Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
10-18-2004 Planning Packet
* i ORONO PI.ANMNG C OMMISSION Moaday October 18,2004 6:00 P.M 2750 Krilcv Parkwa% - Council C hamber% ac;fm>a Council Represrnialivr: Mayor PclcrMui AI DIFNC'E MKMHKKS: Pkasr sign in fur the |>uhlic record at the front |iodiuni if you Hi&h to addrc»% the Planning C ommisMon. Applicants will be asked to mose to the front table to answer questions when the Chair announces the applkalkm. The Planning C'umnitssiun is an adsisury body to the City Couttiil. If action is taken on any items on this agenda, they will be scheduled for the Nos ember 8, 2004 CNy C'ouncil meeting unless otherwise noted by the C*hafr. consi :nt I. 804*305.1 liart and Betsy But/cr. 2625 North Shore Drise. Variance (Stall'; Janicc Gundlach) oi n BusiNi:ss 2. 804-3024 City of Orono. Cl'P for % ehicle Storage, Code Amendments (StafT: Mike CialTron) 3. 804-3052 Eric X ogstroni. 2618 C'asco Point Road, N'ananecs (Staff: Mclamc Curtis) NEW BUSINESS 4. 804-3IM2 Pillar Homes on behalf of Roger & ('arol Ro\ iek. 1625 Bohns Point Road. Afler-lhe-Eact Conditional Use Permit (Staff: Janicc Gundlach) 5. 804-3054 Jon and (Jail Blaekstonc. 4475 Forest l.ake Fanding. N'ananccs (Slar- Janice (Jundladi) 6, 804-3055 Dr. Martha Spencer. 1005 Willow Drive S, Variance (Staff; Mclamc Curtis) 7. 804-.3058 Timolhy Zuart. 3970 .North Shore Drive, N'anances (SlalT: Melanie Curtis) 8. 804-3059 James Render. 1.335 Toakawa Road, Coiidilional Use Pemiil (Staff; MikeGalTron) 9. 804-.3061 Gary Hansen on behalf of Bill and Robin Grierson. 1989 Fagemess Point Road, Variances (Staff: Melanie Curtis) i OKONO Pl.ANMNG C OMMISSION ^londay October 18, 2004 6:00 PM 2750 Krilrv P«rkw«% - C ooBcit rOamber% /UiEMIA ConHcil Representative: Mayor Peterson Al DIESrE MK.MBKRS: Please sign in for the public record at the front podium if sou wish to address the Plannine C'ommissioa. Applicants will be asked to move to the front table to answer questions when the Chair announces the application. The Planning Commission is an adslsors body to the Cits C'ouuiil. If action is taken on any items on this aKcnda. they will be scheduled for the Sosember 8. 2004 City C'ouncil mcetinf* unless otherwise noted by the Chair. CONSl NT I. M04-3U53 Uart and Betsy Bul/cr. 2625 North .Shore Drise, V'anance (Stall: Jaiiicc Gundlach) OI D BUSINKSS 2. #04-3024 City of Orono. CC P for \ ehicle Stora|;e, Code Amendments (StafT: MikeGalTron) 3. #04-3052 bnc N ogstriHit. 2618 Casco Point Road. N'ananccs (Staff: Melanie Curtis) NHW BUSINESS 4. #04-3042 Pillar Homes on behalf of Roger & Carol Rovick. 1625 Bohns Point Road. After-thc-Kact Conditional Use Permit (Staff: Janiec Gundlach) 5. #04-3054 Jon and Gail Hlackstone. 4475 Forest Lake Landing. Vanances (Stan"- Janice (jundlacli) ft. #04-.3055 Dr. Martha Spencer. 1005 Willow Drive S. Variance (Staff; .Melanie Curtis) 7. #04-3058 Timothy Zwart. 3970 .North Shore Drive, Vanances (Staff: Melanie Curtis) 8. #04-3059 Janies Render. 1335 Tonkawa Road, Conditional Use Permit (Staff: Mike GalTron) 9. #04-3061 Gary Hansen on behalf of Bill and Robin Grierson. 1989 Fagemess Point Road, Vanances (Staff: Melanie Curtis) Public A ttendance Mi:(iiM;Dtic lO- □ COfNCII. 01*I.ANMNr. COMMISSIO> □ Park C ommission □ Other ____________ NA.MK (please |)rinl| PtC ASEHI.LOl T Till: INFORMA I ION KEgi ESI CD BELOW FOK Ul R CIt \ RECORDS. ADDRKSS I'KKSK.M FOR (from auenda) namk or .NL.MBKR l._\X C -t L ^h. O I f A^ 1 b /7L I. / . M t A______S V Z • I'.. ‘ r ■ ' . N •• a./llvl D f 4. u ______<uC '•> l/t S.__________r.» C'V4. ny,. 6._ 7._ «_ 9. _ 10. _ !»•_ I2-. 13. _ 14. _ 15. i-CA.. S.r-» c v -y r y rtTmi^a o«.^TSS rage 1 of4 Date AfpUcaliOB Received: S-30-1M Date AppUcatten Coaiidered at Coaiplete: ^30-04 60-Day Review Period Capiret: lt-294M Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, Ciiy Administrator From: Dale: Stebjcct: Janice Gundlach. City Planner^ October 14,2004 04-3053, Aulik Associates on behalf of Bart & Betsy Bulzcr, 2625 North Shore Drive, Lake Setback Variance, Public Hearing ZoBiag Dbtrict: LR - 1 A, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acre min.) Lot Area: 1.97 acres (86,129 s.f.) Lot Width: 268 feet @ shoreline; 259 feet @ 75' setback ApplicalioH Summary: Applicant requests the following variance in order to replace an existing dormer on the lake side of the residence with a larger dormer: 1. Lake setback variance to permit structure within 75 ’ of Lake Minnetonka. Staff Mecommeudartou: Staff finds that the applicant is requesting a reasonable improvement without increasing the non-conformity. Stalf recommends approval noting that the hardship is the current lake setback of the existing dormer and house. PcrtincBl Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-1279. Placement of structures on lots. Uhen more than one setback applies to a site, structures and facilities must be located to meet all setbacks. Structures shall be located as follows: (1) Structure and on-site sewerage system setbacks (in feet) from ordinary high water level. Setbacks 1 Sewige PubiK Water Stfuctuft Treatmenl CUsuncaiion L'nsrwrrcd So»cfee S>«em NE ISO ISO ISO RD 100 75 75 GD 75 75 75 Tnbutary too 7$75 Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations, (a) No hard cover or imperv ious surface shall be placed, located or constructed within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of any lake or tributary, except for stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in this Code. i (•4-MS3 Octoter I1,:M4 Lut of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applications and Description of Request Exhibit B - Hardship Documentation Form Exhibit C - Survey Exhibit D - Hardcover Calculations Exhibit E - Elevation (Before and After) Exhibit F - Properly Owner’s List Exhibit O - Plat Map Background This applicant originally appeared before Planning Commission at the May meeting proposing a new accessory building and a conditional use permit *0 allow installation of plumbing within that structure. The Planning Commission and Council approved this request in June. In conjunction with the work that was approved in June the applicants have been remodeling the existing structure, which sites uiihin the 0-75 ’ lake setback zone. Had the applicants known that this request required a variance it would have been included in the original request made in May and approved in June, earlier this year. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot Arca/Wldlh LR-IA Lot Area Lot Width Required 87,120 s.f. (2.00 acres)200’ Actual 86,129 s.f. (1.97 acres)268 @ shoreline, 259' ^ 75 ’ setback Setbacks LR-IA Required Exiitiag Proposed Front 50 ’N/A N/A Rear 50 ’296 ’-house 240 ’ - garage NO CHANGE Uft Side 30 ’107 ’ - house 35 ’-garage NO CHANGE Right Side 30 ’55 ’ - house NO CHANGE Lakeshore 75 ’39 ’ - house 100 ’ - garage NO CHANGE Average Lakeshore Less Restrictive than 75 ’ Setback Compliant NO CHANGE MM.J053 October m. 2004 Pose J of 4 Total Lot Area ToUl Structural Cov erage 86.129 s.f. (1.97 acres)Allowed: 12.919 s.f (15%) Existing & Proposed: 4,941 s f (5.7%) Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed HaHcover 0-75 19,880 sf Os.f (O*.) 3.768 s.f (19^0)NO CHANGE 75 - 250 43.247 s f 10.812 s f (25%) 9.075 s.f (20 9«%)NO CHANGE 250 - 500 23.002 s f 6.901 s.f (305o) 0 s.f (0%)NO CHANGE Lake Setback Variance The applicant’s have proposed to replace an existing dormer on the lake side of the home with a larger dormer This dormer will exist over existing roof and not increase the existing, non-conforming. 39 foot lake setback. No new hardcover or structural coverage is proposed llardfbip Statemeut Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in txhibil B. and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application Hardship Anahsis In considtrint appikatlom for variance, the Hanning Conembshn shall coniUer the effect of the proposed xwlance 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 Hanning Commission thaU consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provhians of the Zoning Code in Instances where their urict enforcement would cause undue hardship becanse of circumstances unique to the individual property under consUerathH, 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 the hardship is the existing location of the home. To replace even the dormer that exists today would require a variance due to the house ’s 39 foot setback to the lake. The proposed dormer also docs not increase the existing non-conforming situation as the peak will match the dormer on the other side of the home and the remaining roof structure and chimneys extend even higher than the proposed dormer ’s peak. Staff finds that the applicant is requesting a reasonable improvement without increasing the non-conformity, with the hardship being the current setback of the house. Past renovation applications arc typically approved if the non-confonnity is not increased, the changes arc less than 50^o of the volume and value of the struciiue, hardcover and structural coverage arc not increased, and there are no negative impacts to mt-MSi OclolMrll,20M Pifc 4 of 4 the neighbors. Staff finds this application meets alt those criteria. lames for Coa iider ati — 1. Is the view from the lake changing significantly? 2. Is the non-conformity increasing? 3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff RccoBBBeadation Approval of the plans as submitted. City of Orono Variance Application EXHIBIT A Sfreef Address 2750 Ke:iey Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Man 952-249-4603 fax 952.249-4516 Mailing Address P O Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-:Q66 Application » 0^/' '60^' Amount Paid, -ktio bo Staff Fee. . S600 Renewal" m S3C0 After-the-fact 200 Oouoie Fee This application form must be completed in fun App cant v/ill be notified withm 15 days as to the status of tne application Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: “ZOlS" Mams Dgjifg Property Identification Number (PIN); <?<n t*? 1toool (Attach legal description to application if not inc uded on the survey ) Date Property Acquired (month/year): uIqt, □ Yes. I own the adjacent parcels. Present use of property; Residential □ 0:ner_____________________________________ Zoning District: A___________ APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Cam^lete legal na-es and manta! status required fcr each irte'ested party) Name: A ouak Phone (home): Address; Email: A P. Lt Phone (work); ^1^2^ sir -isoo UtsiS s^i -Utoo OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names a*d mar.iai status required for each interested party) Name. b><k«.T < ___ Phone (home): Address: 2.<^zsl Phone (work); JVoo N/«,tw Rgiiys Email: y.i^Q,T ^xrr^ ra-nw<Acr.Fax: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost: Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): ____________ $ iZO. OOP U -*rf*o y REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadl.ne dale in order for your application to be processed. □ Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. □ Completed Application Form □ Completed Hardship Documentation Form □ Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150' of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance. Government Center. A-603 300 South 6**" Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 □ Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations Also provide one copy 8 5" x 11' or 11" X 17" for reproduction □ Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet) □ Topographic survey - including existing and proposed elevations Provide one copy 8.5' x 11" or 11" X 17* for reproduction. □ Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5* x 11" or 11* x 17'). □ Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. * APPLICANT'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Tho applicant rocognizos that hc/sho is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so. tho staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend tho request for denial of the request regardle^of its potential merit Applicanl't Signature: Applicant's Signat OWNER'S ACXNOWUI The owner h.ireby a^nowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request Owner s Signature ^ ^^ -______ Date ^______ Owner's Signature: o _________Oate </ Applicant must tev^ll sdbppittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Plannlhg^omrfH«ion Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month Applicants must bo 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. #8053 City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form Street Address 2750 Kelley Pa'<way Orono. MN 55356 (This *orTi IS to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-app!ca! on meQt>rg.