Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06-28-2004 Council Packet
AC;KNDA for COUNC II. MKKTINC sk i for MONDAY, JUNK 28,2004, 7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNC'IK (ilAMBKRS, 2780 KKLLKY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNKSOTA (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City ('ouncil under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each ofthe Agenda items are available in the Public Packet • located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROKKtAM C ’ONSKNT AOKNDA I. Approve/An icnil COllM'''tl MCf. j JUN 2 6 2004 CITY OF OHONO rkc 'o<;nition 2. Pauline liouchard Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission PRKSKNTATION 3. Kcprescntalivc Barb Sykora. House District 33B APPROVAI, OF MINUTKS • 4. Regular Council Meeting of June 14. 2004 PARK <'OMMISSION C’O.MMKN I S Andrew McDermott/Debora llalvorson. Representative Pl.ANNINC; ('OMMISSION C'OMMKNTS - Roland Jurgens. Representative LMCD RKPORT Debora I lalvorson PUBI.IC C OMMKN I S - (l imit 5 Minutes Per Person) /,ONINC; ADMINIS I R.VrOR'S RKPORT • 5. Terry and (irek hen Blount, 1 3 ‘>o Cherry Place Varianccs'Conditional Use Pennit - Re.solution t/U4 2074 Reliance Development C'ompany, LI.P, \ViIlow/l2 (Stonebay Outlot A) General Development Plan Final Plat Resolution * 7. t/04-3000 James and Daiey l.oll1er. loot) Shadywood Road V’arianee Resolution 8. t/04-30l0 I lenr> I a/niar/of Way/ata Design and Development. 1 20 Brown Road South PRD Siibdix ision Preliminary Plat t/04-3()iy Wendy Sullivan. 325 Crestview Avenue N'ariance Resolution (’’ity of Orono, /miing .Amendments a) Aeees.sor> Stiuetuies on Through l ots Ordinance b) l,arge Vehicle Storage • 5./UM-29(»'l 6.«U4 2974 * 7.«04-3()09 8.t/04-30lO * 9.t/04-3019 10,;-3024 MAYOR/C'OUN('ll. RKPORI PUBI.IC SKRVICK DIRKC rOR'S RKPORT 1 1 . Purchase ot Backup I )ialer for SCAD.A System 12. Rerjuest for Final Paynieiil Brown Road North llomesle.id Sewer Project 13. Reijuest for Final Pacineiit Count) Road 10 Sidewalk Impuwements a (;i:m>a for council meeting set for Monday , june 28,2004,7:oo p.m. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 14. Approval of Purchase of Software Licenses 15. Appoint Planning Commission Chair 16. Nuvane Fire Station Application foi Payment No 8 17. West Metro Drug I'ask Force Agreement and Budget Adjustments CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT * 18. LICENSES Gambling ♦ 19. BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 2004 06/28 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 07/05 - HOLIDAY', Obser\’ance of Independence Day 07/06 - Park Tour and Council Work Session. Tuesday, 5:30 p.m. (Council Liaison - Lili McMillan) 07/07 Planning Commission Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30 p.m. 07/08 - Council Work Session. Thursday, 5:30 p.m. 07/12 Council Meeting. 7:00 p.m. 07/19 - Planning Commission Meeting, 6:00 p.m. (Council Liaison - Bob Sansevere) 07/26 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 08 02 - Park Commission Meeting. 7:15 p.m. (Council Liaison - .lint Murphy) 08/04 - Planning C ommission W'ork Session, Wednesday, 5:30 p.m. 08 05 Council Work Session, Thursday, 5:30 p.m. 08/09 Council Meeting, 7:(M) p.m. 08/16 Planning Commission Meeting. 6:00 p.m. (Council Liaison -Jim While) 08'23 - Council Meeting, 7:(K) p.m. 1 Public A ttendance Meeting D ate □ C ouncil □ Planning C ommission □ Park C ommission □ Other Please fillouttiie information reqi ester BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER iLi Jiu <t y /<:^ LC2.nL/l. (3 4. 5.. 6. 7..• ^ 9.. 10. II. 12. 13. 14. 15. Mk , vAdifnirioe S«p|Mti4lMau)#«Mto Aliwidnnw mp4 Vt*L if Public A ttendance MEETING l>ATt: O' C ouncil □ Planning C omivilssion □ Park C ommission □ Other Pl.EASK FUJ.OIJTTHE I.NFOKMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR ODR CITY RECORDS. NAMK (please print)ADDKKSS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 9 t rj-L (.^Uilt S.t'tLs 3. cj^.Z k L ___________ a.I>kUUA bA^'j hjLidzAlUH 6 A 2)/. 5. 6. To A(j -^i Sun I ^ /oy^ Ua /L il< _____ fpl'/u ( tUL L R. /^/ " /i - 7tn /^~^."ccA |C y^-^'(^rh\x.OT— //rz-Ly yypp /yi<xp — , / ('>hee/i.yy: 4/ V// J/ A/.y i/p6 ^r i/» 1 H->thr,tU} ZcS^ Lk-P'^ f't'' ^Pr.it^ PfU.lt ' £>^ \x.Tpii^^~XnbA)on J^^fo ’T/U^rkkA^ci Spyr^^Fafk '^hs^cyrjP ^ / c ^I. i'^fiyifc /r: ^ f Zt/iA c tf '^y Uc»i/37‘V TT^ r A^>nu>r^hfL<; vAdn»MUiiaU«r SMpfMct^f Aticndancc «p4 ( 1*MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. COlIMriI MFFTING JUN 2 6 2004 ROLL CITY OF ORONO The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson^ Council members Jim White, Lili McMillan, Jim Murphy and Bob Sansevere, City Attorney Thomas Barrett; representing staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, Planning Director Mike Gaffron, Planner Melanie Curtis, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, Public Serv'ices Director Greg Gappa and Recorder Glenda D. Spiotta. Mayor Barbara Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA ]. Approve/Amend The following items were included in the Consent Agenda: # 4, 5,6,9,10, 11,13,14,16,17, 18,19, 20 and 21. Murphy moved* White seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. RECOGNITION - (Item #2 was moved to foUow Item #3) 3. Pauline Bouchard - Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission - Resolution No. 5184 Mayor Peterson read Resolution No. 5184 into the record. Mayor Peterson moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5184, a Resolution of Appreciation to Pauline Bouchard for Distinguished Service as a Member of the Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Mayor Peterson asked Drew McDermott to ascertain if Pauline Bouchard would be available at a later date for presentation of the Resolution. 2. Robert Searles - Resolution No. 5183 Mayor Peterson announced that Mr. Robert Searles who is recognized as a significaiit, long-time community leader passed away recently. .Mayor Peterson read Resolution No.5183 into the record. Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5183, a Resolution Recognizing Robert Searles for His Visionary Leadership and Distinguished Service to the City. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 1 of 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (2. RECOGNITION - ROBER T SEA RLES continued) McMillan remarked that the Resolution was well-said and concurred with its sentiments regarding Mr. Searles as a founding father of Orono’s philosophy for a lower density, rural character to protect Lake Minnetonka. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *4. Regular Council Meeting of May 24,2004 Murphy moved. White seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting on May 24,2004 as presented. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Irene Silber, Representative Silber reminded the City Council of the joint Park Tour and work session set for 5:30 - 8:00 p.m. on July 6,2004. Plans arc to meet in the City Hall parking lot with tours of Saga Hill and Lowry Woods. Drew McDermott slated the Park Tour of the former Hennessy property and Saga Hill will show where the land swap was made and discuss the future of Saga Hill park. He reported the Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission discussed the two-year plan, which will be further discussed at the work session. Mayor Peterson reported she received a phone call over the w'cekend from a non-resident who requested information about availability of the lilac bushes near the Montessori School location on Hwy 12, which arc to be removed with road improvements. She referred the person to the MnDOT office. Mayor Peterson commented that she obser\’cd people at the Navarre Park on June 13, 2004. White noted that the 2-hour parking signs are installed now. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS-Jeanne Mabusth, Representative Jeanne Mabusth was available for questions and comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Peterson invited comments froni the public. There were no comments. Page 2 of 22 * f i MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.ni. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT *5. #01-2671 ALISTAIR AND KAREN JACQUES, 645 OLD LONG LAKE ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 5185 Murphy moved, White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5185, a Resolution granting 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 for Alistair and Karen Jacques at 645 Old Long Lake Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *6. #04-2971 HICKORY FINE HOMES, INC. 3220 - 3240 WATERTOWN ROAD - FINAL PLAT APPROVAL - RESOLUTION NO. 5186 Murphy moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5186, a Resolution granting approval of the Final Plat of Mallyvalc to subdivide the property located at 3220 - 3240 Watertown Road for William and Roslyn llenderson/llickory Fine Homes. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 7. #04-2974 REIJANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLP, NW QUADRANT HWY 12 (OUTLOT A, STONEBAY) - COMMERCIAL PUD SH E PLAN REVIEW, GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAI., CMP AMENDMENT APPROVAL - RESOLUTIONS NO. 5188,5189, AND 5190 GalTroii explained the application was initially filed in December 2003 and subsequently there had been about 32 or 33 revisions'reiteralions submitted to the City. On May 17, 2004 the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the most current plans. Its recommendations were incorporated into a detailed Resolution approving the General Concept Plan (Exhibit A ofstaff memo). The resolution establishes the background for the approval and lists numerous conditions of approval to be met to gain “General Development Plan Approval,” likely to be presented for fonnal action on June 28, 2004 with a variety of submittal documents. GalTron described some of the plan’s major features. Us primary access point is from Kelley Parkway for two commercial building lots, one for Walgreens with a drive-through and one lot for two retail buildings. Proposed parking meets the City’s Zoning Code requirements as established for the site. A secoiulary right-in/right-out access is on Willow Drive. He .id\ ised that plans were submitted and included in the agenda packet for grading and drainage, lighting and signage, landscaping and building exterior designs and elevations. Gaffron pointed out certain notable features. In the proposed Outlet B, there is proposed a tenace gathering area feature that w ould need MnDO f agreement and subsequent maintenance agreement. It is a part of the developing trail system through the StoneBay residential area, which would use the sidewalk in the proposed commercial development as well as an eight- (8) foot bituminous trail. He commented that it is a pedestrian-friendly commercial site. Gaffron advised the City Engineer evaluated the parking, access and trallic plan and is satisfied w ith the plans, fhere is an intended doublc-lanc drive-through for Walgreens that required a by-pass lane and the second drive-through is not covered. Page 3 of 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (#04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLP, NW QUADRANT HWY 12 (OUTLOT A, STONEBAY) - COMMERCIAL PUD SITE PLAN REVIEW, GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, CMP AMENDMENT APPROVAL - RESOLUTIONS NO. 5188,5189, AND 5190 continued) Gaffron reported the Planning Commission determined it was not necessary for additional trees in the retail development. However, the Planning Commission and the City ’s Planning Consultant do recommend substantial screening vegetation along Kelley Parkway behind the retail buildings to screen them from the residential buildings across Kelley Parkway. He illustrated the proposed screened trash facilities. Gaffron pointed out that topographically the buildings would be situated 3-4 feet below the Kelley Parkway elevation. Gaffron reported the Planning Commission concluded that a variety of the required conditions arc met by the current plans, that the plans are sufficient to allow granting of Concept Plan Approval but acknowledging that there yet will likely be several minor adjustments. Therefore, Gaffron recommended adoption of the three draA resolutions included in tlie agenda packet by individual motions. McMillan initiated discussion of where the monument sign is located. Gaffron pointed out the monument sign’s location, explaining it would be 10’ maximum height with frame and at about tlic same elevation as Hwy 12. McMillan asked if the storm water pond is designed to be adequate for all the anticipated surface water and to where docs it eventually drain. Gaffron illustrated the direction of stonn water drainage, its discharge facility and noted that the proposed stomt water plan also redirects storm water from a problem outlet. Gappa responded that the stomi water drainage is directed to the proposed Hennepin County pond on the church property, but that for now it follows the railroad tracks. Gaffron confirmed that the pond is designed for the storm water from the subject property and for the residential sites to the west. McMillan asked about the traffic/parking design on the southw est side of Walgreens and if parked cars would back-up into the two-lane traffic. Gaffron indicated that it’s a driving lane in a parking lot and such a layout is not uncommon. He stated that about six layouts had been reviewed and this is the one that was acceptable to the City ’s Consultant Engineer, Shelly Johnson. He described the right-iiv'right-uul entrance from Kelley and reported there would be appropriate signage and expects low-traffic volumes. McMillan was provided with clarification that there would not be a sidewalk for a pedestrian connector between the two small retail buildings. White asked what the final parking ratio calculation was. Gatfron responded that initially the Walgreens model of a minimum 60 stalls was used upon recommendation from the City ’s Consulting Engineer. For the remainder, the ratio of 1 parking space per 150 feet of retail ' pace w as used. He indicated that these ratios confomi to the Zoning Code requirements. Gaffron expressed a concern for a potential issue if one of the smaller retail buildings attracts a restaurant-type use with higher Page 4 of 22 f MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (#04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLP, NW QUADRANT HWY 12 (OUTLOT A, STONEBAY) - COMMERCIAL PUD SITE PLAN REVIEW, GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, CMP AMENDMENT APPROVAL - RESOLUTIONS NO. 5188,5189, AND 5190 continued) parking volumes for which the Zoning Code requires a ratio of 1 parking space per 60 feet of retail space. White indicated that with the higher standard there is more hardcover. Gaffron replied there would be a 25% minimum green space applied within the site as was set by the Planning Commission. Sansevere asked about what assurances there arc that Walgreens would not try to change the concept plan. Gaffron responded that the City would tie the design to developer documents. Mayor Peterson agreed with Sanseverc’s concern for potential changes. Murphy initiated discussion about the letter received from the applicant ’s attorney, Michael A. Putnam, dated June II, 2004, listing comments on the proposed draft documents, including the proposed City resolutions and PUD agreement. He asked if there was anything in the letter that would cause the City to be doing business with anyone other than the current applicant. City Attorney Barrett indicated that he had not seen the letter until about 3:00 p.m. and could not comment thereon. He advised any resolution be adopted subject to City Attorney review of the Putnam letter and if inconsistent with City Council intent, the matter would be returned to the City Council. White commented that an applicant ’s attorney who looks at all the details is preferable as it represents a knowing buyer. Also, if the comments relate primarily to smaller details it indicates that they arc past the major issues. Gaffron advised that one issue from the Putnam letter is that because there is a drive-through the assumption is there will be a menu board somewhere along the rear. If it is a lighted menu board, Gaffron stated it would be expected that the vegetative screening would be increased to prevent the lighting becoming a problem for the near-by residential neighborhood. White asked for information about the pending opening date for the Walgreens store. John Trautz, applicant, responded that Walgreens anticipates a real estate closing in mid- to the end of July, 2004. with 60 days for permit acquisition and about 6 months for construction. Walgreens is projecting the store opening to about March, 2005. Trautz indicated the two smaller retail buildings are projected to be opened sooner than the Walgreens store. Mayor Peterson asked if staff was satisfied with the landscaping plans along Ilwy 12. Gaffron indicated that initially he was not satisfied but the Planning Commission eventually concluded that as it is a retail site, and there is substantial screening along Kelley Parkway, the vegetative screening for about 400-500’ along llwy 12 was adequate. He deferred to the Planning Commission conclusion that more screening was not necessary. Mayor Peterson asked Jeanne Mabusth, Plmning Commission Chairperson, to comment on the Planning Commission’s determination. Mabusth referred to Planning Commission discussion that no MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. («04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLP, NW QUADRANT HWY 12 (OUTLOT A, STONEBAY) - COMMERCIAL PUD SITE PLAN REVIEW, GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, CMP AMENDMENT APPROVAL - RESOLUTIONS NO. 5188,5189, AND 5190 continued) trees would be required along Hwy 12 as it is a commercial building site and to allow more view from Hwy 12 to the buildings. The Planning Commission wanted landscaping on the north and east sides. She explained that the Planning Commission wanted low vegetation close to the moi>ument signage and at the intersection of Hwy 12 and Willow Drive to avoid safety problems. Vicki Van Dell, applicant’s engineer, explained the specific vegetation proposed for the length of Hwy 12, including a couple of ornamental trees with the low growing vegetation. Gaffron referred to the landscape request from the City’s Planning Consultant, Phil Carlson, to clarily if the City Zoning Code requires vegetative screening of parked vehicles not abutting residential areas. Though not required by the City Zoning Code, the City Council could add a condition requiring 2.S’ - 3’ high vegetation to line the outward facing parking stalls. White commented that even a commercial view would appear nicer if over the distance of400’-500’ there would be planted some trees, not only deciduous trees but also evergreens. 1 le indicated he was pleased with the overall landscaping plans. McMillan asked Trautz who was anticipated to be using the parking along Hwy 12. Trau.z replied that most likely it would be used for employee parking. She also asked why the buildings were pushed so far away from Hwy 12. Trautz explained the building locations resulted fro.n the siting of the Walgreens building and the right-iiv'right-out access. Gaffron added that the sense of openness with the final proposed layout is positive and in keeping with the Orono vision, w'ith the same architectural features on the rear of the build.ngs, and that the City preferred the Walgreens building front to face inwards on the property. Mayor Peterson asked if the final Walgreens building design colors were proposed to be approved with the recommended resolutions. Gaffron advised that he did not have the aciual brick-type example and recommended the colors be brought to a future work session. 1 iowever, staff provided the building design colors for the two smaller retail buildings, which are proposed to be lightc. than the Walgreens building colors. McMillan asked how many vehicles arc anticipated daily. Gaffron explained the daily vehicle count is spread out through a day and estimated there w ould be about 1000-2000 vehicles trips to the site, according to the City’s Consultant Enginn'r, Shelly Johnson, w ho further concluded the average daily vehicle count would be similar to an office building. McMillan expressed her concern for potential traffic congestion off of Kelley Parkw ay w ith traffic backing up, citing tlie problems at the Culvers in Navarre. Murphy commented the proposed plan limits businesses to less than 7000 s.f so that w ill keep traffic volumes smaller than at a larger scale building. i Paged of 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (#04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLP, NW QUADRANT HWY 12 (OUTLOT A, STONEBAY) - COMMERCIAL PUD SITE PLAN REVIEW, GENER.\L CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, CMP AMENDMENT APPROVAL - RESOLUTIONS NO. 5188,5189, AND 5190 continued) Curtis provided the sample of building exterior design colors for the two smaller retail buildings. Gaffron stated Walgreens would have the same brick but not the blue canopy color. Van Dell pointed out the colors of each building design feature. .Mayor Peterson and White objected to the blue color for the canopies. White asked if there could be parking spaces removed on the side of the smaller building to try to address McMillan’s traffic concerns. Gaffron commented there is no entrance on that building side. Trautz replied that if the parking spaces were removed, Walgreens would pull out of the development because with rotating of the Walgreens building, Walgreens ended up losing front door parking spaces and is anticipating their customers will use the parking spaces on the northeast side of the smaller building. Traut/ emphasized they do not foresee traffic volume problems. Van Dell pointed out there would be a 24’ drive aisle plus 20’ widths for parking stalls. Sansevere remarked that most patrons would likely park elsewhere due to walking distances and therefore there would not be too many parking stalls impacted by any potential problems of vehicles backing into cross traffic. Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5188, a Resolution approving the General C'onccpt Plan for property located in Outlut A, Stunebay, subject to City Attorney review of the letter from the applicant's attorney, Michael A. Putnam, dated June 11, 2004. VOTE: AvesS, NavsO. Murphy moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5189, a Resolution approving the Preliminary Plat for property located in Outlot A, Stonebay, subject to City .Attorney review of the letter from the applicant's attorney, Michael A. Putnam, dated June II, 2004. VO TE: Ayes 4, Nays I Murphy moved. Mayor Peterson seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION No. 5190, a Resolution approving Amendment #2 of the 2000-2020 City of Orono Community Management Plan regarding Outlot A, Stonebay, subject to City Attorney review of the letter from the applicant's attorney, Michael .A. Putnam, dated June 11,2004. \'O rK: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Gaffron advised the following documents would be scheduled for City Council action on June 28. 2004: a. General Development Plan Approval Resolution b. Final Plat Approval Resolution c. Rezoning Ordinance for PUD 4A Dunbar, applicant’s representative, confirmed there would be no blue colored canopies on any of the proposed buildings. Instead he proposed a green. By consensus the Council accepted a darker shade of green as an alternate to the proposed blue color. Pace 7 of 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14,2004 7:00 o’clock o.m. (#04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLP, NW QUADRANT HWY 12 (OUTLOT A, STONEBAY) - COMMERCIAL PUD SITE PLAN REVIEW, GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL, PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, CMP AMENDMENT APPROVAL - RESOLUTIONS NO. 5188,5189, AND 5190 continued) White complimented the planning staff for their work on this application and writing of the staff report. He stated his appreciation for staffs’ efforts with this complex application and the top-notch Planning Commission review of the application. Mayor Peterson indicated the whole City Council concurred with White ’s comments to commend the staff and the Planning Commission. 8. #04-2984 MCCARTHY CONSTRUCTION ON BEHALF OF BERKSHIRE PROPERTIES, 2745 KELLEY PARKWAY - DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT/PUD - RESOLUTION NO. 5191 Gaffron presented one change from the Public Works Department as a condition regarding lighting. He read the proposed condition into the record and asked that it be added to Item #A.7. Lighting, on page 3 of 10, of the Developer ’s Agreement: "Public street lighting along Kelley 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 costs for installation paid by the Developer. The City will then be responsible for payment of the operation and maintenance costs to Excel Energy per the terms of the agreement.’’ Saoseverc moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5191, a Resolution granting commercial site plan approval for Planned Unit Development No. 4 for the Orono Professional Center 11 located at 2745 Kelley Parkway with the above language added to Section A.1 Lighting on page 3 of 10 in the Developer’s Agreement. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *9. #04-3003 GEORGE STICKNEY ON BEIULFOF BRUCE AND KRISTINE PADDOCK, 3250 FOX STREET - FINAL PLAT - RESOLUTION NO. 5192 Murphy moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5192, a Resolution approving the final plat of Maxwell Bay Estates to create three (3) lakeshore lots on one block for Bruce and Kristine Paddock at 3250 Fox Street. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 8 of 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. *10. #04-3006 AULIK COMPANY ON BEHALF OF BARTHOLOMEW AND ELIZABETH BUTZER, 2625 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION NO. 5193 Murphy moved, White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5193, a Resolution granting a conditional use permit to allow plumbing in an accessory building in accordance with Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-418(6) and a hardcover variance to permit 30% hardcover in the 75’-250’ zone when 25% is normally allowed and 33% currently exists in accordance with Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-282 and 78-1288 for the Aulik Company on behalf of Bartholomew and Elizabeth Butzer at 2625 North Shore Drive. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *11. #04-3008 STEVEN VALEK AND RALPH PaL.MER, 4720-4750 TONKAVIEW LANE - LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT - RESOLUTION NO. 5194 Murphy moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5194, a Resolution granting preliminary subdivision approval for a three (3) lot residential re-plat where five (5) lots (four tax parcels) currently exist at 4720/4750 Tonkaview Lane for Steven Valek and Ralph Palmer. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 12. #04-3012 ROGER D. O'SHAUGHNESSY, 1265 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD - VARIANCES/CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - RESOLUTION NO. 5195 Curtis introduced Susan Stcinwall, applicant’s attorney, representing the applicant. Curtis explained the applicant is requesting the following variances and conditional use permits: 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 in conjunction with a floodplain restoration and buffer project. 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 w-all 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. Curtis reported at its May 17,2004 meeting, the Planning Commission voted 5-2 to recommend approval of conditional use pennit for the chimney heights and 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. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the hardcover variance and variance to allow a fence within 75’ of the lake. She reported the two dissenting Commissioners felt the proposed floodplain restoration was a valuable project and they wanted to support approval of some hardcover variance for the boardwalk within 75’ of the OHWL for the floodplain restoration project. Curtis concuiTcd w ith the Planning Commission’s recommendations, noting there w ere no hardships to support the hardcover or fence variances. Page 9 of 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (12. #04-3012 ROGER D. O’SHAUGHNESSY, 1265 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD - VARIANCES/CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - RESOLUTION NO. 5195 continued) Murphy questioned if the boardwalk is denied what will be the access to the lakeshore. Steinwall stated the landscape plan would need to be revisited if the boardwalk feature is denied. Options include use regular grass turf or some combination of vegetation. She stated her client does need some sort of lake access. Steinwall advised that her client, Mr. O’Shaughnessy, is very interested in the prairie restoration project on this property, and proposes to build the boardwalk with spacings to allow infiltration and at a height that would allow li^t for plantings to grow underneath the boardwalk. Steinwall distributed photographs to illustrate her client ’s concept for the prairie restoration project. Murphy mentioned that David Rahn, Planning Commissioner, has encouraged the City to look at the changes to the City’s hardcover requirements. He asked if the boards are spaced far enough apart is it then still a hardcover issue. Murphy indicated that this proposed landscaping design is moving in a good direction and supports this concept, and pointed out the MCWD is a proponent of wetland and shoreland buffers like this proposed prairie restoration. Murphy acknowledged there is no hardship but he personally supports the landscape and boardwalk concept. Murphy asked for information about the existing boardwalks in use around Lake Minnetonka. McMillan advised the LMCD allows boardwalks over cattails marshes to get to waters edge instead of allowing dredging as it did not harm the lakeshore vegetation and the MnDNR uses boardwalks in certain locations, too. McMillan indicated as a member of the LMCD she was a proponent of lakescaping, and sees this application as a privately funded lakescaping project that should be supported. She recognized tliat if the restoration project is installed and if in five years the boardwalk was proposed, it would be considered because the restoration would then be an environmentally sensitive area, i.e, a hardship would exist then. She reiterated that if the restoration area does us it is intended, then it would become a future hardship factor by making lake access difficult or undesirable through a sensitive v egetation environment. McMillan stated the City should not be discouraging the applicant, but acknowledged the City Zoning Code currently does not accommodate such a restoration project. She urged the City to consider this a step in the right direction and stated she was strongly in favor of approving a hardcover variance for this applicant. White pointed out the application hasl% hardcover proposed within the 75’ zone and 24.3% hardcover within the 75-250’ zone, which docs not require a variance, for a total of 25.3% on the whole property which is almost not a variance. Sansevere asked Gaffron for his opinion about the ramifications of approving the hardcover variance. GafTron responded that if the City began to allow more open-spaced decks to allow infiltration and not be counted as hardcover, he believed this would open a ’Pandora ’s box’ of issues. How ever, as Page 10 of 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (12. #04-3012 ROGER D. O’SHAUGHNESSY, 1265 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD - VARIANCES/CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - RESOLUTION NO. 5195 continued) long as the area is maintained as proposed restoration then a hardship condition would exist and continue to exist; in this case, allowing a boardwalk is similar to the steps/stairs permitted on lakeshore slopes, as it provides access to the lake under a hardship condition. He stressed the need for requiring a condition for approving the restoration project to be maintained permanently. Mabusth interjected a summary of the Planning Commission minority opinion. If the boardwalk was to be permitted, it should be limited to a 4’ width and to a height no greater than 30” in order to avoid the Building Code requirement for a railing. Also, there was no landing approved. These conditions would minimize the structure’s visual impact. Curtis advised the proposed landing is 177 s.f. or about 10’ xl7 ’. McMillan and White expressed their opinion that some sort of landing at the end of a boardwalk would be needed for practical purposes. Gaffron pointed out the dock extends beyond the proposed landing. Murphy withdrew his comments supporting wide spacing upon hearing Gaffron’s reserv'ations and potential issues. McMillan added that she supports the need to control hardcover and structures in the 0-75’ zone to minimize hardcover impacts. White noted the Three Rivers Parks District successfully manages and utilizes boardwalks over metro area wetlands because boardwalks are not as invasive and allow people to get out to sec the natural settings. Sanscverc asked if there is no other access to the lake other than the proposed boardwalk. Steinwall explained there is grass turf there now but the applicant is very interested in the prairie restoration project and planting native floodplain shrubs and grasses. Murphy asked for a description of the proposed mesh fence material. Steinw all replied the fencing will be placed w ithin the shrubs and stated the existing road curv e and the need to be parallel to the roadway for security purposes cause the hardship. Curtis confimicd the fence is not proposed to be chainlink. Murphy questioned the reasons for denying the fence for the short distance when the fence within shrubbery is visually discreet. Gaffron pointed out the only hardship may be for security from the public road so close to a private lake access. Also, a proposed fence should not block others’ lakeshore view s. White indicated that he docs not support lakeshore fences but this site may warrant a fence variance, though he recommended the conditions be very specific, if approved. Sansevere questioned why the applicant docs not want to have turf rather than a boardwalk to the lake that could be w ider than 4’. Steinwall explained the applicant wants to have the look achieved by the floodplain restoration as an aesthetic and environmental positive to Lake Minnetonka. She added Mr. O’Shaughnessy would be a more eloquent proponent of his restoration project than she. Steinwall indicated that turf would be a fallback choice. Page II of22 r MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (12. #04-3012 ROGER D. O’SHAUGHNESSY, 1265 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD - VARIANCES/CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - RESOLUTION NO. 5195 continued) Sansevere asked for Gaffron’s opinion regarding the potential hardship created by the proposed floodplain restoration project. Gaffron stated the proposed floodplain restoration project creates a hardship as along as there is a condition that the boardwalk remains only as long as the restoration project exists; this would address a future situation when it may be decided to mow the area and convert it to turf. McMillan explained the floodplain restoration projects are desirable especially in low, wet areas that otherwise would be attempted to be filled, and also, the projects promote diversified wildlife habitat versus a mono-culture lawn. Curtis reported the applicant’s landscape architects are proposing the boardwalk be constructed within the plantings to be less visible from the lakeside and it could be more serpentine to minimize visual impacts. She added she thought a mowed path would be more visually apparent. Sansevere asked planning staff if they were now supportive of the proposed boardwalk/liardship variance and if staff raised their issues to the Planning Commission. Gaffron replied that initially staff did not find any hardship to justify the variance; however, McMillan’s concept of the floodplain restoration project creating the hardship appears to be persuasive as a reasonable hardship. Mabusth explained the Planning Commission as a whole was not opposed to the proposed floodplain restoration project but discussed when to allow such a variance and their decision is based only on existing conditions. They encouraged the applicant to install the project and return at a later date to apply for a boardwalk through an established, existing condition. Mabusth expressed her support for allowing the boardwalk with the floodplain restoration project to allow the property owner to access the lakeshore. Sansevere initiated discussion of whether approving the hardship variance would be seen as ‘creating a hardship.’ Curtis agreed it might be a potential pitfall that could be favorable if there are more vegetative buffers created on the lakeshore. She recommended there be very detailed findings for this variance request if granted so it would not become an overall problem of others claiming to create a hardship. White interjected that granting this variance may become an incentive for other property owners to undertake what is an expensive restoration effort. McMillan commented that the planned vegetative restoration might actually prevent outside storage in the floodplain that is seen with turfed shorelines. Sansevere requested information about the timing of the boardwalk construction. It was explained that the planted vegetation takes several years to become established; Gaffron referred to the MnDNR landing at Maxwell Bay and that the first 2-3 years it looked similar to a lawn but eventually it becomes mature. Sansevere suggested that conditions of approval be detennined to have the Page 12 of 22 ;* « MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (12. #04-3012 ROGER D. O’SHAUGHNESSY, 1265 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD- VARIANCES/CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - RESOLUTION NO. 5195 continued) plantings done before the boardwalk is installed. Steinwall advised that the plantings would be done immediately before the boardwalk is built. Moorse initiated discussion of the proposed mesh fence in the 0-75’ zone. He advised that there have been prior requests for fence variances due to security reasons in the 0-75’ zone and there maybe many property owners who would be interested in a security fence in the 0-75’ zone. Moorse indicated security purposes arc not a hardship. Steinwall emphasized the applicant is interested in the fencing running parallel to the road and the curve of the road itself runs into the 0-75’ zone. The applicant does not propose to run the fence perpendicular to the lake. Curtis and Gaffron explained the proposed fence includes a 50’ distance into the 0-75’ zone as it follows the road and there would be a gap of no fence from its end at the road to the lake. Curtis added that there is an existing fence there now along the road. Moorse summarized the applicant’s position as that there is a road in the 0- 75 ’ zone and the applicant intends to run a new, imbedded fence only along the road to the property line. McMillan questioned the security reasoning for the fence, acknow ledging that the entire property boundary is not proposed to be fenced due to the gap at the lakcshore. Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5195 approving a hardcover variance to allow 438 s.f. of hardcover within the 0-75* zone in order to construct a 4* boardwalk to the shore ending with a 177 s.f. landing for Roger D. O’Shaughnessy at 1265 Brackett’s Point Road. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 1. Mayor Peterson opposed. White moved, Sansevere seconded, to deny a lake setback variance in order to construct a svire mesh fence along Brackett's Point Road within 75' of the OIIWL extending to the northeast 56 ’3” for Roger O'Shaughnessy at 1265 Brackett's Point Road. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 1. Council Member Murphy opposed. Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5195 approving a conditional use permit and variance to allow grading, filling and retaining wall construction within the floodplain for Roger O'Shaughnessy at 1265 Brackett’s Point Road. \’OTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. White moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5195 approving 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 for Roger O'Shaughnessy at 1265 Brackett's Point Road. VOTE: VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Sansevere asked w hat is the record highest chimney in Orono. Gaffron described pitched-roof houses w ith 38’ peaks. He explained the proposed chimneys are an arcliitcciural feature. Page 13 of 22 i F MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. *13. #04-3014 TIMOTHY POWERS, 3210 NAVARRE LANE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 5196 Murphy moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5196, a Resolution granting a 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) in accordance with Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-350 (B) in order to construct a second story above the existing first story, and add two garage stalls for Timothy Powers on behalf of Campo Bellow Partners at 3210 Navarre Lane. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *14. #04-3015 ROBERT LUND ON BEHALF OF WILLIAM AND BONNIBEL BYERS, 1389 ORONO LANE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 5197 Murphy moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5197, a Resolution granting a conditional use permit per 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 .Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-282,78-305 Subd. B, 78-966,78-1286,78-1279 Subd. 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 roofline, add a balcony where a pitched roof currently exists and to add a *witch*s bat* feature within the average lakeshore setback at 1389 Orono Lane for Robert Lund on behalf of William and Bonnibel Byars. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 15. #04-3016 HENRY LAZNIARZ OF WAYZATA DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT, 120 BROWN ROAD SOUTH - PRD SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY PLAT Gaflron presented the proposed PRD Subdivision with 14 acres dry builduble and 6 acres in wetland with Long Lake Creek meandering through the property. He illustrated the subject property ’s site location, noting its proximity to Kallestad Acres and the 40’ corridor owned by the Durm’s that provides access to the subject property as well as another 10’ of casement on the edge of Lot 1 of Kallestad Acres. After reviewing several possible layouts in Sketch Plan review, the Planning Commission concluded that this site lends itself to clustering of lots as opposed to lots spread out over all the dry buildable areas. The PRD proposes a 7-lot residential plat with an overall density of 2.0 acres, with some lots smaller than 1 acre, clustered around the cul-de-sac. The existing house is proposed to remain. Setbacks proposed would meet the Zoning Code 1-acrc setback requirements. Due to the Long Lake Creek course, Gaffron noted that the shorcland setbacks would apply, as well as w etlands. The OHWL affects only two proposed lots. The steep slopes arc not determined to be bluff areas. Gaffron advised that revised grading plans were received last week; said documents w ere provided to the City Council. Referencing the May 21, 2004 Planning Commission recommendation for areas to be preser\’ed via conserv ation casement or similar open space dedications covering multiple individual properties rather than within one or more platted outlets, Gaffron strongly recommended that the open space be preserved as an outlet. He explained staff s rationale (included in the staff report), including: Page 14 of 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (15. #04-3016 HENRY LA^IARZ OF WAYZATA DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT, 120 BROWN ROAD SOUTH - PRD SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY PLAT continued) McMillan asked for confirmation if the plan is to cut down the knoll and move out on the slopes. Goodrum responded that the existing private road would remain and the knoll would be minimally flattened only to facilitate stormwater to run down the road and into the stormwater pond. Murphy asked for confirmation of the proposed side yard setbacks. Gaffron replied that it mimics the 1 acre setback requirements of 10’ side yard, 35’ front yard and 30’ rear yard setbacks. Lazniarz asked for the requirement for the 2.0-acrc side yard setback; Gaffron indicated that it is 30’. Murphy remarked the plan proposes houses that could be only 20’ apart. Expressing that he would generally support clu.stcring with a natural environmental site. White agreed with Murphy ’s comments regarding the small size and number of lots of the proposed PRD. Murphy reiterated the proposed PRD goes spiritually against what is trying to be done in Orono and suggested that if an outlot w ould exist there should be only about three homes on the site, certainly not seven as proposed. La/.niarz. offeied to maintain wider side yard setbacks than now- shown with designing houses to be deeper into the lot. Gaffron explained the house pads are set close to the road in order to provide the walk-^out design. McMillan stressed there could be potential surface water runoff problems with the higher densities on a knoll and with the existing grades, roof runoff is a serious environmental impact. She supported reducing the proposed number of building sites. Also, McMillan noted that Long Lake Creek is a tributary reaching Tanager Lake on Lake Minnetonka which directly impacts its water ipiality. Sanscverc asked if the 30’ side yard setback from the 2.0-acre requirements address her concern. McMillan repeated her position that there arc too many proposed sites, agreeing w ith Murphy. Sanscverc pointed out that w ithout the outlot it remains the same issue of higher, clustered densities on a knoll. Goodrum responded that the knoll is a natural site for w-allc'out designs with 100-150’ of yaul before reaching the creek or any environmentally sensitive area. He provided information on the stonnwatcr pond design, overland surface water quality and rate control and plans to capture surface w ater. He showed other Sketch Flan examples of 2.0-acre, 1,0-acre and 1.5-acre developments brought to the Flanning Commission earlier w ith only single family lots, w ith more hardsurfacc for roads, drivew'ays. etc. throughout the entire site. Goodrum pointed out the proposed FRD now shows a more environmentally sensitive design with clustering of houses and open space to protect the majority of the parcel. Muqihy interjected his opinion that the developer is trying to back into a 7 lot design since they earlier proposed 7 lots on 2.0 acres, and he w as offended by that. Goodrum indicated the plan examples w ere to show' the application could meet Code requirements. Murphy replied the design should lit into Orono’s community and not just meet Code requirements. Page 16 of 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (15. «04-3016 HENRY LAZNIARZ OF WAYZATA DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT, 120 BROWN ROAD SOUTH - PRD SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY PLAT continued) 1. an outlot situation works best under association ownership 2. it would provide more permanent open space protection 3. it would be less likely for individuals to encroach on other properties 4. it would be a better representation of a PRD. Sansevere stated it was good that the Apple Glen access is out of the proposed design. He asked about the status of access and sewer service, emphasizing that he wanted to know if these issues were now resolved. Murphy added that if the access issue with the Dunns was not resolved, he did not know why the City Council should continue discussion of the application. Henry Lazniarz, applicant, stated there is now a signed agreement between Lazniarz and Dunn at his office. Gaffron confirmed that he had received a voice message from Jerry Snyder indicating there was an agreement but Gaffron had not seen it. Barrett commented that with the Dunn agreement, he believed access is provided to the subject property and any City approvals would require proof of a signed agreement. Gaffron pointed out an additional access issue related to the 10’ public road easement at Kallestad Acres. He explained the City Attorney is reviewing the question of transferability to tlie 40’ private easement from Dunn to create the 50’ riglit of way as required. Barrett indicated his examination of the casement is not cuneludcd but will ascertain if a public easement can be used in conjunction with a private easement to meet the 50’ access requirement. Murphy asked w hat is the actual acreage of each lot if an outlot is created, as staff recommends. Gaffron replied that each lot is smaller than 2.0 acres and lots range from .75 - 1.5 acres in area. Murphy expressed his opposition to the PRD and cluster housing and being given “credit” for open space/outlot. It results in putting bigger houses on smaller lots which violates Orono’s rural character. He stated the PRD does not result in 2.0-acrc residential lots. Moorse remarked that there is a similar subdivision on Willow View with lots of about one acre with open space but the homes are more spread out than this proposal. McMillan referred to the w'alk/out house design on .steep slopes, which result in no level backyard areas. She expressed concern for future homeowners w ho may want to “make” a backyard with retaining walls. McMillan de.scribed the proposal as inten.se development on a knoll with a .strong potential for problems with surface water runoff with tree removal and resulting in slope erosion. Goodrum replied that the lots w ill have backyards as tlie houses would be built on the knoll with natural slopes and the backyards would be at the slope bottoms about 70’ from the houses. Lazniarz explained the plans show a rectangular box representing the proposed house pad but that actual custom house pads would be deeper and not as wide as now shown on the plan. He offered to to incorporate into any City approvals that the City Engineer pursuant to receiving a building plan would approve each house pud pennit. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (15. 1104-3016 HENRY LAZNIARZ OF WAYZATA DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT, 120 BROWN ROAD SOUTH - PRD SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY PLAT continued) Gaffron advised that after seeing the earlier sketch plan proposals, both the Planning Commission and staff supported clustered housing rather than a standard lot development that scatters 2.0-acre lots throughout the entire site. There are numerous benefits to clustering, including reduced hardcover and open space preservation. Murphy asked if any of the applicant’s earlier plans showed fewer lots. Gaffron responded that when a developer proposes a plan that meets Zoning Code, there is no basis to require fewer lots but could only make the suggestion. He stated that with a standard subdivision on the subject parcel there would be six lots, with the PRD there would be seven lots. Gaffron stated he did not disagree with Murphy’s philosophical concerns but the Zoning Code suggests that there could be 5-6 standard lots scattered around the site with more hardcover. Other than the visual impact of clustering the houses, Gaffron expressed he did not see a reason to not support the clustering design. Murphy observed that the City needs to be careful to not ‘codify’ Orono into a result that would look just like other communities and not be consistent w ith Orono’s community vision. Sanscverc asked if the City has a legal right to tell a developer to reduce lot numbers even when having met Code requirements. He concluded that perhaps the site should have been guided for a 5-acre minimum lot size to satisfy the expressed concerns of Murphy and McMillan. White suggested that a walking tour of the Fleming property occur to find out exactly what are the objections to it. White expressed that he was offended by the faet that recurring discussions happen about what is the Orono spirit and the City Council does not come to a consensus. Without the consensus, an applicant is at a disadvantage in trying to meet City expectations. He suggested the application decision be postponed until the City Council can actually walk the subject property to gain a better understanding of the tightness of the site. Mayor Peterson asked for the approximate square footage of the houses. Lazniarz replied an example would be about 54’ wide with 1800 s.f on the main level and 2000 s.f. on the second levcl/over the garage. Goodrum pointed out that in the Fox Run subdivision there are 1 -acre lots with larger homes and an outlet, w ith the subject parcel they thought with a few- more lots it would have a similar visual impact as the three lots on a knoll, as well as the benefit of prescr\ ing the environment. Sansevere asked how far is the PRD from where Apple Glen ends and how far is this from the first proposed house. Gaffron replied it is at the property line and about 500’ from the first proposed hou.se. Sansevere asked Gaffron for his opinion on how well the proposed PRD w ould blend into the neighborhood. Gaffron replied that the proposed houses would be larger than those in Apple Glen, the proposed houses arc in a circle, not in a row, there would be minimal visual impacts to the surrounding neighborhood w ith clustering rather than spreading single lots all throughout the parcel. Gaffron recommended that all stonnwater drainage from roofs and driveways be routed to the stonnwater pond by intentional design. He commented that the concern about w alk/outs and future Page 17 of 22 j i 1 r MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (15. #04<3016 HENRY LAZNIARZ OF WAYZATA DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT, 120 BROWN ROAD SOUTH - PRD SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY PLAT continued) development of backyard areas could be a potential issue so property owners would need to know for certain that no change in lot elevation would be permitted. Lili McMillan suggested there could also be a main floor s.f. limitation added with any approvals. She also asked how to address future building s.f. increases. Goodrum explained the PRD proposed plan shows the largest house pad of4,000 s.f but the actual house pads would be smaller. Mayor Peterson asked staff if there were any time constraints with decisions on the application, and if there were none, she recommended the City Council take the opportunity to do a site visit over the next couple of weeks. Lazniarz agreed to allow time for the City Council to visit the site prior to concluding discussion or deciding on the application. Moorse recommended the applicant re-do the design plan to show house pads with the 2000 s.f footprint and what the setbacks would be, and if acceptable, the setbacks could be cited in the PRD documents. Lazniarz agreed to provide a plan showing the houses drawn to scale. Murphy reiterated that his issue remains the number of homes in a clustered space. Mayor Peterson stated she would agree that there are too many houses proposed if there would only be 10’ side yard setbacks. McMillan moved. White seconded, to table Application #04-3016 Henry Lazniarz/Wayzata Design and Development, Preliminary Plat, Planned Residential Development (PRD), at 120 Brown Road S until the June 28,2004 City Council meeting to allow the City Council the opportunity to conduct a site visit and to allow the applicant to prepare plans showing 2000 s.f. house pads and subsequent setbacks. Mayor Peterson confirmed the applicant agreed with the postponement until the City Council could do a site visit and the applicant could redo the plans to show 2000 s.f house pads and setbacks. Lazniarz advised he was open-minded on the determination of outlot or a conservation easement over private property. McMillan, White and Mayor Peterson indicated they supported the outlot concept. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Sansevere noted that in his experience as a City Council member the applicant may be one of most agreeable applicants because he is willing to listen and work with the City. Page 18 of 22 jtiiauiiiL MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. *16. #04-3017 SPRUCE HILL PROPERTIES, 3775 BAYSIDE ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 5198 Murphy moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5198, a Resolution granting a hardcover variance to permit 3.8% hardcover within the 0-75 ’ zone when 0% is normally allowed and 3.9% currently exists, a lake setback variance to permit a structure within 75 ’ of the lake and a street yard setback variance to permit a 22 ’ setback when 50 ’ is normally required and 22 ’ currently exists in order to do an extensive remodel which consists of renovating the first floor and re-constructing the 'A story above for Spruce Hill Properties at 3775 Bayside Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT McMillan reported there were washed-out road edges in her Orono Orchard Road neighborhood and that preventive maintenance is needed. Gappa indicated there were other locations, too, that needed preventive maintenance but would look into a small project in her neighborhood. White reported progress on the Birch Lane issue and that the City Engineer and Greg Gappa arc working on a plan. Gappa confimicd there is a plan and efforts are underway to get casements from the neighbors. Sanscvcrc expressed his disappointment with the sudden resignation of Jeanne Mabusth as Planning Commission member and Chair. Mabusth explained she made her decision based upon extended family issues that will impact her availability for Planning Commission meetings, and her obligations at the Apple House. She stated she enjoyed working with the great members of the Orono Planning Commission and appreciated being able to scr\'c on the Planning Commission. Sanscvcrc asked Moorsc to contact the Alternate Planning Commission member to see if he is interested in becoming a full Planning Commission member to fill the vacancy. Sanseverc expressed his opinion that the Dentist sign is jarring and is not what he expected to sec. Murphy noted that he has seen changes in the sign over the past couple of days with the top piece taken off. Moorse advised that he checked to see if it was extending past the roof height and concluded it was at a correct height, but did not know why the top piece was removed. Murphy expressed a semi-apology for his strong position on the cluster housing issue discussed earlier. Murphy suggested that in future approvals for Special Event permits for Open Houses there be a condition for making arrangements for a shuttle from off-site parking areas in order to lessen traffic congestion and on-street parking problems. Moose replied that if staff anticipates parking problems, shuttles arc required but agreed the City should move in this direction and routinely require shuttles w ith Special Event permits. Mayor Peterson advised that if any City Council member who is running for re-election wants to be in tlic Com Days parade they need to tell Moorsc. Page 19 of 22 m MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT continued) She provided Moorse with the following correspondence and reports: 1. Letter from Congressman Jim Ramstad, re: Big Island access. Mayor Peterson asked Moorse to provide copies to the Council members. 