kallestad Acres easement with Mr. McCuskey, and I have been advised by Mr. Van Eeckhout that an appeal will be filed regarding the latest ruling on the 40’ easement). 8. Road to be 28' paved width, not 24'. 9. Subject to recommendations of City Engineer as noted in his comments dated 5-7-04, except that the 40’ access corridor need not be platted as long as it is covered via the required easements. 10. Subject to MCWD approval and permits as required. 11. Subject to standard Conservation and Flowage Easement over wetlands and creek, and subject to some fonn of conservation/preservation easement over the defined conservation areas, such easement or dedication to be in a format acceptable to the City Attorney and City Council. Summary of Minority Position; Mabusth - the areas to be preserved should be in the form of an outlot; this is not the normal PRD format the City has used in the past in terms of being able to credit total area for individual lot area variations... Kempf - neighborhood responsibilty for the preserv ed areas would be greater if they were owned in common as an outlot... Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: 1) Park Commission - Monday, June 7; meeting starts at 7:15 p.m. 2) City Council • Monday, June 14, 2004; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. 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. If you have questions, please contact Planning Director Mike Gaffron at 952-249-4600. Haft Ir •M m ___•r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY. MAY 17,2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. e and, to recommend denial of a hardcover variance to reduce the existing 29.48% hardcover within the 75’- 250* zone to 28.31% where 23% is normally allowed and to ask the applicants to reconfigure the proposed driveway (or other hardcover) to meet the 25% hardcover requirement. V'OTE: Ayes 7, Nay 0. 14. ff04-3016 HENRY LAZ.MARZ OF Wa YZATA DESIGN AND DEVXLOPMENT, 120 BROWN ROAD SOUTH. SUBDIVISION, PUBLIC HEARING (10:29-11:02 p.m.) Caffron presented the proposed 7-lot residential plat (PRD) of property' abutting the Luce Line Trail and Long Lake Creek. This property was the subject of extensive reviews by the Planning Commission and Council during the period 1999-2001. A variety of schemes ranging from 4 lots to 7 lots had been proposed, but the ullimate result was denial based on the lack of suitable access to the site. The proposal includes a pnvate cul- de-sac road that accesses from Brown Road South. The proposal includes obtaining municipal water and sewer from the City of Long Lake. Legal actions taken by property owT.crs. the Van Eeckhouts. resulted in findings filed on May 5. 2004. City Attorney Tom Banctt reviewed the findings and concluded they indicate the existing access casement does not provide suitable access meeting all regular City requirements for subdivision. However, Mr. Barrett suggests that the City proceed with review of the application through the preliminary plat approval stage. If the developer ultimately cannot meet the conditions imposed by the City for final plat approval, final plat approval will not be granted. In staffs opinion, the property is a candidate for development as a PRD, due the physical nature of the property. There arc only 14 non-wetland, dry buildable acres that are proposed to be subdivided into seven (7) lots. The seven home sites are proposed to be clustered within an area roughly 300’ by 500’, or. the high knoll in the westerly quadrant of the property. Gaffion indicated the proposed individual lot lines svnll go all the way to the property boundao' and emphasized that no open space outlots are proposed. This ts not typical of what the Planning Commission has seen in prior approved PRD, where there were outlet open spaces. Gaffron pointed out that with a larger, open space outlot, the perceptions of trespass are different than when the area is in individual lot ownership. The issue of individual lot ownership versus larger open space areas owned in common is one that the Planning Commission needs to determine. Gaffron advised the proposed PRD for residential purposes would be in conformity with the Community Management Plan (CMP) as long as density standards are met, that is, a density at I imit per 2 acres. He Paa^ 47 nf MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. anticipates the perceived density of the clustered, compact layout of perhaps 2 units/acre with individual lots that actually range in gross area from 1.05 acres to 3.90 acres. Gaffron advised the individual lots do not meet all lot size or setback requirements of the R-IB District. The proposed 35’ front and 10' side setbacks are typical ofOrono’s I’acre zones. Gaffron observed that the proposed site layout and lot standards makes more sense t’nan prior submittals as it no longer proposes long, narrow back lot necks with poor driveway patterns. Now it is a very clustered, compact development. Gaffron referred to the MnDNR comments in Exhibit H. supporting the conservation area and expressing reservations about individual lot’s private access to the Luce Line trail. Gaffron continued he review the significant Subdivision Review points addressed in the Staff Report, dated May 14, 2004, noting its highlights. Included are 7 Issues for Consideration to be addressed by the Planning Commission and providing direction to staff and the applicant. Gaffron indicated that any recommendation for approval should address the Issues for Consideration the staff recommendation, as found on Page 8 and 9 of the Staff Report, May 14, 2004. Henry Lazniarz, applicant, conveyed that there is now an easement agreement with the Mary Dunn for road access to Brovvn Road. The agreement has been submitted to the Dunn's. Tom Goodrum, Schoell and Madson, planner for the applicant, c.xplained that in an effort to preserve the property p'nysical amenities and to create a residential enclave with clustering the homes, the house pads are 50’ X 80’ and are expecting estate-style homes to built. Mr. Goodrum commented the layout feattires a massed relationship and does not now force additional homes next to the two back to back homes on t'ne south. He expressed the plat layout was redesigned to accommodate the neighborhood and the Planning Commission's concerns from earlier meetings. Trees loss will occur but is focused into one area with the clustering of the home sites and are looking to plant boulevard trees and providing perimeter screening with trees looking both inward and outward. He indicated the 18% slopes though not very long provide a natural setting for walkout style houses. Mr. Lazniarz added the road placement is proposed where the existing driveway is now to minimize site disruption. Paee48 of 5 8 I I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Mr. Goodrum concluded by stating the house will be custorn-built snd sensitive to the site, noting the grad.ng plan si. . probably is e.xceedmg what will occur. Chair Mabusth asked for information about the final slopes behind the house pads. Mr. Goodrum e.\plained there is a 6’ drop over 50 ’ distance which is a 12% slope. Mr. Lazniarz assured the Planning Commission that even though the plans indicated house pads 50' x SO’ as a conservative e.xample. he t.xpects no actual house to be constructed to that size. Mr. Lazniarz added their intent is to maximize the space between homes. It was confinned that only one principal structure with anached garages are proposed for the site. Chair Mabusth invited comments from the public. Kevin Bigelow, 32 Apple Glen Road, Long Lake, questioned if the plans still propose using their dead-end road. Mr. Lazniarz confirrned the PRD only proposes the extension ot sewer and water from Long Lake. Chair Mabusth offered Mr. Bigelow a copy of the Staff Report, dated May 14. 2004. for more infomiahon. Doug Coleman, 140 S. Bro\vn Road. Kallestad Acres, asked for confunnanon of the proposed rear yard setbacks. It was confirmed there would be a 50 ’ rear yard setback to the Kallestad Acres lOts and at least 75 setback to creek. Sandy Coleman, 140 S. Brown Road, Kallestad Acres, asked if the existing home woulc remain. She was told that the plans indicated the existing home would be kept on site. Mr. Lazniarz stated the sewer and water casement will be ran down the easement with Dunn’s and it will be provided sewer and water as part of the agreement. Mr. Coleman as ’iced for more information about the removal of trees and final slopes at the knoll. Mr. Goodrum explained that from the Kallestad Acres property there is a 50 ’ setback and no grading is expected withm this setback, so that no trees will be affected within 50 ’ of the Coleman's lot line. Mr. Lazniarz continued that each lot will be custom graded to minimize the loss of trees and he contmiRed . j planting trees along the driveway to make it a tree-lined road and to replace trees lost on house sites. He repeated their intention to minimize impacts to each site. Page 49 of 58 MEsTJTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p m. JiT. Dunn, speaking for Mary Dunn, remarked the agreement has not yet been reached as Mr. Lazniarz stated. It is under consideration and not yet signed. Chair Mabusth asV.ed for further public comments. Mrs. Coleman asked for further confinnation that there the houses proposed will be 50’ back from her property line. Mr. Lazniarz responded that the setback is 50' but the houses will not be positioned at the setback, resulting in potentially more distance, up to about 100 to the Coleman’s property line because t'ne houses will be closer to the proposed street. Chair Mabusth closed the public hearing. Chair Mabusth led the Planning Commission is discussion of the following Issues for Consideration: 1. Does the Planning Commission agree with the use of the PRD subdivision method for this property? It was a consensus that the PRD subdivision method should be used for this property. 2. Should the areas to be preserved via conservation easements, be in an Outlot, or merely as an easement within each individual property? Chair Mabusth commented that to be consistent with prior Planning Commission decisions, outlets owned by a homeowners association were created. Gaffror. concurred and e.xplained that in standard subdivision plats usually individual lots were created vvith a wetland easement. He advised that within an outlot the City can put whatever conditions'easements is deemed necessary. Bremer asked for information about why not have an outlot ve'>;us individual lot ownership; Gaffror. responded that with a homeowner’s association managing an outlot there is greater recreatior.s use by more people than if it is individually owned and had potential trespass issues. Bremer commented that she would not support a path to the Luce Line Trail. Chair Mabusth concurred with Bremer and thought there m.ay be problem.s with people trespassing from the Luce Line Trail into t’ne subdivision area. She suggested the Parks Commission should look at the proposed plan prior to Planning Commission action to asceruin if they have an interest in a walking access to the creek and its existing bridge. Mr. Van Eeckliout interjected that in the winter skiers use the land but in the summer there arc very few. Page 50 of 58 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:001 '-.’ockp.tn. iCcmpf suggested the Planning Contmission focus on one issue & time. He stated he liked the ide& of s Isrge outlot used &s a shared amenity managed by a homeowners association. Kempf noted the matter of pedestriart access perhaps should be left to the Parks Commission for review and decision. Jurgens commented that with a large outlot it may create one giant access to the Luce Line Trail. Gaffron asked Fritzler about his experience with observing winter skiers use on the former Ski Tonka slopes since he lives across the Luce Line Trail. Fritzler replied there is more snowmobiler use coming off the Luce Line ridge and running up the hill and not from the owners or residents. It creates a spot where there is no enforcement. In the summer, there had been some dirt bike use some while ago but not recently Also, horseback riders usually stay on the limestone or horse trail. Chair Mabusth asked Mr. Van Eeckhouts about his experience with the snowmobilers going on the property. He replied there are very few and it is post No Trespassing. Mr. Goodrum commented that as an outlot no one will feel ownership of it and believed individual lots provided more control of the area. Rahn concurred that individual lot ownership is better than an outlet design. Chair Mabusth polled the Planning Commissioners; individual lot ownership received 5 supporters, outlot design received 2 supporters. Chair Mabusth expressed she supported the outlot design to have bener controls and enforcement than individually owned lots. 3. What type of Luce Line access should be allowed (in terms of pathways, etc)? This issue was referred to the Parks Commission before the Planning Commission would make a decision. 4. Does Planning Commission accept the proposed lot sizes, configurations and setbacks? Chair Mabusth stated she would not accept the lot lines as shown as she supports an outlot layout. Further, she commented that she did not think each lot had to a certain square footage area but m an attempt to minimize impacts on the surrounding areas building pads could be created within the setbacks to adjacent parcels, such as in the Northgate subdivision. She concluded that the proposed layout looks more like a standard subdivision than a PRD. Page SI of SS Si MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY. MAY 17,2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. There followed general discussion about whether the proposal should be looked at as a standard subdivision with individual lot ownership, and what makes the proposal a PRD. Brcrr.er commented that cluster.r.g the houses creates a more environmentally design without huge lawns. Mr. Goodrum indicated that the 12 acres of conservation and dedication of the area bcm'ccn the creek and the Luce Line Trail are fearures that make it a PRD. Gaffiron referred to the PRD standards in E.xhibit N*l and read the standards into the record. He summarized that a PRD is not required to have an outlot for open space bur requires open space dedication in some form and that a PRD can be done under the Code due to a property unique characteristics. He stated there is nothing wrong with the proposed layout if structured correctly but it m undoubtedly one of the most unique subdivisions done in a while because it is proposing clustering of the houses and its physical features for possible public amenities on this property. Mr. Lazniarz pointed out that on a plat in another city, they proposed conservation easements described as drainage/utility caseir.unt on each lot with a metes and bounds description and with monuments to mark the easement crossing each property line. This type of easement would be filed with the chain of title and the association covenants would stipulate what can and cannot be done within the conservation easement. Gaffron added the City Attorney should review the various methods for drainage and utility easement and conservation easement and if these easements meet the open space requirement for subdivision. Mr. Lazniarz offered to provide easement language from the City of Minnetonka as an e.xample for review. Gaffiron stated the City has standard language for conservation and flowage easements over wetlands and asked what the Planning Commission would want to allow on the slope or dry areas. Mr. Goodrum e.xplained his experience with the City of Minnetonka and homeowner association on what is allowed in the conservation easements. He summarized there is a full range of what may be allowed or restricted, such as no touching of trees, no removal of trees, no removal of dead brush, removal of fallen trees may allowed as well as buckthorn, foot paths may be allowed and some restricted access as a measure of pure conservation. t . •m It was a consensus that no structures, no fencing, no tree houses, no bridges, no storage, no logging or cutnng of trees, no keeping of animals, no motor vehicles, no boats would be allowed in a proposed conservation easement. 1 5. Does Planning Commission fed that slopes of greater than 18% should be protected from land alteration for this development? If so. a very different layout might result. Chair Mabusth commented that to develop this property would require land alterations of the IS% slopes. Mr. Lazntarz reiterated that housing costs will maintain smaller than proposed house pad sizes and this will minimize slope impacts. It was a consensus to not prohibit land alteration of slopes greater than 18%. 6. Is Planning Commission comfortable with moving ahead with this review given that the issue of access to Brown Road is still unresolved? David McCuskey, Shorewood, attorney for David and Connie McCuskey, 130 Brown Road South, advised the McCuskey's property had a lO’road and utility casement over it in favor of the City. He questioned if this easement is proposed to be used for the private roadway. Chair Mdbusth responded that an e.\isting 40' casement granted to an individual for access to the subject property, and there is also the 10’ wide along the 40’ casement. Gaffron confirmed the 10’ city casement is proposed to be used in combination wuh ihc 40’ casctiicnl. Mr. McCuskey asked if the City Attorney concurred with using a public easement in combination with a private road. Gaffron indicated staff will confer wuh the City Attorney to confirm these facts and asked for Mr. McCuskey ’s phone and address to advise him of the City Attorney ’s opinion. Mr. Lazniarz confirmed the proposed 24 ’ private road is situated within the 40' easement within the total 50' width. Gaffron indicated that normally the City prefers roadways to be centered within t’ne easement due to sno ’.v storages needs, etc. He summarized the question if the 10' public easement can be used by a private developer for private road purposes and there needs to be resolution of the question. Gaffron introduced a concept whereby the portion of road from Brown Road to the subject property becomes public road. He indicated more discussions are needed on this issue. Chair Mabusth asked to discuss the road width issue, stating that if the spirit of a PRD is to minimize impact, would more trees be lost with the 24' road width section. Mr. Lazniarz indicated the proposal includes curb and gutter but stated they are open-minded on whether the road would be an urban or rural road section design. Gaffron indicated the City Engineer should look at this and provide a recommendation. 4 i# '•Page 53 of 58 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Chair Mabusth questioned the Planning Commission is there is enough resolution on the main access to the property for voting at this meeting. She suggested the Planning Commission wait for the Parks Commission to comment on the access to the Luce Line Trail. Gaffron indicated that the Parks Commission may look at this matter at its meeting on the first Monday in June 2004. He also stated the road access issue could be addressed as part of Final Plat approval. Leslie as’iced if the Parks Commission recommendation on access to the Luce Line Trail would actually affect the site lot layout. Bremer did not support that a point access to the Luce Line Trail be approved with the PRD and therefore it was not necessary to go through the process of Parks Commission review. Rahn commented that the access issue is not something needed to be determined but left to the individual lot oivner to determine. Chair Mabusth responded that it is a maner of access control is an individual lot owner creates an informal path to the Luce Line Trail. I: was pointed out there are only three lots abutting the Luce Line Trail. It was a consensus to not stipulate any point access. Bremer moved, Rahn seconded, to recommend approval of Application *04-3016 for Preliminary Plat - Planned Residential Development (PRD), Henry LazniarzAVayzata Design and Development, 120 Brown Road South for a proposed 7-lot residential plat of property abutting the Luce Line Trail and Long Lake Creek, subject to the following stipulations: a. Approving the site layout and lot standards, lot configuration and setbacks b. Requiring a conservation easement to match the utility/drainage easement as shown c. Requiring no joint access point to the Luce Line Trail d. Resolving the legal issues resulting from the private road and assuring real access to the property, including utilization of the lO’public easement e. Requiring a Phase I archaeological survey be completed prior to Final Plat Approval VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 2. Chair Mabusth expressed her opinion that she agreed with all issues except for the format of the PRD. She supported designation of an open space outlot with credit for the area based on the outlet area and all of the dry buildable area instead of individual lots. Pawa S4 of M EL-. 4 ) MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17,2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Kempf stated he agreed with the entire proposal except that if it were an outlot with neighborhood responsibility for the area he expected the neighborhood would evolve differently from individually owned lots. 15. #04-3017 SPRUCE HILL PROPERTIES, INC., 3775 BaYSIDE ROAD, VARIANCES, PITBLIC HEARLNG (11:42-11:50 p.m.) Dave ThoTJ, Spoice Hill Properties, Inc., applicant, was present, Curtis explained the application requesting hardcover, lake setback and rear yard (street) setback variances in order to do an extensive remodel, which consists of renovating the first floor and re-constructing the 'A story above. She recommended approval of the application and plans as submitted due to the hardships inherent to the configuration of the property, in particular, the shallow lot depth and size and location of the existing home on the lot. Matt Cookson, Spruce Hill Properties, agreed that the shallow nature of the property makes limited buildable area, as the lake yard setback and front yard setback overlap. He stated the house now sits on the most conforming location on the lot meeting the 30 ’sidc yard setback. The proposed remodel is on the existing foundation and slightly reduces the amount of existing hardcover. Further, he suggested they could reduce the cement patio to the setback of the deck, reducing it about 6’ back. Dave Thorp. Spruce Hill Properties, commented that the deck is essential to the property. Chair Mabusth pointed out the c.xisting patio/landing is cracked and suggested it be replaced. The applicants indicated it is proposed to be replaced. Chair Mabusth moved, Kempf seconded, to recommend approval of Application #04-3017, Spruce Hill Properties, to grant a hardcover variance to permit less than 3.8% hardcover within the 0-75’ zone when 0% Is normally allowed and 3.9% currently e.xists (removal of 7.5’ x 2.5’ chimney shaft) and when added to the 75’-250’ zone allowance yields total hardcover of less than 30% due to the reduction in size of the patio by about 6’, to grant a lake setback variance to permit structure within 75’ of the lake and to grant a street yard setback variance to permit a 22’ setback when 50 ’ is normally required and 22’ currently exists. She commented that this is certainly a hardship lot. Chair Mabusth asked for public comment. There were none, b Date Application Received: 4-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 4-21-04 120-Day Review Period Expires: 8-20-04 To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Mabusth and Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator Mike Gaffron, Planning Director May 14, 2004 /t04-3016 Henry LazniarzAVay^ata Design & Development -120 Brown Road S, Preliminary Plat - Planned Residential Development (PRD) - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential, 2-acrc min. 20 acres Total, 14 Acres +. Dry Buildablc Application Summary: This is a proposed 7-lot residential plat (PRD) of property abutting the Luce Line Trail and Long Lake Creek. The developer. Henry Lazniarz of Wayzata Design and Development, is purchasing the property from the Van Ecckhouts The proposal includes development of a private cul-de-sac road accessing from Brown Road South. The property is in the Metropolitan Urban Service .Area but does not abut any existing municipal sewer lines. The proposal includes obtaining municipal water and sewer from the City of Long Lake. The site is wooded and contains an existing single family residence. This property was the .subject of extensive reviews by the Planning Commission and Council during the period 1999-2001. A variety of .schemes ranging from 4 lots to 7 lots had been proposed, but the ultimate result was denial based on the lack of suitable access to the site. The owners of the property, the V'an Eeckhouts, have taken legal action to have their existing ea.scment declared as usable for access to the property. City Attorney Tom Barrett has reviewed the Findings of Fact. Conclusions of Law. and Order of Judge Holahan filed on May 5. 