*) Mailing Address PO Ba«66 Crista; Bay. WN 55323-0C66 Mam 9S2-249-4600 Fax 952-243-4516 For Of*i-e Use 0^'v C :y Piannef ___ Meeting Date.T.r-e PC Date Oof. What IS the purpose of a pre-application meeting ? Pre application meetings aid the appl cant in preparing a complete proposal, info'rn them of the procedures and requirements of the city code and identi^ pol.c es c» regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address Z^Z.5 fkorc- blr- Property Identification Number (PIN) ________ Zoning District; (^-|A ___Size o'f Property Z0OO3. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: □ Average Setback □ S de Yard Setback C Rear Yard Setback C Ha'dcover □ Lot Coverage □ Lot Area pother (AAi ^t^U^bUC - t£\arl />75' laHi SVK?A4Jl □ Front ^ard Setoa^n □ Lot Wrttn igAi. builuo^UciJopc of jhvcJVf^i l&kt^Lr derhry tK_____________________ Applicajif^; Initials'^ HARDSHIP: Applicant has rece.ved tne Hardsimp Documentation Fo*m understands it as it has been explained to them, and is aware that it must be completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal variance application. OTHER INFORMATION: ‘Please note: Your variance appli^a^on v/ill NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during whicn this completed by Cit) M. O iT\_ ft 8. “The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoinmg property." The existing home was constructed within 75* of the lakeshore prior to the adoption of the 1975 hardcover ordinance that introduced the 75’ setback from the lake shore. The existing conditions do not meet the requiremects of natural lighting and ventilation 9. "Tlie conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the disuict in which said land is located.” Though many properties m the district basT a high water mark >ctback, not all ha\x a high watermark setback and a delineated wetland setback. Not only does the prt^rty m question have both setbacks, but the combination of these setbacks also reduces the allowable area to build by more than half The property in question has another disadvantage due to the majonty of the shared driveway within the 75' to 2S0' setback located within its boundaries, decreasing the ability to add more hardcover. All of tlicse restrictions do not even allow for the Owner to do the extreme of relocating a sunibr sized structure an>w here withm the property. 10. “Tlic granting of the application is necessarv' for the preservation and enjojinenl of a substantial propeit>’ right of (he applicant.” The intent of the Owner purchasing and renovating the said property is to enjoy the lake and the lake view*. The grantmg of the application is necessary to allow the applicant to be able to take advamage of the lake view. 11. “The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health. safet>. comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to tlie intail of (he Zonmg Code.” The granting of the application will not in any way impair health, safely, comfort, or morals Health will be improved by the increase of natural sunlight and ventilation Safety wtU be improved by increasing the vuew the Owner has of their land allowing for a more watchful eye for inmidcn and/or the ability to prevent accidents at the lakeshore involving children or others (hat may need help. Comfort will also be unproved by the increase of natural sunlight, ventilation, and the peace of mind the larger view shall create. 12. “The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difTicult^-.” Due to the cxistmg conditions, the grantmg of this variance is necessary to allow for the applicant to be able to take advantage of the lake view, provide a healthier, safer, and more comfortable space to live in. Hardship Statenient The applicant would like to stress that they axe w Ulmg to and arc domg ev oyiiung they can to comply with the Zoning Ordinances. Per the Owners variance application (zoning file #04-3006) the proposed hardcover of I2,843sf (29.7«/o) was ^iprovcd by the Planning Commission on June 14,2004. The Owner u willing to decrease the hardcover by an additional 399sf above and beyond what was approved This will bnng the hardcover dowm to 12,444 (28.7%), for a net reduction of 4.6** from the cxistmg fir '■ vV 2 of 2 i 4 4 > t • . ♦-. ' >. EXHIBIT C HARDCOVER CALCm^ATIOIOiaji^HEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) (j»^ 75-250* EXHIBIT D 2S0-S00' EXISTINC HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ______________ 500-1000' B. Ginse C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. PatioDcck F. Landwape Underlain By Plastic G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____________* B a 100 SJ. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S F. A SF B PROPO.SED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________ X Lengdi WiUih B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. PaiiO'Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTV AREA IN ZONE A _____________B xlOO SF. SF. SF. SF. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. SF. S F. A S F. B r» JL HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZON£: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ 7S-2S0* EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A- House _____________ sM-iatr ^.3’l ! B. Cange C Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck O. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ♦ B xlOO 6^3 PBOPOSEP HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________ X uieu) B. Oarage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. PaiitVDeck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____________XlOO S.F. SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. Sf. SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. A SF. B iJf.i s SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. S F. A S.F. B % Z' O EXISTING Srtr.r^r ©PROPOSED snr»r^ r ^ r 0S2604 rnr ■ i-(T |T • • 2625WR^IHS^O^ 'DfR^'Ul. TXLSTHf^ 2i^S0) VRQTOS'L'D fww** ■»»<•» »* SVratKtaliBiitttf.ilVOtfMutM* lUtidcncc R«io«Mlon PhM« IM^Cl.IXI.BS (f«8. U&r NtW. W27/20M ia3J SI AM ed n EXHIBIT G MEMORANDUM To: From: Date: Sabjcci: Chair Rahn and Planning Commissioners Mike Gaffron. Planning Dinxlor October 15, 2004 M4-3024B Proposed Eoolog Code Ameodmcnl: SectioB 78-1 577(c) - Consider CUP for Vehicle Storage (>l4,ooo lbs ) on Residential Properts' Attachments A - Revised PERMIT OPTION Amendment of 78-1577(c) B - Memo and Exhibits of October 1.2(X)4 At >o«ir October work session. Planmng Commission re\ icw ed the **pcrmit option** for addressing large vehicle storage and concluded this was superior to the CUP option. Your comments includeil a request to revise the proposed language slightly to require registration of any replacement vehicle that is acquired under a storage permit. Such language has been added to the draft amendment. Exhibit A. Staff RccommendaCion SlafTrecommcnds that Planning Commission make a nreummendation to Council for adoption of the proposed amcndmenl to Section 78-1577(c) regarding exterior storage in R Districts, to establish aune- time permit for pre-existing users to continue the storage of large vehicles under prescribed conditions. PERNirr OPTION: 78-1577 y^oM be revised as follou s Seclioo 7K-I577. Exirrinr Sloragr in R llistricts. HLNISID It-IJMM (c) N'chicle Slorage. Al! \ ehicles parked or stored on any property withm the City stull be operable and currently licensed The parking of \chicles, other than recreational \chicles, in “R” districts is regulated as follows (I.) Parking of \chicles other than recreational vehicles, wiih a maximum Gross N'ehicle Weight (GVW) of U.Otx) pounds or less is allowed in all **R" districts. (2.) Parking of vehicles in “R” districts in excess of 14.0IK) pountls (JV \V has the potential may include noise t from operation as w ell as maintenance of vehi cle): vihraiion: giarc; ixlors: soil water contamination (from dnpping. washing, etc ), hazards to petle* by w av y. wear & tear or I of day: and visual mcomnatibilitv w ith the character of a ncighborliooil Such use mav be acceptable under certain parkin_g of such \ chicles requires each of the follow mg conditions be met; (Rc-ordcred a-g) a. b. c. d c. f. g Properly ow ner must be \ ehicle ow ncr or operator. Vehicle must be set back 50 feet from property lines. Vehicle Mniust not be visible from neighboring properties and public streets; vegetative screening is preferred .Maintenance of said vehicle shall (K'cur within an enclosed building. The vehicle shall not constitute a nuisance at any time, and In n shared drivcxxay situation, the City must have on file an agreement signed by all cunent driveway users. Minimum lot size of 5 acres. For anv property at least 2 acres but less than 5 acres in area, w here it can be shown that pnor to the ctTective date of this after Januar\~ I. 2(Xi4. a Vehicle Storage permit mav be granted if the abtw e conditions a. through f are met, subfcct also to the follow ing limitations: JJ A N'chicle Storace Permit mav only be issued for properties w ithin the RR-IH. RR-lA.and I.R-IA zonint! districts 2) Such iKnnit shall be granted only to the current property owner and only for the specific vehicle applieil for The current owner mav replace the vehicle in kind, but shall not add other such vehicles. Any replacement vehicle must be registered with the City w ithin 30 days to transfer its pcnnitted status il This permit shall not anniv to subsequent property ow ners. Subsequent property owners shall not be considered as having a grandfathered permit bv virtue of their prcdeccssor*s permit © MKMORANDIM To: From: Date: Sabjcct: Chair RaJin ami Planning C'nnimissioncrs Mike GalTron. Planning Director^^^^^,^^ October 1.2(KM M)4-3024B Proposed Zoaiac Code Ameadmeat: Section 78-1 577(c) - Consider CX P for Vehicle Slorace (>I4.ooo tin ) on Residential Properts Attach ments A - Revised Diafl (I0-1-(V4) Revisions lo 7S-I577 B - Memo and nxhihils ofSeptember 17. 20<»4 - the Cl 'P should be tai lored to Uie speci fie current ovv ner and vehicle, and should not be a nglit tliat goes with the projx*ny uhen its sold; and - the owner should be able to replace the vehicle in kind, but not add vehicles. I have drafied language that adds these prov ision. and it*s being forwarded to Uie City Attorney for comment. Hopefully I w ill have his thoughts on it for the work session. *‘Pcniiit'*Ontion for Consideraiion Dc^ite tlic City Attomev ’s cone lusion that a Cl P is the appropriate tool for dealing with the existing users. staiTis still reluctant to define large vdticle parking by pre-existing users asa 'conditional use’. bccaiLscthc CUP is usually reserved for activities that arc generally acceptable in a district and applicable to any property. Furtlier. because a CUP generally goes with the property, not the applicant. olTcnng it onl.v to current users for their current vehicles w ould seem lo be a misuse of the CUP. So, what liaven I we tried vet? How about simply a one-time * large vehicle parking pennit' that can be revoked if at some future time the required conditions are not met. We would use the same set of conditionsasw cwould have established fortheClT. including the limitation toonlypre-existing u-sers. but simply require a permit rather than a CIT. The review process would be adniinislraii v e. not inv ol ving PC or Council, nor requinng a public hearing, althougli an option w ould be to require that these be rev icwcd by Council before issuance. A possible downside is the lack of notification to neighbors if there is no hearing process. If an applicam w as denied by staffbecause one or moa* conditions could not be met, this could trigger a public hearing. L Submitted for >our consideration.. E /Ofr-oH At v\)ur September 20 meeting. Planning Commissum reviewed and then tabled tliedraft uidinance amendment for allow ing large v chicle sti>rage as a conditional use. Vour cunmients included; /e-/*oy Rcvifgd 10-1-04 Drift laaguage for CLP entr>- to be added to appropriate residential distrkis (RR-IB. RR- I A. I.R’l A, i.e. the 2-acre and 5-acre zones): (10-1 resisions are in bold itatic undeHinf) 7S-XXXX. Comlnional Lscs (gj^i Vehicle Storji;c. The s^o^J^e or parking of one or more vehicles u Hh a Gross Vctiidc Weiphl fGV*W) in excess of 14.000 pounds on a properly at least 2 acres hut less llun 5 acre in area, where it can he shown that prior to the elTcclivc date of this onlinance such a vehicle was previoush stored on a regular hasis prior t» and afier Januar\' 1. 