2. Letter from LMCD re: Lake Minnetonka Zebra Mussels document and CD. Mayor Peterson asked Moorse to provide copies to the Council members. Also, Mayor Peterson advised she received several calls regarding residents ’ concerns and sightings of three coyotes in the Deer Run neighborhood. She asked Moorse to prepare a response to the residents. Mayor Peterson asked when a notice would be sent out to residents notifying them that the Minnetonka Art Center is no longer a permanent polling place. Staff did not know when Hennepin County would send out the notice. Moorse reported the Fire Chief is aware that the Fire Station is the new polling place. Moorse announced the next City Council work session is set for 5:30 p.m. on June 24,2004. PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT *17. JACOBS MILL SUBDIVISION REFUND LETTER OF CREDIT Murphy moved. White seconded, to approve the refund of $5,000 in letter of credit proceeds to the developer for the Jacobs Mill Subdivision. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT *18. PURCHASE OF GOLF COURSE GREENS MOWER Murphy moved. W hite seconded, to accept the price quote from MTI Distributing 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. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *19. ESTABLISH NEW POLLING LOCATION CHANGE FOR PRECINCT 1 - RESOLUITON NO. 5199 Murphy moved. White seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5199, a Resolution establishing the Long Lake Fire Department located at 340 Willowr Drive North as a changed Precinct Polling Place location for Precinct 1 in the City of Orono, Minnesota. V’OTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT AUomey Barrett had nothing to report. Page 20 of 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. *20. LICENSES GARBAGE HAULER 1. Baldy Sanitation 5906 Henry St. Maple Plain, MN 55359 2. BFl Waste Systems of North America, Inc. 9813 Flying Cloud Dr. Eden Prairie, MN 55347 3. Randy’s Sanitation 4351 U.S. Hwy 12SE Delano, MN 55328 4. Veit Container Corp dba Veit Disposal Systems 14000 Veit Place Rogers, MN 55374 SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT 5. Applicant: Jim Dillman Event: Wedding Reception with Music Location: 225 Willow Drive North Date: Saturday, June 19,2004 Time: 6:00 p.m. - Midnight 6. Applicant: David Healy Event: Going Away Party with Music Location; 2135 Colin Drive Date: Saturday, June 19, 2004 Time: 5:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. Murphy moved. White seconded, to approve the above listed licenses. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *21. BILLS Murphy moved, White seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nay 0. Page 21 of 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. ADJOURNMENT Sanscvere moved, Murphy secouded, to adjouni the Orono City Council Meeting of June 14, 2004 at 9:55 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ATTEST: Linda S. Vec, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor <L. In /i >974 A X ’”1 T • ihC -----■‘•‘••X;.—-fiz XJl t 3019 O X >2969 VC z' •II X. / 3016 T^' (r~^. J \\<i^: «5^V i-... / y* L\ 6-28-04 X ( X y AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 28, 20<M, 7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (•) Asterisk items ere considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each o;the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. C0IIM<^'I MFF^TINGROLL CALL JUN 2 a 2004CONSENT AGENDA 1 . Approve/Amend CITY OF ORO\’0 RECOGiVITION 2. Piuline Bouchard - Parks, Open Space and Trails Cosunission PRESENTATION 3 Representative Barb Sykora, House Distnct 33B approval of minutes • 4. Regular Council Meeting of June 14, 2004 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Andrew McDcrmott/Debora Halverson, Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COA^DIENTS - Roland Jurgens, Representative LMCD REPORT - Debora Halvorson PL3LIC CO!VLMEaNTS-(Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONLNG ADsMINISTRATOR’S REPORT • 5. #04-2969 Terry and Grcichcn Blount. 1390 Cherry Place - Vaiianccs/Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 6. #04-2974 Reliance Development Company, LLP, WilIow/l2 (Stonebay Outlol A) - General Development Plan/Final Plat - Resolution • 7. #04-3009 James and Darcy LofRcr, 1690 Shadywood Road - Variance - Resolution 8. #04-30 1 6 Henry Lazniarz of Wayzata Design and Development, 1 20 Brown Road South - PRD Subdivision Preliminary Plat • 9. #04-3019 Wendy Sullivan, 325 Crestview Avenue - Variance - Resolution 10. #04-3024 City of OroDO, Zoning Amendments a) Accessory Structures on Tluougli Lots - Ordinance b) Large Vehicle Storage MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRE Cl OK’S REPORT 11 . Purchase of Backup Dialer for SCADA System 12. Request for Final Payment - Brown Road North/Homcstcad Sewer Pro’cet 13. Request for Final Payment County Road 19 Sidew alk Improvements cm' ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 14. Approval of Purchase of Software Licenses 15 Appoint Planning Comnu*-sion Chair 16. Navane Fire Station Application for Payment No. 8 17 West Metro Drug Task Force Agreement and Budget Adjustments CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ♦ 18 UCENSES Gamblmg • 19 BILLS LTCOMLNGISSLTS AND EVXNTS 2004 06/28 Council Meeting, 7 00 p m 07/05 - HOLIDAY, Observance of Independence Day 07/06 - Park Tour and Council Work Session, Tuuiay, 5 30pm (Cauncit Liaison - Lih McMillan) 07/07 - Planmng Comimsiion Work i'ession, (Wednesday, 5 30 p m. 07/08 - Council Work Scsiion. Thursday, 5 30 p m 07/12 - Council Meeting, 7 00 p.m 07/19 - Planning Commission Meeting. 6 00 p m (Council Liaison ^ Bob Sansr-^enj 07/26 - Council Meeting, 7 00 p m 08/02 - Park Coirunission Meeting. 7.15 p m (CoufKil Liaison - Jtm Sfu»ph\J OS 04 - Planning Conumsuon Work Session, l^eduesd^iv, 5.30 p m. Date Application Received: 12-17-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 1-8-04 j j ». . • 60-Day Review Period Expires: 3-8-04 extended to 5-7-04 extended to 7-6-04 extended indennitcly COUNCIL MEETING JUN 2 Q 2004 CITY OF OHO nO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: June 23, 2004 Item No.: ^ Department Approval: Name: Janice Gundlach^ Title: City Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-2969, Terry & Gretchen Blount, 1390 Cherry Place - Variance - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre minimum) 0.527 acres (22,957 s.f.) 100 feet List of Exhibits A - Amended Resolution per Plamiing Commission Recommendation B - PC Action Notice 6-22-04 C - PC Memo and Exhibits of 6-15-04 Application Sumntary: Applicant requests tc amend the original deck replacement variance approval, received in March, 2004, to include the following variances needed in order to construct a covered entry in conjunction with a remodel project; 1, Hardcover variance to permit 39.25% hardcover in the 75’-250 ’ zone when 25% is normally allowed and 39.25% currently exists and no change is requested. 2. Variance to allow the proposed covered entry to be located 4’ from of the existing detached garage where a 10 ’ building-to-building setback is normally required. Planning Commission Recommendation Approve the variances as requested in accordance with the staff recommendation, on a unanimous 7- 0 vote. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution which amends Resolution #5127. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution amending Resolution #5127 granting a hardcover variance and a building-to-building setback variance for 1390 Cherry Place. iMiid A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION «5127 GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-1288 (B) AND 78-1438 FII.E NO. 04-2969 within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City ”) and legally described as follows: That part of Government Lots 4 and 5, Section 8, Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the S'** Principal Meridian, described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of Lot 7, Block 11, Saga Hill Rivised; thence East along the South line of said Lot 7 to the shore of North Am, Lake Minnetot^a, thence southerly along the shore of Lake Minnetonka 57.0 feet, more or less to the Northeast comer of Lot 1. Block 4. “Crystal Bay View”; thence West along the North line of said Ix)t 1 to the Northwest corner of said Lot 1; thence northerly to the place of beginning; AND ALSO Lot 7, Block 11, Saga Hill Revised. (hereinafter the “property”); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-1288 (B) and 78-1438 to allow hardcover within the 75’-250’ zone to remain at 39.25% where no additional hardcover is proposed and to allow a 4 foot building-to-building setback when 10 feet is normally required, in order to construct a covered entry over the front stoop. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS I. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #04-2969. Page 1 of 5 1 r 2. The property is located in the LR - 1B, One Family Lakeshore residential district, which requires a minimum lot area of 1 acre. The applicant’s property is 0.427 acres in size. 3. The Plaiming Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on June 21, 2004 and recommended approval of the variances based on the following findings; a. No new hardcover is proposed since the covered entry will be constructed over the front stoop, which already counts as hardcover. b. The applicant has chosen to remodel over existing footprints where the existing hardcover is set at 39.25%. c. No negative visual impacts result in the 4 ’ building-to-building setback that will result between the covered entry and the detached garage. d. The layout of the house doesn’t allow the entry to be moved in order to meet the 10’ building-to-building setback. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 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 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 ri^t of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. ti Page 2 of 5 f 1 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-1288 (B) and 78-1438 to allow hardcover within the 75’-250’ zone to remain at 39.25% where no additional hardcover is proposed and to allow a 4 foot building-to-building setback when 10 feet is normally required, in order to construct a covered entry over the front stoop, 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 A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Plarming Commission and City Council review. Hardcover in the 75’-250’ zone shall not increase above 39.25%. Hardcover in the 75-250’ zone shall be limited to 5,966 s.f. per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit A. Applicant is advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or ch2mge 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. Authorities granted by this resolution rxm 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 28, 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, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the appl'<*''nts ’ heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution iu chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 28*’’ day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vce, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owncifs) 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 4 of 5 State of Minnesota ) ) ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this __day of ,2004 by Terry J. Blount, husband of Gretchen Blount, husband and wife. Notary Public State of Minnesota ) ) ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this __day of ,2004 by Gretchen Blotmt, wife of Terry J. Bloimt, husband and wife. Notary Public Page S of 5 S 88®37' 30'* E ms coRNef) aCA85 ........... OY 0 5 184.92 (9».)) AfPWAlEP /'/I covettep OMDen ♦«r7 ^ OF BLOCK 4. 'AL BAY VIEW ...... N 87-42'30" W 163.67 ™ /'V . . OVEp [ \ V \ pn X v ■\NORIH LINE OF LOT 1, BLOCK 4. "CRYSTAL BAY VCW" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES ; That part of Government Lots 4 and 5, Section 8, Township 117 North, R described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of Lot 7, Bloc the South line of said Lot 7 to the shore of North Arm. Lake Minnetonk Minnetonko 57.0 feet, inore or less to the Northeast corner of Lot‘l, B [ . CITYOFORONO ZONING FILE: 04-2969 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952)249-4600 DATE OF NOTICE: June 22,2004 TO: Terry & Gretchcn Blount COPIES: 208 N. Pine Thief River Falls. MN 56701 TYPE OF APPLICATION:_____Amended Hardcover_V _____________ DATE OF MEETING: June 21,2004 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approve the request as submitted. VOTE: 7 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council — Monday, June 28,2004; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they are available from Ae City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Gundlach at 952-249-4623. liiiliiiri BlinrBi’iaMi nm J «^04-2969 June 21i 2004 Page 1 of 2 Date Application Received: 12-17-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 1-8-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 3-8-04 extended to 5-7-04 extended to 7-6-04 To:Chair Mabusth and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Janice Gundlach, City Planner ^ Date: Subject: June 15,2004 04*2969, Terry & Gretchen Blount, 1390 Cherry Place - Hardcover - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR- IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre min.) 0.527 acres (22,957 s.f.) 100 feet Application Summary: Applicant requests to amend the original deck replacement variance approval, received in March, 2004, to include the following variances needed in order to construct a covered entry in conjunction with a remodel project: 1. Hardcover variance to permit 39.25% hardcover in the 75’-250 ’ zone when 25% is normally allowed and 39.25% currently exists and no change is requested. 2. Variance to allow the proposed covered entry to be located 4 ’ from of the existing detached garage where a 10 ’ building-to-building setback is normally required. Sta/f Recommendation: Staff recommends the variance approval for the deck be amended to include the requested variances needed to allow the applicants to construct a covered entry over the front stoop. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Survey Showing Proposed Covered Entry & Previous Deck Approval Exhibit B - 60-Day Review Period Extension Letters Exhibit C - Prior Approved Resolution Background The applicant originally applied for variances in order to essentially rebuild a new residence on the existing lot. The applicant then decided rather than constructing a new home; a major renovation of the existing home would be conducted and the applicants merely needed a variance to rebuild the existing deck. The applicants received a variance for bedcover and average lakeshore setback for the deck in March of this year. The applicants are also working on submittal of a conditional use permit request to replace the existing railroad tic retaining wall, within 75’ of the lake, with a boulder outcrop. The Plaiming Commission will review this request once an engineered plan h^ been submitted. The applicants have since proceeded in the renovation of the existing home. / #04-2969 June 21,2004 Page 2 of 2 The applicants arc now requesting an amendment to the March approval. The amendment includes a hardcover variance and a variance to allow two structures to be within 10’ of each other, in order to allow a covered entry over the firont stoop of the home within 10’ of the existing detached garage. Hardcover Variance The applicant is proposing to construct a roof over the front stoop in order to achieve a covered entry. Although over existing hardcover, a hardcover variance is required because the nature of the hardcover is changing to structural. The existing hardcover within the 75 ’-250’ zone is 39.25% where 25% is normally allowed. iO’ Separation Variance The Zoning Ordinance Section 78-1438 requires that all structures and buildings maintain a separation of 10 feet With addition of the covered entry the separation between the roof and the existing detached garage will be 4 feet, requiring variance approval. Hardship Because the applicant has chosen to conduct a renovation, the existing hardcover of 39.25% can remain whereas in a rebuild situation it would be strictly held to the 25% regulation for the 75 ’-250’ zone. The applicant is also proposing to keep the existing detached garages on the property and is Aerefore restricted by their current locations. These could be considered hardships, although possibly created by the applicant and not inherent to the land. The Planning Commission should discuss the overall effect this request has on the existing non-conforming hardcover and location of the existing detached garage. Issues for Consideration 1. Is there a hardship inlierent to the land in order to allow the covered entry? 2. What effect, if any, does the covered entry have on the overall non-conformities? 3. Arc there any possible negative visual or access density impacts when the 10’ separation is encroached upon? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Amend the originally approved deck replacement variance to include approval of the following variances in order to allow a covered entry over the front stoop: 1. Hardcover vzuiance to permit 39.25% hardcover in the 75 ’-250’ zone when 25% is normally allowed and 39.25% currently exists and no change is requested. 2. Variance to allow the proposed covered entry to come within 10’ of the existing detached garage This approval is subject to the following condition; 1. Should, if under some unforeseen circumstance, the covered entry comes within ■ 3’ of the existing detached garage the construction shall adhere to the pertinent building code provisions for fire-proofmg. iMI S 88" 30 ” E 1HS C0»« CLCAHS LtC Bt 04 ,*•••-*... > I 184 /# ^ i -EXISTING^! [J^GARAGES; ta# CONC. \ MS COBNCR ^acARS uc Br 03 u e i EXISTING GARAGE ✓ * ry £pJa^ ' ' " GRAVEL DRIVEWAY GRAVEL DRIVEWAY «®^#.ooF ♦- PCfrs p^oiysFD iTILY- 184.92 •*•.... (9679)(9640)(943Lpi (9603) V- \\'iL V ■ ROOA o> LtVlL ♦ : EXISTING .^1 /survey °/ ^ LINE \x / (959.«) ''^7 ' fWPWeP / PECf. / / HOUSE : #1390 riooRuvauva V......... -(ssje^l BOftOU ]------------- ont-Y, |4r^f^IV^OV^^ WMOMWM 'fD CONC. .................. A/C pad LJ *- IR OF . BLOCK 4.”- TAL BAY VCW‘N 87 ‘’42'30" W 163.67 r. ;?/ (J57.9) ^ ■ "I PECL' -fO '. ci/ be I^OVEP ...••'••-.(95^ ---- \n ORTH line Of LOT 1. BLOCK 4. "CRYSTAL B) LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : That port ol Government Lots 4 ond 5. Section 8 Township 117 North R described as follaws: Beginning at the Southwest corner of Lot 7. Bloc thlsiuth line of said Lot 7 to the shore of North Arm. Loke M.nne onk inc ouuui Wnrihf'nst comcr of Lot 1. b•—• ^ • i •'V>4A^ •* <4 ^ 04/06 2004 13:42 FAX 1 218 661 5972 ARCTIC ADMINISTRATION 121002/002 EXHIBIT B June 4,2004 30" E 184.92 (9679) ....... (964.0)(963pi (9C05) 7 r T T-w 2aj EXISTING GARAGE 70.5 ^ i f ^ t y ^t 962- - - psi.g) (959 9>—---- /■ TOP Of Will « (9609) /'survey °/ d LINE GRAVEL DRIVEWAY iV ...... (9S9.9) 37S aooR o> UWfl V -(961.9)’^ ISED lejE'Dm- ' f ?{ EXISTING AVPROMBP .y /' I ^ I HOUSE : #1390 riooR ^ itva .rv -(9536 ■95 J 7) DECK 9530) COHC. tTL^ / ‘ A/C PAol—I •KYBIONE ‘•Ji53.0 (954.6) (954.7) (.A.) [W . ; - ■ I; •''-ij ■OVED'-I --------VL_xl 163.67 ' 0^,..• \(951 5) \ \ \ NORTH LINE OF LOT 1, ‘biScK 4. "CRYSTAL BAY VIEW” EMISES Lot 7 to the shore of North Arm. Lake Minnetonk «r i«>«o To the Northcost corner of Lot 1, b Janice Gundlach * City Planner CityofOrono PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 XE: Conditioiud Use Permit request to replace the existbg railroad tie retaining wall with a Boulder Outcrop. Dear Janice: I would like to have the review period for my CUP request extended 60 days to complete tibe investigation and final plans for the project If you have any questions, please contact me, Yours truly, yf Gretchen Blount Terry Blount 208 N. Pine Ave. Thief River Falls. MN 56701 (218)681-2550 wm April 13,2004 APR 1 9 g^J4 eiTY QF &fi§f^§ Janice Gimdlach City Planner City of Orono PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 RE: Conditional Use Permit request to replace the existing railroad tie retaining wall with a boulder outcrop. Dear Janice: I would like to have the review period for my CUP request extended 60 days to complete the investigation and final plans for the project. If you have any questions, please contact me. Yours truly, 208 N. Pine Ave. Thief River Falls, MN 56701 (218) 681-2550 EXHIBIT C A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-282,78-1288 (B) AND SECTION 78-1279 (6) FILE NO. 04-2969 WHEREAS, Teiry J. Blount and Gretchen M. Blount, husband and wife, (hereinafter “the applicants*’) are the owners of the property located at 1390 Cherry Place within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City") and legally described as follows: That part of Government Lots 4 and 5, Section 8, Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the S'** Principal Meridian, described as follows; Beginning at the Southwest comer of Lot 7, Block 11, Saga Hill Rivised; thence East along the South line of said Lot 7 to the shore of North Am, Lake Minnetonka; thence southerly along the shore of Lake Minnetonka 57.0 feet, more or less to the Northeast comer of Lot I, Block 4, “Crystal Bay View"; thence West along the North line of said Lot I to the Northwest comer of said Lot 1; thence northerly to the place of beginning; AND ALSO Lot 7, Block 11, Saga Hill Revised. (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-282,78-1288 (B) and Section 78-1279 (6) to allow reconstruction of an existing rotted deck in a slightly different location in conjunction with an interior remodel; such deck encroaching four feet past the average setback line, and resulting in hardcover in excess of the 257o normally allowed in the 75’-250* zone. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as 7x)ning File #04-2969. Page I of 6 iw. 2. 3. 4. 5. The property is located in the LR - IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District, which requires a minimum lot area of one (1) acre. The applicant’s property is 0.527 acres in area. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at public hearings held on January 20, 2004 and February 17, 2004 and recommended approval of the hardcover and average lakeshore setback variances based on the following findings: a. The property is 0.527 acres in size where the zoning district requires 1 acre. b. The existing deck has rotted and is in need of repair. c. The property contains 40.45% hardcover in the 75’-250 ’ zone where 25% is normally allowed and the applicant is proposing to reduce that hardcover by 183 square feet. d. The four (4) foot encroachment into the average lakeshore setback will not obstruct any views to the lake as the neighbor to the north sits much higher in elevation and the neighbor to the south doesn ’t have any views over the applicant’s property to due changing topography. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, repons by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property arc peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial 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. Page 2 of 6 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS B&sed upon one or moi’c of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-^82, 78-1288 (B) and Section 78-1279 (6) to allow reconstruction of an existing rotted deck in a slightly different location in conjunction with an interior remodel, 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 A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. Hardcover in the 75-250* zone shall be limited to 5,96o s.f. or 39.25% 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 reductions in existing hwdeover. 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 (183 s.f. of decking) shall be completed at the time of the footing inspection for the deck. 5.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the properly not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variances will expire on that date (March 8, 2005). 6.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terras 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, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants heirs. Rage 3 of 6 iMoasiiaafltiiiMiiiiifei 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 8* day of March, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 4 of 6 r State of Minnesota ) ) ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this by Terry J. Blount, husband of Gretchen M. Blount. day of .. 2004 Notary Public State of Minnesota ) ) ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this by Gretchen M. Blount, wife of Terry J. Blount. day of 2003 Notary Public Page 6 of 6 f Application Date: December 17,2003 Initial 60>Day Review Period Expiration (Site Plan & PUD Rezoning): February IS, 2004 60-Day Exteniion Notification Faxed on 2-13-04, Extenilon to: April 15, 2004 120 Day Review Expiration {Subdivision): April 15,2004 Additional 60 day extension granted by applicant April 12,2004 to: June 15,2004 COlIMril MPFTING JUN 2 8 2004 CITY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: June 25, 2004 Item No.: / Department Approval: Name: Michael P. GafTron Title: Planning Director Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-2974 “Stonebay Marketplace”, Reliance Dev. Corp., NW Quadrant Hwy 1 2AVillow Drive Commercial PUD Development: - General Development Plan and Final Plat Approval - Resolution - Rezoning - Ordinance List of Exhibits A - General Development Plan and Final Plat Approval Reisolution (for adoption) B - Rezoning Ordinance (for adoption) Application Status: Applicants request General Development Plan Approval and Final Plat Approval. The Ordinance for Rezoning can also be approved at this time, subject to its not becoming efiective until all required documents have been executed to the satisfaction of staff a i City Attorney. d the Final Approval The applicants have provided mylars for final plat approval. Staff has incorporated the Final Plat Approval and General Development Plan Approval into one comprehensive resolution (Exhibit A). Applicants have provided final Building Materials boards which reflect the darker brick as requested. The blue awning material sample has been removed, but no sample has been added to replace it. Staff has requested the applicant confirm that the awnings will be a dark green as discussed at the Council meeting. Council did not specifically include in its motions whether some evergreens should be added along the 400-500' Highway 12 fi-ontage. If your intent is to have a handful of such trees added, please confirm this. *04-2974 Stoncbay Marketplace June 2S, 2004 Page 2 The applicant ’s attorney has suggested a number of minor technical changes to the Preliminary Plat Resolution and the General Concept Plan Approval Resolution you adopted on June 14. The City attorney and I are reviewing these changes and for the most part they arc inconsequential. Note that Reliance Development Company LLC is assigning their interests to a replacement entity, Stoncbay Commercial LLC, for legal purposes. This still involves the same individuals, however. Documents will be revised to reflect the assignment. The applicants attorney has requested that the rezoning ordinance add to the list of allowed uses a final line item, “29. Other non-food retail uses”. Given the effort Planning Commission put into establishing this list of allowed uses, such an addition would open the door to unlimited retail uses which are not acceptable to the City. Therefore, staff has rejected this requested change. If an unlisted use is requested, staff would reject it and the applicant at that time could appeal staff s interpretation and request PC/Council action to determine whether the proposed use is similar enough to one of the listed uses as to be allowable, or would have to request to amend the PUD. The City Engineer will be providing a final letter establishing the required amount for the letter of credit. Staff Recommendation Staff is satisfied with all aspects of the application, except as noted above. The applicant has complied with the conditions establish,.! by the City in the Comp Plan Amendment for this site, and has revised plans to be in conformance with the recommendations of the City Engineer and the City’s Planning Consultant. Staff recommends adoption by individual motions of the following documents: 1) General Development Plan Approval and Final Plat Appro val Resolution (Exhibit A) 2\ Rc/oning Ordinance (Exhibit B1 3) Acceptance of the PUD 4A Agreement and authorize Mayor and staff to execute said agreement upon City Attorney acceptance of final language. Note that as of this writing, final drafts of all documents are under review, and slight revisions to those attached may be presented Monday night prior to Council action. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED 1.Motion to adopt “A RESOLUTION GRANTING GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 4A FOR STONTBAY COMMERCIAL LLC AND APPROVING THE PLAT OF STONEBAY COMMERCIAL - FILE NO. 04-2974". #04*2974 Stoncbay Maricctplacc June 25.2004 Page 3 2. 3. Motion to adopt “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 "8*1010 REGARDING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 4A - FILE #04-2974". Motion to accept the PUD 4A Agreement and authorize Mayor and staff to execute said agreement upon City Attorney acceptance of final language. 'Ill 1 1I liiilfliiaAildllilifiiii First Draft S-24-04 ORDINANCE NO., THIRD SERIES 'O''/ 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 78-1010 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 corporation, has applied for rezoning and subdivision of the property within Outlot A, STONEBAY, Hennepin County, Minnesota, from PUD/RR-1B Single Family Rural Residential Disuict to PUD/B-6 Highway Commercial District, such properties being legally described as follows; Lots I and 2. Block 1, STONEBAY ADDITION, Hcimepin County, Minnesota; 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. 4A Agreement between Reliance Development Company LLC and the City of Orono executed on , 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORONO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN; Section 1. TheMunicipalCodeofOronoisamendcdbyamendingtheofBcialzoningmapand zoning district boundaries for the property described as follows: Lots I and 2, Block 1, STONEBAY' ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota Said property is hereby rezoned firomRR-lB Single Family Rural Residential District to PUD/B-6 Highway Commercial District. Page 1 of 4 J Section 2. The Municipal Code of Orono 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 file in the OfBce of the Zoning Administi ator under File #04-2974. Allowable Uses. The uses allowed in PUD No. 4A are as follows: (1) Permitted Uses: A. Retail and Service Businesses - The following neighboriiood 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 beauty shops. Bicycle sales and repair. Books, magazines, recorded music/vidco shop. Drugs, candy, ice cream, soft 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). Gift 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, furniture, carpet store. Postal substation. Real estate sales. Retail food of all varieties and home supplies. Sewing center and yardgoods. Sporting goods store. Tailor shops. Page 2 of 4 I r 25. Travel agencies. 26. Variety store. 27. Wearing apparel store, shoe store. 28. OfT-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: A. Restaurants (Class 1). Food is served to customer while seated at counter or table, or cafeteria in which food is selected by a customer while going through a line and taken to a 'able 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, drive-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 dnve-up window for consumption on or off the premises; or restaurants which serve intoxicating liquor or have live entertainment. C. Tlie following uses when such use includes a drive-thru condition; 1. Offices (business and professional). 2. Banks and financial institutions. 3. Libraries. 4. Motels and hotels. 5. Any ofthe Permitted Retail and Service Business usn when such includes a drive-through facility. Page 3 of4 (3) Accessory Uses: A. Signs. Signs, as regulated in the zoning code for the B-1 District. B. Temporary Buildings. Buildings temporarily located for purposes 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 rcgilated in the Zoning Code. E. Incidentals. Any incidental repair or processing necessary to conduct a permitted principal use, provided that 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. 4A 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 newspape and shall be effective upon publication. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the___day of___________, 2004 by a vote of__ayes and___nays. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 4 of 4 B Draft ffl 6-24^4 A RESOLUTION GRANTING GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 4A FOR STONEBAY COMMERCIA L LLC AND APPROVING THE PLAT OF STONEBAY COMMERCIAL - 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, 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, Stonebay Commercial LLC (“the Applicants”) have a purchase agreement for property owned by Dahlstrom Development LLC and legally described as Outlot A, STONEBAY, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the “Property ”); and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application by the Applicants for subdivision and development by the Planned Unit Development (PUT-) process of the Property; and WHEREAS, on June 14, 2004 the City Council adopt'*i Resolution No. granting General Concept Plan Approval for the proposed development, which approval includes the following elements: 1.Subdivision platting of Outlot A to create two developable commercial building lots, to be designated as Lots I and 2; 2.Rezoning of each newly created lot from PUD/TIR-IB Single Family Rural Residential District to PUD/B-6 Highway Commercial District Planned Unit Development (B-6 PUD), 3.Comprehensive Plan amendment to re-guide the property from Commercial Office to additiorally allow commercial retail uses; and 1 . t f 4.Commercial site plan approval and conditions for proposed retail/office buildings on Lots 1 and 2. WHEREAS, on May 14, 2004 the Metropolitan Council via letter indicated that the Comprehensive Plan amendment is in conformance with metropolitan system plans, consistent with the Regional Development Framework, and has no impact on the plans of other units of local government, and that the City may put the amendment into effect; and WHEREAS, on June 14, 2004 the City Council adopted Resolution No. formally adopting the Comprehensive Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have agreed to execute Planned Unit Development No. 4A Agreement providing for the installation of certain improvements as a condition of site plan approval for the construction of commercial retail buildings and ancillary improvements on the Property, and which agreement documents the general and detailed conditions for use and development of the Property; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have agreed to submit and execute the appropriate shared access, parking and maintenance agreements over the portions of driveways, parking areas and other shared improvements and facilities within and Lots 1 and 2; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have agreed to grant public casements to the City over the proposed trails to be constructed by the developer within the Property; and WHEREAS, the Deve!on*»r completed or has agreed to complete all other requirements of the Zoning Code, platting ordinances and related Ordinances of the City including; 1. 2. 3. Completion of all platting requirements of Preliminary Plat Resolution No. Dedication on the plai of Drainage and Utility Easements. 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 and Erosion Control Plan, Sheet dated 4.Payment to the City of Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fees for the development of the Property in the amount of SS23,94S.OO as established in General Concept Plan Approval Resolution No.____. 5.Payment of Sewer and Water Connection Charges in the amount of $52,164.00 as established in General Concept Plan Approval Resolution No.____. 6.Payment of a Park Dedication Fee in the amount of $50,870.00 as established in General Concept Plan Approval Resolution No.____. 7.Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat agreements, easements and covenants in the amount of $250.00. 8. Payment of the final plat fee in the amount of $280.00. 9. Granting to the City of public easements over proposed trails within the Property; and 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. 4A: 1. Approval of site plan per “Preliminary Site Plan” Sheet dated 2. Approval of “Preliminary Grading Plan” per Sheet dated subject to the additional requirements of the MC WD and subject to the additional requirements and conditions specified by City Engineer Tom Kellogg in his letter dated 3. Approval of “Preliminary Utility Plan” per Sheet dated subject to the additional requirements specified by City Engineer Tom Kellogg in his letter dated Approval of “Preliminary Landscape Plan” per Snect dated subject to the landscaping approval conditions established in General Concept Plan Approval Resolution No.________. 5.Approval of floor plan and facade elevations for the Walgreens building on Lot 2 and the two retail buildings on Lot 1 ^)cr Sheets______________by I___ 6. Approval of Signage Plan per Sheet dated and subject to the conditions established in.General Concept Plan Approval Resolution No. 7. Approval of Lighting Plan per Sheet_dated and subject to tlie conditions established in.General Concept Plan Approval Resolution No. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based on the findings of Resolution No.______, the City Council of the City of Orono does hereby approve the plat of STONEBAY COMMERCIAL, Hennepin County, Minnesota and does hereby grant General Development Plan Approval for Planned Unit Development No. 4A, subject to the following conditions: 1.General Development Plan Approval is granted subject to conditions established within Resolution ______and subject to the conditions established within the Planned Unit Development No. 4A Agreement and other pertinent documents. 2.Upon the final approval and execution of this resolution and the Planned Unit Development ’o. 3 Agreement, the City Council shall '‘'rmally approve an ordinance ameiiding the ofiicial zoning map of the City to rezone the Property from PUD/RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential District to PUD/B-6 Highway Commercial District, and amending the Orono Zoning Code by adding language establishing Plaruied Unit Development No. 4A (PUD-4A) to include the Property. 3.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. 4A Agreement”. 4.Minor changes in the location, placement and height of structures may be authorized by the Development Review Committee if required by engineering or other circumstances not foreseen at the time the final plan was approved and filed with the Planning Director. 5.Changes in uses: Significan; «.hanges in the location, size, or height of the proposed buildings, and any other changes to the approved final development plan deemed by the Planning Director 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. i 6. 7. 8. 9. Ir I I If substantial development has not occurred within one year after approval of PUD No. 4A as set forth in the Planned Unit Development No. 4A Agreement, the City Council may declare the approvals granted within this resolution and within said Agreement as null and void. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles Office on or before December 28,2004 together with a certified original copy of this resolution and executed copies of the agreements, easements, and covenants pertinent thereto. The plat approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if ^e 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. The approvals granted in this Resolution shall not become effective until such time that the Developer successfully completes purchase and provides suitable evidence of ownership of the Property. The approvals granted in this Resolution shall become effective only when all conditions of approval requiring actions by the Applicants have been satisfied. 9 Adopted by the City Council of Orono this 28th day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Developer (On behalf of Stonebay Commercial LLC) 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 Oiono, 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 I MSWord Rc\lwd <Tinal) Draft 6-284M 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^ HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND ADDING SECTION 78-1011 REGARDING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 4A - FILE #04-2974 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the taws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Reliance Development Company LLC, a Minnesota limited liability corporation, has applied for rezoning and subdivision of the property within Outlot A, STONEBAY, Heiutepin County, Minnesota, from PUD/RR-1B Single Family Rural Residential District to PUD/B- 6 Highway Commercial District, such properties being legally described as fol'ows: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, STONEBAY COMMERCIAL, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, subsequent to the original application. Reliance Development Company LLC has assigned its rights to Stonebay Commercial LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (hereinafter “Developer”); and WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the rezoning of said properties per the findings, tenns and conditions of Resolution No._____adopted June 28,2004. and the PUD No. 4A Agreement between Stonebay Commercial LLC and the City of Orono executed on 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORONO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN: Section 1. The Municipal Code of Orono is amended by amending the official zoning map and zoning district boundaries for the property described as follows: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, STONEBAY CO.VIMERCIAL, Hennepin County, .Minnesota Said property is hereby rezoned from RR-1B Single Family Rural Residential District to PUD/B-6 Highway Commercial District. Page 1 of 4 Section 2. The Municipal Code of Orono is amended by adding Section 78-1010 to read as follows: 'Subd. 10. Planned Unit Development No. 4A - Stop Say Commercial Ll.C i \ Lk. (a) Legal Description. PUD No. 4A is legally described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, STONEBAY COMMERCIAL. Hennepin County, Minnesota.. (b) Incorporated herein by reference arc the Reliance Development Company LLC PUD plans attached as exhibits to the PUD No. 4A agreement, on file in the Office of the Planning Director under File #04-2974. Allowable Uses. The uses allowed in PUD No. 4A arc as follows: (1) Pennitted Uses: A. Retail and Scr\'icc Businesses - fhe following neighborhood retail and service businesses supplying commodities or performing a service primarily for the residents in the surrounding neighbo'hood: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. II. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21 <•>*»• 23. 24. 25. 26. Arts and school supplies store. Banks and insurance companies. Barber and beauty shops. Bicycle sales and repair. Books, magazines, recorded music/vidco shop. Drugs, candy, ice cream, soR drinks, cosmetics and other usual drug store merchandise. Dry cleaning and laundry pick-up stations including incidental pressing and repair. Garden supplies, ilorist shop (but not home and garden equipment rental). Gin or antique shops. Hardware store, paint store. Hobby shops, camera and photographic supply store. Jewelry shops and repair. LiK'ksmith. Music, radio. TV, appliance sales and repair store. Newsstands. OfTice supply store, olTice machine store, copy shop. Pipe and tobacco shops. Housewares, furniture, carpet store. Postal substation. Real estate sales. Retail food of all varieties and home supplies. Sew ing center and yardgoods. Sporting goods store. Tailor shops. Travel agencies. Variety store. Page 2 of 4 ____i 27. Wearing apparel store, shoe store. 28. OfT-salc Liquor Store. B. Additional PcmiittcJ Uses. The following u.scs allowed in the B-6 District: 1 . OfTiccs (business and professional). 2. Bunks and financial institutions. 3. Libraries. 4. Motels and hotels. (2) Conditional Uses: A.Restaurants (Class I). Food is .served to customer while sealed at counter or table, or 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 penuilted in Class I Restaurants. Restaurant*-' (Cla.ss II). l•a.st-food. convenience foml, colTee shop, drive-in, drive-through or liquor store restaurants, which is a restauiunt where a majority of customers order and are served their fimd at a countei in packages prepared to leave the premises to be consumed; or a drive-in where most customers consume their food in an automobile parke<l on the premises, regardless of how it is served, or a drive-through where most customers pick up ftwd at a drivc-up w indow for consumption on or olT the premi.scs; or restaurants which serve intoxicating liquor or have live entertainment. C.fhe following uses when such use includes a drive-thru condition: I. ■) 3. 4. 5. Offices (business and professional). Banks and financial institutions. Libraries. Mt>tels and hotels. Any of the Pennitted Retail and Serv'ice Business uses w lien such includes a drive-through facility. (3) Accessory Uses: A. Signs. Signs, as regulated in the/oiling code for the B-1 District. B. 1 emporary Buildings. Buildings teni|H)rarily UK'ateil for purposes of construction on the premises for a period not tt) exceed time necessary to complete said constniction. Page 3 of 4 C. Landscaping. Decorative landscape features. D. Fences. Fences, as regulated in the Zoning Code. F. Incidentals. Any incidental repair or prtKessing necessary to conduct a permitted principal use, provided that 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 os indicated on the approved PUD No. 4A General Development Plan as documented within City Council Resolution No._____and the PUD No. 4A Agreement on file in the OlTice of the Zoning Administrator under I 'ilc /^04-2974. Section 3. This ordinance shall be published in 1 he 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 28tli day of June, 2(M)4 by a vote of__ayes and nays. ATTEST; Linda S. Vcc, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mavor Page 4 of 4 I)rari»2 fr-2H>04 A RESOl.UTIOlS GRANTING GENERAL DEVEI.OPMENT Pl.AN APPROVAI. FOR Pl.ANNED UNIT DEVELOPMEN I NO. 4A FOR STONEBAY C OMMERC IAL LLC ’ AND APPRC'VINC; THE PLAT OF STONEBAY COMMERCiAL - FILE #04-2974 WHEREAS, (he City of OroiH) isu municipal cor|K)ratioiu)igani/uluiul existing uniter (he laws of the State of Minnesota; anil WHEREAS, (he C'ity Council ol'thc City of Orono (hereinafter “City Council”) has adopted land development regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of hmd within (he City; and WHEREAS, Stonchay Commercial IXC' (“the Applicants’*) have a purchase agreement for properly owned by Dahlstrom Development LI-C and legally described as Oullol A, SfONEUAY, Hennepin County. Minnesota (hereinarter the “Property ’); and WHEREAS, the C’ity Council has consid 'cd the application by the Applicants for suhilivision and development by the Planned l>'nit Development (PUD) priHress of the Property; and HEREAS.on June 14.2(X)4 theC'ity Council adopted Resolution No. 5188 granting General C’oncept Piai; .\ppmval for the propi^seil development, which approval includes the following elements: I. Subdivision platting of Outlot A to create two developable commercial building lots; Re/onitigofcach newlycrcaied t-M fn>m PUD RR-1R Single I’amily Rural Residential District to PI ID lUh I hgim ay C'ommcrcial District Phuinal I 'nit IVvelopmenl (11-6 PUD); .1.C’omprchcnsive Plan amendment to re-guide the property from C ’ommerci al - Olllce to additionally allow commercial retail uses; and Page 1 of 8 L 4. Commercial site plan approval ami comlitions for proposal rdail/ollice buildings on 1 x)ls 1 and 2. WIIKREAS,on May 14.2004 the Metropolitan Council via letter indicated that the Comprehensive Plan amendment is in confot mance with metro|>olitan system plans, consistent with the Regional Development I'ramew t>rk. and has no impact on the p!;uis ofother units ofltK-al government, anti that the City may put the amendment into elTect; and WHEREAS, on June 14.2004 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 51 90 formally adopting the Comprehensive Plan Amendment; anil WIIEREAS,theApplic;iiits have agreed toc.xecute Planneil I Jnit IX'velopment No. 4A Agrccmait providing Ibr the installation ol certain improv ements as a condition of site plan approv al for the constt 'ction of commercial retail buildings and ancillar)’ improvements on the Property, and which agreement documents the general and iletailed conditions for use and development of the Property; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have agreed to submit anil e.xecute the appropriate .sharal access, parking and maintenance agreements over the portions of ilrivew ays, parking areas and other shared improvements and facilities v ithin Lots 1 and 2; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have agreed to grant public easements to the City over the propo.scd trails to be constructed by the ilcveli'per within the ProjKrty; and WHEREAS, the Developer has completed or has agreed to complete all other requirements of the Zoning Code, platting ordinances and related Ordinances of the City including: ('ompletion of all platting requirements of Preliminary Plat Resolution No. 5189. Dedication on the plat of Drainage and Utility l•;ascments. 3.Submittal of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) permit approving the grailing and .stomiw ater management liicilities plan for the development of the Property as proposed per the (irading. Drainage and Ibosion ( ontrol Plan, Sheet C3.1 dated May 7.2‘.H»4. Page 2 of 8 4.I’aymciil U» Ihc C'ity of Stormwater ami Drainage Trunk fees Tor the ilevelt)pment of the Property in the amount t)f $23,948.WI as establisheil in (ieneral ("oneept IMan Approval Resolution No. 5188. 5.Pa>inent of Sewer and Water ('onnection Charges in the amount of $52,164.00 as established in (ieneral Concept Phui Approval Resolution No. 5188. 6.Payment of a Park I )edication Pee in the amount t)f $50,87(MM) as establisheil in (ieneral Concept Plan Approval Resolution No. 51 88. 7.Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat agreements, easements and covenants in the amount of $250.(M1. 8. Payment of the final plat fee in the amount of $280.(N). 0. (iranting to the ('ity i>f public easements over proposed trails w-ithin the Property; and \VIIKKI',AS.Citystal1 aiul consultants ha\erevie\\eil the plans for this PI IDappiication and hereby specify approval of each att.iched plan and identify them as part of the official record for Planned Unit Development No. 4A; 1 Approval of site plan per “Preliminary Site Plan ” Sheet (^2.1 da'td May 7. 2CMJ4. Approx al of “Prelimm.iiy (irading Plan" per Sheei C'3.1 dated May 7. 2(M)4. subject to the additional rei|uirementsofthe MCWDand subject to the additional requirements und conditions specilied by City I ngincer 1 oni Kellogg in his letter dated Apnl 28.2004. X Approxal of “Prehminary Utility Plan" |H*r .Sheet ('4 1 dateil May 7. 2tHi4 subject to the additional tei|uircments specified by C’ity Pngineer foni Kellogg in his letter dated April 28. 2004. Appiox ,il of“Preliniin.iry I andsia|x.* Plan" per Sheets L2.1 and !7.1 dated May 7.2(K)4. subject to the landsi-apmg approval conditions esi.iblisheil in General C'onccpt Plan Approxal Resolution No. 5ISS. Page y of 8 5.Approviil of floor plan aiul facade elevations for the Walgreens building on I .ot 2 per Sheet A2.I dated 12/11/03. latest revision by l*TI, dated 5/7/04; and the two retail buildings on Lot I per Sheets HU and 1*1 2 dated 5/(> 04; and approval ofthe building malcriuls and colors as identified on the boards of record in the O'fice ofthe Planning Director. (}.Approval of Signage Plan per Sheet C2.2 datetl May 7,2(M)4; Sheet SN-I tlateil May 6,2(X)4; and the Walgreens sign color rendering, unnumbered and undated of record in the Onice ofthe Planning Director; and subject to the conditions established in Cieneral Ci>ncept Plan Approval Resolution No. 5IXS and in the PUD 4A Agreement. 7.Approval of I .ighting Plan per .Sheet 1*2.1 ilateil May 7,2(HM aiul subject to the conditions estabiisited infieneral ('oncefg Plan Appro\ al Resolution No. 5 1S8 amd in the PI ID 4A Agreement. NOW, I’llHRF.mRF, BF IT RF.SOI .VFD that h;i.sal on the findings of Resolution No. 5188. the City Council of the C'ity of Orono does hereby appr«>ve the plat of STONHRAY COMMHRCIAL. Hennepin ('ounty. Minnc.sota and does hereby grant (iencral Development Plan Approval for Planned Unit Development No. 4A, suhiect to the follow ing conditions: 1 (iencral Development Plan Approval is granted subject to conditions established within Resolution 5 188 aiul subject to the conditions estahlishei* within the Planned Unit Development No. 4A Agreement and other pertinent dtH'iimcnls. I 'pon tlie final approval ami e.xccution ol Uiis resolution and the Planncxl I Init IX*\ clopment No. 3 Agreement, thet ’ityCouncil shall fotmally approve an ordinance amending the olVicial /omng mapofthc ('ity to rc/onc the Properly from PUD RR-1U Single Hamily Ruial Resiilenlial District to PI I) H(* I lighw ay Commercial District, and amending the (.)runo/oiling Code by adiiing language establishing Plannal I liiit I K*\ clopment No. 4 A (PUD-4A) to include the Property. 3.Upon .ipproval of this Resolution the ('ity Council shall direct the Mavwand Clerk to execute other documents required by this PI ID re/oning, including but not limited to the “Planned Unit Development No. 4A iXgrecinent”. Page 4 of 8 4. Minor changes in Ihe location, placement and height of structures may be authorized by Ihe Development Review Committex* i f required by engineering or other circumstances not foreseen at the time the linul plan was appro\ cd and fi led w ith Ihe Planning Director. 5. Changes in uses: Significant changes in the location, size, or height of the proposed buildings, and any other changes to the approved final development plan deemed by the Planning Director to be sig\. j** ant may be made only alter a publie hearing conducted by the Council. Any changes snail be recorded as amendments to the recorded copy of the final development plan. 6. If substantial development has not occurred within one year alter approval of PUD No. 4A as set forth in the Planned Unit Development No. 4A Agreement, the City Council may declare Ihe approvals granted within this resolution and within said Agreement os null and void, or the C'ouncil may renew the approvals for an additional year. 7. fhe aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with the Hennepin County Registrar olTitles Otfice on or bcibre IXxx'inbcr 28,2IK)4 together w ith a certi lied original copy of this resolution and e.xcx'uted copies of the agreements, easements, and covenants pertinent thereto. The plat approval grantcxl by tliis Resolution shall e.xpire i f the plat has iH>l been filetl by the tiate sped ficd above. In that e\ cnt, it will be necessary' to file a new application w ith the City of Orono for subdivision review. 8. I he approvals granted in this Resolution shall not become elTective until such time that the Developer successfully completes purchase and provides suitable evidence of ownership of the Property. 9. The approvals granted in this Resolution shall bevome effective only when all conditions of approval requiring actions by the Applicants have been satisfied. Page 5 of 8 : Adopted by the City Council of Orono this 28th day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Developer (On behalf of Stonebay Commercial LLC) Page 6 of 8 m STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing inslniment was acknowledged before me on this__day of .2004 by Baibara 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. Vcc, City Clerk oftheCityofOrono, a Minnesota municipal corporation atxl said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 7 of 8 STATK OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This inslnuncnt was acknowledged before me this day of .,2004 by for Stonebay Commercial LI.C, its Notary Public Page 8 of S L iMhti akOiikiiiilfl 4 IJ Date Application Received; 4-21-04 Date Application Conildcrcd u Compirtr: 4-21-04 Initial 60-Day Review Period Expires: 6-20-04 60 Day Extension Notice 5-19-04; Extended to: 8-19-04 REQUEST FOR COUNCII. ACTION COliM('‘ii mpfiING JUN 2 fl 2004 cnYcroivc.'vo Date: June 22, 2004 Item No.: Department Approval: Name: Michael P. GafTtoii Title: Planning Diicctoi Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-3009 James and Darcy l-officr, 1690 Shadywood Road -Variances - Resolution List of Exhibits A • Resolution B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 6/22/04 C - PC Memo and Selected Exhibits of 6/17/04 Application Summary: Applicants request lot area and 75-250' hardcover variances to constnict a new residence on the property. .Mlcr Planning Commission ijcction of an initial plan in May, applicar.t submitted a revised plan with reduced hardcover which was reviewed by the Planning Commission on June 21. Variances needed for the revised plan include: 1. Lot area (0.39 acre where 0.50 acre required; does not meet 80% ndc) 2. 75-250' Hardcover (Proposed <= 3,557 s.f. = 33.0% where 25% is allowed) Other items of note: - All existing structures to be removed. - New house will meet average setback and 75' setback, as well as all other required setbacks. - A proposed grading and drainage plan has been submitted. ________________________ Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission reviewed the revised plan on J unc 2 1,2004, and on a vote of 7-0 recommended approval, subject to City linginecr approval of grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building pennit. Staff Recommendation Staff concurs with tlie Planning Commission rccottuncndation, COUNCIL ACTION RFQUES IT.D Motion to adopt or anrend the attached resolution. f f- L* A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-350 AND 78-1288 HLE NO. 04-3009 WHEREAS, James Sheldon Loffler and Darcy Dee Loffler, husband and wife (hereinafter “the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1690 Shadywood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: All of Lot 10 and that part of Lot 11, "Shady Wood”, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest comer of said Lot 11; thence Southerly along the Westerly line thereof to the Southwest comer of the North 14 feet of said Lot 11; thence South 87 degrees 27 minutes East to the shore of Crystal Bay; thence North along said shore to the North line of said Lot 11; thence West along the said lot line to the point of beginning. (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City ofOrono for variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-350 to allow construction of a new residence to replace apre- existing residence on a lot 0.39 acre in area with in the LR-1C Zoning District where a 0.50 acre minimum lot area is required; and a variance to Section 78-1288 to allow hardcover in the 75-250 ’ zone at a level of 33.0% where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: HNDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File <<04-3009. The property is located in the LR-IC Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, which requires a minimum lot area of 0.50 acres and minimum lot width of 100'. The lot has a defined width of 80’-83 ‘, meeting the 80% rule of Section 78-72(bX 1) for existing lots of record, but is only 0.39 acres in area, not meeting the 80% rule noted above. Page 1 of 6 3. 4. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at public hearings held on May 17, 2004 and June 21,2004 and recommended approval of the lot area variance bas^d on the following findings: The property contains an existing residence structure and detached garage, which will be removed by the applicant in order to construct a new residence on the property. The property is provided with municipal sewer. The lot area of 0.39 acres is sufficient to allow reconstruction on the site, where a residence has previously existed for many years, without the need for setback or lot coverage variances. There is no land available for acquisition by the applicant to bring the lot into conformity. The Planning Commission similarly recommended approval of the hardcover variance based on the following findings: Tlie proposed residence will meet all setback, average lakcshorc setback and lot coverage by structures requirements of the Zoning Code. The lot shape is not optimum for a lakcshorc lot of 0.39 acres. The degree of hardship supported by the lot shape is calculated as follows: 17,060 sf / 250’ =» 68.2’ - optimum width for 75-250’ Hardcover 68.2’X 175'* 11,935 sfx .25 = 2,984 sf-2,695 sf= 289 sf variance due to lot shape There is an inherent n red for a backup apron to allow forw'ard vehicle movement onto Shadywood Road, as Shadywood is a County Road with substantial traffic which would make it dangerous to back out. The applicants have proposed a minimal driveway and backup apron meeting the City’s minimum dimension standards for such features while allowing for sufficient off-street parking on the site. Page 2 of 6 1 I 5. 6. The hardcover level of 33% in the 75-250’ zone is furtlier justified by the location near the lake of the two adjacent homes. Moving the proposed residence nearer the street to reduce the necessary driveway hardcover would cause a hardship because it would result in loss of lake views by the applicants, and would pose a future hardship for the adjoining homes by increasing their degree of nonconfonnity to the average setback rule. The City Council has considered this application, including the recomnicndalions and findings of the Planning Conunission, reports by City staff, conunents by the applicant and the public, and the cfTect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 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 variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or di fficulty; 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 IMan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-350 to allow construction of a new residence to replace a pre existing residence on a lot 0.39 acre in area with in the LR-1 C Zoning District where a0.50 acre minimum lot area is required; and a variance to Section 78-1 288 to allow hardcover in the 75-250' zone at a level of 33.0% (3,557 s.f.) where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: I Council approval is based on the site plan and hardcover calculations submitted by the applicant and amiotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amentlmcnts to the site phui which are not in confonnity witli City codes will require fiullier Planning Commission and City C.'ouncil review. No hardcover is approved for the 0-75' zone. Page 3 of 6 2.Prior to issuance of a building permit, the City Engineer shall review and approve a site grading and drainage plan submitted by the applicant. 3.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are pennissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building pemtit for the new consuuction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (June 28,2005). 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, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the sq^plicants’ 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 this 28th day of June, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 4 of 6 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instnunent was acknowledged before me on this__day of ^2004 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, aMinnesota 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 ^2004by 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 S of 6 mm STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of 2004, Janies Sheldon Loffler, husband of Darcy Dee Lofiler, 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/afTirmation of credible witness ..a and who executed the foregoing instnmient, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/hcr/their free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of 2004, Darcy Dee Loffler, wifeof Jajnes Sheldon Loffler, 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 credible witness a and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public Page 6 of 6 c Dale Application Received: 4-21-04 Dale Application Conildcred as Complete: 4-21-04 Initial 60-Day Review Period Expires: 6-20-04 60 Day Extension Notice 5-19-04; Extended to: 8-19-04 To: Chair Mabusth and Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Mike Gaffron, Planning Director Date: June 17,2004 Subject: ^04-3009 James and Darcy Loffler, 1690 Shadywood Road -Variances - Revised Plan - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area/Width: LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Required = 0.50 acre (21,780 s.f.) min. area, 100' inin. width Existing per updated surveyor calculations; 17,060 s.f. (0.39 acre) 0- 75 '^,280 sf: 75-250 ’=10,780 sf Application Summary: This item was tabled at your May meeting for revisions. Applicant has submitted a revised plan with reduced hardcover, and eliminating the lot coverage variance. Variances needed for the revised plan include: 1 . Lot area (0.39 acre where 0.50 acre required; does not meet 80% rule) 2. 75-250’ Hardcover (Proposed = 3,557 s.f /10,780 sf in zone “ 33.0% where 25% is allowed) Other items of note: - All existing structures to be removed. - New house will meet average setback and 75' setback, as well as all other required setbacks. • A proposed grading and drainage plan has been submitted. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends; 1 . Approval of lot area variance. 2. Approval of 75-250' hardcover variance for 33.0% as proposed. 3. Subject to City Engineer acceptance of grading and drainage plan. List of Exhibits A - Updated Survey w/Grading Plan B - Revised Site Plan C - Revised Floor Plans and Elevations D - Corrected Hardcover Calcs E - Notice of PC Action/60-Day Extension F - Memo and Exhibits of May 12,2004 Pertiuent Code Sections 1. 78-350: Area, height, lot width and yard requirements for the LR-IC District 2. 78-282 & 78-1288: Hardcover limitations for LR districts and Shoreland District M4-3009 June 17,2004 Page 2 Revised Plan At the May meeting applicant was advised to formulate anew site plan that would reduce the hardcover substantially from the 42% initial proposal, and eliminate the need for a lot coverage variance. Applicant has submitted a revised plan with the following characteristics, based on the surveyor’s updated lot area and hardcover zone calculations: Lot Coverage bv Structures: 2,506 sf /17,060 sf 14.7% (15% would be 2559 sO 0-75* Hardcover: 0 s.f. = 0% 75-250’ Hardcover: 3,557 s.f. / 10,780 sf = 33.0% Hardcover Variance. As noted in the May memo, from staffs perspective, there is some hardship to support approval of a modest variance based on the lot shape and the need for a backup apron to allow forward vehicle movement onto Shadywood Road. The degree of hardship supported by the lot shape is calculated as follows: 17,060 sf / 250' = 68.2' = optimum width for 75-250' Hardcover 68.2' X 175' * 11,935 sf x .25 = 2,984 sf-2,695 sf = 289 sf variance due to lot shape Also, the property should be allowed a reasonable backup apron. The proposed apron per the revised plan is 8' X 8', or 64 s.f., the bare minimum needed for a reasonable turnaround. The driveway now proposed at 8’ wide plus a minimum garage apron, has adequate room for off street parking for at least 4-5 vehicles. Planning Commission at the May meeting suggested that the potential reduction in views and the impacts on adjoining average setback lines, by moving the house nearer the road, is also a hardship that justifies some measure of hardcover variance for this site. From staffs perspective, a justified quantifiable 75-250' hardcover variance include 289 sfdue to lot shape, and at least 64 s.f (If not more) due to the need for a backup apron. Total quantifiable 75-250' hardcover would be 2,695 + 289 + 64 =3048 sf, (28.3%). More difficult to quantify is the impact due to location of adjoining homes. Given theat the ^plicant has reduced the home to meet the lot coverage 15% limit, give»i the factors of lot shape, road access and location of neighboring homes, staff feels the proposed plan is reasonable. M4-3009 June 17,2004 PiKc3 REVISED/CORRECTED LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Lot AreaAVidtht LR-IC Lot Area Deflned Lot Width Required 21,780 s.f. (0.5 acre)100' Actual 17,060 s.f. (0.39 acre)80'-83' LR-IC Required Existing Proposed Street (West)30*(to be removed)67’ Lake (East)75’(to be removed)75’ Right Side (South)10'(to be removed)17' Left Side (North)10'(to be removed)10’ Average Lakcshorc No Encroachment (All homes in line)No encroachment Structural Coveraee; Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 17,060 s.f. (0.39 ac.)Allowcu. 2559 s.f. (15.0%) Proposed; 2506 s.f. (14.7 %) Hardcover Calculations; Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75*6,280 s.f 0%900 sf(14.3%)Osf (0%) 75-250 ’10,780 s.f 2,695 s.f (25%)2,126 s.f (19.7%)3,557 sf(33.0%) Totals 17,060 s.f 2,695 sf 3,026 sf 3,557 sf #04-3009 June 17,2004 Page 4 Grading and Drainage The submitted plan directs drainage down the side lot lines toward the lake. This plan appears acceptable, subject to any conditions the City Engineer may recommend upon his review. Issues for Consideration 1.Does the revised plan meet the goals of the Planning commission for redevelopment of this lakeshore property? 2. Are the requested variances supported by hardship or other reasonable justification? 3. Does the Planning Commission have any other issues or concerns about this proposal? Staff Recommendation Staff recommends; 1 . Approval of lot area variance. 2. Approval of 75-250' hardcover variance for 33.0% as proposed. 3 . Subject to City Engineer acceptance of grading and drainage plan.4 j O t UBilV i/i \ 'f-.C3 \>' to ■*' • ; -si ' o \ ^ O o \ 1 O • \ \ V1M«rh0UM »rgara 4Btf Wkf Mkirsn Mid*) MMdrlva^eilald*) iroiiid M>fW)WftTAlW TOTAL BUlDiNa AREA • 7i0t 6F-r Ifr.-m (f • U.9» S^M Nfdcovy pfepo»*d TS5») 5 E lot Ml h uM*i0^ieir rh» auRvcr dated s-3-m TOTAL LOT AREA BASED ON CALOJUTIONft BY \W0NBE» IA6600ATE5* . B.123 MUARE FET 201B1 IB i 4 \ \4- M4»reHv«T0Nddi^ \ 41 m ------ 'cn>^ \ ^ \ \v-^ \ jiftb A pMiieibaoclii \_________________ OARAGE *%»r I HOUSEnssir r---------- 7 I I I 15 FT SETBAOC Lie __, I 5 IITj•I V 3 I ' .§! u,- , ij §1 10 FT BULDNO 8ETBAacTli~' -L------------------------------- sirens for. THE LOffLER RESIDENCE SCALE, r.sr-o*ARRL2O.3O04 REVISED HAT n, 3004 REVISED KAY n, 3004 revised KAY 1^ 3004 N ev2re>e>" lu ibsj® . I^WRMATION TAICBIFWM SURVEY BY'COFFlt 4 QRDNBEHa' DATED 9-3-M fee H > —- ■K UINC. ^5 if -'t'CnAU OUIWPIMC^ %SOto >p C'2^ 9 __ iffaiflnfcfrti ■! i I .0Frus\f;5c;itf'iu!- . ’pUv.''^y -J llK^ p^*‘ • \ V/^ r 0 • I J pRoixrv flO-T- CUA'/I'pM 02-1 ’>;■' cy'i-tuju • I 'f. '• t I ' ’~^'—-h'— - ! f; ,1 ........ ... . J^.,-■^■■. ..1. .. . . .. j ---------------------------- I ^ , ............. V « i I I ► * $ ^ . c*..^ ITSXJTirl! >> : i i .(1. ~1i W- —.. ■j .« I. A •4 •N «- Jl:. >;l.},Vt'^ IMA:__________;.|. i^ Ayfirr--, (uh-. ^ mr.y /aI < (! l^b. M^.'S. M^'r ii.Jf!- peviiBu ' , H-4V lii'i^sv^r ' JuWt 1^2/^ U <r LoffFLEfl .1' HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) (O-^ 75-250’ 250-500' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE X ________ “ )fHAoruj0ao 500-1000* A. House LengOi Widih B. Gartge • •• > C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Palio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric 0. Other X X X X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE’ A, House _____ Length B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric O. Other X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ^ B 62BD X ICO Widih SF. SF. S.F. S.F. •« S.F.> • SF. SF. SF. S.F. SF. , S.F.- ■ SF. SF. .SF. RfiTAININ^ S.F.- w^ll to neAiAiti SF. A ;SF. B % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S F. • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. xlOO S.F. A S.F. B % i Loffvea. . HARDCOVER CALCULATIQUVVORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House __________ 0-75' Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Palio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other TOTAL Hardcover in zone TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A House _____________ Length X X X B. Garoge C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk 4 ?- *>rooQ iH Q/tex X X E. Palio/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plaslic Or Fabnc X X X 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN20NE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____ B (^S-2S(j / 250-500'500-1000' WidUi \0.1BO X 100 24M Widih {Q I 3S57 xlOO - \o.lQQ 33.0 S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. SF. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F L k S.F. S.F. SF. Vt A B pnopoiso "wt/Sf- SF. SF. SF. __ paopojfo s.l-.- ORIVCVUAJ/ S.P. S.F.-ST£P^f P4, SF. S.F. SF. SF. SF. S F.-Ttf K/nS* S.F. A SF. B V# Date Application Received: 4-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 4-21-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 6-20-04 /o To: From: Chair Mabusth and Planning Commissioners Ron Moorsc, City Administrator Mike Gaffron, Planning Director Dr.tc:May 12. 2004 Subject:#04-3009 James and Darcy Lofflcr, 1690 Shady^^'ood Road -Variances - Public Hearing Zoniog District: Lot AreaAVidth: LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Required =0.50 acre (21,780 s.f.) min. area, 100' min. width Existing: a) Hennepin County Tax Records: 19,344 s. b) 1986 survey - surveyor calc w/o 929.4: 17.700 s. c) 5/12/04 Staff calc, based on ‘99 survey: 16,200 s. d) Submitted hardcover worksheet: 16,283 s. For this review. 0 ‘7S'--6,I83 sf; 75-250'=^!0.100 sf; total lot f. (0.44 acre) f. (0.41 acre) f. (0.37 acre) f (0.37 acre) --16,283 sf Application Summary: Applicant requests a hardcover variances to construct a new residence c the property. Other variances are needed for the proposed plan, however. The required vanances include: 1 . Lot area (0.37 acre where 0.50 acre required; does not meet 80% rule) 2. Lot coverage by stmcturcs is proposed at 16.3% where only 1 5% is allowed. 3. 75-250' Hardcover (Proposed ■ 4297 s.f /lO.lOO sf in zone ■■ 42.5% where 25% is allowec|) Other items of note: - All existing structures to be removed. - New house will meet average setback and 75' setback, as well as all other required setbacks. Stuff Recommendation: Staff recommends: 1 . Approval oflot area variance. 2. Denial of any lot coverage variance. 3. Approval of some degree of hardcover variance in the 31% range rather than 42% as proposed. 4. If the application moves forward with a recommendation to Council, a site grading and drainage plan should be submitted for review and approval prior to Council action. List of Exhibits A - Application & Hardship Statement B - Applicants Letter of Request C - Existing Conditions Survey (1986) D - Existing Conditions Survey (1999) E - Proposed Site Plan (May 1 1 ,2004) F - Proposed Plans & Elevations G - Hardcover Calculations II - Photos 1 - Plat M.ip J - Property Owners List K- Ncii^bor Acknowledgements L - 1992 Resolution No. 3066 (Var. never used) M - Airphoto depicting Average Setback r N04-3009 May 12.2004 Page 2 Pertioent Code Sections 1. 78-350; Area, height, lot width and yard requirements for the LR-IC District 2. 78-282 & 78-1288: Hardcover limitations for LR districts and Shoreland District Background This nearly conforming lot contains a modest home and detached garage. The existing residence and garage are in fair condition but are in nonconforming locations. The applicant recently purchased the property with the intent of removing the existing structures and constructing anew 2-story residence with attached garage. The property is served with municipal sewer and water. Lot Area Variance Required. The lot size is a factor not controllable by the applicant, and no additional land is available for acquisition. The lot area based on the submitted hardcover calculations is 0.37 acres, not quite meeting the 80% of Vi-acre exemption, and requiring a lot area variance. Lot width at the shoreline is 83' and at the 75' setback line is 80', meeting the 80% standard and not requiring a width variance. Lot Coverage bv Structures. Based on the hardcover calculations submitted (which do n^ match the sum of the hardcover zone areas used on the site plan) the allowed lot coverage by structures is 15% of 16,283 s.f. or 2,442 s.f Proposed lot coverage including the house (1686 sf), garage (720 sQ, front covered stoop (104 s.f.) and rear covered stoop & porch (151 sO = 2661 sf or 16,3%. There is no hardship to support a lot coverage by structures variance; the house can simply be made smaller. Note that the applicant has included open porches, but no open decks, on the lake side of the house. U.ard^QVcr.ygoance. The applicant's hardcover proposal based on the 1999 survey is for 42.5% (4,297 sO in the 75-250' zone where only 25% (2,525 sf) is allowed. Based on suffcalculations, the 75-250' zone is approximately 10,100 sf in area, not the 11,600 sf used in the calculations submitted by the applicant. From staffs perspective, there is some hardship to support approval of a modest variance based on the lot shape and the need for a backup apron to allow forward vehicle movement onto Shadywood Road. The degree of hardship supported by the lot shape is calculated as follows: 16,283 sf / 250' = 65.1' “ optimum width for 75-250' Hardcover 65.1 X 175 = 11,393 sf x .25 = 2,848 sf-2,525 sf = 323 sf variance due to lot shape Also, tlie property should be allowed a reasonable backup apron. The proposed apron is 261 sf, being 15' wide and 14' deep with angled eoraers, allowing easy backing movement. Staffcan support the 261 sf for a backup apron. The driveway proposed at 13' wide and 73' long, plus garage apron, has substantial room for off street parking, but could be narrowed significantly to reduce hardcover. 0 #04-3009 May 12,2004 Page 3 The other factor that comes into play is the length of the lot and the neighboring homes ’ proximity to the lake. While applicant proposes to place his home to meet the 75' setback, the homes on either side are located just 55' fiom the shoreline, so applicant would potentially be deprived of lake views as he moves his new home closer to the road to reduce hardcover. Moving closer to the road also negatively affects the average setback line for both neighbors, changing it to make their homes less conforming. Planning Coitunission must determine whctlierthis potential reduction in views and the ir.pacts on adjoining average setback lines, by moving the house nearer the road, is a hardship that justifies the magnitude of hardcover variances requested. From staffs perspective, quantifiable and justifiable 75-250' hardcover vaiianccs include 323 sf due to lot shape and 261 sfin the proposed backup apron. Total allowable 75-250'hardcover would then be 2,525 + 323 + 261 ■ 3,109 sf, (30.8%) as compared to the 4,297 sf (42.5%) proposed. Staff would recommend a? i starting point that the driveway be reduced in width from 13' to 1 O' for the first 50' from the road, reducing hardcover by ISOs.f. Additional reductions in hardcover should be considered to bring this property nearer the 30.8% level. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Lot Area/Width ; LR-IC Lot Area Defined Lot Width Required 21,7^-) s.f. (0.5 acre)100' Actual 16,283 s.f. (0.37 acre)80'-83' Setbacks; LR-IC Required Existing Proposed Street (West)30'(to be removed)69" Lake (East)75'(to be removed)75' Right Side (South)10’(to be removed)17' house, 10'deck Left Side (North)10'(to be removed)10' Average Lakeshore No lincroachment (All homes in line)No encroachment r M04-3009 May 12,2004 Page 4 Structural Coverage: Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 16,283 s.f. (0.37 ac.)Allowed; 2442 s.f. (15.0%) Proposed: 2661 s.f. (16.3 %) Hardcover Calculations : Hardcover Zone Total Area iu Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75'6,183* s.f. 0%900 sf( 14.8%)56 sf (1%) 75-250'10,100* s.f 2,525 s.f (25 %)2,126 s.f (20.8%)4,297 sf (42.5%) Totals 16,283 s.f 2,525 sf 3,026 sf 4,353 sf Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a hardship statement, and should also be asked for his testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In consldtrlng 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 with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds that substantial hardship exists to support the lot area variance. This lot has had a home on it for decades, is served with all utilities, and is similar in size to most other lots in the neighborhood, Staff finds no hardship that would support a variance to the 15% limit on lot coverage by structures. The lot is suitably sized and shaped that a substantial home and garage of over 2400 s.f. footprint can be developed without the need for variances. As noted above, staff finds a number of hardships that might support a variance for hardcover on the site, including; • Lot shape (323 s.f. quantifiable) - Need for backup apron due to County Road (261 s.f proposed is acceptable to staff) - Length of lot, relationship to lake setback of homes on either side (not quantified...) r M W4.3009 May 12,2004 Page 5 Issues for Consideration 1. 2. 3. 4, 5. Does the fact that applicant will be removing two nonconforming structures (garage too near the road, house mostly within 75' of the lake) have any bearing on whether a hardcover variance should be granted? To what extent, if any, is a hardcover variance justified based on the need to keep the house relatively near the lake due to the location of adj acent homes which block peripheral lake views as the house moves further back toward the road? Is there anyjustification for a lot coverage variance? It appears applicant’s proposal mistakenly assumed the 75-250'zone was 11,600 s.f. in area based on the surveyor’s 1986 numbers, which apparently didn’t account for the 929.4' OHWLbut which also showed a lot size more than 1400 sf greater than depicted by today's survey. The property is relatively flat, with a gentle slope from nonh to south. Applicant has not provided a topographical survey nor a grading plan. The house elevation views and floor plans suggest a basement is proposed. This lot should not be filled to create a walkout, as that would place it out of character with the surroundings. By the same token, the basement floor elevation can be no lower than elevation 932.5'. City topography maps indicate lowest grade at the existing house is about 937'; if they are correct, abasement could be placed about 4.5' into tlie ground on the south side. A site grading and drainage plan with existing and proposed contours will be required prior to Council action if this application moves forward. Should the proposed house and site plan be redesigned to reduce the extent ofliardcover variance and eliminate any lot coverage variance? 6. Does the Planning Commission have any other issues or concerns about this proposal? 1 M4*3009 May 12,2004 Page 6 Staff Recommeodation Staff recommends as follows: 1. Approval of lot area variance. 2.Denial ofany lot coverage variance, limiting the property to 15% of the 16,283 s.f. lot area, or 2,442 s.f. of structures exceeding 6' in height. 3.Approval of the degree of hardcover variance necessary to accommodate a house (and its essential amenities) that is conforming in terms of setbacks and lot coverage; i.e., allow only die amount of hardcover necessary to functionally accommodate the house, driveway, necessary sidewalks, AC pad, etc. A 7*5-250' hardcover variance to allow 3,109 s.f. or 30.8% appears justified; any Planning Cotrmission i-ecommendation for additional hardcover variance should be accompanied by a clear hardship justification. 4.If the application moves forward with a icccmmendation to Council, a site grading an drainage plan should be submitted for review and approval prior to Council action. 5.The ^plicant should be provided with clear direction in terms ofany revisions that may be required. Options for Action 1. 2. 3. 4. Approve per applicant's request. Approve or partially approve with conditions, forward to Council. Table for submittal of revisions to be reviewed at a future PC meeting. Denial. 5.Other J r City of Orono Variance Application A Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 i( u Main; 952-249-4600 fax; 952-2494616 Mailing Address: . P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 X Application # !r^ ^ Date Received: ~'2-l Amount Paid: ^[^CC — Fee: S600 Renewal: $300 After-ihe-facr. Si,200 Dcuaie Fee This application form must be completed in full. Appxant will be notified ^within 15 days ^as to the Siatus of »he application, incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: , k Site Address; \U^O <od • ■ _ kt. /niM\.' • —I ^11—7.^ O y'O vn. Property Identification Number (PIN): t *7 — I o o I *7 (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year): ^ jr")^ D Yes, 1 own the adjacent parcels. Present use of property: ^jS.^Residentiai ' □ Other _____________________________ Zoning District: L.^ I C q < y.C- A -2^ Phonfe (work): CJr^O Ua APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal naras and marijal status required for each interested party) Name: ’^orcv,/_L Phonfe Address: q *^~7J Email: rVi Q^'? g?‘2-<=T- C-,%11 •> r /juw OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names a*d marital status Name: _________________________ et?ijirfeB for each interested party) Phone (home): Address: ___ Email: Phone (work): Fax: .DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost $ Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): __________________________ _____ C.C 07 — >__________________________ Cr(jn^0.^ r ^>/"D ij jAM(J I n ^4. riijr.:___r— r rrArt.wrs!>i--------------- 0..^^ 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 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" 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 ail information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until It is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request r^ardless ^4t^ 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 investiga^n and ver^frc^tion of this request. Owner’s Signature! Owner's Signature; Applicant must have all submittals Into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each m.onth. 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 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 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." Li r -V MI 2."The plight 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." 4."Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." O o I ML ■a ^ V j J i Ik. page 2 of 3 5.“Undue hardship a!-o 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." 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.* 9. 10. 11. 7. . “The Board or Council may permft as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling." 8. “The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar • ' to such property or immediately adjoining property." “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." “The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant * •■iiclAn 'ifi' I___________________ . I “The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code." » » , ir O • ,1 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): I/--(X^i /"I j.h o .n f »Tr ^ M tfiiTnrtliiiiflif iitmiiSmiMil E Property owner requests a hardcover variance at 1690 Shady Wood Drive. Rather than adding on to existing structures the property owner is considering removing the current 19.2% hardcover within the 75 foot setback and the existing entry monuments and garage located within the roadway easement. Additionally, the property markers and current garage is located close to County Road 19 and 51 within the city easement. Safety concerns. The highway is located on County Road 19 and 51 which is heavily traveled. The shape of the lot is such that considerable additional hardcover is needed for automobiles to turn around so they can safely drive forward onto the county road eliminating the need to back out into on-coming traffic. A hardship is created by the unusual shape of the lot angle which puts nearly a third of the lot within tire 75 foot setback. This combined with the angle and length of the lot requires a longer driveway and safety turn around. Under section 78-123 of issuances for variances, undue hardship also includes but is not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight. Additional hardship is created because the angle of the lot at the street dictates the garage should be on the south side of the lot to reduce the amount of driveway length needed between the street and the garage. Placing the garage on the south side would block the sun to the home from 12:00pm on eliminating substantial passive heating and lighting benefits as allowed under the code. The property owner will remove the existing structure wall and steps within the 0-75 setback (more thanl9.2% including steps). In addition the large entry monuments and the garage will be removed from the highway set back area. Homeowner puts a high value on the preservation of our lake quality and will make a conscientious effort to use materials that that will aide in the absorption of runoff. Property owner is requesting a reasonable hardcover variance to allow for a modestly sized home with a foot print of approximentlyl, 700 square feet and a minimum amount of additional hardcover for a garage, driveway, walkways and decking. Thank You Jim and Darcy Loffler A t,.V. ( r' CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR JACK F. RHODE OF LOT 10 AND IN LOT 11, SHADY WOOD HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 0-1 /<?«) 'y Ttfm nr Pf ■ Lot 10. INI p9f\ of Lol H, Sho4/«ootf of fooo*i ! •* ^ Nortl»*ftl of Mitf Lot 11; th««Kt Soutfwtr IM Wfiurty tnoroo' lo ir^ tout^*•ll ff lAO Norm UOO ffot of foid Lot ti. mor«co fowth 87 Ooffioi 27 Co«l. ctow^O lo mo oMo/o ml C/fttd Bof. tSo*vo Norm atoA^ »o5d fhorf lo f'O Norm of omd Lol l». Ihooca •••! Jloi«| 104 Norm fro lo mo oo*rt of bomrvw^ 0 t df»»oHt Iroo »»<oniof 6oorW^ aNoM oro boto4 upoo on ottw'*4d doh^. THf flavor mtvNO to iho« mo bmo^loi of Ino obort dooc^^td propr'Ijf. mo locolion of on o«4tl4«^ vto ond «oroo«. ond IM Ncotion of 0^ oto*bit *nor#co«or* mBtON « doof not m^OOrt to ohoo ony emor OnproaomofiU or oncrooc^vnonU 2 COFFIN k GROKBERG, INC. 4tl rAMAfUOC At^MC LflN6 UdC lii hjm fta*«7>-oioi • ICOOQI CSOTOV flMt fm «LM. OAt oocoaoo or i€ 00 4«0 ifv fmf • 40 * OULr am 00 uoi r no naic v tm» tXD« MA4CP LvA4 f-2 “TO CONC. ST€PS % 1g. •V DaSef dlv« fO^ irtcte < Incjuda® 2^Uf tnnarcp»/>d> m«f oiflM4niiw«; ie4«r tioop 24«f pad Bl*fr«ar PORCH! 23of REAR 6TA1R& /c: / ■ / Vv ' - . . *•- / O'-! , . >V r-1 - V Vi'. 1 o| •. V 1 1 i 1 1 $a • • -ft 1 1 1 1 1 r -----!re • • -1 4 it k |?A^T hfCAVl' Vfe”- I'f'*kpw«iP ,m II,vq AAl u HARQ SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) R CALCULATION WORKSHEET 75-250* 250-500* 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A House Length X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Oeck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Retaining Wails H. Other 7 • t''*- TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY IN ZONE A ♦ B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A House Length X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Retaining ____ Walls H. Other ___ TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY^g^A IN ZONE ♦ B Jk Width / 7 Width O I 7^7 S.F. 8 S S.F. S.F. S.F. mtm S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ss 3 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 5/S.F. X 100 = ___S.F. A ___S.F. B / <7.2-____% S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SJ^. 5-0 S.F. S.F. X100 = 4^^ Ii 4 "i V'] ^ __S.F. A ___S.F. B ___________ . '^•i < ,fl '-, U •■ '•• I V -••» T .CM.. • " ■'■ ■ I ' M ■^vffiA. I \^H mm mif^M ' • - » ' ifejiVr-'t > '• NV. • ■V \ .» /•■iU ':‘T'" '. K. m ..........n1%^ ‘0^ rVn-v fr,‘ V;*53'¥'■‘11 • ' .s .VL\ »*V .• I .*h « ! . 4< 'f :V; ^iv...viaJi. I rfAlf m~--'^•■■yj-'; .'J:.■....• •‘y, ** --------------- f. iAV^. .' k ik ' \'' ' ♦• I^ » N7 ?;''’’'r-*--*. k ktVi. ! ^ ‘ , -^y " 1 * i #.#/ *• • • A • m,.t iv.'^jaar-i ..'^•JI'vVlV I V' ' '^C.-'-i'JA •, ■ ' ''jT' ll'. ijl^X MP ^Ump % I *v ^ I ^j !*.• ^ V il > .' , . / • • » .• s- -•* * ilUi .A .; A *. <•» . ‘ »‘. 1 i- . /* •* !•’ . /, Vu % . V . \ ,.3«» •V...(.'.• :V.y?n‘l^‘ • * J-^r /f‘;V’.y *V.'( v;*" •^‘- • • • ' ' * • • ’ * j v* ^ ?T-. ••»■' >1(i ,V A-.- ^ It-'-, lifelin ' > - • V i*: ! ¥.i^ »w€v- :k:. ' ■ '^■'-\' >ymw,W- "Wm ^ ‘f , ■ ,'<fv>'>''’ >. -''^ &W4 ::A'-V- »A 4*% M »«*»••••♦• .•*• f ®!Sas« i.h ■r m T?jrr ‘* i‘.-.i * ;•, '’ V. »», u I ^ i~i* l^ **s^P^^SBl ^ ** .^i^*^*'**' **'*'*^*>V• .**• * .. >■ ^ -■ ■ ■-.... . ^ ■H*'^ iBinii ^'fTvr •■' .k 'V 'f. ; J. •' 7.' '-i: m ,4lk ~\k.wim w I’^. t V »il 'W*' ■ tm. * '"•i Vi Tt: V. Vmi , A- •' TiTfiiMm. ^i« pfp 1 <* t • • • ^7^':' -' • * *i«-^ / * • f *!«■, ) • ^ T* 'ir^f> •4 iS‘f^ (V I •?*.* ' .t V ' • ' ■V • V' •• - '*' V*• f • 4 'I■ ■ ■' > Si-^ .-; i‘ i:>. I, I .V; y(^ •. iWw- •= •■ ■ y Ll •• ...— -rtfV I,""'-'-A’ I ‘i)J' ''t:i\-''-<f'‘' ■ • • '• •',■■■,''.'’*,« • L'J .ifcV W. .u ••••.- • ♦.M ■ •• k *« • • ♦ r.m fm r • * ' I. •}/ #• - I Hennepin Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department 1 *'* * 1 ti * • • m m m .*__ - |ue/ «f««; t t« r » f ti .J % t e *00 •• . % # Mr m im 'M M/0 m 10 TT- #%mL. \(95) ul aWj *1 xl fS4) lil rssj If 1 (561 •>» ISV «: 1 It 1 (59) < d • JO ^ % r«o/ 1^1 1 ’ ... j»-.m LJ 1 «•m IL 1^-JL-m 10 m M.M -~PtAT-6e)----------NQR^ ^ OF tor 1 a,oc« * 17-117-23-21-l, :• (IV (10) i»7r rrru mu (121 IMM (25) ; maplegate 'ifCi »•! ♦ RLS NO 1216 (V 'S AS PT— — T7-' irf'K r* RUNDME:«/iyja)» 3B 17II7212IOOM PROPADDR 1675 SHADVWOOD RD OWNERNAME RICHARDONORUM*WIFE TAXPAYER RICHARD NORUM NAME/AODR box 408 WAYZATAMN SS19I 38 1711723210013 PROPAODR 1620 SHADYWOODRO OWNER NAME D R KJELLEY A A J KIFI.LEY TAXPAYER DONALD R* ARLENE J KJELLEY NAHE/ADDR • SHADY WOOD RD WAYZATAMN 55391 31 I7II7232I00I8 PROPAODR niO SMADVWOODRD OWNER NAME JOHN P UTZPA7 RiCK taxpayer JOHNPEnZPAlRJCK NAME/ADDR 1710 SHADY WOOD UU WAYZATAMN 55391 )8 171172)210005 PROPADDR 1^*9 FACitRNESS POINT RD OWNER NAMb l-AUREEN E DARLING taxpayer I tureen E DARIJNG NAME/ADDR 1719 EAGERNESS POINTED WAY/ATAMN 55391 38 I71I723JIOOI4 PROPAODR l6f-0 SMADYW(X)DRD OWNER NAME J A KREISl.ER ABA KREISIJ:R TAXPAYER Jr.RROU) & OAHBARA KREISLER NAME/ADDR l«50 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 1711723210016 PROPAODR 1680 SHADYWOOD RD OWNERNAME JOHNGDOLEMANClAl TAXPAYER JOHN 0 DOLEMAN NAME/ADDR I680SHAOYWOOO ROAD WAYZATAMN 55J9I 38 17II72J210017 PROPADDR 1690 SHADYWOODRO OWNERNAME W OE MINNETONKA INC TAXPAYER RHODE NAME/ADDR 1690 SHADYWOODRO WAYZATAMN 55391 38 I7II7232IOOI9 PROPADDR 1720 SHADYWIXJDRD OWNER NAME ALAN R KOZICKY taxpayer AI-AN H K07.ICKY NAMIVADOR I720SHADYWOODRD WAYZATAMN 55391 I CERTIFY THATTHE FACTS REI’RESBNIT’D ARR AN ACCURATE !•; RECORDS OFMV KNOWLEnCBANDDBUOR^^^^ •/-ZS-O'/ „Y •PACE: r ( 1 iC •J I (J ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS’ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM K.. I (we) [print name(s)] of (print address] have reviewed the platis for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located aj ■>4^(0 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. Property Owner Date I (we) •« \~ </J >\j /^/ J [print name(s)]i '-7jnr, -c k of i~7lo \5 /v d'f" [s)]i[ [print address]^ have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located Qt ______________ 3lso 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 nr 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. Date / V/C97> 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 O ) I" it*~ '*■ s - h v\ f fI *U' 1 H } t« I dll i L 'O . O % O%fSS‘ CITY of OKONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3066_ _ _ _ __ A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2, PILE #1707 WHEREAS, Jack Rhode (hereinafter "th® applicant ) is owner of the property located at 1690 Shadywood Road within the ?i?? of Srono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 10 and that part of Lot 11 = Beoinning at the Northwest corner of said Lot 11, thence southerly along the Westerly line thereof to the Southwest corner of the North 14* of said Lot 11; thence South 87 dl|?les, 27 minutes East to the shore of Crystal Bay; thence North along said shore to the North line of said Lot 11, thence West along said lot line toin Shadywood, Hennepin County, Minnesota (he..einafter tne property”); and variances coat litnl the^exiUing® f'ound^tLon°\hi propo^s?d ^n^^ead^o- rhe"re»setback area of 812 s.f. or 13.3% where none is allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota;FINDINGS 1, 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1707 The property is located in the LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a -/ acre or 21,780 s.f. The property consists of 17,700 s.f, or .41 acres. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on January 21, 1992, and recommended approval of the xeejuested variances based upon the followxng rindmgs. Page 1 of 5 iMiiifa fo - ft* ^3^esho^ CITY of 0R0\"0 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _3^S A.Major upgrading of the property will result in the following changes to existing substandard conditions; Lakeshore setback; Required = 75' Existing Principal Structure =» Existing Accessory Structure = Proposed Principal Structure = Proposed Accessory Structure level deck extends 2' beyond lakefront of principal residence) 55' 10' 61* (second Variance; Existing Principal Structure =20* or 26% Proposed Principal Structure =14' or 18.6% Existing Accessory Structure = 65' or 86% Proposed Accessory Structure = 16' (second story upper level deck) or 21% Hardcover within the 0-75' setback area: Allowed = 0 s.f. Existing - 926 s.f. or 15.8% Proposed - 812 s.f. or 13.5% Total Reduction =» 2.5% B.The application involves no need for a hardcover variance within the 75-250' setback area as applicant proposes removal of major portions of existing hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. C.The use of the existing foundation will provide less of an impact on the lakeshore property. D.The original structure was placed on the property prior to current standards for lakeshore development. 4.Tne City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Plannxng Commission^ reports by City stafff comments by the applicant and the effecu of the proposed variances on the healthr safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 5 f. o ■'■'1%^ t CITY of ORONO M y«RESOLUTION OF THZ CITY COUNCIL ’^esho3 NO.3066 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 thxs 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 Comprehonsive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to permit the construction of a new residence structure using the existing foundation subject to the following conditions: 1.All hardcover scheduled for removal must bo completed prior to the final inspection by the Building staff for the new construction. Please refer to Exhibit A of this resolution for hardcover areas designated for removal. 2.Applicant to provide a Highway Department permit for the relocated curb cut to the site. 3.Applicant or applicant's architect shall provide the Building staff with the engineering data or findings that confirm the existing foundation can sustain the proposed 2-story structure at the time of application for a building permit. Applicant is hereby advised that, if for any reaso»' unknown at this time, the exiuting foundation cannot be used, all improvements shall be installed per an amended plan that shall meet current standards of the City for development of lakeshore properties. If the amended improvement plan does not meet all applicable standards, applicant shall file a new variance application with the City. Page 3 of 5 p • r.. r.. A. \\^ > •' .Vj' ‘ ^ ^ /> CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _________ 3.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant# but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year cf the date of Council approval# or this variance will expire on that date (January 27# 1993). 4.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance 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 applicant has read# understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself# his heirs# successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono# Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 27th day of January# 1 0091992. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY CP HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was ac)cnowledged before me on this 27th day of January 1992# by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy M. Hallin# Mayor & City Cleric of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. CAROLE A. HASEMAN NOTART RUWJC-UMNUOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY UV COMUfSOM CXAIIU3 AS3-ca Notary Public Page 4 of 5 f/O ,, wring'll: CITY of ORONO o'/;S'/' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 3066NO. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ STATE OP MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN j S3. ) On this a 9 ^day of xT*(X^Lio^199 ?x A * a 1 ■ M T •» ^ ^ ^ ’ w_ m _ before me a Notary Public within and for sa-ld county, personally appeared rT^.clC f-, f^.hodi o c<J oi^/>-- - - -- - - - - - — — known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the — . • . _ _^ a — ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Ji a-Vk«a4- VtA Avo 4* ft o Known to me i:o oe —--- ; . . \ ^ foregoing instrument^ and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY public • MINNESOTA • ENNEPIN COUNTY viy coritmiia*rn cxpiraa 6-12-90 STKTTti ■’ 0t'“^ Hx'r^ pIiUSO’l'A'^ ^ ) ss • COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) Notary Public On this_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _' J-9 9 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument^ and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public 4 Page 5 of 5 I I j Ir. '-'i u f':i^- <-tZ^4 ;tf^fr'r '-'• ^ % i ^ ’w»''A''’ »“■■ L>^ *-* - . ■Z<-'r'*. •<- w<5r-. ^ V r 'i v •, '*;.' -w H. -■'■ y-'-;.. V - -^ ■'sV^:•. J ' *•• •. - •> ’ '* •>. ‘ -^HS ■ t:.?'w M - s. • ‘ \ V"V •-■ ■ y- V' • *' V • . r»^ , , :''W%PV.;; ' . >k ‘‘^- \>»- ■ ••■ ■ v^lSSiSa * ^ .A T \ rp^ >..-v rnmS^i^J^ i- 5 'i- ' '■• BWtSMy.■'tcC» ■•'".!.■ • Xf rC n ' '^ -•*- . ■1Sh(9(5>v^^ '• '■ ^'V--^0 • ‘ '-' ir'vi:-:^/-.m <T4^: - W *« ■ * • —4lP^ * *vA ^ V* ^ " \J V :: W-V-'V ? -‘1 S®?li ■<^ i Date Application Received: 4-21-04 Date Application Contldered ai Complete; 4-2I-04 120-Day Review Period Expires: 8-20-04 COUMCII MPRTING JUM 2 6 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORQNU Date: June 24, 2004 Item No.: ^ Department Approval: Name: Michael P. GafTron Administrator Approval: Title: Planning Director i/TK \ Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: tt04-3016 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 Dry Buildablc List of Exhibits A - Notice of Council Action 6-24-04 B - Supplementary Materials Delivered 6-21-04: 1 - Letter dated 6-19-04 2 - Environmental design diagrams 3 - Photo of sample “L” house 4 - Sample Floor Plans, Elevation Views 5 - Rcvi.scd Grading Plan showing house footprints, setbacks C - Staff sketch of lots showing hardcover zones D - Dunn/Lazniarz Access Agreement E - Memo and Exhibits & Supplementary Exhibits of 6-10-04 Application Status: This item was tabled at your June 14 meeting to allow developer to provide additional detail regarding proposed house locations, »elationship tu lot lines, setbacks, etc. Council indicated support for the concept of creating an outlet for the areas to be preserved, but concern about the clustering, building separation, and intensity of development in the portion of the property being developed. Staff Recommendation: Approval of the proposed preliminary plat as a PRD, subject to the general and specific conditions noted at the end of this memo. Address issues of concern noted 4t your last meeting, then direct staff to draft a resolution for preliminary plat approval. Plca.se review the additional exhibits provided by the applicant, including the conceptually proposed house locations and footprints. The applicant has also provided a copy of the agreement he has reached wuh Mary Duiui regarding access to the site. #04-3016 June 24,2004 Page 2 Further Analysis of Application Preservation Outlot. The applicant’s newly submitted drawings do not yet reflect the creation of an Outlot for the areas to be preserved as open space. This would be a condition of preliminary plat approval. The result will be lots varying in area from about 30,000 sf (Lx>ts 3 and 6) to as much as 70,000-plus sf (Lot 7). The outlot will be approximately 1 2 acres, of which 6 acres is wetland and creek, and 6 acres is dry land. Further discussion should occur about what type of restrictions you may want to incorporate into the Open Space Easement. Hardcover. Lots 2 and 3 are near enough to the bank of the creek to be subject to the 2S% hardcover limitation of the 75-250' zone (Note that non-wetland areas more than 300' from the creek are not in the defined Shoreland District and not subject to hjirdcover regulations). Staffhas reviewed the hardcover ordinance impacts on Lots 2 and 3 (Exhibit D) and the conclusion is tliat while each lot is somewhat limited, each has ui excess of5500 sf. ofhardcover allotment which will accommodate new homes with drivcv^ays, decks, etc. The ability to add accessory structures to these hvo lots will be somewhat limited, however. Items for further discussion: PRD Layout & Development. Staff sees development of this site as a PRD, as a win-win situation for the City and the developer. Compared with the variety of possible standard plat layout options wc reviewed for this property during the sketch plan review, a standard plat would likely result in homes and driveways on the dry buildablc land to the northeast abutting the Long Lake city boundary, as well as on the area south of tlie creek abutting the 1 .uce Line trail. A standard plat would result in more roadway and driveway hardcover. Wc have done many PRD’s in the rural residential zone, although most of them have been only ‘quasi-clustered’ and never really resulted in substantial preservation of open space. The best good example is Luce Line Ridge, the old Ski-Tonka site on Bayside Road, where 2.5 acre - 3 acre lots were clustered in the 5-acre zone, allowing the steep slope areas to be preserv'ed and not developed. From staffs perspective, the visual impacts from the Luce Line and from surrounding properties will be minimal with the proposed development. The property has 14 dry buildablc acres, and w ithout PRD devel' pment, it is possible they would have still ended up with at least 6 scattered lots, and one of them would have been south of the creek next to the Luce Line. Visual Density. Staff would support holding the dc\clopcr to greater side setback requirements ifbuilding separation is an issue. The’r new plan shows Iiow homes can be constructed 60 feet apart, so a 30' side setb<ick with the same sizc^'shape lots they are proposing, w ould not be unreasonably restrictive. The only problem site would be the existing home, w hich is 15' from its proposed north lot line and 50' from the next proposed liouse. In all 7 lots, it would be reasonable to require any new constmetion to meet a 30’ setback. In terms ofhow visible this development will be from off-site, there may be some long views from the cast (from the Rydell property and/or the Luce Line looking westward, and probably some views from the ncighboihoods to the north. From the direct south and west, existing vegetative screening is substantial. 1 lowever, wc should not be afraid to require substantial tree plantings at the walkout sides of the homes if screening is on issue. M4-3016 June 24,2004 Page 3 Because this is a PRD, the City has the ability to impose higher standards to mitigate any neg''tive impacts of the clustering while preserving substantial areas of wooded ‘dry-buildable’ land as open space that would otherwise have homes on it. Another option to consider if the views from outside the site are a conceri, might be to require even smaller lots, with lesser setbacks, further compacting the area to be developed and maximizing the open space. Philosophically, it’s a question of accepting dense development in one small portion of a property in order to save the rest of it. It would be nice if someone would buy the entire site and build one house, but that hasn’t happened... Accessory Buildings - A discussion should be held regarding required setbacks for accessory buildings, where will they be allowed, where will they not be allowed (to preserve buffer to perimeter neighbors, etc.). They obviously will not be allowed within the 0-75’ creek setback, nor in the defined front yards. Road Access. Applicant has provided a copy of the easement agreement he has obtained with Mrs. Dunn. The City Attorney is reviewing this to confirm whether it meets the City’s requirements for access, and will also be reviewing the ability of the developer to privately use tlie adjacent 10 ’ public road easement granted to the City as part of the Kallestad Acres subdivision. Allowed Uses in Open Space Outlot. Council should consider what uses (i f any) miglit be allowed in the Open Space Outlot. As a minimum, staff would recommend no structures, no fences, no domestic animals (i.e. no horses, sheep, chickens, etc.), no tree or vegetation removal except by special permit for maintenance, no excavating or earth movement; OK to maintain walking paths, and perhaps allow the existing small pedestrian bridge across the creek to be maintained or reconstructed but not expanded... and per Park Commission recommendation, only one trail access point to Luce Line trail. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed subdivision as a PRD, subject to the following general or specific conditions: 1. 2. Acceptance of the proposed 7-lot plat on 14.0 dry buildable acres and acceptance of the proposed lot sizes, configuratiotrs and setbacks; except that die areas shown on the preliminary 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 preliminary plat drawing to be provided by the applicant Applicant shall submit for Council review and acceptance a draft “Conservation 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 irKlude 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. W04-3016 Juac 24,2004 Page 4 3. All areas shown as wetlands on the preliminary plat drawing shall be subject to the standard Flowage 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. 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 extending to Brown Road South need not be platted as an outlot. Approval is subject to provision ofthe 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 ofthe City Attorney that the 40' easement over the Dunn property and the adjoining 10' easement over Lot 1, Block 1, Kallcstad Acres, arc sufficient to provide the City with the intended underlying public ingress, egress, and access casements 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 their priv.’*'. 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 outlot or casements for such use. 8. Approval is subject to recommendations ofCity 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. Given the tabling at your June 14 meeting, staffhas Q2t drafted a Preliminary Plat Resolution as of >*ct, but will prepare one for your next meeting if you so direct. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Address issues of concern noted at your last meeting. Motion to direct staff to draft a resolution for preliminary plat approval. r A CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE #04-3016 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 24, 2004 TO: Henry Lazniarz COPIES: Charles & Sue VanEeckhout Wayzata Design & Development 1117 Marquette Ave. South, Suite 2S09 Minneapolis, MN SS403 120 Brown Road South Long Lake, L-.N 55356 Tom Goodrum Schoell & Madson, Inc. 10580 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 1 Minneapolis, MN 55305 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Preliminary Subdivision / PRD DATE OF MEETING: June 14, 2004 Motion: Table, pending additional submittals by applicant and provide Council opportunity to visit the site. Vote: S In Favor Against Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, June 28, 2004; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available fi-om the City Recorder after review and approval by the Council. If you have questions, please contact Planning Director Mike Gaflron at 952-249-4600. r To: ORONO CITY COUNCIL AND MA YOR June 19, 2004 From: Henry J. Lazniarz Re: “CREEKSIDE IN ORONO” PRELIMINARY PLAT Wc have prepared a packet of information for your review to answer questions raised at our meeting with the City Council. I received my training as an Environmental and Civil Engineer at the University of Minnesota. I was employed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) as an Environmental and Civil Engineer for 21 years before 1 began my development and residential construction business. A portion of my responsibilities at the MPCA was the review of development projects. I received on the job training at the MPCA in appropriate land development practices and inspected development sites for compliance with MPCA written development guidelines and rules. We designed “Creekside in Orono ” with the Schoell and Madson, Inc., an environmental engineering firm, we believe, employing the best principles practiced in land pUmning. We conferred with Mike Ga^in, the Orono City Planner, before presenting to the Planning Commission five proposed plats. The Planning Commission approved the Preliminary Plat presented to the City Council. We believe the plat approved by the Plarming Commission employs the same development principals put forward by the MPCA. I have attached some diagrams wc utilized at the MPCA to help developers and builders complete environmentally sound development projects. Utilizing these same diagrams, you can sec that we are clustering development using a PRD approach resulting in shorter streets, preserving significant blocks of undeveloped open space as referred to by the atuiched Figure 3.1-15. We are saving sensitive areas such as natural drainage areas to form buffer zones between our cluster of housing and neighboring lands as referred to by tlic attached Figure 3.1-2. Wc are placing the private road over tlic exiting driveway along tlte existing ridge line, keeping road pavement out of existing low areas and maximizing the natural infiltration capacity of the vegetated natural drainage areas as referred to by the attached Figure 3.1-4. We wished to utilize a narrower road to reduce impervious surface and conserve energy as refcircd to by the attached Figure 3.1-20. Additionally, we are installing a storm water pond to regulate and treat storm water leaving the site. The topography of the site allows the development of rear walkout homes with minimal amoimts of grading activities. The new homes will be built on the exiting knoll along the new roadway, which will be placed over the existing driveway. I run a residential building contractor and design many of the homes we build and I assist in the design of the home layout on the lot. We custom design homes to fit the lot, minimizing disruptive and expensive grading. The topography at “Creekside in Orono” will require that the homes on lots 4,5,6 and 7 be narrower and deeper structures so that the rear walkout exit doors can exit to an existing flat area without significant grading and additional fill to the rear of the new home. A “L” design home serves this requirement well. Please review the updated attached Grading and Erosion Control Plan. We have placed a “L” home on these lots, 4,5,6 and 7, that we have previously constructed elsewhere. We have included pictures and architectural drawings of the home so that you can see that it is a substantial home, the type that will be built at this development. As an additional matter, please notice that the sample home always is 30 feet or more from the lot sidelines and also a substantial distance from the major portion of the property we are conserving as a conservation outlot. This was a matter of concern raised by the City Council during our meeting with you. Also, please understand that we will be utilizing all Best Management Practices during the construction of the development and the new homes on the site to protect the conservation outlot. We will install an extra row of silt fence to help assure a redundancy of protection of these areas. There was a concern raised by the city council that neighboring residences may view the rear of the newly developed homes. Mr, Tom Goodrum of Schoell and Madson, Inc. and myself conducted a thorough inspection of the site and found that the densely forested areas, layout of the newly developed home sites and the topography of portions of the land between the newly developed home sites and the Luce Line hide most views of the new homes from the Luce Line or from the homes in the City of Long Lake. There are no homes to the rear (the cast) of the new homes to be built on this 20 acre site as tlie siUTOunding area is wetland. As a result, we believe we all can conclude that neighboring residents will not be impacted by the newly developed homes. We look forward to meeting with you agaia Please do not hesitate to contact me at any time at 612-SS8-1491 to discuss our project. Sincerely, Figure 3.1-2: Use sensMvt arsas such as natural drainage areas to fomi boundaries or buffer zones between clusters of housing.iP f 2. DU/A^ DEN6ITY 2. pti^C^ net DEMe>ITY IZ DWPU.I N£. UNl'pt' ON 6 OfW^ACB^: I \y :iBmi Crri 2.nj/A:. oeiveiTY 4 Ner PliNSI-rY IZDkjBUJNC^ UNI73 0H3 A^Pes? Rgure 3.1-15: Cluster development using the PUD approach can result In narrower lot fromages, shorter street and utility rows plus the preservation of significant blocks of undeveloped open space. f fv* e j»d M POAP^J ON PIPtAp- W;1E.5> 6WALE. ALON<:i Fee^4 eetWEEW HOMEft' 6tAee?l6 location : HOLtee& ON 'BTOW' 0<* PID2|B. MAiTUIW- PPAINAC a BW^ (=I«63BI«JEP AW3N& WITM ,4e«mAlTO YE5£ienATI0N I ngurtd.1-3: Plaet roads along ridge IlMt. Kaap construction arm away from low areas < and valley flow llnee. « V ■ iVl iOlAMki ^co OK pcwwAy ka ^kokec ?: z EAFWJ& 60Ne»BKveo® lOCDf^Qpn l««3>U6nGN |MFWieA*ei^ 4 ppar *iD fe^ppei^ OP oiu <coNeppvEP* 200 €apr. pmJonoN op iMPEW-teAM-e. 6Uph ^ 5 pget -2Db«^N^i-^ cpolu <y3KP€KVKP*-4cop^.n: p ^cuoticn op imp ^pmrabl ^ £Upm6E. Figure 3.1-20: Narrower roads reduce Impemieable surface area and conserve energy (Source: NAHB).^ N) m i > ( t ^ ^K ■ • ■ •' .. (5 V^i' '>VS'♦ . s”]rvo;i mm Kfc. 1 V^' C s? I i ■ ■ I /X ii -M} •V J t>JU^""is L..-W ..7f ifl i ils tii:.# • -t-.v--- BBS iJl. Hi. ' .-w“V,-w V ./^. ‘ H. •• . ^ n ■ .' H- ■■ • ^ — •/■■ V. - ; - - u ^,".-.r. c' *-’• y.-'r OBBl W! »■■:> ( ^ fs*. .s- fW% r»S.