2004, and has concluded that the findings indicate the existing ncce.ss easement docs not prov.de suitable access meeting all regular City requirements for subdivision. However, Mr. Barrett suggests that the City proceed with review of the application through the preliminary plat approval stage. If the developer ultimately cannot meet the conditions imposed by the City for final plat approval, final plat approval will not he granted. Staff Recommendation: The nature of this property is such that a relatively small portion of the 20-acre total is suitable for actual construction, due to the existence of wetlands, drainage ways, the creek, and steep slopes. The property is a candidate for development as a PRD, in staffs opinion. Planning Commission is advised to make recommendations regarding a small number of issues that will affect the layout of the subdivision. The result of those conclusions will affect the final recommendation to Council, and the final plat layout. «>04-3016 May 14.2004 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application & Narrative B • Plan Sheets: I: Cover Sheet 2: Existing Conditions 3: Tree Preservation Plan 4: Preliminary Plat 5: Preliminary Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan 6: Preliminary Utility Plan 7: Typical Details 8: Typical details C - Site Map Exhibit D - 4/16/04 Letter from City of Long Lake re: Utilities E - 3/24/04 Letter from Schoell & Madson: Cultural Resources Review F - Excerpts: 4/21/04 Stormwater Management Report; Existing & Proposed Drainage Maps G - City Engineer Tom Kellogg Comments 5/7/04 H - DNR/Martha Reger Comments 5/12/04 I - Order of Judge Holahan Filed 5/5/04 J - Full Size Copy of Preliminary Plat K - Plat Map L - Property Owners List M - Airphoto of Site N - PRD Zoning Code Standards; RR-1B Standards O - CMP Excerpts re: Private Roads P • Staff depiction of slopes exceeding 18% PRD PROCESS The Planned Residential Development process is available to land subdividers subject to Council approval, as an alternative to standard minimum lot size subdivision of land. The purpose of this plan is to enhance the appearance of neighborhoods through preservation of natural open spaces, to counteract the effects of urban congestion and monotony, to provide cohesive structure to neighborhood design, to offer recreation opportunities close to home, and to aid in improving the welfare in general of City residents. Land owners may submit land subdivision plans for any "R" District without adherence to minimum lot size requirements for each building lot, provided that the total number of building lots, or dwelling units, shall not exceed the number of such lots or units permissible under the minimum lot size requirements of the zoning district or districts in which such land is situated. The dwelling units permitted may be, at the discretion of the Council and subject to the conditions set forth by the Council, in detached, attached or multiple family dwelling structures; subject to the limitations provided for in each zoning district. The City Council has broad discretion as to whether a property will be allowed to subdivide using the PRD process. The PRD should be considered when unique land configuration or natural amenities can be best protected and preserved by relaxing the lot suMivision regulations. A I #04-3016 May 14,2004 Page 3 The dedication, ownership, use and maintenance of open spaces created by the application of the Planned Residential Development shall be subject to conditions deemed necessary by the Council to assure the preservation of such open spaces for their intended purposes. The dedication and ownership of such open spaces may be through: (1) Homeowners Association; (2) Landlord Maintenance; (3) Special Service District; (4) Municipal Ownership; or (5) any other method deemed appropriate by the Council to accomplish the purposes of this plan. SUBDIVISION REVIEW 1. Conformity with 2000-2020 Orono Community Management Plan (CMP) The property is guided for single family residential use at a density of 1 unit per 2 acres. The proposed layout contains 7 lots on 14.0 non-wetland acres. Based on the City ordinances that exclude road right-of-way from a calculable area, the only way the code density requirement could be met for 7 lots is via a Plarmed Residential Development (PRD). The property is located within the MUSA and is intended to be developed using municipal sewer. The proposed use for residential purposes would be in conformity with the CMP as long as density standards are met. 2. Relationship to Surrounding Development The property is abutted on the north by the City of Long Lake, with housing of significantly higher densities than allowed in Orono. The south boundary of the property abuts the Luce Line Trail. Properly to the cast and west is developed generally at a 2-acrc density. South of the Luce Line, the Fox Ridge neighborhood is zoned for 2-acre lots but was developed prior to the 1975 rezoning, with 1 acre lots. The proposed layout creates individual lots that range in gross area from 1.05 acres to 3.90 acres. However, the 7 homesites are proposed to be clustered within an area roughly 300 feet by 500 feet, on the high knoll in the w esterly quadrant of the property. Setbacks from adjoining residential sites arc proposed at 30’ and 50 ’, consistent with the 2-acrc zoning standards of the RR-IB District. 3. Conformity with Zoning District Lot Requirements The property is in the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential District, which allows for single family residential use, with a minimum lot size of two dry buildable acres. The individual lots being proposed via the PRD process do not meet all lot size or setback requirements of the R-1B Distnet. The developer’s ability to achieve the densities and lot layouts proposed relics solely on the City acceptance of the PRD development process, and relaxing a number of lot standards. RR-IB Standards: Lot Area: 2.0 acres Setbacks: Lot Width: 200* Front: 50 ’ Side: 30’ Rear; 50 ’ Side Street: 50 ’ Wetland: 26 ’ #04-3016 May 14.2004 Page 4 Proposed setbacks arc as follows:Front (Street):35'Side:10' Rear:30'Side Street:35' Back (Lots 1 & 2):50'Wetland:26' Side (Lot 7);35' The proposed 35' front and 10' side setbacks are typical of Orono ’s 1-acrc zones. 4. Site Layout and Lot Standards The individual lots proposed typically contain 3/4 acre to 1 acre of non-wetland, non-conservation easement area. Some lots contain steep slopes which severely limit the flexibility for house locations, and the potential 20' separation between homes requires careful site drainage planning. Note that on Sheet 5 of 8, substantial grading is proposed on steep slopes to create building pads which appear to be 35'-40' apart at the closest. If the 35'-40' separation is adhered to, drainage between the homes is less of an issue. A few general and some specific comments arc offered here regarding the site layout; 1. Based on the results of the Sketch Plan Review in March, the plan no longer shows a building site along the Luce Line Trail, which would have required a creek crossing and would have yielded a very narrow and limited (but perhaps highly attractive) building site very near the Trail. Exhibit H is a letter from the DNR’s Martha Reger, supporting the inclusion of the area south of the creek as conservation area. Reger is strongly suggesting that individual lot private access to the trail not be allowed, “as they create potential trespass problems, erosion problems and interrupt habitat preservation projects ”. She would still oppose, but be less strongly opposed to, a single access path to serve the entire development. Staff finds that the developer ’s proposal to preserve the area south of the creek strongly supports the concept of developing this property as a PRD. 2. As noted above, the plan presented has been developed generally using the City’s 1-acrc zoning standards, in terms of setbacks, lot widths, etc. In the context of a PRD, staff believes this is appropriate for this site, meeting the City’s goal of retaining open space areas. 3. All 7 lots have substantial frontage on the proposed private road, ranging from 45-50’ for the cul-de-sac lots (typical of such lots) to mor: than 300' for Lot 1. Each lot has a width of 100’+ at the front setback line, to allow for homes that arc wider than they arc deep. No lots are proposed as back lots, which is a plus for this development proposal as compared to many of the sketch plans reviewed in March. 4. The proposed lots are continuous to the boundaries of the property, creating wetland and conservation casement lands within each private ownership. This is how Orono has commonly preserved wetland and steep slope areas in standard plats. However, in PRD’s such as Painter’s Creek (1984, the old Ski-Tonka property off Bayside Road) and Willow View (2000, west of Willow Drive south of Co. Rd. 6) the areas to be preserved as open space have more typically been established as outlots ow-ned by a homeowners association with casements granted to the City. #04-3016 May 14,2004 Pages How docs this difference in preserved area ownership methods affect the individual homeowner and the City? From staffs perspective, outlot land that is owned by an association may be perceived by individual lot owners as ‘off limits’ in terms of the various uses that might occur, and such land is probably ‘policed ’ by the neighbors as a group. Individual ownership of open spaces reduces the likelihood of neighborhood recreational uses of the preserved open space. Hiking and similar activities are more likely monitored by the individual landowner, who may perceive such recreational use as a trespass. Planning Commission should discuss whether the preserved open space should be within individual lots, or within an Outlot owned by an association. Staff recommends the latter. 5. Road Layout and Standards The proposed private road corridor w ithin the site is 50' in width as required by the Subdivision Code and CMP for a local private road. The standard paved width for this road would be 28', as it will serve 7 lots plus the adjoining property at 130 Brown Road South; the proposed road width is 24', which should be discussed by Planning Commission (see also Exhibit G, Tom Kellogg’s comments). The private road will be subject to homeowner association ownership and maintenance, and subject to an underlying Road, Drainage and Utility Easement to be granted to the City. Staff also recommends that such an easement be granted over the existing 40' easement used by Van EcckJiout over the Dunn property; as of this writing it is questionable whether this requirement can be met. The need for this easement is that the City has a long established policy of obtaining, at the time of subdivision, the underlying right to enter and maintain private roads used by multiple landowners. This is clearly expressed in in the City’s Transportation Plan, CMP Part 4A, Rural Transportation Policies 4 thru 6, attached as Exhibit O. Policy 6 states; “The City will guarantee reasonable maintenance levels and public access on all private roads. In the process of approving 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.” This language has been in the CMP since 1980, r m-3016 May 14.2004 Page 6 6. Park/Trail Easements or Dedication Needed The City has no current plans for trails or parks that specifically require dedication of land from this property. However, the southerly part of the property abuts the Luce Line and as an outlet, the preserved land south of the creek would make a nice addition to the trail corridor, with potential public walking access to the creek. This unique configuration should be looked at by the Park Commission to determine whether the dedication of land could result in regional trail access to the creek. While this might not be within the property owners’ expectations for the property, the City does have an 8% Park Dedication requirement and the public benefits of such an access must at least be considered. Absent dedication of land for parks, the Park Dedication Fee would be expected to be the maximum fee which by ordinance is capped at S5,550 per new lot. 7. Road Improvements and/or Easements Needed The City will require Road, Drainage and Utilities Easements over the private road, which should be platted as an outlet as proposed, to be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Access to Brown Road. The plat does not include the existing access corridor to Brown Road, as that property is not owned by the applicant but by Mary Dunn of 20 Brown Road South. This 40* corridor is an easement, and is the subject of ongoing legal action between Dunn and Van Eeckhout in terms of what rights are associated with the existing easement. In addition to the 40' easement, an additional 1 O' road easement exists along the north 1 O' of the plat of Kallestad Acres, granting the City “an easement for ingress, egress, access, road and utilities purposes and uses”, hence the use of that 10' strip appears to be unquestionable. The total corridor width is 50, and the road should be located to make use of this width, although the current design shows it is primarily being located in the northerly 40'. The City will require that the current driveway be upgraded to City standards all the way out to Brown Road. The City Engineer has recommended that the easement portion of the private road be platted. As of this writing, however, it seems unlikely that either adjoining neighbor would be interested in becoming part of the plat. This recommendation is not necessarily a requirement, but would result in a cleaner legal description. 8. Stormwater and Drainage Improvements and/or Easements Needed Development of the property will require creation of stormwater management facilities. The applicant is proposing a runoff rate/quality control stormwater pond behind the building site within Lot 7 to serve the subdivision. The City Engineer has made a number of recommendations which the developer must adhere to (see Exhibit G). The property will be subject to the Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fee, established currently at S2700 per acre for the 2-acre zone, or $54,000 for this 20-acrc site. ith «V04-3016 May 14,2004 Page 7 9. Utility Locations and Availability The property is proposed to be served by municipal sewer and water from Long Lake. The letter from Long Lake Planner Jennifer Zierke indicates that these connections are possible, subject to agreements to be made between Long Lake and Orono. Staff supports the concept of development of this site as a PRD with sewer and water, even though it is within Orono’s defined Rural Area. 10. Utility Assessments or Connection Fees The developer will be responsible for any sewer and water connection fees required by the City of Long Lake, for the actual construction costs of any the lateral system serving the development, and for any costs incurred by Orono (legal, etc.) as a result of the connections. 11. Conformity with Shoreland Regulations The setback to the creek bank for Long Lake Creek for this sewered property is 75'. Wetland setbacks of 26' must be adhered to. The MCWD may require greater setbacks or buffers for this wetland, and developer should contact MCWD to determine this. The City Engineer has suggested that the plan need to show the OHWL and floodplain boundary for the creek, and that the developer submit the plans to the DNR regarding stormwater management. 12. Wetlands On Site and/or Impacted The wetlands on the property were delineated a few years ago to help determine the amount of dry buildable area. The City will require a Flov.'age and Conservation Easement over all wetlands designated on the site. The proposed grading plan appears to avoid any impacts to wetlands. 13. Tree and/or Woodland Impacts; Steep Slope Impacts The site is heavily wooded with a variety of tree speeies. Orono does not have a tree preservation ordinance other than within the 0-75' lakeshore and creek setback zone, where clcarcutting and removal of trees 6" or greater in diameter is prohibited. The developer has provided a Tree I’rescrvation Plan (Sheet 3 of 8) which indicates the areas w'here tree removal will occur on the site. Tiee removal and site regrading is proposed to occur in substantial areas of slopes ranging from 20% to as much as 35%. The proposal is to shave the top 4-6' of the knoll area and fill to create w alkout- style building pads with 4:1 (25%) maximum finished slopes. Staff has determined that the areas to be graded do not meet the definition of “bluffs ”. However, the subdivision code definition ofdry- buildable area excludes slopes of greater than 18%. The City has in many past applications not excluded such areas from the dry-buildable calculation, but has limited their development. An example is the Cristofori Woods subdivision on Bayside Road, in which "no residential construction or land alteration” was allowed on slopes greater than 18% (Resolution No. 3069, February 1992). Exhibit P is a sketch of slopes exceeding 18% on the site. Imposition of such a limitation on this application will have a sever impact on the viability of this subdivision. rom Long Lake. The letter from tions are possible, subject to rts the concept of development Orono’s defined Rural Area. on fees required by the City of n serving the development, and ctions. k^ered property is 75'. Wetland Iter setbacks or buffers for this he City Engineer has suggested he creek, and that the developer :lp determine the amount of dry on Easement over all wetlands d any impacts to wetlands. oes not have a tree preservation k zone, where clearcutting and developer has provided a Tree e removal w ill occur on the site. ireas of slopes ranging from 20% 11 area and fill to create walkout- iff has determined that the areas bdivision code definition of dry- is in many past applications no{ limited their development. An hich “no residential construction ution No. 3069, February 1992). ition of such a limitation on this dsion. #04-3016 May 14.2004 Page 8 Given the extent of grading, the developer should be required to provide boulevard trees along the private road as required by code. 13. Archaeological Site Proximily Study Applicant ’s consultants have completed a cultural resource review of the site and has suggested that a Phase 1 archaeological survey be completed for the property. Issues for Consideration 1 . Does Planning Commission agree with the use of the PRD subdivision method for this property? 2. Should the areas to be preserved via conservation casements, be in an Outlet, or merely as an easement within each individual property? 3. What type of Luce Line access should be allowed (in terms of pathways, etc.)? 4. Does Planning Commission accept the proposed lot sizes, configurations and setbacks? 5. Does Planning Commission feel that slopes of greater than 18% should oe protected from land alteration for this development? If so, a very different layout might result... 6. Is Planning Conunission comfortable with moving ahead with this review given that the issue of access to Brown Road is still unresolved? 7. Any other issues or concerns? Staff Recommendation Planning Commission should address the various issues noted abo providing direction to staff and applicant. Any recommendation for approval should address the issues noted above, and include the following: 1 . Approval is subject to the standard Park Dedication Fee, unless Park Conunission makes other recommendations. 2. Approval is subject to the standard Storm Water Drainage and Trunk Fee. 3. Approval is subjetc to provision of the standard Road, Drainage and Utility Easements to be granted over the new road outlot as well as over the 40' easement access to Brown Road. (. - #04-3016 May 14.2004 Page 9 4. 5. Road to be 28' paved width, not 24'. Subject to recommendations of the City Engineer, except that the 40' access corridor need not be platted as long as it is covered via the required R, D, & U easement. 6. 7. Subject to MCWD approval. Subject to standard Conservation and Flowage Easement over wetlands and creek, and subject to some form of conservation/preservation easement over the defined conservation areas. f City of Orono Subdivision Application '[>. •uxl'4 S/reef Address 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mam: 952-249-4600 ^ ^/J fax: 952-249-4616 Mailing Address' P.O Box 66 • » •Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Application # 30l(o Date Received. -O V Amount Paid Staff: f*c'*i __________ Renewal; — This application form must be completed in full. PROPERTY INFORMATION; Site Address; ! Xn Property Identification Number (PIN); flocj. Zoning District; 'rian^ status required for each interested party) Phone ______________________________ CTr\ Ct w\y% ^ ^ - TT __T . r “*--------- ---------—__________________________________ Fax; OWNCR (Compte|e|gal names ^ status feqt.l,cd for each fntereated party) Ad°r'’e°5s'^°™jjO ~,t,„. _ n—i------------------ Phone («,orjO; ~ Email ^ ^-^0—1--------—y ■ ClnyLi---->±; !>f r< -^<7^___________ ------------------------------ Fw] ----------------EXISTING LAND USE: Number of Tax Parcels: Development Size; / /V F^resent Use (check one) Present Zoning District __20. Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres TOTAL, all parcels Residential; Number of Units: _i □ Other (Specify) re, /e-1 ------------- Proposal: □ Division for Tax Purposes c° Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) *-'T Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of D,elding S.les _____i____Ex.shng Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) 7 _ /. sr/~.a «r- Residential □ Other (specify) -10- New Units Total Units Ui.its per Acres Square Feet Dry Buiidable Land i.ril #ho J. 5 ^ ^4 ft r.'liHIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COVIPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to "application fees" listed below). 2. Completed application form. 3 Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. ^ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Depaitmcnt of Finance. Government Center. A-603 300 South 6*^ Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5310). , As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if applicable) 2 Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat 3. Title opinion 4. Easements, covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check [Xj those which apply) , • / A. Anniication Base Fees: jf, . _ _ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) $350 00 ^ _____ Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $500 00 i AilT Subdivision Ar plication (Class I & II) $600 00 TOTALS Preliminary Subdivision Application $750 00 $30 00/lot (Ciass hi & all ron-residential) ____ Final Plat Application (Class III) S250 00 ____ Legal Review ano riling _____ Subdivision only $140 00 Subdivision w/easemen»s and covenants: minimum $280 00 ♦ any additional costs Park Fees (to be determined Section 82-227) Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) Renewal of Class I, II. & III Subdivision and of a Lot Line Rearrangement Application $300 00 B. Special Improvement Fees: ____Proposed Private Roads $650 00 + $ 50 per lineal foot. Proposed Public Roads $950.00 + $.50 per lineal foot; lin ft X .50 = $ Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road $950 00 lin ft X 50 = $ __Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $275 00 + S25/stub __Proposed Watermam Extension $275 00 + $25/stub Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $250 00 On-Site System. Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivisions) $60/per let x ___new lots C. Flexible Application Fees/Miscellaneous Fees ____ Variance $600.00 ____ Vacation of Public Road $75 per benefiting property ($600 minimum per application) ____ Easement Vacation Assoc.ated with a Subdivision $100 00 ____ PRD Application with Subdivision $35 00 per dwelling unit The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by Planning Department Staff, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council ne-.essary to process this application and furthe'' agr^s to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. • Applicant’s Signature: __________________________ Date: Owner's Signature: Date: Date: ________ Applicant must have all submittals into the City Office 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 City Planner assigned to your project of this change prior to the meeting. -11 -I a ^ ■=f -fy- sent by: Edina Realty Park West 0; XO^ICO rpix 100 FAX .Sent by: Edina Realty Park west O; 04/20/04 e:aSPU;#83Q;Page 3/7 PfiGE 0: C4/20/04 3:59PM;/(829; Pag^ 212 >4 J *<W*A4u*n Co thij jppjiej. pUM«imA*t, . ^ Fuupco a .403 l: p.*.f.pp. kS pC 4^ o. A ^ Signed Certifi 3. Tide opicion. Ca*enteotc« coyentnu, etc. tppacable). ~ Dfite ‘ A.*'ApStJfeo Adr,inl«,cor co chede fX] moii which .p^,y) “ — (Chit* t, ir& ni) «75 00 ---- Auhai'^*'°" •(«*«ncancni SJS0.03---- SubAvjiioo AppJwieoon /a*** (A II> SlOO.OO ■■ ***intineiy SubdivicKia Appliettiee l40o 00 ♦ *m nnr i/« ---- F*«43 Wu AppHcAtion (CUct ril> S250.00 A: ill Mo-rwiountwi)---- ^l»IR«*«oreiuJ Fitine —- Subdivuion ©ijy S|00 oo Tspy >. spp.« '" »' >•«0.P ^P«edFnv*tekoa<U$650 60»-J.50/Ji;;celft.- ■ ^ TV T ^ i.bQ/Ttnea( ft;b# fi. t.SOmf lin. R v.10-$' $2J.'*rub — ^nf!^ s**««*o» i2’A«o; $«'.«;— Sr,irp^rj"js^.;^£>- c....... izr SSSSHS « P«««aj« Of |„ «*. a,u« be « orain.n« limitiog otso.orx.orarauR 'ri «r rw o *v"%r«M* re^.e* “‘ •'Tv ^ ’ A (.•J I- c r-VNAIUIATIVE FOR CREEKSIDE IN ORONO (120 BROWN ROAD) Wayzata Design and Development is interested in the development of the 20-acrc piu cel located at 120 Brown Road as a 7-lot Planned Residential Development. 'Die existing home will remain on the site. In review of the site’s natiual setting and surrounding amenities it was envisioned tliat an upper market single-family residential housing would be appropriate for the site. This isolated area provides a nice residential enclave that is sunounded by natural and recreational enjoyment. The project is designed to create a central neighborhood that wraps itscK with vast open .space and scenic views. This proposal was based on the direction received by the Orono Phuming Commission on March 15,2004. From llie five-concept plan that were reviewed by city staff and the Commission a centralized cluster development was favored. The development incorporate the following design elements that were supported by the Planning Commission; 1 . Dedication of over 1 2 acres of land as a conservation easement. 2. Preserving the upland along the south end of the site. This area is adjacent the Luce Line Trail anti the dedication will maintain the scenic atmosphere along the trail. This lu'ca was designated as a premiere building site in all of the concept plans, but was offereil as open space for the opportunity to cluster the lots. 3. Preserving the upland on the northern edge of the .site. This area was also considered a premier development site However, having a large open space that separates this development from the homes to the notih preserves the natural views of the homes. 