2<X>4. Approval shall be conditioned twi the follow ine. IL No such iu»e shall he allowed on a lot less than 2 <> acres m area. Property owner must be vehicle owner or operaior. L Vehicle mtisi he set back 50(**l feet from property lines. iL Vehicle Mmust not be visible from nci|^hhonnp properties jnd public streets: vepeiative screening is preferred, t Maintenance of saiJ vehicle shall occur uithin an enclosed building;. £ The vehicle shall not constitu«<*» nmeap^y at anv time: and g. In a shared driveway situation, the City must have on file an agreement si^’ned hv all current driveway users & This cemdiHenat u%e permit if tntmtfd %h be framted omtv to the current owner end omhe for the s^ecifie tekide mppiied for. The curremt owner mar replace the rekicte in kind, bnt skaU not odd other snek rehieies. 4 This conditional use permit shaU not oop/r to subsequent property owners. Snbseqnent prvnertx- oH-ners shall nt>i be considered as having a frandfathered nse bv virtue of their predecessor ’s nse. PERMIT OPTION: 78-157^ would be revised as follows: ScclioB 78-1577. Exterior Stora|»r !■ R Districts. (c) V'ehiclr Storage. All vehicles parked or stored on any propcrt>' within the City shall be operable and currently licensed. The parking of vehicles, other than recreational vehicles, in **R” districts is regulated as follows; (1.) Parking of vehicles other Uian recreational vehicles, w tih a ma.\imum Gross N'ehicle Weight (GVW) of U.fKX) pounds or less is allowed in all "R" districts. to create potential negative impacts on the surrounding ncighb<irhood. These imp^ts may include noise (from operation as well as maintenance of vehicle): viVation: glare: iMlnrs; soil water contaminniion (from dripping, washing, etc ): hazards to pedestnans bv wav of proximity. cspccialU on pn\ate roads: wear A tear on local or private roads: propensity to oOload remaining cargo on site at end of dav: and visual incompatihilit\ with the character of a neighborhood. Such use mav be acceptable under certain conditions in zoning districts where lot areas arc ecncrallv 2 acres or larger Therefore, parking of such vehicles requires each of the following conditions be met: (Re-order a-g): Property owner must be vehicle owner or operator. V'ehicle must b. set back 50 feet from property lines. Vehicle Mn}ust not be visible from ncigliboring properties and public streets; vegetative screening is preferred. Maintenance of said vehicle shall tKcur w ithin an enclosed building. The vehicle shall not constitute a nuisance at any time, and In a shared driveway situation, the City must have on file an agreement signed by all current driveway users. Minimum lot si/c of 5 acres. For anv property at least 2 acres but less than S acres in area, w here it can be shown that prior to the cfl'ective date of this ordinance such a vehicle wxs previously stored on a regular basis prior to and after January I. 2(K)4. a Vehicle Storage permit mav be granted if the abo\ c conditions a. through f. arc met, suhjtvt also to the following limitations: li A Vehicle Storage Permit mav onlv be issued for properties within the RR-1B. RR-1 A. and LR-1A zoning districts. 2} Such nemiit shall he eranted onlv to the current property owner and onlv for the specific vehicle applied for. The current owner mav replace the vehicle in kind, but shall not add other such vehicles Subsequent property owners shall not be considered as having a grandfathered permit bv virtue of their predecessor’s permii. MK.MOR.4NDIM To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Ra!ui and Planning Commissioners Mike Gaffron, Planning Director September 17,2004 r-^ ^04-3024B Proposed Zoning Code Amendment: Section 78<1577(c) - Consider CUP for N’ehicic Storage (>i4,ooo lbs c\ \\> on Residential Property Attachments A - Draft Ordinance .Amendment for CLT^ B • Memo and Exhibits of August 26,2004 At your August 31 work session. Planning Commission rev^f-ed the pro's and con’s of allowing large vehicle storage as a conditional use, to be lunited to just thcii pio(. cn. that hast had large vcliicle storage in the past. Planning Commissiem agreed with staff that there may be a number of pit falls to * ic CUP, but also asked that we have the City Attorney confirm whether it is legal and advisable to limit t CUP to just those existing users, and'or what otlier options we have for grandfathering existing users. The City Attorney has indicated he believes Uic CUP can be established for just the existing users, w ho would have to apply for the CUP and prove they have stored large vehicles for some pnor period of time. He beiie\‘cs this is an excellent method to allow the use to continue under controlled conditions, w iihout allowing new such uses to occur. One of staffs concerns w as that establishing a Cl T for only existing users would send a wrong message that the use is generally allowed in a zoning district. The Attorney thinks that it can be written in a manner that makes it clear that the use is not generally acceptable, and the CUP places perfonnance standards on the existing users to make their continued use acceptable until it goes away of its own volition The issue of a CUP for large v elude storage has been pubhshed for a public hearing for September 20, and we are advised that at least one member of the public maybe in attendance to comment. Exhibit A is a draft ordinance amendment that revises the language o: die current ordinance and ad^'. s a CUP entry to the Conditional use section of the 2-acre and 5-acre zoning districts. A preamble is added describing the reasons w hy this use is a CUP for existing situations on lots less th.Ji 5 acres and only for pre-existing users Staff Recommendation Hold the public hearing and considc whetha J.t CUPo: Ion is uable and whether the current ordinaiKe conditions are appropriate or stringent cnoi.