«^^ffc3K<v ,■ MaJ. tils'i mrr^IW'/ / f [ —■■ m u k'wM iM S^v ^ ''^ MLMm Pt.;V: • * VI h H* iii4 Mi-A' .. Jh." /••S- VvJ*1 k M m 'T* iS. :v ^ 11 -.1 »iW MmH % ^.'r*-h '.4. ■'M mm .3 k,fr^ •> . - ’ We. ■'“ ''' r ■f;f I ' "•> “I 'V > f • ■•"iv' '^ s ^, I % . _________________ItitJL __ . .................—LKo:.............0.0 -• *0* • • m A «*-\Ji. /.. ^ /. ,'V' Ir w a j —p... - :• “V •• .. ^ %r -i^4 2 1-w.o ‘Sr*}! —r'r*!”^" I i?* •: t 1^ ,<W-fW' ■"! » f •ti *T: tVjVTTg .» ! f r j *1—f •• • • •— I . •<------- lT‘ •i J I ':rpTj------—^ • •* nirra# — i y:..;V. . .• Z. .i — ri^__ ,..—...p,, A> t/ ^t>* » •,./ ---------- xM>l%™;r> ------»•.. ? «r.; - 'r-‘ (-l A ' i.*, '-••■•■ k' ■ JLjU*’;==s y . ^iV’ ‘iv*- •<' -' r,U-!2Vlff i «!-. .1.1 J i iiir;r>r. v«^ ^ — • •. »-•>»tkwv ^ ; j-._( * j ! J „'"sirT ; ~r ‘ .1 .>.■- _____'.••____i-._’-^. J.iv._.".l../. y.i-fl ‘-'__ I ■ I • . *: L' -.4-*-'"™-^' • -V .r V p |Tz:^T rtOQTC ruAk) ~ f Ac;• A k I ..'ll.t "T ..................................; M ••■-’• •- — ' —'{ J«!-m> •# «»«••• • m 1» . . • I 4 ^:!|1 1 <• *v •Z'tsjii V\f)^ «M> 7#,*"” "* * ^i '^KZL.',,-.I •i / •N /1 f./ ;J / If. ^ T C)*.; •iM'i !ViJuc^ A4> «iCV% ! 1‘• i* < r \ m mm m I I s\ '■;B a Oii€ «C- 1••^'1_____ * » SsaR C TA*0 ----- f » /I nii SZL » *» 'f V40 8 * O'*A _______ ____L____jLsc__:___m • m r'. A.* JL......... 3i* <>:---------- .!_____^ - i I I 7^^>. ! isy- Tt.yR. ^^‘^>.'<4-' - i‘ ^ Nr- rJ_~H !l U\^lc.k\ 4 ?:' •4 / f 4 # -------- __ _i ! i ^-r>> ^ .’. !• r L- I r*.^TI* • •>( .V s-.r.-:---- f\ ?r?‘ I I iS-‘ ' ' ■'• '^ I \.-~J Nr'o '.J $ i •bi ! I» r ^ I’ ; ■■•! •-Sr ll -T < ! 11 i !•!.];■ ‘* / i I ... .j ^m.mm * »4*‘ 1—r I N vf.> J —’s------------------------------‘ I I * ' • ^:\*i 'V* ‘. ! .1 ■ [I '•! ' l^'‘••-'‘.'•i|.-^•• _ riU, ‘ V . : fe3?c:r,-^ ■‘ ’ • -‘ :v \ y '.1 ! t -’ •''■ y ...il.. -.1 ':i.K^^l : jfr_v?; jr 15^ ; 1 • j . , r. . ! t I I j .; .^sr\-'x it.--.' I \» X I _ ■.; T:‘;'. IJ <. JI., .T*, i . ■*.•'.. I _ *:. -Mi_____fA ^ 1 f “ “ '' •■ -»,.-% I r^a tl ■?47Cfy>M'4 4J3^ ■ ■ V . i . .^M> •'••• > OF^»; \3!^gu»v I' , -... .., •' PI____’ * —*’-**’ •y*'"*. _ ^. n»;; jl-rinfi'J '.‘■:sT'--yjjj3iji.l?ii- - tLyi ■" ' ■=» i. i i >• -ii .l. i-- 'v'—X. \ X . --------r'■*—?• ___/ ~ *• •____ vi ?m.«A i'\ /»j : ^ja:;*JJ..-^,-.y V n ; ,-..> o4r-V - T^,i:r:C^j i ! X» ! i I I i I t I A. * ••4 4*:* . 4*:' ’ ^*V4L 1 ^ ' • i;;»« w * " • — x^' •*• - • ••-I.-. i»w , t» H- I i •> 'n ' •’ » s •. ♦ •>. ..i-i . p..,. t « 's jS-J----- ■S !■ I I 1 ! ' i-:’|‘ (. I' 5 I f \/'A o’a--------- M • ' • ’] Ir c /] i .............. NO * . . ^ V * ‘' ' 'V '=‘^4o>4t> 'floors ?L^.T4 ‘ c. % ‘-Jif'.V. ri Ll 9m »m •« s co*ro.« % P40POSC0 C0.S73J* % UM 5 CXST un S D£LN£A^D ^CnA'O I O^AiN<kCt/JT\;*"nr tA5£vc^7 ( PWOSCO wr*j^O Bjn'CP ZO\£ S CwrN3 STC^M 5‘>£« B W^PCSEO STOAU 5CWt« 5 IROlOh COKT^ S'J rtNCC S PPOPOSCO BOCK CCNS^^CTW C k TRAKCC 5 »£BCrKT or CBAX S DiBtCTiOX Of OBA ka X now S PRCP3SC0 SPOT uTva TW 3 Onsr^ 8UBJDIV3 B PPOPSSCO BUilDiNO S CUSTOM GfUOrO HCH.SC PAO 5 TUJCOCT s ppcposro tx:sTKS rts s PBOPOSCO rfs.'rts pth r .prap s o«HNC STOPu lUKHoi^/ce S PNOPOSeO TTDPy WIAN»IOtX/C9 S D«S7'^C iTU^tNOOS s coNCPrrt S PBOPCStD CO n SCPVA ’ION CA5CVE»T^ s r OnADm NOTES: \ 4 \" \ V \ \ \ iliii A I iTiJ • •■■■*■« / r \F-2000. C»fO3t0N CO rCNCt SU»VOt*n*BlE CONC rwHB * oj:*LR 24 r-r tBOSiON CO^SL rtNCC t•t »VX\ »*T7 04 ^ «rcoNsi?oCT nc A\ X CBAVCl 0^iV?'AA7 TO 'jUTIOH NOCK COiSTRvXTlDN CNTU*^ o 1—4 o o CKOb'ON co^a? > \ \ '^M 7^■w ^ 'tC s. --------ci^^^c _Ti- . (tvtt (BROWN RD. ipLS NO. " ■IHOODUD W ■MfPJSiCN B-^ co*<nur?o« snu . co^«ct 0**^ 10 ac4«ioM, c-nu m£T«0 mK •S1*4i \;r:iOG(o. 1. c<Kni«mw W4M1 ncLD vijrrr tmc locaior am ) lixvAT>L<«t or UJ»1A4) VOUIO AM) 10M»54Ari«C riATl^n A4KM TO llAin 0» Iffl CAMMO. CMTWCKW »4«a W»AOlAlt.» Mnrr TMf AftOJUT OSMOR or A»#r OdONFMOCS 04 VATAnc««. 1. 9uni^ CKAOAtS lUlCKM. IHMJL tMTV Of ALL »QAL rCClATTFO CM TkC tfit rn« OCIF10N or lorusc CCIRI. 04CAMC lAAnDKVIL AM) on«j» imtau MATCWi. *»ockfk £ tctioa . and cram /lar nu. at locA-m%it MccTO fT cxmACTor. 4. OUtORA?? aCAVATOA IMAll If •ASr**UfO lAWfOATUr ATIU OCA/A^CM TO MdF O^nCT MAT rMR^T MietlXMS Xt TO «AT19 SIXFASC CR nXF VJS^ «MO» rtACMB not SJWACI AlATTRtAL ASdlCCN* K) curvAO r«RX>ir. -in dca^atcja »4au k SAOinuD mcwr*\t t> A»M) UNCOtWMNC or TWf C<StR« PAVUAESt. I. coAmucrc* shrj . k upcnmu roo ao . mcrioiral aac vtvtcm. COATMT- %. t:«.*KAC^ WU. OCAirATC OKAPiAaC TRUCMIS TO rotlDT rrCPCUS frCMA K1ADI AjCNhiCVTS. 7. OKAOa w« ARC R mMB CRA90. Ce<nAC*OR tHAO. «:a JCH 6RA0C *0 tJtVOC*. CLDMUIOAt. IIA^< fWIIT 4CACT TC4 lUHAOC § ALk 0»t I^TIRMC. NrUMXUt iCR'ACNO. CCAtOCTl ^>0. ART A4MOOMO (T\nY mtf, AM) ano irouta MATtRAJ SMU MtOrt TX ARorPWT or TX contractor am SNAA K Olorcso cn ih : ccNsmucTOM SHL f. ccyrtXDOM or s-tc craomo ortRA*K)Mt »«Aa aoukT m aax arcm otm: cueo TO MAN fUKRAOr CUWrON* KOAO RAO ATC a S S»iAL1 « OTTRWMCD r» RI7CWM) TO ivc ARCMitCTUAx OtMar^Mt ?wc A*«««n. un MO 0RM3MT a KAS S»RU. K CrtRNMO ft RCiTRMNC 10 TX 4*t RUN MO r*ADlCNr fCmOM OCTAAS rOR UDCA719N AMO CWTO X ■RIIA40U1 RrnOCRT SimM 10. tUTR TO irvrr PUN »OR lAMTART STPCT MA(N. PATfR UAA« «D*vrt UTSUr AM) ILTAAnONl AM) CASTMG mo STRUCTURC SCH0\AJL II. IX laruuM 0RA9C0 Kcrt moM cocc or mcrk : shaj . bc • aocs M *0 riLT 1L ripsxs CRCVNO AAO too nxvATo** AOJACINI ra outCHC •wu k a •Tjpw rtOVI r.IVl’XN t*3Rf 5*<X.M) Apt? rpQu RiMtT'^ a W«A4 ;«< or •' M 17 rui ocrcM) io na.T wtR ro pun c%kv % 11 COW-RM^ « 4t9O«r0l£ JR CRAC*« ANO S^QP^G TX rHOTO CA2o»4) OUPTACC TO PRIMOC tMOOP* • WXONM 9L0m. PAAM PR(MC( PO^lVt CRA.HACI APA'^ fROM BUKX ipOS A»0 PRtVfKI PC«0«< % l^•» « APu* coxiACT ancm *\ct r nuo Ao^jrXNrt to craomc pup» am RCJUAIO. CCW*RACrOR *1 RQPOPTXC *CR CC»«TTW.^nOAl PAkflu^ir^ AMO C X I AMO CvTIlR »"W WuiTM UATOAP «P«C-A PRUACC PCtr>t \ ORNNAM. cc^xr APCARUa r »mO AOlCTrXArs am . RtXlPUt is\ priTALL A in«U.n< or 4 IXMI CLA44 » ACSRCC a TT OAtC UNCTR CkX ; Apo ctm»» I E3TOSION CONTROL NOTES: I AAi til iTMcr AM) Ron< ccwyMjcncp fNT^Asrrt Wu. ac Pd’u^ilS AMM *3 CCM^PwC1*>« I ka ^ ca /i» tv Tixt smau tc ysro *i>ic tv? actuo ••ntr I »mT r(P*»M‘*CR VMa CC mI'Pp.1 OM'PCr MtA-t PP-*** nj vit GPAOi*< A CR a TI V*. a 'K* •■•Vai . 1 TX CO»AlVXTOr wo, MtiAU. C.A»CP B a U i (POtCN COP^Oi »iXa O r»#r 4 M'lMM two PCOit V vn CR a £MC. C '*n.RO i> AiMAi L'\AU. 04 VAMUZU) •"»« trio. 400 ON ROCR »At4. 7 AIL nmoR COATWX WCNUMTI wa M *aam ’a «mU) m xcoromul rok orr, am ) nailr .pR3) la .mct PTRwAn • TX fCwnUTTCR tlAU UAlWAM A|k «CVUO n C TX RIIAOML or ACCirtAAAlU) 44.1 M »R0Mt OT Al riM.Li XA n C TX OuRATOl or TX COX-RUCnOAl t. ANT LAu44 WV*X N PROPOSfB RAV^T SHAU. tl RONMO 9t IK C»rRACt;a '** »0 RTWawt kAll CRGOOP CO"NROL XA4c*Ll a )T|N vT&CT a RON *4 UTABUV^ lV\\ 1 \.‘ll. TX COA tIa CTIR 4AMJL RtMTKC Aa 4-^4 - mV J K 4TNan ati pa ¥0 anlm ,rX •* Ai.rMr-*.'» M'“wrfA A M TX VUlU *. a AA xt pa RR JTRXA a Ta M T7*J0T »C a U. N*0 MOAKNT iR a C a C* rCNnucTQR 4»XA iAAxtf wa RJI JfRXA A tAM T>*jOT »C AU. CtPV’R^wTRpI ap La S li 4XtF a ;^co<t rmr n accorcaxx cnr rcxapcmn ^ KAL1.es TRAD ACREa s ^ 102P»f^ S^h: LER ^ ^ a I BwTla A 833SB=SSaBK'' ^ARMING •Wt CONTRACTCB SHRU CONTACT ML PUBUC LTUL.T'CS roR .ccA^NS cf Aa unscrorouno wres . ca B wC s. CONOUm. PPC5. MAKhXES. VAL^. OR OTNCR BtRCO STRUCTURES BEFORE D«C:NC. HE SKICl WKH OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN OAIMCCO DURING CO mSTSuCION at MO COST TO OWMClt |?SI,jQ scale 1 hMly wmtSf IM fSli riM ow fnfvH Ip m ir nStr Ml te«M ■■ftntNRA IBi ttil 1 Mi • liCCiMl PMMMUl ^itaMi «b 4« thi 1m iMIb Ktit W “------*1 BN* ... , ,. BW Pi^ Onrri Rr 0mm R|! 0««M %. Schoell £i Madson, Inc. _ GnfllAMrtno • Survvyino • Ptonnlno BoBinMUrm • CfTvtrorTmontBl BorvloMB turn WKyxRti B b Mmm4 B uTp I lawTAApMA iO<rA>P.« MOOB^OtJ fa^ ^*1) 34fr7WI • »o ^ MB 6&4 M mjlp VO KUO XJB S4BOOBS WAYZATA DESIQN A DEVELOPMENT 1117 MAROimm AV«. B., autre tsoa MtNNBAPOUB. MN CR40B IBID BBBMBB1 NoM KMMAjcwakan CREEKStOe In ORONO _______ORONO. MN ___ C«!* 4/2V04 PRELIMINARY ORAOINQ AND I ,• EROSION CONTROL PLAN > '8 I * **f /tEROS'ON CCNfROL //>. FENCE |-f£2.0o d\ ' \\ POND 7r^90.7 5 / 'Sm —na?^ ''"K06.2 6 ^ \lk\ ' \ y: '•\ •S' \ V •• X ’• ' ..1 *N ‘ 9^* r \\\A\\- • /VJO.3r.0% -r^ >95k5 ^-957s0 ^ iJr ■tfc1 IFI EROSION CONTROL- FENCE I V 'O/^tra, ''M\\ / //////' / vS- 95270 \ X 7^ 1 SURMOUNTABLE CONC. CURB^ic GUTTER - RLS lOPp 24'^ V \ \ -EROSION CONJJROL FENCE V\i/\I Vx \\X' exi^'ik :qk W^jGE' .' R\Z0Ni<i N./ ^ /• //^™ 7 '■cv.. jjLj ESTRX Wtn SEE LEFT A n O TP O r-1 V_. 1V. i_i k^wARNING THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES. CABLES. CONDUITS. PIPES. MANHOLES. VALVES. OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. HE SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO OWNER. r certify that thii plan *as prepared bj me or under tt sQpenlaion and that I am a licensed Profeasional F mtdiHA »H* Uw« <»# f»ml0 nf tfinnoMf*. Designed By;Schoell Gi Madson, Inc. EnqinmmrIng • Survaylng • Plannina Cfenb r' '&()' WAYZATA OEi o •s . %'i •« »•. p« • • \ \ i-rROSiON CW^KOL/r^c \ A'O _____ vS:-v a o o o V 'A.o' -'S> - ^ \ //< •0^ - J) •• N^J’V • n> R c -aam T .^. ^ '-■* HC ^ , *7s HC IWOSION control ' irmotLlfJtlHf /; y r^i\: ■•; -\ i-s x \'X \ Wi Ciftr ■ V \" > • \ y 'i ■^^cthkni '^'V> V)%-i>s''>r N / r„. u .J \ ■ T i........ ■> \~ i^^KK ccnft^>-‘:t>wc'of.T^--; C'.iKC 1 ^..., >l;j r/-:r;co»fl>^r.ur:^ :V ^ -1 c 'r^- ;. A ■) • i t' ' \ ‘*\>V'\‘ •r r 3«V \'> \- \\ > iJW§Hi!? I___ io2-m A ( • F\ r I »SvARNING «V vAx'Vc SiLL-LLiL ▼Ht co**TrA'"^"p :0frA T A.L PUBUC FjH lccat .cns cf Ale ct»7 — »£'; orrr.;?C O'CC^ Ng ?.MAU kipaih OR ©r ^LA * ''‘t AF*''\T A«£N OAMAGCO DUR NG aNSiwjCJ*':' A- COST k cv #>_.ew________ m •• » • • • • » — ■ • « « •.fti* < I d-a f^v2^ L<37^c;.-■'-sV . i ^ --------------------------------------------------------------—----------------------------------------------------------—. -^TT ____ _ ................................-=--..13,f2.0.-i:f.<?..i:. t>jp yO^O.(oO^%S^.. . 7^ • • •••• <• • •-«• • »• •.—/.A -^.!^.^'Cr-?.-C?^ "*** • • • * • • • • • ^ 0*rnmm^ •• ?• • • •• • ■' •• •• • ■«•, «>•■-•••«•«.««•••• »« . .V_^o - ....7^,^/^.^., 4^<ve.___ -...........- !T>.^.^_,.. jfTd .______________ •■• ' * • • • ' ,-* tc? *•90 *• • • •»«>•«»«•»««•« 0 4 •• » ^ *•® /< L: 4«* «* • 1} *1 I • it jl ■ ...% W.. -^. .y.'Se^. /3 ^Jr =: 20, 2/(0 r^.. ' *......—..........— •• ------..._.. ............................. T ^P . WV\NCVV,,. ^/jrr ,J5^ ,./Ai Or^* l«* I* )4 ~ - - -♦ ■®’. - ^piO ■z.\-'A.^.j:e,ppo._.^ii,.......... ^ST. fKw - ^ »■*-• •.• .. • a> * *•• • ♦••*■• •*• •* . *B* MW* ■ »• ••• • «». < * «•«>*. ••, .-y.-----^------------------------------ <e^,PS/MpSSA ‘caan^ ' •* • •«*» ..«— • -»>M« W . **• • •» ■ • • • • M I k- AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this ■— day of June, 2004, by and between Mary A. Dunn, a single person (“Owner*’), and Henry J. Lazniarz: and Premier Design ic Development, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company ("Prcniier”) (Hcnr>' J. Lazniarz and Premier arc herein collectively referred to as “Developer”). RECITAI.S A. Owner is the fee owner of the following tracts of land located in Hennepin County. Minnesota, namely; Tract A, Registered Land Sur\ cy No. 1022 (“ I racl A”) Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 1022 (“ Tract B") Tract C, Registered Land Sur\cy No. 1022 (“Tract C“) Tract D, Registered Land Sui^ ey No. 1022 (“Tract D") Tract G. Registered Land Survey No. 352 ("Tract G“) Tracts A, U, C, D and G arc herein collectively referred to as “Owner’s Ptopeity.' B. Developer has entered into a Purchase Agreement by which Developer w ill .lennirc a tract of land located in Hennepin County. Minnesota, legally described as follows: Tract H. Registered Land Survey No. 352 (“Tract 11") Tract 11 is adjacent to Owner’s Property. Developer is acquiring Tract H for purposes of subdivision, development and resale. C. Access from Tract H to County Road No. 146 is accomplished by means of an appunenani easement for private driveway purpo.ses over Tract G as cstabli.shcd by deed recorded as Document No. 432783. As a condition of its approval of Developer’s proposed plat (“Plat") subdividing! raci H and know n as Creekside in Orono (the "Development"), the City of Orono (“City”) has required or will require that it be granted a permanent casement for public road, utility and drainage purposes (thc“Ea.sement’’)ovcrTractG providing access fiom County Road No. 146 to the platted lots in the Plat. Owner has agreed to grant the Easement to the City over Tract G subject to and upon the tcmis and condition stated in this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals, which arc incorporated in and made a part of (his Agreement, and of the terms and conditions stated bcIow', Owner and Developer agree as follows: 1 . At such time as Developer has a) obtained final approval of the Development and the Plat from the City, and b) acquired fee title to Tract H, Owner agrees Owner shall execute and deliver Owner’s agreement to execute and deliver the Easement is subject to Developer’s compliance with all of the terms and conditions stated in this Agreement. 2. In consideration of Owner’s agreement to grant the Easement to the City. Developer agrees to pay Owner the sum of $60,000.00, payable at the time of Owner’s execution and delivery of the Easement. This 560,000.00 payment to Owner shall be payable by execution and delivery by Developer of a Promissory Note payable to Owner in the fomi and containing the terms of Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein (the “Note”). The Note shall be secured by a Mortgage in the form of Exhibit B attached hereto and incoiporatcd herein (“Mortgage"), The Mortgage shall be recorded as a second mortgage lien against each of the seven platted lots included in the Plat, and shall be subordinated only to a first Mortgage securing Developer’s land development loan up to an amount not to exceed S1,6.S0,000.00. Developer shall execute and deliver the Note and the Mortgage at the time ofOwner’s execution and deliveryof the Easement, and the Mortgage shall be recorded imntediately after the Plat is recorded in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of I itles. The Note and the Mortgage shall be executed and delivered by Premier as the holder of fee title to Tract H or all of the seven platted lots included in the Plat. The Note shall be payable and the Mortgage shall be released upon the terms and conditions stated in Exhibits A and D attached hereto. 3. Owner’s agreement to grant the Easement to the City and to execute and deliver the Easement is also subject to the following tenns and conditions; a.The underground sanitary' sewer and city water lines to be installed by Developer as part of the Development shall provide two sanitary sewer and two city water stubs or connections adjacent to the southeast line of Owner’s Property in locations reasonably approve a by Ow ner to provide for future connection of sanitary sewer and city water service to Owner’s residence and/or a future residence or residences to be constructed on Owner’s Properly. These sanitary sewer and city water stubs or connections and the underground city water and sanitary sewer lines to be installed by Developer shall be provided at no cost or assessment, private or public, to Owner or Owner’s Property, with the exception of any standard connection fees that maybe charged by the City at such lime as Ow ner or a future Owner of Ow ner’s Property connects to these city water and sanitary sewer stubs or connections. b. c. There shall be no more Uian seven platted single-family lots in t!ic Development. The Easement shall provide that Owner reserves the right to have access from Owner’s Property over the Easement and Tract G to County Road No. 146 for two private driveways bcncfitting Owner’s Property. Cl £>un n* Airecmem -2- if the Development and the Plat DwTier shall execute and deliver andition of-appro-val -of-thc- Plal.- to Developer ’s compliance with “in to the City. Developer agrees r’s execution and delivery of the : by execution and delivery by containing the tenns of Exhibit I shall he secured by a Mortgage ^lortgagc"). The Mortgage shall tted lots included in the Plat, and 5 land development loan up to an : and dclixer the Note and the .•ment. and the Mortgage shall be e Hennepin County Registrar of i bv Premier as the holder of fee The Note shall be payable and cd in Exhibits A and D attached execute and deliver the Easement ;s to be installed by Developer as y sewer and two city water stubs ■ Owner’s Property in locations : connection of sanitary sewer and lure residence or residences to be y sewer and city water stubs or iniiary sewer lines to be installed ment. private or public, to 0\s tier idard connection fees that may be ture Owner of Owner’s Properly lbs or connections. ^amily lots m the Development. ■s the right to have access from to Countv Road No. 146 for two d. Developer shall be solely responsible for completion of all driveway, road and utility improvements to be constructed within Tract G, at Developer ’s sole expense, and Developer shall complete the same in compliance with all requirements of the City, and shall fully restore all vegetation and landscaping within Tract G after completion of road and utility construction by Developer. c. Developer rights in this Agreement arc not assignable. Owner shall be obligated to grant the Easement only to Developer, if and when Developer has obtained final approvals for the Development and the Plat from the City and has acquired fee title to Tract H. 4. In the event Developer has not obtained final approvals for the Development and the Plat from the City and acquired fee title to Tract H by September 30th, 2004, this Agreement shall be null and void and neither party shall have any further rights or obligations hereunder. 5. All of the tenns, covenants and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding upon Ow ncr and Developer and their respective heirs, and pemu’tled successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. Owner and Developer have cxccnlcil this Agreement effective and date and year first above written. OWNER; Mary A'. Dunn DEVELOPER: —-/ ri V ■ Henry J. I^.iiiai4 /J Premier Design & Development, Ll.C '^ / 0 ^B V —J. ?■ r ^ f. L ./? .{/{ /l -3- EXHIBIT A PROMISSORY NOTE $60,000.00 Dated:.2004 FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned, Premier Design & Development, LLC. a Minnesota limited liability company ("Borrower") hereby agrees and promises to pay to the order of Mar>' A Dunn ("Holder"), at P. O. Box 77, Long Lake. MN 55356. or such other place as the Holder may from time to time designate the principal sum of Sixty Thousand and OO'lOOths Dollars (560,000.00), together with interest on the unp.aid principal balance of this Note at the rate of eight (81o) percent per annum commencing on the date of this Note. The principal balance of this Note and accrued interest thereon shall be payable as follows; a.Commencing on the first anniversary date of this Note and on the same day of each .successive year thereafter, Borrower shall pay I lokler a pa> ment in the amount of all accrued interest due on the principal balance of this Note at the time of such payment. b.Reference is made to that certain M> !gage Deed from 1 lolder to liorrower of even date herewith (“Mortgage”) grantin. Iloldei a second mortgage lien upon each of .seven platted lots (“Lots”) ou ned by Borrower as security for repayment of this Note. As provided in the Mortgage, upon the .sale of each of the lots. Borrower shall pay Holder a principal payment of SS.600.00 plus all accrued intere.st due on the remaining princip.il balance of this Note at the time of such principal payment I he principal payment due at the time of .sale of the seventh lot shall be in an amount equal to the remaining unpaid principal balance of this Note. c.On January 1. 2008. the entire unpaid balance of this Note and accrued interest thereon, if not sooner paid, shall be due and payable in full. All payments made by Borrower on this Note shall be applied fir.st to interest and the balance, if any, to principal, except that if any advance made by the Holder of this Note under the temis of the Mortgage or any other instruments securing this Note is not repaid on demand, any payments received, at the option of the Holder, may first be applied to repay such advances, plus interest thereon at the rate of eight (8®(>) percent pet annum, and the balance, if any. sh.dl be applied on account of any installments then due. Borrower may prepay the principal of this Note, in whole i>r in part, at any time without penalty. The terms, agreements and covenant.s of the Mortgage arc incorporated in and made a f t t of this Note. Borrower agrees that any default by Borrower under the mortgage sliall constitute a default under this Note entitling Holder to invoke all of Holder's remedies upon a default under this Note or the Mortgage. Any notice to Borrower provided for in this Note shall be given in the manner provided in the Nlortgage for the giving of notices. f Dwisn PfcmNete - I - It is agreed that time is of the essence in the perfomiancc of this Note. In the event of default in the payment of principal or interest due on this Note, or if any other event of default as defined, specified or provided in this Note or the Mortgage occurs and is continuing, the Holder hereof shall have the right and option to declare, without notice, all of the remaining unpaid principal balance of this Note, together with accrued and/'or accruing interest thereon, immediately due and payable. The I iolder may exercise this option to accelerate for any default by Borrower regardless of any prior forbearance. In the event of any default hereunder tlic Borrower agrees to pay all costs of collection including reasonable attorneys' fees and legal expenses, whether or not legal proceedings arc commenced. No delay on the part of the Holder in exercising any right or remedy under this Note shall operate as a waiver of or preclude the exercise of such right or remedy or any other remedy under this Note. No waiver by the Holder shall be effective unless in wTiting signed by the Holder. A waiver on one occasion shall not be construed a waiver of any such right or remedy on a future occasion. Borrower expressly waives demand for p.aymcnt, presentment, notice of presentment, notice of dishonor, protest and notice of protest. 1 his Note shall be the joint and several obligation ofall makers, sureties, guarantors and endorsers and shall be binding upon them and their successois and a.ssigns. All agreements between the 1 Iolder and the Borrower arc hereby expressly limited so that in no contingency or event whatsoever, whether by reason of acceleraiion of maturity of the indebtedness evidenced hereby orotheiwisc. shall the amount paid or agreed to be p.iid to the I Iolder for the use, forbearance, loaning or detention of the indebtedness evidenced hereby exceed the maximum rate permissible under applicable law-. I f, from any circumstances w hatsoever. fulfil Intent ofany provisions hereoforofthc Mongage shall involve transceiJing the limit of interest pcnnilteJ by law. then, the obligation to be fulfilled shall automatically be reduced to the limit of such validity and if from any circumstances the Holder should ever receive as interest an amount which would exceed the highest lawful rate, such amount which would be in excess of such highest lawful rate shall be applied to the reduction of principal balance evidenced hereby and not to the payment of interest. Thi.s provision shall control every other provision of all agreements between the Borrower and I Iolder and shall also be binding upon and available to any subsequv nt holder or endorsee of this Note. 'fhis Note is made pursuant to and shall be construed in accordance w iih the laws of the State of Minnesota. above. IN \MTNF.SS Wl lERHOF, the Borrower has executed this Note the day and year first written Premier Design & Development, LLC By Its c Prom Note . 1 t ------ \. i JWierrj^'L MiliMtttia SUIui0f7 Uniform Short Form Mortgatr This Statutory Mortgage, Madethu day of bct\fcccn J!reoiictJ}csi|n Sl Dft^xlopnicm> LI.C> a Mmncsou luuiied liabiiiiy.company ________ . 2001. tYMtJ Jddrcsi..--------------------ill7 Marqu:uc Aicnuc*Suiic23d9. WUuacapoUsIiviN”55403 J! fmongagors^ - - -...........- and Alai) A« Dunn_____________________________________________________________ addrcti-------------------------------^ P-0. Boa 77. Long Laic. hLM 55356 II _ H _nuirtgagee ^ . —- WIT.STiSSETH. That to wcurc the pa>Tncnt .>f Siaiy Thouoaiia and no/100ihs,t56Q.000.00j __________ Doltari according lu the (ernu ot a. . . proiniwory n>Mc payable to die order of uid mortgagee . _________ as follow;*:-----hc.{fing even dale here with I Accrued inicrcst is payable annually. TIic cntiic bafaiKC uf unpaid principal and accrued inicresi thereon i% due * and payable in full ianuary 1, 20US .See aitaclicd Addendum for addiiional icrnw and conditions. uith interest thereon at.. ciglU l8'c) . per vent per annum pay.ibfe according to die condilit^ns of the l*a>in:ssofy N*»ie of even dale liercw nh.annually ilic morljM^nr.. hneby moncates lo Itw motitjaKtc die iiacis of l.mJ lying m die Oimtiy of I lleiinviiiii _ .........._ . Mniic 111 Miiiiicmii.i, (Icserilvtl .IS folloAs, (ij Hilt 1 IIN.SliRT OLSCRirriON 0|- StVLN I.OTS IN I'f.AT OP (. KI.I KSIDH IN ORONO] I Sec atf.iciied Addendum for addi:nMi.il terms and e«»ndi(u)as. and . the nmintjgiv . tovfiunu utdnhc iiw.ttg.-ce Ois MjtuioVy iovcnaiu,- --------- 1 lo warrant the ride !■* die premisev. 2 To pay the indcbtcdncf^i as hciem puw ided; 3 To pay all taxes; 4 To keep tlK budding in.uteJ jgain.1 fire for fuU insurable value thereof . and ;,ga!;.st windMorni* and loriuJos for fuU iroutable value thereof . f„i die proicctu.ii of die n.Migacec ^ .. Hut me premises shall be kept in lepair and no Haste ^liali l*c cominiticd fi That die whole of d.e priiKipal vuni dull betonve due alter dclault in the pa>nh.m of any iiuulliwni. _ of P''"<.ipal or inicicsr. or of any tav. or in the pctfoinuticc of anv oihct covenant at ihe option of the holder of this _____ -nvongage^. _________ ‘ cnam. 7. To pay principal and iiitcicst viii prior nKitigaget. ' I I If Jcfauli be rude in any pay riKm or covenirthercm, the mortgagee__ * —— —. ... .... tMf 1 ---------s:ia*l have die suiui jfv * 1 4I e ! Form No. 100 M Fogt 3 ... ADDENDUM TO MORTGAGE BET\^'EEN PREMIER DESIGN MORTGAGOR AND MARY A. DUNN, MORTGAGEE, DATED _____ A DEVELOP.MENT. LLC, _____________, 2004. Mortgagor agrees the following icmu and conditions arc incor|>oratcd in and made a part of the Mortgage:I I If all or any part of said land or any interest in said land is sold or transferred witliout Mortgagee's prior written consent. Mortgagee may require immediate payment in full of all sums secured by this Mortgage However, this t»I»iion 10 accelerate shall not be exercised by Mortgagee if such exercise is proliibited by applicable law. If Mortgagee exercises this option to accelerate. Mortgagee shall give Mortgagors notice of acceleration IT.c notice .shall provide a period of not less than thirty (3H| days from the dale tlic notice is given sviihin which Mtutgagors must pay all sums secured by this Mortgage. If Mortgagor fails to pay those sums prior to the expiration of this period. Mortgagee may invoke .xn) renvdies permilled by this Mortgage wiihoui further notice or dcm.ind to .Mortgagor. ! Rclcrcr.ee K nude lo die Pronihsor)' Note of even djie licrcHiili frem Mongjcor lo Moncjpcc. in die original principal amount of Sixty nmiisaiid and OO'IOitihx Dollars (S60.IXX).00) ('Note*). As provided in llic Note. , Mortgagor sliall pay Murtgagc*e a principal rixJuUion payment of Eight lltousand .Six lluiklrcd arxl OO/HXhbs ! . Ihiliars (SK.600 00) upon the sale of each of the pLilted lots included in Uh? lacid described in this Morig.igc At j Uic time of ca».h such paymeni. and provided Miutgagor is not in default in |x:rf«irnuiicc of ah) of the terms, j . iovciunis and cundilions of the Note or tins Mong.igc, Mnneagee stiall exc-cuic and dclocr a Fartuf Release of ! M«»rtg;ige releasing one ol the pl.ittwd lots desuifv.I in this Morigagc and dcsigiuicd b> Munc.ig. rs from the lien ' Ilf tins Morig.ige. | PKI:M1I:R DluSKiN A Dr.ULOPMl.N 1 . 1 1C .SIAH:OI MINNISOIA ) ).SS. COUNIYOrilENaNHIN ) j The foregoing .nstruiiK’iit wav acknowkd;;ul K'lore me this ! “ day of............................ 20t)I, by I of Pieiiitcr Desigti A Devcinjmicnt, LLC, H liliukd Ihituliiy cnmp.nny under the laws of MmueSMia, uii Uiialf of the liimicd Iwliiliiy company. N'lUiy Puhlic The attached supplemental infomtation was received after the packet was copied Schoell & Madson, !nc. Engineering • Surveying • Planning Soil Testing • Environmental Services wwv/. schoellmadson. com TO; City of Orono DATE: 6/10/04 PROJECT NO.: 64093-001 2750 Kelley Parkway ATTENTION: Mike Gaffron Crystal Bay. MN 55323 SUBJECT; Creeks'de i I i Wo arc sending you 0 herewith □ under soparato cover the following; 0 Plans □ Speci'Icaliors □ Pnnts 0 Reports □ Shop Drawings □ Changa Order □ Samp'cs □ Copy of a Letter □ Data Sheets G Other ___________ _______________________________________________________ Transmitted v.a: □ ^'all □ Fa* □ Will Call □_Hr Messenger Scrv' ce □ Ovcmignt Del very 0 Oltior i QUANTITY • DE.SCR'PTION 8 PfO’iminar/ Gradm*! and Frosion Control PMns - 11^17 1 Narralivo Adclondiim i ; t Those arc transmitted as foiiov/s □ As Requested □ For Your Records □ For Your Use 0 For Rcv.ew and Comment Htf.tARKS SCHOELL & MAOSON, INC Tom Goodrum D reel Oia! No. Copy To 952-847-<ju-t 5 F OOt'rcrreiO^lO'tM \t/.« CnY-o-i Joe Ml.i-J Affirmative Action Equal Opportunity Emptoyar 10530 WayZBta Boulevard. Bute 1 • Wmneapo'is. MN 553C5-1525 OH'ce 052) 546-7601 • Fa* (952) 545 9055 NARRATIN E ADDENDUM FOR CREEKSIDE IN ORONO Way/ata Design ami De\dopmont is excited to present tlte picliiv.iiurx plat of CREEK.SIDE IN ORONO to the City Council. Tliis plan \\as well received by City staff. Planning Connnission and the Park Board for its efforts in open space presen aiion and sensitivity to the natural resources and neiehborinj: propcnies. From the comments we recciv cd by the Planning Commission and the Park Board w e are able to impro\ e the plan in the follow mg ways; Mininii/.e Grading • Single Trail .Access to the I.uce Line The Grading Plan has been revised to reflect the benefits of utilizing custom built homes in this development. 1 lie custom built walkout-homes w ill be designed to use the natural grades of the slope and to piesei ve as many as the tiees as possible. Tiee.s are an amenity that liomeownets enjo\ and take great cate in pteset\ing. .See the revised Grading Pl.in. The prev ions giailing plan showed the extent of the rr.ading limits if house pads w ere to be constructed with the initial road ami pond constntction. With custom built homes the initial site uradine will be ereailv lediiced with onlv minimal iiradiiu: for the road and pond. No grading will be needed for lots 1-4 with the initial site grading, (hading plans and erosion contiol measures w ill be provided with the d* .sign of the custom home at the time of the building permit. Again, the adv antage of using a custom built home is that it can be nestled into the site miiiiiiii/ing grading and tree impacts. 1 ots 5-7 will require some grading along w ith the coiKstruttion of the pond and the storm-scwcr 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 show n to reprc.scnt a potential trail location. The trail vv ill come off of the jriiv ate cul-de-sac between lots 2 and .1 follow ing the sliared lot line to the conservation easement where it will tuni to the east and connect to the existing footbridge. Acioss the bridge it will meander to the Luce Line Trail follow mg the natural teiTam and avoiding trees I he path w ill be pleasing for the residents but designed to discourage public use from the trail. Wavzata Design and Dev elopment w ish to thank the Planning Commission and the Park Boaid for then comments and believe an improved project is being presented to the (’ity Council. LCCENO ----------- oc»»oTts tiisTiNC coMvomi ------------OCNOTCt (»<»OPOSCO CONTOU* • " OCfiOTCS 8OUW0MY VHt - *— OdiOTCS CXiStiWC 0CLt«tAt£0 WCT iah O — — OMOTCS WUiM4C€/uXiTt CASCytMT --------- OCMOTCS AWOWO wCT lan O •urrc« ipyc OCMOTtS t*lSTiNC ST0»II 5D»t« OCwOTtS PWOSCO STOH m S£wCR 30000 OCNOTCS CROSOy COWlROl S«.T riHCt SaSHW OCMOTCS RROROSCO ROCK CONSTR u CTOM CNTRAMCC L OCMOTCS PCRCCNT or ORAOC OCMOTCS OUlCCTiON Of ORAMACC aow OCMOTCS RROPOSCO S«)T aCVATOM ^ OCMOTCS CRiSTiMC BunOiMC /' "n OCMOTCS PROROSCO eUR.OR*C OCMOTCS CUSTOM CR40C0 MOUSC PAO OCMOTCS WAUCOUT OCMOTCS pROPOsco cxiSTiMc rcs ^ OCMOTCS PROPOSCO rcs/rcs «wtn riprap OCMOTCS CKtS^MC STORM MANHOLC/CS OCMOTCS PROPOSCO STORM UAMH0U/C8 OCMOTCS CXtSTiMC RTUMIMOUS OCMOTCS C k»STimC CO n CRCTC * -r OCMOTCS PROPOSCO CO mSCR vatqn C a SC mC n TS | --------/A V' -•'I 3 SEE RIGHT N \ . i* ‘ - Surmounta BiC CS mT , ^ ________. V ------------------------------- l>n/' i / / kp, fl /• •• v^/_X i ' ♦* - I A/T , .fty-PLE «tLs;«hhlS f-x/.o « COMTROI. SURMOUMT a SLC CONC. JRB * C u TTCR CROS^OM COMTROI rcMCC c »♦§: o« MO RCPLACt 15* CMP RCCOMSTRUCT t* CRA^ ORMCMAV TO ORDMAL SCCtiON ROCK CONSTRUCTION CNTRANCC CD .r •-•i: ■.M/josl L VV > » CRAOiNC NOTCS: I CMirMCtMl »«iU COHfaCt COM<tf r«ft 0*C CJit ■**»«• ^ lOMMiC AOTf «m 10 uumaoa / coA«Tawcr«N rm wivM ioc«fOM t«N c<r4f MTSO MU UlotU^OOOt OR HU-^acC «-tes>IM-MM I co wiac toi 1MA4 r<iA wiarr »«c kOUtlOMt «M0 cav*K>-« Of cmtwe uiAit<f MO toRooR*M< ruiuicf to r«m or tm CMOMC IK COMAiCtOO «m«u MKOAfl^T IK MOACt CMOKOI or tm MORRMCCl 00 WIUTOM S fUlAALf CMM MMOMU »UU COURT OT M. MA rKAMttKO OM h< vrc MTM cievrot or lootOA. ocoRt qaumc mmcmm m« OTKR urCRMi SIOCAM lC IOPSOA mo CAMMAR fAL M iOCAlOK OKCnO or C9»1AiCTaA • fUOCMOC CAC am UM i Smau 0( ■AC«r%iCO M«ciurct.v «nrA CKMWION 10 KlP orrott mif TAfc.»iv PAOOaiO OuC to ••HR «C*KC OA fICCA IkOAn «KN A.ACIMC K« WW«a MUKCHT *0 CUTAiC r*KK*t. *K C«OM«t«A «MAk K UurAkCO AAOwArkV to MOO vMOCAM mC or TK cnrwti am CK«i » COKAKtOA RMa m ACfAQNfOU fm HL tOMtONUl MO K«tCM COwTAOl f eowtAneiOA UAu. ciuiMit oammcc nvAoct ro rouOA aaoaokb STORM SKA auCAMUTt t CMOCS S>0<Mi MR r«KKO CAKCt COMtAKtQA %rnmx AO iC m CAtfll TO SuiCAaoC CiUA’Oi. a*K taut Kaor »0A ftuOM • AX crass MtftAAu mtsjumOkA Mttemc CQ ac ATC itCMS MM ■AMOOKD kfhUff iTtMt M« 0»mCA uHtlKU w«TtMA.t »MU MCOK t< AAQACATt or TK CONtRaCTOA MO >UU « 0«AOS0 Vf TK caniTAgctOA »rc t CO h AO^ V MR OAaOAC OACAMOK t(MU KSM.T « «u KCK KK GAAOCO to Pum VMCPMX COvAtOA Mr OAC A a O «ACK M arCAMKO or ACriAMO TO TK KOmCTUM^ OAMMCS TK MAcMC iO« M« OANCm* aRUA Smsu K OreAMAC O or KKA—C TO TK RM rUA MO AM<KAt KCTOA OCT a M fOA kflCAlOA MO UMtt OT OnAMOIt AMCKAT KCTOA* to ACrCA TO UTMA* rUA roA UtPftmr Sa CA IMA mKA mam KAKt UTOl/l MO CiOAAOK MO CKtMO MO STAUCTuAC ftCKOUU. IT. TK MAMAJR GAOCO tkOAf nOtf COS OT IKOa O SMMX K • «<KS M 10 rtcf It riKKre cAouAD MO too cooroA OMCto to OKOAie VMu. ac t* •UOM IXOOA CiXwfOA tiOK OAO ua O mm mom OUkOAe A MMMUM or •* M to rtn ««0N0 10 rcn KrtA to alm * oaoc * "J’v;i'w. S>4 ^o CROSION CO«lTRqt-U rchcc i ■ It C0MTAK10A 0 ACSAUlMll roA QAOMO MO SORMO TK A mSKO CAOmO MVKC TO AMMOC Smoot* a MKOA m OLOAC*. mkm mowoc AOSitK OMMKC mm MOm WmJOmet MO aac KK AO homo • wOKA MCA*. COMfaCT aACHfCCT # KiO MAItl«CAT* TO COOrC a ^mI «AC AIOUOCO lA. COATA a CTOA is AISAOASOa TOA COAfTAvcttOA AArCwCAfS MO CUO M.0 anco MtM wootM jmomt voacs mcm aaomoc aovtk . OA mm«C( COMtiCt MCMTCCT # r<k0 aOAntwC*tS MC KOtMCO IS. iAStA.t. • WWMUW or * MCKt C.XSS S ACCACUrC ra S «a 0CA C iRR ^ MO Cuttt* CROSION CONTROL NOTCS. I *U ACAMCTCA sat HKC AMO AOC m COMSTRiCTOA CNKM<tS ^MAu. tc AStAiao aaoa to comstrjcdoa . I KAVT OWTV KT aKC IMAU K UIC9 ALOK fK ACTlMO Ourn* 1 TK CO mTA i^toa |h %4 COM«r»t<T oam AMC Oa A mS AA«A T9 S>n CAAQ iAC « TK MATA a CTOA Smau CA a OC MO MfT^ ut«^Ci I TK COAtAKTOA UAa. iwitAU CATO* M*i CAO*«a COMOOk mCAS mKS 0 mr*m t«o ArcK or sm caoao . au oonooco «ack rou k,' V' U • •.!. / ^ IT S'A^MnO AifH UC9. *00 OA AOCA lAU \ V- ’ /•S'‘pf • HKISOi OOMTAa mC a Su ACS tHMk ■ mfHXt9 AAO MAMT am CO At AaOAOAMCt tAt*« OTt. A«0 A»ttAR<0 RStACt AlAMlTS 0| -J TK COATAtCTOA SMAkk MAMT4M AU (AOMi COTAOk mC a SUK*. MCkuOMC tK aCMOMk, or KfiAMAAttO KT m r«OMT or KT ^ ^, y, rcNas ouMc ik ouratoi or tk coastructoa . \‘V I *.« t. AMtr Crass KO a CAT m aaqaosco *«*«* « AtwOKO rTKCOAfAKTOR 1 lit* KKMiru CABSO i COMTAOk MCAMMCS MTCA KeTTAliOl I* L crMUPROi TK COMTAKTOA smau K mOK Kk SOkS MR SPKNT TUCKO OMtO iMSttAG routs A mO A jKS MtA*. ■kOone* OMtt KCOMtS A (MOa KK. tk COTA a CTOA SMAU MKT AAlUi rtOM A Tmai TA u OI to au COASTA u CTOA AAC a S •KtA a OmOmt ftotn At aocqaqmcc mta art KAMCK0T1. I______ NO. 146 IBROWN RD. US MO, 411^ 10?:: kallestr X d SEE LEPT ACREa«».= TKC CONHUCTOR SH*a contact au PU0UC UTOJTICS roR locations or au umocrcrouno «nics . cablcs . CO n Ou TTS. PIPCS MANMOLCS VALVCS OR OTNCR BVJRiCO STRUCTURCS BCrORC OiCCiMC Hi StWkLL R£PAIR OR RCPLACC Th C ABOVC RHCN OA au CCO OURINC construction at no cost to owncr . rtlOR!•r Mm Orr H oU ar :•f 1 lMl| nrttfjr ttoi ihli plOA am proftiK If m or Bo4or Rf *mA RiMr^Wii oM llRl 1 MB 1 U mssiO FtR osN imI •MRMSlIr 1 ^ 0 FOR CMTOi CMOCS UTTI a •HiMor MiR Ifeo Im of On lUM or R aamiu .Pam If -m Immu L oirif ^Ormm Hr INC ■■l/li/M, ■ . 8r . ii imi Schoeli Gi Madson, Inc. Iw^nRRrtnt • turoRyitii • MRisiilfso B oNT mU ri • glWtfOWlWRtRl •• TIM »«AI N»,M RO *^Tt ‘fTninii laOMiai rOlDMKBI-lMWDf WAYZATA DESIGN A DEVELOPMENT HIT MAROUtm AVI. t., MTI IBOB »OUR. MM •R40B MUI ••••14R1 SCAiX M rcn friiKl NRlIiAMtot CREEKSIDE In ORONO ORONO, MN (0- 4/31/04 *Trio 5------------PRELIMINARY QRADINO AND 5,8EROSION CONTROL PkAN SMI Projtct Moabtr. MOM-MI I : i Date Application Received: 4-21*04 Date Application Coniidcred ai Complete: 4-21-04 120-Day Review Period Expires: 8-20-04 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: June 9, 2004 Item No.: Department Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffion Title: Planning Director Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: «04-30l6 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-acrc min. 20 acres Total, 14 Acres +. Dry Buildablc List of Exhibits A - Notice of Plamiing Commission Action 5-21-04 B - Staff Sketch C - Draft PC Minutes 5-21-04 D - Memo and Exhibits of 5-14-04 Application 5i/mmary: This is a proposed 7-lot residential plat (PRD) ofproperty 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 Eeckhouts The proposal includes development of a private cul-dc-sac road accessing from Brown Road South. The property and those adjoining proertics along Brown Road are in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area . The proposal includes obtaining municipal water and sewer ftom the City of Long Lake. The site is wooded and contains an existing single fanv.ly residence. 'riiis property was the subject of extensive reviews by the Planning Coimnission 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. Tlic developer has indicated he is nearing an agreement with the owner of the access outlot (Mrs. Dunn) which connects this property to Drown Road. SiafThas not been provided with a copy of the agreement document as of this writing, although the developer indicates one of the tcmis is tliat the D'iiur propcity will be provided a sewer stub. The City Attorney advised that if the dcvelopej ultimately caimot meet the conditions imposed by the City for fmal plat approval, final plat approval will not be grantci #04-3016 Jun« 9,2004 Pite2 Please review the memo and exhibits ofMay 14, and die Planning Commission draft minutes of May 21. Planning 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 outlots. (***Scc staff discussion below***) 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. 6. Approval is subject to the standard Storm Water and Drainage Tmnk 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' Kailestad Acres easement with Mr. McCuskey, and / have been advised by Mr. V'an Eeckhout that an appeal wilt be filed regarding the latest ruling on the 40' easement). 8. Road to be 28' paved width, not 24 . i 9. Subject to recommendations of Cit> 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. r m W4-3016 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 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 outlet; 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 preserved 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 reg. rding 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 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 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 staff s 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. 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 ofopen spaces also reduces the likelihood 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. Tient over wetlands and creek, and iment over the defined conservation eptable to the City Attorney and City rm of an outlot; this is not the normal rms of being able to credit total area d areas would be greater if they were ^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 serve 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? ommended that no public dedication for lication Fee should be required. Park iccess trail to the Luce Line should be y rding the method of dedication of open the boundaries of the property, creating ership. This is how Orono has commonly vever, in PRD's such as Painter ’s Creek low View (2000, west of Willow Dnve ice have more typically been established its or covenants that provide permanent affect the individual homeowner and the ssociation may be perceived by individual accur, and such land is probably ‘policed ’ ly property ’, there is a reduced risk of an accessory buildings, fences, or other uses. )d 0 f nei ghborhood recreational use o f the cly monitored by the individual landowner, ■espass, whereas the common outlot gives rea to use’. Staff RecommeDdatton 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; except that the areas shown on the preliminary 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 preliminary plat drawing to be provided by the applicant. 2. Applicant shall submit for Council review and acceptance a draft “Conservation 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 casement 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 Flowage 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. ed as im outlot, per the sketch attached. J J ‘ 7. I #04-3016 June 9,2004 Pages 6.The portion of private road to be created on the property shall be within aplatted outlet as shown on the preliminary plat drawing. The portion of private road to be created within easements extending to 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, Kallcstad 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 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. 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 outlot 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. 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. r A CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE #04-3016 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 21, 2004 TO:Henry Lazniarz COPIES: Charles & Sue VanEeckhout Wayzata Design & Development 120 Brown Road South 1117 Marquette Ave. 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 Vote: 5 In Favor 2 Against Planning Commission recommended approval of tlie proposed subdivision, based on the following findings or subject to these recommended conditions: 1.Plamung 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 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. 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. 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 (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 V i Notice of Planning Commission 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 outlet as well as over the 40' casement 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 Ecckhout 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 MCVVD 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 easement or dedication to be in a format acceptable to the City Attorney and City Council. Summary of Minority Position: Mabusth - the ar eas 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 preserved 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 arc available from the City Recorder after review and approval by tlic Planning Commission. If you have questions, please contact Planning Director Mike Gaffron at 952-249-4600. ..i i “ —■ T 11 r - C2 MI^JUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY. MAY 17,2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. and. to recommend denial of « hardcover variance to reduce the existing i9.48»/. hardcover within the 75’. 250' zone to 28.31% where 25% Is normally aUowed and to ask the applicants to reconfigure the proposed driveway (or other hardcover) to meet the 25% hardcov er requirement. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nay 0. 14. M4-3016 HENRY LAZNlARZ OF WAYZATA DESIGN AND DEVXLOPMENT. 120 BROWN- ROAD SOUTH. SUBDIVISION, PUBLIC HEARING (10:29-11:02 p.m.) Oaffron presented the proposed 7-lot residential plat (PRJD) of property abutting the Luce Line Trail and Long Lake Creek. This property was the subject of extensive reviews by the Planning Corrarussion end 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 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 owners, the Van Ecckhouts, resulted m findings filed on May 5, 2004. City Attorney Tom Barrett reviewed the findings and concluded they indicate the existing access casement does nfiLprovidc suitable access meeting all regular City requirements for subdivision. However. Mr. Barrett suggests that the City proceed with review of the application lluough the preliminary plat approval stage. If the developer ultimately curaiot 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 build.ablc acres that are proposed to be subdivided into seven (7) lots. The seven home sites arc proposed to be clustered within an area roughly 300' by 500', on the high latoU in the westerly quadrant of the property. Gaffron indicated the proposed individual lot lines will go all the way to the property boundary and emphasized that no open space outlots arc proposed. This is not typical of what the Planning Commission h.is 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 arc different than when the area i8 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. Gaf&on advised the proposed PRD for residential purposes would be in conformity with the Comraimity Management Plan (CMP) as long as density standards are met, that is, a density at I unit per 2 acres. He 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 l.OS 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 of Orono’s I’acre zones. Gaffron observed that the proposed site layout and lot standards makes more sense than 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 refened to the MnDNR comments in E.xhibit H. supporting the conservation area and expressing reservations about i'.uividual 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 Plarmmg Commission and providing direction to staff and the applicant. Gaffron indicated that any recommendation fc approval should address the Issues for Consideration the staff recommendation, as found on Page S 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 BroNvn Road. The agreement has been submitted to the Dunn’s. Tom Goodrum, Schoell and Madson, planner for the applicant, c.xplaincd that in an effort to preserve the property physical amenities and to create a residential enclave with clustering the homes, the house pads are SO’ X 80’ and are expecting estate-style homes to built. Mr. Goodrum commented the layout features a massed relationship and does not now force additional homes next to fne two back to bac'x ‘nomes on the 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. 1 J Page 48 of 58 Cl MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY. MAY 17,2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. and, to recommend denial of a hardcover variance to reduce the existing 29.48% hardcover within the 75’- 230’ zone to 28.31*/o where 25% is normally allowed and to ask the applicants to reconfigure the proposed driveway (or other hardcover) to meet the 25% hardcover requirement. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nay 0. 14. #04-3016 HENRY LAZNIARZ OF WAYZATA DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT, 120 BROWN- ROAD SOUTH, SUBDIVISION, PUBLIC HEARING (10:29-11:02 p.m.) Gaffiron 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 Corrjnission 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 proposal includes a private 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 owners, the Van Eeckhouts, resulted in findings filed on May 5, 2004. City Attorney Tom Barrett reviewed the findings and concluded they indicate the existing access easement 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 are only 14 non-wetland, dry buildablc acres that are proposed to be subdivided into seven (7) loU. The seven home sites are proposed to be clustered within an area roughly 300’ by 500’, on the high knoll in the westerly quadrant of the property. Gaffron indicated the proposed individual lot lines will go all the way to the property boundary and emphasized that no open space outlets are proposed. This is 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 outlet, 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 Kcas owned in common is one that the Planning Conunission needs to determine. Gaffiron advised the proposed PRD for residential purposes would be in conformity with dw (Community Management Plan (CMP) as long as density standards are met, that is, a density at I unit per 2 acres. He 1 Pao^ A7 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 of Orono’s I’acre zones. Gaffron observed that the proposed site layout and lot standards makes more sense than prior submittals as it no longer proposes long, nan-ow 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 arc 7 Issues for Consideration to be addressed by the Plarming Commission and providing direction to staff and the applicant. Gaffron indicated that any recommendation fc approval should address the Issues for Consideration the staff recommendation, as found on Page S 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 Brown Road. The agreement has been submitted to the Dunn’s. Tom Goodrum, Schoell and Madson, planner for the applicant, c.xplaincd t’nat in an effort to preserve the property p’nysical amenities and to create a residential enclave with clustering the homes, the house pads arc 50’ X 80’ and are expecting estate-style homes to built. Mr. Goodrum commented the layout fcamres a massed relationship and docs not now force additional homes next to the two back to back homes on the south. He expressed the plat layout was redesigned to accommodate the neighborhood and the Planning Corrmission’s concerns from earlier meetings. Trees loss will occur but is focused into one area with the clustering of the home sites and arc looking to plant boulevard trees and providing perimiCter screening with trees looking both inwsird and outward. He indicated the 18% slopes though not very long provide a natural setting for wal’jcout style houses. Mr. Lazniarz added the road placement is proposed where the existing driveway is now to minimize site disruption. Page 48 of 5 8 iifiiiiMiitiii ' ^ i. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17,2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Mr. Coodrum concluded by stating the house will be custom-built and sensitive to the site, noting the grading plan shown probably is exceeding what will occur. Chair Mabusth asked for information about the f.nal slopes behind the house pads. Mr. Goodrum e.xplained there is a 6' drop over SO’ distance which is a 12% slope. Mr. Lazniarz assured the Planning Commission that even though the plans indicated house pads 50' x 80’ as a conservative example, he expects no actual house to be constructed to that size. Mr. Lazniarz added their intent is to maximize the space between homes. It was confirmed that only one principal structure with attached 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 confinned the PRD only proposes the extension of sewer and water from Long Lake. Chair Mabusth offered Mr. Bigelow a copy of the Staff Report, dated May 14, 2004, for more infomiation. Doug Coleman, 140 S. Brown Road, Kallestad Acres, asked for confirmation 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. Brovvn Road, Kallestad Acres, asked if the existing home would remain. She was told that the plans indicated the existing home would be kept on site. Mr. Lazniarz suted the sewer and water easement will he run down the easement with Dunn's and it will be provided sewer and water as part of the agreement. Mr. Coleman asked for more information about the removal of trees and final slopes at the knoll. Mr. Goodrum explainc'^. that from the Kallestad Acres property there is a 50’ setback and no grading is expected within 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 committed to 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 i ——— MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17,2004 6:00 o'clock p.m. Jim Dunn, speaking for Mary Dunn, remarked the agreement has not yet been reached as Mr. Lazniarz stated. It is under cot«ideration and not yet signed. Chair Mabusth asked for further public comments. Mrs. Coleman asked for further confirmation 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 the 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 PEUD 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, outlots owned by a homeowners association were created. Caffron concurred and explained that in standard subdivision plats usually individual lots were created with 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 versus individual lot ownership; Gaffron responded that with a homeowner's association managing an outlot there is greater recreations 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 may be problems with people trespassing from the Luce Line Trail into the subdivision area. She suggested the Parks Commission should look at the proposed plan prior to Planning Commissioa action to ascertain if they have an interest in a walkmg access to the creek and its existing bridge. Mr. Van Eeckhout inteijected that in the winter siders use die land but in die summer there are very few. Page SO ofS8 ; • ► ' • MINUTES OF THE ORONQ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. ICcinpf suggested the Fl&nning Cornmission focus on one issue et & time. He stated he liked the idee of s l&rge outlot used es e shared amenity managed by a homeowners association. Kempf noted the matter of pedestrian 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 e.xpcrience 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 o^ it and believed individual lots provided more control of the area. Rahn concurred that individual lot ownership is better than an outlot design. Chair Mabusth polled the Planning Commissioners; individual lot ownership received 5 supporters, outlot design received 2 supporters. Chair Mabusth c.xprcssed she supported the outlot design to have beucr controls and enforcement than individually owned lots. 3. What type of Luce Line access should be allowed (m terms of pathways, etc)? This issue was referred to the Parks Commission before the Planning Commission would raa'ice 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 in 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 duU the proposed layout looks more like a standard subdivision than a PRD. Page SI of 58 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. Bremer commented that clustering the houses creates a more environmentally design without huge lawns. Mr. Goodrum indicated that the 12 acres of conservation and dedication of the area between the creek and the Luce Line Trail are features that make it a PHD. Gaffron 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 but 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 in 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 descri*^ td as drainage/utility easement on each lot with a metes and bounds description and with monuments to mark the casement 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 casement and if these casements meet the open space requirement for subdivision. Mr. Lazniarz offered to provide casement language from the City of Minnetonka as an e.xamplc for review. Gaffron 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 explained 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, sxich 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. It was a consensus that no structures, no fencing, no tree houses, nc bridges, no storage, no logging or cutting of trees, no keeping of animals, no motor vehicles, no boats would be allowed in a proposed conservation easement. Ravft of S8 1 yiEETING e looked at as a standard subdivision remer commented that clustering the r. Goodrum indicated that the 12 acres uce Line Trail are features that make it a idards into the record, ipace but requires open space dedication perry unique characteristics. He stated ' but it in undoubtedly one of the most of the houses and its physical features conservation easements de» :ribed as 3tion and with monuments to mark the )c filed with the chain of title and the i^ithin the conservation easement. for drainage and utility casement and jquirement for subdivision. 'Minnetonka as an example for review. f.owage easements over wetlands and .ope or dry areas a and homeowner association on what is full range of what may be allowed or loval of dead brush, removal of fallen trees SQiM restricted access as a measure of pure . MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANKING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17,2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. ic bridges, no storage, no logging or cutting i be allowed in a proposed conservation Gaff.-on asked for a consensus on the lot sizes. It was a consensus that the proposed lot sizes were acceptable. 5. Docs Planning Commassion feel that slopes of greater than 18®/o 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. Lazniarz 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 McCusk^y, 130 Brown Road South, advised the McCuskey's property had a lO'road and utility easement over it in favor of the City. He questioned if tnis easement is proposed to be used for the private roadway. Chair Mabusth responded that an existing 40 ’ easement 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 easement is proposed to be used in combination with the 40 ’ casement. Mr. McCuskey asked if t’nc City Auomey concurred with using a public easement in co.mbination with a private road. Gaffron indicated staff will confer with 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 no -m,illy the City prefers roadways to be centered within the easement due to snow storages needs, etc. He summarized the question if the 10 public easement can be used by a priva.e developer for pnvatc road purposes and there needs to be resolution of the question. Gaffron introduced a concept whereby the portion of road from Brown Road to t'ne subject property becomes public road. He indicated more discussions are needed on this issue. Chair Mabusth asked to discuss the road ^v^dlh issue, stating that if frte 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. Page S3 of 58 J ______ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY. MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Ch&ir Mabuslh 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 comn. '.t 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 oc 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 tnerefore it was not necessary to go through the process of Parks Commission reNhew. Rahn commented that the access issue is not something needed to be determined but left to the individual lot owner to determine. Chair Mabusth responded that it is a matter of access control is an individual lot o^vner creates an infonnal path to the Luce Line Trail. It 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/dralnage 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 Mabustti 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 outlot area and all of the dry buildable area instead of individual lots 54 of 58 i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MAY 17, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Kempf sttted he agreed with the entire proposal except that if it were an outlet with neignborhood responsibility for the area he expected the neighborl jod would evolve differently from individually owned lots. 13. ##04-3017 SPRUCE HILL PROPERTIES, INC., 3775 BAYSIDE RO.AD, VARIANCES, PUBLIC HEAPING (11:42-11:50 p.m.) Dave Thorp, Spruce 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 rc-constructing the '/i 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 natu-e 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’side 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, conunented that the deck is essential to the property. Chair Mabusth pointed out the existing patioAanding 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 3.3% hardcover within the 0-75 zone when 0% U normally allowed and 3.9% currently exists (removal of 7.5’ x 2.5’ chimney shaft) and when added to the 75’-230’ 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 requi.