4. Clustering the homes minimizes the amount of road that is needed and concentrates the traffic impacts, such u.s noise and hcadliglits, to a central urea. 5. Preserves large tracts of open space for wildlife habitats and cco-systcms. 6. Provides efficient centializcd municipal sewer and water service to the ho'”"*" This eliminates the need lor septic systems near the environmentally sensitive w .and and creek. It also eliminates extending service lines to homes spread out throughout the site. 7. Preservation of trees. -----g—A 50-(bot-sctback from thc wesfproperty liinrofthcn^virlntsTumlrTjfthrncwTDad.~T1ris~ will provide an additional 40-foot building setback and a buffer from the existing homes. 9. An archeological review was done and found no archeological properties on the site. As a PR]), this development will enhance the appearance for the entire area by preserving the natural open spaces instead of dotting the atca with large homes. Allowing the homes to be clustcird with the dedication of a conscivation ca-.cincnt picsciving the many amenities witliin the site, including wctlaiuls. Long I-ike Creek, trees, drainage ways, slopes, ami natural corridors. As noted in the |ircvious sketch plan report, it is staffs opinion that this site is a candidate a.s a PKI) ncighboihood Site Desij’ii The lots range in si/.c fiom 1 .05 acres to 2.04 acres including .ue;is dedicated for conservation casemenl;!. The development provides a 15-foot front setback a lO-foot side setback and a 30 fool tear .setback. A setback of 50 feet was incorporated along the west side of l.ots I ;uid 2 to create a greater Imffci fioni the existing homes. Even though Uicrc is a 26-foot setback from llic wetland, the homes arc expected to be placed on the knoll and setback much fuilhcr tli.in the rcipiitcd 26 feet. Although the homes will be custom built, the lots were, designed to mC ii (■ \ .• •• • •« !• 1 ) cc- accommodate a house pad of 80 feet by 50 feet and situated to be harmonious with each other and the site. A private road via Brown Road will serve the 7-lots. The new road will be placed generally over the existing driveway to minimize grading. The road will be built to city standards with the required city easements. Grading within the site will be minimal. Grading impacts will be limited to only the area around the central knoll. The knoll provides desirable walkout homes with little grading needed. Since the homes will be custom built the grading limits as shown on the plans will likely be reduced. The grading limits demonstrated on the plans are likely to be greater than what is expected. The submitted plans represent grades for the size of house pads shown with added grading for rear yards. Silt fencing will be used to preserve the wetland/creek areas. Sewer and water are proposed via Long Lake services. These services are located on the north end of the site at the end of Apple Glen Road. The City of Long Lake is aware of this request and has provided a letter supporting the connection. Agreements with the City will be needed to outline fees and access to the lines. (See the attached letter). These services will be located along the northwesterly lot line. This is needed to avoid any impacts to the preserved areas and to locate the services in stable soils. A stormwater retention pond is placed to the northeast of the proposed homes. The pond will treat and provide rate control for the stormwater on the private road. Curb and gutter and drainpipes will be used to direct the stormwater to the pond. The outlet for the pond will be to the wetland basin to the east. Creekside in Orono is within a unique site that provides great opI/^Jrtunities to creatively design a development that preserves its’ natural fcatxires and serenity between Long Lake, the wetland, the Luce Line Trail and surroundmg homes. A cluster development provides a nice transition between the small lot singlc-fami.y homes to the north and the 1-acre single-family homes in the Fox Ridge Development to the south. The vast buildable area within this site -.lows the development to appropriately place new homes to blend nicely with the existing homes to the west. The greatest bcne.fit of the project, as acknowledged by the city and Wayzata Design and Development, is the dedication of the large tract of up-land along the Luce Line Trail. This area is a very nicely v/ooded area with nattual scenic beauty that will continue to be enjoyed by the public on the Luce Line Trail. We look forward to working with the City on this development in providing quality homes while preserving nattual amenities. if ■ , • ’.V •;• rv • t’^ c \ 1 m ?l'!J y vA\ i 1 ■. I- ()!i 1 1 '(A^i 'i i'-'•> ' • 1 \! K'dN'i, '.IN 1 ^ !A! i 1 • rKs:»jf t-f- >>■•■> t \ -•-4 •; '^ • 1: |S: 4K • 'ir!m 2^7/?wm V.wm ? -i^.W wvy*> . mpkmm. ,'-C*i^’ <•»“ J'^*"-Vi'{ •■^11X7 PRELIMINARY PLANS FORi CREEKSIDE ORONO ORONO, MINNESOTA PREPARED FORi WAYZATA DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT SITE GRADING, SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAIN, STORM SEWER, STREET PAVING WARNING SHALL contact all public UTIUTiCS TOR unocrcrouno wires , cables , conduits , pipes. OR other buried structures beeore digging SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN construction at NO COST TO THE OWNER. SHEET INDEX DESCRIPTION title SHEET EXISTING CONDITIONS TREE preservation PLAN PRELIMINARY Plat PRELIMINARY GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN PRELIMINARY utility PLAN DETAILS details • ^ I •. ''«** • I hereby certify that this PLAN WAS PREPARED BY me or under my direct supervision and That I am a duly licensed professional ENGINEER UNDER The LAWS OF THE STATE OF MiN *£SOTA. Kc'^nclh E. Adolf DATE APRIL 21. 2QQ4 REG. NO 12Q4B SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS SOIL TESTING • ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 10SS0 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 1, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55305 554 THIRD STREET NW, SUITE 100, ELK RIVER, MINNESOTA 55330 MvTiifM Dilt Ottcntucfl I9 i— 1 1 ^ 1 _ __--------1 ------------------------ Mgfjrr SMI pTDjtel KumMtr ft40t€-00) SMCET I OF S SHEHS Om CRrEKSIDE In ORONO 4/21/04ORONO. MN f •Ml EXISTING CONDITONS’^S i 2.8 . ■ . \.A * * *. •. : • i \'. i •’ *. » • >' ■ vi V, ■• ■••/ \v^ : • V •V- r;v ! . /fV ;i- ‘-d CITY OF LONG LAKE April 16,2004 Thomas Goodrum Schoell & Madson 10580 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 1 Minneapolis, MN 55305-4525 Re: Utility Connections Chuck Van Eeckhout Property Development Dear Tom: Thank you for taking the time to meet with us today regarding the development of Chuck Van Eeckhout’s property in Orono, located to the south of Apple Glen Road in Long Lake. It is our understanding that an application for preliminary plat of this property will be submitted for the May Planning Commission meeting. As part of the development, the applicant is interested in connecting into Long Lake’s utilities. Connection to Long Lake’s sewer and/or water for this development is possible through an agreement between Long Lake and Orono. As we discussed today, there are a number of legal issues that will need to be addressed before an agreement can be finalized for use of Long Lake’s utilities. When the application is moving forward for final plat approval, we would suggest another meeting to discuss the content of the utilities agreement. The agreement will require a resolution of approval by Long Lake’s City Council. If you have any additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (952) 473- 6961. -lencdTAICP [aimer nI 1 430 Vugini* Aveoue • P.O. Bo* 606 • Long L^. MmoMOU 55336‘ • 932-473-6961 • 932-476-9622 (fix) • btip//ww.d.long-Ute.mn.ul Schoeli & Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying • Planning Soil Testing • Environmental Snrvices www.schoellmadson.com March 24,2004 Mr. Henry Lazniarz 1117 Marquette Ave S Minneapolis, MN 55403 Dear Mr. Lazniarz, A cultural resource files and literature search was conducted for a property in the northwest 'A of the northeast V* of Section 3, T117N, R23W, Hennepin County, Minnesota on Wednesday, March 24, 2004. The records on file at the State Historic Preservation Office in the Minnesota History Center were reviewed. No archaeological or architectural properties are within the project area. A number of architectural properties are recorded in the vicinity of the project area, none immediately adjacent to the project area. The railroad bridge, labeled HE-ORC-51 on the attached map, is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Several archaeological sites have been identified on Long Lake, again these are not near the project area. An unsubstantiated report of a mounds and a habitation site is on file with the State as 21HEf It is our recuiniiiendation that, if given an opportunity for review, the State would recommend a Phase 1 archaeological survey of the project area with a focus on the iiortioHS-that-afe-near-or^djacen Ho the Long Lak e Creek:---------------------------- An opinion is just that, and it is possible that if given a chance to review this project, state level reviewers might differ with our recommendations. It has been a pleasure working with you. Sincerely, SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. Kim Breakey Senior Project Manager, CulnirJTResources Enclosures (1) V . Afftrtnative Action Equal Opportunity Employer 10580 Wayzata Boulevard. Suite 1 • Minneapolis. MN 55305*1 S3S □fflCB (952) 546*7801 • Fa* (952) 546*9065 ' i I CREEKSIDE IN ORONO Orono, Minnesota STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT SUBMITTED BY: HENRY LAZNIARZ 1117 Marquette Avenue South, Suite 2'j09 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 Phone: 612-558-1491 PREPARED BY: Schoell“&“Macfsoh, liic. Engineering • Surveying • Planning Soil Testing • Environmental Services WWW.scho«!lmud5on.corn 10^80 woyioto 8ow'«vo'’0 Minntopoi*!. M.r^ntsoto 58305-152S (952) 546--7601 - fo- (952) 548-9065 April 21. 2004 o7T O 11 9 j . #•!*• ir If C*M •r Maa 07 2004 7J36RM HP LASERJET 3330 1/1 Bonestroo ff^Rosene Anderlik& Associates Enginvarc £ ArcMt«<ts May 7, 2004 Mike Gaffron Planning Director City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Day. MN S3323 Re: Creekside File No. 139-04-000 Plat No. 04-3016 2335 West Highway 36 • St Paul, MN 55113 Office: 651-636-4600 • Fa>c 65I-636-13U w^w bonestroo.com P- 1 Dear Mike: We have reviewed the preliminary grading, drainage and erosion control plans for the proposed seven lot Creekside subdivision. The site is located east of South Brown Road, south of Long Lake and north of the Luce Line trail in the northeast quarter of Section 3. Wc have the following comments in regards to engineering matters. 1. Acccas/Strccts: An application to subdivide this site was reviewed in 1999. Atthat time access to Che site from South Brown Road was across an easement to the property. It appears the access to this s;1e is across the same easement shown in the 1999 application. Our position was then and is today that access to the property should be platted as part of the subdivision and not across an easement. The platted access nght- of-way should be a minimum of 50-feet in width to meet City standards for a private sticct. Seven properties will use this roadway for access onto South Brown Road. The proposed typical street section shows a 24-foot urban street with concrete curb and gutter. City code requn-es a minimum paved street width of 28-feet for a private road serving seven units Staff and council should review and detemuiie what street width is appropriate for this site. Final plans should include plan and profile views of the street. Horizontal and vertical alignments should meet the minimura standards specified in the code (30 mph design speed, maximum street grade of 12%). A typical street section should be included ui the final plan set. The final submittal should include a geotechnical leport, R-value rccommendauon and pavement design. Hennepin County should review and approve the proposed access to the site 2. Grading: The erosion control fence detail should be revised to allow only steel t-posts and should specify machine sliced installation of the fence. Wc >vill provide detailed comments regarding the erosion control plan with the final plat submittal. The final grading plan should identity fust floor and lowest floor elevations for all proposed and existing homes. Additional erosion control will be necessary during construction of the houses. 3. Drainage: The draft version of the City's* Comprehensive Storm Water Managc.Ticnt Plan (SWMP) shows that the site lies within ihc Tanagcr Lake drainage distnci. Long Lake Creek, a Mn DNR protected waterway, flows through the site. Plans should be submitted to the Mn DNR and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MC WD) for review and approval. The plans should identify the OHW and flood plain boundanes for Long Lake Creek. The proposed pond should meet KUR? standards. The final plans should include detailed pond design showing a 10:1 aquatic bench lO-fcci wide at the pond NWL. The pond design should also include a concrete outlet structure that provides 1-foot of skimming to remove floatables and debris. Storm sewer design and calculations including outlet structure details should be ptovided for review. Final plans should incorporate Best Management Practices (BMP’s) in all areas where storm water cannot be routed directly to a pond. The rate control calculations provided are acceptable. • $t. Paul, St. Cloud, hochefter, Willmar, MN • Mllwauitee, Wl • Chicago. IL i AcfiMi/lfual Oppmnmnw Implvytr snP OwrcB Ma^ 07 2004 TtSSRH HP LASERJET 3330 P.2 4. Saaltaiy Scwer/Water Main: Proposed sewer and water services are to be provided by the City ofLong Lake. The applioam provided a letter from Long Lake indicating that sewer and water connections to their system are possible provided legal issues can be resolved and an agreement can be executed between Orono and Long Lake. We recommend that the agreement for sewer and water service from Long Lake be in place prior to final plat approval. Final plans should include plan and profile views of the sanitary aewer and water main. All utility details shall comply with the City of Orono engineering standards. S. Easenents: The perimeter lot easements shown appear to be appropriate. Drainage easements should be provided across all wetlands, drainage ways and pond areas. Some casements shown need to be revised to include existing wetlands. The site is located east of South Brown Road, south ofLong Lake and north of the Luce Line trail in the northeast quarter of Section 3. We have the following comments in regards to engineering noatters. I Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 9925 Valley View Road, Eden Prairie, \fN 55344 952-826-6769, 952-826-6767(fax) May 12, 2004 Mr. Mike Gaffron Planning Director-City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Re: Land Use Application File ^04-3016, 120 Brown Road So. Dear Mike: Thanks for sending me the follow-up information regarding the above Land Use Application. 1 have reviewed the information with respect to the Luce Line Trail and have the following comments to offer: 1) The DNR supports the idea of the conservation easement proposed for the development, especially the area adjacent to the Luce Line Trail. This will help serve as a buffer between the trail and houses, as well as create a larger area for conservation purposes, and wildlife habitat. 2) I’m not sure what fonn/wording the conser\'ation easement wilt take, but please note that we would prefer that lots 2, 3, and 4 be aware that private accesses to the Luce Line Trail through the property, are not to be constructed. We are trying to eliminate'minimize private accesses to the trail as they create potential trespass problems, erosion problems and interrupt habitat preservation projects that we continue to try and manage. If there were to be a “private access" we would prefer some sort of consolidated one be designed into the development, but because of contours, etc in reality we would prefer to see none. 3) We are concerned about potential drainage issues from this new development and want to be assured that the development will not rapidly increase flows to the creek, thus creating problems at the culvert and downstream against our horse trail. Is there any sort of detailed drainage plan that shows where the excess runoff will go and rates at which it will occur? If so we would like a copy of that information to assure a stow delivery of water to the creek and downstream areas. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to review this. If you have any questions, or need additional clarification from me on anything please feel free to give me a call. Area Trails and Waterways Supervisor martha.reger@dnr.state.mn.us DNR Infornialion; 651-296-6157 • 1-888-616-6367 • TTY: 651-296-5484 • 1-800-657-3929 An Equji Opportunity Empfoycr Q Pitnied on RccvkleJ ConUinin^ j Mtniniuniut PuM*Con«umct , Ai STATE OF MINNESOTA Lr c D) DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN MAY 5 2004 FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT ■H6NN. CO. BIST. CT In the Matter of the Petition of Charles E. Van Eeckhout and Susan L. Van Eeckhout, Petitioners, V. Mary and John Dunn, ADMINISTRATOR CLERi' RV r- Court File No. A-3I-1531 DEPUTV FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT OF EXAMINER OF TITLE’S FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND RECOMMENDED ORDER AND MEMORANDUM EXCEPl AS MODIFIED HEREIN Respondents. The above-mentioned matter came on for dc novo review before the Honorable Jolin L. Holahan, Judge of District Court, on Petitioner’s Motion to Adopt Examiner’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Including Memorandum and Recommended Order dated December 2, 2003, on April 21,2004, at 3:00 p.m. Judge Holahan appeared for the assigned Judge Ann L. Alton. Petitioners seek this Court to adopt the Title Examiner’s findings in its entirety. Respondents seek this Court to adopt the findings of the Examiner with modifications. Richard Schieffer appeared for and on behalf of Petitioners and Jeremv S. Steiner appeared for and on behalf of Respondent Mary Dunn. All parties submitted documents supporting their respective positions prior to oral arguments. Judge Holahan took this matter under advisements by agreement of the parties on April 21, 2004. This Court adopts and incorporates herein the Referree’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Including Memorandum and Recommended Order except as modified. This Court, having received the evidence submitted by the parties and having considered arguments made by counsel, this Court makes the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Respondent Mary Dunn is the ow-ncr of land. Tract G (Certificate of Title No. 1090376), which is subject to an easement for driveway purposes that was entered on August 23,2002, by the Registrar of Titles. 2. Petitioners are fee owners of Tract H (Certificate ofTitlc No 1035711), which has an easement over Tract G for driveway purposes entered on November 5, 1999, by the Registrar of Titles. 3. Both Certificates of Title Nos. 1090376 (Tract G) and 1035711 (Tract H) contain an easement for the installation and maintenance of utilities over Tract G. Both tracts of land arc in the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. 4. Tract G has a width of 40 feet, its westerly boundary abuts County Road 146, and its easterly boundary abuts Tract H. 5. Tract H is a 20 acre parcel of land that does not abut County Road 146. Tract G lies between Tract H and County Road 146. 6. Tract G was conveyed to John and Mary Dunn in the early 1960’s subject to an casement for driveway purposes, which was already in use and existence. 7. On May 31, 1971, the Dunns conveyed to Petitioners an easement across Tract G for purposes of installation and maintenance of utilities to the home they planned to build on Tract H. At that time. Petitioners requested only an casement to serve their personal lesidcncc. 1 8. Soon after the easement grant, Petitioners constructed a home on Tract H, using the utility easement over Tract G for ingress and egress to Tract H. Petitioners / have used the driveway easement within its scope for about 50 years and the utility easement for about 30 years. 9. About 3 years ago, Petitioners sought permission from the Dunns and the City of Orono to expand the driveway easement on Tract G. The Dunns have asked for reasonable offers of compensation in exchange but Petitioners believe the current easements scope satisfies the expansion of driveway. Respondent Dunn does not dispute that the driveway easement can be used by 7 homes but argues that Petitioners are seeking to create a public road easement to the City of Orono. Petitioners argue they arc not seeking to create a public roadway out of the driveway casement, 10. The City of Orono requires a 50 feet easement for residential roads. Tract G is 40 feet wide in its entirety. 1 1 . Two issues were raised respective to Petitioner’s motion. The first issue relates to the utility easements’ scope and the second issue relates to the scope of the driveway easement. 12. This Court hereby adopts the Report of Examiner of Title’s Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Including Recommended Order and Memorandum with the following modifications; 1',•# ^ CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. A court may refer a case to an examiner to make a report of its findings. After filing the report, the court may order such other or further hearing of the cause before the court. Minn. Stat. § 508.20. 2. In non-jury actions, the court shall accept the referee’s findings of fact unless clearly erroneous. Minn. R. Civ. P. 53.05(b). 3. The district court may vacate the findings of the referee when the findings arc 'manifestly and palpably contrary to the weight of the evidence.” Prior Lake State Bank V. National Sur. Corp., 248 Minn. 383, 80N.W.2d 612 (1957). The Report of the Title Examiner found that the utility easement is construed to permit Tract H to be subdivided into additional, residential parcels. This Court finds that the existing utility casement authorizes only installation and maintenance of utilities to serve a single residence on Tract H, which is a limited utility access. >/5. Petitioners’ intention to use the existing utilities easement to subdivide Tract H is beyond the scope of the casentent. The Referee’s Findings with respect to the utility easement were erroneous as these Findings go against the weight of the evidence. 6.' The Report of the Examiner of Titles found the existing driveway casement authorizes Petitioners’ to construct, reconstruct, maintain and repair a drivcw'ay on Tract G, and grants Petitioners authorization in the fonn of grants or assigrunents to third-parties by Petitioners. Petitioners’ right to transfer existing 4 driveway easement to third parties for purposes of construction, reconstruction, maintenance and repair is beyond the scope of the easement. 7. The Referee’s Findings with respect to the driveway easement were erroneous as these Findings go against the weight of the evidence. 8. This Court finds that Petitioners attempt to create a public road easement out of the existing easements is outside the scope of said easements. The parties intended to create appurtenant private driveway easements and single residence utility easements. The parties did not intend to create a public road easement. 9. The Court rejects the Title Examiner ’s proposed Conclusions of Law 1(c) and 2(c) at pages 3 and 4 of the Examiner ’s Report. The Examiner ’s findings that Petitioners have the authority to grant rights in their appurtenant easements over Tract G to third parties who do not own any part of Tract H is speculative and not supported by the evidence. 10. This Court agrees with the Findings of tlie Title Examiner except insofar as modified ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The Report of Examiner of Titles Including Findings of Fact. Conclusions of Law, and Recommended Order, in addition to the attached Memorandum dated December 2. 2003, is hereby adopted except as to the following: a. Conclusions of Law, 1 (c) is hereby V,^CATED. b. Conclusion.' of Law. ^ 2(c) is hereby VACATED. c. Memorandum, ^ 21 -27 are hereby VACATED. 5 - ■ ^ ' :t. Conclusions of Law. and >f Fact. Conclusions of Law idified Herein was filed with T ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK - ------ Deputy lure for the District Courts of 4. at the City of Minneapolis, a copy of the within Findings sport of Examiner of Title ’s d Order and Memorandum ire-named attorneys at their hand and affixed the seal of S V' day of tT AOMINISTRATOR/CLERK Deputy IN PROCEEDINGS SUBSEQUENT TO INITIAL REGISTRATION OF LAND STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN affidavit of SERVICE BY MAIL DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT , .U w ru n - • , Case Type: Other Civil In the Matter of the Petition of: Court File No. A-3153I Charles E. Van Eeckhout and Sue L. Van Eeckhout, Petitioners, For an Order Construing an Easement In Relation to Certificates of Title Nos. 10357 11 and 3SS0II issued for land in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota and legally described as follows: (Certificate No. 103571 1) Tract H, Registered Land Survey No. 352; together with an easement for driveway purposes over Tract G, Registered Land Survey No. 352, as contained in Deed Doc. No 432783. (Certificate No. 355011) Tract G, Registered Land Survey No. 352; subject to an casement for driveway purposes over Tract G, Registered Land Survey No. 352, as contained in Deed Doc. No. 432783. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Debra R. Skatter of the City of Bloomington, County of Hennepin, in the State of Minnesota, being duly sworn, says that on the 6th day of May, 2004, she served the annexed Notice of Filing of Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order Adopting the Report of Examiner of Title's Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommended Order and Memorandum Except as Modified Herein on Richard Schieffer the attorney for Petitioners in this action, by mailing to him a copy thereof, enclosed in an envelope, postage prepaid, and by depositing same in the post office at Hopkins, Minnesota, directed to said paity at Anderson Dove Frectland i!ic Van Valkcnburg, P.L.L.P., 5881 Cedar Lake Road, Minneapolis, MN 55416, the last known address of said paity. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 6th day of May, 2004 Notary Public, itfennepin County, Minnesota. Debra R. Skatter ••■ 1 • /#»> j ’ RUN DATE: VMAQ04 PROPADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAMC/AOOR 38 03117231lOOOl 31 AODRliSSUNASSiGNEO tONGRIOGE ASSOCIATES lX>NORIOOE ASSOCIATES POnOX5628 MPLSMN 31440 3628 38 0311723120003 PROP AODR 3« ADDRESS UNASSKiNED OWNER NAME STATE OF MINN TAXPAYER DNR REAL ESTATE MGMT NAME/ADDR ATTN DEDBIE OURTIN 300 LAFAYETTE RD STPAULMN 33155 38 03II72JI20006 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIONOO OWNER NAME MARY A DUNN TAXPAYER A DUNN NAME/ADDR 20IIROWNHDS P O BOX 77 U7NGLAKEMN 55356 38 0311723120009 PROP AODR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNl-.l) OWNER NAME MARY A DUNN TAXPAYER MARY A DUNN NAMPyADDR 20 DROWN RDS POUOX77 LONGIAKEMN 353)h 38 03II723I3000I PROP AODR 350 DROWN RD S OWNER NAME RICHARD NCMALFI-N TAXPAYER RK ’H a RD NCIIALFEN NAME/ADDR 330 DROWN RDS U3NGLAKEMN 33356 38 03II723I10007 PROP ADDR 1893 FOX NIDGE RD OWNER NAME T J DAYTON A M DAV ION TAXPAYER TODIN j A MAE DAYTON NAME/ADDR IW* FOX RIDGE RD lONGUKEMN 35356 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERI’Y INFORMATION SYSTEM FROPI-KTY OWNERS UST •PAGE; !• 38 03117731IU002 PROPADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIONED OWNER NAME STATE OF MINNESOTA TAXPAYER DNR HEAL ESTATE MGMT NAME/ADDR AT I N DEDDIE OURTIN 500IJMAYDTTE RD STPAULMN 53155 )8 Oil 1723120004 PROPADDR 38 ADDRESSUNASSK3NED OWNER NAME MARY A DUNN TAXPAYER MARY A DUNN NAMIJADDR 20 DROWN RDS PODOX 77 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 0311773120007 PROP ADDR 3R ADDRESS UNASSIONLI) OWNER NAME MARY A DUNN MARY A DUNN 20 DROWN RDS PODOX 77 I.UNULAKEMN SS356 TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 O3II723I20OIO PROP ADDR 130 BROWN RD S OWNER NAME C F MCCUSKEY A D W MCCDSKY TAXPAYI.R DAVIDACONNIEMCCUSKY NAME/ADDR 130DROWN RDS LONGIAKEMN 55356 38 0311723130005 PROP ADDR 1995 K)X RlIXiE RD OWNER NAME K AH HACK TAXPAYER RAYMOND II HACK NAME/ADDR ''7951 OX RlIXiE RD EOERilAKI MN 55356 38 03II7232I0009 PROPADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO OWNER NAME STATE OF MINN TAXPAYER DNK REAL ESTATE MOM T NAME/ADDR ATTN DEBBIE CURTIN SOOIAFAYETTERD STPAULMN 33153 38 0311/23120001 PROPADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO OWNER NAME EON(iRIIXiE ASSOCIATES T/VXPAYER IDNORlIXiE ASSOCIATES NAME/ADOK P « »OX 5628 MPISMN 33440-3628 38 0311723120003 I'KUPADDR 120 BROWN ROS OWNER NAME SUEI VANEECKIIOUT TAXPAYER SUE L VAN EECKHOUT NAME/ADDR 120 DROWN RDS LONGUKEMN 33336 38 0311723120008 PROP ADDR 20 BROWN RD S OWNER NAME MARY A DUNN TAXPAYER MARY A DUNN NAME/ADDR 20 BROWN KD S PODOX 77 EONUEAKEMN 53336 38 03II723I200II PROPADDR 140 DROWN RDS OWNER NAME D4LC0LEMANJR TAXPAYER DOUGUS R COLEMAN JR NAME7ADDR 140 BROWN RD S LONGUKEMN 33356 38 03II721I10006 PROP ADDR 1945 FOX RIOCIi HI) OWNER NAME D E KIRKM AN A J M KIRKM AN TAXPAYER DAVID E * JOANNE M KIRKMAN NAMI/ADUR 1945 FOX RIIXJE. RO LONGUKEMN 53336 72 341182)430019 PROPADDR 31 APPIEGIENED OWNER NAME M H AM DOIMIIKIE TAXPAYER MARY A MITCHEIT. OUTIIRJE NAME/ADDR 3* APPU- Gl EN HD LONGIAKEMN 35356 v*T •> ‘ Ir. • i -.5 * 1 RUN DATE :V2V2dM 72 34111234)0020 {•ROPADOR 32 APPUiClIJiNRI) OWN6R NAME K V IIKtl IXtW * ) T IlKJnLOW TAXPAYER KliNNI-.rU A JUDY UlOtlDW NAMli/ADUR 32APPU:0II;NIU) U)N<ilAKi:MN n 14IIRJ)4)00M PROPAIXJR 46 (;RI-,I KSIUli OR OWNER NAME 11 PAS1ER R A LPAS1LR TAXPAYER JAMEST PASTER NAME/AUUK 46rREEKSIDE UJNULAKEMN )»J)6 72 MUIIJMRHK.) PROPAOOR 64 CKEEK.SIDE UR OWNER NAMI MARY ANN HANJiEN TAXPAYER MARY ANN HANSEN NAME/ADOR •>* ‘ REE.KSIUE. UR lONtilAKEMN S5))6 72 34IIB234IOOU PHOPADDR 41 APPI.E(illNRI» OWNER NAME OJUUUINSKY El Al. TAXPAYER UAVII) I UIIUINSKY NAME/AUDR APPEE (il EN RU E()N(ilAKEMN 33336 PROPADDR OWNER NAME lAXPAYtR NAME/AllUR 72 341U7MMMI/3 I9R3 KENNI IIYIA nancy EPEIERSON NAEK YI PI lERSON I9^l^ KENNEDY lA tONIilAKEMN 33356 It I4IIIJMUM43 PROPADUH EO IIROWNRUS OWNER NAME DP A I. A ERICKSON lAXPAYER DAVID PRIISA ANN ERIC KSON NAMIVAUim I0DRO3VNROS LONOIAKF MN 33136 HENNEPIN COUNIY PKOI’ERTV INFORMATION SYSTEM pr (x *i;rtyowni ;rsi .ist PAGE 2 PROP AUDR 77 J«llll7M100;i 76 APPI EEil l NRU OWNE.RNAME 11 l/AIIE.lll A OIIX3N lAXPAYER NAME/AODR EU/AUETHABIDON 76 APPI li GEENRD lONGIAXEMN 55356 72 341112)430061 PROPADDR 32 CREEKSIDI DR OWNER NAME J I.OIIMAN A R A OIIMAN IAXPAVER JOHN I.OIIMAN NAME/AUDR 32CR1.EKSII)I.UR lONOI AKI MN 33136 PROPADUH OWNER NAME lAXPAYER NAME/AUDR It J4IIH7MI0064 43 ( RI EK.SIDEDR ROROACII&KAROACII KUULREOA KIMIIIICI V A ROACil 4ICKia:KStl)E UR LONOIAKI. MN 33136 PROPADDR OWNI R NAMI lAXPAYER NAME/AUDR 77 341 1X7 3411X1/3 33 APPII.OlINRD J J Kl MNA A C A KI MNA 1RSII S lAMI S IA CANDACE A Kl MNA 33 APPEE Ell I.N Rl) lONOIAKEMN 33336 77 I4III7I4HXIKI PROPADUR 33 VAEIE.Y VII WRD OWNER name; (i W ANDERSON A S i ANDERSON -f AvnAVI R OHEER1R3' W A SAII Y J ANDl'.RSON N^M^IdDR 33VAI.EYVI.WRI, lONCilAKI MN 35336 3X I4III7I440UI3 PROPADDR 1)3 OHUNO ORCHARD RUN OWNER NAME. E. WF RYDI.IJ/I* M RYDI11. IR.SE lAXPAYER LDMUNDWIfl'HVIIISM MVOI I NAME/AUDR 133 ORONO ORCHARD KD N lONULAKEMN 33336 PROPADDR OWNER NAMI. lAXPAYER NAME/AUDR 77 34IIK7I4KKI77 70 APPI I. on N Rl) 1 WWOIJ.INAMRWIU.IN THOMAS A MEI.ANIE. WOEt IN 20 APPI Ji GLEN RD tJONOI>3KI.MN 33E36 77 )4IIX7I41(M)67 PROPADDK OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 CRI EKSIDE DIE OMKVAI I A I E.KVAI.B IIIOMASLA DM KVAIJi .31 E RE E KSIDE DR LONEilAKI.MN 33336 CP 72 3411821430070 PROPADDR 23 APPU Eil.l N RD E,WNER NAME S C FEDII A W I, El IHI. lAXPAYER SIEVENE-A Wl NDY I.EI.DIR NAME/ADDR 25 APPI E Eil I N RD UINEilAKI MN 33336 PROPADDR OWNI R NAME lAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 17 3411X7 3410024 19X1) KENNEDY I.A I. K DANIEl SE)N04 M DANIEI SE)N ITt R A NANE'Y M DANII I.SON 1980 KENNEDY I A IX3NGLAKUMN 33 336 r.*fVv!i( li E- PROPADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 77 341 1X734300X7 18 IIROWNRUS lUDYI.KEIEI ir IDDYE Kilt ITT 18 IIKEIWNRDS lONEilAKEMN 3S3S6 RUN DATE : WWOM Mii} FACE; 1 • E=HS=sSSiss““ OFMYKNOWU-DGEANDBOUOF. -r ■9U^*/ DATE*^lfllZ BY < ... .V ~ . • • * ** f * ^ • • •' .«* ■•*• • • V *. • • . - - .'• ^*. t*;.- ■'• •, .->. .*. - *• '*• ^ ' *^'*.*. . ' ^ t ** * I * 's- >!. «:;•>• .'.'4 . .• < .« « to \ V ^ ■ •• % ,* ' - > ( # I • • * * **. V ^K ’V ' • •♦- '.r*,. v>-i vvr * - -to'. 4 'V^ t I- i . ‘r " - . k • U V** *t ..10^Mc* Vtw-. •. • ■♦* -v ..r ^ / .w V V - - •- • * ^• • :^44 O i • •• % 4. ^’VC V ~ *voV''^to **.'x.,v 1^ % •> «• • •* vj'C'l A*' V$- J A /''»•*» .V:i'V-Tr,W-;:.. •i '• V <- •_ .'i AX, 'A t:;, •vv - '•r > .4- • « ' ^-to r \ • •• 1 ■ - » • ■ t d%• -f >v. •*. ri. % -.i*. V V^. •V t mM • •*••♦• .1 • f' w r. • * - S ^r; kV*: :> -"i.*f . 4 KJ^ ^ -t*-'' ► .. 4 ' . -^ • Hx \ * • tv -4 ^-L^. *A * r /,-rv«x ‘ v,>?:> N* a V; I*--. ' le.; ',•' -• , ^- V'X • (. 'i-t ' A- I* 1 •- :K\- :v' :v^ V ♦A >'<■ ■■ ^ j< <V» *^-‘•>i •>-7- •; •. \^ ) i’S ^ y ^ v\ •r< v^>- >*t.*..^* Vv1 1'^ . V. V* ^rN . ’ -*^'-Vi v^ ■». •••*- *.-----------.*'«p> ^;vvms^m L’^./ ‘ t*^ >\ '% f r-?^. t—t. T »Nr-r mvS•V * \> ■-V.‘>V 4*iV •> >-.^- U%5 » *» \t V '* •:• V nu^ ': i «. Hf.* »14,\iv I L-, 3t#g*' ;•rissaSi. ZONING REGULATIONS } 78-«09 DIVISION 10. PRD PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Sec. 78<^1. Purpose. This plan is available to land subdividers sub ject to council approval, as alternative to stan dard minimum lot size subdivision of land. The purpose of this plan is to enhance the appearance of neighborhoods through preservation of natural open spaces, to counteract the effects of urban congestion and monotony, to pro\nde cohesive structure to neighborhood design, to offer recre ation opportunities close to home, and to aid in improving the welfare in general of city residents. (Code 1984, § 10.32(1)) Sec. 78-602. Submission of plans. Landowners may submit land subdivision plans for any R district witliout adherence to minimum lot size requirements for each building lot, pro vided that the total number of building lots or dwelling units shadl not exceed the number of such lots or units permissible under the minimum lot size requirements of the zoning district or districts in which such land is situated. (Code 1984, h 10.32(2)) Sec. 78-603. Council discretion. Dwelling units permitted may be, at the discre tion of the council and subject to the conditions set forth by the council, in detached, attached or multiple-family dwelling structures, subject to the limitations provided for in each zoning dis trict. (Code 1984, § 10.32(3)) Sec. 78-604. Open space. Thu dedication, ownership, use and mainte nance of open spaces created by the application of a planned residential development shall be sub ject to conditions deemed necessary by the council to assuro the preservation of such open spaces for tlieir intended purposes. (Code 1984, $ 10.32(4)) Sec. 78-605. Dedication of open space. The dedication and ownership of the open spaces referred to in section 78-604 may be through: (1) Homeowners' association; Landlord maintenance; Special service district; Municipal ownership; or (2) (3) (4) (5)Any other method deemed appropriate by the council to accomplish the purposes of this plan. (Code 1984, § 10.32(5)) See. 78-606. Site plan. The proposed site plan, including location, spac ing and basic design of proposed buildings, street and parking plans, water and sewer (public or private) plans, and plans of open space available for park or recreational purposes shall be submit ted for approval by the planning conunission and the council. (Code 1984, $ 10.32(6)) Sec. 78*607. Hearings. The council may direct that a public hearing be held to review plans governed by this division. (Code 1984, 5 10.32(7)) Sec. 78-608. Final approval. Fmal approval of plans governed by this divi sion shall not be granted until all conditions set by the council are met, and, further, the council shall not approve any such planned residential development prior to the legally binding estab lishment of the open space dedication, ownership and maintenance provnsions, such provisions to be guaranteed by bonding or other means satis factory to the council. (Code 1984, h 10.32(8)) Sec. 78-609. Subdivision requirements. All provisions of subdivision procedure estab lished by chapter 82, except as modified in this division, shall govern applications under this plan. (Code 1984, § 10.32(9)) CD78109 /V ■2.- ZONING REGULATIONS f 78-417 DIVISION 6. RR-IB ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Sec. 78-416. Purpose. The RR-IB one-family rural residential district is intended to provide a district which will allow a combination of low-density residential develop ment and limited agricultural activitv. (Code 1984. § 10.28(D) Sec. 78-417. Permitted uses. Within any RR-IB one-family rural residential district, no land or structures shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: (1) (2) (3) (4) One-family detached dwellings. Publicly owned parks and playgrounds. Municipal buildings. Personal wireless service antennas and towers. a. b. Purpose and intent. The purpose of subsection (4) of this section is to establish predictable, balanced reg ulations for the siting and screening of wireless communication equip ment in order to accommodate the growth of wireless communication systems within the city while pro tecting the public against any ad verse impacts on the city’s aesthetic resources and the public welfare. Personal wireless service antennas. Personal wireless service antennas erected on a municipal water tower may be allowed as a secondary use by administrative permit, provided they comply with the city policy re garding the use of city-owned prop erty fo/ wireless telecommunication antennas and provided they meet the following conditions; 1. The antenna shall be in compli ance with the state building code and all other applicable federal and state regulations and permits. Supp No 1 CD7S.69 2. Structural design, mounting and installation of the antenna shall be in compliance with manufacturer's specifications and shall be verified and ap proved by a registered profes sional engineer. 3. No advertising message shall be affixed to the antenna. 4. Antennas shall not be artifi cially illuminated unless re quired by law or by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to protect the public's health and safety. 5. When applicable, proposals to erect new antenna shall be ac companied by any required fed eral. state, or local agency li censes. 6. IVansmitting, receiving, and switching equipment shall be housed within the existing struc ture. If a new equipment build ing is necessary for transmit ting. receiving and switching equipment, it shall be situated in the rear yard of the principal use and shall be screened from view by landscaping. 7. All obsolete and unused anten nas shall be removed within 12 months of cessation of opera tion at the site unless an ex emption is granted by the city administrator or his designee. The removal shall be the respon sibility of the communication provider. 6. Antennas shall utilize camou flaging techniques or shall be side-mounted to an antenna sup port structure in order that sudi facilities are compatible with the character and environment of the area in which they ore located. I 76-417 ORONO CITY CODE 9. The appUcant shall demoastrate by providing a coverageAnter- ference analysis and capacity analysis prepared by a regis tered professional engineer that the location of the antennas as proposed is necessary to meet the frequency spacing needs of the personal wireless service system and to provide ade quate portable personal wire less service coverage and capac ity to the area. (Code 1984, 55 10^(K2). 10.28(2); Ord. No. 161 2nd series, 5 7,6-7-1997; Ord. No. 226 2nd series, § 1, 5-27-2003) State law reference—State mandated permitted uses, .Minn. Slat, i 462.357. subd. 7. Sec* 78-418* Conditional uses* Within any HR-IB one-family nnal residential district, no structure or land shall be used for the follomng uses without a conditional use permit; (1) Public schools and parochial or private schools which teach a curriculum similar to a pubUc school, provided no building shall be located within 50 feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an R district and a fence is erected 15 feet or more from all street lot lines where the abutting use is for open play, and nursery schools provid ing 50 square feet of playground space per pupil. (2) Uses accessory to a high school. The fol lowing uses are accessory to a high school use and require a separate conditional use permit: Indoor ice arenas. All such facilities and structures shall be located on the same tax parcel as the principal high school use to which they are accessory. No such struc tures shall be located less than 50 feet from any lot line of an abutting lot in an R district. Such facilities shall not be sepa rated from the principal high school use by a public road. All such facilities shall be owned and operated by the school district, or by a nonproSt organization under a land lease arrangement with the school district. The developer of such a facility, prior to final conditional use per mit approval by the city council, shall demonstrate financial capability to com plete construction of the facility, by pro viding suitable documentation that at least 80 percent of the estimated project costs are in the control of the school district or nonprofit lessee. (3) Churches, Including those related struc tures located on the same site which are an integral part of the church proper, and convents or homes for persons related to a religious function on the same site, pro vided no building other than a residence shall be located within 50 feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an R district. (4) Golf courses, country clubs, tennis clubs, public swimming pools serving more than one family, scout camps. YMCA camps. YWCA camps, church camps, or private nonprofit parks, playgrounds and other similar uses. The principal structure for any of these uses shall be 100 feet or more from any abutting lot in an R district, and accessory structures shall be a minimum of 50 feet from any lot line. (5) Public service structures, including but not limited to electric transmission lines, buildings, such as telephone exchange sta tions, booster or pressure regulating sta tions. wells, and plumbing stations, ele vated tanks, lift stations and electrical power substations, provided no building shall be located within 50 feet from any lot line of an abutting lot in an R district. Prior to granting such permit it shall be found that the architectural design of service structures is compatible to the neighborhood in which it is to be located and thus will promote the general wel fare. Public service structures that have been approved by the city at required public hearings for public improvements projects shall not require a conditional use permit, but such structures shall be subject to all other appropriate standards set forth in this section; sunendments to approved plans involving design and/or Supi>. No. 1 CD7870 3 ZONP^G REGULATIONS 9 76-418 placement of these structures will require written notice by the dty tu all affected property o\^Tiers 14 days prior to the adop tion of the amended plans by the council. Personal wireless services and commer cial broadcasting antennas and towers shall not be considered public service struc tures. Commercial greenhouses, provided all out side storage is fenced in such a manner so as to screen the stored material from view when observed from the public street or adjoining lot. Commercial greenhouse structures shall not be located in a re quired yard area, and are subject further to the general requirements of this chap ter pertaining to accessory structures. (7) Private gun clubs, archery ranges, and ski slides, provided the area is fenced and no part of the principal use is less than 150 feet from any lot line. (8) Guest bouses and nonrental guest apart ments. a.Guest houses, A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undi vided lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal buildings, including their domestic employees or their nonpaying guests. All regu lar lot requirements shall be met by the guest house. Nonrental guest apartments An apartment within the principal res idence structure on a lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal residence, including their domestic employees or nonpaying guests. There shall be at least one access door to the apartment from within the prin cipal structure, and such door shall be the primar>* access to the apart ment. Application for such a guest apartment shall address the con cerns of parking, sewage treatment, entryway and interior access method. Such apartments shall not have util ities metered separately from the principal residence utilities and shall not have a separate street address Planned residential development, limited to detached single-family dw’ellings onlv and subject to the limitations of division 10 of this article. (10) Apiaries. (11) Farms (stock), provided the area is ten or more acres. (12) Stables and bams, public. The use of accessory buildings or land for the storage or rearing of animals not owned by the property owner or resident. Such use must meet the requirement of section 78-74. Further, no such structure shall be lo cated less than 150 feet from the nearest lot line. (13) Riding academy. Any such instruction maintained as an accessor>' use and con ducted by the owner shall meet the re quirements of subsection (12) of this sec tion. and no such instruction shall occur less than 100 feet from an adjacent resi dence or less than 75 feet from the nearest lot line. (14) Hospitals for human care, sanitariums, rest homes, nursing homes, provided that all buildings are located 100 feet or more from the lot line of any abutting lot in an R district. The site shall contain not less than 600 square feet of lot area for each person to be accommodated. (15) Nonprofit libraries, provided that all build ings are located 50 feet or more from the lot line of any abutting lot in an R district. Screening and signage requirements shall be determined with each individual con ditional use permit (16) The provision of a toilet, b^ithtub or shower in an accessory building. Approval shall be conditioned on pro\dsion of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the Supp No 1 CD78:71 I 78*416 ORONO CITY CODE anticipated flows from the building plumb ing. Approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met: a.The council finds that the proposed use of the accessory structure with plumbing will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neigh borhood. b.The council finds that the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. c.The property is 2.0 acres in area or larger d.The accessory building is conform ing in location, size and height. e.The property owner agrees to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that the acces sory building will not be: Used for a home occupation un less specifically approved by the city or if allowed by this Code. Used as a dwelling unless a guest house conditional use per mit is obtained. 3.Rented, leased or otherwise pro vided for use as a dwelling un der any circumstances. (17) Personal wireless service antennas. Per sonal w'ireless service antennas erected on a municipal structure other than a water tower may be allowed as a condi tional use if they meet the following cri teria: a.Such antennas must be in compli ance with the city policy regarding the use of city-owned property for wireless telecommunication anten nas; b.Such antennas must meet the condi tions listed for personal wireless ser vice antennas as a permitted use in the LR-IC zoning district. c. Supp. No. X CD78:72 Such antennas may be located in the following locations: 1. Co-located on an existing city emergency warning siren tower. Co-located on a replacement city emergency warning siren tower, with a height not to exceed 75 feet. 2. 3.Co-located on a new city emer gency warning siren tower, at a location that meets the city's emergency warning needs, with a height not to exceed 75 feet. Such antennas shall meet the follow ing performance standards: 2. The antennas must be located on the existing emergency warn ing sirens poles, unless the height of the existing pole, or the capacity of the existing pole to support both the siren and the antenna(s) is inadequate to minimally meet the needs of the carrier. In this case, the carrier may be allowed to in stall a replacement tower that will accommodate both the emergency warning siren and the telecommunications anten- na(s). The existing emergency siren towers can be replaced with towers with a maximum height of 75 feet, wdth the con dition that the tower accommo dates both the emergency warn ing siren and the telecommunications antenna(s). The city may also require the tower to have the capability of accommodating one additional carrier's antenna(s). A new emergency warning si ren tower location, selected by the city to meet its emergency warning needs, could also be used as a telecommunications antenna site through co-loca tion of the warning siren and Supp No. 1 3. 5. 7. 8. 9. ZONING REGULATIONS antenna. The standards set out in 1. above also apply to a siren tower in a new location. The height of a tower can be no higher than the minimum height required to address a gap in coverage. The setback of a tower from a property line must, at mini mum, be equal to the height of the tower, except where an ex isting emergency warning si ren is located on a site that does not enable this setback too be provided. A carrier must demonstrate through an engineering analy sis that there is a gap in cover age. At the city's discretion, a tow'er must be designed to structur ally enable co-location by an other carrier, and the carrier must agree to allow co-location. The carrier must provide com puter-generated photos show ing the \iews (as selected by the city) with an without the tower. All consultant analysis and le gal analysis related to the tow ers and the lease of the towers shall be paid by the carrier. The carrier is required to pro vide coverage maps to demon strate the specific gap in cover age and need for an additional tower and antenna(s), and to demonstrate there are no exist ing tower options within a ra dius of two miles that could accommodate the carrier’s an tenna needs. The size of the cabinets on the ground needed to house the sup port equipment for the anten nas is limited to the minimum necessary size, as determined 11. by the city council. Add .*)riate vegetative screening jround cabinets shall be provided by the carrier, subject to approval by the city council. The council at its discretion may allow the use of non-vegetative screening methods such as berming, fenc ing. etc. ''Stealth"-type antennas (cylin drical) vs. an array of panels, is required if the technology is available. 12.Only monopole towers are al lowed. (Code 1984, 5§ 10.20(3), 10.23(3), Ord. No. 145 2nd series. § 1. 3-11-1096; Ord. No. 161 2nd series, §§ 3, 4, 6-7-1997; Ord. No. 179 2nd series, § 2. 