^ for properties under 5 acres with pre-existing users. Considermorc restrictive standards in terms of screening, setbacks, etc for smaller lot situations. Finally, consider whether we should ^proach this fiom the standpoint of an Interim Use(w'c w'ould have to add an Interim Use ordinance to the zoning code) rather than a more permanent Conditional Use... r 1 Section 78-1577. Exterior Storage in R Districts. (c) Vehicle Storage. All vehicles parked or stored or. any property within the City shall be operable and currently bcensed. The parking of vehicles, other than recreational vehicles, in *‘R" districts IS regulated as follows: 4^Parking of vehicles other than recreational vehicles, w itii a maximum Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) of 14,000 pounds or less is allowed in alt "R" districts. Parking of vehicles in **R ’ districts in excess of 14,000 pounds ovw Jiaj to create potential negat:\e impacts on the sunounding neichborliood. These impacts tick vibration: glare. /a, propensity to ofCoad remaining cargo on site at end of dav. a nd \nsual ir.cor.ipati {/14 -haracter of a neighborhood Such use mav be acceptable under cer.ain ^ , %f} conditions in zoning di.stricts where lot areas are generally 2 acres or larger. Therefore. odors: soil/watcr cont.imination tfrom dnpping. washing. etc.V hazards to pedestrians bv wav of proximity, especially on onvatc roads: wear &. tear on local or onvatc roads; propensity to ofCoad remaining cargo on site at end of dav. a nd \isual inconipatibiiity 4 parking of such vehicles requires each of the follow ing conditions be met; j I- I 4 Minimum, lot sice of 5 acres. For anv rropcr.v at least 2 acres but less than 5 acres in area, w here it can be shown that prior to the effective date of this ordinance such a vehicle was previously stored on a regular basis prior to and after January 1.2004, a Vehicle Storage conditional use permit mav be granted subject to the conditions established for such conditional use permit if allowed in the respective zoning district in which the property is located Property ow ner must be \ chicle owner or operator. Vehicle must be set back 50 feet from property lines. Veliicle Mm.ust not be visible from, neighboring properties and public streets, vegetative screening is prcfen^cd. f. 8< Maintenance of said vehicle shall occur w'ithin an enclosed building. The vehicle shall not constitute a nuisa.nce at any time; and In a shared driveway situation, the City must have on file an agreement signed by all current driveway users. Draft laoguage for CUP entry to be added to appropriate residential districts (RR-IB. RR- 1 A, LR-IA, l.e. the 2 acre and 5-acre zones): 78-XXXX Conditiona! Uses Vehicle Storage The storage or parking of one or more ve^* *!es with a Gross V*ehic!e Weight in excess of i^t.OQQ pounds or. a property at least 2 acres but less than 5 acres in area, where it can b . shown that prior to the effective date of this ordinance such a vehicle u as previously store d on ?. re^ 2004, Approval shall be conditioned on the followinp: iL sL & L & h. i. No such use shall be allowed on a !o! !< Property owt.ct must be vehicle owTier or ocerator. Vehicle nvist be set back SOt*^)____feet from property lines Vehicle Mmust not be visible from neighboring properties and public streets: vegetative screening is preferred Maintenance of said vehicle shaK occur mthin an enclosed building The vehicle shall not constitute a nuisance at anv tinte: and Ln a shared dnvevsav situation, the Citv must have or. file an agreement signed bv a!! current drivewav users /y^/n MEMORANDUM E_ To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Rahn a:;d Planning Con'^issioners MiksGaffron. Plajnur.g August 26, 2004 #04-3024R Propused Zoning Code Amendment: Section 78*1577(c) • Consider CUP for Large Vehicle Storage on Residential Property Attachments A - July 9,2004 Moorse Memo to Council B - July 7,2004 MPG Memo to Moorse C - Zonmg Code Section 7S-1577 (as amended 1 1-24-03 %ia Ordinance #4. Tlv.id Series) D - Excerp* on Condit:ona! Uses fro:n “Advanced Zoning" by Jo'.m Shardlow of DSU Inc. Discussion The City Council in July reviewed die Plaiuung Commission ’s leconuner.datior. to not revise the 5*aci e laaumun lot size rermrement for «orage of large \ rfuclcs, under the recently res issd “Extencr Storage in R Districts" ordinar.ee Council took no formal action on a zoning anicnd:nc:;t, but duccted staff and Planning Comntission to consider the pros and cons of, and poteniial performxnce sundards for. allow ing Large \'eliiclc Storage Basis for Current Ordinance The current ordinance establishci a mnunium lot s:r c of 5 aa es for storage of a vch;. Ic in excess of 14,000 lbs. GVW. The 5 -acre standard was put in place to ensure the ability to provide adequate separation, buffering and screening of large vcluclcs from adjacent properties. Tlic code as wrir.cn rcquucs that such vehicles stored outside :nust meet a 50’ setbac’K from lot lines, must be fully screened ("not visible") fr?:n adjacent properties and streets, and any maintenance of the vehicle must occur w itlnn a building. Tlicbasis for the cunent otdinar.ee is to protect out neigliborhoods from the noise, vibration,odor and general visual intrusion and disruption caused by the comings, goings and storage of vcr> large vcliicles. Coaditlonal Use Applicability A conditional use is, bydcfjution, ause that is permitted in a zoning district if certain established coadilions or ‘performance standards’ arc met. A conditional use miglit not be appropriate generally within a zoning district, but may be allow-ed wiiii ^propriatc restricuons established ’oy the zoning code if it is found that 1) the conditions detailed in the code arc met, 2) the use confoims to the Comprdiensivc Land Use Plan; and 3) the use is compatible w ith the surrounding neighborhood. L*rge Vehicle Storage CL P Autust 26,2004 Page 3 - SoiVwatcr coniainination (from dr.pping, washing, etc.) - Hazard to pedesa-.ans by way of proximity, especial!