-ed and 22’ currently exists. She commented thet this Is certainly a hardship lot. Chair Mabusth asked for public comment. There were none, Date Application Received: 4-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 4-21-04 120-Day Review Period Expires: 8-20-04 To:Chair Mabusth and Planning Commissioners Ron Moorsc, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Mike Gaffron, Planning Director May 14, 2004 vA #04-3016 Henry Lazniarz/Wayzata 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 Buildable 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 ’"cckhouts The proposal includes development of a private cul-dc-sac road accessing from Drown 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 Van Eeckhouts, have taken legal action to have their existing casement 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 access easement docs 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. Staff Recommendation: The nature of this property is such that a relatively small portion of the 20-acrc 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 d vclopmcnt as a PRD, in staff s opinion. Planning Commission is advised to make iccoiumendatioits 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: 1: 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 Schocll & 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-IB 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 ejects of urban congestion and m .notony, 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 pe^tted 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 subdivision regulations. L «04-3016 May 14. 3004 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 Planned 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. Property 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 westerly quadrant of the property. Setbacks from adjoining residential sites arc proposed at 30' and 50', consistent with the 2-acre zoning standards of the RR-IB Distr':!. 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-IB District. The developer ’s ability to achieve the densities and lot layouts proposed relies 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 are 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-acre 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, substancia ’ grading is proposed on steep slopes to create building pads which appear to be 35'-40' apart at the closest. If the 35'-40' sepa-ation is adhered to, drainage between the homes is less of an issue. A few general and some specific comments are offered here regarding the site layout; 1. 2. 3. 4. Based on the results of the Sketch Plan Review in March, the plan no longer shows a budding 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 allc-.vcd, “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. As noted above, the plan presented has been developed generally using the City's 1-acre 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 Cit> s goal of retaining open space areas. All 7 lots have substantial frontage on the proposed private road -ging from 4 J-50' for the cul-de-sac lots (typical of such lots) to more than 300' for L . Each lot has a width of 100'+ at the front setback line, to allow for homes that are wid"^ *ian they are 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. The proposed lots are 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 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 outlets owned by a homeowners association with easements granted to the City. «04-3016 May 14,2004 Pages How does this difference in preserved area ownership methv'ids affect the individual homeowner and the City? From staffs perspective, outlet land thai 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 ac tivities 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 Outlet owned by an association. Staff recommends the latter. 5. Road Layout and Standards The proposed private road corridor within 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 shouldbe 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' casement used by Van Eeckhoiit 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, ihc 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 financtal responsibility will assure that all private roads are designed and constmeted 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. J ;p methods affect the individual outlet land that is owned by an ‘off limits’ in terms of the various r by the neighbors as a group. d of neighborhood recreational uses s are moie likely monitored by the lal use as a trespass. :rved open space should be within ition. Staff recommends the latter. #04-301( 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. IS required by the Subdivision Code or this road would be 28', as it will jth; the proposed road width is 24’, hibit G, Tom Kellogg’s comments). :rship and maintenance, and subject anted to the City. c existing 40' easement used by Van mable whether this requirement can jtablished policy of obtaining, at the ain private roads used by multiple ortation Plan, CMP Part 4A, Rural ^ 6 states; ince levels and public access on all it subdivisions, the City will acquire sements over all private reads. These ill properties served by the private road. IS of financial responsibility will assure ccording to City approved standards and tat all private roads are maintained to iired maintenance agreements and/or nvate group to so maintain their private needed maintenance and to assess the lintenance.” 7. Road Improvements and/or Eas«'ments 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 Brewn 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' tasement, an additional 1 O' road casement exists along the north 1 O' of the plat of Kallestad Acres, granting the City “an easement for ingress, egress, access, read 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 tl«.L the easement portion of the private road be platted. As of this writing, however, it seems urilikely 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 (sec Exhibit G). The property will be subject to the Stormwater and Drainage Trtink Fee, established cuacntly at $2700 per acre for the 2-acrc zone, or $54,000 for this 20-acre site. #04-3016 May 14,2004 Page? 9. Utility Locations and Availability The property is proposed to be served by nuiiucipal 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 Flowage 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 i.*ee species. Orono does noc have a tree preservation ordinance other than within the 0-75’ lakeshore and creek setback zone, where clearcutting and removal of trees 6" or greater in diameter is prohibited. The developer has provided a Tree Preservation Plan (Sheet 3 of 8) which indicates the areas where tree removal will occur on the site. Tree 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 tep 4-6' of the knoll area and fill to create walkout- 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 of dry- 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 Baysidc 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. #04.3016 May 14,2004 Pages 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 Proximity 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 easements, be in an Outlot, or merely as an easement within each individual property? 3. 4. What type of Luce Line access should be allowed (in terms of pathways, etc.)? Docs Planning Commission accept the proposed lot sizes, configurations and setbacks? 5.Does Planning Commission feel that slopes of greater than 18% should be protected from land alteration for this development? If so, a very different layout might result... 6.Is Planning Commission comfortable with moving ahead with this re\ iew 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 above, 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 Commission makes other recommendations. 2. Approval is subject to the standard Storm Water Drainage and Trunk Fee. 3. Approval is subjctc 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 cortserv'ation/preservation easement over the defined conservation ateas. i 9 City of Orono Subdivision Application A-f street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Application # (o Date Received: 'ONV Main: 952-249-4600 fax: 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 This application form must be completed in full. Amount Paid: ^ "3~^zs ^ Staff: /frC A^J.rr\ Renewal: •— PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address; _ /2<0 Property Identification Number (PIN): ^Attach Ipnal ___»^ttach legal description to application if not induded on^he^u^ey ^ Zoning District: j? ^ :7 KS t ome). _------- Phone (work): s-^lr- /^c,f -------------------------------------------------------- Fax: Nam^e^^ FORMATION: (Complete l£gal names a^ marital stalus required for each interested party) . Phone (home): Address: f :in Email:Aci.J n,i. EXISTING LAND USE: Number of Tax Parcels: Development Size: Phone (wori<[! Fax: I I V • Acres Dry Land - (p_____Acres Wet Land 2X1_____Acres TOTAL, ail parcels Present Use (check one) Present Zoning District Residential; Number of Units: D Other: (Specify) ^-------------------- Proposal: □ Division for Tax Purposes Lot L'ne Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) ^ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites / Existing Units ___________ New Units ^ ^ ^ ■ ____________Total Units -°?rm Acres■"'irnum Lot Size posed Use (check) ' ■■■■ I i—— -- f- r ^wi Square Feet Dry Buildable Land 0^ Residential □ Other (specify) -10-#HO 1 fi r.'liMIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE 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 Department of• # ^ ------------- .................. IIW'I I ICIIMCIJIII V^UUl Finance. Government Center. A-603 300 South s"' Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910). g As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. MINIMUM MATERl'iL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if applicable). 2. Sigri id 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 (X] these which apply) » / A. Anniication Base Fees: 4i- V U _ Sketch Plan Review (Class I. II & III) $350.00 ^ ____ Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement $600 00 Subdivision Application (Class I & il) $600.00 TOTALS Preliminary Subdivision Application $750 00 $30 00/iot (Class III & all nen-residential) ___ Final Plat Application (Class III) $250.00 ___ Legal Review and Filing. Subdivision only $140 00 _ Subdivision wreasements and covenants; miriim.um $280 00 ♦ any additional costs f ark Fees (to be determined per Sect c.n 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 fool;_____lin. ft. x .50 = $ ____ Proposed Public Roads $950.00 ♦ $.50 per lineal foot;lin. ft. X .50 •“ $ Request for City to Accept Existing Private Road S950.00 Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $275.00 $25/stub Proposed Watermain Extension $275.00 + $25/stub Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $250.00 On-Site System. Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivslons) $60/per lot x__new lots C. Flexible Application Fees/Miscellaneous Fees ___ Variance $600.00 ____ Vacation o» Public Road $75 per benefiting property ($600 minimum per npplication) ____ Easement Vacation Associated with a Subuivision $100.00 ____ PRO Application with Subdivision $35.00 per dwelling unit application and further to pay all^dditior. ! fees established by ordinance. _______________________ Date:Applicant's Signature: Owner's Signature: Date Date: Applicant must have all submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission mee ing. 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 -ilace and to advise the City Planner assigned to your project of this change prio, -11-“I ft Sent oy; Eoma Bealty Perk West 0; •__ KOUCfl FOX 100 FAX Sent by; EOiiu* Aealry Park west 0; 04/20/04 e:a5PU;«83e;Page 3/7 PfiGE 01 04/20/04 3;59?M;/(8S9; ItCfUlOQ Xtr A' s S ^ Co this jiD3Jlci*i j i c ^ A*^3Officul-, Sitmtiue __ ~ -P * tin of any othe r^,^n, 1. application \. TiSlJ.Sjn*''*'*“P'«*rffoil-Kl2!“■“* P**'" '<’“PpliCtbl,), EaACfncotc, cdvcr.tAK. cic. Li^waisgi'r; ------------------------- '■ «=»«<!..PP.,) ---------SVej^ Plxn kev{c«p (CUc* J. U A lit) S375.00 ---------,'i^!'^*'“"®^^‘-"‘LineRMmna«ieijiSJ5C00 ■ -^PP^^^on (dim j 4^ £1) S400 00 — «'“•* •'■• --------. LeS*> P-evicM. *njJ nitne --------- Subdj vuton only $ IOO 00 —-------- „ Revurw Fees (i$ iocurrerf) mZ Rcnoo/aJ of cull “riflin»t opplic.dor,) B. Spcd.ItoTrotoo.'^*!"' Appj.e,!:oo $,50.00 ^R^s«ac»V$*sS!^ftr —‘" ‘ ‘ * Pro^iae Storm Stw., Sy,u:m (wclujing aulvcra' $J50 ca Oa.S,u Syram, Slo. Ev4tw«ioo RcvUwTan,,.^,. llA I), » .so » $ lin. 11 * .so** S ) .'»-jb ^ e . •«* * ...--------OCW lots C. rlf]T»6If AppU^Aftop Fptt/Misc. F««a ---------- Auocurri er.U SubdivWon^ io -------- PRO Appheedon w^t), Subdi^Kjjon S3S.00/Dw<-nuic Unit AppHeaBt'rStfn&ture _____.__«_______ •^tlonal fci Mt*i>i,»h«J by ^^'•oSca^s SigUAime XT'.rsssi?p‘?r?iir.tS“'45»^^ ---- ajwiCouncii. Ifa*> applUam u unrbia tolatod^KbV “*«4ul«d ,evkw maeLr!^ oWp-atTi.^vi^ ▼! er fw®e^ir«-i vp^.n • • r i NARRATIVE FOR CREEKSIDE IN ORONO (120 BROWN ROAD) At Wayzata Design and Development is interested in the development of the 20-acre parcel located at 120 Brown Road as a 7-lot Planned Residential Developineut. Tlie existing home will remain on the site. In review of the site’s naniral setting and surrounding amenities it was envisioned that an upper market single-family residential housing would be appropriate for the site. This isolated area provides a nice residential enclave that is surrounded by natural and recreational enjoyment. The project is designed to create a central neighborhood that wraps itself with vast open space and scenic views. This proposal was based on the direction received by the Orono Planning Commission on March 15, 2004. From the 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 12 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 and the dedication will maintain the scenic atmosphere along the trail. This area was designated as a premiere building site in all of the concept plans, but was offered 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. Howevei, having a large open space that separates this development from the homes to the north 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 as noise and headlights, to a central area. 5. Preserves large tracts of open space for wildlife habitats and eco-systems. - • 6. Provides efficient centralized municipal sewer and water service to the homes. This eliminates the need for septic systems near the environmentally sensitive wetland and creek. It also eliminates extending service lines to homes spread out throu^out the site. 7. Preservation of trees. "8:^ A. 50-fuul Sclbauk fiuiu llic west ^lUpuily luie uf Uiu~lwu luls bOLlh of ihb'ucw luaJ. Tlus 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 PRD, this development w'ill enhance the appearance for the entire area by preserving the natural open spaces instead of dotting the area with large homes. Allowing the homes to be clustered with the dedication of a conservation casement preserving the many amenities within the site, including wetlands, Long Lake Creek, trees, drainage ways, slopes, and natural corridors. As noted in the previous sketch plan report, it is staff’s opiraon that this site is a candidate as a PRD neighborhood. Site Design The lots range in size from l.OS acres to 2.04 acres including areas dedicated fer conservation easements. The development provides a 35-foot front setback a 10-foot side setback and a 30- foot rear setback. A setback of 50 feet was incorporated along the west side of Lots 1 and 2 to create a greater buffer from the existing homes. Even though there is a 26-foot setback from the wetland, the homes are expected to be placed on the knoU and setback much further than the required 26 feet. Although the homes will be custom built, the lots were designed to V C’ ^7* •••**. • C M accommodate a house pad of 80 feet bv 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 minimiae 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 I.ake 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 opportunities to creatively design a development that preserves its’ natural features and serenity between Long Lake, the wetland, the Luce Line Trail and surrounding homes. A cluster development provides a nice transition between the small lot single-family 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 allows the development to appropriately place new homes to blend nicely with the existing homes to the west. Pue greatest benefit of the project, as acknowledged by the city and Wa>”zata Design and Development, is the dedication of the large tract of up-land along the Luce Lme Trail. This area is a very nicely wooded area with natural 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 natural amefiities. ■ ■w. I, ! * "* * * r.*' '.V mm / V\ I3SS' mm m y®^l( 'O* 4 : *Jf . i IR Otn«1tt «oc■>f V.|0»Ai Offftoiftr#KC K*>".Uvk,i CofUl LI Ofn«tt«L4«C It lO Ovncltt LOCWtlCm**M • 'Awl Mf* C«n«l««l«w«0 R*<tt 0 0*k Ri Ovf^iti •r ^0 0**^itt Rop«or *0 R v««hia Oi^ Sm Si»««r y<pn ••»sl OVMCIM i»rwC« TO 0«*«oiM Tr«« 0«C*««M m« 1 TC T't# «*•W«(«twl t« CKfttnvt «i «T4to« •tO»t tfvtl T««C ttc«r< lift me •! trunks 01 IMOt I MOt irso) Wit Mnottt ti l Mmoior in Ittt. Oonotot tnrut Oonotot IrOO Un# C*«sstnui K • I (TO K OCMOttCO) lA OtnottS Ironwaotf Ai Oonoiot Arnipor KC OtnoitS NtniuCky C«tftf U OtnoiM to OsnoiOS tOCwSt M Oonettt Moot Otnoift Mw90 ^»nt 0 Oonoits Ook Otnoiot PO Otnoitt *OOi«r HO Oonotos HukOton Onw« Sw Oonoits S^tr ysotf |H Oknoits Ipruct to Os*«otkt T#t« 0kc4«iOus TC Oo«»0iss Troo C^or^'ssn VA OonotSI »Oi«S«l tM Oonottt «J)Ou S££^ R ight ” i" >'• ' /; < •• ...• I*' KALLES —~--l3 ir.. o,7.t 2 L*3 '^•‘ S ^g<r<§ O * CHaSiON tQis^QW rtKCC \m y CHOStO^ COMTROt apple 'QLEN.gooSop' ttj it ,9 i -fj 'Oo ^ \Mue ^ecs CHCStON CONTOOt rt^ct IkOSOy dOwT^Ot y' ' r * ■ 0. 146 IBROWN RD. ts-% a -X O :/^ o y — RLS No.j 1022.il ------------ ,_V^ -X^K\ V . .’k - . . •' . - f". ESTRAD ACRES Schoeil & Madsen, Inc. _ Enotnoorlng • Bufvaytng • Pionnlng ioi 'TtaUns • SnvIroiwtHifltAl 6arvic«« P«BA«t > to t<i»Tioi_« tsp tm> kg-fPM b DS r «BA l>Od Ikwc Mr iuu no Efe Ow UtvwMls M39O-M0I U»«l-»sr{tm kkWi WAYZATA DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT ttt7 MARQJeTTt AVC. tUtTf tSOi MiliNtAROttO. yy StOOS tetti ••■•<uoi CREEK8IOE In ORONO ORONO. MN TREE PRESERVATION PLAN SMI frsjtd Roabtr SsOM-OCl J) a CUOMC M » C<»tMCtOI ••WIU 0*< Wii' ^ •0»»^ to racM«M<«/ co«*«nM;iOii ro« wiv»» w0CAr«»r| • or»«m m^NC - - OCIIOTTS MO»OSCO COiXTOUH — OCMOrct touMOAiir LMC - - OC»«OT(t 0«IMN*CC/Uliw<Tt USC mC mT ----- OCMOTtS CUSTIWC s?0«ii SCWC» — ocNOfti Nio^oiCd ««<• DD OCNOni CiOliON COHf«(H. rfwCC Si OCMOrtS MOPOKO «OC« COHSTtuCriON tNT^MCC OCMO^Ci »f«CCMt Of C«40€ DCNOTCS ONCCVOM or 0««IM«CC fiOW KNOTCS 9WOSC3 CUvATtON KNOrcs CIUTWC iutiOiMC OCNOro Mm»C0 •ua .OimC oc*«rcs Mio^ouo cnsruie ru H nqtci «»«OWCO rc»/rt% •r.fH •iAA a A 0C«I0T$ CtlSTINC StO«M IMNNOlC/Ct oc«ioTci Mo^osco roiiM MANMO\.CAt OC«ftl CttSTilC ifTvIMIMQ^ OCHOTfl cnstwc CONCncn SEt RtGHT .T~ 1 1%'?a?o r \ I*! ^aoooMoooo^ SU«MOUNfA0cC CONC o4'i3r-OQ • r C»OVO« C0*<T«01.1 nnzt . / r -k L-ri; f'C-A*. tJfhiOMHffBit zone 'M 41 cunen CWOfiON COi»t«Oi otc* «?fO 0* tou»r«ci »*«kiI, c»>««^to4 »*«ki ^<fc* «mc wee**«*« fio**t«>«f 90 me n^ccnAPmc ••o* »o **^^®L*^ c««omc coirttuetw VMu ••moiwa^ »o*^ »■€ »«a«c» c>cwa« y m* 9f%CM9mOt% 04 wAtfOMf I Wfafu c|««*o t«Mu eo»w or «U MA o» t«i OTI *». or *ono4. 0Cf*t. 054^ «AC o»-c* itoc«4«^ 4*0 co**w« r*^ *» toc4noN»|»i«&nB *t co*tt«<roA. 4, M0U8C **)A4 ft ••CArKtn trtf iVir -•» r*pwrr MooiCMt owe »o ••jw •«•*« o« rtr» KMI •»<» 9\Mmc •€• IUir«ct to iDStMC «MwCMV TmC ttCMTAtOM CMia tC ft*Ci9tufO MOM^ir TO MOO or fH C»rHC »4NtM(Wt r c»<tA*CTo4 VMU OC 4M4B«if<a ro« mx -OOitOwtaa «mO t«rOi COHftQC • c >*o«cto 4 ••we^ oo4*i*ct r«c»to<ei <0 rotto* Mo»otco riOMH m4c « T. 0M0C1 - mt rwMt-o e«wioc» co-*vrr>* •*•44 •owo* cm «oc »o tMtoi ttwi «»«cn ro« kooabc 1 4.V CttCfJw4tl»*i QtfWWWUKrt $t^«C»C cowcont J’twf 4**V I gIIgo If j vtt«>rr «ic«t mo Ot><« «4*r40i.C *MttaMkS Wo. MCM tMf MOAWnr or Twc COM*TUCtOO M<0 tMU K MMOCO orr coKftouC^on »<»C or «TC au09< orf«»ro«f Om*ix aCKAt • hx «ac«» M«C OuOfiUteC IUV4IO* tuAO-X r^O MUI P^K K ancawMCl aert—t* to tmC »umc% t»< a«a«»e««ca »u^ ac omaM«<o aert...^ to 1^ %m uct«M roo i0CAf>0» •*>0 k**t| or Qtimwoui rMfwiMf HCtotf «0 acre* n UtIM* M rut war •I 10 rci ^>tv PUM roa uit0tm icaCO ««* «»tta imm ua«tcc m«MiOMt «hO C«tt>MC «rO fl^CT«M UXDtAC ea«flie uoac rao« coct or oiraM i«*«u « f a<-u ^ MiO 100 cap*T«a tCjtam to pmx iC * . CiCMT.0H waac eaowNO •••• roo* o>*.»ac • ^ rcr octo« <0 risf ac/ca re auM ca«eci \ X:;r • ^ // rc»rct ' •’ v> . II ta^ote^Jk ^ atiao«i4«4l roa oapoae *-o oiorucM r<r»co „ cjM^tO tVaf<cc TO paoaoi i*<0Ct*» a waaoa** iicatl poVTipC oC^-fT MMP r«o»» Oua OmCI *a0 rac^pr pq»o«< « ^0^* MUt cJwTKt i«C'«*CCt r »<tO aClwVMtwri to CAafraC a OC atouMKO i« eo<i*AiC'o4 -» aiirowtoif »<>■ ct»»%»aixt^ mc mm ImOO'M lAP^OPP WOPtI *«C" PaO«0| PC*tP^ giMitmU TCO«t^T «Ae«i|Cr P »4w0 «CJV«»*<Pit -PC aco^A »|. •**< tM) ewTt( C^^OSON c In TOOI WOTCS: .-I. ...,•COOVOa C3*4TtOc rC«<CI » —■ aicottf’Tiucr ti CO av C l ontwTwpp OftCiMAi^ SCCTiOt •oca C0a%T«uCTC!«] faToaNCt XX ^ '’VT^ la u» ri<f «M0 aocp camvrnx^ twTaMCfl Muuia *aoa fo copitpiictop. ton vwu. coaraocr oaaata oatpil *a«a to •»€ :toa umx GIUOC Ont p«0 k/iv<T<l tga pou P4TPU. cprpt eoa caowa coara«. Lfc«i or yit oa«oae pu osruaou pac*i oc |«»ta ufo toe oa aocM optc '•Wj IMMiOi ) , CO mTOOw wC a WICI PMU. IC Pit««ikC0 «« a wmanwCI «pr»i pr* Mi3 »*tiPVC0 OiirocT tea pau HPa*r«ia «u Ca^tOi CO»«aOi. K*4wa<t U ^ 5*00 Tu*a '■■ ^ V.!; I S:-3 Ip ^ .a. ppto.»- ^ ibrowtTrd \ 146 ! pj - ^ uja'li.------------go I % '' 1%.' '1 r./ r ** ’ ■ . ViZ^ ^ «.y *4 «,rn .**'2^ f**H- «^vaa MPM Ap»ap p^M»> ■ HI J --------------------•* ■^ --------------------------------- '^N ' ^ ' ''^' k ALLSSTR^D A r**::. irc: ^ i.*. - .'^WARNING tkC CO w'Ract OO S«au , contact au OyfLC UTJW'^I roo LOCATIONS or au UNOCICAO un O anocs. CAStCS iiOtip 9 * 6a49M0«ri .f ^ •V* ! __terj STAUCTunts BCTOtt orcCNC mC Shall «1Pa # OA Ai»l>C( TmC AAOwt wmC n 0AL4ICC0 OUAMC construction at »i0 COST TO QNNCA f££T if 9m IwnirtiaAi tr I OifOH oorlMl U ni 10(1 elu tM Ntfarai I9 aa v mOn mt tern imotnmm aao lAaii a* 4 Unaaai rtNoMMul Ugiaaaf aaiv lit taat ar tea $uu a« UMawta (Mf"------------- IMS i/lt/ll III HA Al*l 0iari4 If ' ►ap. H oaatailt Schoell & MaHson. Inc '—— ■ CnnlnaiorlN^ • Surwy4nR • PlAn^Ing SoA Tpollrig a tf«vlr<mm«filpl Baralcao ) BMP Nyt^ SoJeia rA OSo I «i TTom aroei fia ItA« CO 4VXX>^ WAY2ATA DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT im MAAOUITTB A VC. 1^ AOTrt tlOf OatNNCAAOLiO. MN 88401 Iflli 888-1481 ■BOBsaBap CREEKSIDE In ORONO ORONO. MN ____ PRELIMINARY GRADINQ AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN 8 Sit fre^cl Atnolor: AaOM-OOl 1 3 y OMTtt CX*StwiC CQNTOmi OCtiOTfl PWOPOfCO COtHQUIl ■■■ ' tOUNOAirr UNt OC mOTCS 0«AtMACC/UT\rTV CAStMCNT .«--------------- KMOTCS CKISTWIC STOWM tCwCM •«--------------- OCNOtCS ^WOSCO STO«M KWCA }Qaooooo ocNorrs maom coNmot ut rcucc OTNOTCt Momco »OC« CMTH u CTO n CNTtt .JJBL OCMOTtS PCKCMt or CfUOC ociiOTCT omccT«M or oitoNACC now OCMOrn #«OmC9 S^OT CuCVATOfi ocmotcs CS4TIMC imcOMc Kwcs pwfnto iuiLOMC OCNOYCS PAO^OSCO CWMG res OCKIOTW PAOPOKO rei/rct wU h wipiup OCMOrtl CxiftMC ITOC m immmOlC/CA XkiOTCS paOPOMO STOA h lawHOLt/CB OCMOTCS CXiSTMC bituminous KMQTti UiSTlNC COMCACTC scrcp TO «AC>^ OmCPfiOMt cdwi micT / V. MOP TO CUSTWC UTtUT OSCPCPMCV PCPOPTCO TO roM. tmc comtmctqp iM«a rcio vcp #v mx LOCATONI AND wi^PTS. tMOM OP MOT SmOmm. dr>a€tM PIANI MO riCiO comopons Wa K OMWCP IMCOltfCtT t / \ / •<u / \ // •- IMIC uflurr or tmc OUPOI coNMCCToirs Hx utciry «oi or OPONO SP r PATCPMPN ' PCOUACMCMTS S>MU 1C CLASS CIIO/A2I.IO PaCCP Aft Mi compi ^imc •m« SMCiC osc MAM CSOf SHAU. if P NX VMXPMMI t ACCOPOMCt COProPMMC SCPWCL. tmc rius*€0 « < ImC i-PMCfOTi eOiTPPCTOP 1C »OPC COMTOOPNC TO TK or rnitfmm Ctsi/Aii^i mo cio «/a]i.« httmcs 2SO CONfOPMvC TO TMC AIOIMC mC mti or Mfi/MNw MV/MAM ClSV*|t^3 WtOPANrs Smau BC Tmc ACTuPtO fr PATtPOuf CO. OP MPP(M0 CO u AL tmc T»< orr or opono . cats Mi«cs smnx bc I «AfTM PCKCNT SCAT MCCT mC TK PCO vMC mCMTS Of L Ptucs. TICS. KNOS AMO OTICP TMU vST Powri ICO MTM cohcpctc PCACTOP ooonc OP MCCA luc SMAU K WfTAUCO MTM A MMMUM QT TJ' COWfP MTM MWA CftOe AMO COHOUCTiMtT PPOWWM PNSi/AMM CII1/A2I II. ICrOPC KMC PlACCO M OMPtnCD MArtPMbM SMAU K 90MTCTCD MO :opdaa»c £ pm« mm cisi mo t< tco««PCiici>Ts or OCPAPtl^MT or MCAiTM \ \ \/ -\ I! <3 \ P^MfSOJ IpfatABA} f ft* 0» M*«A a*mmssi a IMM.fJO }l . ft'.r itt 1022 / >•* cv 4 Mro B* 9i \ \ COMMCcr m CPtSTMCftHck wu OiPCCTtONAL BOAC — ft* cv 4 ft* PluC i KALLES T-WPCCTIOMAt v^i* HOPc PM X 0 VTP.ITV \kPPlE GLEN ROAD COAC OAIU MTO XfSTtNG MH >NV*S34 It AM- I —— PM.9ABB filStiMC v.ri station \ \ I A vv: f:r 4 4' • i.... D. NO. 140 (BROWN RD MV«tAA 19 MH-2 AlM-t«ft A iNVMfSA «2w* ia ; \ \ POND NWV.fJ7 5 C^CM|9ft 0 x^ \ \ X \ \ 1 V. CO maC^tiom to P*SPCC5T*O m ftr "1 \ Zh “Bv'd I If JnrA* \ft* 0»P, PM mm-2 PtA'»f AA 9 MVMf3S92 A A s o MH.4 Pimm9S2§ . »Nv-93ft2i -----------vN • -•“O Pty«9S2 '. f~“ I <nv .9a:j7 M^I-5 l,VAl 3S .•Sj. S *« ’mn -9 L/ i^.SftO 3 ^•sfsocr* / NOTES: :crs »Ti PVAM rop kOCATIOMS. SNAU. ICPPT Th C kOCATOvS AMO CUVAT«MS P<PC tVfTCM PfPOP TO CONfTPuCTwe ftCPMCC SmAU K PCPTOPMCO •• ACCQPOAACC mTm TK CiTY PCATlOHS AMT iUCOMC PCPMTT KQua«AltNTS. SaatTaPt K pc 4 shau K ft* AMO ft* PIC-SOP*3ft tPAXSS motiO opTCPCPTvr. MAfpAOOs fNAix K Aft* (Miiznn ppccAT pcwro»ao CO n CPCTK in . CCOPO amCC «mTm aSTm C ato. CAStiMC SHNt K NCCNM P*tft< I PITN TYPC *B* COKP. IIMPCUS fM^X HAWC A Tl 0 AAp) A WAnMUM QT fOuP i«X|fTliCMT PMCS. HJL PPf CPSTPC UTxmr STPUCfUPCS ««ak4. « *40P-M- A^PPOIPD COUAL. rOP CO aOCTC IIOCR OP PPCP I 9NSTPUCT M OPfMNC CCUAi 10 IK PPC »2C. CPOUT ^ ^ •*••• fT4#C?UPC TO OTt TK CO mTPaCTOP fH«u KPPT Ttpc or comkctiom CCPPC OCP aPTaiC mT aa« COOPaNATC amt PCO aMCO OTt M toco roR OTV ac CCPT ah CC. mu, BC PCMTOPaa eowCPTC ppc op apppoko couAi catca basmas ftMAu K •kcast AOKaPcco c»cprc C aSTimC maul bc mCC aam A. JJM i v<rM cuMB PO« 0« ammio^o COUAi manm us ftMAU K rouP n OmmC tcp pkcast RttaraicCD coMCPCit N < CCOPOAMCC pn*« attm cats , castpc wkl k KtMAM P-17: 3. MAMOXS SMAil. NAK a MMMUM OT 9 AMO A or na Ojvstknt piHcs TPC mC h ^ V .. K CO i^aCTCO to tss STamQaPO PPOCTOP OPT ICNS it (AST m OMAt 9s OP AAV<TO l-ttl MQM fK NMC otThi i Tmkc rcr or r*«c CPOUMO Su VaCC amO loep •po^tqp m TK uPPCP T»«pic ren TK CBSTIMC SAMllAPT KKP AMO MMTtP 4C0UPCS TK C*Tt or OPONO k C aSTmCS to maTC m fMAL CPAOCf Sm U.L OOmtact ’OO^CP mtaIC ok C all' two PPOM to IKAVArCN/CONSTiwCTCM rOP unuTT T AM c>*iCS KTPO aPC a. ftS'-AfA.ocMn OP TOu-racc KwO AOAlST CONTP aCIOA wOA an O Oats kOCAt)0»iS I-BOO-^2- eOATAACTOP s4*.l. *^TCT TK C tTT or OPONO 4f MQUPS IN A»*AMCC or VOMfC M tH»M TK PO«T or MAT OTT NSPCCTOPS MUST OPtCPK MX I lOM CO mA lCTCO On TOmm CC aipC QPn C vaCU iIMC " r»STiMC pruMMOus PaK mOiT. C aC ataToh Or TPC nc KS WaTCP mam AK SAMrtAPT SCKP OTA.ITT CO n KCTCK (>Ct. B aca /almc ak) PuetKAt or pruiMiOuS / PlMOTAi or I PLAaKNf, or TO f*ilt PaK wCNT [Nf. or T«4 LI •*.ft* TCC •950 3 i9A0 42 •ft* (?r 4 M>t) ~1- at / 13.' CO nt PaCT oP I.NfCtfSAAT < OCVCCS ».tAA>AiN Tf«t. OK ! CNMC SMAU CONTOPM TQ TK MMUTCQ MCLUONC fCU} T AlPQPAPT TPArre CONtPQL fOK LATOL/TS. MMUAM — J CKN root MMIMUU woTn um C I* C aC m onCCTOt ;^Shax K pp^ -iOCD at au tmc S. 14 Me CVSTMC B NiTn ma/OOT 15 COkt«ACto« M «KP. VATCR OCPANtKTT. uima Ou S PavCK mT IWAU K SamC i/I m KCOMD amCC PtoriCAfo*S K pCS pon SiBlC roN ostaaaac IK ammpqpau tc |AK> PUMMNC KPAATt roow tK CiTt % BunOMO Vv tft CCKPAi coni COMPAMCS ITP CTOP Wa COOPO^t£ \ cv 4 Al * .:^^s NO.; 1022 KALLESTRAD \ ACRES y. \ teKr AMi^ BK UK piM TM pripMi If •• AT Mi» 4T 4n 4 ItpmM Mi UK I Mi • VMamH NllMiPitl ftAflAM Miw liA t»«t aT Uw IMU W liAAtMte. ife si ------- IMP im/it_____i« 14 WARNING tmc CO n T^ACTOB Shau C ontact au pu BUC UTitiTiCS rop kOCAnoNS or au unocpcpouno mpcs . cablcs . CO^TS. p#cs. maaih OlCS. valves. OP otmcp Bumco STPuctuPU BCroPC OtOCMC K Small iCPAit. qp MSTAU. ATSPCCt. WAMlAM AMO KwOK tK ACC roA ca K C vOSu ACS ikx TPATre CONfNOt «PM AU WTUTT IBO SCA lC rccT Schoell & Madson, Inc. ■n K w—rtwt • SurvwylrHi • ^UiAnln« r SoBlBBlIm • CnvironmBnlBl BurvlcPB ■MTTWP IB aaI NV 4A a oo BIP m. IBwimA SiaXHAOB lAA isia sapkom 1 HENRY LAZNIARZ rit7 MAPQUBTTl 4Vf. 1., *VJ|T1 tfOt MMMBAPOUS. MN BB409 IPitl ftBP-IABI rKAd mmaA jaopMit CREEKSlOE in ORONO ORONO, MN 4/tV04 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN au IrajM Murnktr *40M-Mi Wt*C MCS*« (lA-l/r MIM CA} •riwtc* Ml NT) uneigrytictt tote EROSION CONTROL FENCE c^sirufr^s-io... CO<C*cCO »«LCt v*.i*lt.C Tn IC kh CSS iDJUSTtwC .In CS M tCOUitCO .MINIMUM •* iOju ITmC n T MkllliNiM If ABJUtTMCH? wtC U*<lwC* «CJUt.MC*»r NINGt .0 MINIMIK MUMiCt ^ iCfftAt INCV.WOC m;n or i-f n C IMHrei^tk* um XI TmC CAtrtHC WKtf VAtCI MAT t.«Nf. ^9 Of mm tMAcw K I f'CCT AlOvC C*O.A»f. M»0/0« t f^CCt AlOvC K IM tCM StOKM W*V£B lC vU. ON mmmxcs r ICC* M. c*c**c« A On C rw* rout in C m tf«*i MCCAit SCCriQN SMA4.L K rvNCCB iMMCOIAtCWV lUOV CONC UenON X Alt xtNTs icwccM sccnoHS imaci MAVC iUlK. GASUtS C NtNlMI^ llAl .MlCANtSS 4* roo 14' OCAT h INCtCASC TmiC in CSS I* fOtTACH «• or OCr»M GKAfCt T»^ 14* AMO tClMfOICC WlfM .*■«* I0/|I mCS m sccnoN i-i STANDARD MANHOLC n 0* *A0. >/v *'*’■w /" ■flrci B6I9 i/ir -L--- 'V "Cj7( I SURMOUNTABLE uorti/i’ «• rr Ifv 1,. —.^■40 3 ‘—4 NO»C Uil Cut. TO K VSCO AT tAOluS sec :itf Rt*TC *« Stit-9 I i'W' I WAllAft^■H»—\ /-+?> •Ati Cl^ANttfOi XtMT iiotm s:ksi Z\jP.d C ut 0£TAfL CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER *wt0OAriM0Ct* ma TIOmac Stamda OO OrCtAtiHC «t r 4.1/r otA^ct cONACcnow r*iMAT10MAi. ttAMOAlB TmOC a O CARS TO 1C CMIMCO irCMtACOM NUT On CAAti 2-l/r Kne COMCCTION IMATIONAC tTAAiOAtl TMtC*8l -r-0* WATCWu: <W|-67-29C> WITM tlAl^rtt ttfCL fOLlt mu C llC tt centurion (A.42:) WttM ttAIMLfH f?gCL SatTl I Culic taro CR av C^ or ClwKI AOC< WITH I tATC* 'or 4 Mic »ot« 11/3 or NATCIlAt KtOV MtaRANT) vcocc Tfn C9UAC ICC iTMtMo n.4«c w-< rot •WIOVCD ’»»« Of C*'C V44VC (Oil lIM-tMI-CDA CO<»CtC r.ATjr vAt yfi HOCA vOftlSTiOIBCS I CATC VALVtl ARC ICXTtCt W|TM AU. NtORAMU t riRC MTitAMtl gMAtl K aa ImTCO TCit^ At T< rACTQtT 1 mr or rite hvr Iam T KSICM C iC va T|9« Snau . K ts ABOwf flMtfoCp M4AfwARB CRAOt- C r.«Uit iLKKtNC NAV ACSfi 1C ItOUltCI »N CU.-K-SACS 1 HJL KUTt NO.UOMC T-|QlTS fMAit K STAiMlCSt STCU. STANDARD HYDRANT AND VALVE 7A-»0* r,r fURuOUNTAtiC CURS ii CUTTCR ir .3* /^10% 1 1 1 U:—‘----------H-r i--------------------.r «* TORSOR. SECO OR SOO I 1/2* - 2>AI Courts 2* - 2231 mtf CsM^ta •* . Dtss 2 AOfrffOSIt TOOTS C^ulNs. •* - Dsst S AORragOTt i«»t Ca^teisR SmAr/sm TYPICAL SECTION fh=t= MOTCt .4*I3A* StAl QRCNING rot ictNAM • -30ST CAStlNC. OS COUAl. WITm Bt. D« OR T^n V CI a TC 0»*<« ROfCNTlAti» a CCCAT a ILC C a .C m B a |:n CASfiMCS Ka C n OIn C i^On t< CltCR*STAACCI AMO tUiXCf TO CIT* aaanowa ,. n CC nam 0..9AI.A KC mIvC CR a TC l C a STin C n CC mam S-.ST3 COMCAVC CRATC A CAffiM* NCCNAM 2577 CONVCI MATC i CAiriNC KC nam R 3220<I CRATC i C a ST|< NCCNAM «-43«t w/ CONCKTC rSAMC oimcnsion r«OM iacn or cmi fO ccmtcr or AiAC 4 i:a NM-f IM riOM B aca QT CiUf s IIA MJC-S* BC mimB saca or Ci^t • DIA. HM-l)* BC min O B a CR or OAI rvA.1 ICI or iCRT a R ICT vCCR am . a 4* COLLAR ON r< OursiK or t< rimCS SliTViS •* -^nwm ICR ■ImC amv 0'<R r RKl IR.DCR K LAlia« Size RINGS RRCCAtT RCI n TORCC CO n CRCTC SLa S amn CR or similar Ga Ia CT T?ac NATCIlAt TO 1C R lACCO KTVCCN ItAl AMI TOR or HA«A«LC UCI;3H Att JOTNTJ in N ANICLC to MAVC RufKR Ga Sn CTI RRCC a ST CO n CRCTC maw C lC SCCTIO n mai KIlC STCRS NCCNAM tinu RLASTIC COATCD OR AlRtOvCI COUAt. i4* OO use RtCCAll SCCTlONt VKn C vCR ROISIB lC use min 4* BlAXTtI NAIR<JtC tfCT|»S rOR RtRC sizes 9 tQ 34* OlAMCtct IOGpC u SCI small K CROUTCB » lOtN T< OUTSIK AN8 INIIOC MIN SLAB Tni CKSS I* rOR |4- BCRT mi iNCRCASC TMtociCSS r roi cacm • or KRT m CRC atc R Tmam |4' am B RCItRORCC WITm 4*14*. 14/18 ICSM. BOrT»i TO i/f BIN or PiPt. STANDARD STORM SEWER MANHOLE_ _ _ _ _ vMf 7 1444 T4n fUa w pn| MptnNMA AM liil I MR 4 Hw til IMS R Tia Asm If If M w sa.tr cum------ I WAYZATA DESIGN A DEVELOPMENT ntT MAnourm av «. b ., bwtb bbos MNMCABOUB, MN tS«Bl •Sill BBB>14B1 120 BROWN ROAD ORONO. MN 4/21/04 TYPICAL DKTAIL8 Ml nt|tei Rumtar. 1 im m•>, I z i y f I 1 IIMA# *tOUNO tiKt AMD ovcB t(F or rxj VIC LAST } JOlM^I DM INLCT AMO OutuCV. A»»OM It Utct VIC v< CAIT J ICCV|»«tor Pin OA lorH iMLCvt amo oututs . use fIMJVAU _ or Pin. use s/r TIC rop pipc tiict ir to «v , use 3^A* TIC roil Pin fItCI 90* VO 00*. wic I* tic rop PIPC sizes ovcp tr. N»V0VC«I CCO^rvivC rA|oic PtOuiPCI UHOCi iiPOAP HMVt ami VAfKPl APC N)V PCOuitCB OmPin size tcss vmam fi*. *^i PvACti PiPtAp I rooi occp V*<ltc uses rop Cm;m>imC ti*om ouA«it viwi. K ocoutno om to* o« lAPCCI PIPC IM PVACC or VP aS m CuaPOS C*<PCV OlStiPATQil IMM/I0r SVAMlAPI ttrr nr *tpr ia*c Vt Tf •< . It* 3/A*5/r 9/«* A* ft*to •f* I*A*«l*VO ff l-l/A*l*tf ppovioc ) cuipf fo rAfvcM tPAtM coAti TO res. >P)V II* Cacvamiic apvcp r*Mlc*viOn FLARED END SECTION A TRASH GUARD IJ* Vi'A^i^SiSrirPci-, PIP# HINIHUH PIPPA* ACOUIPCO •owovcN ccovcsvitc rAinc^ section B-B OiA. or 1 Pin fiN)L. crv.)OUAMVITT tCv)Class Pi i 5 ii_4—i 1 II LI®to •M 1- !!If I IIr ^|A Iff IIr ifc IS lA 1 III i4 ■" n tv Ai ft K IV >A|M*A|IV «vc. IX CuPlC taao is aPPPO ahuTClt M T0*1.'1 PLAN r tif’H- II* »i»t» IS- Of MO lMCC* f|»C> ,S££jn2N_A^^ '■hO.wOv Ci CCO'Cl’IkC f»l«ie RIPRAP AT OUTLETS fo%iVW'*?o.'?IT5!t5f:f? ’»* <■» X ItATlONAPT too IS PC0U1PC9 rot ALL ClPI| tVQPt. r t ^oisUk,B-9AI«-u•AlCtuCP-PTIPI rOAI-TTPC Pc vapuil C cue plam •m pla < WMO PQITI rtf OR A*I«* ON MCf*4. POST A* AlOVC CPOlpva Cups stop a»o •OS — 1 C___ cuni STOPS M|»eCAPft.lS PAVVCEM <OOMACO«AIM<|*» SiCUtP-MlSlII A«ltl|ACri roPD-StfM »U^TtS NUSCAC 4 SIX mmhu VAlCLUt-MIOJtO rOA»*UZ-n-XM ... vV. T5- M|M COvCP (K VATCA SCPv;CC *V CliPI STOP ftju!t Cisii STOP M gLOv riNisno leva VO I* •lOCm CniPflEAtIQM ttflPt MCOONni-AVoun MAvcs imiri sculp tCPviCC A* PvC. SOP J. mimi*mi SLOn 1/4* PCP root TYPICAL SEWER AND WATER SERVICE 7-' ^paumckv riiSr S-S xa •if <4 !(•’> 0* M GO KC lOf HOUSE PAD DETAIL !!TW / nV r P* flw «M FifWSi If M « MPM PInK HpMAlMi AAl iPti t Ml i UtMMt P taIammmI Hi IMS sMN HAM •mm .iAAL H m.4.Schoeii Gi Madson, Inc. — iPilnMorlo® * 8A»rv«irli»o * PUnnlno M IteUnf • EmrlronmoMal tervloM MATVWAiMNIV IMiAaS ■ ■' --------------------------------------r—______— ■■■■■■ 1 WAYZATA DESIGN 120 BROWN ROAD 1 A development ORONO. MN H 1117 MAMQUtTTl AVI, •„ iUlTV ISOO 1 MINNCAPOLIl. MM MPOa •mm> -------------------------------—----- 1 tPUl ••■•1401 typical DETAILS \ t e\ .*■c> ■*!k:1<v>&i I fifl fnjtci ANflUtr IPOM-OOI ------ souAk TOT“ACld 41^.7r ii» •■.••1.17 2.04 ••.•1I.57 1.1ft 2.ft1 1ft3.l71.St 3.7t ■■riiiricni 1^9MKrnrpE^niHi ffS0.47 ■Kqgracai • 6 x.n?xc3B 14.0 ii.it •7V0t1.lt 1f.ftft7 r t,- - f . •• . CITY OF LONG LAKE April 16,2004 Thomas Goodrum Schoell & Madson 10580 WayzataBlvd., 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 applicati< >n is moving forwaird for final plat approval, we would suggest another meeting to aiscuss 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. Sincer ;i»kd:AICP ianner 430 Vhjiai* Avenue • P.O. Box 606 • Lons Minaeeote 55355 • 952-473-6961 • 952-476-9622 (f«) • http://www.ct.lor.g-Uke.Ba.Hl r Iff i 4 W Schoell Si Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying • Planning Soil Testing • Environmental Services 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 V* 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 Mirmesota 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 tfie project area. An unsubstantiated report of a mounds and a habitation site is on file with the State as 21HEf. It is our recommendation that, if given an opportunity for review, the State would recommend a Phase I archaeological survey of the project area with a focus on the -pert-ioBS-thfti-flre-near-or-a dja eent to-the Long Lake 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 Breakcy Senior Project Manager, Culturkf Resources Enclosures (1).1 •• 1 Affirmative Action Equal Opportunity Employer 105BO Wayzata Boulevard. Suita 1 • MinnaapoGs. MN S5309-152S Office (9521 546-7601 • Fax [952] 546-9065 CREEKSIDE IN ORONO Orono, Minnesota STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT SUBMITTED BY; HENRY LAZNIAR2 1117 Marquette Avenue South, Suite 2509 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 Phone: 612-558-1491 PREPARED BY: SchOBlI Sl Madson, Inc. Enginooring • Surveying • Planning _ Soli ToGtIng • Environmontal Sorvlcos ww w. 5cho«llmadson.corn 10:^60 wayioto Uoui«voro Mmntopolit. MJnn#*olO 55305--1525 pHon«; (952) 546-7G01 - fo«. (952) 546-9065 April 21, 2004 X im f The proposed Creekside in Orono is a 20-acre site consisting of 7 residential lots consisting of a 24-foot wide bituminous street with curb and gutter and storm sewer. The houses and street will drain to catch basins in the proposed street and then to the proposed pond. The pond has been sized to not exceed the existing 1-year and 100-year outflow rates for the site. Dead storage is provided for the 2.5 ” design storm. Cmently on the site is an approximate 2,400 square foot foundation single family home with a gravel arid bituminous driveway to the house. An approximate 1,200 square foot accessory building is also located on the site. Wetlands are located along the south, east, md north veas of the site. Long Lake Creek runs along the south part of . he site. Soils * identified in the SCS soil survey are predominately Hamel Loam, Lester Loam, and Marsh. The majority of the current drainage is to the wetlands and to Long Lake Creek. Brown Road is west of the site and Luce Line Trail is south of the site. Two subcatchments were modeled for the proposed conditions. One subcatchment is for the proposed street and houses. This subcatchment is routed to the proposed pond. The second subcatchment is for the back of the bouse pads and the unchanged areas of the site. This subcatchment is routed directly to the existing wetland. The following summarizes the results: 1-yr. (2.30 in.)100-yr. (5.90 in.) EXISTING 0.99 cfs 14.16 cfs PROPOSED 0.79 cfs 13.73 cfs Pond Normal Water Level - 937,50 ■pond 100-yeaf olev&itdd * 939.00 Pond 1-year elevation - 937,16 Attached are the associated hydrology calculations and drainage area maps for Creekside in Orono. JX O io P:Simd4Q§§id^\MMP6k7t€f9^^ i. CV I «9\ w \ \ I V \ \ \ \ \ / ■r. m; \ 1 ¥$\ m \<\ p \ 31 ?•. I \ X wnnn:^-H'-'S-mm Oct** o m « (O \ ^L" illii * \ N| T^: j; 1 '- \V ’\y^ ■': S''--^^‘'/ / >s \'K 4-fe?^;iar r /.// ■ '-m^ - '- t. 9i% J7 r» ^ ^t** C'*9 •fW**' , / /i / / / HftoM tr Me •HifiUBe Ir /j-////^Vv>7 ;• V. ;y \' '' 1;#^ >'^ ca • V*--- '=^ U '. J •iv- '80 SCikU rat I kvHi «rW/ ilMi UM P«M •«• rtpirti W W «r «r ««iil Ml IMII Mi «r U#MV Mi» lif HM iflil SM tf — •mm , 4flliH m-ia Schoell & Madsan, Inc. ^ gwMiMMMflnt • tunwyfn* • Ptoffmlna Sot Itatlfiv • Imfrofimofilol tonHcMM IMT.tMiOO M Kno^Moi WAYZATA DESIGN A DEVELOPMENT tii7 MAHourrrt Avt. sum atoi MMMUlMOUt. MN 80409 1019I •99-t4t1 CREEKSIDE In ORONO OWOMO, MN 4/ai/04 PROPOSED DRAINAGE UI Rfjfci Viunhtr f4RI-QQl Met* 07 2004 7:30RM HP LASERJET 3330 • •i/U Bonestroo Rosene ■ Anderlik & Associates Cn9ln«ar* & Architacti May 7. 2004 Mike Otifron Planning Director City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 33323 Re: Creekside File No. 139-04-000 Plat No. 04-3016 2335 We»t Highway 36 • St Prul, MN 55113 Office: 651-636-4600 • Fax: 651-636-1311 wwwbonestroo.com p. X 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. We have the following comments m regards to engineenng matters. 1. Acccss/Streets: An application to subdivide this site w.ts reviewed in 1999. At that time access to the site from South Brown Road was across an casement to the property. It appears the acces.s to this site is across the same easement shown m the 1999 application. Our position was then and is today ili.it access to the property should be platted as part of the subdivision and not across an casement. The platted access nght- of-way should be a minimum of 50-fcct in width to meet City standards for a private sticct. Seven properties will use this roadway for acce.«;s onto South Brown Road. The proposed typical street section shows a 24 -foot urban street with concrete curb and gutter. City code requirc.s a minimum paved street width of 28-fcct for aprivate road serving seven units. Staff and council should review and determine what street width ia appropriate for this site. Final plans should include plan and profile views of the street. Horizontal and vertical alignments should meet the minimum standards specified in the code (30 mph design speed, maximum .street grade of 12%). A typical street section should be included in tlic final plan act. The final submittal should include a geotechnical report, R-value recommendation 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-posls ;uid should specify machine sliced installation of die fence. Wc will provide detailed comments regarding the erosion control plan with the final plat submittal. The final grading plan should identify first floor a:id lowest floor elevations for all proposed and existing homes. Additional erosion control will be nccc.ssary during coiustruclion of the houses. 3. Drainage: The draft version of the City ’s' Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) shows that the site lies within the Tanager Lake drainage distnci. Long Lake Creek, a Mn DNR protected waterway, flows through tJic site. Plans should be submitted to the Mn UNR and the Minnehaha Creek W.atcrshcd District (MCWD) for review and appros-al. The plans should identify the OHW and flood plain boundaries for I tiiig Lake Creek. The proposed pond should meet NURP standards. The final plans should include detailed pond design showing a 10:1 aquatic bench 10-fcct wide at the pond NWL. 'Iho pond design should also include u concrete outlet structuie that provides l-foot of slamming to remove lloaublcs and debris. Storm sewer design and calculatiwis including outlet structure details should be provided fur review. Final plans should incorporate Best Maiiagcmsat Practices (BMP's) in all areas where storm water c:mnot be routed directly to a pond. The rate control calculations provided are acceptable. • St. Paul. St Cloud. Rocbeiter. Willmar, MN • Milwaukee, Wl • Chicago. IL AffV«4«tlv« Action/Cquai Opportunity Impfoytr snd tntployeo Omncit I Mail Q7 2004 7:38RM HP LASERJET 3330 p.2 4. Saaltaiy SewerAVater Main: Proposed sewer and water services are to be provided by the City ofLong Lake. The ipplioast 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 t rWkp be in place prior to final plat approval. Final plans should include plan and profile views of the sanitary sew» and water main. All utility details shall comply with the City of Orono engineering standards. 5. Easements: The perimeter lot easements shown appear to be appropriate. Drainage easements should be provided across all wetlands, drainage ways and pond areas. Some easements shown need to be revised to include existing wetlands. The site is located east of South Brown Road, south of Long Lalce and north of the Luce Lino trail in the northeast quarter of Section 3. We have the following cooimeats in regards to engineering matters. 6. Financial Guarantee: When the plans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site improvements to detemiine the amount of ^e financial gxiarantee required. If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604«4863. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLDC it ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono r ■lW< I Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 9925 Valley View Road, Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-826-6769, 952-826-6767(fax) • S . •» r / . • • • May 12,2004 Mr. Mike Gaffron Planning Director-City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 •it 5 X Wi-:Oi^;Q Re: Land Use Application File #04-3016, 120 Brown Road So, Dear Mike: Thanks for sending me the follow-up infonnation 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 form/wording the conservation easement will take, but please note that wc 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 slow 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 Information: 651-296-6157 • l-888-6i6-6367 • TTY: 651-296-5484 • 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recycted Paper Containing a Minimum of 10^ Post-Consumer Waste !■ I ; c STATE OF MINNESOTA ij D DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN MAY 5 2004 FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 4ENN.-Ca- Charlcs E. Van Eeckhout and Susan L. Van Eeckhout, ADMINISTRATOR CLERK py C-vc^a.v r- Court File No. A-31-1531 In the Matter of the Petition of DEPUTY 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 Petitioners, V. Mary and John Dunn, Respondents. The above-mentioned matter came on for de 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 Couil to adopt the findings of the Examiner with modifications. Richard Schieffer appeared for and on behalf of Petitioners and Jeremy 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 2l, 2004. Tliis Court adopts and incorporates herein the Refcrrec’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 I. Respondent Mary Dunn is the owner 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 ofTractH (Certificate of Title 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 are 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 easement for driveway purposes, which was already in use and existence. 7. On M*y 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 residence. 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 SO years and the utility easement for about 30 years. 9. About 3 years ago. Petitioners sought permission from the Duruis 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 Dutui 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 are not seeking to create a public roadway out of tlie driveway easement. 10. The City of Orono requires a 50 feet easement for residential roads. Tract G is 40 feet wide in its entirety. ll. 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: iHiia CONCLUSIONS OF LAW t-'S ■( : t ■J f ,I 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. § 50S.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 easement authorizes only installation and maintenance of utilities to serve a single residence on Tract H, which is a limited utility access. v^. Petitioners’ intention to use the existing utilities easement to subdivide Tract H is beyond the scope of the easement. Tlie Referee’s Findings with respect to the utility casement were erroneous as these Findings go against the weight of the evidence. s/^^' The Report of the Examiner of Titles found the existing driveway casement authorizes Petitioners’ to construct, reconstruct, maintain and repair a driveway on Tract G, and grants Petitioners authorization in the fonn of grants or assignments to third-parties by Petitioners. Petitioners’ right to transfer existing I 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. Tlie 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 the Title Examiner except insofar as modified. ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: I. 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 VACATED. b. Conclusions of Law, ^ 2(c) is hereby VACATED. c. Memoranda, 21-27 are hereby VACATED. 1 2. This matter is referred back to the Examiner of Titles pursuant to Minn, Stat. § 508.13 for further proceedings consistent with this Order. Dated: . .2004.OUR ThcH6norabIe John y. Holahan For Judge Ann L. Alton Judge of District Court I •0 • NOTICE Mr. Richard J. Schieffer Anderson. Dove. Fretland & Van Valkenburg 5881 Cedar Lake Road Minneapolis. MN 55416 Mr. Jeremy S. Steiner Miller. Steiner & Curtis 400 Wells Fargo Bank Building 1011 1“ Street South Hopkins. Mn 55343 Notice is hereby given that the within 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 was filed with the Clerk of this Court on the 5th day of May, 2004. DISTRICT COURT ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK By j — Deputy STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN I hereby certify that pursuant to Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts of Minnesota, on the day of ________, 2004, at the City of Minneapolis, Minnesota. I mailed in a sealed envelope! postage prepaid, a copy of the within 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 and Notice to each of the above-named attorneys at their respective addresses. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said Court, at the City of Minneapolis, in said County, this ^ day of A^lLo^__________. 2004. DlSTRiCT COURT ADMINISTRATOR/CLERK Deputy IN PROCEEDINGS SUBSEQUENT TO INITIAL REGISTRATION OF LAND STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN In the Matter of the Petition of: Charles E. Van Eeckhout and Sue L. Van Eeckhout, DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Case Type: Other Civil Court File No. A-31S31 Petitioners, AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL For an Order Construing an Easement In Relation to Certificates of Title Nos. 1035711 and 3S501 1 issued for land in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota and legally described as follows: (Certificate No. 1035711) Tract H, Registered Land Survey No. 352; together with an casement for driveway purposes over Tract G, Regis'.erec Land Survey No. 352, as contained in Deed Doc. No. 432783. (Certificate No. 355011) Tract G, Registered Land Survey No. 352; subject to an easement for driveway purposes over Tract G, Registered Land Survey No. 352, as contained in Deed Doc. No. 432783. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Debra R. SkatteroftheCity of Bloomington, County of Hennepin, in the ftate 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 party at Anderson Dove Freetland &. Van Valkenburg, P.L.L.P., 5881 Cedar Lake Road. Minneapolis, MN 5^416, the last known address of said party. Debra R. Skatter an Subscribed and sworn to before me this 6th day of May, 2004 N^ry Public, tfennepin County,I!::;!—— Minnesota. innepin BS!^ m 13 3 - a » » run DATE; 38 03II723UOOOI PROPADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME LONORJDCE ASSOCIATES taxpayer LONORiDOE associates NAME/ADDR PO box 5621 MPLSMN 55440-5628 *‘8 031172312000) PROPADDR 38 address UNASSIGNED OWNEKNAMB STATEOFMIMN TAXPAYER DNR REAL ESTATE MGM f NAME/ADDR ATTW DEBBIE OURTIN SOOUFAYEHERD STPAULMN 55155 38 031172)120006 PROP ADOR )8 address UNASSIGNI-O OWNER NAME MARY A DUNN TAXPAYER MARY A DUNN NAME/ADDR BROWN RD S POBOX77 long LAKE MN 5S35Ij 38 0)1172)120009 PROPADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME MARY A DUNN taxpayer MARY A DUNN N/U4E/ADDR 20 BROWN RD S P 0 BOX 77 long LAKE MN 55)56 38 0)1172)1)0001 PROPADDR 350 BROWN RDS OWNER NAME RICHARD N CHALFEN taxpayer RICHARD N CHALFEN NAME/ADDR 3)0 DROWN RD S long LAKE MN 55356 38 03117231)0007 PROPADDR 1895 FOX RIDGE RD OWNER N/5MB TJ DAYTON A M DAYTON TOBIN J A MAE DAYTON NAME/ADDR II95FOXRIDOFRD long LAKE MN S5356 111 NNEPIN COUNTY PROIT' INFORMATION SYSTEM proi 'Crtyov sLisrr r^UL^. 8 ^ 18 oilI77JI10002 PROPADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME STATE 01 MINNESOTA 1-^yp^Y£j^ ONR REAL ESTATE MGMT NAME/ADDR ATTN DEDBIf: CURTIN 300 lAFAVEnE RD STPAULMN SSI55 )8 0)11721120004 PROPADDR )8 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAMF. MARY A DUNN TAXPAYER MARY A DUNN NAME/ADDR 2° BROWN RD S P0D0X77 long LAKE MN 55355 38 0)1177)120007 PROPADDR )8 ADDRESSUNASSIGNtD OWNER NAME MARY A DUNN TAXPAYER MARY A DUNN NAME/ADDR 20 DROWN RDS POBOX77 long LAKE MN 55)55 38 031177)120010 PROPADDR 130 BROWN RDS OWNER NAME C F MCCOSKEY « U W MCCUSKY taxpayer DAVID &CONNIE MCCUSKY NAME/ADDR 130DROWN RDS LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 0)117731)0005 PROP ADOR 1995 FOX RJDGF. RD OWNER NAME R&BHACK TAXPAYER RAYMOND II HACK NAME/ADDR 1995 FOX RIDGE RD LONG LAKE MN 55)56 )8 0)1172)210009 PROP ADOR )8 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME STATEOFMIMN TAXPAYER DNR REAL ESTATE MOM I NAME/ADOR ATTN DEBBIE OURTIN 500 LAFAYETTE RD STPAULMN 55155 38 031172)120002 PROP AODR )8 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME LONGRJDGE ASSOCIATES LONCRIDGE ASSOCIATES NAMF7ADDK PO BOX 5628 MPLSMN 55440 5628 38 03II723I20005 PROPADDR 120 BROWN RDS OWNER NAME SUE L VAN EECKHOUT TAXPAYER van EECKHOUT NAME/ADDR 120 DROWN RDS LONG LAKE MN 55)56 )8 0)11723120008 PROP ADOR 20 BROWN RD S OWNER NAME MARY A DUNN TAXPAYER ^ NAME/ADDR 20 BROWN RDS POBOX77 LONGUKEMN 55356 0 ^1 - 38 031172312001 1 PROPADDR 140 BROWN RDS OWNER NAME DALCOLEMANJR Y^YPAYER DOUGLAS R COLEMAN JR NAME/ADDR •40 DROWN RD S LONG LAKE MN 55)56 r 18 . ^ fl 38 031177)1)0006 PROP ADOR 1945 FOX RIDGE RD OWNER NAME D E KJRKMAN A J M KJRKMAN Y^YP/^YER DAVID E A JOANNE M K)R)LMAN NAME/ADDR 1945 FOX RIDGE RD long LAKE MN 55)56 » 72 341182)430019 PROP AODR 31 APPLE GLI-:N RD OWNER NAME M E A M I) GUTIIRJI; TAXPAYER MARY A MITCHEIXCOTIIIUE NAME/ADDR 38 APPU GLEN RD long LAKE MN 55)56 r- mi f 'Z RUNDATI::V2</?0M 72 3411821430020 rROr ADDR M APPLE OLEN W> OWNER NAME K V OK3ELOWA JTUKJI.IOW taxpayer K£NNET« Sl JUCY mOLLOW NAME/ADDR 32APPLF.OIJJ4RD NAME/AU hjnolak EMN 55)16 72 3411823410060 PROPADOR 46 CREEKSIDEDR OVWJBRNAMB JTPASTERR A LPASI I.K TAXPAYER JAMES T PAS ri-.R mamf JADDR 46CREEKSIDE U3NOUKEMN 553«. 77 3411821410061 PROP ADOR 64 CRtl KSlUB DR OWNER NAME MARY ANN HANSEN TAXPAYER MARY ANN HANSEN NAME/AOOR lONGUKEMN 553)6 72 34118234)00/2 |•KOPAUl>K 41 APPlJ OIJ NRII OWNER NAME D JIR/DINSICY ET Al. 1-^j(I>«Y|;r da VII) J UUDINSKY NAMI/ADDR APPLE GLEN R® I.ONlilAKEMN 55356 71 34118734300/5 PROPAOUR H85 RliNNUDYLA OWNER NAME NANCY E PETERSON TAXPAYER NANCY E PET ERSON NAMB/AUDR 1983 KENNEDY long LAKE MN 55)56 72 1411821430083 PROPADOR 10 BROWN Hi)S OWNBRNAME D P A L A ERICKSON TAXPAYER OAVIO P A USA ANN ERK KSON NAME/ADOR 1® BROWN RD S UONOLAKEMN 55)56 III NNEPIN COUNTY PROPI-RTY INI OKMA IION SYSTEM IMUM'I.KTYOWNEUSLISI PAGE: 2 77 3411823410071 PROP AODR 26 APPLE GLEN RD OWNER NAME LIJ2ADETH A UIIX3N TAXPAYER EUZAHETH A OIDON NAME/ADOR J6 APPLE GLEN RD lONGUKEMN 55)56 72 341182)430061 PROPADOR 52 CRElKSlOE Dll OWNER NAME J LOIIMAN A IIA OllMAN TAXPAYER K)tlNI.OIIMAN NAMI/ADDR 52CREEKSIDEDR LONOIAKEMN 55356 72 341182)430064 PROPADOR 41 CREEKSIOE DR OWNER NAME RO ROACH A K A ROAM I taxpayer ROBERTO A XIMIIERI.Y A ROACH U3NGUKEMN 55)56 72 541182)4)00/3 PKOP ADOR 35 APIT I til I N lU) OWNERNAME J ) XI MNA A C A KIMNA IRS1I 5 lAXPAYER lAMLSlACANDACLAKIMNA NAME7ADDR 15 APPLE UI.I N RD I.ONtiUKEMN 55356 /2 3411821430081 PROPADOR 55 VALU:YVIEWRD OWNER NAME C W ANDERSON A S) ANDERSON tAXfAVI R (JRKiORY W« SAEI.V) ANDERSON NAMI/ADDR 55 VALLEY VIEW RD LONOUKLMN 55)56 II 34111234400)5 PROPADOR 135 ORONO ORCHARD RON OWNERNAME L WE HYDEE1.7 M RYDLLLTRST |AX)>AYER EDMUND W E/PIIV).L)SM RYDEL NAME7ADDR I)' ORONO OHClURD RD N lONtilAKEMN 55356 PROPADOR OWNER name ; taxpayer name /aodk 72 341 IH/34 100/2 70 APPI.EOLLNKD 7 WWOUJNAMRWHJ.IN THOMAS A Mtl ANIL WOLI.IN 20 APPLE GLEN RD U/NGUKEMN 55356 72 1411121410062 PROPADOR 58 CREEKSIDI: DR OWNER NAME O M KVALE A I I. KVALE taxpayer THOMAS E a D M XVALO NAME/ADDR 58CRELXSIDEDR LONOIAIU MN 55)56 77 34118734)00/0 PROPADOR 75 AITITGLENRD OWNER NAME S C FEDIE AWE I EOH TAXPAYER STEVEN C A WENDY 1. I EOH. NAME/AODR J ' A*’***-^ GUN RD long LAKE MN 55356 5* PROPADDR 77 34118714100/4 1980 KENNEDY lA OWNER NAME LR DANlEUSONftJ M OANIEI.SON TAXPAYER 1 IT R A NANCY M DANIELSON NAMI2ADDII 1980 KENNEDY 1A H4.EONIilAKI MN 55)56 77 3411871430082 PROP ADDR )8 DROWN RDS OWNERNAME. IUDYLKELLE3T TAXPAYER JUDYLK£I.U.rr NAME/AUDR II brown RDS LONGUKEMN 55)56 A r run DATE: i A ! ' • HENNEPIN COl^ PROJPE' SYSTEM f‘ROPERTYOVf OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BE /N l^v I'AUi:' i . t >) Ty ..,• wl ,>vw •y s VI ..: • f 4 'NFORM ATION SYSTKM r J LISr |*AUIi: J ==r£SI"K;”“ BY / ♦MS? .. ^ * *. "V •- «.v »»- ••:< ::'f;v«.-r.^. '**.* : ‘ ' % -i k •! :*;r •^ * ^ ••> IT* i ,• • V;•SIVA *. S'. ■\.. % *w [ - '' %. .*• **. \ ^1- vV-/ • * • .*•- . - . •-* J X.»- V :^x 1 h f ■'. r '..• • • c • •> •'-• » 4 ’. -, * V- L ' *■ . ' •-.A* i*# '* •...-• y . • V *. /•>-V r VV, ri.\•V*i:^‘'*y ,*^s < K c, -I .-A -•- y; n •♦ • >v V V -•>v^ ^ ?*** -^'t y-a -'rV . V .»i» i*vr.vN-SSS •VJ»> ^ff^?=r:L-..-v ..■ > V. •»T, *1 ^ ^ —» >>■ •I'-A, •5l ** ‘^rr ‘t- i:i' *; :* I" ^ 'Vr* • - '-. ' -n M* r- L- •x r V e*..V’C r*>.mTA i^:J:v'rH L **' ^-4 K' -^ >»•* . -V>V?•A-'A' •i ■» >v>1 •s: I- -■*>*• '- ^ A.r W *. . % - *• f"!-: AiS ,/;* V €.* N' • ‘r->> " •^ A-. ; T* ^p. •/V i...\tl--..'. £V.: /• . .fc-— A V:- r c^v*: ■ ‘ V V‘ w>->-; ..■5^':"*V v -9 ■> S^^i' •'4 ., r.v> w i:.v-■ "V ’O- A.^ V i. <- V > ’-v*. r-":r 'v * ■• • •v.* i'* I 1\- -N ' W > ‘ •^^ >.' A . • •• • ' Na i I >^v.:‘:v.A .’^A‘’■“-:. A'..,. ^Vv: - j - i^r> * i :v s« *^‘V .--w *' >.'•'=’ i'.V. 4A •.A-- ^ « .V -•^'•pV. Vi •tK-M.v^ ♦ U4iv-- r-iv A*-A' i??! ■ -' A; 'A, >A ?i-r Y% '--J ./.<• . *•.-% -Y*m*t >. > ■y *. N ■ A 5 '.\« -T4» '» . • • • _ 'A r V' I ■ll'«S?i YV/ ',..1 r r4T*T^! s^P >7/ rj > \tl^^v •S .t" :-. i •v: "^"v.. ••• iY-n>-A-v V *r A<r V A... T> S!^ X" A/'/ ZONING REGUIAnONS i 78-609 DIVISION 10. PRD PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Sec. 78*601. Purpose. This plan is available to land subdividers sub ject to council approval, as alternative to stan dard nuniruuA 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 recre ation opportunities close to home, and to aid in improving the welfare in general of city residents. (Code 1984, § 10.32(1)) Sec. 76-602. Submission of plan'.. Landowners may submit land subdivision plans for any R district without adherence to minimum lot size requirements for each building lot, pro vided 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. (Code 1984, § 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 coimcil, 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. The 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 assure the preservation of such open spaces for their intended purposes. (Code 1984, 5 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 Any other method deemed appropriate by the council to accomplish the purposes of this plan. (Code 1984, § 10.32(5)) (2) (3) (4) (5) Sec. 