10-12-1998; Ord. No. 226 2nd scries, § 2, 5-27-2003) Sec. 78-419. Accesi:orv uses. Within any RR-IB one-family rural residential district, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: (1) Private garages and parking space. Private swimming pools, tennis courts, and paddocks. Home occupations, as defined in this chap ter. All home occupations shall comply with the provisions of section 78-1376, and the licensing provisions of section 26-76, when applicable. (4) (5) Signs, as regulated in this chapter. Buildings temporarily located for pur poses of constructing on the premi.ses for a period not tc exceed time necessary for such constructing. Gardening and other horticultural uses, including avdaries and decorative land scape features One roadside stand offering for sale only farm products produced on the premises, provided such stand does not exceed 200 square feet in area and is located at least 30 feet back from the public right-of-way. CD78;73 iiMi Li ill utilize private road feeders »lic road grid. Because of ric shape of rural land divisions, i, most new rural residential lots d roads running off the existing ivellings on each road, the dead* ;d road locations make public costly compared to any public lots will be directly served by adways. New public streets will )nfiguration provides a general number of residences justifies constructed to rural design private road design standards to d adequate all weather access to ti of road surface required will es to be served and hence the . The length of dead-end roads irposes. Private rural roads and emergency vehicles such as pace to operate efficiently and lable maintenance levek and ds. In the process of approving :quire underlying public ingress, 3ver all private roads. These s of the public to all properties ^clopment contracts backed by tponsibility will assure that all constructed according to City nations. The City will further are maintained to reasonable quired maintenance agreements and that failure of the private road will be cause for the City to and to assess the benefitied ;h maintenance. Page 4A-20 *• \ ^ 2 \ J / •' 0 / f\ ^ ; j Jl’iLBNG •v.. \ lJ -T ✓ V 5 ^ * ^ s ’V., // tyi /)f X*"7/ O' / X ’•V. • • ' •. ^'//// . 'y A ' •650' k X.k Mo % >>N •yr ■ / / • 1 / ••• ! 7Y ‘ J>• *■ f j t /1 I i J i 'M. «0''OAV-iV.-* rt ^ • •' f ‘ •/- •\u o: JkViVw.- a .y' __-k>4 ■' ■ >/' ■ j/f/n ! L L \ \ \ ^ \ X,X' ■V lilillii! \ V >-^r * ' /■■. \ -is' C ■f. .X,t.r HOODED S 08“58’4r E 508,83 •' T, ^ r 1 I '■ 4 rr-< 7 \ . \ t i . J- X iJ •** ^ ^ . i 1. .J ) J, • * \ •\ /I V .'iv. ICi % ^ > ► .7 \\ l O ff ^ f-: ^ * Schoell & Madson, Inc. ^EngliM^ng ^Swvaylng • Planning Clar* WAY To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor & Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator Mike Gaffron, Planning Director (Jjlf June 10. 2004 J'. #04-3016 Henry Lazniarz / Wayzata Design & Development The attached supplemental information was received after the packet was copied. Schoell & Madson, Inc Engineering • Surveying • Planning Soil Testing • Environmental Services WWW. schoonmadcon com TO: City of Orono DATE: 6/10/04 PROJECT NO : 64096-001 2750 Kelley Parkway ATTENTION: Mike Gaffron Crystal Bay. MN 55323 SUBJECT: Croeksido Wo aro sondinu you horewith O undor sopuralu covur Iho (ollowino: [3 Plant n Spociltcations (J Prints H Rnports O Shop Drawings D Chango Ordor (~] Samptas IZl Copy of a Latter n Data Shoots Q Othnr______________________________________________________ ■ ■ ■. Transmtttod vId: □ Mail □ Fn* □ Will Call □__Hr Mnssongor Service □ Ovemiyht Delivery □ Othoi QUANTITY DtSCKIHTION B Mfoliminarv Gradinu and Frosion Control IMans - 11x17 1 Narralivo Addendum These are liarisntittud us follows: I ■) At Rmjuesfud □ For Your Records □ For Your Uso For Review end Comment CCMOELl A MADSON, INC Jont (jcwdr uitl DiiucI Dial No. Copy To 5K-84Z:9W5. Ji!a r ift ^006'VUClVuiics\06'lO 04 Mike G«frioit «!at Krv i lltM Affirmalivv Action Equol Opportunity Employor 10500 Wny/otn Duulffyoftl. Buito 1 • Minnofipnlis. MN 55305-1525 Office (052) 54B 7601 • Fox (052) 546 9065 NARRATIV E ADDENDUM FOR CREEKSIDE IN ORONO Wayzata Design and Development is excited to present the preliminary plat of CREEKSIDE IN ORONO to the City Council. This plan was well received by City staff. Planning Commission and the Park Board for its efTorts in open space preserx ation and sensitivity to the natural resources and neighboring properties. From the comments we received by the Planning Commission and the Park Board we arc able to improve the plan in the following ways; • Minimize Grading * Single Trail Access to the Luce Line The Grading Plan has been revised to reflect the benefits of utilizing custom built homes in this development. The custom built w'alkout-homes will be designed to use the natural grades of the slope and to preserve as many as the trees as possible. Trees are an amenity that homeow ners enjoy and take great care in preserving. Sec the revised Grading Plan. The previous grading plan showed the extent of the grading limits if house pads were to be constnicted with the initial road and pond construction. With custom built homes the initial site grading w'ill be greatly reduced with only minimal grading for the road and pond. No grading will be needed for lots 1-4 w ith the initial site grading. Grading plans and erosion control measures will be provided w ith the design of the custom home at the lime of the building permit. Again, the advantage of using a custom-built home is that it can be nestled into the site minimizing grading and tree impacts. Lots 5-7 will require some grading along w'lih the construction of the pond and the storm-sew er connection from the street. The Park Board recommended that the development provide a single trail access to the Luce Line Trail. A six-foot wide trail has been shown to represent a potential trail location. The trail will come off of the private cul-de-sac between lots 2 and 3 following the shared lot line to the conser\ation easement where it will tiini to the east and connect to the existing footbridge. Across the bridge it will meander to the Luce Line Trail following the natural terrain and avoiding trees. The path will be pleasing for the residents but designed to discourage public use from the trail. Wayzata Design and Development w ish to thank the Planning Commission and the Park Board for their comments and believe an improved project is being presented to the City Council. ijiMitMauak 1 lir Date Appikaltoii Received: 4-21-0'l Date Application Conildered av Omplrtr: 4 21 -O-l 6P-Day Hrvlrw Priiotl K*plrr%; (> 20 0-4 ^0/ ' 4 !004 KKQIIKS r I’OU t:OlJN(il. AC I ION Dale; June 8. 200-1 Item No.: /C Dcpui tinent /\|i|irovul;Acliiiliiistrator Approval:Acrnda Section: Name: Janice Guiu1lacltY!\ Title; City Planner /oiuiii’ Item DoM'iiption: //04-3017, Spiiicr llill Propnlirs, M7H Haysiilc Ul) Variances * Resolution /.oiiiiii' District: Lot Area: l ot Width: I R I A. One Family 1 akcsluuc Rcsiilenti.il District (2 acre minimum) 0 91 acres (41..’20 s.f.) Appioximatrly 4(i0‘ (<i) Shoreline; 420’ 75’ Sctlnick Ust of Kxliihits A Kcsolution per Planning, Commission Reimmmeiulation D PC’ Action Notice 5-18 01 /ippUcathii .Summary: Applicant icquests the lollowing variances m oulcr to do .in CNlcnsivc remodel which consists of lenovalin^ the Hisi Moor and re-consliuctiiu', the Vj story above; 1. Ilaidi'ovci vaii.ince to pciinit V8"o haidcovcr within the 0-75’ /one when O‘’o is normally allowed and C0% currently exists (removal of 7,5’ x 2.5’ clnintiey shaO). I'his haulcovcr. when mhled to the 75’-250’ /.one allowance yields total haidcovri ol 10%. 2. 1 .iKe scihat k vaiiancc to pcimit .structure within 75’ of the lake. 3. .Street yaid setback vaiiancc to peimit a 22’ seib.ick when 50’ is noimally tcipnied and 22’cuircnily exists. _ Planiiinit < ’oininissinii Ueeomineiidiitioii I hc Phinninc. (’omimssnm at their May 17, 2001 mcctinp voted un.inimously to .approve the ie«pieste»l variances slipiihitinv; that the patio on the lake side of the home be leduced m si/e to be even with the ilcck Siafl Ui cumimiidnlioii /\j»pioval pel the attache«l Uesohition C'OIINCII, ACI ION UFQIJK.SrKI) Ailopt the att.ichcd Rc.solution granting a hardcover, lake setback, and street' ard setback variances for 3775 llavside Ro;id 1 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-282,78-1288, 78-305 (B) FILE NO. 04-3017 WHEREAS, Spring Hill Properties, Inc., (hereinafter “the applicant ”) is the owner of the property located at 3775 Baysidc Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City") and legally described as follows: See Attached Exhibit A (hereinafter the “property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for hardcover, lake setback, and street yard setback variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-282, 78-1288, and 78-305 (B) to allow an extensive remodel of the existing building w'hich consists of renovating the first floor and re-constructing the '/j story above. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLNTD by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #04-3017. 2. The property is located in the LR - 1 A, One Family Lakeshore Residential District, which requires a minimum lot area of 2 0 acres. The applicant ’s property is 0.94 total acres in area. 3. fhe Plarming Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on May 17, 2004 and recommended approval of the hardcover, lake setback, and street yard setback variances based on the following findings: a. The configuration of the property causes the required lake yard setback and street yard setbacks to overlap resulting in no buildablc area unless variances arc granted. Page 1 of 6 4. 5. b. TTic existing house is located in the most conforming location of the lot. c. The proposed remodel will take place entirely within the existing footprint. d. The proposed remodel will yield a net reduction in hardcover of 108 square feet. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants hardcover, lake setback, and street yard setback variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-282, 78-1288, and 78-305 (B) to allow an extensive remodel of the existing building which consists of renovating the first floor and re-constructing the '/j story above, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B. Any amendments to the site plan which arc not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. Page 2 of 6 1 2. Hardcover in the 0-75’ zone shall not increase above the level of 3.5%. Hardcover in the 75’-250’ zone shall be limited to 3,340 s.f. or 29% per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit A. Applicant is advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover, 3. Applicant shall remove all plastic or fabric liner material from the decorative landscape beds on the property to ensure their permeability as non-hardcover surfaces. 4. Required removals of structure and hardcover shall be completed and confirmed at the time of the initial required construction inspection. 5. Applicant shall remove 80 s.f. of patio on the lake ride of the home so that the patio will not extend any further towards the lake than the deck. 6. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (June 14, 2005). 7. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 8. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicant and the applicant’s heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 6 Adopted by the Orono City Council on the H'** day of June, 2004, ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Cleric Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 4 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of 2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 EXHIBIT A tCCAI. OESCIIII»TIOM cr ^RtMIStS: _ day of nc. .2004 « » Oltovlllt on Likt Mlnnttonkiiti<* tots 15. 16. 19, 20, 21, «no 22 lying Southtrly of • lint drawn paralltl wlth.tad.llLXM4; 4i(iiaa^.vt«rly. •aaiurrd at right angits, fro»-a l4na haral-naft«r r«fifM^SVa JJ. *S'^ B- D,ing d<,er>b,0 ,s folio.,; Co.ow^1!,'.? ^rilcrjlliot JoT^T^ of 0f*th.''sth*0M2f?nirM*^ii?* "“f**"'**' Soetlon S. To«mijMp M7 Morth, l«ngt 23 Ue,tMArin ?^*^* -,^*^ *^**”’^^^*”^* South along tht Watt lint of tald Southeast Quarttr of thaMorthufst Quarttr a distance of 234 fact, thcncc dtflectlng right 48 degrees a distance of dtflectlng left 83 degrees to the Southerly iiii*!! laid ‘Line B" there ending; MiinI?SnkS**“S.!Lii!tS dedicated cn the plat of Oitoville on Lakenf •* (o**owi: COMencing at the hortheist corner of the Northwest Quarter the East line of said Northwest quarter a distance of 1400.28 feet; thence daflectlno left ^ 64 degrees 30 Minutes a distance of 143.32 feet to the point of taginniag of a lint harelnaftar ioo*fwIt-^t thence deflecting right 180 degrees along said “line A* a distance of* ®5! a tangential curee to the left having a radius of 500 feet and central I”dlJt!lri^i5*8n5*c ? "Ifi** * distance of 196.35 feet; theoce Westerly tangent to tald curveand thenct alono j tangential curve to the left having a radius of 300 feet ?2?f degrees a distance of 235.62 feet; thence SouthwtJterly tangent to Section 5 iJd West line of the Southeast Quarter of said Northwest Quarter ofsaid Line A there ending, said anding point being the point of btginninc of the Thertia Street in said plat of Ottovllle on lake ?•*** Northerly extension to tha Southerly line of said Lake or ^JSI^^*'**^*** Jf • ®'*® Southerly line of Lake View Avenue to the East Hneof.said Lakt Street, thence South along said East line of Lake Street to Its Intersection with a Mn, dr.wn PtrtMel «(th ,nd 30 feet Horthe.sterl,. .eesured it ria^ mo e,. frSi I I m hireM- efter referred to t» nine B*. i,ld nine B* being deicribed i$ f.llo.j: "crein coMcneing <t the North.ett corner of said* Southeist Qutrter/of tha Northwe&t Quarter' thence deflecting right 48 degrees a distance of 90 feat to ha point of beginning Md’tifd *•» '‘-t- Mono »el« perillel line to It, Intersection uith tiid Ue,t tine of the Quarter: thencr North alono t«ld W,,t lint to the point of «I*i22 ?** *elQ ebo.e detcrlbcd property lying Northerly of . line 33 feetSoutherly of. Mcetured at right angle to end ptrell'.l uith. „ld nine A'; (C) That pari of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarttr of tht Northwest Ouxrtwr of h*ir?p?i? ;:?.??.Tto-:7^f2e-BJ! ji.rvn: Nor ?::rt iS5rUr!'’!h:s7i''?;;u‘;7s;rt'he‘!iit*i7^j*s^ LXISTING AND PKOPOSEO ELLVAfIONS GARAGE rLOOR"942.3 lOP OE rOUNOAllON «942.S EOWESI ELOOR^D.VjO Kxiimir g X'' NOTE CXISlING lOUNDAllON TO REMAIN VLRIf Y AND USE EXISTING ELEVATIONS PROPOSED 10 riT EXISTING EOOIPRrTj / / SCALE FEET - CXlSTWC SPOT TLCVATION X(<KmO) - WOPOStI) SPOT tLlVAItON ^ ■ - OWICIION SU<I ACE (JKAINAOC flLNCHMAKK sM' IOP SAN MU O tLLV - ojy.o 7 e«- ^ '1'^„.oT % /r -/[^f</'>->'/ / ^ y * O /, • V ^ / I / ^ / / / > • // - / X.- F 'U S''*" t 9 'f » / {/V I .) « *'•/17? / // • . s'V'-'A., ^‘.W: • # / • LI ' / ,V:>.“V :j H \'A/^‘ \ ^ A> » ' / ''>• / Z ' LXISTING HARDCOVIR•%/'* \ / iP^/ ' 0-^s '■ ' "'r' ' , / ' /' HOUSi: = 5/0 SI V / »• ^' / 01 CK ~ JUS SF \l '' PA 110 . IBS sr •4‘ / ' / 7 / »•// / . y I / // / / ^—•■ / / 0 -3^ _ OrSCRIPTION. ;;;^1.-I»AHT OF LOTS 5.6./.8.U.IS.IG. 19.20.2 1.22.2J / AND iA, OIIOVILIF ON LAKl MINNL TONKA ;r»,yi;V'' HINNfPIN COUNIY. MN ^ lOI AREA TO OIIW--^ 41220 SF/ 0.94 AC \ ■V V 1> J^Z.Z:,NNtrONKA i'*' LAKiT M'W ■ipK HFM0V£P LOT ARLA</5 SLIUACK « ll43oy/0 26 AC X 2S% i>HS7 SI Al l OWAHLL HC PRGPOSLO IIAKIKIOVLH 0-75 iiousL » sso sr DECK = JOS sr PA no - "ms-sfl05».i. TOTAL TMO- SF <75 lOSO HOUSE »1SJ0 SF SUP - 40 SI WALK * 120 SI DRIVL = GOO SF TOTAL ™ 2298 ST (20 OX) TO I AT. - 2290 SF (20.0X) TOTAL - J44fl SI (JOOX) TOTAL - >HH*. SF(TIHKC) ------------------------------- TOIAl <7S IIOUST - ST T P « WAIK = orivt: 1IS0 SF 15J8 SF 40 SE 120 ST GOO SI TO: TYPI DATI Plann variar VOTl Appli' City< If you availa If you UIQ SI 0 /S HOUSl -!j‘jO sr sr orcK -jyi SI- IBS sr PAlfO »'ws-sclOSs.v. nso SF TOTAL »•me- sr <7S lOSO sr HOUSE -iroo sr40 sr SUP -40 SI1?0 SF WALK »i?o srBOO V ORIVL «600 sr '2298 SF (200%)TOTAL «2290 sr (200X) .S44H SF(30 0%)TOTAL ^>4m SF(79-9{C) =: 04-3017 OMMISSION ACTION : May 18, 2004 r variance, the lake setback 00 pm ion minutes, they arc the Planning Commission. :h at 952.249.4600. M4-3017 May 17.2004 Page I of 5 Date Application Received; 4-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 4-21-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 6-20-04 Chair Mabusth and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Janice Gundlach, City Planneij^ May 5, 2004 Subject: #04-3017, Spruce Hill Properties, Inc., 3775 Bayside Road - Hardcover, Street Yard and Lake Yard Setback Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR— lA, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acre min.) 0.94 acres (41,220 s.f.) Approximately 460 feet @ Shoreline; 420’ @ 75’ Setback Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variances in order to do an extensive remodel which consists of renovating the first floor and re-constructing the '/: story above: 1. Hardcover variance to permit 3.8% hardcover within the 0-75’ zone when 0% is normally allowed and 3.9% currently exists (removal of 7.5’ x 2.5' chimney shaft). This hardcover, when added to the 75’-250’ zone allowance yields total hardcover of 30%. 2. I akc setback variance to permit structure within 75’ of the lake. 3. Street yard setback variance to permit a 22’ setback when 50’ is normally required and 22’ currently exists. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the plans as submitted due to the hardships inherent to the configuration of the property. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-282. Lakeshore hard cover and land alteration regulations. In any LR-IA, LR- IB, LR-IC or LR-lC-1 district, within 75 feet of shoreline, there shall be i.o excavating, filling, hard cover, temporary or permanent structures except as permitted under section 78-281. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Within 250 feet to 500 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 30 percent hard cover. Within 500 feet to 1,000 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 35 percent hard cover. See. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (a) No haid cover or impervious surface shall be placed, located or constructed within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of any lake or r W04-3017 May 17.2004 Pace 2 of5 tributary, except for stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in this Code. (b) Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OHWL, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Between 250 feet and 500 feet of the OllWL there shall be no greater than 30 percent hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 35 percent hardcover. Sec. 78-305. Area, height, lot width and yard requirements. (b) Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be observed: Lot Area (acre)Lot Width (feet) 200 Front Yard (feet)Side Yard (feet)Side Yard Adjacent to Street (feet)_______ Rear Yard (feel) List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applications Exhibit B - Hardship Documentation Form Exhibit C - Applicant’s Narrative Exhibit D - Existing and Proposed Survey Exhibit E - Elevations Exhibit F - Floor Plans Exhibit G - Photographs Exhibit H - Property Owner’s List Exhibit I - Plat Map Background City staff met with the applicants prior to submittal of this application to discuss the setbacks required by the zoning district. The applicants had specific questions regarding what could be done with the existing building as the lake and rear (or street) yards setbacks overlap. City staff advised the applicants of how hardcover is figured on lots which have non-allowcd hardcover within the 0-75’ zone and the various variances that wou'd be needed to perform several improvements to the existing building. W04-3017 May 17,2004 Page 2 of 5 and lockboxes as regulated shall be no greater than 25 ;t of the OHWL there shall i 500 feet and 1,000 feet of it hardcover. ill be observed: Side Yard Adjacent to Street (feet) Rear Yard (feet) 50 s application to discuss the specific questions regarding c and rear (or street) yards hardcover is figured on tots id the various variances that aing building Lot Width 200’ 460’ @ Shoreline 420’ @ 75 ’ Setback 404-3017 May 17,2004 Page 3 of 5 Setbacks LR-IA Required Existing Proposed Front 50’N/A N/A Rear 50’21.8’NO CHANGE Left Side 30’32’NO CHAN''-. Right Side 30’272’NO CHANGE Lakeshore 75 ’ 50’ - Patio 56 ’ - Deck 60.5 ’ - House NO CHANGE Average Lakeshore N/A N/A N/A Structural Coverage Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 41,220 s.f. (0.94 acres)Allowed; 6,183 s.f. (15%) Proposed: 2,475 s.f (6.0%) Hardcover Calculations Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75 29,790 s.f Os.f (0%) 1,150 s.f* (4.0%) 1,130 s.f (3.8%) 75-250 11,430 s.f 2,858 s.f (25%) 2,298 s.f* (20%) 2,290 s.f (20%) 0-250 (transferring 0- 75 ’ hardcover back to 75 ’ - 250’ zone) 11,430 s.f 2,858 s.f (25%) 2,298 s.f (20%) -f 1,150 s.f (30%) transferring 0- 75 ’ hardcover back) 3,420 s.f (30%) - reduction of 19 s.f total * After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Rear Yard (Street) Setback Variance The LR - lA zoning district in which this property is located requires a 50’ street yard setback. At its closest comer, the existing house is setback 22 feel from the fVont property line. The applicant has proposed to renovate the existing structure and maintain that 22’ setback. However, because the requirement is 50’ the applicant must receive a front yard setback variance to allow the house to remain at the 22’ front yard setback. M4-3017 Muy 17, 2004 Page 4 ofS Lake Yard Setback Variance This lot has lake access at the north end of Stubbs Bay of Lake Minnetonka The required lake setback on all lakeshore lot i~ 75 feet from the OHWL. The existing house is setback 60.5 feet with a deck and patio setback of 56’ and 50’ respectively, all within the required 75’ lake yard. The applicants have proposed to renovate the existing building keeping these setbacks. This requires approval of a lake setback variance. Hardcover Variance (0-75’ & 75’-250’ zones) The property has two hardcover zones; the 0-75’ zone and 75’-250’ zone. 1,150 square feet of hardcover currently exists in the 0-75’ zone where 0 s.f is normally allowed. The applicant has proposed to keep 1,131 s.f. of this hardcover with removal of a 19 s.f chimney shaft, which requires approval of a 0-75’ hardcover variance. Also, 2,298 s.f (or 20%) hardcover exists in the 75’-250’ zone where 25% is normally allowed. However, in order for the entire property to be within allotted hardcover allowances the 0-75’ hardcover gets transferred back bringing the hardcover in the 75’-250’ zone to 3,429 s.f (including removal of 19 s.f chimney shaft) or 30% requiring variance approval. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibits B & C, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis______________________________________________________ In considering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safely and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of properly In the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when It Is demonstrated that such icllons will be In keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds a hard.ship exists in that the '.akc yard setback and front yard setback overlap resulting in no buildable area. The location of the house sits in the most conforming location on the lot meeting the 30 ’ side yard setback. If the house were moved more towards the road to meet the lake yard setback the house would have almost a 0 front yard setback at the most northwestern corner. A smaller house could possibly be more conforming, however the applicants have not proposed a rebuild but rather a renovation. Staff however, feels that the Planning Commission should discuss removal of hardcover within the 0-75’ zone, po sibly parts of the patio or deck, which amount to 580 s.f or 5% of the total hardcover on the lot. If this hardcover were removed the lot would essentially conform at 25% when the 0-75’ hardcover is transferred back to the 75’-250’ zone. Staff is not suggesting that the applicant ’s not be allowed any kind of deck or patio but r.'ductions could bring the property closer to conformance. M4-3017 May 17.2004 Page 5 ofS Issues for Consideration 1. Should hardcover within the 0-75’ zone be reduced in an ttempt to bring the property closer to 25% total hardcover? 2. Is both a deck and patio necessary within the lake yard? 3. What is a reasonable amount of deck and/or patio for a lakeshore property? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Approval of ths requested variances stipulating that: 1. Removal of decking and/or patio be required equal to an amount determined reasonable by the Plaiming Commission. J EXHIBIT A City of Orono Variance Application Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Application # 0^/" Main; 952-249-4600 fax: 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: . P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 Date Received. ^rZlfO^ Amount Paid; AtbO- Qt> Staff: Jhruoe _________ Fee: S600 ____________ Renewal; S300 After-the-fact; $1,200 Double Fee This application form must be completed in lull. Applcant will be notified within 15 days as to the status cf the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: Property Identification Number (PIN):>in -Oiii (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year': □ Yes, I own the adjacent parcels. Present use of property: ^ Residential □ 0*iher _____________—---------------------- Zoning District. L-R- fLA_________ APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal nares and mantal status required for each interested party) Name: j-hH Phone (home): Address: _________ Email: /h ,x, fyi^LaXe.. oc.>vi. ^ / > - 5^’ -l:>o 7 5TQO /-.w/.. S-f-^JLll Phone (work); _____ ^ V /.><- . AlA/ ^ ■> I Fax;'^/Ol -I ^ OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names ard marital status required for each intere^ed party). Name: SP/C<-'C^ Pt^cPrr-fZTfc^:::; jr/vc-. /c'j-v>g-/g/}A~;zrA~‘5-/Z.-^y y Phone (home): Address: ___ Email; -ZS'7-Zy!^S C-Akx: $7-. ^27/ Phone (work); /£T>:A1A, 3 S> 6/z ys~o 7 11________> Fax: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost: $ Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary):iMt; ICqUC;Dl lll utivau uwwiwiwi.v*. .. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 'Vg TO Rer^ooei 77/g- £j</5r//vg KV P^PU\c.!aj<^ 77-fZ T^oef <iy*»7S'/>'J Aa/a? UPPK-jQ Fi-Or^^ L-iV/Ar’^ 'TU^ ]Z£/rt o ^ AiouS^____ VVfi-4^ ^<£rriA^/AJ /\ 1^ ^^(zy / - 'TV£- bX'PPPAfT fif^OATtOA/ AAfO /v/g$7- WAU^S gg t/$£/} /A/ nVS ST^gc'C-TZ'/ge: ,------ A \/Aig/>iAe>g lA Neex>G^o bbcaosc -rue iAti£ a /vo Pi^AC Ser^Acdc e^tu____ n\16^LAP wrTW/A/ THe CorteSA^ fCv^TTy/Arn 'TU£^e !£> N<^ A </7H Q/\J ~THC L£>T ~T0 _________________________________________________ i: i Ll REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be processed. □□□□ □□ □□ Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. Completed Application Form Completed Hardship Documentation Form Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150’ of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance Government Center. A-603 300 South O"’ Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting ail the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 1 r X 17" for reproduction. Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet). Topographic survey - including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one coov 8 5" x 11" or 11" X 17" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x11"or11"x 17") Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. * APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information suoplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge The applicant recognizes that hc/she is solely responsible for subrnitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so Uie staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of Its pote^ial merit. ^XV<f Ihu. pjiC^fieirnaD OtG! ^^fe: Applicant ’s Signature: Applicant ’s Signature: // -/9-c? y OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigatioji^nd verificatiojvof this request. Owner’s Signature: Owner’s Signature^ • Date: ~c ^ Date; Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the Citv Planner assigned to your project. ^ #3017J City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form (This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting.*) Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Main: 952-249-4600 Fax: 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0C66 For Office Use Only: City Planner , jArf\ll Uf Meeting Daie/Time; _ PC Date; tl^a4j What is the purpose of a pre-application meeting? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal, inform them of the procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION: * Site Address: ^775 ________________________________________ Property Identification Number (PIN): _________ Zoning District: Lk-iA Size of Property:/' 7/3 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Average Setback □ Side Yard Setback ^fi^r Yard Setback □ Front Yard Setback lardcover □ Lot Coverage □ Lot Area □ Lot Width □ Other: Lfitt V^itAju.c , -jo A / \ ii ^ tM'- > ^ f I ^ ^ k ^ ut:3(6a> /s-^ -ffOOY V/oP rdp-f S'“Jf .^pp!ic^!Sy^^’ HARDSHIP: Applicant has received the Hardship Documentaf'on Form. InitiaiefXj^^______ur^derstands it as it has been explained to them, and is awate that it must / be completed and submitted in conjunction with their forma! variance application. OTHER INFORMATION: •please note: Your variance application will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this form will be completed by City staff. Applicant Signature this torm will be co^ieted by uty statt. y ■r ✓ •' r ;i ) X V i 1• • * f w. EXHIBIT B Paae 1 of 3 HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM This form Is a required submittal for ALL variance applicab'ons. An application will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this fcrm is complete and submitted to the City. __________ Minnesota State Statue Section 394.27, Subdivision 7 requires that a hardship be demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted. The hardship must be unique to the property as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic situations are not considered valid hardships. In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated. HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP? This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determ'ne if a hardship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a hardship, address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance is justified. The information the City receives is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will net be cons dered. Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request {some may not apply): 1. “The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls." fitND cve/ZLfiiP wmiiA/ fhaT P>2tAy7 CP HcfPP . T7V£/gg /S AJ<>T A Cr-’V/2vg/>t/A.*c.c </TC oa/ 7T/^ U'T.__________________________________________ 2. “The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." 'TtUS cjsr /M5 cveJUAPf'irvc, Acg AJcfT TJ-ttS F. "The variance, if granted, will not alter the essentia! character of the locality." Wu L A / STZ>^y c'/\j_:Di^_____________________________^____ •nTfjg TH^ fh-vp£ U'/t-L A- "Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter.’ 77/^ SB-T^Ac/rS TPo fJcT op" £xm/?tcfX yW/3 ~Th!S 35" y£Ar3~ct-0 sm*'CTi»ee. n^eAiiz __________________________________________________________ ^7* •i I Page 3 of 3 12.■The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience^ to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty." cf^ -Tue nnof>T i^-AyicA/ 'TH6t A/ArTv-ee /r— -TVfcV 0/i(fZL^^4 Hardship Statement . ^ ____:u«*v,« Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be described in the above critena, describe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary). ATT/HV/g^ STATEi^^ex/ J-_________________________ M fi».> ew 6 >*• :• . ; i •y 1: s TI EXHIBIT C HARDSHIP STATEMENT For 3775 Bayside Road Orono Due to the conditions that arc specific and unique to this property, a variance would be required to do any remodel of the existing home that alters the character of the exterior. The existing home sits on the most conforming location possible, with no adjacent land available, but the shallow nature of the lot makes it impossible to comply with either the road or lake setbacks, as they overlap. It should be noted that only a small portion of the existing house sits within the 75 * lake setback, while a larger portion is within the road setback. The current home is 1 '/i stories, with a narrow, unsafe spiral staircase to the upper floor. It is a 3S-year-old structure, with design faults (particularly the flat roof area) ^at have led to water damage. The house therefore requires redesign and repair. We propose a remodel of the existing structure, replacing the roof system and the upper floor living areas. The remodeled structure will remain a 1 '/i story house, on the existing footprint, and provide adequate access to the upper floor, while conforming with building height guidelines. Finally, our proposal docs include removal of the exterior fireplace shaft attached to the existing house, which represents removal of approximately 19 square feet of hardcover within the lake setback. Therefore, our proposal for remodel creates a more conforming house than exists now. ia h. •• I. }• . ■ ^ * 1 : / “W ' /I i = 939.9 '/1^ ^ 9 r /\w r r THORP REMODELING } ■' t; ?4 *.• J/4 11 VT .H ^•iL IMfV *IMI -7^ x..jS, I I UJa m WA HH n i( #«•• «94 «i%»«M ------------«»**>^*f(9 ill -------- a!p ij ----------------- «“»rf« (■>W?S"^'“’“" S "* « $ a ;; ^1 A2 T 'M ' ■/ ■' mM. ^!P W ^m-'iv,iw i ' ■TV'-. AutfMiiiiiittiMi i«i«» fli !.» *i"iI 38 SuiK h li r^-"!*—I A1 »s? •« —.••*...■• ,K* ■•. ^ •• : J '. I 4/ iS M t • *> 4 .. , VV lii® ,v;jvVhv^ v ; N «* \. ♦ , j i > • ij *\* ■ijiH V"/ ' 4 V iS -' T:rr*^’"• V ^Y!• *-!•!#’ f' ''■ I'K'’t:- ■ ■: l-i-li^ I ' ' W‘ ' t' ' i'i * .. '--i ^r. ..\\ ^ v •' < mrtj 'mi J li!^I'-*\.l\ V n'" •■^' ■ ‘ .‘ *4 , * ' I* >.»«» i#''‘.-T '* .* / • 1 • ♦•* A i.v.> jrv. ' •-<■ . , • ’ “■ H* ^ r • *'•• ■•1.' <-«'• ■* . *X»,V'^''• ■"* ^ f'-'* f. ^ •-• *»*• ' .-oia,;;*#**'^'j* -I'••'> , '>1^4,>,,,.• .- . “ r-\. "A,, f. .*y/^ -. J '4 'yt5v4,>,(. .• ■ “ r \. "A , • * . ■ ■“ -''Cn/iAi'-, . •'^'•‘ ’ * v..:... *'•4 •. • t) . . - •'COf'MW';.: r .' a^sT' • •' ■^HKanrivjiV - r> ' I —4i W- %k ■ ,A ^ . 4 •* • %-4 - Ja'' ^ ♦ # \ ' ' ^^‘ . '■■■’; '• • •';■ :4.r> ' ' ... :• .'• .•'V-' ’ • ^;v; n'JIWvX •sA'*. '.|.*l^'^‘'!' • im-' * { \ ' }/^ f »*i spas-* i i ?•' v • v - • •, 4 \ ’J '‘f *^ ' Vvi > T # / V. f' fV- •- >. Mkf^^m >vV -Aj jUj»/2N j # t. ‘ 1 jivr. '5^^iL71 ‘t*WTP' ■•J'f VI'V ► ' N ' *’•♦ •;:•'* • '•'. •'■^7 *V' ‘ • •■•’'.■,fTW’sVy* .v. 'i ui * V.” . ;'c' ^' ■ •'' •-• ('/■. •• •, ■' * ^ ■ t; %, • % mm ¥' jtH . 1- *if » *•.* A. V ^.9\ '« » W li:W^.)s^: V/ . 5>;'" ' ''t.^ ::;:;^v^r:^;v i V %'j ’ . ■( 4^J. ». '•H.:k%Xsv>' • • • '.1 }VJf '*jgpnf >: V. \v. R v^i r fi< »> * .f / • '*f ;n ^ ti, -. ^cm “1 > t w. RUNDATE:4/W2fl04 II OSII7232I000S PROPADOK 3710 OAYSIDtRD OWNER NAMK CLARJ WICKLUND TAXPAYER CRAIOL*RENIJiJWICKl.UND NAME/ADDR 3^*0 OAYSIDE RD LONGUKEMN 333W 31 0SII723230035 PROP ADDR M ADDRESS UNASSKiNI O OWNER NAME MARK L A KARENA S CASEY TAXPAYER MARK L A KARENA SCASEY NAME/ADDR 25i LANDMARK DR LONOI^KEMN 53336 31 OM1723240012 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIONED OWNER NAME HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND TAXPAYER HENNFJ*IN FORFEITED LAND NAME/ADDR I64*C/NC DNR RESTRKT SALE 31 0511721240112 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS DNASSKiNI.D OWNER NAME HENNEPIN IOREEITED I>ND taxpayer HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND NAME7ADDR DNR ISSUE UNDER S lUllD’S DAY-LAKE M IK A 31 0511723240119 PROP ADDR 31 ADDRESS UNASSKiNI D OWNER NAME GARY K VAU KIUS TAXPAYER VALERIUS NAME/ADDR 3750 DAYSIDE RD LDNGI^KFMN 55156 HFNNEIMN COUNT Y PROPERTY INFORMATION SYS IUM PROPERTY OWNERS LISI PAGI>: I 38 0511721210022 PROP ADDR 3760 DAYSIDE RD OWNIiR NAME A O A OI; USHER JR TAXPAYER ORVII.I.EE USHER JR NAMli/ADDR 90S /III ST MPISMN 55402 18 0511721230036 PROP ADDR 18 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNEX NAME IANDMARK OR HOMEOWNERS ASSOC TAXPAYER lANDMARK DR HOMEOWNEXS ASSOC NAME/ADDR ^ 175 LANDMARK DR LONG LAKE MN 55156 38 0511721240105 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS •JNASSKiNED OWNER NAME HENNEPIN I OKI Ell ED LAND taxpayer OE ORONO NAME/ADDR POHOX66 CRYSIAl. HAY MN 55323 38 05II723240I1S PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME HENNEPIN EOREEIIED lANU TAXPAYER CITY OI ORONO NAMI7ADUR PODOX66 CRYS1ALI1AYMN 55123 38 0511723240120 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIONED OWNER NAME CTIY OE ORONO TAXPAYER ^'13 ^ DRONO NAME/ADDR P 0110X66 I.ONDIAKI. MN 55356 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 0511723210023 3750 DAYSIDE RD GARY K VALERIUS GARY K VAUIRJUS 3750 DAYSIDE RO LONG lake ; MN 55156 38 05117232)0017 PROP ADDR 255 landmark DR OWNER NAME MARK 1. ft KARENA S CASEY TAXPAYER MARK L A KARENA S CASEY NAME7AUUR 255 IXNDMARK DR LONGIAKE MN 55356 38 0511721240111 PKOPADDR 1/75 DAYSIDE RD OWNER NAME H J ERICKSON ft R ERICKSON TAXPAYER ROSS ft DARDARA J ERICKSON NAME/ADDR 3773 DAYSIDE RD IjONOLAKEMN 55356 31 051172)740116 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIONED OWNER NAME HENNEPIN FORM 11LD 1>ND TAXPAYER CIIYOFORONO NAME/ADDR POUOX66 CRYSTAUIAY MN 55323 38 051172)240121 PROP ADDR 37/0 DAYSIDE RD OWNIX NAME WINFIELD R STEPHENS III TAXPAYER WINFIEID R STEI'HENS III N/^E/ADDH 3770 DAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN 55)56 r*i X X S H X mt*il RUNDATC:4/IW2(D4 HUNNtPIN SYSTEM PACE; 2 I CERTIFY TIIATTIE FACTS REPRESKMl ED ARK AN ACCURATE AND TKUF. REPRESENTA110N OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OFTHEIfl-NNEPINCOUhTIY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMDTTJDITIE BEST ^ / j/ OFMVKNOWU-CXiB*ND»F.URF._^^^^ EXHIBIT I Hennepin Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department (U) mFMTtSfgft I iMi m Co 05-117-23- I r«l»«mr*ow I 5 f.v; 1 ‘S’2> Cq. EILEi * ^ ff6>§*w#« "< ouaora It—^ rii 1 M«a Vf9* I V «: m ; '»»•tilt 9 : <’®' i’ , 11 »*uto i ' «: ... / tf«aa 4 M /t v ^-U* tl • V fW W' f S' M / •■ ■ - -i. / 1- if /<r f'ell •' I ft aa tire • nai S. It / O/ » * If ' *V •, \ * Vnr »ft/ f70/ * t t « tj :1X2»A —rr. »..*,• ■» . j *• . • in,___oS__ __ *» \ / < ^ •• ti ? rn» I *•• i f • f If j*., Is* ) '^jy. -*« - J5^- rcellnformation .. \** ,V' i •• • reel ID 0511723240111 Number377S; ^ ' %| V»|)«*4 not • U^ny n^nMfntp. linpnmrXt a cornplatfm *•and data ftom Oly, County, and State rbad BulhoiWta and other acu^a r ^ni REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JUH 1 4 2004 OF OftONo DATE: June 14,2004 ITEM NO. Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa nile Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public .Services Director's Report Item Description: Refund Letter ol C redit F’rtK'eeds for Jacobs Mill Subdivision In 2000, the city caslied a letter of credit in the amount of $5,(KK) for the Jacobs Mill Subdivision because the developer had failed to complete construction of the pond outlet control stnicture to conform to the approved plans. I he developer has completed the corrections to the outlet structure and the City Engineer has approved the structure. We are recommending refunding the letter of credit proceeds ba.sed on final acceptance of tlic outlet control structure for the project. C OUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the refund, to the developer, of $5,000 in letter of credit proceeds for the Jacobs Mill Subdivision DATE: June 11,2004 ITEM NO: yg REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION »^PPTING JUN 1 4 2004 CITY OF ORONO Department Approval: Name Ronald J. Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Purchase of Golf Coune Greens Mower T he Orono Public Golf Course Equipment Replacement schedule calls for the replacement of a greens mower in 2004. The Golf Course has two greens mowers. Each mower is scheduled to be replaced on a three year cycle. The mower scheduled for replacement in 2004 is in poor condition. The Golf Course Superintendent has obtained three price quotes for a replacement mower. The preferred and lowest price quote is from MTI Distributing in the amount of $6,292. less $1,500 for the trade-in of the mower being replaced. It is recommended the price quote from MTI Distributing be accepted. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to accept the price quote from MTI Disuibuting for the purchase of a Toro GR- 800 Greensmower at a cost of $6,292, less a $1,500 trade-in allowance, plus $312 sales tax, for a total cost of $5,104. r COn^'r'ii fippTiNG JUN 1 4 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO DATE: June 10, 2004 ITEM NO: / ^ Department Approval: Name Lin Vee Title City Clerk _______ Adminis Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Adniinisiraior's Report Item Description: Establish New Polling PKce Location for Precinct 1 - Resolution Attachments:Exhibit A - Resolution Exhibits - State Statute 204B. 16 Polling places; designation. Exhibit B Pret incl Boundary Map Showing Old and New Precinct 1 Locations Background The Minnetonka Center for the Arts, located at 2240 North Shore Drive, has been the designated polling place location for Precinct 1 voters for many years. Due to scheduling conflicts this fall, they are unable to continue to provide the use of their facility to the City for election day activities. Requirements for Polling Places 2. State Statute 204B. 16 (see attached) specifies the requirements for polling places and their designation. The following criteria was used by stafl to identify potential polling place locations to replace the Minnetonka Center for the Arts: 1 . Is it w ithin the boundaries of the precinct or witliin 3,000 feet of one of those boundaries? Is it accessible to and usable by elderly and physically handicapped individuals? Does it comply w ith the standards specified in the State Building Code for accessibility by hamlicapped persons? Is there at least one handicapped parking space available near the accessible entrance? Is the space separated from other activities w ithin the building? Is there sufficient parking? Arc there sufficient facilities to accommodate judges who w ill be w orking the entire day? Are intoxicating liquors or nonintoxicating malt beverages serxed in the facility or any atijoining rooin(s)? 3. 4. 5. 6. Alter review ing a number of potential locations, w hich included the Lake Minnetonka Environmental School, Lake Minnetonka Alano facility, New' Thought Church, Calvin I’—sbyterian Church, Orono Golf Course. Camp Teko, Long Lake Fire Station and several mannas, staff determined that the Long Lake Fire Station w as the best option for replacing the Minnetonka Center for the Arts as the Precinct I polling place location. Request for Council Action June 10, 2004 Page 2 Establish New Polling Place Location for Precinct I Notification of Change in Polling Place Location Slate Statutes require that designation of a new or different polling place must become effective by June 16,2004 (no less than 90 days prior to an election) and that every affected household with at least one registered voter in the precinct be mailed a notice stating the location of the new polling place at least 25 days before the next election. Hennepin County will mail these notices for the City. StafT Recommendation Staff recommends that the Long Lake Fire Station located at 340 Willow Drive North be designated as the polling place location for Precinct 1, and that the attached resolution establishing a changed polling place location for Precinct 1 be adopted. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED; Motion to adopt the attached resolution establishing the Long Lake Fire Department located at 340 Willow Drive North as a changed polling place location for Precinct 1 in the City of Orono, Minnesota. r A RESOLLI ION FOR ESTABUSHINt; A CHANCED PRECINCT POUJNC PI,ACE I.OCATION FOR PRECINCI I IN THE CIT\ OF ORONO, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, Resolution No. 4797, adopted April 22, 2002, reestablished the designated polling location for Precinct 1 at the Minnetonka Center for the Arts located at 2240 Norlli Shore Drive; and WHEREAS, the Minnetonka Center for the Arts is no longer available for use as a polling place location; and WHEREAS, per Minnesota Statute 204B.16, the polling place for a precinct in a city in the metropolitan area shall be located within the boundaries of the precinct or within 3,000 feet of one of those boundaries; and WHEREAS, alter review of potential polling place locations in Precinct 1 and within 3,000 feet of the precinct boundaries, it was detemiined that the Long Lake Fire Station located at 340 Willow Drive North would be the best option for replacing the previous polling place location; and \\ HFREAS, the Long Lake Fire Station meets the following criteria for a polling place: 1. It is within 3,000 leet of the northern boundary of Precinct 1. It IS accessible to and usable by elderly and phssically handicapped individuals. The space is separated from other activities witliin tlic building. Adequate parking is available for use b\ voters. There are sufficient facilities to accommodate judges who w ork the entire day. Intoxicating liquors or nonintoxicating malt hex erages arc not serx ed ui Uic facility or an> adjoining room(s). 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. NOW, 'ITIERFFORF, BE IT RESOIA ’FD THAT the City Council of die City of Orono does hereby establish the Long Lake Fire Station located at 340 Willow Drive North as the designated p«)lling place kx ati*>n for FVecinct 1, and designation of this polling place shall leinain effective until a dilfcrent polling place is designated for this precinct. Page I of 2 r Adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held the 14th day of June, 2004, ATTEST: Linda S. Vec, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson. Mayor Page 2 of2 Minnesota Statutes 2003, 204B.16 Page 1 of 3 Minnc^5latutes_2Q03._TablcpfChaptcrs labkoTjconients for Chapter 204p 204B.16 Polling places; designation. Subdivision 1. Authority; location. The governing body of each municipality and of each county with precincts in unorganized territory shall designate by ordinance or resolution d polling place for each election precinct. Polling places must be designated and ballots must be distributed so that no one is required to go to more than one polling place to vote in a school district and municipal election held on the same day. The polling place for a precinct in a city or in a school district located in whole or in part in the metropolitan area defined by section 473,121 shall be located within the boundaries of the precinct or within 3,000 feet of one of those boundaries unless a single polling place is designated for a city pursuant to section 204B.14, subdivision 2, or a school district pursuant to section 205A.11. The polling place for a precinct in unorganized territory may be located outside the precinct at a place which is convenient to the voters of the precinct. if no suitable place is available within a town or Within a school district located outside the metropolitan area defined by section 473^. 121, then the polling place for a town or school district may be located outside the town or school district within five miles of one of the boundaries of the town or flchool district. Subd. la. Notica to voters. If the location of a polling place has been changed, the governing body establishing the polling place shall send to every affected household with at least one registered voter in the precinct a nonforwardable mailed notice stating the location of the new polling place at least 25 days before the next election. The secretary of state shall prepare sample of this notice. A notice that is returned as undeliverable must be forwarded immediately to the county auditor. Thin subdivision does not apply to a polling place location that is changed on election day under section 2 0 4 B.17. Subd. 2. Repealed, 1994 c 607 B 7 Subd. 3. DttBignation effective until changed. The designation of a polling place pursuant to this section shall remain effective until a different polling place is designated for that precinct. No designation of a new or different pollinq place shall become effective less than 90 days prior to an election and no polling place changes may occur during the period between the state primary and the state general election except that a new polling place may be designated to replace a polling place that has become unavailable for use. Subd. 4. Prohibited locations. No polling place shall be designated in any place where intoxicating liquors or non intoxicating malt beverages are served or in any adjoininq room^ No polling place shall be designated in any place in which substantial compliance with the requirements of this hftp://www,rcvisor.lcg.state.mn.us/sJa(.s/204B'16.htmJ j 6/10/20O4 ..TTEl Minnesota Statutes 2003, 204B.16 chapter cannot be attained. Subd. 5. Access by elderly and handicapped. Each polling place shall be accessible to and usable by elderly and physically handicapped individuals. A polling place is deemed to be accessible and usable if it complies with the standards in paragraphs (a) to (f). (a) At least one set of doors must have a minimum width of 31 inches if the doors must be used to enter or leave the polling place. (b) Any curb adjacent to the main entrance to a polling place must have curb cuts or temporary ramps. Where the main entrance is not the accessible entrance, any curb adjacent to the accessible entrance must also have curb cuts or temporary ramps. (c) Where the main entrance is not the accessible entrance, a sign shall be posted at the main entrance giving directions to the accessible entrance. (d) At least one set of stairs must have a temporary handrail and ramp if stairs must be used to enter or leave the polling place. (e) No barrier in the polling place may impede the path of the physically handicapped to the voting booth. (f) At least one handicapped parking space, which may be temporarily so designated by the municipality for the day of the election, must be available near the accessible entrance. The doorway, handrails, ramps, and handicapped parking provided pursuant to this subdivision must conform to the standards specified in the State Building Code for accessibility by handicapped persons. A governing body shall designate as polling places only those places which meet the standards prescribed in this subdivision unless no available place within a precinct is accessible or can be made accessible. Subd. 6, Public facilities. Every statutory city, home rule charter city, county, towTi, school district, and other public agency, including the University of Minnesota and other public colleges and universities, shall make their facilities, including parking, available for the holding of city, county, school district, state, and federal elections, subject to the approval of the local election official. A charge for the use of the facilities may be imposed in an amount that does not exceed the lowest amount charged to any public or private group. Subfl. 7. Appropriate facilities. The facilities provided in accordance with subdivision 6 shall be sufficient in size to accommodate ail election activities and the requirements of subdivision b. The space must be separated from other activities within the building. The local election official may approve space in two connecting rooms for registration and balloting activities. Except in the event of an emergency hUp://www.rcvisor.lcg.statc.mn.us'stats/204B/16.html Page 2 of3 6 10/2004 r Minnesota Statutes 2003,204B.I6 Pages of3 making the approved space unusable, the public facility may not move the election from the space approved by the local election official without prior approval. In addition to the requirements of subdivision 5, the public facility must make remaining parking spaces not in use for regularly scheduled activities available for voters. HIST: 1901 c 29 art 4 S 16; 1903 c 124 s 4; 1904 C 471 s 5; 1905 c 307 s 1; 1907 c 266 art 1 S 25; 1991 C 227 s 12,13; 1991 C 349 B 3^,37; 1992 c 474 S 1; 1993 C 223 s 10; 1997 c 147 s 29,30; 2000 c 467 8 16 Copyright 2003 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota hlip;//www.rcvisor.leg.state.mn.us/stats/204B/l 6 html M0/20U4 ,) !