} cn pnvatc roads - Wear &, tear on local or pnvatc roads - Propensity to offload remaining cargo on site at end of day - Visual incompatibility with rural character The conditions underw luch stafTfecls use might be accqitable are generaUy tliose conditio;,. ..a^ed m the existing ordinance. Staffbclievcs that opemng up the possibilit}’ of large trucks being stored on 2acre lots will become more problematic for oar neigliborhoods as time goes by Tlie 5 -acre lot sice minimu.m provides some assurance that a neighborhood of 2-acre lots won'tbc invaded b> dump uiicks. It also increases the likelihood that separation and screening from adjoining propenics will be feasible The conditions currently in tlie Code for storage of a vehicle over 14,000 lbs. GVW are as follow s: a. Minimum lot size of 5 acres. b. Property owner must be vehicle cw ner or operator c. Vehicle must be set back 50 feet d. Must not be visible fiomneigliboringpropeiries and public strccis, vegetathescreei-lngisprcfciTed. e. Maintenance of said vehicle shall occur w ithin an enclosed building, f The vehicle shall not constitute a nuisar.ee at any time. (Note: “Public Nuisar.ee" is defined in the Municipal Code, Section 70-^, as follows 1. Maintaining or permining a condition w hich unreasonably annoys, injures or er.dangers die safety, health, morals, comfort or repose of any considerable number of members of the public 2. intcifering w uh, obstructing ot rendering dangerous for passage any street, public right-of-way cr waters used by the public; or 3. Any other act or emission declared by law to be a pub' . nu*sance ) g. In a shared drivew ay situation, the City must have on file an agreement signed by all current driveway users jfti'iiiMiliiii aiill Laix* Vehictf Storase CUf Autuit 26,2004 Page 4 Stall Recommendatioo Staff is satisfied \v:di the currea: code as-is. Fiowever, in response to the Council ’s direction, Plaiuiing Commission should review the infonnation provided and consider whether it is appropriate to make ’large vehicle storage* a conditional use in the 2-ac:e and'or 5-acre rones If so, Planning Commission should make a recommendation as to w hat specific conditions or performance standards should be required fer such use to make it acceptable at the allowable locations The potential for a large vehicle storage conditional use applicable only to existing users is stiU under investigation, and staff will provide you more information as it becomes available. file (KA Xil OctotMf u. 2004 3 Datt AppUcation Received: •••11-04 Date Applicaiion Cemidcfed at Camplcle: 09-13-04 60-Day Review Period Eipirei: 1M3-04 Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Dale: Melanie Curtis. City Planner |y||| Octobers. 2004 Subject:04-3052, Eric Vogsliom, 261S Casco Point Road, - Variance • public hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Width: LR«IC,One Family Lakeshore Residential, Vt acre/100* 0.47 acre (20,561 s.f.) luO' parallel to the shore 80 ’ @ 75’ setback Apptlcatiott Summary: The applicant is requesting a number of variances in order to build a new single family residence on the property. The application consists of the following; 1. A hardcover variance for 38.9**« hardcover within the 75’ - 250’ setback zone where 25**/« is normally allow ed and 27.1% currently e.xists; and 2. A variance for side street setback of 10’ where a 15’ setback from the adjacent right-of-way is normally required; and 3. An average lakeshore setback variance to encroach 5’ nearer to the lake than the property to the south. Staff Recommeiulation: Planning Department Staff recommends the follow ing 1. Approval of the average lakeshore setback variance; and 2. D^al of the side street setback variance and denial of the hardcover variance as proposed as there are no hardships to support the variances as requested. Hardship: Staff dots not find that there is a valid hardship to Justiff granting a hardcover variance or a variance to encroach on the side street setback. List of Exhibits A. PC Report of 09-13-04 B. Revised Surv’ey dated 10-13-04 C. Revised Hardcover dated 10-13-04 D. Revised House Plan & Elevation ■fntnirUiUhf FILE ■04-30M OdotMT 14. 7004 Pag* 2 0(4 BsdcfroMid This application was before the Planning Commission at the September 20'*' meeting and was tabled in order for the applicant to redesign and reduce hardcover. Since that time the applicant has met with staff and redesigned the proposal in an attempt to further reduce hardcover. Additionally, the applicant has proceeded with tree removal in preparation for redevelopment of the property. The applicant performed this uork without City approval or permits. The City is now in the process of anals’zing the number of trees lost and an appropriate restoration plan. Staff recommends any vanance approval include implementation of a CouiKil approved restoration plan. LOT ANALYSIS WORSlIF.ET Lot Area/Wldih; LR.IC i Lot Area Lot Width Required 21.780 5 f. C/jacre)100' Actual 1 20.561 s f. (0.47 acre)100' (la' shoreline 80' 75' sctbick Setbacks: 1 LR-IC Required Esiillng Proposed (Revised) ] Lakeshore 75'j 80' (home) I 78*(deck) Rear 30'30* North Street Side 15'lO' South Side 10'13.2' Amage Lakeshore The home on propert>' lo the south is set back 86*± from the OHV\X; the applicant's proposal shows a 75* setback. Technically, the applicant needs an average lakeshore setback x-anance how*e%rr. lake \iews from the property to the south will not be impacted by the applicant's proposal. Structural Coveraee: Total Lot Area T Total Structural Coveraae .Mloued 3.084 s f. (15*.) 3.002 s f (14 6 *i) 20.561 s.f. (0.47 acre) Approximately 16.400 s f. not includhfi' , iposed: the portions of the property to the Etut '* .........................—.................... Carman Bay_____________________ Adjusted Allowed; 2.460 i.f.