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 commission and the council. (Code 1934, § 10.32(6)) See. 78-607. Hearings. The council may direct that a public hearing be held to review plans governed by this division. (Code 1984, § 10.32(7)) Sec. 78-608. Final approval. Final 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 provisions, such provisions to be guaranteed by bonding or other means s.itis- factory to Uie council. (Code 1984, § 10 32(8)) Sec. 78-609. Subdivision requirements. All provisions of subdivision procedure estab lished by chapter 82, except as modiHed in this division, shall govern applications under this plan. (Code 1984, § 10.32(9)) CD78:109 \ ZONING RECUIATIONS DIVISION 6. RR.IB ONE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT See. 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 activity. (Code 1984, § 10.28(D) Sec. 78-417. Permitted uses. Wthin any RR-lB one-family mral rejidential district, no land or structures shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: (1) One-fancily detached dwellings. Personal wireless service antennas and towers. 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. b.Personal wireless service antennas. Personal wireless service antennas erected on a municipal water tower may be allowed as a secondary use by administrative permit, prorided they comply with the city policy re garding the use of city-owned prop erty for 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 CD78:69 7. 8. /ly f 78-417 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. No advertising message shall be affixed to the antenna. 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 When applicable, proposals to erect new antenna shall be ac companied by any required fed eral, state, or local agency li censes. Transmitting, 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. 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 grainted by the city administrator or his designee. The removal shall be the respon sibility of the communication provider. Antennas shall utilize camou flaging techniques or shall be side-mounted to an antenna sup port structure in order that such facilities are compatible w’lth the character and environment of the area in which they are located. f 78.417 ORONO CITY CODE 9.The applicant shall demonstrate by providing a coverage/inter 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, 10.20(2). 10.28(2); Ord. No. 161 2nd series, j 7,6-7-1997; Ord. No. 226 2nd series. § 1. 5-27-2003) State law reference—State mandated permitted uses. Minn. Stat. { 462.357. tubd. 7. See. 78-418. Conditional uses. Within any RR-IB one-family rural residential district, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses without a conditional use permit: Public schools and pairochial or private schools which teach a curriculum similar to a public 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 axe accessory. No such struc tures shall be located less thain 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 nonprofit 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 SO 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 lo; 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 fer any of these uses shedl 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. 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 sn R district. Prior to gTEinting such permit it shall be found that the architectural design cf service structures is compatible to the neighborhood in which it is tc 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; amendments to approved plans involving design and/'or Supp. No. 1 CD78:70 ZONING REGULAnONS i 78-418 placement of these structures will require written notice by the city to all affected property owners 14 days prior to the adop tion of the amended plane by the council. Personal wireless services and commer cial broadcasting amtennas and towers shall not be considered public service struc tures. (6) 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 houses and nonrental guest apart ments. a. b. Cueat /louses. 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 primary access to the apart ment. Application for such a guest apartment shall address the con cerns of parking, sewage treatment, entiyway and interior access method. Such apartments shall not have util ities metered separately from the principalresiden.ee utilities and shall not have a separate street address. (9) Planned residential development, limited to detached single-family dwellings only 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 barns, 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 muzt 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) Ridmg academy. Any such instruction maintained as an accessory use and con ducted by the cwmer shall meet the re quirements of subsection (12) of this sec tion, and no such instruction shall occur less than 100 feet frozr 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 acccmracdated. (15) Nonprofit libraries, provided that all build ings are located 50 feet or more from the let 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 prevision of a toilet, bathtub cr shower in an accessory building. Approval shall be conditioned on provision of municipal semitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the Supp. No. 1 CD76:71 ) 76-418 CRONO cm' CODE anticipated flows from the building plumb ing. Approval shall be granted only whin 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 acce.ssory 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: 1. Used for a home occupation un less specifically approved by the city or if allowed by thi: Code. 2. 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 wireless service antennas erected on a municipal Htriicture other than a water tower may be allowed as a condi tional use if they meet the following cri teria: a. Such antennas must bo in compli ance with the city policy regarding the use of city-cwned property for wireless telecomnumication anten nas, b. Such antennas must meet the condi tions listed for personal wireless ser vice antennas at a permitted use in the LR-IC zoning district. c. Such antennas may be located in the following locations. 1. (3o-located on an existing city emergency warning siren tower. 2. Co-located on a replacement city emergency warning siren tower, with a height not to exceed 75 feet. 3. Co-located on a new city em^^r- gency warning siren tower, at a location that meets the city’s emergency warning needs, with a height not to exceed 75 feet. d. Such antennas shail meet the follow ing performance standards: 1. The antennas must be located on the existing emergency warn ing sirens polos, 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 accemmodato both the emergency warning siren and the telccoramuriications anten- na(s). The existing emergency siren towers can be replaced with towers with a maximum height of 75 feet, with the con dition that the tower accommo dates both the emergency warn ing siren and the telecoraraumcations antenna(s) The city may also require the tower to have the capability of accommodating one additional earner’s antenna(s). 2. A new emergency warning si ren tower location, selected by the city to meet its emergency warning needs, could also be used as a telecommunicaticns antenna site through co-loca tion of the warning siren and 8up|i No I CD78;72 w 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. ZONING regulations § 76-419 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 tower 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 views (as selected by the city) w'ith 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 tho 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 antcnna(sl, and to demonstrate there arc 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 by the city council. Appropriate vegetative screening of ground cabinets shall be provided by the carrier, subject to approvi by the city council. The council at its discretion may allow the use of non-vegetative screening methods such as berming, fenc ing, etc. ‘'SteaUh “-type antennas (cylin drical) vs. an array of panels, is required if the technology is available. 12. Only roonopole towers are al lowed. (Code 1984. §§ 10.20(3), 10.23(3); Ord. No. 145 2nd series. § 1. 3-11-1996; Ord. No. 161 2nd series. §§ 3. 4. 6-7-1997; Ord. No. 179 2nd scries. § 2, 10-12-1998; Ord. No. 226 2nd series. § 2, 5-27-2003) See. 78-419. Accessory uses. Within any HR-IB one-family rural residential district, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: (1) Private garages and parking space. (2) Private swimming pools, tennis courts, and paddocks. (3) 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. Signs, as regulated xn tins chapter.(4) (5)Buildings temporarily located for pur poses of constructing on the premises for a period not to exceed time necessary for such constructmg. Gardening and other horticultural uses, including aviaries 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. Supp No. 1 CD78;73 $ 76-419 ORONO CITY CODE (8) Communication reception/transmission de vices as follows: a. Accessory antennas. Accessory anten nas shall be limited to radio and television receiving antennas, satel lite dishes, TVROs, and amateur shortwave radio transmitting and receiving antennas. Accessory anten nas that are accessory to the princi pal use of property are permitted accessory uses in all zoning districts provided tiiey meet the following con ditions: 1. Height A ground-mounted ac cessory antenna shall not ex ceed 20 feet in height &om ground level. 2. Yards. Accessory antennas shall not be located within the re quired front yard setback, cor ner side yard setback or side yard setback abutting a street. 3. Hoofs. If vegetation or obstruc tions interfere with satellite sig nals at a location in any allow able placement area, the accessory antenna may be placed on the roof of any autho rized structure on the premises. 4. Location. Accessory antennas shall not be located within a required yard or setback area or within drainage or utility easements. Antenna towers shall be set back from adjacent property lines a horizontal dis tance no less than the maxi mum height of the antenna. 5. But/ding permits. A building permit shall be required for the installation of any accessory an tenna requiring a conditional use permit. Building permit ap plications shall be accompa nied by a site plan and struc tural component data for the accessory antenna, including de tails of anchoring. The building official must: pprove the plans before installation. 6. Lightning protection. Each ac cessory antenna shall be grounded to protect against nat- urad lightning strikes in con formance with the National Electrical Code as adopted by the city. 7. Electrical code. Accessory an tenna electrical equipment and connectior.5 shall be designed and installed in conformance with the National Electrical Code as adopted by the city. 6. Colortcontent. Accessory anten nas shall be of a neutral color and shall not be used as signage. b. Amateur shortwave radio antennas and towers. Amateur shortwave ra dio antennas and towers which do not meet the conditions for accessory antennas may be allowed with a conditional use permit in all zoning districts, provided they meet the fol lowing conditions: 1. Height. When an amateur short wave radio antenna is mounted on an antenna tower, the total height of the antenna and tower shall not exceed 65 feet. 2. Yards. Amateur shortwave ra dio antennas and towers shall not be located within a front, corner side or side yard. 3. Setbacks. Amateur shortwave radio antennas and tow^ers shall net be located within any re quired setback area and shall be located no less than the height of the antenna and tower from the property line. The keeping of domestic animals for non commercial purposes, including horses for the use of the occupants of the premises. A minimum of one acre in aggregate, exclu sive of one acre for the principal building. Supp. No. 1 CD7S:74 r 5 Z0N2^G REGULAHONS i 78-441 must be available for each animal unit, except as set forth in this subsection. A minimum of two acres of open pasture must be available for a single horse, and one additional acre must be available for each additional horse. When the horses are kept stabled and do not require pas ture for feed purposes, the minimum pas ture requirement may be adjusted at the discretion of the council. Such minimum pasture acreage shall not include low- lying lands unusable for pasture or graz ing. Any person keeping such animals must comply with the provisions of this Code. (10) Stables and bams, private The use of an accessory building for keeping animals for noncommercial purposes, provided it is for the norxommercial use of the property owner or resident and meets the available area standards outlined in subsection (9) of this section. Further, no such structure shall be located less than 150 feet from the nearest adjacent residence and no closer than 75 feet from the nearest lot line. (Code 1934, 5§ 10.20(3XM), (3){N), (41, 10.25(4); Ord. No. 161 2nd series, § 6, 6-7-1997; Ord. No. 221 2nd series, § 3, 9-23-2002) Sec. 78-420. Area, height, lot width and yard requirements. (a) Height. No structure or building in any RR-IB district shall exceed 2Vi stories or 30 feet in height except as provided in section 78-1366. (b) Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be observed: Lot Ana (acres) Lot Width (feet) 2 200 (Code 1984, § 10.28(5)) Front Yard (feet) Side Yard Side Adjacent Rear Yard to Street Yard (feet)(feet)(feet) 30 50 50 Secs. 78-421 —78-440. Reserved. DIVISION 7. RR-lB-1 ONE-FAMILY RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT See. 78-441. Permitted uses. Within any RR-lB-1 one-family rural residen tial district, no land or structures shaU be used except for one or more of the following uses: (1) One-family detached dwellings. (2) Publicly owned parks and playgrounds. (3) Municipal buildings. (4) Personal wireless service antennas and towers. 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. Purpose arid intent. The purpose of subsection (4) of this section is to Personal wireless service antennas. Personal wnreless 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- Supp. No. 1 CD78:75 CMP Part 4A. Transportation Plan« - rTS=.rx=====s=i 4. S. €, Rural residential developments will utilize private road feeders to supplement the existing public road grid. Because of topographical limitations, the historic shape of rural land divisions, and &e low density of rural land use, most new rural residential lots are best preserved by short dead-end roads running off the existing street system. The low number of dwellings on each road, the dead end configuration and the scattered road locations make public roadway maintenance excessively costly compared to any public benefit. Therefore, most new rural lots will be directly served by privately owned and maintained roadways. New public streets will be accepted where a "through" configuration provides a general public benefit and/or where the number of residences justifies public maintenance expense. Private rural roadways will be constructed to rural design standards. The City will regulate i.:"'vate road design standards to ensure environmental protection and adequate all weather access to all properties. The type and width of road surface required will vary with the ijumber of residences to be served and hence the amount of expected vehicle usage. The length of dead-end roads will be limited for public safety purposes. Private rural roads and cul-de-sacs will be designed so that emergency vehicles such as large fire trucks have adequate space to operate efficiently and effectively. 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 casements 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 main tain 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. City of Oroao Comnunity Management Plan September 2000 Pago 4A-20 ! »7-- '•- O •'■ A ..' V-,V\\YV'.' (T^oxf^ j /' ^ / // / V (» / f; - *"**‘^ * , ^ \ woooeo \ L A ' r T“** ^ s ■*■^1 \ ^\ 5 I J- '-N W A 1 V i. \ i. \ .'-.i i .jLj 1 ± ••"=!; \ J \ S 08'’58 ’41" E 506.B3^/»**j.K'W.'-'A A r ::> T?:rl V.. I V1.#».. ^st •f f % p I t Schoell & Madson, Inc. _ EhgbiMrlng • Survayliig • Planning dwt^ WA Date Application Received: 4-21*04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 6>9>04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 8-8-04 MPRTING JUN 2 8 2004 CITY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: June 23, 2004 Item No.: ^ Department Approval: Name: Janice GuodIacl^|b( Title: City Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: /^04-3019, Wendy Sullivan, 325 Crestview Avenue - Variances - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - 1 A, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acre minimum) 0.43 acres (18,796 s.f.) 150 feet List of Exhibits A - Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendation B - PC Action Notice 6-22-04 C - PC Memo and lixliibits of 6-14-04 Apptication Summary': Applicant requests the following variance in order to consirr.ct a new residence on and existing lot: 1. Lot area variance in ordei to const: uct a new residence on the existing 0.43 acre lot where 2 aces is normally required. 2. Lot width variance in order to construct a new residence on the existing 150’ wide lot when 200’ is normally required. 3. Front yard setback variance to allow the new house to be setback 30’ from the front property line when 50’ normally is required. 4. Side yard (south) setback variance to allow the new house to be setback 19 ’ from the side nronertv line when 30’ is nonnallv required. Planning Commission Recommendation To approve the plans as submit*"d in accordance w'th the staff recommendation, on a unanimous 7-0 vote. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL AC HON REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting lot arca/width and front and side yard .setback variances for 325 Crestview Avenue. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-305 (B) FILE NO. 04-3019 WHEREAS, William L. Sullivan, a single person (hereinafter “the applicant”) is the owner of the property located at 325 Crestview Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City”) and legally described as follows: Lots 3-5, Block 5, Bayside Addition to Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the “property”); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for lot area, lot width, front yard and side yard setback variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-305 (B) to allow construction of a new residence on a lot that is 0.43 acres in area when 2.0 acres is normally required, has a width of 150 feet when 200 feet is normally required, and to allow a front yard setback of 30’ when 50’ is normally required and a south side yard setback of 19 feet when 30 feet is normally required. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council Orono, Minnesota: HNDINGS 1, This pplication was reviewed as Zoning File #04-3019. 2.The propt.‘v is located in the LR - 1 A, One Family Lakeshore Residential District, wdtich requires a minimum lot size cf 2.0 acres. The applicant’s lot is 0.43 acres is size. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on June 21, 2004 and recommended approval of the lot area, lots width, and front and side yard setback variances based on the following findings: Page 1 of 5 4. 5. a. The lot is an existing lot of record where the existing house was constructed prior to adoption of the Zoning Ordinance. b. The lot is 0.43 acres is size located within a small lot neighborhood yet remains subject to the 2.0 acre zoning district standards. c. The setbacks proposed fit with the general development of the immediate small lot neighborhood. d. If the Zoning Ordinance standards were enforced the applicant would be forced to construct a long, narrow home. e. The proposal meets all other standards established by the Zoning Ordinance. 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 a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-305 (B) to allow construcuon of a new residence on a lot that is 0.43 acres in area when 2.0 acres is normally required, has a width of 150 feet when 200 feet is normally required, and to allow a front yard setback of 30’ when 50 ’ is normally requi*'ed and a south side yard setback of 19 feet when 30 feet is normally required, subject tc the following conditions: Page 2 of 5 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. Hardcover in the 500 ’-1000 ’ zone shall not increase above 35%. Applicant is advised that any requests to increase hardcover above 35% shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reductions 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 Heruiepin County Health Department site remediaiion shall be completed prior to issuance of a building permit. Tliis work can be conducted congruently with a demolition pemiit for the existing house and any out buildings. 5. Authorities granted by this resolu >n 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 28,2005). 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. S 7. 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 5 Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 28'*’ day of June, 2004, ATTEST: I Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTS OF HEN1>1EPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged befoie 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 4 of 5 State of Minnesota ) ) ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this by William L. Sullivan, a single person. day of ,2004 Notary Public 0 ' Page 5 of S EXHIBIT A (9Sa.«} (957J) O O o in (9S«J) R1M« fiVml 935^1 946.0! BCNCVA4APK oc/1 ^'4 •.•••••0 N 89 “34'00" W 125.25 (955J) (992 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : Lots 3. 4 and 5. Block 5. BAYSIDE iiMifcl1) Garage = 2) Top of foundation CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE: 04-3019 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 22,2004 TO: Wendy Sullivan 3409 26*^ Avenue S Minneapolis, MN SS406 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Lot Area/Width, Front & Side Yard Setback Variances DATE OF MEETING: June 21,2004 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approve the plans as submitted. VOTE:FOR AGAINST Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as; City Council - Monday, June 28,2004; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Gundlach at 952-249-4623. H ^04-3019 June 21,2004 Page 1 of 4 Date Application Received: 4-21-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 6-9-04 60-Day Review Period Expires; 8-8-04 To:Chair Mabusth and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Janice Gundlach, City Planner June 14,2004 #04-3019, Wendy Sullivan, 325 Crestview Avenue - Lot Area, Lot Width, Front and Side Yard Setback Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Loi Width: LR- lA, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acre min.) 0.43 acres (18,796 s.f.) 150 feet Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variance in order to construct a new residence on and existing lot; 1. Lot area variance in order to construct a new residence on the existing 0.43 acre lot where 2 aces is normally required. 2. Lot width variance in order to construct a new residence on the existing 150 ’ wide lot when 200 ’ is normally required. 3. Front yard setback variance to allow the new house to be setback 30 ’ from the front property line when 50’ normally is required. 4. Side yard (south) setback variance to allow the new house to be setback 19 ’ from the side property line when 30 ’ is normally required. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the variance requests as submitted. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec, 78-305. Area, height, lot width and yard requirements. (b) Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be observed: List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applications Exhibit B - Hardship Documentation Form Exhibit C - Proposed Survey Exhibit D - Hardcover Calculations Lot Area (acre)Lot Width (feet)Front Yard (feet)Side Yard (feet)Side Yard Adjacent to Street (led) Rear Yard (fcci) 2 200 50 30 50 50 IBMi M04-3019 June 21,2004 Pege 2 of 4 Exhibit E - Proposed Floor Plans & Elevations Exhibit F - Illustrations Showing Buildable Areas at Vi and 2 Acre SetOt.ck. Requirements Exhibit G - Aerial Photograph Exhibit H — Neighbor Comments Exhibit I - Property Owner’s List Exhibit J - Plat Map Background This lot is located within a small lot neighborhood zoned for 2 acre lots. Many of the lots on Crestview Avenue and Tonka Avenue are substantially under the required 2 acres and require variance approval to do virtually any improvement. This particular lot has a vacant, old, and dilapidated house that has been posted as hazardous by the Building Officid. The applicant’s father rented the house out, where the Pc lce Department discovered that methamphetamines were being created. Since that discovery the house has remained vacant and remediation will be required prior to issuance of a building permit for any new residence. The applicant proposes to tear down the existing buildings and construct a new residence. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET LR-IA Lot Area Lot Width Required 87,120 s.f. (2.0 acres)200 ’ Actual 18,796 s.f. (0.43 acres)150 ’ Setbacks (a survey of existing conditions was not provided and the following existing setbacks are estimates from an aerial photograph on file) LR-IA Required Existing Proposed Front 50 ’22’30.5 ’ Rear 50 ’70 ’ - house 50 ’ - shed 50.6 ’ Left Side (north)30 ’18 ’49.4 ’ Right Side (south)30 ’95’ - house 85’-shed 19.3 ’ JL, „■ ■ , A pool is proposed for the new residence however it is considered an accessory structure and meets all of the accessory structure setback and hardcover requirements. i ^040019 June 21, 2004 Page 3 of 4 Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 18,796 s.f. (0.43 acres)Allowed: 2,819 s.f. (15%) Proposed: 2,702 s.f. (14%) Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 500- 1000 18,796 s.f.6,578.6 s.f 1 (35%) Information not provided 5,370 s.f (28.57%) After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Lot arca/width variances This property sits within a small lot neighborhood in a 2.0 acre zoning district. Many of the lots on this street as well as Tonka Avenue have substandard lot areas. Because this property is less than a '/t acre, where 2.0 acres in normally required and has a defined weith of 150’ when 200’ is required, variances to area and width must be approved in order for the applicant to construct a new rc-iidcncc. Front and Side Yard Setback Variances Because of the nature of the small lot neighborhood the applicant has proposed Vi acre setback standards when the 2.0 acre setbacks are required. The applicant has proposed a 30.5’ front yard setback when 50’ is normally allowed under to 2.0 r.cre standards. The applicant has also proposed a 49.4’ north side yard setback and a 19.3’ south side yard setback when 30’ is required under to 2.0 acre standards. This requires approval of front and side (nortli and south) yard setback variances. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhib't B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis fn 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 valm s 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 'here their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the IttJividual 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 with relatio»'ship to the lot area and lot width variance requests. The lot was established prior to adoption of the Zoning Ordinance and is therefore a legal lot of record. I ^04-3019 June 21,2004 Pige 4 cl 4 Staff also finds a hardship exists with relationship to the front and side yard setback variance requests. The lot is situated within a small lot neighborhood yet is subject to the 2.0 acre standards of the zoning district and the neighborhood is too small to re-zone to Vj acre standards. It has not been unusual for other lots in this neighborhood to receive setback variances at Vi acre standards to rebuild. If the 2.0 acre standards were applied much of the lot would be unbuildable and the applicant would be forced to construct a long, narrow home, as demonsirated by Exhibit F. Issues for Consideration 1. Should the shape of the buildable area be considered a hardship? 2. Are Vi acre standards reasonable due to the small lot neighborhood? 3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Approval of the plans as submitted. 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 68 Crystal Bay, MN 5532S-C066 Application # Date Received. Amount Paid; _11OO■ ^P/3 Staff . Fee; S600 Renewal; S300 After-the-fact; Si.200 Double Fee This application form must be completed in full. App'.cant will be notified within 15 days as to tne status of the application, incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: . ^ Site Address; 32.S Property Identification Number (PIN); (Attach legal description to application if riot included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year): ^ ‘‘‘ f"' *hp Present use of property; Ja^Residential Zoning District; __________________ 0 T □ Yes, 1 own the adjacent parcels. U Other ^PPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal narres and marital status required for each interested party) ame; 6u\\.iVgLn _____________________c.za\ - gcyb3 Phone (home)i rJ^lL^ Address; ^4oq tT-iATR Au S> email: • LOSottVio&-Ai-0 com ______Phone (work): (fatT-’) z.oS-5~q^9 M poli4» I KA<4 SS40Cg___________ Fax; (foOS**oi^^ OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names c.'d marital status required for each interested party) Name; V\;c»v\'f ______________ Phone (home); ^ W V^I Phone (work): jr\ i > p’O^TT-zAHi j Address; ?iH0*I •? ______.clvwtMLr*. pAlia , ^/j4b(r____________^ Email; luwV.V.>vc<-'.v.V(^. twov- rv-(t> _______ L»oS~0*^** DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Pra^c» Cost: $ :3^73.0oD Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): __________________________ \ c Q. 6ucr^- CU\S‘ 'u- 0-Ct~p <^c ,t L-(U’^i 1'0 ____ 'y-VAvUiii fi C*3v--VU. bsn-i.r> uJa..[K6i^t _CLv^rA. 'll f/j AJl" ? tj .f-.- 'I'l'v r (^4 ________________________________ -C"' 71^\J 4 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for vc application to be processed. ’ □ Pre-Application Meeting Fr-m, completed by a City Planner. □ Completed Application Fo. m “ Completed Hardship Documentation Form Certified Roperty 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, telep hone 612-348-5910 • n Original Certi5cate of Survey '(signed by a licensed surveyor); meeting all the requirements listed wuhin this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one ccdv 8 5" x 11** or 11" X 17" for reproduction. ‘ * □ Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided v/ithin the variance packet). ^ Topographic survey - including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8 5" x 11" or irx 17" for reproduction. py «am D Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide orie 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 bv tiie Plannlro Deparlment. agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or c. 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 ^ City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigation ^d verification of this request. Owner ’s Signature: C i? Owner's Signature:T Date: ^ | oV Date: 25 days before the Planning Commission Mee ng. 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 Commi-sioTrd Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled mieting, please mate arrang'emCTls to S^rgned Cu^rojerP'anner & S y \ V. tJ \\ Triiixwk o City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form (This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting.*) For Office Use Only City Planner. street Addrsss: Mailing Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway P O. Box 66 . ----------------- Orono MN 55356 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 Meeting Date/Time:_____ PC Date: murth^i Main: 952-249-4600 Fax: 952-249-4616 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; 2>Z5 Av ____________________________ Property Identification Number (PIN); _________________________ Zoning District; (X '’l/\ Size of Property; /5U' ^ 16 * DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: □ Average Setback J^Side Yard Setback Rear Yard Setback □ Hardcover . □ Lot Coverage □ Lot Area □ Other; '/z. a ^ tf\' 7^ iUre^ ^Front Yard Setback □ Lot Width __________________________ 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 submiftad in conjunction with their formal variance application. OTHER INFORMATION: •Please note: Your variance application will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this formyvill be comp|eted by City staff. Applicant Signature: ^ Date: AI I m ith r ali EXHIBIT B Page I 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 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 os clearly as possible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance Is justihc J. The l .formation 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 requcct (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." ' . , i:i.j (i C‘J t'vjQLt/ 4it_ L.V fc vjr r3- CwC-i-v. vv.\ ^ «I'f ^ (A c ir g. ^_______________________ 2."The plight of the landowner Is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." _____________toT C^C»' 3.The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.* nc' _______________________________ 4.“Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." __________^ t Vl>.| <H-t>-ouLa <Tyy (1 t L 5* r <*■‘•it iJif p* .r- •Sm •• I Il 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Page 2 of 3 •Undue hardship also Includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes. Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter.” ________\,\[0.________________________________ The Boaid of Appea.s and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located." "The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. •The special conditions applying to the stnjcture or land in question are peculiar to such property or Immediately adjoining property." r. V.. ..i a 11 ItrT K rV.. nfjr-Ti ~ <rv/Cc IT •The granting of the proposed variance will net in any way impair health, safety. Code°"^ rnorals. or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning /; c:?; f*-; • .•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." Hf ft Sn ^ 'h!) l2x.u! d> Hardship Statement . . ^ Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be describea 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 ______Itff i<> gnly sjiri.y ^ ■Su»~/^LcrNi)(x.r>vj/ q-tivl I&-V-; 1 s f/ be/ o-U^tfC Atv^df ^ 1 Ik ft > t l-tvlM . pt lO>J'VJ)LC.j . PiX. ^ K-g i. fi, i t.t>—vT& |A< ' .L>if H_________ ? ri-Cr/ V:^/i ^ Tw [t 1>L( ■ lul*rijrv ( i I * . . • t • m ** i WcHOr SuLUVAhi EXHIBIT D 6-9-f^^v^ioe Act La»4E AI tiC HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARP COVER tN ZONE A. House 0-75* X Len|0i X X X B* Garage C. Driveway X N D. Sidewalk X X £. Patio/Deck • «»«••• • • F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X O. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ______________ + B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE* A. House ______________ X Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B 75-250' 250-500' <^00-1000'^ Width X3 X 100 - Width a a X 100 174/^ 4-S8 432- SMO 1BP96 28.S1 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F, SF. SF. S.F. S.F.- • SF. SF. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. */• A B llOZ. S.F.- Haui£ S.F. : S F 4 S.f!- SroaP ' S.F. S F.-OR/Vfuyiy* S.F; SF. S.F. S F. - PATiO S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.-POGL- S.F. - A S.F. B % ■-K ____ ff-cTW;. ^^""■yiT:- UCIII A VLNI scutouc rtK. CAMUlNf UMO#«CfUOMI. NQOrO IMl NO.in rr. wr Ol rramtaua. srEfTiMiri II •«USA M.UI J4«0 10 M f 01 SCCA JOM-J MM ir.M VCCA S4M O 10 03 VrCA 4M0 o IS IS SCCA SOM 0 IDS2 so« V*«V>ISM S4J4 nosi noao soumw rooucc • Mljssrwar.SBS i"8ff * VltCMOr OAIOU •MN9 t m 7 mk OrtlOM Hor «ND rolo wtr* sumr tM% m« m<itc fMG roil «u nuuOMC iuimcs mi smoocb iMMMjai fi€ fiOUH Of lomt. vuiT mam ; roo Ml lUruMt IS SrUMlTD IMOOIOI i»< rar run or Ncmsc OMIOCJI a onrowMic ftm mmmc Mi CIINOICIUWS 10 U€ UM« UlOS AH »lt. wriMRH ««i M HIT orr ron on imc nuuOMC COMNCCtOM r M>«C0 on I»€ riOQO fSMI DATES OfttCVML PIAN 3-UMM .. fSMSCO PIAN 4- 3CMM CM 5- tO-CM CUB 3-2P04 CMB 05'20-(M MV 03-25-04 CMC 2/-04 dll d 1100 u NORSE BUILDING SYSTEMS uwm no.* UDYSHiTH, n mou WENDY SULLIVAN F^RST ...FLO OR PI AN i ■« $w W X KHH U vV- • H PI ittii ni^ST FLOOR PLAN lIGMl A vnil SCIlCIMill Itpl UAimrACTii()fft Ulill HU T CAUUfNi NOMCU fT vfHmd n SICA JMO- SrCA MtfUi SttA ^OLO-^ VCA S4U SCCA 4B60 SrCA 6060 SC I to 9/o«ft/a * iULJUe^. iaa4 lU ?o \a ui 0 o 0 l^4S UAVLVfl 16 sa 901 2/CIV MJOS 15 /V 16 04 HRS! riCXJR SUUMIt fUUlAf;!. - 1001 siroNR rifXM saiMin luniM^ • ti6 IIMA4 SOUMll rCX)UU - /VJ9________ miociH: cusiUM sfArfis ru*.ioy BATHS 10/0) CUSTOM OATH 4- 1/7 IIAIH |/ liui AND COUl VWUIH SUfVntf UMTS AM) WASff! TOM All nmOMNC nxlUfllS Am SIUBOIO iMMliOai lllf flOfiN UT NUChl VINT I*NSNC luff All IMIIJRIS IS SfUfItJIO iMfnMlClC Tiff ItN* PIAIC ITT HUIf*J IIUMOfM 15 RC5»H)««*.<lir fOM MAKVlC All IIMMCIHINS TO Till MAIN UNIS UN Sill •JHIIINICiC WIU Ut Iff I Off fOH ON *JT( inUMfBNf: CONNiLilONS II NOirO ON no hoon ItAN DATt.S UmCMM. 1 )0>04 Ktvisro 4 -JOHN C.M0 10 04 Ckia U 20 04 6MH 1)5 70 04 MN in 75 04 GMI CIS 7/ 04 CJm 4ftV^ J^ffljTJsinivAN nisOJlNCL ^NORSE ^fclUUlLDING SYSTKMS I IN BARNETT ID - UDYSHITII. H MMI W ^N1)Y SU1.UVAN . - J -j/r »|RST MOOR Pl>^N l7V luu A Ji iia IT A _vt lYHr. CAStMtMT liArnifAEIUKLR HOfTCO UNIT HO SO rr viNi _A^CIP OPO. so n. iMsucm oec 5CCA 7B60 7 18 64 1656 SCCA TOGO 10 20 9 03 StCA 3060-i 30 60 2709 SCCA 54J4 0 10 03 SCCA 4B60 0 15.79 SCCA 60C.0 0 20.52 SCHO 9/o*6/a 15.46 3664 nnsT noon soiwtr iootacc ■ 2003 STCONO flOOR SCXMRC fOOfAfiC • «3« TOfAl *^IARC fOOTACC » 3939_______ KITCHIN. CUSTOM SfAmS: CUSTOM OATHS I * 2 *3 CUSTOM bath 4» 1/2 liATM |2__________ hot Mf) COlO WATCR sum.y uhcs amo waste HlfMNC ton All PLUMUiNC nxTURCS APE S1U06C0 TMIfOUCll THE aOOH BT VORSt. VEWl PIPIWC FOR AU flKTUHtS IS STUlHiEO lllHOUf.H THE TOP PLAlC BY NOnSC BlMliCM IS IlCSPONSWU »0« UAKIHC AEl CUNNCCTlOriS TO THE MAIN lINfS ON SITE. siirrTROCK wnL BE irn orr row on site PLUMoiMC aiNNCCTiONS If Noicu OH iiiE aoof! I*LAN DATES QfDCtNM. PLAN RCVTSEO PLAN 4- 30-04 CMO 5- 10-04 CM8 5-20-04 CMO 05-20-04 ARP 05-23-04 CUE 05-27-04 CUE SFrOND FI OOR PLAN Iwllfl ISUUtVAN RtSlOCNCE NORSE BUILDING SYSTEMS 1100 BARNm RS. • UDYSUrm. II MS48 WENDY SULLIVAN *ow l**oQi ixal A-it-0* SECOND FLOOR PLAN LMtr-r-fL sTV loo stf)iiic w%i Ilf inf orr ui nil. mNAi 7 c:rMifi%(n up fllDM lilt tIOIIOM tJ> lift. ^ couitsis HCiwifN IMC IM ANU 7M) fifXiRS ON A 7 Slim. Wllll NO *jll)lNC ON HIT CAOll I NOS SNMNi; MAlIRtAl r. SUPinilO or MBS ANU »Mr»HlO ON Sill irr UIIILNS IHAN MTi II* umi |«* liM CMMVIMI. iutN:K ON MU or omtifs w?'B?"ono'GANAf;r frr nitirRS niAir.s I*IAN 3-lft U4 DdSCU IHAN • jU-04 U4il >10 04 CIAII >20 U4 cull 5 20 04 Nit H 25-04 5 2;-04 (fan uOfc/iiNAriY W > ■> OBAEl-^FRONT ELFVATION I W^IOtNCt NOFiSIi: BUILDING SYSTEMS UN OAMirr m. • uoTSHmi. n mmb WENDY SULLIVAN 1. Wvuiuai I RONT n rVAIlOlsI 5£?v^r-*- i7?i* Iwi •r • «*lKt»Utn«« •i*5 MWM •««».)• M M •• •*-<»« ■■« _ •« fit «# ■« • I i>^| •«•*.«« It* i< cAJucr tr oMvt MKH OM I4t »r cmcr& E!eHT_D.tVM!QN •:.*a3S3 ^i(wN. w»u (If I in tur o» iitr MfMi*»r 7 coi/KsPi ijf» riKM im uuiuju Of ih( ifou i . j cooir>f^, enwriN Tin isr AND 7N0 f lOOfTS ON A 7 ■tiURY. HriTtl MJ VOiNC ON THf 0(A C I NOS SifliNC MAT r RIAL r. SIR*''1RII or MRS AM) riNisnru ln siii ue OrilfKS THAN M)S m§Mw mL CirVATlON r« »t wii »f oi>« »\ •^t mi0 »«• M' f—* 1 »• M M*>Mt ID 'ifs PHELJMIf ARY Ua1 21 DRAFll DAlf^. ORIGMAL riAN J-IO-04 Mcvisro PIAN 4 -30-04 CMO i-IO-04 CAia 5-70-04 CUfl 05-70-04 AW 05-75-C4 C;m|J 05-27-04 Uil 004 - - I0«t« ICVU fwi VM av yi®? fiCAtOu:VAj^N « vn .. .«« F.VATI0NS I MN nil Km i tVAM nrcini^iri NORSE BUILDING SYSTEMS 1100 mihm rd - uyv^r^ ii 54848 *^*c*»R- I QOj J»^p« Tljlr.*J (fsa.4) (957.2) LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES :fcM;Ba (93a.*) (956.0) »IM-(9S5 3e I— ZD •^V-(946 D2 ethO^AUK o (/) (S52 Loti 3. 4 and 5. Block 5. BAYSIDE 1) Garoge = ____ 2) Top of foundation (mo) O O o in »5S7) ------------1 {95B.J) 30.3 ZDocn 34 3 .25 rassj) UA.!^4CL c O «»M-(9S5.3« »^V-(946.02 eCKC^AAK (952 HJfe 1 crvf A 1) Garoge >= [559311 2) Top of foundation = -/> I'tJk k V • »< i * ? pitssftsti r-'A*^y &1 ‘'‘v'' / m iii p >V;V-. /• iJ m Wm^.111 ■':<- rv"-!alB rru^ r /. - ^Pi Ww0MwmmM WM Pv4 '-K1^ ' jMn^ ■'^ A. ‘ •> . I rmmi m m p .V pai F..^*..>»*.. ."*•-43 L>\ - • y^ i[* ^ ^ • *->' ri^-- * < ‘ *' Si^.- • 05/11/2004 08:38 7634796445 C3?EPEAU DOCKS Miy 11,2004 PN3E 01 EXHIBIT H Michael P. Gaffron, Planning Director City of Orono 2760 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 RE: 6/17/04 Planning Commlesiof) Meeting Dear Members of the Planning Commission, Please consider carefully the request of Wendy Sullivan, 325 Crestview Avenue (#04-3019), I variances of lot area, lot width, front, side and rear setbacks. In order to construct a new resilience on the property. Everyone in this neighborhood wants that property cleaned up. After the meth lab bust last viear, the property has become an even worse eyesore, and is now In terrible condition. However, word has it. Wendy Sullivan is the daughter of the owner - or if she has purchased.me property • her father was the previous owner. We in the neighborhood simply want to bo ass ured that this property virill not become another rental home to the likes of several of the previous j renters. Sincerely, Sandra NIccum 285 Crestview Avenue Orono, MN 55356 i RUN DATE: 3« 05U723I400I8 »ROf ADDR 290 CRESTVIEW AVE DWNBR NAME J R WOCMAN * K M AN TAXPAYER * KRJSTEN M WDCMAN MAME/ADDR 290CRESTVIEWAVE MAME/ADD 35356 38 03H723I4003I TROPADDR 325 CRESTVIEWAVE OWNER NAME WILLIAM L SUUJVAN rlxPAYER WILLIAM SULLIVAN N^E^ADDR 8<I7REOENTAVEN.I05 NAME/ADDR y^p^rk MN 55443 38 0511723140015 PROP ADDR 3382 BAYSlOE RD OWNERNAMB ALADOISONETAL TAXPAYER MRS A L ADDISON NAME/ADDR DAYSlOE RDNAME/AUUR 55156 38 051172114004) PROP ADDR 300 CRESTVIEWAVE OWNER NAME THOMAS R BETZ TAXPAYER THOMAS R BETZ NAME/ADDR 300 CRESTVIEWAVE NAME/ADU jjOj^qlAKE mN 55356 38 0511721140057 PROP ADDR 350 CRESTVIEWAVE OWNERNAMB WRSTEPHENSlUETAL taxpayer WINFIWZ) R STEPHENS III NAME/ADDR 3770 OAYSIDE RD IDNOLAKHMN 55356 MENNBPINCOJ^TOjpr 18 051 Wl 140075 PROP ADDR 285 CRESTVIEWAVE OWNER NAME SANDRA 1NICCUM TAXPAYER SANDRA 1 NICCUM NAME/ADDR 285 CRESTVIEW AVE long LAKE MN 55156 18 051172)140031 PROP ADDR 31 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO OWNERNAMB BERT L ADDISON ETAL TAXPAYER MRS A L ADDISON NAME/ADDR LONG LAKE MN 55356 31 0511721140016 PROP ADDR 18 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME ESTHER M AOOBOM taxpayer MRS a L ADDISON NAME/ADDR 3)82 BAYSIDERD LONOI^EMN 55)56 II 051172)140052 PROP ADDR J)90 BAYSIDERD OWNERNAMB BARBARAiOANNEHUBER TAXPAYER BARBARA JOANNE HUBER NAME/ADDR ))90 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN 55)56 38 051172)140061 PROP ADDR 280 TONKA AVE OWNER NAME PAAKSSKOOG TAXPAYER PHILIP A KAREN SXOOG NAMWADDR 2M tonka AVE iONOLAKF.MN 55)56 INFORMATION SYSTEM .S LIST PAGE: I 31 051I72)U00)0 PROP ADDR 315 CRESTVIEW AVE OWNER NAME R A EDDINCTON/T J EDDINGTON TAXPAYER ROBERT A TAMARA EDDINGTON NAME/ADDR 315 CRESTVIEW AVE UONGIAJCEMN 55156 38 051172)1400)4 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO OWNERNAMB ESTHER M ADDISON taxpayer MRS a L ADDISON NAME/ADDR 3)87 BAYSIDERD LONOUKEMN 55356 38 0511721140039 PROP ADDR MO TONKA AVE OWNER NAME PATRICK J SKEIE T/LXPAYER PATRICK) SKEIE NAME/ADDR 5710 NORTH ARM DR mound MN 55164 38 051172)140056 PROP ADDR 320 CRESTVIEWAVE OWNER NAME J F LEHMEYER & T L LEHMEVER TAXPAYER JOHN A TRUDY LEHMEYER NAM E/ADDR 379 CRESTVIEW AVE LONG LAKE MN 55)56 )g OSt1721140062 PROP ADDR 310 TONKA AVE OWNER NAME HRUCE SINGER* LINDA SINGER Ta XPAYFR URUCE SINGER* I JNDA SINGER Zc/AOOR IX)NGIAKEMN 55356 o n H - ^ RUHDAie:«2V2a04 FAG6:2 EXHIBIT J "rru«■*' jnnepin •' V .V' \\- ,k * < ^ v*c' ":• Hennepin County . Taxpayer Services Departrhent ' .V' REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COiiM^'n MFFXj^Q JUN 2 8 2004 CITY OF ORONO Date: June 23,2004 Item No.: IQ Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Janice Gundlach ^ Title: City Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: t^04-3024A - City of Orono - Zoning Amendment - Ordinance List of Exhibits A - Ordinance per Planning Commission Recommendation B - PC Memo & Exhibits of 6-17-04 Please refer to the attached memorandum to the Planning Commission dated 6-17-04. The only change to the Ordinance since the Planning Commission’s review is the title has been changed to reflect that a conditional use permit is no longer automat'cally required. Planning Commission Recommendation On June 21,2004, Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the amendments. Staff Recommendation Adopt the attached Ordinance COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached Ordinanc". ORDINANCE NO__, THIRD SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ORONO ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1431 REGARDING CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS ON THROUGH LOTS The City Council of Orono ordains as follows: Section 1; Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1431 is hereby revised as follows: Sec. 78-1431. Co nditional use pewa it reqnire4. Accessory buildings and structures on through lots. All accessory buildings and structures on through lots located in R districts shall raqii ira n onnditional use permit meet the following requirements: 1. The building or structure shall meet the principal building setbacks that are established under sections 78-230. 78-2SS. 78-305. 78-330. 78-350. 78-370. 78- 39S. 78-420. 78-444. 2. No negative impacts to adjacent neighbors or public right-of-way result in the placement of the building or structure, determined at the discretion of the Planning Director. Should the Planning Director determine that item U2 above cannot be met an accessory structure or building mav be permitted by conditional use permit if the Plaiming Commission determines no negative impacts result in the placement of the building or structure. The Planning Commission mav apply reasonable conditions as part of the approval. Section 2: This Ordinance shall be published in THE PIONEER and THE LAKER newspapers and shall become effective upon approval and publication. Adopted by the City Council of Orono on this 28* day of June, 2004 by a vote of ayes and___nays. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor AlHEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Published in the Laker/Pioncer newspapers the week of 2004. The strieteen language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted. Page I of 1 iMMiMaii r Memorandum Date: To: From: RE: June 17,2004 Planning Conunisston Janice Gundlach, City Planner #04-3024A: Ordinance Revision Concerning Accessory Buildings and Structures on **Through Lots” Zoning Ordinance Section 78-1431 prohibits placement of any building on a “through lot ” without obtaining a conditional use permi*. The Ordinance docs not specify conditions that must be met in order to receive approval of a conditional use permit. Because through lots have at least 2 frontages staff has required that the accessory structures meet principal building setbacks in an effort to reduce negative impacts that could arise with enforcement of the accessory setbacks alone, which means a building or structure could get as close as 10 ’ from a lot line. This is the only requirement staff has recommended when a conditional use permit request is made. Attached is a Zoning Ordinance Amendment which eliminates the conditional use permit requirement if the building or structure meets the principal building setbacks. The Ordinance revision also requires discretion of the Planning Director on whether oth'r negative impacts could arise depending on the lot. This could simply mean that additional screening would be required in conjunction with construction of the building or structure or a full Planning Commission review should the Planning Director deem necessary. Staff Recommendation Recommend adoption of the attached Zoning Ordinance Amendment eliminating the Conditional Use Permit requirement for accessory buildings and suaicturcs on through lots. Sec. 78-1431. Conditional use permit required. All accessory buildings and structures on through lots located in R districts shall raqiiira a flftnditionnl un a pefHftit meet the following rcQuirements: 1. The building or structure shall meet the principal building setbacks that are established under sections 78-230. 78-255. 78-305. 78-330. 78-350. 78-370. 78- IQS. 78-420. 78-444. 2. No negative impacts to adjacent neighbors or public right-of-way result in the placement of tb? structure, determined at the discretion of the Planning Director. Should the Planning Director deteimine that item U2 above cannot be met an accessory structure o*- mav be permitted bv conditional use permit if the Planning Commission determines no negative impacts result in the placement of the building or structure. The Planning Commission mav apply reasonable conditions as part of the approval. I . REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUMrii mppjinq JUN 2 8 2004 CITY OF ORC/VO Date: June 23, 2004 Item No.: Department Approval: Name: Michael P. Gatfron Title: Planning Director Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-3024B Proposed Zoning Code Amendment: Section 78-1 577(C)2a - Reconsider 5 acre requirement for storage of vehicles >14,000 lbs. GVW List of Exhibits A - PC Memo and Exhibits of June 18,2004 Application Summary: Planning Commission was asked to consider whether it may be appropriate to amend the ordinance regarding storage of large vehicles, with regards to lots of area 2.0-4.99 acres with pre-existing large vehicle storage situations. Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on June 21. Mrs. Timm was present and spoke regarding her plight. Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend that the ordinance remain as-is and qsi be amended. Staff Recommendation: Staff concurs w'ith tlie Planning Commission recommendation. Please review the memo and exhibits of June 18. Planning Commission in their deliberation noted that the negative impacts of large vehicles on 2-acre lots can be more than just visual, and they did not express any desire to allow pre-existing situations to be ‘grandfathered’. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Determine whether Council wishes to proceed any further with revisions to the large vehicle storage ordinances. I • . i MEMORANDUM To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Mabusth and Planning Commissioners Mike Gaffron, Planning Director June 18,2004 #04-30246 Proposed Zouing Code Amendment: Section 78-lS77(C)2a - Reconsider 5 acre requirement for storage of vehicles >14,000 lbs. CVW Attachments A - Ron Moorse Memo to Council 5-17-04 with MPG Memo Attachment B - Zoning Code Section 78-1577 (as amended 11-24-03 via Ordinance t/4. Third Series) Discussion The City Council has asked that the Planning Commission consider whether it may be appropriate to revise tlie 5 -acre minimum lot size requirement for storage of large vcliiclcs, under tlie recently revised “Exterior Storage in R Districts" ordinance. The 5-acre standard was put in place to ensure the ability to provide adequate separation, buffering and screcningof large vehicles from adjacent properties. The code as written reciuires that vehicles exceeding 14,000 lbs. GVW stored outside must meet a 50' setback from lot lines, must be fully screened (“not visible") from adjacent properties and streets, and any maintenance of the vehicle must occur within a building. The basis for the current ordinance is to protect our neighborhood.s from the noise, vibration, odor and general visual intrusion and disruption caused by the comings, ;^oings and storage of very large vehicles. Counci 1 has expressed a relatively strong degree of support for the ordinance as- is, but is concerned about the impact of the ordinance on those properties with existing large vehicles stored on lots less than 5 acres. Council has suggested a few options to make tlie ordinance less onerous for such situations. These include: - Revising the code to allow such vehicles to be stored on lots of 2.0-4.99 acres in area only if stored in a building; or > Granting a lot area variance for outside storage for pre-existing situations on a case by case basis; or - "Grandfathering" existing situations but not allowing new ones. Planning Commission is asked to make a recommendation as tc whether the ordinance should be rcrised. Staff RccunimcDdation 'I1iis has been published for a Public 1 [coring for June 21. Planning Commission should hold the 1 learing, then discuss whether the code should be amended, and if so, recommend any appropriate conditions to be incorporated into the ordinance. TO; FROM: Mayor Peterson and Council Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator ^ DATE:May 17,2004 SUBJECT: The Parking of Commercial Vehicles in Residential Zones. In late 2003, staff recommended adoption of an amendment to the City zoning code related to the parking of commercial vehicles on residential property. This ordinance was needed to update the City's parking regulations to reflect the character of development occurring in the City's tv/o acre residential districts. The former ordinance allowed parking uses that could have very negative impacts in two-acre subdivisions. Because the new ordinance restricted the parking of commercial vehicles, it has the potential to cause some hardships for those who have been parking commercial vehicles in two- acre residential zones. The Council has heard from one set of neighbors regarding the new ordinance. One neighbor has indicated the ordinance will cause a hardship to him. The other neighbor is looking forwzu-d to relief from the negative impacts of the commercial vehicle. The feedback from this set of neighbors has caused the Council to review the ordinance to ensure it is providing necessary and useful regulations. Although the ordinance does have a bearing on a longstanding dispute between the two neighbors, it is important the Council focus on the ordinance, and not on the dispute. The first step is to make a determination about whether the ordinance is meeting a need, and is meeting that need in a reasonable and effective way. Attached is a memo from Mike Gaffion providing background regarding the ordinance. liiilitM ; I i i MEMORANDUM To:Ron Mooroe, City Administrator From:Mike Gaffron, Plarmin^: Director Date:January 9, 2004 Subject: Background Regarding Vehicle Storage Ordinance During summer and fall 2003 staff and Planning Commission worked on an update and revision to the vehicle storage ordinances. This was in large part due to the obvious long standing need for an ordinance that would address contemporary issues as Orono has changed and developed fiom the primarily 'lakeshore cabins and fanns ’ character of the 1960s to a more ‘urban lakeshore and large-lot suburban ’ mode. This was a natural next step following the Boat Storage ordinance of 2001. While it would be incorrect to suggest that the vehicle storage ordinance was solely a direct response to the Tiinm/Hagen situation, tlrat situation did provide an inunediate focus point for discussions. However, vehicle storage has been an ongoing issue for certain properties throughout Orono for many years, and the Hagen/Timm situation is not by any means the first or only instance of large vehicle activity that has caused or has the potential to cause problems in a neighborhood. Other existing current examples include: - Stubbs Bay Movers activity (non-conforming use on Old Crystal Bay Road) - Vem Hubbell Excavating on Watertown Road - conUactor who stores his trucks and sometimes dumps excess loads, on this residential property; few if any past complaints, but new neighbors arc going to be building expensive homes in the woods just cast of his operation... - Kim Edwards - landscaping business on Woodhaven Drive • Sporadic tmek storage at Hannings on Co. Rd. 6 - Lawn guy across from Sansevere - Truck storage (rental space) at a detached garage on Russell Avenue - Tree Care guy cast of Hwy 12 just north of Luce Line - Chuck Henke in Navane - Dick Ledstrom - all kinds of veliiclcs and stuff stored at property abutting north end of Lurton Park property - Vacuum trucks, railroad salvage business... - Rossing sons tree/firewood business on Cygnet Place - Trucker at 4575 Wayzata Boulevard (south of RR, parks semi trailer/tractor on site) - and wc can probably find a few more if we think hard enough... The revised ordinance establishes certain performance standards for keeping a large vehicle (in excess of 14,000 lbs GVW) as follows; a. Minimum lot size 5 acres. ^ ^ ^ ^ A-c. b. c. d. is e. f. g- Property owner must be vehicle owner or operator Vehicle must be set back 50' from property lines. Vehicle must not be visible from neighboring properties and public street; vegetative screening preferred. Maintenance of vehicle shall occur within an enclosed building. The vehicle shall not constitute a nuisance at any time. In shared driveway situation, City must have signed agreement of all driveway users. At least two of the above-noted examples, b.:sides Timm/Hagen, are shared driveway situations. Following is a brief description and justification for these standards: - The minimum lot size restriction was established because the impacts of large vehicles are minimized, and the ability to reduce those impacts is heightened, with larger properties. Our 2-acre neighborhoods should not be subject to large vehicle impacts. . Requiring the property owner to own/operate the vehicle ensures that the extent of commercial activity is probably going to be limited to a home occupation type use and not to some higher fonn of commercial storage. - The 50' setback is a minimum separation distance that may reduce tlie visual/noir.e/odor impacts of a large vehicle being stored on a site. It matches the 50' principal structure setback for the 5-acre zone. The requirement for screening to hide the veliicle fi-ora view from neighboring properties and roads is an attempt to maintain the residential character of neighborhoods. - Large vehicle maintenance outdoors can be noisy and disruptive, probably much more so than car repair. Requiring it to occur in an enclosed building helps to minimize the disruption due to sporadic banging, etc. - Public nuisances are dealt with in Section 70-4 as follows: (a) It is unlawful for any person to maintain a public nuisance by his act or failure to perform a legal duty. For purposes of this section, a public nuisance shall be defined as any of the following: (1) Maintaining or permittiDg a condition which unreasonably annoys^ injures or endangers the safety, health, morals, comfort or repose of any considerable number of members of the public; (2) Interfering with, obstructing or rendering dangerous for passage any street, pubUc right-of-way or waters used by the public; or MiiiillbidliidteiiHL. (3) Any other act or omission declared by law to be a public nuisance. (b) It is unlawful for any person to permit real property under bis control to be used to maintain a public nuisance, or let the property to another knowing it is to be so used. It is questionable whether ihe storage of a large vehicle would rise to the level of a public nuisance, as it impacts only a small number of members of the public. ORDINANCE NO 4 . THIRD SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ORONO ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1491(H); SECTION 78-1577; AND SECTION 90-1 REGARDING EXTERIOR STORAGE IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS The City Council of Orono ordains as follows: Section 1: Municipal Zoning Code SecUon 78-1491(h) is hereby revised as follows: (h) Commercial vehicle parking. Off-street parking accessory to residential use shall be utilized solely for-tho parking of passenger automobiles provisions of 78-1577 of this Section. Additionally, vehicles in excess of 14,000 pounds GVW shall be subiect to the provisions of 78-1577(c')(2) and no c^mmereially licensed trailer .n excess of 10 000 pounds GVW shall be parked or stored in a residential district except when loading, unloading or rendering a scr\'icc. except that one ouch vel^le-may bo parked at the-rooidonce-of the owner-er operator of the-vel^le? ^tmder no oircumstonoeo shaU-^lang facilities-acceasory to residentk^tructuros be used-fer-open- air storage of-commereial- vehioloo nor for open-atf-ytfking-for busine&s-pm-poses' of automobUoo belonging to the Section 2: Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1577 is hereby revised as follows: See. 78-1577. Exterior storage in R districts. In all R districts, all recreational vehicles, mobile homes. camping_ti^erSt.rnotor homes, pickur) coaches, travel trailers, special mobile ectuipment, and utilitYJ.raiiers_shall meet the requirements of this code. Additionally, all mobile materials and equipment shall be stored within a building or fully screened so as not to be visible from adjoining properties, except-lh at'utility trailcro less-than 20 feet in length, whioh-aro-not-storod-foF commeroial-pufposos, need not be-^rccncd Nvhen stored-4o-the-ioar-&f-the house-and-a, distanoo 5 feet or more from-nny-property-line aird-4-S-doet-ot-more-from-the princrpal n»shl<HK-e-stiuctwe-on anyadjaceatTot. (nV Definitions: 0 1 Recreatior.al-GamtMng-Vehicle. Mobile home and rrrrrndnnal campmfj vehicle shall mean and include the following definitions^ and shall not ^lude any manufactured housinti unit bearing a State of Miimesot.. manufactured hoiLsing seal or certificate, for uses includinp. but nut limited to those listed below: The otfiflkan language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted. Page 1 of 6 (2.) QA a.Camoine trailer means a folding structure, mounted on •wheels and designed for travel, recreation and vacation uses, also called a pop-up camper fi4otor home means a portable, temporary dwelling to be used for travel, recreation and vacation, constructed as an integral part of a self- propelled vehicle. Pickup 6&€teh camper means a structure designed to be mounted on a truck chassis for use as a temporary dwelling for travel, recrea tion and vacation. ^ Travel trailer means a vehicular, portable structvire built on a chassis, designed to be used as a temporary dwelling for travel, recreational and vacation uses, permanently identified as a travel trailer by the manufacturer of the trailer. Special Mobile Equipment means every vehicle not designed or used primarily for the transportation of persons or property and only incidentally operated or moved over a highway, including but not limited to: ditch digging equipment, moving dollies, pump hoists auid other well drilling equipment, street sweeping vehicles, an d other machinery such as asphalt spreaders, bituminous mixers, bucket loaders, tractors other than truck-tractors, ditchers, leveling graders, finishing machines, motor graders, road rollers, scarifiers, earth-moving equipment. The term does not include travel trailers, dump trucks, truck-mounted transit mixers, truck-mounted feed grinders, or other motor vehicles designed for the transportation of persons or property to which machinery has been attached. Utility Trailer means any motorless vehicle, other than a boat trailer or personal watercraft trailer, designed for carrying of snowmobiles, motorcycles, all terrain vehicles, or property on its own structure and for being drawn by a motor vehicle but shall not include boat trailers, a trailer drawn bv a truck-tractor semitrailer combination, or an auxilictrv axle on a motor vehicle which carries a portion of the weight of the motor vehicle to which it is attached. (h) Parking of recreational oamoing vehicles, mobile homes and utility trailers _shall be regulated as follows: d ,1 It is unlawful for any person to park a mobile home or recreational careptag vehicle upon public property for human habitatioci except in-O'licensed mobile-home-paik -or publicly osvn ed caropgroundr (2.