£^ ■mviim i. \ V»t MaWl^d Vl',s if ‘FMA't,^ A|;m /.. \/(! ’" \mj\ m)1i . iVi#rj/ Crysta M ,// L ^r—___. \ '■) )j I ^ pff ••'S[j.^ C'ify of Orono Voting Prccinci Boundrics -■'■{^Spring Par ( ( Td MinnefonkaTr^ch > />v '\A Precinct 1 Precinct 2 Precinct 3 ] Precinct 4 Curmnf pf^jj .j Rt^jncjary M 4 “ r ii^''t.i.' De< ft a COliM^" »<'crrriNG JUN 1 4 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CIT Y OF ORONO DATE: June 10,2004 ITEM NO: 20 Department Approval: Name Lin Vee Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: List of Licenses for Coi ncil Approval Agenda Section: Licenses GARBAGE HAULER 1. Baldy Sanitation 5906 Henry St. Maple Plain, MN 55359 2. BFI Waste Systems of North America Inc. 9813 Flying Cloud Dr. Eden Prairie, MN 55347 3. Randy’s Sanitation 4351 U.S. Hwy 12 SE Delano. MN 55328 4. Veit Container Corp dba Veit Disposal Systems 14000 Veit Place Rogers, MN 55374 SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT 5.Applicant: Event: Location: Date: Time: Jim Dillman Wedding Reception with Music 225 Willow Drive North Saturday, June 19, 2004 6:00 p.m. - Midnight 6. Applicant: Event: Location: Date: Time: David Healy Going Away Party with Music 2135 Colin Drive Saturday, June 19, 2004 5:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the above listed licenses, with conditions if desired. (D RCeEIVED City of Orono Box 66 (27S0 Kelley Porkway) Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 — / • I. . f, • ■ f'’’ • License Year_____ Date Receivedifc/t CUYOF OBQM q Fee Paid^A Liitials ^r> Garbage & Refuse Collector's License Application The undersigned wishes to operate the indicated business in the City of Orono and herewith makes applications for a license to do so. Business/Firm . //ue. Address ^94^ c( sir Pi-Af^ £'5^3r9 (State) (Zip code)(Street) (City) Business Phone Number J Applicant's Name Address Phone Number Check One: (Street) (City) (State) (Zip code) Individual Partnership Corporation Number of Vehicles to be used in Orono / Description of Vehicles (attach list if more) : onni. General area of City ser\'ed Schedule of Collection charges/ dates Approximate number of cusiorncis in Orono /^ LoejUion of dumping ar^ IN ORDER FOR THIS APPlJCATION TO BE PROCESSED, YOU MUST INCLOSE THE FOLLOWTNO: • Surety bond in the amount of $ 1 ,000. ■ Proof of insurance in the amount of SIOO.OOO - S300.000 - $50,000 and 10-day cancellanon clause ■ Annual fee is a 1 50.00 flat rate fee, Dim SI 5.00 per truck, and a $30.00 transfer fee (If applicable) ■wwrr*" ■pwjwy ;'#r . 1 * “”«‘^*.T"f “u ®P®”*®'’ ‘**® business and I have paid all license fees and taxes required by law. I havevenncd thit the above infomutionjs correct.^ «»•» uic wMivc iniormiiionji — Applicant Signture ^ SY:i^ /a ^ Date POLITY USE ONLY: After review of application. sUff recommends: ->/L Approval ____Denial .jbapfa, Signalftre of City Of!i/ial Other (specify) (3 City of Orono Box 66 (2750 Kelley Parkwiy) Cryitil Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 License Year ^ O ' j Date Received c:- Z"7 ■ Fee Paid lt^O*” Initials i?Jl Garbage & Refuse Collector's License Application The undersigned wishes to operate the indicated business in the City of Orono and herewith makes applications for a license to do so. Business/Finn BFX. _________ Address (Slryct) Business Phone Number Mfli' 5( 7*^ (City) /vi.v . (Sute) ^ 7 / (Zip code) Applicant's Name __ Dflfj jiiLik Address ]G(e Oil. 1 /r.fj 5607/ Phone Number Check One:Individual Partnership # Corporati ion Number of Vehicles to be used in Orono Desenption of Vehicles (attach list if more); Year Mfgr. Gross wt. Rear Axle Wt.Si7e/Yards License Number - /itffidiED - General area of City scived . , , __________ t2;fy / Schedule of Collection charges/ dates Bi Approximate number of customers in Orono .3100 Location of dumping area FlylkJ^ (jltWTfl^MsffTgy/CiVoi')/ IN ORDER FOR THIS APPLICATION TO BE PROCESSED, YOU MUST INCLOSE THE FOLLOWING: ■ Surety bond in the amount of S1,000. ■ Proof of insurance in the amount of SI 00,000 - $300,000 - S50.000 and 10-day cancellation clause. • Annual fee is a S50.00 flat rate fee, plus $15.00 per truck, and a $30.00 transfer fee (if applicable) I 1 j i I am the owner and operator of the above business and I have paid all license fees and taxes required by law. I have verified that the above infoimation is comet. ]; ApplicanrSignature Date FOR USE ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends: Moproval __Denial Other (specify) Signature of Oty OfficialIfYinsI / ■h VEHICLES PROPOSED TO BE USED ft *• • ^ • ft / • •’ C ft ^ ft •a 4 21 L>. \ 1.lIclH Hao —yuncic 1 9?1 ^^11 OFP 2.WT 5l 3 /T I 7/jr/,1 (T)QgPj(1 } ara \»hOl.1 •...1 (<i~f^(i 1 c£i:‘ ^ 4.W/n 5!t/nB 1 1 U)<-l 1 /'TT/jr/.,i ftO-LcJAf) ^ 5.V'A/l'? ^?MOL| 1' (r05 1 /1 (0;j_P(£P,k U'^PD 6.7/JrJ f.CO 1 / !rA^.tc 1. 95 ReAQfOAAi • 7. lUqH iS7^-,biS 1 ■ / 1 ■t.rTL.ioA f, 8.MO 1 /• 1 (^kO r9r? 5.Ml 1 / 1 PbRO j 03 i /^AC’ ificJcci'' -3- IW?P 1 / i [=01W 01 i Jl'tfi'Ji P/l'ikEr,i 1'- IWi? 5i5./'-/^,q3 1 1«/ !PokiO 03 j M/U) 1 1 '5 11 -M. ,vm wti-. !<?0H /MCC -?4 Lc>f\£) I •5- iy//fi ^5w i Sll / 1 MACr.95 ( 1 /Pi-firL Co^Aj . < ! » •« ft •'Ilf, fini52 1 Q}i-> i /MO. 1 9^! /^Mt U'P-^ t 1 BFI Truck Information Size/Yards Gross ^eieht V.-’mi Rear Aile Weight 420 Varies 63000 44000 513 25 54000 40000 601 13 33000 23000 604 25 54000 40000 605 25 54000 40000 609 25 54000 40000 618 20 35000 23000 690 6 19000 13000 691 6 19000 13000 692 6 19000 13000 693 6 19000 13000 904 40 61500 43000 926 40 61500 511 25 54000 40000 V ■•' - CUy of Orono Box 66 (2750 Kelley Parkway) Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249^600 License Year OH Dale Receive^. ^ ^ I. T '’sceivgo ^ ^ :; IJBIC i\.cccivcq ' Pnv m t Fee Paid ) TP-^ initials Garbage & Refuse Collector's License Application The undersigned wishes to operate the indicated business in the City of Orono and herewith makes applications for a license to do so. Business/Firm PawrlyV^ Sa 4~i'On Unr Address » M.O. HUf\J (Street) '(City) UeiAnO =>=>^olA (Stale) (Zip code) Business Phone Numbw f 7fi 3 ') ^ 7,5 -3335 Applicant's Name S>^i in^hr. Vj^ Address Phone Number Check One: (Street)(City)(State) (Zip code) Individual Partnership I—Corporation Number of Vehicles to be used in Orono fP_____ Description of Vehicles (attach list if more): XeS! Mficr. Gross wt. Rear Axle Wt Size/Yards License Niimb^f — __(xHicAijoL General area of City served L^jJ^ndSL Schedule of Collection charges/ dates r c lqJJl Appioxirnale number of customers in Orono /a^ Lucatiun of dumping area ‘VTZ/rr. —fclAT-li\—i\te.yr ltnj ^ Tre^n^^C*-______fV\op lp GrcvC^ P?O . IN OKUCK FOR THIS APPLICATION TO BE PROCESSED, YOU MUST INCLOSE THE FOLLOWI.NG: ■ Surety'bond in the amount of SI,000. ot(A£^C^ 'h • Proof of insurance in the amount of SIOO.OOO - $300,000 • $50,000 and 10-day cancellation clause ^ ^ ■ Annual fee is a ISMS flat rate fee, pJiitilS,00£!eiiirurk, and a $30.00 transfer fee (if applicable). I ain the owner and operator of the above business and I have paid all license fees and taxes required by law. I have venned tiut the above information is correct. Applicant Signature Date FOI^ITY USE ONLY; After review of application, suff recommends: —VI Approval ____Denial '----' Signature of City Official ^ Other (specify) w } L nSCEfVSD » .• City of Orono Box 66 (2750 Kelley Parkway) Crystal Bay, MN $5323 (952) 249-4600 k'*! < • J • • I . ClTYOFOflONO License Year 'ICiM ' ^ Date Received" f 10^ Fee Paid^^‘ Initials Garbage & Refuse Collector's License Application The undersigned wishes to operate the indicated business in the City of Orono and herewith makes applications for a license to do so. Business/Firm Veit Container Corp dba Veit Disposal Systems Address 14000 Veit Place Rogers MN 55374-9583 (Street) Business Phone Number 763-428-2242 (City)(State)(Zip code) Applicant's Name Steve Halgren Address 14000 Veit Place Rogers MN 55374-9583 (Street) Phone Number 763-428-2242 (City)(State)(Zip code) Check One:Individual Partnership XX Corporation Number of Vehicles to be used in Orono Desciiption of Vehicles (attach list if more): Year Mfgf. Gross wt Rear Axle Wt, See Attached Size/Yards License Number General area of City served As Requested Schedule of Collection charges/ dates Varies by size Approximate number of customers in Orono Location of dumping area Vonco II 15301 UOth Ave SE Becker, MN 55308 IN ORDER FOR THIS APPLICATION TO BE PROCESSED, YOU MUST INCLOSE THE FOLLOWING; ■ Surety bond in the amount of S1,000. ■ Proof of insurance in the amount of SI 00,000 - $300,000 - $50,000 and 10-day cancellation clause. ■ Annual fee is a $50.00 flat rate fee, plui $15.00 per truck, and a $30.00 transfer fee (if applicable). ■W-iiWiiin tTi^..jimm I am the owner and operator of the above business and I have paid all license fees and taxes required by law. I have verified that the above information is correct. 5/18/2004 A/p»icantSign^fure rfteve Halgren, VP Date FOR^ITY USE ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends: Approval Denial Other (specify) Signature of CityOfficial ' '... City of Orono 2004 rahw m o CITY OF ORONO SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT Date Issued: Date of Event: Time: June 14, 2004 Saturday, June 19,2004 6:00 p.m - Midnight. (Live music from 7:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m.) Name of Person(s) And/or Organization Sponsoring this Event: Jim Dillman 225 Willow Dnvc North Long Lake, MN 55356 Phone: 952-473-8924 Location of Event: 225 Willow Drive North Type of Event:Wedding reception with live music for approximately 150 guests The following documents are required and on file at the City Administrative OfHccs: • Approval from Orono Police Department • Approval from Orono Building and Zoning Department The following conditions have been placed on this event: • The Orono Police Department and its officers arc empowered to revoke this special event permit at any time for any safety concerns that are not immediately resolved by the pcnnit holder or a representative of the permit holder. This revocation shall cause the immediate cancellation of the event onginally authorized by this pcnnit. • By acceptance of this special event permit, the permit holder, on behalf of any and all organizations and pnvatc persons, grants authority to operate under the special event permit, agrees to, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Orono from all claims ansing from said event. The permit holder, all organizations and pnvate persons exercising authonty under this permit, do waive and release all claims against the City of Orono. its officers or employees for any damage to person or property arising from the cxercis'; of privileges granted by this pcmiit and agrees to hold harmless the City of Orono. its employees and officers from any such claim. • Notification of tlie event to be provided to the neighbors, indicating the hours the music will play, puipose of the paity, date of the event, and a contact name and phone number for any questions or concerns regarding this event. • I’arking is recommended to be limited to one side of Willow Drive, Elm Lane and 1 lackberry Hill, Apprusrd at City Council meeting on: June 14,2004 (City Seal) Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator i 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66. Ciy^tal Bay. MN 55323 Phone; 952-249-4600/Fax. 952-249-4616/www.ci.orono.mn us r f CITY OF ORONO SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT Date Issued: Date of Event: Type of Event: Time: Location of Event: June 14,2004 Saturday, June 19, 2004 Going Away Party with Music (Approximately SO guests) 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. 2135 Colin Drive Name of Person(s) And/or Organization Sponsoring this Event: David Healy 2135 Colin Drive Orono, MN 55356 Phone: 952-473-1048 The following documents are required and on file at the City Administrative Offices: • Approval from Orono Police Department • Approval from Orono Building and Zoning Department The following conditions have been placed on this event: • By acceptance of this special event permit, the permit holder, on behalf of any and all organizations and private persons, grants authonty to operate under the special event permit, agrees to, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Orono from all claims arising from said event. The permit holder, all organizations and private persons exercising authority under this permit, do waive and release all claims against the City of Orono, its officers or employees for any damage to person or property arising from the exercise of privileges granted by this permit and agrees to hold harmless the City of Orono, its employees and officers from any such claim. • The Orono Police Department and its officers are empowered to revoke this special event permit at any time for any safety concerns that are not immediately resolved by the permit holder or a representative of the permit holder. This revocation shall cause the immediate cancellation of the event originally authonzed by this permit. • Parking should be limited to one side of Colin Drive. • Live music to be allowed from 5:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. • Notification to be provided to the neighborhood regarding the event activities, houis, and a contact name and phone number for any questions or concerns regarding this event. Approved at City Council meeting on: June 14,2004 (City Seal) Ronald J. Moor-c, City Administrator 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66. Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Phone: 952*249-4600 / Fax: 952*249-4616 / www.ci.orono.mn.us • I CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register© 05^64)4 6 53 AM Pago 1 MAY 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment JUN 1 4 2004 CITY OF ORONO (S 10100 Primary Cash PaidChk# 076446 5/26/2004 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES G 101-21701 Federal Withholding $8.664 96 FEDERAL W/H G 101-21703 FICA Tax Withholding $4.260 82 FICA 6 MEDICARE W/H G 101-21703 FICATax Wrthholding $4,260 82 FICA & MEDCR CITY SHARE Total FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES $17.206 60 PaidChK# 076447 5/26/2004 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 G 101-21705Other Retirement $951 62 DEFERRED COMP-302030 ToUl ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 $951 62 PaidChk# 078448 5/26/2004 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE G 101-21707 Union Dues $618 26 UNION DUES Total LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE S61826 PaidChk* 078449 5/26/2004 MN DEPT OF REVENUE G 101-21702 State Withholding $3.66079 STATE TAX W/H Total MN DEPT OF REVENUE $3.68079 PaidChk# 076450 5/26/2004 MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM G 101-21716 Post Employment Health $258JB0 post retirement Total MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM $258 60 PaidChk# 076451 5/26/2004 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION G 101-21705Other Retirement $1.877 00 USCM - ENTITY 2339 G 101-21705Other Retirement $140_95 OBRA #2343 Total NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION $2.017 95 Paid Chk# 076452 5/26/2004 ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST G 101-21705Other Retirement $3,294 08 MN STATE RETIREMENT Total ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST $3794 68 Paid Chk# 076453 5/26/2004 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT G 101-21704 PERA $6,778 96 PERA CITY SHARE G 101-21704 PERA $5.25^96 PERA EMPLOYEE W/H Total PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT $12,038 92 PaidChk* 078454 5/26/2004 UNITED WAY G 101-21708 United Way $70 00 CHARITY DONATIONS Total UNITED WAY $70 00 Pauidhk# 076455 5/26/2004 WISCONSIN SCTF G 101-21712Other Deductions $164 62 JOHNSON # 0002756698 Total WISCONSIN SCTF $164 62 10100 Primary Cash $40 322 04 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 10100 Primary Cash $40,322 04 $40,322 04 •9 i I CITY OF ORONO check register 0S/26AM6 57AM Page1 Check Pay Number Employee Name Period 054119 DODGE. RACHEL M 11 054120 LESKINEN. DENISE M 11 054121 SILUS, BARBARA G. II 054122 ANDERSON. BRUCE L 11 054123 BOBZIEN.SUEA 11 054124 BORIS. SCOTT W 11 054125 DEMBOUSKt. JAY C 11 054126 ERICKSON. KURT R 11 054127 FARNIOK. CORREY L 11 054128 FISCHENICH. DAN T. 11 054129 MADSON. ADRIENNE M 11 054130 MCNICHOLS. DAVID L 11 054131 MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES 11 054132 PERSELL. WILLIAM R 11 054133 TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. 11 054134 TOMCZYK.MARKW 11 054135 WHITE. ANTHONY J 11 054136 WITTKE. ANTHONY A. 11 054138 VOID 11 054137 GAFFRON. MICHAEL P. 11 054139 MEYER. WILLIAM C 11 054140 OMAN. LYLE E 11 054141 VANG. BRUCE L 11 054142 GREGORY. JAMES D 11 054143 HANSEN. STEVEN 11 054144 OBRIEN. RANDY L. 11 054145 PALMER. GREGORY A. 11 054146 RATHBUN. BARRY J 11 054147 SKREEN. DALES 11 054148 ABRAHAMSON. FREDW 11 054149 HAMBRO. MARSHALL J. 11 054150 JENSEN. RODNEY W 11 054151 MARSELLA. DAN G 11 054152 MCINTYRE. WILLIAM E. 11 054153 OAS. DANIEL O 11 054154 PEICKERT, GARY J 11 054155 POLLEY. MIKEA 11 054156 ROSS. JOHN A 11 054157 SMYTH. KATHERINE R 11 054158 STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD 11 054159 STORK. JOHN T 11 003412 MOORSE. RONALD J 11 003413 VEE. LINDAS 11 003414 KUEHN. THOMAS M 11 003415 OLSON. RONALD J 11 003416 PETTIT. SANDRA K 11 003417 ANDERSON. BRUCE L. 11 003418 BOBZIEN.SUEA 11 003419 BORIS. SCOTT W 11 003420 BUDIG. STACIE M 11 003421 CORNICK. JAMES L 11 003422 DAY. SUSAN J 11 003423 FISCHER. CHRISTOPHER K 11 003424 GOOD. STEPHANY R 11 003425 JOHNSON. JEFFREY 11 003426 MCNICHOLS. DAVID L 11 003427 RUSSETH. KYLE M 11 003426 SCHOENHOFF. JOHN B 11 003429 TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. 11 Check Check Amount Date Check Status $1.042 63 5/26/2004 Outstanding $687 98 5/26/2004 Outstanding $478 02 5/26/2004 Outstanding $441 02 5/26/2004 Outstanding $47 02 5/26/2004 Outstanding $1,454 71 5/26/2004 Outstanding $1.549 10 5/26/2004 Outstanding $1.579 66 5/26/2004 Outstanding $1.700 55 5/26/2004 Outstanding $1.508 20 5/26/2004 Outstanding $669.77 5/26/2004 Outstanding $516 11 5/26/2004 Outstanding $1,691.05 5/26/2004 OuUtanding $671.80 5/26/2004 Outstanding $417 22 5/26/2004 Outstanding $1.370 49 5/26/2004 Outstanding $837 34 5/26/2004 Outstanding $1.427 11 5/26/2004 Outstanding $0 00 5/26/2004 Void $1,428 50 5/26/2004 Outstanding $67.43 5/26/2004 Outstanding $64.72 5/26/2004 Outstanding $1,323 53 5/26/2004 Outstanding $882 79 5/26/2004 Outstanding $650 40 5/26/2004 Outstanding $699 98 5/26/2004 OuUtanding $745 18 5/26/2004 OuUtanding $1,120 71 5/26/2004 OuUtanding $1,070 35 5/26/2004 Outstanding $114 45 5/26/2004 Outstanding $61 04 5/26/2004 OuUUnding $254 00 5/26/2004 OuUtanding $263 52 5/26/2004 OuUUnding $289 94 5/26/2004 OuUUnding $19 86 5/26/2004 OuUUnding $262 51 5/26/2004 OutsUnding $65 56 5/26/2004 OuUtanding $78 64 5/26.2004 OuUtanding $95 94 5/26/2004 Outstanding $1.34317 5/262004 OuUtanding $190 75 5262004 OutsUnding $2,336 49 526/2004 OuUUnding $1,266 69 5262004 OuUUnding $ 1,328 20 5262004 OutsUnding $1,161 81 5262004 OuUtanding $1,061 30 526/2004 OuUtanding $1.135 00 5262004 OuUUnding $830 00 5/262004 OuUUnding $20 00 5262004 OutsUnding $832 32 5262004 OutsUnding $1.337 68 5262004 OuUUnding $1,075 19 5262004 OutsUnding $1,432 28 5262004 OuUUnding $2,008 57 5262004 OutsUnding $1,532 12 5262004 OutsUnding $1.100 00 5262004 OuUtanding $1.34913 5262004 OuUUnding $1.514 67 5262004 OutsUnding $900 00 5262004 Outstanding CITY OF ORONO 05/26/04 6:57 AM Page 2 check register Check Number Employee Name Pay Period Check Amount 003430 003431 003432 003433 003434 003435 003436 003437 003438 003439 003440 003441 003442 003443 LEE. JOSEPH P PMARO, CHRISTOPHER M BOLTERMAN. MATTHEW A CURTIS, MELANIE GAFFRON. MICHAEL P GAPPA. GREGORY A GUNDLACH. JANICE J. OMAN. LYLE E DEBAERE. DONALD L HANSEN.STEVEN OBERAIONER. SCOTT G OBRIEN. RANDY L PALMER. GREGORY A RATHBUN. BARRY J $14823 $845 01 $572.10 $1.058 36 $125 00 $1,810.50 $1.01047 $1.400 00 $1.184 25 $775 00 $1.056 30 $500 00 $350 00 $200 00 $62.63942 Check Dale Check Status 5/26/2004 OutsUnding 5/26/2004 Outstanding 5/26/2004 Outstanding 5/26/2004 Outstanding 5/26/2004 Outstanding 5/26/2004 Outstanding 5/26/2004 Outstanding 5/26/2004 Outstanding 5/26/2004 OutsUnding 5/26/2004 Outstanding 5/26/2004 OutsUnding 5/26/2004 Outstanding 5/26/2004 Outstanding 5/26/2004 Outstanding . i ; ! CITY OF CRONO check register 06A}8A>4 9:47 AM Page 2 Checii Number Employee Name 00:M65 003466 003467 003468 003469 003470 003471 003472 003473 003474 003475 003476 BOLTERMAN. MATTHEW A CURTIS. MELANIE GAFFRON. MICHAEL P GAPPA. GREGORY A GUNDLACH. JANICE J. OMAN. LYLE E DEBAERE DONALD L HANSEN. STEVEN OBERAIGNER. SCOTT G. OBRIEN. RANDY L PALMER. GREGORY A RATHBUN. BARRY J Pay CtMCk Check Period Amount Date Check Status 12 $707 33 6/9/2004 Outstanding 12 $1.058 36 6/9/2004 Outstanding 12 $125 00 6/9/2004 Outstanding 12 $1.610 50 6/9/2004 Outstanding 12 $1,155 07 6/9/2004 Outstanding 12 $1.400 00 6/9/2004 Outstanding 12 $1.25529 6/9/2004 Outstanding 12 $775 00 6/9/2004 Outstanding 12 $1.056 30 6/9/2004 Outstanding 12 $500 00 6/9/2004 Outstanding 12 $350 00 6/9/2004 Outstanding 12 $200 00 $67,295 69 6/9/2004 Outstanding i; r of\¥m CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register© 06/09/04 7 21 AM Page 1 JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Cor men! 10100 Piifwry Cash Paid Chk* 078456 6/9/2004 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES G 101-21701Federal Withholding $9.666 46 FEDERAL W/H G 101-21703FICA Tax Withholding $4,470 16 FICA & MEDICARE W/H G 101-21703FICA Tax Withholding __$4^47ai6_FICA & MEDCR CITY SHARE Total FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES $18,608 76 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 GIOt-21705 Other Retirement $95162 Tout ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST . 457 $951 62 Paid ChkO 078458 0/9/2004 G 101-21707 Union Dues ToUl LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE $0 00 $0 00 Paid ChkF 078459 6/9/2004 MN DEPT OF REVENUE G 101-21702 State Withholding Total MN DEPT OF REVENUE $4.08260 $4.082 60 Paid Chk« 078460 6/9/2004 MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM G 101-21718 Post Employment Health $256 90 Total MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM $256 90 PaidChk# 078461 6/9/2004 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION G 101-21705 Other Retirement $1,877 00 G 101-21705 Other Retirement $142 67 Total NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION "$2.01967 Paid Chk# 078462 6/9/2004 ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTtE'CUST G 101-21705 Other Retirement $3.542 68 Total ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST $3 542 68 Paid Chk# 078463 6/9/2004 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT G 101-21704 PERA $7.346 64 G 101-21704 PERA $5.668 30 Total PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT $13,014 94 Paid Chke 078464 6/9/2004 UNITED WAY G 101-21708 United Way $70 00 Total UNITED WAY $7000 Paid Chk# 078465 6/9/2004 WISCONSIN SCTF G 101-21712 Other Deductions ToUl WISCONSIN SCTF $184S2 $184 62 10100 Primary Cash $42.731 81 Fund Summary 101 GENERAl FUND 10100 Primary Cash $42,731.81 $42,731 81 DEFERRED COMP-302030 UNION DUES STATE TAX W/H post retirement USCM - ENTITY 2339 OBRA #2343 MN STATE RETIREMENT PERA CITY SHARE PERA EMPLOYEE W/H CHARITY DONATIONS JOHNSON # 0002756898 r CITY OF ORONO 06A»/04 7 42 AM Page 1 check register Check Pay Check Ch9ck Numbtf Employe Nam#Pafiod Amount Data Check Status 054200 PETERSON. BARBARA 6 S323 22 6/14/2004 Outstandir>g 054201 MCMILLAN. ELIZABETH T.6 $269 36 6/14/2004 Outstanding 054202 MOORSE. RONALD J.6 $369 40 6/14/2004 Outstanding 054203 SANSEVERE. ROBERT K 6 $269 36 6/14/2004 Outstanding 054204 MURPHY. JAMES L.6 $269 36 6/14/2004 Outstanding 054205 WHITE. JAMES M 6 $269 36 $1.770 06 6/14/2004 Outstanding J r CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Registei^ 06/11/D4 9 :16 AM Page 1 JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment 10100 Primary Cash J^aidChk# 078374 5/24/2004 DEPUTY REGISTRAR E 231 •45650*441 Licenses A Taxes E 231*45650-441 Licenses & Taxes Total DEPUTY REGISTRAR ($13 50) Void ($13 50) Void ($2700) Void Check 78374 Void Check 78374 Paid Chk# 078395 5/24/2004 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY INC E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories Total LAB SAFETY SUPPLY INC ($127 97) 1004709439 ($127 97)~ Void Check - 78395 PatdChk# 078527 6/14/2004 ACCLAIM BENEFITS E 101 -41900-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges E 101-41900-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges Total ACCLAIM BENEFITS $85 00 343103 $100^^00 343104 $185 00 COBRA Adm 5/2004 FSA Adm 5/2004 Paid Chk# 078528 6/14/2004 ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $57 61 17090A E 101-41900-413 Office Equipment Rental Tout ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS $1.086 66 21888391 Staple Cartridge Copier Lease-5/15-6/15/04 $1,144 17 Paid Chk# 078529 6/14/2004 ALL AMERICAN GOLF E 613-49900-095 Pro Shop Items For Resale Total ALL AMERICAN GOLF $243_92 80833 $24392 Golf Tees Paid Chk# 078530 6/14/2004 ANCHOR PAPER E 101-41900-201 Office supplies ToUl ANCHOR PAPER W89TO 152596601 $489 90 Copier Paper Paid Chk# 078531 6/14/2004 ANDERSON, KRISTI E 101-41300-319 Other Professional Services E 101-45200-319 Other Professional Services ToUl ANDERSON, KRISTI $140 00 5/24/04 5/24/04 $305 00 CC Minutes 5/24AI4 Park Minutes 6/7/04 Paid Chk# 078532 6/14/2004 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES E 101-42110-201 Office supplies $17» 00 6013-394790 E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $1^4 00 6013-394791 ToUl ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES $285 00 Coffee - PD Coffee - CH ^aidChk# 078533 6/14/2004 AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS*^ E 601-49400-401 Repairs/Maint-Office Equip E 602-49450-401 Repair s/Maint-Office Equip ToUl AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS CO. $261 00 15622S $261 00 15622S $522 00 SCAOAMaint SCAOA Maint Paid Chk# 078534 6/14/2004 BATTERIES PLUS E 602-49450-227 Utility System Main! Supplies E 602-49450-227 Utility System Main! Supplies ToUl BATTERIES PLUS $69 75 21-43977 $18 09 21-44012 $87 84 Bafferies Batteries Paid Chk# 078535 6/14/2004 BFI OF MINNESOTA, INC E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Mamt Bldgs/GrounJs $166 02 1307115 Solid Waste E101-45200-404 Repairs/Mainl-Bldgs/Grounds $138 66 1307214 Solid Waste E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Mamt-Bldgs/Grcunds $570.35 1307420 Solid Waste E 61349830404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/G.oundS $142.30 1307461 Solid Waste E 10142260404 Repairs/Mamt-Bldgs/rjroundt $56 18 1347632 Solid Waste ToUl BFI OF MINNESOTA, INC $f.07y51~ Paid Chk# 078536 6/14«004 BOLTERMAN, MATT CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 0e/11.t)4 918AM Page 2 JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Commeiit E 101-42400-437 Training & Development E 101-42400-415 Other Equipment Rentats Total BOLTERMAN, MATT Paid Chk# 078537 e7l472004 BORIS. SCOTT E 101-42110-437 Training & Development Total BORIS, scon $22 50 6A9/04 $47 93 6/9/04 $70 43 Mileage - Meeting Boat Rental-Big Island $22 ^ 5/22/04 $22 43 Meals - Training Paid Chk# 076538 6/14/2004 BUDGET PRINTING E 101-41900-322 Postage $8 98 29385 Shipping Chgs - Nextet E 101-42110-201 Office supplies $15 12 31566 ID Cards E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $66 49 31618 Report Covers E 101-42110-3?2 Postage $8 10 5/24/04 Shipping - BCA Tolal BUDGET PRINTING $118 69 E 613-49830-381 Gas & Electric E 101-42110-381 Gas & Electric E 101-41900-381 Gas & Electric E 601-49400-381 Gas & Electric E 101-42260-381 Gas & Electric E 602-49450-381 Gas & Electric E 602-49450-381 Gas & Electric E 101-41900-381 Gas & Electric E 601-49400-381 Gas & Electric Total CENTERPOINT ENERGY $5290 $97 13 $118 72 $668 59 $138 72 $1294 $7983 $159.62 __S2661 $1,355 06 ' 060-006-750-6 060-006-750-6 060-006-750-6 O6O-O0B 750-6 060-006-750-6 060-006-750-6 060-006-750-6 060-006-750-6 060-006-750-6 Gas Service Gas Service Gas Service Gas Service Gas Service Gas Service Gas Service Gas Service Gas Service Paid Chk# 078540 6/14/2004 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Mamt-Auto Equip $13 50 25414 Tire Repair - #194 E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint Auto Equip $50 42 25417 OilChg, Trunk Latch #188 E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $83 4 5 25421 Oil Chg, Oiagnstcs #198 E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $90 51 25425 Oil Chg. Lube #185 E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $86 40 25447 Diagnostice#188 E 10'.