^ Tt is up,lawful for anv person to park or store a utility trailer, mobile home. The otriekMi language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted. Page 2 of 6 f recreational vehicle in anv fes44eftce- “R” district for more than 24_hoy _s^ except in a sirie or rear yard at least five feet from anv property lin^ QA Tt ig unlawful to use a mobile home or recreational camping vehicle for human habitation on any private property for more than J_2 hours -without a permit from the city. (C.1 Vehicle storage. All vehicles parked or stored on an y property within thejlity shall be operable and currently licensed. The parking of vehicles, other.than recreational vehicles, in “R” districts is regulated as follows: £L1 ParVing of vehicles, other than recreational vehicles. %vith a maximurn Gross Vehicle Weight (GWW\ of 14.000 pounds or less is allowed in all »R’* districts. OA Parking of vehicles in **R” districts in excess of 14.000 lbs GVW requires each of the following conditions be met: a. Minimum lot size of 5 acres. bi Ci d. Property owner must be vehicle owner or operator,^ Vehicle must be set back 50 feet from property lines. Must not be visible from neighboring properties and public streetsi vegetative screening is preferred. e.Maintenance of said vehicle shall occur within an enclosed building. f The vehicle shall not constitute a nuisance at anv time, and. In a shared driveway situation, the City must have on file an agreement signed bv all cunent driveway users. (d.) Boats, unoccupied boat trailers, and boats on trailers shall be subject to the following storage requirements when not stored for commercial purposes! Licensing, operability and restorations. All boats stored outside on a residential property shall be licensed to the owner or occupant of the property. All boats stored on a property shall be in operable condition, except that inoperable boats under active restoration may be stored on a property for not more than two years, the intent being to discourage the longterm storage of inoperable boats on residential property. (2) Principal residence required. No boat shall be stored on a property or on a The otrithffn language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted Page 3 of 6 • t group of contiguous conunonly owned properties that does not contain a principle residence structure. Maximum length. Boats ruid unoccupied boat trailers exceeding 30 feet in length shall not be stored on any residential property except within a fully enclosed building meeting all applicable zoning and building code standards. Exception: Existing boats over 30 feet in length which are documented to have been stored on the property within the 24 months prior to the effective date of the ordinance from which this section is derived shall be allowed to continue such storage practice until the property is sold, and shall meet the setback requirements of this section. Allowed storage locations. Boats and unoccupied boat trailers up to 30 feet in length may be stored outside on residential property as follows: a.Lakeshore lots. Boats may be stored in a side yard, street yard, side street yard and lakeshore yard as long as they meet required setbacks and have no significant impact on lake views enjoyed by adjacent neighbors. b.Nonlakeshore lots. Boats maybe stored in a side yard and rear yard; trailerable boats may be stored on trailers in a driveway in a front yard or side street yard. (5) Required setbacks. Boats and unoccupied boat trailers shall be stored no less than five feet from any lot line and no less than 15 feet from the principal residence structure on any adjacent lot. (6) Screening. Screening is not required for outside boat storage when in conformance with this section. If boats are shrink wrapped, white is the preferred color but is not mandatory. (7) Dispute resolution Complaints regarding boats stored in lakeshore yards and potentially impacting a neighbor's views of the lake will be referred to a dispute resolution committee, consisting of the planning director, the building official, and a member of the plaiming and zoning stafif. (Code 1984, § 10.60(13)) (e.) Outdoor narking or storage of special mobile equipment as defined in this section • shall be prohibited in anv “R” district. The Btriehen language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted. Page 4 of 6 L « Section 3: Municipal Zoning Code Section 90-1 is hereby revised as follows; Sec. 90-1. Prohibited use and parking of mobile homes and recreational campini vehicles. (a). Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this section, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this subsection, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: (1.) Recreational Camping-Vehicle. Mobile home and recreational camping vehicle shall mean and include the following definitions, and shall not include any manufactured housing unit bearing a State of Minnesota manufactured housing seal or certificate, for uses including but not limited to those listed below: a. Camping trailer means a folding stmeture, mounted on wheels and designed for travel, recreation and vacation uses, also called a pop-up camper. b. Motor home means a portable, temporary dwelling to be used for travel, recreation and vacation, constructed as an integral part of a self- propelled vehicle. c. Pickup coac h camper means a structure designed to be mounted on a tmek chassis for use as a temporary dwelling for travel, recreation and vacation. d. Travel trailer means a vehicular, portable structure built on a chassis, designed to be used as a temporary dwelling for travel, recreational and vacation uses, permanently identified as a travel trailer by the manufacturer of the trailer. (2A Utility Trailer means any motorless vehicle, other than a boat trailer or personal watercraft trailer, designed for carrying of snowmobiles, motorcycles, all terrain vehicles, or property on its own structure and for beinp drawn bv a motor vehicle but shall not include boat trailers, a trailer drawn by a truck-tractor semitrailer combination, or an auxiliary axle on a motor vehicle which carries a portion of the weight of the motor vehicle to which it is attached. (b.) Unlawful aetsr Parking of recreational oamping vehicles, mobile homes and utility trailers shall be regulated as follows; (1.) It is unlawful for any person to park a mobile home or recreational camping vehicle upon public property for human habitation. cKoopt in Q licensed-mobile home park or j^blioly osvncd campgfouadr The Btricken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted. Page 5 of 6 .Liildyfei (2.)It is uxJawful for any person to park or store a utility trailer, mobile home, recreational vehicle in any resident*^ “R" district for more than 24 hours, except in a side or rear yard at least lea five feet from any property line. (3.)It is unlawful to use a mobile home or recreational comping vehicle for human habitation on any private property for more than 72 hours without a permit from the city. Section 4: This Ordinance shall be published in THE PIONEER and THE LAKER newspapers and shall become effective upon approval and publication. Adopted by the City Council of Orono on this 24thday of November____, 2003 by a vote of 4 ayes and 1 nays. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: J. i': Linda S. Vce, City Clerk Published in the Laker/Pioneer newspapers the week of December 13, 2003. The steiflten language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted. Page 6 of 6 • awii / Coi ^^cpTING JUN 2 8 2004 CITY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 28,2004 ITEM NO.// Department Approval: Name Grcgor>'A (iappa Title Director of Public Services Admini.<ttrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services Director's Report Item Description: Purchase Backup Dialenlbr the Sewer SCADA System We recently c.xpcrienced a sewer backup into the basement of a home on Baysidc Road w hich w as caused by failure of the West Luke Street lifi station. This lift station is one of the ten .stations that have the SC!ADA automated alarm system installed, fhe SC'ADA system did register the lift station malfunction and successfully sent an alarm signal to the public works garage. However, the dialer system software did not work properly, and the public works on call person was not notified of the alarm. We have been experiencing a sporadically reoccurring problem with the dialer system. The vendor is having a difficult time finding the problem because when he comes to fix the problem everything works successfully. We are continuing to work on solving this problem, but are concerned about the total reliability of the dialer system. The existing Navarre water plant control system has an alarm and dialer system, which has been functioning fine since 1 999, to notify the public works on call person of problems at the water plant. This w ater plant system could be expanded to function as a backup dialer system in the event of a failure of the SCADA .system. The SCADA system provides detailed alamis on lift station problems while the water plant backup system would only provide a general alarm notification of a problem at a particular lift station. Our recommendation is to purehasc a backup alarm dialer system for the SCADA system from Automatic Control Systems for a cost of $7,798. W'e will also continue to work on solving the problem with the SCADA system dialer. This backup dialer will provide an additional level of protection in order to further reduce the potential for sewer backups, fhe cleanup and restoration costs for one sewer backup could easily exceed the costs of the dialer system. In addition, it would prevent the homciiwner inconvenience and difficulties caused by sewer backups. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the purcha.se of a backup dialer for the SCADA system from Automatic Systems Company. Roseville, Minne.sota. in the amount $7,798, to be funded from the 2004 Sewer Lund Budget, w ith approval of a budget ad justment to reflect this expenditure. »^PFTING JUN 2 6 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO DATE; June 28, 2004 ITEM NO.: / dij Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services Director's Report Item Description: Request l•'inal for Paymenr I (otnestead Road Sanitary Sewer Project Wc have reviewed the inlormation submitted by the City's engineering firm and recommend approval of this Request for Payment. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Request for Final Payment North brown Road (Homestead) Sanitary Sewer Project to Red Pederson Utilities Inc. in the amount of $3,160.78 1/1 Bonestroo ^jRosene Anderlik& |\ I Associates Cnginf ert i Architeas Owner: City of Orono, P 0 Box 66. Orono, MN 55323-0066 Date:June 22. 2004 For Period:5/4/2004 to 6/22/2004 Request No*2 AND FINAL Contractor;Red Pederson Utilities Inc . 100 Inlerlachen Road Hopkins MN 55343 CONTRACTOR'S REQUEST FOR PAYMENT HOMESTEAD ROAD SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS BRA FILE NO 139-03-141 SUMMARY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 11 12 Original Conlracl Amount Change Order - Addition Change Order - Deduction Revised Contract Amount Value Completed to Date Material on Hand Amount Earned Less Relainago 0% Subtotal Less Amount Paid Previously Liquidated damages - AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO $34.914.50 $ S 000 000 2 AND FINAL $ S s s $ $ 34.914 50 34 905 65 0 00 34.905 65 000 34.905 65 31.744 87 0 00 3.160 76 Recommended for Approval by: BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC, 4^ Approved by Contractor RED PEDERSON UTILITIES INC Approved by Owner. CITY OF ORONO Specifiod Contract Completion Date* _________________July 31. 2004 Date: 1 j903!4tH£O2FINAL jH No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 8 10 11 12 13 14 Item PART 1 . BASE BID; 1-1/2'HOPt. SDR 11 DIHrCKONAt DRIILFD 2" HOPE SDR 11 DIRECTIONAL DRILLED MM* HDPF. SERVICE PIPE SDR 11 DIRECTIONAL DRILLED 1-1/4* CURB Stop AND BOX 2* ISOLATION VALVr CONNECT TO EXISTING FORCE MAIN BITUMINOUS TRAIL PATCH TERMINATION FLUSHING CONNECTION HUSHING CONNECTION CLEAR AND GRUB SILT FENCE. REGULAR SODDING. I AWN TYPE, MNDOT SEED MIX fiOA WOOD FIBER BLANKET Tolol PARI 1 ■ BASE BIO PART 1 - BASE BIO: • OhJ Amount ToUil • S34.914 50 Contract Unit Current Quantity Amount Unit Quantity Price Quantity to Date lo Oato LF 41U 10 45 410 $4.284 50 LF 1400 1045 1400 $14.630 00 LF 300 1145 287 $3,286 15 FA 7 950 00 8 $7.600 00 LA 1 7G5 00 1 $765 00 LA 1 850 00 1 $850 00 SY 60 1000 50 50 $500 00 LA 1 117500 1 $1.17500 LS 1 57500 1 $57500 LA 1 ;^50 00 1 $250 00 LF 300 200 $0 00 SY 500 100 500 500 $500 00 AC 05 500 00 05 0.5 $250 00 SY 300 1 50 ICO 160 $240 00 $34,905 65 Total PART 1 • BASE DID.$.34,905 65 Tolal Work Cumplulocl To Datn $34,905 65 1 i; PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS OWNER CITY OF ORONO BRA FILE NO. 139-03-141 CONTRACTOR RED PEDERSON UTILITIES INC CHANGE ORDERS No.Date Description Amount Total Change Orders PAYMENT SUMMARY No.From To Payment Retainage Completed 1 03/23/2004 05/03/04 31.744.87 1,670.78 33.415.65 2 AND FINAL 05/04/2004 06/22/04 3.16078 34,905 65 Material on Hand Toldl Payment to Dale $34.905 65 Original Contract $34,914 50 Retainage Pay No. 2 AND FINAL Change Orders Total Amount Earned $34.90565 Revised Contract $34,914 50 131103141 RtCUriNAl M REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COdM/'ll »«CPT|(y|Q ‘JUN 2 8 2004 CITY OF ORONO DATE: June 23,2004 13ITEM NO. Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services Director's Report Item Description: Request for Final Payment, Navarre CR19 Sidewalk Project We have reviewed the information submitted by the City's engineering firm and recommend approval of this Request for Final Payment in the amount of $6,781.47 with $473.00 of this amount paid to Gronberg & Associates for resetting a survey monument that was removed by the contractor. This results in a net final payment of $6,038.47 to Schmidt Curb Company. We have discussed this issue with the contractor who is agreeable to this method of resolving this issue. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Request for Final Payment, Navarre CRI9 Sidewalk Project to Schmidt Curb Company Inc. in the net amount of $6,308.47 Motion to approve payment to Gronberg & Associates in the amount of $473.00 for resetting a survey monument for the Navarre CR19 Sidewalk Project. i If I^Bonestroo ^iRosene nAnderlR(& |\j| Associates EngineersiArchitectt Owner: City of Orono. P.O Box 66. Orono, MN 55323-0066 Date:Jur^e 22. 2004 For Period 12/3/2003 to 6/22/2004 Request No*2 AND FINAL Contractor Schmidt Curb Co . Inc . 13195 NE 95th Street . Elk River MN 55330 CONTRACTOR’S REQUEST FOR PAYMENT COUNTY ROAD 19 SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS BRA FILE NO. 139-02-116 SUMMARY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Onginal Contract Amount Change Order - Addition Change Order • Deduction Revised Contract Amount Value Completed to Date Material on Hand Amount Earned Less Retainage 0% Subtotal Less Amount Paid Previously Liquidated damages • AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. 40.552 50 S s 0 00 ii 0 00 2 AND FINAL 40.552 50 37.423 25 0 00 37.423 25 0 00 37.423 25 30,641 70 000 6.701 47 Recommended for Approval by; BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Approved by Comractor. SCHMIDT CURB CO INC Approved by Owner CITY OF ORONO Specined Contract Completion Date: October 31,2003 Date: No.Ittm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 13 14 >•; V lEfe !!■? i ^ !l s: .iy BASE 810; REMOVE BITUMINOUS SURFACING SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) COMMON EXCAVATION (P) AGGREGATE BASE. CLASS 5.100% CRUSHED BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE. PATCHING. TYPE 31 BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE. PATCHING. TYPE 41 MODULAR BLOCK RETAINING WALL 5* CONCRETE WALK CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER. DESIGN B618 6* CONCRETE DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMP TRAFFIC CONTROL SILT FENCE, HEAVY DUTY SODDING, LAWN TYPE Total BASE BID: BASE BID: - Bid Amount Total • $40,552.50 Contract Unit Currant Quantity Amount Unit Quantity Prica Quantity to Date to Date SY 190 11.00 •152 $1,672.00 LF 340 3.75 276 $1,035.00 CY 99 25.00 99 $2.475 00 TN 115 30.00 BO $2,400.00 TN 18 125.00 12.5 $1,562.50 TN 12 125.00 12.5 $1,562.50 SF 45 35.00 70 70 $2,450.00 SF 2350 500 2350 $11,750.00 LF 335 17.50 347 $6,072.50 SY 10 4500 5 $225.00 EA 2 250.00 2 $500.00 LS 1 3000.00 1 $3,000.00 LF 200 3.75 $0.00 SY 500 7.25 375 375 $2,718.75 $37,423.25 Total BASE BID;$37,423 2S Total Work Completed To Date $37,423.25 ‘ r r L PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS OWNER CITY OF ORONO BRA FILE NO. 139-02-116 CONTRACTOR SCHMIDT CURB CO INC CHANGE ORDERS Total Changa Oi ders PAYMENT SUMMARY No.From To Payment Retainage Completed 1 08/14/2003 12A)2/03 30,641.70 1,612 73 32.254 51 2 AND FINAL 12/03/2003 06/22/04 6.781.47 37.423 25 Material on Hand Total Payment to Date $37,423.25 Original Contract $40,552.50 Retainage Pay No.2 AND FINAL Change Orders Total Amount Earned I $37.42325 Revised Contract $40,552.50 «4ie«vlla#«9 ««« DATE: June 25,2004 ITEM NO: f<f REQUEST FOR COUNCIE ACTION COMM^n ^^crPTING JUN 2 6 2004 CITY OF ORONO Department Approval: Name Ronald J. M(M>rsc Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: Purchase of Software L|Knses Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report i he City is transitioning from Word Perfect software to Microsoft (iftlce software. The City of Minneapolis is ofTering excess Microsoft Office 2000-Professional software ficenscs to governmental entities at a sub.stantial di.scoiint through a bid process. It is recommended that the City purchase 18 licenses at a cost of $225.00 per license, for a total cost of $4,050.00. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the purchase of Microsoft Office 2000-Profe.ssional licenses at a total co.st of $4,050.00. \ iiatM i. I I COnM''ii McpTING JUN 2 S 2004 DATE: June 25,2004 ITEM NO: /S' REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF OROMy Department Approval: Name Ronald J. Moorae Title City Administrator Adminbtrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Appointment of Pladiting Commission Chair With the resignation of Jeaiine Mabusth from the Planning Commission, it is necessary to appoint a new Planning Commission Chair. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to appoint a Planning Commission Chair to replace Jeanne Mabusth - **«^PTING JUN 2 6 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO DATE: June 25, 2004 ITEM NO: !(p Department Approval: Name RonMoonc Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:m Agenda Section: City Adiniiiislralor's Report Item Description: Navarre Fire Station Application and Ccrtitic.'Uc Tor Payment No. 8 The City has received Application and Certificate for Payment No. 8 IVoin DEW, the General ConUactor, in tlic amount ol $28, 722.00. Tlie application for payment has been reviewed and approved by the architect and project manager. The Nav;u-re Fire station is complete and operational. COUNCIL ACmON REQUESTED: Motion to approve the Application and Certificate lor Payment No. 8, in tlic amount of $28,722.00, to be paid from the Navarre Fire Station Constiiiction Fund. BKV O (I O ‘.I «* 0of«: June 11.2004 Attention: Ron Moorse AfCNlMfUf« knMof DMign CngtnsTtng 222 North 2nd Street Minneapolis, MN SS40) Phone 612-339-3752 Fax 6 1 2-339-62 1 2 Address: CityofOrono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55336 Project No.: 1124.10 ON q Wf ARE SENDING YOU:^ Shop diawings r~l Change order Re: Navarre Fire Station n Pdnts n Plans D Samples O Specifications Q Copy of letter 13 Other: TRANSMinED VIA:I I Mail D Messenger dl Fa* D Other: COflES OAtfc NO. 1 2 1 • • 6 e ««••••#« f * •e««•»«•#•»•••«»•4 •«« »««•#*••**••• »•«•»•••f•••«••♦••••••• „. _____ PoYmcn! App.lif=a.t ‘o^^^e*e»e**e****ee«e*e««••e«e«*•e*«eeee«e6« ee » ...»m»..*.*».*..»m***.m**»»*«*»»»««»»»«»*»*»»»**^»***'****“*-............................................................................................ ..... ........................ .♦••ee#*e6»6eee*eee#«6eeeeAeeefee« »»e« «»«•••• ee e *••••♦»••« ••eee*e«*e»ee »*e«eee»A«M*««e««*«Me»e««e«e«M*eee«»»e»eeeee*e«ft««D«e«»M«»D«*»»*Peeeee*eeeee .........................• e • •e* - ♦ • • ••♦e •« eev« • » • • ee«e« •••e«eeee** • « •«e«eee4 #«eee*«* e« 4 THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked belj^: For approval 13 Approved as submlHed For your use C Approved as noted As requested (Zl Returned tor corrections For review and comment Q Other: ______ Resubmit Submit_ Return _ copies for approval copies for distribution corrected prints □ FOR BIDS DUE □ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS; Enclosed are two copies of Payment Application No. 8 tor work performed on the Navarro Fire Station. This application has been reviewed and certified in the amount of $28,722.00. Please remit payment against this application. Regards. Nan Gustafson COPY TO: Bill Woltors. Constructive Idea:. 901 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 300, SI. Paul, MN 55102 Brad Berke. DEW Corporation, 2125 Century Avenue. North St. Paul, MN 55109 File q\i 124-io\bui\cotre9;-owntf-rto poB doc If enctosuies ore not os noted, klncty notify ui of onci.Pfin!«d;6/n/2D04 r . 4 I. > PAYMENT APPLICATION Page 1 TO: FROM: City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway OroTK). MN 55336 Attn: Accounts Payable Dew Corporation 2125 Century Avenue North St Paul. MN 55109 PROJECT 03005 NAME AND Navarro Fire Station LOCATION: 37^^0.3790 shoreline Drive APPLICATION » PERIOD THRU: PROJECT its: Orono, MN 55336 ARCHITECT: BKV Group. Inc 222 N. 2nd SI Mrmcapoiis. MN 55401 DATE OF CONTRACT: 8 JiniSl' DisUibuUon to: 04/28/2004 OWNER (i3 ARCHITECT 07/01/2003 S] CONTRACTOR □□ CONTRACTOR’S SUMMARY OF WORK Applicatkxi Is made for payment as shown below. Continuatkxi Pago is attached. 1. CONTRACT AMOUNT $1,138,000.00 2. SUM OF/U.L CHANGE ORDERS $10,857-00 3. CURRENT CONITMCT AMOUNT (Lino 1 ♦/-2)$1,148,857.00 4. TOTAL COMPLETED AND STORED $1,148,857.00 (Column G on Continuation Pago) 5. RETAINAGE: a. 2-50% of Completed Work _______ (Columns 0 ♦ E on Continuation Page) b. 2 50% of Material Stored _ (Column F on Continuation Page) Total Retainage (Lino 5a ^ 5b a Column I on Continuation Page) 6 TOTAL COMPLETED AND STORED LESS RETAINAGE (Line 4 minus Line 5 Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENT APPUCATIONS (Line 6 from prior Application) 8 PAYMENT DUE 9. BALANCE TO COMPLETION (Line 3 mlrws Line 6) ________ S28.72100 $0 00 $28,721 00 $1,120.136 00 $1.091.41400 $28,722io' $28,721.00 SUMMARY OF CHANGE ORDERS ADDITIONS Total Changes approved in $10,657.00previous months Total appro^ this monlh $0.00 TOTALS $10>57.6 o NET CHANGES $10,857.00 DEDUCTIONS $0.00 $6^ $0.00 Contractor's signature below is his assurance to Owner, concerning the payment herein applied for. that: (1) the Work has been performed as required In the Contract Documents. (2) all sums previously paid to Contractor under the Contract have been used to pay Contractor's costs for labor, materials and other obligations under the Contract for Work previously paid for. and (3) Contractor is legally entitled to this payment. CONTRACTOR: By: Dew Corpor^ Date:04/28^004 Roberf^. Dew, President State of: Minnesota County ot Ramsey Subscribed and sworn to before me this 28th day of Aprfl 2004 a TAMMYJNELSON notaiv ». euc - llyF»OfttJin.3« Notary Public »ammy no»on ^ \ A V 'iiiCN My Commission Expires: January Jl. 20 Tammy Nelson ARCHITECT’S CERTIFICAT ON Archiled's slgnalu'e below Is his assurance to Owner, concerning the payment herein applied (or. Uiat: (1) Architect has inspected the Work represented by this Appticatton. (2) such Work has been completed to the extent indicated in this Application, and the quaility of workmanship and materials conforms with the Contract Documents. (3) this App'ication for Payment accurately states the amount of Work completed and payment due therefor, and (4) Architect Ktk>ws of no reason why payment should not be made. CERTIFIED AMOUNT....................................................................... -- (Hlhe ceitiTiod amount is attOrontfmm the paymoit due. you should ettech an explanation. Initial all the tguros that are chanced to mate/i Vv ^lUTied amount.) ARCHITECT: By;Date;k/lfk'L PAYyiEHT APPLICATION Neither this Application nor paylwnl applied for herein is asslghabte or negotiable Paymem shall be made only to C^ontractor, ay Is wthout prejudice to any rights of Owner or Contractor under the Contract Docurpents or ^)nerwtse. ■ QSS. INC- DOCUMENT CONTINUATION PAGE Page 2 of 3 PROJECT:03005 Navarro Rre Station Payment Application oontainino Contractor's signature is attached. APPLICATION#: DATE or APPLICATION: PERIOD THRU: PROJECT #s: 8 Final 04/26/2004 04/28/2004 I COMPLETED WORK ITEM #WORK DESCRIPTION SCHEDULED AMOUNT AMOUNT PREVIOUS PERIODS 1 2 3 4 5 0 7 8 0 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1/ 18 19 20 21 2? 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 General Condilions Bonds Earthwork Situ Utilities Asphalt Paving Site Concrotu t.andscaping Concroto Masonry l^ecast Concroto /Vch Precast Steel Fabrication Steol Erection Rough Carpentry Mlllwark WaterprooAng RooAng (Uiulking HM/Doors/I Urciwaro Ovorlioad Doocs /VI. Clad Wood WIndcjws /VI Glass A Glazing Coramic 7 Uo Acoustical Celling Tito Epoxy Flooring Carpot/ResIBent f^ainUng Toilet Paretiorui ToNot Acoossortes SUB-TOTALS $126,687.50 $9,994.00 $25,645.00 $11,900.00 $16,857.00 $4,950.00 $1/.58?.00 $41.200 00 $241,700.00 $9.28300 $11.71500 $35,696.00 $8,700.00 $35,323.00 $13,102.00 $6,400.00 $48,840.00 $3,657.00 $9,345.00 $5.91900 $9.952 00 $11.409 00 $7,130.00 $2,640.00 $11,500.00 $6.339 00 $11,17800 $711.00 $2,140.00 $747.494 50 $126,687.50 $0,094.00 $25,645.00 $11,900.00 $16,857.00 $4,950.00 $17,582.00 $41,200.00 $241./00.00 $9.283 00 $11.71500 $35,696.00 $8,700.00 $35.323 00 $13,102.00 $6,400.00 $46,840.00 $3,657.00 $9,345.00 $5,919.00 $9,052.00 $11.409 00 $7,130 00 $2.64000 $11.500 00 $6,339.00 $11,176.00 $711.00 $2.140 00 $747,494.50 AMOUNT THIS PERIOD STORED MATERIALS (NOT IN D OR E) TOTAL COMPLETED AND STORED (D ♦ E ♦ F) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0 00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0 00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0 00 $0.00 $0 00 $0 00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0 00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0 00 $0 00 $0 00 $0 00 $126,687.50 $9,994.00 $25,645.00 $11.900 00 $16,857.00 $4,950.00 $17,582.00 $41,200.00 $241,700.00 $0,283.00 $11,715.00 $35,696.00 $8.700 00 $35.323 00 $13,102.00 $6,400.00 $40,840.00 $3,657.00 $9.345 00 $5,919.00 $9,952.00 $11,409.00 $7.130 00 $2,640.00 $11,500.00 $6,339.00 $11.17600 $711.00 $2.140 00 $0 00 $0.00 $747,494.50 PERCENT COMPLETE (G / C) BALANCE TO COMPLETION (C-G) RET/VINAGE (IF VARIABLE) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% $0.00 $0 00 $0 00 $0 00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0 00 $0.00 $0 00 $0 00 $0 00 $0 00 $0.00 $0 00 $0.00 $0 00 $0.00 $0.00 $oon $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,167.00 $250.00 $641.00 $296.00 $421.00 $124.00 $440.00 $1,030.00 $6,043.00 $232.00 $293.00 $692.00 $21800 $883 00 $328 00 $160 00 $1,221.00 $91.00 $234.00 $148 00 $249.00 $265 00 $178 00 $66 00 $268.00 $156.00 $279.00 $18.00 $54.00 100%$0.00 $18.6^.00 CONTINUATION PAGE FOR PAYMENT APPLICATION OSS. INC DOCUMENT CONTINUATION PAGE Pago 3 of 3 PROJECT:03005 Navam) Fuo Station Payment Application containing Contractor ’s signature is attached. APPLICATION #. DATE OF APPLICATION PERIOD THRU PROJECT #5 8 Final 04/20/2004 04/28/2004 A B c D E F G H 1 ITEM n WORK DESCRIPTION SCHEDULED AMOUNT COMPLETED WORK STORED MATERIALS (NOT INDORE) TOTAL COMPLETED AND STORED (D ♦ E ♦ F) PERCENT COMPLETE (G/C) BALANCE TO COMPLETION (C-G) RETAINAGE AMOUNT PREVIOUS PERIODS AMOUNT THIS PERIOD (IF VARIABLE) 30 Lockers 17.280.00 $7,260.00 $0.00 $0.00 $7.280 00 100%$0.00 $182.00 31 Louvers $244.00 $244.00 $0.00 $0 00 $244.00 100%$0.00 $6.00 32 Visual Display Boards $812.00 $812.00 $0.00 $0.00 $812.00 100%$0.00 $20.00 33 Rre Extinguishers $350.00 $350.00 $0.00 $0.00 $350.00 100%$0.00 $9.00 34 MIsc. Specialties $960.00 $960.00 $0.00 $0.00 $960.00 100%$0.00 $24.00 35 Floor Mats $1.91500 $1,915.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1.91500 100%$0.00 $48.00 36 Idontifyino Devices $7,554.00 $7,554.00 $0.00 $0.00 $7,554.00 100%$0.00 $189.00 3/Residential Appliances $4,466.00 $4,466,00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,466.00 100%$0.00 $112.00 38 Crane $6,709.50 $6,709.50 $0 00 $0.00 $6,709.50 100%$0.00 $168.00 39 Window Blinds $1,655.00 $1,655.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,655.00 100%$0.00 $41.00 40 Mectuinical $236,000.00 $236,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $236,000.00 100%$0.00 $5,900.00 41 Tire Piuloclion $12,560.00 $12,560.00 $0 00 $0.00 $12,560.00 100%$0.00 $314.00 42 Electrical $110,000.00 $110,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $110,000.00 100%$0.00 $2,750.00 43 COffI $10,857.00 $10,857.00 $0.00 $0 00 $10,857.00 100%$0.00 $271.00 TOTALS $1,148,857.00 $1,148,857.00 $0.00 $000 $1,148,857.00 100X $000 $28,721.00 CONTINUATION PAGE FOR f’AYMENT APPUCATION OSS. INC. DOCUMENT PAYMENT APPLICATION Pago 1 TO. CltyolOfono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55330 Attn: Accounts Payable FROM: Dow Corporation 2125 Century Avonue North SL Paul. MN 55109 FOR: Application Is made for payment as stiown below. Continuation Pago Is attached. PROJECT 03005 NAME AND Navarre Fko Station LOCATION; 3^70.3790 shofBlIne Diivo Orono, MN 55336 AKCMITECT; BKV Group, Inc 222 N. 2nd SI. Minneapolis. MN 55401 APPLICATION U PERIOD THRU. PROJECT «s: DATE OF CONTRACT: 0 Distribution to: 04/28/2004 (^1 OWNER ARCHITECT 07/01/2003 IXI CONTRACTOR □ n $1,138,000.00 (Line 1 2) $10,857.00 $1,148,857.00 $1,140,857.00 $M,7^.(» $0.00 1. CONTRACT AMOUNT 2. SUM OF ALL CHANGE ORDERS 3. CURRENT CONTRACT AMOUNT 4. TOTAL COMPLETED AND STORED (Column Cj on Continuation Pago) 5. RETAINAGE: a. 2.?K)% of Comi)lotod Work (Columns D ♦ C on Continuation Pago) b. 2.50% of Material Stored (Column F on Continuation Pago) Total Retainago (Une 5a^ 5b a Column I on Contiimation Pago) ____ e. TOTAL COMPLETED AND STORED LESS RETAINAGE _____ (Llno 4 minus Line 5 Total) 7. LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENT APPUCAT10NS ______ (line 6 from prior Application) B. PAYMENT DUE 9 BALANCE TO COMPI El ION (Linn 3 minus linn b) $2d.72100 $28,722.00 $28,721.00 SUMMARY Oh CHAN(3E'oROLI<S ADDITIONS OF DUCT ions ' Totiil changes approved In $1U.B57.00 $0.00pre^ous months Total appioMid this nHNilh $000 $000 TOTM.S $10,857.00 $000 NF^T CHANGES $10857.00 Contractor's signature below is his assurance to Owner, concerning the payment herein applied for. mat: (1) Iho Work has been performed as required in the Contract Documents, (2) all sums previously pakJ to (ontractor under the Contract have been used to pay Contractor's costs for labor, materials and other obllgaUons under tlie Contract for Work previously paid for. and (3) Contractor is legally entitled to this payment CONTRACTOR: OewC By: __________ Robert State of: Minnesota County of: Ramsey Subscribed tnnd sworn to before me this 28th day of April 2004 —Date:04/28/2004 TAMMVJ nelson N0T4Pv>;aiic MWNESOU Notary Public: Tammy Nebon My Commission Ejrplres: January 31,2C^ Srlor ViW\\\V ARCHITECT’S CERTIFICATION Architect's signature below is tns assurance to Owner, concerr>ir>g the payment herein applied tor, that: (1) AfcNlect has inspected the Work represented by this Application. (2) such Work has been complelad to the extent Indicated In this Applicallori. and the qualllty of workmanship and materials conforms v^th the Contract Doajments, (3) this Application for Payment accurately states the amount of Work con^leted and payment duo bierefor. and (4) ArcWtect knows of no rjason why payment slKHjId not be made. CERTIFIED AMOUNT-...._________________________________________________ (II Iho certified aimuni is diflenml tmm the (layment duo, you should attach an axpImittHgi. Iniial al tho fiaures that am changed to watch Iho certifiod amnunt ) ARCHI1L-CT: By: Neither this /Vpplication th pa Date: PAYMENT APPLICATION ,______________________ Neiiner mis MppncaiKin oor pewinfm ctpiminj for heroin Is assigr\able or negotiable. Payment shall be made only to Contractor, kid is without prejudice to any ri^ls of Owner or Contractor urxtor iheCont^l^^Doa ^________________ y pa^n^iapplteofor he or. kid is without preiudii OSS. INC. DOCUMENT t >* ■ CONTINUATION PAGE Page 2 of 3 PROJECT:03005 Navarre Fire Station Payment Applicalion containing Contractor's signature is attached. Al'PLICATION # DATE OF APPLICATION PERIOD THRU PROJECT #8 8 Final 04/28/2004 04/28/2004 ITEM « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1b 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 B WORK DESCRIPTION General Conditions Bonds EarthvyorK Site UUlitios Asphalt Paving Site Conaete Landscaping Concrete Masonry Precast Concrete Arch Precast Steel Fabrication Steel Erection Rough Carpentry Mlllwor1( Waterproofing Roofing SCHEDULED AMOUNT Caulking HM/Doors/Hardware Overhead Doors M, Clad Wood Windows Al. Glass A Glazing Ceramic Tile Acoustical Celling Hie Epoxy Flooring Carpet/Reaifient PaJnttng Toilet Parttions Toilet Acoessories SUB-TOTALS $126,687.50 $9,994.00 $25,645.00 $11,900.00 $16,857.00 $4,950.00 $17,582.00 $41,200.00 $241,700.00 $9.283 00 $11,715.00 $35,696.00 $8,700.00 $35,323.00 $13,102.00 $6,400.00 $48,840.00 $3,657.00 $9,345.00 $5,919.00 $9.952 00 $11,409.00 $7,130.00 $2,640.00 $11,500.00 $6,339.00 $11,178.00 $711.00 $2,140.00 $747,494.50 COMPLETED WORK AMOUNT PREVIOUS PERIODS $126,687.50 $9,994.00 $25,645.00 $11,900.00 $16,857.00 $4,950.00 $17,582.00 $41,200.00 $241,700.00 $9,283 00 $11,715 00 $35,696.00 $8,700.00 $35,323.00 $13,102.00 $6,400.00 $48,640.00 $3,657.00 $9,345.00 $5,919.00 $9.952 00 $11.409 00 57.130.00 $2,640.00 $11,500.00 $6,339.00 $11,178.00 $711.00 $2,140.00 $747,404.50 AMOUNT THIS PERIOD $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0 00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 STORED MATERIALS (NOT IN D OR E) TOTAL COMPLETED AND STORED (D ♦ E ♦ F) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $000 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $aoo $0.00 $aoo $aoo $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $126,687.50 $9,994.00 $25,645.00 $11,900.00 $16,857.00 $4,950.00 $17,582.00 $41,200.00 $241,700.00 $9.283 00 $11,715.00 $35.696 00 $8,700 00 $35,323.00 $13,102.00 $6,400.00 $48,840.00 $3,657.00 $9,345.00 $5,919.00 $9,952.00 $11,409.00 $7,130.00 $2,640.00 $11,500.00 $6,339.00 $11,178.00 $711.00 $2,140.00 $747,494.50 PERCENT COMPLETE (G/C) 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% BALANCE TO COMPLETION (C-G) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0 00 $0.00 $0 00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 iOJOO $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 I RETAINAGE (IF VARIABLE) $3,167.00 $250.00 $641.00 $298.00 $421.00 $124.00 $440.00 $1,030.00 $6,043.00 $232.00 $293.00 $892.00 $218.00 $883 00 $328.00 $160 00 $1,221.00 $91.00 $234.00 $148.00 $249.00 $285.00 $178.00 $66.00 $288.00 $158.00 $279.00 $18.00 $54.00 $18,669.00 CONTINUATION PAGE FOR PAYMENT APPLICATION QSS. INC DOCUMENT 4 *.N . r' • i ' •'•V ' CONTINUATION PAGE Page 3 of 3 PROJECT:03005 Navarre Fue Station Payment Application containing Contractor's signature is attached. APPLICATION It: DATE OF APPLICATION: PERIOD THRU: PROJECT #s: 8 Final 04/26/2004 04/28/2004 A B c 0 1____E ___F G H 1 ITEM #WORK DESCRIPTION SCHEDULED AMOUNT COMPLETED WORK STORED MATERIALS (NOT IN 0 OR E) TOTAL COMPLETED AND STORED (D ♦ E ♦ F) PERCENT COMPLETE (G/C) BALANCE TO COMPLETION (C-G) RETAINAGE (IF VARIABLE)AMOUNT PREVIOUS PERIODS AMOUNT THIS PERIOD 30 Lockers $/,2ao.oo $7,260.00 $0.00 $0 00 $7,280.00 100%$0.00 $182.00 31 Louvers $244.00 $244.00 $0.00 $0.00 $244.00 100%$0.00 $6.00 32 Vlsua) Display Boards $812.00 $812.00 $0.00 $0.00 $81200 100%$0.00 $20.00 33 Rre Eitinguishors $350.00 $350.00 $0.00 $0.00 $350.00 100%$0.00 $9.00 34 Misc. Specialties $960.00 $960.00 $0.00 $0.00 $960.00 100%$0.00 $24.00 35 Floor Mats $1,915.00 $1,915.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,915.00 100%$0.00 $46.00 36 Identifying Devices $7,554.00 $7,554.00 $0.00 $0.00 $7,554.00 100%$0.00 $169.00 37 Residential Appliances $4,466.00 $4,466.00 $0 00 $0.00 $4,466.00 100%$0.00 $112.00 38 Crane 16.709.50 $6,709.50 $0.00 $0 00 $6,709.50 100%$0.00 $168.00 39 WirxkMV Blinds $1.355.00 $1,655.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,655.00 100%$0.00 $41.00 40 Mechanical $236,000.00 $236,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $236,000.00 100%$0.00 $5,900.00 41 Fire Protection $12,560.00 $12,560.00 $0.00 $0.00 $12,560.00 100%$0.00 $314.00 42 Electrical $110,000.00 $110,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $110,000.00 100%$0.00 $2,750.00 43 com $10,857.00 $10,857.00 $0.00 $0.00 $10,857.00 100%$0.00 $271.00 TOTALS 1 1 $1,148,657.00 $1,148,057.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,148,857.00 100%$000 $28,721.00 CONTINUATION PAGE FOR PAYMENT APPLICATION QSS. INC. DOCUMENT i COllMr'ii t^ppjif^Q M 2 a 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITV OF ORONO DATE: 6/28/04 ITEM NO: / 7 Department Approval: Name: Stephany Good^^/ Title: Chief of Police Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: West Metro Drug Task Force Agreemen t and Budget Adjustment-------- Exhibits: West Metro Drug Task Force Agreement DISCUSSION: Local law enforcement agencies have obtained evidence that trafficking in narcotics and dangerous drugs exists in the western suburban communities of Hennepin County. The municipalities covered by the West Hennepin Department of Public Safely, the Hennepin Coun y Sheriffs Office, and the Police Departments of Orono, Mound, and Medina are aware that sue illegal activity has a substantial and detrimental affect on public safety as well as the health and general welfare of the citizens of these communities. It has been determined that an effective approach to combat this problem is the formation of a task force designed to vigorously enforce laws pertaining to illegal drug sale and abuse. The West Metro Drug Task Force, consisting of the abo'x law enforcement agencies, will disrupt the illicit drug trafficking by immobilizing targeted violators and trafficking organizations. Ihis will include conducting undercover operations where appropnate and engage in other investigative techniques that will result in effective prosecution of the offenders before Federal and State of Minnesota Courts. Each Task Force member will contribute $ 10,000 to fund incidental and support exposes incurred by the Unit. The Hennepin County Sheriffs Office will administrate the Task Force s Funds. To accomplish the objectives, each Task Force member is assigning at least one officer to the enforcement activities. (Hennepin County will be assigning two deputies . A full time Orono Police Officer will be assigned to the Task Force, and his patrol duties will be backfilled by a part time Orono Police Officer. Each jurisdiction will contribute equipment for their officer, including a vehicle, radio, phone, computer, fuel. etc. The Orono Police Department will u« existing forfeiture funds t^urchase equipment for their officer. The Hennepin County Sheriffs Office will provide $20,000 in electronic and other necessary equipment. Each jurisdiction will assist in clerical duucs. The term of the agreement is for one year, commencing July 15,2004 and terminating July 14. 2005 The agreement will be automatically extended for successive one-year terms upon the same terms, conditions and covenants, unless the Task Force is dissolved poor to expiration of the initial or successive term. i COUNCIL AnrlON REQUESTED : Motion to approve multi-agency task force agreement. Motion to expend forfeiture funds for capital expenditures including a vehicle (lease), computer, firearm, and other necessary equipment, not to exceed $9,800 and budget adjustment. Motion to provide $10,000 to fund start-up costs to Hennepin County for exclusive use of this task force. Motion to accept donation of $20,000 electronic equipment from Hennepin County to the Task Force. f ing a vehicle (lease), computer, I budget adjustment. iinty for exclusive use of this Hennepin County to the Task West Metro D rug Task Force Agreement The parties to this Agreement are units of government responsible for the enforcement of controlled substance laws in their respective jurisdictions. This Agreement is made pursuant to the authority conferred upon the parties by Minnesota Statutes, § 471.59. Thr undersigned governmental units, in the joint and mutual exercise of their powers, agree as follows; 1. Name. The parties hereby establish the West Metro Dioig Task Force. (WMDTF). 2. General Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to define the rights and obligations of the Governmental Units with respect to the duties and activities performed by the Task Force throughout the term of the Agreement. 1 ' ; J 3. Members. The initial members of this Agreement are the following Governmental Units; Hennepin County Sheriff s Office Medina Police Department Mound Police Department Orono Police Department West Hennepin Department of Public Safety 3.1 The Governmental Units shall cooperate and use their best efforts to ensure that the various provisions of the Agreement are fulfilled. The members agree in good faith to undertake resolu'ion of disputes, if any. in an equitable and timely manner and in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. 4. Term. 4.1 The term of this Agreement shall be for one year, commencing July 15, 2004 and terminating July 14,2005, unless terminated earlier pursuant to section 12.3 of this agreement. This Agreement shall be automatically extended for successive one-year terms upon the same terms, conditions, and covenants, unless the Task Force is dissolved prior to expiration of the initial or successive term. DRAFT intw 1 4.2 Upon terminaiion of this agreement, all property owned jointly by the Task Force members shall be sold or distributed to the members of the Task Force at the time of dissolution in proportion to the “full-time equivalent" contributions of each member of this agreement as approved by the Board as of the date of dissolution. Personal property shall return to the agency/owner. 5. Administrative Board. 5 The governing board of the \ ask Force shall be a Board of Directors consisting of the Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO), or designee representing each participating unit of government. The chief law enforcement officer or designee of each agency shall be hereinafter referred to as a director. All directors shall serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority. 5.2. Directors shall not be deemed employees of the Task Force and shall not be compensated by it. 5.3 The Board will delegate the authority and responsibility of carrying out the purpose of the Task Force to the Task Force Supervisor. 5.4 The Board shall meet as needed to evaluate the progress of the Task Force. A meeting may be called by any Director, or the Task Force Supervisor. 5.5 The Board may approve contracts, including agreements for the rental of real property, incur expenses and make expenditures necessary and incidental to the effectuation of its purposes and consistent with its powers. 5.6. The Board may recommend changes in this Agreement to its members. 5.7. The Board may receive real or personal property by grant, devise, or bequest for the use of the Task Force. 6. Powers and Duties of the Task Force 6.1 To accomplish the objectives herein, all Task Force members shall assign at least one peace officer licensed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 626.34, subd.l, to the Task Force who must have a minimum of one year prior experience in lav enforcement. 6.2 Each officer/deputy must be assigned to the Task Force on a full-time basis for at least one year unless hc/she is reassigned by the head of ihe officer/deputy’s agency upon the lecommendation of the Task Force supervisor. i OR APT W2&04 2 6.3 The Task Force Supervisor will direct investigative activities based on intelligence provided by the task force members with priority given to case investigations that directly impact the jurisdictions represented by the member agencies. 6.4 While assigned to the Task Force, all personnel shall be under the direct supervision and control of one Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office detective supervisor or his/her designee, who shall be responsible for the following duties: which shall include, but not be limited to: a. .scheduling assigned personnel; b. providing input on employee evaluations, if reiiucsted; and, c. allocating overtime work, if necessary. 6.5. 'I'hc Task Force Supervisor may cooperate with other federal, state, and local law enfoaement agencies to accomplish the purpose for which the 'I'ask Force is organized. 6.6. The Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office shall cause to be made an annual audit of the books and accounts of the Task Force and shall make and file a icport to its iiieinljcrs which includes the following information: (a) 'I’he financial condition of the Task Force; (b) The statu.s of all Task Force projects; (c) The business transacted by the Task Force; and Financial Activity Report System (PARS) Report (d) Quarterly financial report; (e) Other matters which at feet the interests of the Task Force. 6.7. 'Ilte Task Force’s books, reports, and records shall lx* open to inspection by its members at all reasonable times. 6.8. The Task Foiee members may not incur obligations or approve contracts that extend beyond the calendar year in which the contract is made or which will require the expenditure of funds in CXCC.SS of funds .'.vailablc, 6.10. Nothing lu.cin is intended or shouiJ be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relatioiishii) of co partners between the parties hereto or as constituting one of the participating Govennnent Uivts as the agent, rcpie.sent,itive or employee of another Task Force member for any purpose or in any manner whatsiicver. Personnel assigned to the Task Force by one ot the participating Governmental Units shall not be considered icmponuy or pennaneni employees of any other participating Government Unit or the Task Force for any purpose whatsoever or be cnutled to tenure rights oi any rights or benefits by way of workers compcn.sation, re-emplo>mcnt insurance. DKAFT S/28XM 3 medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, severance pay, PERA or any other right or benefit of another participating Government Unit. 6.11 Participating Government UnUs acknowledge that it is their sole responsibility to provide all salary compensation and fringe benefits to employees. Benefits may include, but are not limited to, health care, disability insurance, life insurance, re-employment insurance, FICA, Medicare, and PERA. 7. Indemnincation and Insurance 7.1 a. Each Governmental Unit agrees that it will be responsible for its own acts and any liability resulting therefrom to the extent authorized by law and shall not be responsible for the acts of the other Governmental Units or any liability resulting therefrom. Each Governmental Unit’s liability shall be governed and limited by the Municipal Torts Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466 ano other applicable law. b. Each Governmental Unit agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the other Governmental Units, their elected officials, officers, agents, volunteers and emp’oyees from any costs or expenses, including reasonable attorney fees, resulting directly or indirectly from any act or omission of a Governmental Unit, its sub-contractors, and anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, and/or anvone for whose acts and/or omissions they may be liable for in the performance of the activities required by this Agreement, and against all loss by reason of the failure of a Governmental Unit to perform fully, in any respect, all obligations under this Agreement. c. Each Governmental Unit warrants that it is able to comply with the afore-mentioned indemnity requirements through an insurance and/or self-insurance program. d. All insurance policies or self-insurance certificates shall be open to inspection by each Governmental Unit ana copies of the policies or certificates of self-insurance shall be submitted to a Governmental Unit upon written request. 8.Finances 8.1 The Hennepin County Sheriffs Office, through its Accounting Division, shall serve as sole administrator of all funds contributed by Task Force member agencies and in such capacity is authorized to receive all funds for deposit and make disbursements therefrom in accordance with standard Hennepin County practice and procedure. In conjunction therewith, tf i Hennepin County DHAFT iirtKH A r. \ Sheriff’s Office Accounting Division shall maintain current and accurate records of all obligations and expenditures of Task Force funds pursuant to generally accepted accounting principles. It shall also produce a quarterly financial report which shall be disseminated to the Task Force supervisor and all member agency heads. Such reports and related records shall be maintained by the Hennepin County Shenffs Office Accounting Division for a period of three (3) years after termination of the Task Force. 8.2 The Board shall approve an annual operating budget for the Task Force. The Board may amend the budget as necessary. 8.3 The Task Force’s funds may be expended by the Board in accordance with this Agreement in a manner determined by the Board. In no event shall there be an expenditure of Task Force funds from the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office depository except per the approved budget. 8.4 The Board may not incur debts. 8.5 The Board shall receive a quarterly statistical report and a financial report on all activities conducted by the Task Force. 8.6 Task Force operations will be financed from grant funds, drug forfeitures, and any funds voluntarily contributed by any member. Members will provide agents for the Task Force but will not otherwise be required to provide funds without the prior amendment of this Agreement approved by all members. 9. Agent. 9.1 . Each member shV.l assign experienced, licensed peace officers/deputies (agents) to serve on the Task Force. Assignments for the year 2004 are as follows: Hennepin County Sheriffs Office Medina Police Department Mound Police Department Orono Police Department (2FTE) - 1 Supervisor (1 FTE) (1 FfE) (IFTE) West Hennepin Department of Public Safety (IFTE) For each subsequent year, each member will advise the Board, prior to October first, of the number of employees which that member will provide in the subsequent calendar year. DRAFT V28AM « 9.3 All personnel assigned to the Task Force shall comply with rules of conduct prescribed by the Task Force supervisor developed in consultation with the head of Task Force member agencies and in recognition of the rules of their respective agencies. The Task Force supervisor, or his designee, shall refer disciplinary matters involving assigned personnel to the respective agency for investigation and dispositio.. unless, based on the judgment of the Task Force supervisor, or his/her designee, a particular matter represents prima facie grounds for the issuance of a criminal complaint, in which case the matter shall be referred directly to an external law enforcement agency for investigation provided the appropriate Task Force agency head(s) is(are) notified in advance thereof. 9.4. Agents will be responsible for drug investigation, including intelligence management, case development, and case charging. Agents may also assist other agents in surveillance and undercover operations. Task Force agents will work cooperatively with assisting agencies. Assigned officers acting under this agrccmeni in the jurisdiction of another party to this agreement are acting in the line of duty and in the course of employment and are authorized to exercise the powers of a peace officer therein. 9.5. The Governmental Unit appointing the Agent shall furnish the Agent a weapon, vehicle, phone, computer, and pay any lease payments, insurance, maintenance, fuel, and operating costs of the vehicle and/or othei equipment. Clerical assistance will be furnished by member agencies and/or through the annual budget. 10. Forfeiture, Seizures and Fines. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 609.531, the Task Force members are entitled to money or proceeds from the sale of forfeited property after payment of seizure, storage, forfeiture and sale expenses and satisfaction of valid liens against forfeited property. It is agreed by Task Force members that ff^rfeiture monies and proceeds .shall be distributed equally after deduction of all costs and expenses herein stated. The receipt and disbursement of forfeiture sale proceeds shall be referenced in the Hennepin County Sheriff s Office Accounting Division ’s quarterly financial report disseminated to the Task Force supers'isor and member agencies in accordance with 6.6. 11. Headquarters. DRAFT 5/28«4 The Task Force is physically located in separate offices at a location agreed upon by the Board, which is provided at no cost to the Task Force. All utilities, including electricity, heat, air conditioning, and the like shall also be furnished to the Task Force without cost. 12. Additional Members and Change in Membership 12.1. Any City sharing a common boundary with any department listed in paragraph 3 may join the Task Force and become a member ujxin approval and execution ol a copy of this Agieemcnt by such department and approval by a majority of the Directors. 12.2. In any case in which a City identified in paragraph 3 joins the Task Foicc after the effective date of this agreement or any other City joins the Task Force pursuant to paragraph 12.1, contributions by and reimbursement to such members shall be equitably determined and adjusted by the Board to reflect the paiticipation by that member for less than one full year. 1 he decision of the Board shall be final. 12.3. Each Governmental Unit, upon ninety (90) days’ written notice to all member agencies, may withdraw and cancel its participation in this Agicement. The members by mutual written consent may abolis* this Agicement at any time. 13. Slotc and Loeul Assisluiicv for Narcotics Control Program. 13.1 A member agcii'^y, acting on behalf of the West Mc'ro Diug Task borcc and its members, may apply for Federal, state, or local narcotics enforcement. ITie member agency shall be the “authorized official", as defined in the general policies and procedures for the program. 14. Media 14.1 Media coverage of Task Force activities, including the dissemination of all press releases must reference each Task Force incml)cr agency, and shall Ik* coordinated through the IlCSO Public Intormaiion Officer or designee. 15. Evidence 15.1 Except for seized motor vehicles, all cvidcncc/proiicfty seized by licensed Task Force IK-rsonncI, while acting within the scope of this Agreement, shall be inventoried and stored temporanly at a secure, designated area within the designated law enforcement center that is under jjjc exclusive contml of active agcnts/officers/deputics of the 'lask Force. Such invcniontd DRAFT 5ZMXM 7 9 i cvidcncc/propcrty shall be subject to subsequent transfer to the HCSO Crime Lab Property koom for safekeeping pending lawful release or to another facility at the discretion of the Task Force Supervisor. Seized motor vehicles shall be stored in an impound area designated by the Hennepin County Sheriff until lawfully released. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned governmental units, by action of their governing bodies, have caused this Agreement to be executed in accordance with the authority of Minnesota Statutes §471.59. DRAFT 8 I k West Metro D rug Task Force Agreement Hennepin County Board Approval I'ask Force members, having signed this Agreement. 2004 and the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having duly approved this Agreement on the--------day of----------------------, 2004 and pursuant to such approval, the proper County officials having signed this Agreement, the patties hereto agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. County of Hennepin Stale of Minnesota Approved as to form; Assistant County Attorney Date Approved as to execution: Assistant County Attorney Date DRATT 5/2SXM Chair of its County Board And: Ass(Kiatc/County Administrator And: Hennepin County Sheriff Attest: Dcputy/CIcrk of County Board i J West Metro D rug Task Force Agreement City of Mound The Mound City Council duly approved this Agreement on the _____________,2004. City of Mound day of Approved as to form and legality: Mound City Attorney DRAtT J/»<D4 By: Its Mayor And: Its City Administrator / J r »' Tf West Metro Drug Task Force Agreement C ity OF Medina The Medina City Council duly approved this Agreement on the _____________,2004. City of Medina day of Approved as to form and legality: By: Medina City Attorney Its Mayor And: Its City Administrator DRAFT s/»o« West Metro D rug Task Force Agreement C ity of Independence The Independence City Council duly approved this Agreement on the _____________,2004. City of Independence day of Approved as to form and legality: By: Independence City Attorney And: Its Mayor > \ Its City Administrator DRAFT smioi West Metro Drug Task Force A greement City of Maple Plain The Maple Plain City Council duly approved this Agreement on the day of 2004. City of Maple Plain Approved as to form and legality: By: Maple Plain City Attorney Its Mayor And: Its City Administrator DRAFT ifOM West Metro Drug Task Force Agreement City of Orono The Orono City Council duly approved this Agreement on the __ ____________,2004. day of Approved as to form and legality; Orono City Attorney City ot Orono By: Its Mayor And: Its City Administrator DRAFT 508W Page 1 of 1 Lin Ve# ________________________________ From: Kurt Erickson Sont: Tuesday, June 22,2004 3:37 PM To: Lin Vee Subject: Gambling Permit The police department has no objection to the Minnetonka Center for the Arts having a charitable gambling permit. We understand this to be for a raffle to be conducted on July tO*^ as a fundraiser for the nonprofit Art Center group. We understand they have made application to the Minnesota Gambling Control Board for the proper State authorization. 6/22/2004 \ Promt 06/21/2004 22:05 #332 P.C04 Minnesota Lawful Oambllng LQ220 Application for Exempt Permit Fee $50 Pago 1of2 (web) 12/03 >or Soard Uee Only Fee Paid Oraanization InformationOffl 6roa Check No. rgani^tion name Previous lawful gambling exemption number Street 77Hc Motlk SWe. Orrtig. City U^Wtiedi-^V State/Zip Code Name of cMef oxecutiva officer (CEO) FIrat name _____------------------------------------------------------------- Last name Name of treasurer First name Last name County Daytime phone number of CEO Daytime phone number of treasurer; Typo of Nonprofit Organization Check the box that best describes your organization: □ Fraternal □ Religious n Veteran Other nonprofit orgontzotion Check the box that Indicates the type of proof your organization attached to this application;□□o□ IRS letter Indicating Income tax exempt status Certificate of Good Standing from the Minnesota Secretary of State's Office A charter showing you are an affiliate of a parent nonprofit organization Proof previously submitted and on file wHh the Gambling Control Board Qambling Pramiats Information NameofprsmlMSwheregamClmgac^^ taffies, list ttiosltewhempiadrawingw^ C^iA\fr(cr fL> ^ri<: Addmss (do not uea PO box)aty Stote/ZIp Codo /Uodl\ SAcfe i)r,ys ttlo-yrnK 5sj«?y Dat«(8) of activity (for raffisa, indicate the date of the drawing) 2.ooi County hocktfroChock tffo box Of boxes that indicate the typo of gambling activity your organizotion will bo conducting: Q •Bmgo Raffias (cash prizes may not axcaad $12,000) Q *Paddlcwhools QJ •PulUTabs | | *Tipboords ^Gambling aquipmant for pull-labt, tipboarda, paddlawtioals, and bingo (bingo paper, hard cards, and bingo ball selection device) must be obtained from a dialrlbutor licansed by the Oambllng Control Board. To find a licensed distributor, go to www.gcb.state.mn.ua and dick on Llat of Licensed Distributors. Or cell 651«€39«4000. This Ibrm will be made available in aitemattve format (i.a large print. Braiita] upon request The Information roquasisd on thia form (and any attachrnarHi) wU ba used by the Gambiino Control Board (Board) to datarmina your QuaMloatkM to be invoivsd in lawfU gam^ aedvitiss in MInnesoie. You have Sw right to rehiss to supply the Information requested; however. If you refuse to supply this InkHTTietion. the Boend may not be able to determine your qualiflcetions and. as a consequence, may refuse to issue you e permit. If you supply the information requasted. the Board wifi be able to process your application. Your name ifvd and your organization's name and address will be public Infomnation when leoeived by tiw) Board. the oinw Infbnnatk^ that you pmvkie will be private dote about you until the Board issues your pernsL Whenthe Board issues your pemtit alt of the Information that you have provided to the Board in the process of apph^ for your parmit wHi become public. If the Board does not issue you a parmit. all the information you have provided In the pmoess of applying fbr a permit remans privets, with the exception of your name and your organliation's name and addiees which win remain public. Private data about you am available only to the following Hoard membera. start of the Board whose work assignir.ar^ requires that they have acceea to the Information; the Minnesota Depanmem of Public Safety; the Minnesota Adomey General; the Minnesota Cormnlssionore of Admlnlstrailon. Finance, and Revenue, the Minnesote Legislative Auditor, national and Intemationel gambling reguiatixy agenoiea, anyone pureuar.t to oourt order, other irxfivlduala arid agencies that are spadllcilhi euthorlzed by state or fbderai taw to have accaaa to the inlpn nation, r>drvlduaia and agendas for which law or legal order authonzee a new uaa or sharing of infbmiatiQn after this Notice was given; and anyone witii yourconeeni JL From:06/21/2004 22:05 #332 P.005 LG220 Application for Exempt Permit Organization Nama Local Unit of Oovamment Acknowtedgmenl Page 2 of 2 12A)3 If tha gamblins pramlaao la within olty llmlta, tha dty meat algn thia appIleaUen._______ On behalf of the dty, I acknowledge this application Check tha action that tha city la taking on thia application. rn The city approval the application with no l-J waiting period. Q The dty approval tha application with a 30 day waiting period, and allows the Board to Issue a permit after 30 days (60 days fbr a first class c«y) 0^ The dty denies the application. Print name of dty (Signeture of city personnel receiving appllcallon) TUIB______________________________ Date.J_/ f the gandillng premlaes te located In a township, both the county end townehip must sign this application. On behalf of the county, I acknowledge this application. Check tha actlen that the county la taking on this application. pi The county approvee the application with no I—' welting period pi The county approvee the application with a 30 day waiting pariod, and allows Board to issue a permit after 30 days. Q The county denies the applloatlon. Prtnt name of county (Slgnstira of county personnel receiving application) TMe______________________________ Date / / _ TOWNSHIP: On beftalf of the township. I ecknowtedge that the organization Is applying for eaempled gambling activity wHhin the township limits. (Atownship tias no statutory authority to approve or deny an appUcatton (Minnesota Statute 349.213, subd 2) ] Print name of township (SIgnalurB of townahlp oflldal acknowledging application) Title____________________________________ Date I / Chief Executive OffIcer*e Signature The Information provided In this appll^on la cptnplete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Chief executive officer's slgrvjture Neme(plee•epr1nt)__J^i<>./^>/^^__ Dete^i^ //'/ Mail Application and AtUchmanta At least 45 days prior to your soheduled activity date send; • the completed application, • a copy of your proof of nonprofit status, and • a 160 appUcatton fee (make check payable to *6tete of Minnesota*). Application teas are not prorated, riAindabla, or IransflBrable. Band to:Oambling Control Boord 1711 Waal County Hoad B, SuRa 300 South Itasmrllle. MN SS113 If your appUcatton has not been acknowladgad by tha looel unt of govemrnont or has been denied, do not sandthaapplcadontotie Gambling Control Board. \ CITY OF ORONO check register 06/22/04 10:30 AM Page 1 mppting JUN 2 8 2004 Check Number Employee Name 054206 DODGE. RACHEL M. 054207 LESKINEN. DENISE M. 054208 ANDERSON. BRUCE L 054209 BOBZIEN.SUEA 054210 BORIS. SCOTT W 054211 DEMBOUSKI. JAY C. 054212 ERICKSON. KURT R 054213 FARNIOK. CORREY L 054214 FISCHENICH. DAN T. 054215 MAOSON. ADRIENNE M 054216 MCNICHOLS. DAVID L. 05421*^ MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES 054218 PERSELL. WILLIAM R 054219 TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. 054220 TOMCZYK.MARKW 054221 WHITE. ANTHONY J. 054222 WITTKE. ANTHONY A. 054223 GAFFRON. MICHAEL P 054224 MEYER. WILLIAM C. 054225 OMAN. LYLE E 054226 VANG. BRUCE L 054227 GREGORY. JAMES D 054228 HANSEN. STEVEN 054229 OBRIEN. RANDY L 054230 PALMER. GREGORY A. 054231 RATHBUN, BARRY J. 054232 SKREEN. DALES 054233 ABRAHAMSON. FRED W. 054234 HAMBRO. MARSHALL J. 054235 JENSEN. RODNEY W. 054236 MARSELLA. DAN G 054237 MCINTYRE. WILLIAM E. 054238 OAS. DANIEL O 054239 PEICKERT. GARY J Pay Check Check Period Amount Date Check Status 13 $1,042.63 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $887.98 6/23/2004 Outstand ng 13 $798.03 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $47.02 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1,450 04 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1.558 39 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1,579.66 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1.972 67 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1.508 20 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $64560 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $56273 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1,691 05 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $307.76 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $569 06 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1.370 49 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $899 34 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1,391.26 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1.426 50 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $493.71 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $64.72 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1.323 53 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1,262.05 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $376.59 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $555.42 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $745.16 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1,387.13 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1,070.35 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 $76 29 $49.59 $279.36 $285 70 $217.46 $111 19 $37601 6/23/2004 Outstanding 6/23/2004 Outstanding 6/23/2004 Outstanding 6/23/2004 Outstanding 6/23/2004 Outstanding 6/23/2004 Outstanding 6/23/2004 Outstanding 054240POLLEY. MIKE A.13 $86 26 6/23/2004 Outstanding 054241 ROSS. JOHN A 13 $182 58 6/23/2004 Outstanding 054242SMYTH. KATHERINE R.13 $140 60 6/23/2004 Outstanding 054243STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD 13 $1,343 17 6/23/2004 Outstanding 054244STORK. JOHN T.13 $259 42 6/23/2004 Outstanding 003477 MOORSE. RONALD J.13 $2 336 49 6/23/2004 Outstanding 003478 SILUS. BARBARA G.13 $478 02 6/23/2004 Outstanding 003479 VEE. LINDA S.13 $1,072 59 6/23/2004 Outstanding 003480KUEHN. THOMAS M.13 $1.328 20 6/23/2004 Outstanding 003481 OLSON. RONALD J 13 $1,161 81 6/23/2004 OutsUnding 003482PETTIT. SANDRA K 13 $1,061.30 6/23/2004 Outstanding 003483ANDERSON. BRUCE L.13 $1,13500 6/23/2004 Outstanding 003484BOBZIEN. SUE A 13 $830 00 6/23/2004 Outstanding 003485 BORIS. SCOTT W.13 $2000 6/23/2004 Outstanding 003486BUDIG. STACIE M.13 $832.32 6/23/2004 Outstanding 003487 CORNICK. JAMES L 13 $1.565 33 6/23/2004 Outstanding 003488DAY. SUSAN J 13 $1,047.28 6/23/2004 OuUtanding 003489FISCHER. CHRISTOPHER K 13 $1.360 56 6/23/2004 Outstanding 003490GOOD. STEPHANY R.13 $1,994 94 6/23/2004 Outstanding 003491 JOHNSON. JEFFREY 13 $1,532 12 6/23/2004 OutsUnding 003492MCNICHOLS. DAVID L 13 $1.100 00 6/23/2004 OuUtanding 003493RUSSETH. KYLE M.13 $1.31078 6/23/2004 OuUUnding 003494SCHOENHOFF. JOHN B.13 11.626.80 6/23/2004 OuUUnding 003495 TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F.13 $900 00 6/23/2004 Outstanding 003496LEE. JOSEPH P.13 $393.71 6/23/2004 OutsUmling CITY OF ORONO • / t , Ch#ck Numbtr Em|Hoyt« Nam« 003497 003498 003499 003500 003501 003502 003503 003504 003505 003506 003507 003506 003509 PHARO. CHRISTOPHER M. BOLTERWAN, MATTHEW A, CURTIS. MELANIE GAFFRON. MICHAEL P. GAPPA. GREGORY A. GUNDLACH. JANICE J. OMAN. LYLE E DEBAERE. DONALD L HANSEN. 8TEVEN OBERAIGNER. SCOTT G OBRIEN. RANDY L PALMER. GREGORY A RATHBUN. BARRY J. CITY OF ORONO check register Pay Cheek Check Parfod AmounI Date Check Statue 13 $845 01 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $572.09 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1,058.36 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $125.00 6/23/2004 OutsUndIng 13 $1,010.50 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1,155.07 6/23/2004 OutsUnding 13 $1.400 00 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1.184 25 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $775.00 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $1,056.30 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $500.00 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $350 00 6/23/2004 Outstanding 13 $200 00 6/23/2004 Outstanding $64,535.55 f? 06/22/04 10:30 AM Page 2 CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register® 06^3/04 6 52 AM Page 1 JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment 10100 Primary Cash 'p'iiirChiiM'olaii'i ^0/23/2064'' 'first national bank of lakes G 101-21701 Federal WithhoWing $8,960.49 0 101-21703 FlCA Tax Withholding $4,532.62 0101-21703 FlCA Tax Withholding $4,532 62 ToUl FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES $18.025 73 FEDERAL W/H FlCA & MEDICARE W/H FlCA & MEDCR CITY SHARE 'Paid ChWf 078614“ 6/23/2004 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 487 0 101-21705 Other Retirement $951 62 ToUl ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-467 $95162 DEFERRFD COMP-302030 “Paid Chke 078615 6^3/2004 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE 0 101-21707 Union Dues $618 26 Total LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE $618 26 '^aid Chk# 0786T6*' '*6/23«604“ MN'oEPTOF REVEt^^^ 0 101-21702 State Withholding __$3.821 70 Total MN DEPT OF REVENUE $3,821.70 UNION DUES STATE TAX W/H Paid Chk# 078617 6/23/2004 MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM 0101-21718 Post Employment Health $260 45 Total MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM $260 45 t’ald'chke o^ols* 6/23«o64 NATTONWiOE SETIREMENYsOLUTiorT 0 101-21705 other Retirement $1,877.00 0 101-21705 Other Retirement $168 09 ToUl NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION $2,045 09 TaTd'ChkT'bTaeTai ""wiiiioo* oWcHARo'rRu'sfcfdrfR'usTE^^^ 0 101-21705 Other Retirement $3.562 68 Total ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST $3,562 68 Paid Chkii 078620 8)23/2604 ' PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT.... 0 101-21704 PERA post retirement USCM - ENTITY 2339 OBRA #2343 MN STATE retirement G 101-21704 PERA Tout PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT $6,953 79 $5.3 96 84 $12.350 63 PERA CITY SHARE PERA EMPLOYEE W/H Paid'Chk# 078621 6/23/2004 UNITED WAY 0 101-21708 United Way Total UNITED WAY V^*ChwT"078622 ' ' ‘6r2'’37rd04'** WSCOn 'sIN'^^ 0101-21712 Other Deductions Total WISCONSIN SCTF $70 00 $70 00 CHARITY DONATIONS $184 62 JOHNSON « 0002756898 $184 62 10100 Primary Cash $41.890 78 CITY OF ORONO 06/24/04 3 11 PM Page l Check Detail Register® JUNE 2004 Check Amt invoice Comment 10100 Primary Cash_____ PaidChk#' 070509 6/14/2004 PRAIRIE OFFSET E 101*45200-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldga/Grounds Total PRAIRIE OFFSET ($129 03) 91606 ($129 03) VOID/Pra»ne MaintaPr Creek Pk 'Paid'Clik« 078^ ' 6/i4/2004 wisfSIDE EQUiPMENf E 101-43000-403 RepairVMaint-Misc Equip ToUl WE8TSIDE EQUIPMENT ($25 00) 530394 VOID/TIRE CHECK ($2500) Paid Chk# 07B607 6/14/2004 WHITE, TONY t 101-42110-437 Training & Development Total WHITE, TONY PaidifhiS'OTMl? ($28 11) 5/19/04 VOID/mileage/meals ($20.11) 6/17/2004 INSTANT LAWN INC F 602-49450-7? / Utility Syiitem Maint Supplies $160 00 61704 Sod • Mam Break Resotations $160.00 ■pald'Chk#'078623' ToUl INSTANT LAWN INC 6/28«6o4‘ ■ 'a Tx'galukoher Vcoo K E 613-49830*370 Insurance Agent of Record L 101-41900-370 Insurance Agent of Record E 101-42110-370 Insurance Agent of Record E 602-40450*370 Insurance Agent of Record E 601-49400*370 Insurance Agent of Record Total A J. GALLAGHER A CO OF MN, INC $75 00 20500 $55000 20500 $910 00 20500 $105 00 28580 $00 00^28500 $r800 00 3rd qir 1ns agent fee 3rd qtr Ins agent fee 3rd qtr Ins agent fee 3rd qtr Ins agent fee 3rd qtr Ins agent fee Paid cTk#‘o>‘0624 AbVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS** E 101*41900-413 Office Equipment Rental ___$774.35 23223829 Total ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS ^ $77^35 Copier Lease 6/15/04-7/15/04 Paid ChkJ 078625 6/26/2004 AMEM E 101-42110*433 Memberships & Subscriptions Tout AMEM $100 00 2004amem 2004 membership/PD $100 00 PaldChk# 078626 6/26/2004 ASLET E 101*421 10 433 Memberships & Subscriptions Total ASLET J45 00^ 2004DUES $45 00 2004-05 membership dues/L Tome *Pai?Chk#'078627'* 6/28/2004 AUGIES MOBILE CHEF E 613-49900-093 Concessions For Refale-Txbl E 613-49000-093 Concessions For Resale-Txbl ToUl AUGIES MOBILE CHEF $77 40 06162004 ($1 68) 1723 $75 72 hot dogs Adoruts credit >alTChki 070620 6/20/2004 BEARCOM E 601 -49400-222 Vehicle Equipment A Parts ToUl BEARCOM $06 34 2639567 travel charger $66 34 I^Jd'Chki' 078629 6728/2004 BIFFS INC. E 101-45200-415 Other F.quipment Rentals E 1 0 1 -45200 41 5 Other Equipment Rentals E 101 45200 415 Other Equipment RenUls E 613-49830 415 Other Equipment RenUts E 101-45200-415 Other Equipment RenUls E 101-45200 415 Other Equipment Rentals ToUl BIFFS INC. $62 41 vr220562 $124.62 W220563 $124 82 W220564 $62 41 W220565 $62 41 W220566 $202 91 W220567 toilet/bideneood toilet/summit beach toitet/bacKberry toitet/goK coursa toilet/crystal bay toilat/Navarre Playground $639 78 Paid 67UU &ai/2dd4 bonestroo rosene s assoc. C 101-43280'304 Engliteenrrg-Consultmg $268 00 107684 4763 NSO Plat 03 2973 1 lii k/ . «a t 41 ««I I i o,. o CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register® 06/24/04 3 11 PM Page 2 JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment E 101 •43260-304 Engineering-Consulting E 101-43280*304 Engineering-Consulting E 101-43260-304 Engineering-Consulting E 101-43170-304 Engineering-Consulting E 602-40450-304 Engineering-Consulting E 602-49450-304 Engineering-Consulting E 101-43280-304 Engineering-Consulting E 101-43260-304 Engineering-Consulting E 101-43170-303 Engineering-Retainer E 101-43260-304 Engineering-Consulting E 602-49450-304 Engineering-Consulting E 101-43280-304 Engineehng-Consuiting E 651 -40010-304 Engineering-Consulting E 402-46030-304 Engineering-Consulting O 602-16500 Fixed Asset-Const in progress E 402-48039-304 Engineering-Consulting E 651 -49010-304 Engineering-Consulting Q 602-16500 Fixed Asset-Const, in progress E 101-43170-304 Engineering-Consufting E 101-43170-303 Engineering-Retainer F 101 •43260-304 Engineering-Consulting E 101-43260-304 Engineering-Consulting E 101-43260-304 Engineering-Consufting E 101 -43280-304 Engineering-Consulting E 101-43280-304 Engineering-Consulting E 101-43170-304 Enginoering-Consulting E 101-43170-304 Engineering-Consulting E 101-43280-304 Engineering-ConsuKing E 402-48030-304 Engineering-Consulting E 402-48039-304 Engineering-Consutting 0 002-10500 Fixed Asset-Const in progress E 406-48736-304 Engineering-Consutting O 601-16500 Fixed Asset Const in progress E 402-48037-304 Engineering-Consulting G 602-16500 Fixed Asset-Const in progress 0 602-16500 Fixed Asset-Const in progress E 601 -49400-304 Engineering-Consutting Tout BONESTROO R08ENE & ASSOC. Paid Chk# 076631 6/28/2004 BUDGET PRINTING E 101-42110-322 Postage E 613-49830-201 Office supplies E 101-42110-201 Office supplies E 601-49400 322 Postage E 601-49400 322 Postage E 101-42110-201 Office supplies E 101-42110-701 Office supplies Total BUDGET PRINTING ><Kl dhk« 078632 6/2a/2004 BUREAU OF ATF E 613-49630-441 Licenses & Taxes Total BUREAU Of ATF Paiddhki 07M33' $829 50 107684 Stonebay Marketplace plat 04-2 $692 56 107684 2377 Shadywood Rd Plat 04-2993 $337.26 107684 Stonebay plat 02-2789 $1.127 68 107664 Big Island Road accesa $148 50 107664 Old Crystal Bay Rd swr rehab $99 00 107684 Phillips Group Home swr conn $267 64 107684 1444 Baldur Park Kd plat 04-29 $14622 107684 Maxwell Bay Estates plat 04-30 $100 00 107684 Council mtgs/ Mar2004 $129 00 107684 Wayzata CC Plat 04-3000 $99 00 107684 1355 tonkawa Sn Swr easmnt $193.50 107684 1100 towniine Rd plat 04-2989 $14850 107684 Birch Lane review storm swr do $110.20107685 CR19 SidewalK/Mar2004 $450 00 107686 NLL Swr Est'John Makay 3/04 $1.45242 107687 Lee Carlson Ballfield Trait $1.035 52 107688 Birch Lane stormswr review $295.50 107689 Homestead Rd San Swr 3/04 $25050 108622 prep zoning * rd&address maps $100 00 108622 Counot mtgs -AprU04 $129 00 108622 Prof Properties plat 04-2984 $32250 108622 Maxwell Bay Estates plat 04-30 $204.16 108622 Orono Senior Housing plat 2641 $2,518 19 108622 Stonebay plat 02-2789 $1,237.50 108622 Stonebay Marketplace plat 04-2 $350 10 108622 Mexc eng Apr 2004 $797 50 108622 Big Island road access $193.50 106622 440 Stubbs Bay Rd 04-2968 $474 24 108623 CR 19 sidewalk apri 2004 $580 50 108624 Lee Carlson Battfieid Tri $234 50 108625 Old LL Rd swr ext M04 $486 10 108626 Ferndale Rd Bridge replace $207 46 108627 2003 Hwy12 Trunk wtr main Imp $484 86 108678 Fox St Bridge replace 4/04 $148 50 108629 Phillips San Swr 4/04 $2,485 82 108630 Homestead Rd San swr 4/04 $2,130 00 108631 Orono VA & ERP apnl 2004 $21,257.13 $8.10 061404 film $34801 30975 supply pdntlng/'GC $369.16 31619 form printing/PD $8 18 31626 ups charges $1078 31691 ups charges $70.14 31694 medical reports 1.000] $13 07 31733 upsA ream paper $827 44 $250 00 416008585 2005 Sp«cial Tax $250.00 6/25/2004 CARGILL SALT E 601-49400-216 Chemicais and Chem Products iI $1,852.09 1052739 tolar uS O CITY OF ORONO 06/24/04 3:11 PM Page 3 Check Detail Register® JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment Total CARGILL SALT Tf^cwcTafa^ e/JeSooS carquest $1,852.09 E 101 •43000-222 Vehicle Equipment & Parts ToUl CARQUEST $66 70 N33668 Air Filters $66.70 >aid'ChM» 078635 6/28/2004 CLEARV1EW CORPORATE COMM INC E 613-49830-340 General Advertising Total CLEARVIEW CORPORATE COMM INC $319 90 51599 BUSINESS DIRECTORY/GC $319.90 Paid Chk« 078636 '6^8/2004 CODOON, STEVE R 101*34420 Cond Use-Varianca*Oev Fees ToUl COODON, STEVE S600 00 062104 WITHDRAWN ZONING APP#04-3028 $600.00 TaIdljhMr07863f 6/2'e/2004 COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION E 234-45680-412 Building Rentals $1.200 00 T79 213L2772 3580 Wayzata Blvd/July 2004 ToUl COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION $1.20000 Paid1Chk«'078638 6^8/2004 CRAGUN’S RESORT AND CONF CENTR E 101-42110-437 Training & Development $450.00 509163-1 lodging-cnme conf/JCormck ToUl CRAGUN'S RESORT AND CONF CENTR 6/28/2004 $450.00 PildChk# 078639 6/28/2004 CULLIGAN E 613-49830-403 Repairs/Maint-Misc Equip ToUl CULLIGAN $14.00 071504 sofiner exchange $14.00 >ald Chk#l)7e640 6/28/2004 DAHLGREN 8HAROLOW & UBAN E 101-43280-304 Engineenng-Consulting $1,933.17 24723 E 101-43280-304 Engineering-Consulting $733.75 24811 E 101 43280-304 Engineering-Consulting $515 88 24995 ToUl DAHLGREN SHARDLOW & UBAN $3.182 80 Stonebay Marketplace Stonebay Marketplace Stonebay Marketplace Paid Chk#l378641 6/28/2004 DALBEC ROOFING E 601-49400-404 Repairs/Maint-Bidgs/Grounds ToUl DALBEC ROOFING "^airCh*kTb78642 6/28/^04 DCA-WlRiONLY $800 00 34400 repairs wtr plant $800.00 G 101 -21719 DCA/Spendirg Accounts ToUl DCA - WIRE ONLY $717 35 061504 fix spending - June 15,2004 $717.35 Paldl:Trk#'07BW3 6/28/2004 DELTA DENTAL G 101-21709 Dental Insurance G 101 -15998 Non-Employee Health Ins ToUl DELTA DENTAL $1,486.50 37220072 $56.70 37220072 Dental Insurance 7/2004 Dental Insurance 7/2004 $1,543.20 Pau4^EHr07a644 6/28/2004 OEX MEDIQ EAST LLC E 613-49830-340 General Advertising ToUl DEX MEDIQ EAST LLC $306 30 0208658S • • • I GC advertising $306 30 PatdChk# 078645 6/28/2004 DISCOUNT STEEL INC. E 101 -43000-224 Street Maint Materials/Suppiy Total DISCOUNT STEEL INC. $42.80 01212404 Steel $42.80 078646 6/28/2004 DISPLAY SALES E 101-43000-224 SUeet Maint MaUrials/Supply ToUl DISPLAY SALES $44.73 inv0025589 castings $44.73 I A i k j J CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Registertg) 06/24/04 3:11 PM Page 4 JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment PaidChk# 078647 6/28/2004 DOBO'S E 101-41110-439 Meeting Expenses Tout UUBUb $55 74 6014 council ws 6/8/04 $5574 PaidChk# 076648 6/26/2004 EARL F. ANDERSON 8. ASSOC. E 601-49400-227 Utility System Main!. Supplies $1,657.63 0060066-in Total EARL F. ANDERSON & ASSOC. hydrant flushing signs $1,657.63 Paid Chk« 078649 6/26/2004 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE E 613-49900-091 Beer For Resale ToUl EAST SIDE BEVERAGE $167.40 223295 beer f/resale/GC $167 40 — m Paid Chk# 078650 6/28/2004 EGAN MCKAY ELEC i RICAL CONTRCTR E 101-43000-408 Contracted Street Maint $267.50 JC3014260 E 101-43000-408 Contracted Street Maint. $222.50 JC3014459 Total EGAN MCKAY ELECTRICAL CONTRCTR signal lite/Hwy 12 &OCB repair stop lUe HWY12&C06 $490 00 PaidChk# 076651 6/28/2004 ESCHELON E 101-42260-321 Telephone $352 07 061504 PHONE SERVICE/NAV FIRE Total ESCHELON $352.07 Paid Chk# 076652 6/28/2004 FBINAA E 101-42110-433 Memberships & Subscriptions Total FBINAA $60.00 04dues FBINAA dues-2004/PO $60 00 O/eesT 6/28?2004" FIRST RESPONSE TRAHiiNO E 101-43000-437 Training A Development Total FIRST RESPONSE TRAINING $150 00 6956 CPR training/ $150 00 Paid Chk# 078654 6/28/2004 FOLGER ADAM SECURITY INC E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories $9713 42044 Total FOLGER ADAM SECURITY INC Keys $97.13 Paid Chk# 078655 6/28/2004 FORTIS BENEFITS G 101-21713 LTD Insurance ToUl FORTIS BENEFITS $842 50 4019825-1 LTD Ins 7/2004 $64250 Paid^cKkir 076656* 6/28/2004 G A K SERVICES E 101-43000-226 E 613-49830-226 E 613-49830-226 E 602-49450-226 E 601-49400-226 E 602-49450-226 E 602-49450-226 E 601-49400-226 E 613-49830-226 E 101-43000-226 E 601-49400-226 E 601-49400-226 E 613-49830-226 E 602-49450-226 E 101-43000-226 E 101-41900-404 E 613-49830-226 E 101-43000-226 Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equ^ment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment $72 35 $5.75 $575 $34 83 $12 05 $36 09 $36.15 $11.61 $5.75 $72.13 m uniforms $1203 M « $11 65 1006116174 M $5.75 1006116174 iuniforms $34.95 1006116174 uniforms $69.85 1006116174 uniforma $94 25 1006122637 mats $575 $97 35 1006122637 1006122637 uniforms k o CITY OF ORONO Oe/24/04 3 12 PM Page 5 Check Detail Register© JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment E 601-49400-226 E 602-49450-226 E 101-43000-221 E 101-43000-226 E 101-43000-221 E 101-42110-404 E 101-41900-404 E 101-41900-404 E 101-43000-221 Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Equipment Parts & Accessories Ciothing & personal equipment Equipment Parts & Accessories Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Orounds Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Orounds Equipment Parts & Accessories ToUl O&K SERVICES $16.23 $46 69 $4500 $69.66 $47.39 $147.03 $54 90 $62 07 $4643 1006122637 100612637 1006129145 1006135704 1006142212 1006148678 1006148679 1006148680 1006161/4 unifomrs uniforms towels mats mats mats towels $1,161.49 >ald Chki 0786*57 6/28)2004 GENUINE PARTS CO. E 101-45200-221 E 101-43000-221 E 101-43000-221 E 101-43000-222 E 101-43000-221 E 101-43000-222 E 101-43000-222 E 101-43000-222 E 101-43000-221 E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories Equipment Parts & Accessories Equipment Parts & Accessories Vehicle Equipment A Parts Equipment Parts A Accessones Vehicle Equipment A Parts Vehicle Equipment A Parts Vehicle Equipment A Parts Equipment Parts A Accessories Equipment Parts A Accessories Total GENUINE PARTS CO. $28.21 789983 Cable Ties $7.98 790153 Cable Ties $13.73 790160 Blow Cun $15.74 790442 Supplies $10 64 790760 GOJO $72.79 790950 Oil Filters $26.74 790965 Air Filters $1447 791007 Coupler $2243 791008 Filters $2329 791145 Washer Fluid $236.02 Paid ChkP"d78658 6/28/2004 GRONBERG A ASSOCIATES E 402-48030-530 Other Improvements $473 00 4789 Total GRONBERG A ASSOCIATES Cty 19 Sidewafit $473.00 Paid Chk# 078659 6/28/2004 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH DPT E 101-42110-329 Other Communications Total HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH DPT Pa^'C’hkiTf78^ 6/2*4/2004 * HINSHAW A CULBERTSON E 101-41600-307 Legal-Consulting E 101-43280-307 Legal-ConsulUng E 601 -49400-307 Legal-Consulting E 101-41600-307 Legal-Consulting E 101-43280-307 Legal-Consulting E 101-41600-307 Legal-Consulting E 101-41600-307 Legal-Consulting E 101-41600-305 Legal-Retainer E 601 -49400-307 Legal-Consulting E 101-41600-307 Legal-Consulting E 101-41600-307 Legal-Consulting E 101-41600-307 Legal-Consulting E 101-43280-307 Legal-Consulting E 101-41600-307 Legal-Consuttmg E 101-41600-305 Legal-Retainer E 101-43280-307 LegaLConaulting _ Total HINSHAW A CULBERTSON $76 99 $76.99 24057178 ims transactions $2,167 30 Nelson/Carison/vaated Oak PI $209678 10383259 applications Feb/Mar 2004 $120.00 10383261 water tower lease ATAT $134 68 10383261 misc legal-March $24900 10383261 Stonebay Escrow Agree $520 00 10383261 Hollander Haz Bldg $156 00 10383261 Orono/Hennessy land exchang $1,300 00 10383264 council mtg Mar04 $845 00 10389772 water tower lease AT AT $104 00 10389772 Eminent Domain Matter $7200 10389772 record Hamm Resolutions $793 00 10389772 Orono/Hennessey Land Exchange $65 00 10389772 Stone Bay Excrow Agreemnt $325 00 10389773 Eminent Domain Matter $1,300.00 10389774 counid mtgs /April2004 $1,902.46 10390656 applications/Apnl 2004 $12.150 22 >aki ChM^ 6786in 6/28/2004 HUEDSCH RENTAL SERVICE E 613-49830-404 Repairi/Maint-Bldga/Grounds $26.76 106661 Total HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE $2676 mats/GC 'PaKT^HUr 678662 6/28/2004 IDENTAORUO A i CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 06^4/04 3:12 PM Page 6 JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment E 101*42110*433 Memberships & Subscriptions Tout IDENTA0RU6 $75 00 S4661 Identadrug Web Access $7500 Paid Chk# 078663 6/28/2004 INTL ASSN OF CHIEFS OF POLICE £101*42110*433 Memberships & Subscriptions $100 00 43004 lACP renewal/Chief Good Total INTL ASSN OF CHIEFS OF POLICE Paid Chk« 078664 $100 00 6/28/2004 E 101*43270*442 Sprmg.FaII.X*mas Cleanup ToUl J R.'S APPLIANCE DISPOSAL INC J.R/S APPLIANCE DISPOSAL INC. $40 00 40011 appliances recycled $40 00 Paid Chk# 078665 6/26/2004 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC E 101*42110*403 Repairs/Maint-Misc Equip Total KUSTOM SIGNALS INC $229 17 196946 repair squad recorder $229.17 6/2^2604'*'l^AKEAW^^ E 101*43000*221 Equipment Parts & Accessones $5 30 053469 r* • f • Paid Chk# 076666 E 101*43000*221 Equipment Parts & Accessories E 101 *43000*221 Equipment Parts & Accessories ToUl LAKE AREA POWER EQUIPMENT $7.44 053473 $3.73 053552 washer parts float choke $16.47 PaidChk* 078667 6/28/2004 LEHNE'S TIRE SERVICE E 101-43270-442 Spring.Fall.X-mas Cleanup Total LEHNE'S TIRE SERVICE $261 00 12308 Cleanup day tires $261.00 Paid Chk# 078668 6/28/2004 E 703-49960-361 General Liability Ins Total LMCIT • BERKLEY • PO BOX LMCIT • BERKLEY - PO BOX $18.546 00 16362 general Liability Ins $18.546 00 Paid ChfS'OTaSSr 6/28/2004 LOGIS E 101*41900-401 Repairs/Maint*Office Equip E 101*42110-401 Repairs/Maint-OfTice Equip Total LOGIS $5.599 00 24139 $5.599 00 24139 Network Maintenance Network Ma ntenance $11.198 00 ■PaTd Chk# 071ST6 ’‘&2ih6b4 malef T E 101*42110*433 Memberships & Subscriptions Tout MALEFt $20 00 62204 membership due/L Tomcheck PaldciSl“o7867i iiiirioo* $20 00 MALLOY MONTAGUE''KARNOW^'s CO E 601 -49400-301 Auditing and Accl'g Services E 101*41900*301 Auditing and Acet'g Services E 602*49450*301 Auditing and Acefg Services E 613*49830*301 Auditing and Acet’g Services E 651*49910*301 Auditing and Acefg Services Total MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI & CO $3.030 00 13650 $821 00 13650 $4.050 00 13650 $2.550 00 13650 $470 00 13650 Audit RFP #2 Rcim Exp/Addi Asst Audit RFP #2 Audit RFP #2 Audit RFP #2 $10,921 00 Paid Chk# 076672 6/28/2004 MEDICA G 101-21706 Hospitafization/Medical ins G 101*15998 Non-Employee Health Ins G 101*21706 Hospitatization/Medical Ins G 101*21706 Hospitaiization/Medical Ins E 101*42110*135 City Benefit Contribubon O 101*15998 Non-Employee Health Ins O 101-21706 HospftaUzation/Medicat Ins ToUl MEDICA $1.76070 $1,462 22 $10,090 32 $731 11 $374 75 $1,175.12 $11 474 97 104183122585 Medica Low 7/2004 104183125488 Medtca Elect 7/2004 104183125488 Medica Elect 7/2004 104183134225 Medica Essemails 7/2004 11041831Q255 Medica High 7/2004 110418310255 Medica High 7/2004 110418310255 Medica High 7/2004 $27.069 19 ■ftlul Chk# 078673 6/28/7004 MEMA TREASURER m CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 06/24/04 3:12 PM Page 7 E 101-42110-433 Memberships & Subscriptions ToUl MEMA TREASURER JUNE 2004 Check Amt Involc^Comment $75 00 JUN2004 MEMA membership f/2004 $7500 ’KiyCh»ST78674 '6728/2004 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SER R101-39610 Miscellaneous Revenue ($13 50) may2004 G 101-20809 SAC Charges due to MWCC $1.350 00 may2004 SAC charges f/May 04 SAC charges f/May 04 Total MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SER Paid Chk#T78if75 $1.336 50 6/28ir2004 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS E 602-49450-383 MWCC-Currenl Charges $19.438 93 776422 wasterwater ]an-mar04 ToUl MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS *Paidl:w5r07867¥ $19,438 93 ^^m004 METROPOUTAN RADIO BOARD E 425-48945-580 Other Equipment $10.679 44 cops0401 800 MHZ Radios - Nav Fire Total METROPOLITAN RADIO BOARD PTidChluilD78677 672^2004 MIDWEST’ASPMALf E 602-49450-223 Bldg/Grounds Maint Supplies E 602-49450-223 Bldg/Crounds Maint. Supplies E 613-49830-223 Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies E 101-43000-224 Street Maint. Materials/Supply ToUl MIDWEST ASPHALT $10,679.44 $418 36 71995MB $528 70 72034MB $41748 72034MB $150 59 72075MB Patch • Main Break Hand Patch Hand Patch Hand Patch $1,515.15 >aid Chk#''*6^678 672&2004 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO E 613-49900-092 Soft Drinks For Resale ____$319 00 82495076 Tout MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO ~ $319.00 soda Paid'Chk«r078679 6/26/2004 MIDWEST FUELS E 101-43000-212 Motor Fuels & Lubricants G 101-14101 Gasoline Inventory ToUl MIDWEST FUELS * $743 54 21366 J^3.^33 21368 $4.709 07'* 565 gals die el 2129 0 ga. unleaded pVid*ChlSi"^78680 *6/28/2064*" MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY E 101-43000-415 Other Equipment Rentals $33 66 RI05040381 ToUl MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY $33 68 Cylinders Paid’Chir#^78681 ^267004 MN CHIEF OF POLICE ASSN E 101-42110-433 Memberships 6 Subscnptions $75 00 MCPA ToUl MN CHIEF OF POLICE ASSN $75 00 2004 MCPA/KL T3a^hki*678682 8/28/2004 MN DEPT OF REVENUE G 613-20806 Due to Govts-State Sales Tax R 601-39610 Miscellaneous Revenue R 101-34210 General Taxable Sales/Service ToUl MN DEPT OF REVENUE $1.407 00 $2000 $27 00 May2004 $1.454 00 golf course sales tax wtr meter sates general sales tax Pliid1CWar0786«3 6^872004 MN OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS E 101 -42110.437 Training S Dewalopmenl _ $210 00 JUNE2.4 ToUl MN OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS ■Piy Chw» CONF CRIME VICTIMS/JCir.V $21000 6/28/2004 MN/SCIA E 10142110 433 Mombarahipt & Subacription* Tout MN/SCIA $50 00 MNSCIA04-31 04 InytsHgatof* Assoc rrem&irt $50 00 ■pSidChic# 078685 6/28/2004 MR AUOIES COFFEE SERVICE E 613-499004)02 Soft Drinks For R mpU $49 50 21610 coffeo CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 06/24/04 3:12 PM Pages JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment Total MR AUQIES COFFEE SERVICE 14950 Paid Chk» 0786S6 6/28/2004 Mil DIST CO. E 613^9830-223 Bldg/Groundt Maint. Supplies G 613-16500 Fixed Asset-Const, in progress Total MTIOISTCO. $81.03 406213-00 15.103 48 411537-00 parts Greenmaster 800/sn230000141 15.184.51 Paid Chk# 078687 6/28/2004 NATIONAL WATERWORKS E 601-49400-227 Utility System Maint Supplies $2.100 65 1356795 ToUl NATIONAL WATERWORKS $2.100 65 hydrant valves >aid~Chk» 078688 6^8/2004 NAVARRE CifGO E 613-49830-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip ToUl NAVARRE CiTGO $18 00 061104 tire plug $1600 PaTd ChkF 07ll€89’' "^8/2004 NCPERS GROUP'UFE INS O 101-21710 Life insurance _ Total NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS $320 00 6732704 PERA Life 7/2C04 $32000 Paid ChK# 078690 6/28/2004 NET UT1N DISTRIBUTORS E 101-41900-201 Office supplies _ Total NET UTIN DISTRIBUTORS $34187 20237 cozy cups $341 87 Paid Chk# 078691 6/28/2004 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS E 101-41900-321 Telephone E 602-49450-321 Telephone E 601-49400-321 Telephone E 613-49830-321 Telephone __ Total NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS $280.37 326180427-00 $140 19 326180427-00 $46 73 326180427-00 $56 93 326180427-00 celt phones cell phones cell phones celt phones $52422 078692 6/26/2004 O'SULLIVANS • HOLIDAY ^ E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Mainl-Auto Equip _____$11 00 ju22004 Total O'SULLIVANS • HOLIDAY 546 $11.00 car washes/pd Paid Chk# 078693 6/28/2004 O'SULLIVANS HOLIDAY 547 E 101-42110-402 Repaifs/Maint-Auto Equip $123 50 mey3120Q4 ToUl O'SULLIVANS HOLIDAY 547 ~ $123 50 carwuhes f/May >ald thlurT7'865r''‘ M8/2^^ PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC. E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $129 83 91686 E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC. $316 20 91973 native praire mamt/French Crk native praire mamt/French ere $44603 6/28/2004 PROTECTION ONE E 101-41900-469 Other Miscellaneous Charges Total PROTECTION ONE $179 00 12677951 3rd Qtf 2004 Monitoring $179.00 Paid Chk# 078696 6/26/2004 RED PEDERSON UTILITIES. INC E 651-49910-319 Other Professional Services $450.00 702 G 602-20600 ContracU Payable $1.670 76 RFPi2F G 602-16500 Fixed Asset-Const in progress $1.490 00 RFP»2F ToUl RED PEDERSON UTILITIES. INC $3.610 78 swr locate/Balder ABirch lane RFP#2« - HomesUad Rd San Sm RFP#2# • Homestead Rd San Swr Chkil 67^697 ~6/26/2004 REED VENDING E 613-499004)93 Concsssiont For Reul»-Ti(t>l ToUl REED VENDING S78 10 4479 candy i»ule/GC $78.10 CITY OF ORONO 06/24/04 3:12 PM Page 9 ISll *Check Detail Register® JUNE 2004 CieckAmt Invoice Comment Paid Chk# 078698 6/28/2004 SAFETY SIGNS E 602-49460*415 Other Equipment Rentals E 602-49450-41 5 Other Equipment Rentals ToUl SAFETY SIGNS $175 73 040369 $2982 040374 barricades barricades $205 55 Paid'ChWr678699' ** *6/^ SBC PAGING E 101-42110*321 Telephone $3058 06012004 pagers Total SBC PAGING $30 58 Paid Chk# 078700 6/26/2004 SCHMIDT CURB COMPANY. INC E 402*48030*530 Other Improvements ($473 00) RFP«2F G 402-20600 Contracts Payable $1,612.73 RFPi2F E 402-48030-530 Other Improvements $5.168 74 RFP#2F Tout SCHMIDT CURB COMPANY. INC RFP#2F Cty 19 Sidewalk RFP#2F Cty 19 Sidewalk RFP#2F Cty 19 Sidewalk $6.308 47 Paid Chk# 078701 6/28/2004 SOUTHEAST ACCDT RECONST SOCIET E 101-42110-437 Training & Development $200 00 Jul25-26.04 ToUl SOUTHEAST ACCDT RECONST SOCIET leconstruc conf/B Anderson $200 00 ■ftKl'Chk#'078702' 6/28/2004 ‘ ST. JOSEPH'S EQUIPMENT INC. E 101-43000-221 Equipment Paitt & Accessories $1,84191 SI29129 Link Assembly • Loader Total ST. JOSEPH'S EQUIPMENT INC i^aidChkli'oWos' $1,841 91 6/28/2004 STATE OF MN CPV PROGRAM E 101-42110-469 Other Miscellaneous Charges $150 00 070104-07010 E 101-41900-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $100 00 070104*07010 E 602*49450-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $250 00 070104-07010 Total STATE OF MN CPV PROGRAM ANNUAL FEE ANNUAL FEE ANNUAL FEE $500.00 Paid Chk# 078704 6/28/2004 8TEFFENHAGEN. RON E 613-49900-093 Concessions For Resale-Txbi Totx.1 STEFFENHAGEN, RON Paid’fihkjr oTSTob 6/2872004 STREiCHERS $170 37 061804 GOLF BALLS REIMBURSE $17037 E 101 -42110-226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42110 221 Equipment Parts 6 Accessories E 101-42110*226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42110*226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-421 :0*226 Clothing & personal equipment Totat STREICHERS $779 95 $2593 $807 90 $77995 $145 90 426766 6 439908 1 440204 1 440775 1 441609 1 - /Day halogen bulb ballistic vest/pharo ba'^istic vest uniforms $2,539 63 Pa7d*C'hk# 078706 6/28/2004 SUMMIT SUPPLY CORP OF COLORADO E 101-45200*223 Bldg/Grounds Mamt Supplies ___$772 00 38955 stationary bench frames Total SUMMIT SUPPLY CORP OF COLORADO $772 00 Paid Chk# 070707 6/28/2004 THE TOP FLITE E 613-49900*093 Concessions For Resaie-Txbi E 613-49900*094 Concessions For Resale-NonTax $182 40 54276506 ($14 40) 54297071 GOLF BALLS 2004 club logo ToUl THE TOP FLITE $166 00 HaiTChk# 6/8708 6/28/2004 THORPE DIST CO. E 613-49900 091 deer For Resale E 613*49900 091 E«er For Resale ToUl THORPE DIST CO. $143 00 337772 $3 j20 337069 beer resale/OC beer for retaie/GC $176 20 ‘Sudr£hK*'’5W69 8?jsr2364 TRUE VALUE HARDWARE E 61 3-4M30 223 Bklg/Groundt Main! Suppliaa $10.98 126068 door closer CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register© 06/24/04 3 12 PM Page 10 JUNE 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment £613^9830-221 E 101-43000-224 E 101-41900-223 E 101-41900-223 E 101-45200 223 E 101-43000 221 E 613-49830 221 E 101-42110-201 E 101-42110-221 E613 49830 221 E 613-49830 223 E 101-43000 224 E 101-42110-201 E 101-42110-201 E 013-49830-223 E 601-49400-221 E 601-49400-227 E 601-49400-223 E 601-49400-223 E 101 41900-201 E 101 43000-221 E 101-43000-221 E 101-45200 223 E 101-42110-221 E 101-42110-221 Equipment Paris & Accessories Street Maint Matenala/Supply Bidg/Grounds Maint Supplies Bldg/Grounds Maint Suppl es Bldg/Grounds Mamt Supplies Equipment Parts & Accessories Equipment Parts & Accessories Office supplies Equipment Parts & Accessories Equipment Parts & Accestones Bldg/Grounds Maint Supplies Street Maint Matenats/Suppiy Office supplies Office supplies DIdg/Orounds Maint Supplies Equipment Parts & Accessories Utility System Maint Supplies Bidg/Grounds Maint Supplies Bldg/Grounds Maint Supplies Office suppiies Equipment Pais & Accessories Equipment Pais & Accessories Bidg/Grounds Maint Supplies Equipment Parts & Accessories Equipment Parts & Accessories Total TRUE VALUE HARDWARE PaidChk# 070710 6/28/2004 E 101-42110-220 F 101-42110-226 E 101 42110-226 E 101 42110-226 E 101-42110 226 E 101 42110 226 E 101 42110 226 E 101 42110-226 f: 101-42110 226 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Clothing & personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing & pe'^sonat equipment Clothing & pe sonai equipment Clothing A pe'sonal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Total UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Paid Chki 0/8/11 0/28/2004 VALLEY-RICH CO E 602 49450 406 Repairs/Mamt-Swr tines/lifts Total VALLEY4TICH CO $1,665 50 S3.5J9 49 8200 $3.51949 Paid Chk# 0/8712 6/28/2004 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE E 101-43000 403 Repairs/Mamt-Misc Equip _^5 00 530394 ToUl WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE $25 00 $27 64 135229 marking pamt/GC $8.57 135251 util blades $39.79 135266 iron pellets $14 67 135318 light bulbs $5 85 135482 garbage bags $24.47 135701 batteries $9.44 135761 push pin. air freshner $1980 135809 disinfectants, washers $20 00 135859 misc supplies $17 00 135863 battery, misc supplies $11.56 130011 anchors, cleaners $531 136018 rain gauge $1629 136114 drano clog, clorox $22 95 136192 key A batteries $11 15 136244 letters/numbors, trash bags $21 25 136252 w/secufity insert bit $30 90 136462 ball valve,elbows $16 27 136486 air hose, coupler set $1 05 136487 coupling $2 55 136508 staples $521 136520 hooks $9 57 136521 misc supplies $10 64 136562 ParkArash bags $6 77 1366/3 key __$3 39 136/00 keys $375 12' $5 90 218393 uniforms ($98 45) 219871 returned items $147 80 220540 uniforms/B Anderson $147 80 223640 uniforms/M Tomc/yk $216 64 223641 holstors/erickson $829 14 224271 uniformsA White $10645 224349 uniforms/EricKson S260 27 224070 uniforms/white $49 95 22503/uniforms/Pcrsell install hydrant valve Nav wtr TIRE RLPAlKiSWEfcPER Paid Chk# 0/8713 6/28/2004 WITTKF. TONY E 101 42110-437 Traming A Development ToUl WITTKE.TONY $2811 051904 mileage/lunch-TW PaTcTchki 078/14 0/28/2004 WRIGHT HENNEPIn ELECTRIC E 101-43000-381 Gas A Eleciic E 602 49450 301 GiS A ElectrtC E 101-43000 381 Gas A Electnc $32 70 070804 $22 29 070804 $18 33 070804 electric electric electric CITY OF ORONO 06/24/04 3 12 PM Page 11 *Check Detail Register® JUNE 2004 Total WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC Check^it 173.38 Invoice Comment ■jsa’CflBTWTs 6W2804 xcEiTEHeRdv E 101-42110-381 Gaa8iElactne E 101-48200-381 Gat 81 Elactfic E 101-43000-381 Oat 81 Etaetric E 101-42110-381 Oaaft Electric E 101-41900-381 Oat & Electric E 101-43000-386 Street Ughttng E 601-49400-381 Gat & Electric E 602-40450-381 Gat S Electric E 613-40630-361 On & Electric Total XCEL ENERGY S9.42 $23.24 $283.93 $526 23 $1,164.45 $1,311.22 $3,145.46 $1,384 31 $593 55 116059677716 Electrical Service 118059677716 Electrical Service 116059677716 Electrical Service 118059677716 Electrical Service 118059677716 Electrical Service 118059677716 Electrical Service 116059677716 Electrical Service 118050677716 Electrical Service 116050677716 Electrical Service $6,441.81 10100 Primary Cash $203,370.32 Fund Summary 101 OENER/M. FUND 234 LURTON PARK 402 MUNICIPAL ST AID ST CONSTUCT 406 PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT REVOLVE 425 NAVARRE FIRE STATION PROJ FUND 601 WATER OPERATING FUND 602 SEWER OPERATING FUND 613 GOLF COURSE 651 STORM WATER UTIUTY OP FUND 703 INSUR/kNCE FUND 10100 Primary Cath $93,620 93 $1,200.00 $9,883.69 $488.10 $10,679.44 $16,273.36 $37,61915 $12,950 63 $2,104 02 $18,546 00 $203,370.32 William Anderson 3877 Park Lane Spring Park, MN 55384 June 28, 2004 To: 1 he City of Orono, it’s Honorable Mayor and Council members Re: Big Island Veterans Camp My name is William Anderson and I live at 3877 Park Lane, Spring Park, Minn . I have been asked to speak on bchalfof this group of veterans who are here tonight to discuss the future of The Big Island Veterans Camp. We call ourselves The Big Island Veterans Community and our goal is to keep this unique place open to veterans and their families. We want involved veterans to operate this camp forever. This property is a unique asset to veterans, the City of Orono and the greater Lake Minnetonka community. For over 100 years this island has .serv ed as a place where families have retreated to enjoy this camp ’s 56 acres of woods and wildlife, surrounded by our great Lake Minnetonka. For over 80 years, the veterans have operated and maintained this place and have always been fine neighbors and good stewards of the land. We are proud to have kept this eainp in such a natural state, where we have struck the perfect balance between historv'. wildlife sanctuary and land conservation. Indeed, in many respects this place remains as it was before white settlement. 1 his is what makes our camp .so unique and is the reason we have committed ourseh es to pre.serving it for our veteran community. At limes veteran ’s organi/.ational issues have come into play and forced reorganizations of the camp ’s management; this is one of those limes. One of our goals is to organizationally structure the camp so that it may operate in perpetuity and be free of the petty dilfercnccs that have marked its j>ast. We arc here tonight to formally ask you. the Mayor and Council of the City of Orono, to join with us in recognizing the unique nature of The Big Island Veterans Camp and for you to go on record as supporting the continued operation of this historic and worthwhile facility. We are asking that you consider a rezoning of this property to merely reflect the use that the land has been put to for over 100 years; commercial zoned, seasonal camp for use by veterans, their families and guests. We recognize that there are sev eral uses this property could be put to. How ever, we believe the past 80 years hav e shown our use to be the best balance of accessability. land preserv ation and in hannony with the character of Big Island and it’s ncigliboring communities. Indeed, in many respects, our camp has come to define the very character of Big Island itself. Eighty-five years ago our state legislature debated how best to recogni/e the sacnfices it’s veterans made in fighting World War I. A fitting memorial was discussed but was never built. However, what developed from that discussion was to create this retreat. Big Island Veterans Camp. This place was meant to be unique; not just a memorial built of bronze and granite, but to be a LIVING memorial. This was meant to be a place where veterans who answered their country ’s call could escape to, where they could pause to reflect on their lives, on their experiences and on their tosses. Our state has many memorials, but few living memorials; this place is truly one-of-a-kind. Today, our sons and daughters are still answering their country ’s call to service and we call upon you to help us to preserve this unique place and to prevent it’s loss for our veterans and for the generations of veterans to come. Sincerely, The Big Island Veterans Community > ^ V ss ft’ 'a fcS * *7-fV•tK r i-Ki>Vi'^'./‘ ^ ® - a 5?5 p>.;'-* ■V'’ ■ j4»«Arl » •> ?5*'i ’•■■ /■r,; y.*. A . '4 c;^-^:^^'.a-a£>:''^ 4£|^:-;. VvS^fl! ;.' .„*;:4, «ir' ®#i / V «ll :■ -Vife Ul I *^5* •lUkV -it ■i,<V' V*;. “' 5’#^ 4' nrr *'.V-ii jfT’ Ta If' ^ t: ’^*1 V^v r m^.Sk-V'.Tn g?5 7-*^ "><r, V*»' . I ..•!». »| I »'« \IMi K ! I\1f .!., •»•■«. 1,. •• ,. :.j,. .,,;=; .• \-‘ '*. f j r.nK w.i •*ffi. i.i!!\ I'p. »f • if ;•<■ • I I ,• » » : ! i ' if ■ ■ ' I. ' li> • •» * •' I I I'.'U I* .♦ \ • ' ♦ I : I I ; ^ 11. .Nfl r-»’ SF-r . r 4^i;%^ LE«3END < 1 I ft- i^'rKi eutLC t^i I I ^C^C'ttr BU«LC»iij ^ -"Ee e cc»^tcur3 ♦ \ p" Lcui -opn SPOT plev ^ „p ^OT ELEw ACCESSIBILITY A P»»IMAI»' CiOAa POtt DE.'fLC?^MP>iT OS v-ETER a ;*^ CATtP r6 nA#cE Tuc PAClLtTIES ACCEftftlBLE tO TmE DlftAOLEP OMINC«»«j VtftiTCW UP S«Ct^ T^« Li« LEVEL TO TMi ELEVATION 0T UAAT CP AN BLE . ATOH B4 TlC MAlsl LOO:*E A^C^ A (jCNTLT ftLOFED PATw ON TME BITE hull PIftOvIDf ACCEBB TO rWT OS lecAhC AftTBTEnos PATWIB POLLOttfNCj TNE EftO CONTOUR UMIL ALlCW E'.EM vtBiTORB IN UMTELC mairb TO r-iOvE REBEL> TMROUiLiOUT rv0 CAMP > • W3 ‘‘Af Ji - 7/^- r *v^ ■-•'V ^ i n*r^e^ c i‘ E i *r;^'T^A\ V w,ATF<^ L » fj ^ ft T jr T 1 *1 >41 A_____]A-i-. -i- X: / V LAKE MINNETONKA ^': 7 •• 4«J5 /,: nc' e?t.Lnn ^ V.ru..i# I . LP ,J - * i %Xdt* /■ » ■ >•' •-. • t«/i] o ^ i?i ft^r, i4HPMNCTU4m< ■• W aWlL* ♦ P'*-' CA^tP^ ♦ ;,k t m :7At\ .r.Yk VC\,lMTBA!^ * - ■ -• ^ »t >r>-:' rY j, • r jTt ^ * • * J- .; A< "v ■ % \\' s\ . "IJ16' »4" i '• ..i ■ ♦ ^04. Bf.. . ... iS' ■r' V K'V< 1 . fdf ■y* .«,* . t f .•rT . • t Kn w BIG ISLAND VETERANS CAhlF" 0«0NC ME#4E^6CTA <ELIM NART MASTER PLAN ■'i. m0^. <»• • I Ji ; 5* \ i® r I I iii! l.-jj IM! ijjii i!i! Ti-* < ii *'ih r-.j RESOLUTION CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA JUNE 28,2004 WHEREAS The Board of Governors, Big Island Veterans Camp has voted to sell the Big Island Veterans Camp; and Under Minnesota Statutes, 197.133 the Camp cannot be sold until the end of the 2005 legislative session; and The Orono City Council considers the Big Island Veterans Camp a significant historical part of the City of Orono; and The Orono City Council believes that the Big Island Veterans Camp would be a valuable and patriotic resource if configimed principally for the benefit is disabled veterans and their families, particularly in view of the increasing number of WW II and Korean War veterans becoming disabled due to age and the sacrifices currently being made by Minnesotans in Afganistan, Iraq and elsewhere; and The Orono City Council, which has certain abilities to make rules and regulations concerning development of the Camp, wishes to minimize additional city services which would be required should the Camp be turned into a public park for general purposes or be developed for residential purposes; NOW THEREFORE fhe City Council of Orono recommends to the Board of Governors, Big Island Veterans Camp, as follows: I Every elTort be made to find funding to preserve the Big Island Veterans Camp and build and maintain facilities specifically aimed at providing quality recreational experiences for disabled veterans and their families. It is the Councils understanding that funding for the first special use cabin has been in hand for some time but application for a building permit from the City of Orono has never been sought. If such funding is not forthcoming the Council recommends that only a portion of the camp be sold, as provided in Minnesota Statutes 197.133, with proceeds to be used to build and endow quality disabled facilities on the portion of the Camp retained, plus endow funds for operation. Minnesota Statutes 2003, 197.133 * Page I of I M inncsota Statutes .200,3, Tabkaf Chaptejs ‘I’oblc of contents forChapter j 97 197.133 Disposal of proparty and aspiration of the board of govarnors. If a majority of the board determines that the disposal of the camp rir pnrfinn qI the camo is in the best interests of Minnesota veterans, or if the camp is not used solely as a camp j‘^1 for and by disabled and other veterans and their families and operated and maintained in compliance with all state, federal, and local laws, the board may dispose of the property at market value as provided in this section. Before disposing of the property, the board shall give notice by certified mail to the commissioner of veterans affairs of its decision to dispose of the property. The commissioner shall publish the notice in the State Register. Interested governmental agencies have until the end of the next legislative session after the notice to ^ appropriate money to purchase the property.'uM Proceeds realized from the disposal of the property and any assets on hand at the time of the disposal of the property, must be placed in an irrevocable trust to be used for the initiation or maintenance of veterans programs in the state of Minnesota. Trustees must be appointed in the same manner as provided for under section 197.131. The trustees shall consult with the commissioner of veterans affairs to determine the needs of Minnesota veterans and provide the commissioner with an annual written report on the trust. The commissioner must approve all expenditures from the trust. A certified audit of all assets, expenditures, and property must be conducted prior to any disposition of any assets under the control of the board. Any board member who would benefit directly or indirectly financially from the sale of this property must be removed by the board and a successor appointed as provided by section 19/. 131. Up«)n final disposition of all assets to the trust, the board must disband.Should the assets ot the trust be exhausted,the trust must be terminatea. HIST : 1985 c 152 s 3; 1997 c 7 art 2 s 26 ^ AH tc/y • Copyright. 2003 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. !,ij 7> nt cv/ http://www.rcvisor.leg.slate.mn. us-'slats/1 97/1 33.html 6/28/2004 t 06/15/2004 TO 12:06 FAI 952 472 0773 VF* POST 5113 lOlM QOOl/001 JIM RAMSTAD URD DISTRICT. MINNESOTA WAYS AND MEANS coMMirree TRAOc swrnCOMMirrcf HEALTH StlSCOMMirriK May 28. 2004 ConsreUfi^ of tfie tISniteti S>tateiEl l^otule ot SUpretfentotibeK SBoKfilngton. SC 20515—2303 The Honorable Tim Pawlcnty Governor, State of Minnesota 130 State Capitol 7S Dr. Maitio Luther King Jr. Boulevard Saint Paul, Minnesota SSISS Dear Governor WASNMCTONOincti 103 C*MNO*(>«OOM Of#iu Du«o«aa WA«»M«atOM, DC TOilO D071 2iV^2i7f ntnMTT oaaicgi 1f09 r^vaaouTM IIoao SoatM. noc MoMNCTWfMUk MH M300 tH2|73MttO ' • - ? «MMf.lkAuak.^|ov( ran»u«4 By fax and mail 1 am writingf to yem nn hehatf of onr brave vetera n* in the Thtrri n throu^iout the state. •Jfiyt*;■ssinnal Di^stnct and There is grave and urgent concern among our veterans about the closing and sale of the Big Island Veterans Camp on Lake Minnetonka. The camp is a wonderful and much needed retreat which is widely used and etyoyed by veterans and their Ounilies. With our nation at war, it is a particularly inopportune time to be closing the camp. On behalf of our veterans, I respect^y request that you put an end to efforts to sell the property and keep the camp open for use by our veterans and their fomilies. This camp has benefited veterans by giving fiiem respite at an inexpensive cost formany years. More campers have been coming every year, and keying the camp open seven days a week instead of just Friday and Saturday would bring in more visitors as weU. We cannot continue to take away benefits we have promised or allotted to our veterans and their families. These brave men and women have done so much for our country. Keeping the Big Island Veterans Camp open for them seems such a small price for all they have done. I strongly urge you to reconsider die decasioa to close and sell the Big Island Veterans Canq>. Many thanks. Governor, for your consideration and all the wonderftil and important things you do for our veterans. You and the First Lady have been partiailaily attentive to the needs of Minnesota’s veterans and thdr fiunilies with your qiedal efibits to help the fiunilies of our brave troops serving our nation abroad and very much in harm’s way. Please let me know if I can ever be helpful in any way. Sincerely, jnvf RAMSTAD Member of Congren ec: Comniissiofier Je£T Olson be: Tom Robb 14' i I nI LX 1 Orono City Council Meeting Monday June 28, 2004 Bruce and Betsy Nusbaum 3480 North Shore Drive Wayzata, Minn. 55391ayz 952-471-9659 We are here to give an update on our situation with the water issues on Birch Lane. Our growing oonoems to date are; a) Excessive run off from Birch Lane on to our property causing an undo hardship b) Construction of the lot to the west. i.e. allowable fill and final grade plans. c) Future changes to ttie lot to the east of us. d) Concrete plan for restructuring Birch Lane and drainage issues. e) Expediting the process and setting a time frame for completion. f) Communication from the dty to the neighborhood. g) Request a special meeting be held to deal with these issues. ] We have spoken and met witfi Greg Gappa and Ron Morse and have gotten nowhere We are confident that Mayor Peterson and the Council Members will take action immediately to remedy the problem. Please contact us to schedule the meeting. d ii-S.P