-42t 10-402 RepaIrs/Maint'Auto Equip $160 40 25469 Coil. Diagnostics #185 E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $634 62 25472 Brakes. Rotor #198 E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $33 92 25474 Oil Chg #197 E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $147.75 25482 Coil #185 E 101-42110-402 Repdirs/Maint-Auto Equip $876 06 25502 Brakes. Rotor Oil i195 E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint Auto Equip $44 19 25523 Oil Chg #200 Tout CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO $2 221 22 E 231-45650-441 E 10141900-322 E 10141900-322 E 10141900-322 E 10141900 322 E 10141900-322 E 10143000-221 E 10142110439 E 10142110-228 E 10142110441 E 10141110439 E 10141110439 E 1Q141300439 E 10142110-322 Licenses & Taxes Postage Postage Postage Postage Postage Equipment Parts & Accessories Meeting Expenses Training Supplies Licenses & Taxes Meeting Expenses Meeting Expenses Meeting Expenses Postage $27 00 $0 37 $0 37 $0 46 $0 83 $1 11 $166 $5 99 $6 18 $9 50 $1200 $1200 11596 12370 6/2004 6/2004 6/2004 6/2004 6/2004 6/2004 6/2004 6/2004 6/2004 6/2004 6/2004 6/2004 6/2004 6/2004 Registratioas Postage Postage Postage Postage Postage Pails Donuts Numben Tabs Pie - Work Session Pie • Work Session Cookies - Hwy 12 Postage CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register^ 06/11/04 9 ISAM Page 3 JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment E 101-42110 322 Postage E 101-41300-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges E 101-41110-439 Meeting Expenses Total CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH $28 12 6/2004 $39 90 6/2004 $12 00 6/2004 $197 15 Postage Health Assmnt Party Pie - Work Session PaidChk# 0/8642 6/14/2004 CITY VIEW ELECTRIC E 101-42260-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total CITY VIEW ELECTRIC S2I6 25 12845 $216 25 Security Punch Pad System i^aidChK# 078543 6/14/2004 CLAREY*S E 425-48945-222 Vehicle Equipment & Parts $264 20 150998 Junctron Box 0 425-48945-222 Vehicle Equipment & Parts $337 50 150998 FD/INSTAL FENDERAMUDFLAPS Total CLAREY*S $601 70 PaidChk# 0/8544 6/14/2004 CORNERHOUSE E 101 -42110-19 Otlier Professional Services $1.245 50 2004 2004 Interview Services Total CORNERHOUSE $1.245 50 PaidChk# 07854 5 6/14/2004 CORNICK, JAMES E 101-42110-437 Training & Development $25 83 5/26AM Meats - Bomb Class Total CORNICK, JAMES $25 83 Paid Chk# 0/8546 6/14/2004 COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $159 75 85929 Carpet Cleaning E 101-41900-407 Janitorial Services $1.504 85 86102 Janrtortal 6/2004 E 101-42110-407 Janitorial Services $1,139 55 86102 JanitoriOi 6/2004 E 101-42260-407 Janitorial Services $186 38 86103 Janitorial • Nav Fire 6/2004 Total COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES $2,990 53 PaidChk# 07854 / 6/14/2004 DAHLKE TREE SERVICE E 101-43000-408 Contracted Street Matnl $852 00 6/1/04 Stumps/Tfee Trimming E 101-43000-408 Contracted Sheet Main!$61770 6/1/04 Navarre Banners Total DAHLKE TREE SERVICE $1,469 70 PaidChk# 0/8540 6/14/2004 DALBEC ROOFING E 601-49400-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $247 00 34289 Roof Repair-Nvr Wtr Total DALBEC ROOFING $247 00 PaidChk# 078549 6/14/2004 DCA - WIRE ONLY G 101-21719 DCA/Spending Accounts $804 62 5/26/04 Flex Spending - *^76 ToUl DCA-WIRE ONLY $804 62 Patd Chk# 078550 6/14/21X14 DEANOVIC, JAMES P A DEBORAH E 406-48700-489 Other Miscellaneous Charge's $5.000 00 061404 refund aedit/jacObs mill subd Total DEANOVIC, JAMES P A DEBORAH $5.000 00 Paid Chk# 0/855 1 6/14/2004 DEPT OF ADM • INTERTECH GROUP E 101-42110-311 Data I’rocesstng Communreahon $37 00 DVD04040309 PVC Circuit E 10M1900 321 Telephone $114 20 W04G40603 Phone service 4/2004 E 10M2110 321 Telephone $48 95 W04J40603 Phone service 4/2004 Tout DEPT OF ADM - INTERTECH GROUP $200 15 PaidChk# 078552 6/14/2004 DEPUTY REGISTRAR E 231-45650-441 Licenses & 1 axes ___$13 50 96Chev For1e4-199b Chev - Marso Total DEPUTY REGISTRAR $13 50 CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register© 06/11/04 9 ISAM Page 4 JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment E 101-43270 316 Contract Recycling Pickup ToUl E-Z RECYCLING $6.518 20 6706 $6.518 20 Recycling 6/2004 ^aid Chktr 078554 6/14/2004 EMBEDDED SYSTEMS E 101-42110 403 Ftepairs/Maint Misc Equip Total EMBEDDED SYSTEMS $792 00 30838 $792 00 Siren Maintenance PaidChk# O/8'jVj 6/14/;>004 engineering REPRO systems E 101-41900-201 Office supplies E 101-41900 201 Office supplies ToUl ENGINEERING REPRO SYSTEMS $47 39 69489 $48 76 70172 $96 15 Copies Copies - 1050 Cox Fami PaidChk# 078556 6/14/2004 ERICKSON. KURT E 101-42110 43/ Training A Development E 101-42110-221 Equitirnent Paris A Accessories E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories Total ERICKSON. KURT $368 16 5/10/04 $108 94 5/10/04 $127 97 5/10/04 $605 07 1 odging Chiefs Conf Binoculars OSHA/PH Jail Supplies PaidChk# 078557 6M4/?004 ESCHELON E 10M?2G0 381 Gas & tIecUic Total ESCHELON $351 98 6425807 $351 98 I’hone Service - Nav Fire PaidChkll 078558 6/14/2004 FORTIS BENEFITS G 101-21713 LTD Insurance Total FORTIS BENEFITS $842 50 4019825-1 $842 50 LTD - 6/2004 PatdChk# 078559 6/14/2004 GENERAL OFFICE PRODUCTS E 101-42110 201 Office supplies $11 72 235537 Total GENERAL OFFICE PRODUCTS $1172 Keys Paid Chk# 078560 6/14/2004 GOLF CAR MIDWEST E 613-49830 415 Other Equipment Rentals Total GOLF CAR MIDWEST $1.600 00 9904 $1.600 00 Golf Cart Lease - 5/2004 Paid ChK» 0/8561 fj/14/2004 GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE F 101-41300 437 Training A Development $199 00 11016 Total GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE $199 00 MCMA/MACA Conf Paid Chkf 078562 6/14/2004 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH OPT E 101-42110-414 EDP/Comm'inications Equip Rent E 101 4191K) 321 lelephone F 602 49450 321 lelephone E 601 49400-321 lelephone Total HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH DPT $1,541 89 24058026 $17 53 24058063 $17 53 24058063 $17 53 240f>8063 $1,594 48 800 Mn/ Radios - PD 800 Mh/ Radios 800 Mh/ Radios 800 Mh/ Radios Paid ChK# 0/8M»3 6/14/2004 HF NNFPIN COUNTY TREASURER JAIL b 101 41600 309 JailChatqes $37 00 492 Total HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER JAIL $37 00 paHlChk# o;85<>4 ROOM A BOARD 4/04 6/14/2(K)4 HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE E 613 49830-404 RepausA4aint Bidgs/Gfounds $26 76 991057 Total HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE $26 76 mats PaidChki 07H*>f35 6/14/2(K)4 HYDRO METFRING TECHNOLOGY E60M9400 227 Utility System Main! Supf>ties $145 4 3 0026734 IN E60M9400 227 Utility System Mamt Supplies $1.292 90 0026747-IN 10 METERS 10 METERS i CITY OF ORONO 06/11/04 9 18 AM Pages *Check Detail Register® JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment Total HYDRO METERING TECHNOLOGY $1.438 33 PaKJChk# 07856G 6/14^2004 KEEPERS E 101-42110-226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42110-226 Clothing & personal equipment Tout KEEPERS $146 48 24765 $147 M 24765-01 $294 38 Shirts. Pants - Tomcheck Shirt. Boots • Tomcheck Paid Chk# 078567 6/14/2004 KENNEDY ft GRAVEN. CHARTERED E 234-45680-307 Legal-Consulting $540 00 S^5m4 Total KENNEDY ft GRAVEN. CHARTERED $540 00 MNDOT/Lurton Matter Paid Chk# 078568 6/14/2004 KENNETH N. POTTS. PA E 101-41600*306 Legal-Prosecution Total KENNETH N. POTTS. PA $2.500 00 5/2004 $2,500 00 Prosecutions 5/2004 Paid Chk# 078569 6/14/2004 KNOX COMPANY E 101-42110-223 Bldg/Grounds Maint Supplies ToUl KNOX COMPANY $204 00 407273 Key Box $204 00 Paid Chk# 078570 6/14/2004 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts ft Accessories E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Mamt-Auto Equip Total KUSTOM SIGNALS INC $45 72 196584 $89 88 196894 $WJ^ 197035 $198 85 Computer Cable Antenna Patch Cable Cable Pwr Outlet Assy Paid Chk# 078571 6/14/2004 LOGIS E 101-41900*329 Other Communications E 101-41900-401 Repairs/Maint-Office Equip E10M2110-310 LOGJS-Applications E 101-41900-311 Data Processir>g Communication E 101-42110-329 Other Communications Tout LOGIS $196 50 ($86 57) 117 $1.876 00 24108 $30 00 24108 $196 50^24108 ’$2.212 43 INTERNET REFUND F/PO 13294 POLICE RECORDS HENN CTY CON INTERNET 4A)4 Paid Chk# 078572 6/14/2004 LONG LAKE. CI1Y OF E 101-42260-318 Fire Services Total LONG LAKE. CITY OF $51.284_M 20040013 $51,284 50 2nd Otr 2004 Fire Services ■ Paid Chk# 078573 6/14/2004 MAGIC CLEANERS E 101-42110-221 Equipment Paris ft Accessories E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts ft Accessories Total MAGIC CLEANERS $51 14 $5 4^ 25624 $5661 BLANKETS CLEANED SHIRT CLEANED Paid Chk# 078574 6/14/2004 MCLEOD USA - PHONE BILLS E 601-49400 321 Telephone E10M1900-321 Telephone E10M2110 321 Telephone E 60M9400 321 Telephone E 602-49450 321 Telephone $42 95 5038866 $47271 5038866 $202 59 5038866 $22 51 5038866 $39 45 5038866 E 602-49450-321 Telephone $52 52 5038866 Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service Total MCLEOD USA - PHONE BILLS $832 73 PaidChk# 078575 6/14/2004 MEDIA COM E 613-49830*415 Other Equipment Rentals Total MEDIA COM $5 58 39831 Equip Rental $5 58 P«d Chk# 0/85/6 6/t4/?0(M M(NNEAPOUS OXYGEN COMPANY L 101-42110 221 Equipment Parts ft Accessories $26 61 RI05040682 Cylinder Rental CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register© 06/11/049 ISAM Page 6 JUNE 2004 Chech Ami Invoice Comment ToUl MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY $26 61 Paid Chk« 0/«*>// (./14/2004 MN COUNTY ATTORNEYS ASSOC. I 101 42110 201 Oflir^isiippliPi $36 15 12383 Total MN COUNTY ATTORNEYS ASSOC. $35 15 Eortoilure f orms PaidChklT 0/857B 0/14/2004 MPLS DEPT OF HEALTH & FAMILY E 101-42110 319 OthPt I'lofossinnnl Sorvir/**. $4900 5/2004 Total MPLS Ul PT OF HEALTH & FAMILY $49 00 Laboratory Analysis 04-0549 PaidClik« 0/85/9 0/14/2004 NATIONAL WATERWORKS E 601-49400-240 Small Tools and Minor Lquip E 601 494(H) 22/ Ulility System Mainl Supplier. $235 90 124886? $559 54 1289484 Hose Adapter Hydrant Parts E 601-49400 22/ Ulilily flyf.lem M.iinl Siipplic. Total NATIONAL WATERWORKS $1.408 01 $2,203 45 1302948 Hydrant Parts Paid Ctik« 0/8580 0/14.r2004 NCPERS GROUP LITE INS G 101*21710 hfp InMifsincr $320 00 6732604 PERA Life 6/2004 Tnt.il NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS $320 00 fVidChK« 0/BS81 6/14/2004 NtlOPOST E 101-41900 401 TTepairs/Mami Otfice Equip $693 32 41677703 Metur RenUI C/29/04 05 Total NEOPOST $693 32 Paid Clik« 0/8582 6/14/2004 NLXTEL COMMUNICATIONS r 613*49830 321 Telephonu $52 62 326160427-00 Cell Phones r 601 -49400 32 1 Telrphonp $43 08 326180427-00 Cell Phones 1 60*M94 ‘j 0 321 lrl»»phone $129 24 326180427-00 Cell Phones r 101-41900 321 Itflfphonp $258 46 326180427-00 Cell Phones t 101-42110 321 Telephone $1 032 37 506573311-03 Police Phories Total NLXTEL COMMUNICATIONS $1,515 77 PaidChk# 07H5B3 6/14/. (M)4 O'SULLIVANS • HOLIDAY 546 L 101 42110 402 Mf*p.iifs/M.im! Auto Equip $43 50 4/30/04 CAR WASHES Tot«it O'SULLIVANS > HOLIDAY 546 $49 50 PaHlC.lik# 0/H5H4 6/U/2(K)4 O'SULLIVANS HOLIDAY 547 L 101-42110 402 Re|iaiis/Mainl Aiilo Equip $143 (X)4/30/04 c:arwashf s ToUl O'SULLIVANS HOLIDAY 54/$143 00 F>aKjChk« 07HSHS 6/14/2(M)4 OFMCli DEPOT 1 101 421 U) 201 Off KIT supplies $23 24 245945172 00 Office Supplies E 101 419(K) 201 Offn e suppiktH $23 25 24594517? 00 Office Supplies Total OFFICE DEPOT $46 49 r».iKl(:fiKII O/HSMf. 6/14/2004 Ot D DUTCH FOODS INC. 1 613 49'HX) 0<l.l (U)fuessiorn. For Mesak* 1 nl»l $11 76 102631 Chips for Resale T0I41I OLD DUTCH FOODS INC.$11 76 |»j|Kj(.fiK# 0/MSM/ f»/14/2CH)4 PHAKO, CHRIS 1 101-42110 201 Office $17 13 6/1/04 1 ilm loUl PHARO. CHRIS $17 13 NklChK# O/HSHM f»/14/2004 PlONfcLR 1 101-4eM00 340 (»«*rieial AifveiliHing $29 85 109 Prop /onmg Revisions E 101-42400 340 C*enefal Aciveitisirig $157 21 110 ApfilicatKins E 101 41900 352 Piuiliiiy & Publi^img $13731 ltd r»ub Ord 66 | lL CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail RegisteitD 06/11/04 9 18 AM Page? ^ JUNE 2004 E 101-41900-352 Printinfl & Publishing ^wjeciiwnji^invojce S135 32 129 UtKTIfTXfW Pub Ofd f 7 E 101-41900*352 Printing & Publishing S11144 130 PubOfdfS E 613-49830-340 General Advertising $100 00 339 Adv-Gulf Guide ToUl PIONEER $671.13 l^atdChk# 078569 6/14/2004 PRAIRIE OFFSET E 101-45200-404 Repalrs/Maint Bldgs/Grounds $129 83 91686 Prairie Maint • Fr Creek Pk Total PRAIRIE OFFSET $129 83 l>aid 6hk« 078590 6/14/2004 PRECISION TURF E 613-49830-223 Btdg/Grounds Main! Supplies $41141 22791 Herbicide/Fertilizer E 613-49830-223 Bidg/Grounds Maint Supplies $273 41 22893 Fungicide/Grass Seed Total PRECISION TURF $684 82 Paid Chkf 078591 6/14/2004 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE G 101 -15996 Non-Employee Health Ins $3 30 JUN2004 LIFE INSURANCE 6AM G 101-21710 Life Insurance $89 70 JUN2004 LIFE INSURANCE 6AM G 101-21710 Life Insurance $710 55 JUN2004 LIFE INSURANCE 6AM Total PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE $803 55 Paiddhka 078592 6/14/2004 QWEST E 613-49830-321 Telephone $53 19 9524739904 Phone Service -GC Tout QWEST $53 19 PaidChk» 078593 6/14/2004 REED VENDING E 613-49DD0 093 Concessions Fur Resale Txbi $98 60 4459 candy bars ToUl REED VENDING $98 60 ^aiddhk# 076594 6/14/2004 RICKS SUPERVALUE E 613-49830-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $13 79 5/26/04 Club House Supplies ToUl RICKS SUPERVALUE $1379 PaidChki 078595 6/14/2004 SCHARBER & SONS E 101-43000 221 Equipment f'arts & Accessories ($23 39) 2033156 RETURNED PARTS E 613-49630-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $62 21 2035670 BLADE E 10M3000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $318 2035682 PARTS E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $6 73 2036846 ''UBE E 613-49830-221 Equipment Parts K Ac(x»ssofles $3143 9525 Balance Due E 613 49830 240 Small Tools and Mirmr Equip $213 00 9525 ECHO BLOWER ratal SCHARBER & SONS $293 16 Paid Chk« 078596 6/14/2UU4 SCHWABB INC." .. .-UNI E 101 41900 201 Office supplies $41 21 R21838 Notary Stamp Pad Total SCHWABB INC.$41 21 PaidChK« 0/8597 6/14/2UU4 SHAUGHNESSY, COLIN E 101 45200-404 Rep.ilfs/Maint BMijs/Giounds $2.000 00 V31/04 Park Mowing S/2004 ToUl SHAUGHNESSY, COLIN $2.00000 PaidChki 0/8598 6/14/2U04 ST. PAUL. CITY OF E 101 42110-437 Tratnir>g 8 Development $400 00 83875 Background Investigations ToUl ST PAUL. CITY OF $400 00 6/14/2004 r 231 -4^T'SO- 340 General Advertising r 2314S6M) 340 General Advertising 1231 4*>r»50 340 General Advertising $20720 12757006 $192 40 12757006 $177 60 12757006 Adv • Sale of 93 Daodge Ram Adv-SaieorOI Oids Adv • Sale of 93 Lumma r CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Registertg) 06/11/34 9 16 AM Pages E 231-45650*340 General Adveittr»ing E 101-42110 340 General Advertising Total STAR TRIBUNE PaidChKK 078600 6/14/2004 SIREICHERS E 101-4226O-22G Clothing & personal equipmr*nl E 101-42260-220 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42260-226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42260-226 Clothing 6 personal equipnierit E 101-42260-226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42260 226 Clothing /t personal equipment E 101-42260 226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42260 226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42260-226 Clothing & personal equipment t 101-42260-226 Chthing & personal equipment E 101 42260 226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42260 226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42260 226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42260 226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42260-226 Clottiing & j>ersonal equir)ment E 101-42260-226 Clothing & personal equipment Total STREICHERS PaidChk# 078601 6/14/2004 SUN NEWSPAPERS E 231-45650-340 General Advertising E 231-45650-340 General Advertising E 231-45650-340 General Adverlising E 231-45650*340 General Advertising E 101-42110-340 General Adverlising Total SUN NEWSPAPERS PaidChK# 0/8002 6/14/2004 THORPE DIST CO r 613-49900 001 Deei f or Resale Total THORPE DIST CO. PaidChK# 078603 6/14/2004 THREADS E 613 49900-095 Pro Stiup Items Eoi Resale Total THREADS JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment $177 60 12757006 $222 00 12757006 $976 80 Adv • Sale of 84 Tempo Adv - Sale of Squads $448 10 427323 1 $388 20 427329 1 $24 95 427329 2 $34 95 427329 3 $448 10 427419 1 ($185 00) 430132 1 $185 00 430132 2 $49 95 430182 1 $185 00 430182 2 ($49 95) 430189 1 $99 90 430194 1 $185 00 430194 2 ($185 00) 430204 1 ($49 95) 433449 1 ($185 00) 439169 1 ($49 95) 439170 1 $1,344 30 UNIFORMS UNIFORMS DRESS UNII ORM UNIFORM uniform clothing CR COAT COAT DRESS COAT CRPDtT/SHOES COAT 7 SHOES DRESS COAT CR DRESS COAT CR SHOES CREDIT/DRESS COAT CR SHOES S103 ?0 $103 20 $111 60 $103 20 $120 40 $641 BO 696021 696151 696152 696153 696155 Adv - 93 Luniina Adv - 84 Tempo Adv - 93 Dodge Ram Adv - 91 Cutlass Adv - Sale of Sejuads $155 65 336223 $155 65 Bepi lot Resnto $596 02 OGC 052104 Shirts. Caps $596 02 PuKlChk# 078604 G/14/2004 VL RI20N DIRECTORIES E 613 49830-340 Geiieial AdvLMltsmg Total VERIZON DIRECTORIES $18 20 360007594M1 Dirpctloy Adv - GC $16 20 PaidChk* 0/6605 6/14/21MM VI RI20N WIRELESS E; 1 01 41 900-322 Poslay f Total VERIZON WIRELESS $1W. 53 3M03H4019 OH Phones $166 53 Pawl Chk# O/6WH1 6/14/2004 WES I SIDE EQUIPMENT C 101-43000 403 Rupaus/Ma>ol-Misc Equip Tout WeSTSlOE EQUIPMENT $25 00 530394 $25 00 Tire Repair PuidChk# 078(j0/ I./I4/2IHI4 WHIIE, TONY t 101 42110-437 Tiaminy & Devclupinenl Total WHITE. TONY $28 11 6/19/04 $26 1 1 Miieage/Meafa - Training PaidClik* 07tk/08 6/t4/2004 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC £ 10143000-381 GasSEtecUic $32 37 3113009200 Electnflty CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 06/11/04 9:18 AM Page 9 JUNE 2004 Check Amt invoice Comment E 602-49450-381 Gas & Electric E 101-43000-381 Gas & Electric Total WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC $22.94 3113009200 Electricity $18 55 5015782900 Electricity 1160 Willow $73 86 i ■ Paid Chk# 078609 6/14/2004 XCEL ENERGY E 101-42260-381 Gas & Electric Totol XCEL ENERGY $288.15 118154914714 Electricity - Nav Fire $288 15 Paid Chki 078610 6/1 / 7004 ZEP MANUFACTURING CO. E 613-49830-226 Clothing & personal equipment __ ToUl ZEP MANUFACTURING CO. $64.30 57075396 Insect Repellent $64 30 10100 Primary Cash $107.804 78 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 231 DRUG/FELONY FORFEITURE FUND 234 LURTON PARK 406 PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT REVOLVE 425 NAVARRE FIRE STATION PROJ FUND 601 WATER OPERATING FUND 602 SEWER OPERATING FUND 613 GOLF COURSE 10100 Primary Cash $90.569 79 $1.189 70 $540 00 $5 000 00 $601.70 $4,971.05 $703.29 $4,229.25 $107,804.78 . ^ *ESTFOBMA.TION ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING COUMrii »/icptING :n \ A 2004 OF CITY OF OnONO * % iM/Nii Ail =cTIKjG Mediaram JUN 1 4 2004 CITY OH ORONO Theresa Sunde Community Relations Coordinator *^EC s :JVEO May 25,2004 C^rYo^UnOA/o Dear Community Leader: Mediacom is pleased to introduce new Mediacom Digital Star packages that will give customers improved value and flexibility in choosing digital cable services. The new digital packages are attached for your review. These new digital packages are available to current and new customers as a promotional offer beginning May 21, 2004. The existing digital packages will continue to be sold through June 30, 2004. However, ail current digital customers may keep their current level of digital service unless they request a new digital package. Media-''m remains committed to providing our customers with the finest cable service available. Please contact me directly at (507) 835-2356 if you have any questions or concerns about the new packages. Sincerely, Theresa Sunde Mediacom Communications Corporation 1504 2" Street SE • Waseca, MN 56093 • 507-835-2356 • Fax 507-835-4567 r 4!^ *•aS40002 5/14/04 2:02 PM Pa<j« 1 .1' •*' tt -e- Dear Valued Customer, We are pleased to introduce the new Mediacom DigiUl Star Paks. These new packages were created to give our customers greater value and flexibility in choosing digital cable services. The Digital Star Paks listed below arc now available. Current digital packages will no longer U- sold after June 30,2004. Customers who currently subscribe to a digital package are welcome to contact us to switch to one of the new Star Paks or may choose »o remain in their current package. Digital customers will soon receive more information about the new Star Paks including options to convert from their existing level of service. Thank you for being a valued customer. New Digiuil Pricing Difitid Equipment Digiul Converter with Remote (Standato) Digital Converter with Remote (HDTV/DVR) Digital Gateway (includes Interactive Guide, Pay-Per-View Access, Music Choice) $500 S7.50 $3.00 Digital Proframmittf (Digital Converter Required) (Ruei do not Include the com of Fuiuly Ceble) Digital Plus tFwmly Ceble and Oifilel Calewty required) ChanneU formerly known as Uigiial Special Imereti and Digital Variety Pac $8.00 A la carte Premium Services (Di|iul Converter and Digital Oaieway not included) IIBO STARZ! Showtime Cinemax Cinemax (when adiled to Two Star or Three Star Paks) $13.95 $8.00 $9.95 $9.95 $800 Digital .Star Paks (Indudet StmdArd DigtUl Converter ind Digital Giteway) Mediacom One Star (Includes STARZ') Mediacom Two Star Showtime (Includes STARZ! and Showtime) Mediacom Two Star HBO (Includes STARZ! ai.d HBO) Mediacom Three Star (Includes STARZ!, HBO &. Showtime) $9.95 $17.95 $21 95 $29.95 Mediacom Four Star (Includes Mediacom Three Star plus Cinemax & Digital Plus) $42.95 Advanced Products* DVR Service HDl^ Tier (Includes HD Net, HD Net Movies, ESPN HD, Brivo HD Sl Discovery HD) $4.95 $9.95 ^Digiul Video Recorder (DVR) lervice and HDTV lervtce (where available) require an HDTV/ DVR capable digiul coovcricr Premium HDTV feedi (wh«e available) lecuire an KD capable digital con>ertef lad ari inctuded in the uibacnpoon to each respective premium service. M540002 } ••CCTING JUN 1 4 2004 Hennepin County Administration H<‘nnt‘pin CITY OF ORONO Sandra L. Vargas, County Administrator A-2303 Government Center 300 South Sixth Street Minneapolis,MN 55487 0233 612-348-7574 FAX:612-348-8228 TDD: 612-348-7367 www.co.hennepin.mn.u5 May 18, 2004 D eceived t. CITYOFOfiOA/o Mr. Ronald Moorsc City Administrator City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway PO Bo.x 66 Ci7Stal Bay. MN 55323 Dear Mr. Moorsc: I am pleased to announce that the Hennepin County Board has acted upon my recommendation and has appointed Jim Grubc as the Hennepin County Engineer. 1 will continue to be the Assistant County Administrator, Public Works. Our roles will remain substantially the same e.xcept that Jim will assume all formal responsibilities of the Hennepin County Engineer on Wednesday, May 19, 2004. Both of our office locations will remain the same. Please join me in congratulating Jim on his appointment. Sincerely, Gary 5. Erickson Assistant County Administrator, Public Works An Equal Oaaortuntty Employtr Ii