« IS% of 16.400 s.f. FilE •04-30W Octo£)«* U 2004 P»9*3of4 Hardcover Calcwlattoni; Hardcover Zooe 0-75 75 - 250 Total Area io Zone Aliened Hardcover 12.8SSs.f. (including non- eontiguout ptoperTy east of Catmam Ba%i 7.673 s f KilMSED Exhiing Hardcover REMOLD ; Propoxed f^llardcovcr_____j Osf (0^*) Osf (0%) Osf (0*.) I.9l8s.f. (25"o) Revised 2.080 s f * (27.1 %) Revised 2.9SI sf, (38.9%) ___ * After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Side Street Setback Variance The applicant has not redesigned the proposal to meet the 15' setback to the public right- of-way, however the drive access remains off of Casco Point Road. Hardcover Variance The applicant has revised the plan and reduced the level of proposed within the 75* 250 ’ zone. The previously proposed hardcover percentage was or 4.442 s.f the applicant has now proposed a hardcover percentage of 3S.9'?o or 2.981 s.f. This is a net reduction of 19"i or 1,461 s.f. Hardship Slatemenf Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Fomi attached as Exhibit B. and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis tn eoHsiiierlmg applications for xariance, the Planning Commission shall consider the ej/ist of the proposed variance apon the health, safety and nelfate of the communit), existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the pubUe safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Ptamning Commission shall consider recommending approsal for variances from the iiteral provisions of the Zoning Code in instances nhere their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unigue 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 s position remains that there is rK> hardship inherent to the land which would justify the side street setback variance or the hardcover variance as proposed. There arc no current or future plans to develop or vacate the Casco Point Road nght-of-way along the property’s northern boundary', and the future public use of the right-of-way is unknown. Staff Im contacted the Public Works Depariinent who request that the right-of-way be clear of any encroachments. Staff believ es that the allow ed 55 ’ wide building en\ elope is very reasonable and a setback variance to the side street is not justified. Staff also docs not find a hardship for tins property to exceed the required 25% hardcover limit. The applicant has proposed to redevelop the property, where the Planmng Commission has consistently required full compliance with all regulations. Staff finds file aO«-MU Octooef 14. 2004 Pag«4a<4 that an increase of almost \2% hardcover on a redeveloping lot already having excess hardcover would be completely inconsistent with past practice. Staff finds that no hardship inherent to the land exists lo allow a hardcover level above 25% or 1.918 s.f. as this level allows for a 1.500 s.f. house and 418 s.f for dn\e\vay, sidewalks and patios or decks. Sttmmary of Issues for Consideralioo 1. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff RccommcBdalion Planning Staff recommends approxal of the average lakeshore setback variance. Planning staff also recommends denial of the side street setback variance, and denial of the hardcover variance. Additionally, staff recommends that any variance approval for this site should be conditioned upon the submittal and Council approval of a restoration plan to remedy the vegetation removals conducted on the property duiing the week of October 11‘". FILE •04-30<2 '3 20C4 P*at 1 ol5 Dale Applkatioii Rcccncd: dS-It^ Dale AppUcatlon Coa^idered a» Coaipleic: 09*1 J-04 60-Daj Revtei* Period E»pire%: II-I3-04 Chair Kahn and Planning Commission Members Kon Moorsc, Cily Administrator From: Dale: Subject: Melanie Curtis. Cily Planner j|^ September 13. 2004 04-3052. Erie Vogstrom. 2618 Casco Point Road. - Variance - public hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Width; LR-IC, One FaniK Lakcshorc Residential, */t arrc/ltNT 0.47 acre (20.561 s.f.) 100* parallel to the shore _____________80* n 75* setback__________________________ I Api^ation Summary: The applicant is requesting a number of \ ariances in order build a new single family residence on the property. n>e application consists of the * following: 1. .A hardcover \ariance for 57 liardcoxer within the 75 ’ - 250’ setback /one where 25“o is normally allowed and 26 4"» currently exists, and 2. A variance for side street setback of 10* where a 15* setback from the adjacent right-of-way is nomially required, and 3. An aserage lakeshorc setback variance to encroach 10* nearer to the lake tlian the property to tlnr south. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends the ft'llowing 1. .Approx al of the ax erage lakeshore setback x ariance; and 2. Denial of the side street setback variance and denial of the hardcoxer variance as proposed as there are no hardships to support the v ariances as requested Hardship Staff docs not find that dicrc is a valid hardship tojustifi uraniin}: a hardcover variance or encroach on the side street seihack________________ Pertiurnt Zoning Ordinance .Sretinns See. 78-350. Area, height, lot width and yard requirements, (b) t.iU Atea licit) Lot W iJth (feeil 1 loni YjiJ tiffti su1cY.«ra Ifcril (fcrti Siilc AJjJicni In Stifri (fmi OS 100 III 10 1 .10 15 Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (a) .\o liard cover or imperx ious surface shall be placed, located or constructed within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of anx lake or tributary, except for stairways, liils. landings and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in tltis Code. file •04-3052 S«9twnt>*r 13 2004 P*ae2of5 * I (b) Between 75 fee! and 250 feet of the OH WL. there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. BctN%"cen 250 feet and 500 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 30 percent hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the OH^ L there shall be no greater than 35 percent hardcover. (Ord. No. 101 2nd scries, § 1(10 56(1 6)(L)), 2-24-1092) Sec. 78-1403. Lot coverage. In all zoning districts, for all lots of 0-1.99 acres in total area, the total combined footprint areas of all principal and accessory structures shall not exceed 15 percent of the lot area. Exception: Regardless of lot area, every developed lot shall be allowed at least 1,500 square feet of lot coverage by principal residence and garage structures Sec. 78-1. Dennilions. Lot area means the area of a lot in a horizontal plane bounded b\ the lot lines, but not including any area occupied by the waters of a duly recorded lake or n\ er or area frequently under water which seises as a watercourse draining higher land on which sustains emergent aquatic growth or area which has been dedicated as public riglu-of- way. Sec. 82-2. Definitions. Dry bulldabte /o/nf means land area occurring w ithin the property lines of a parcel or lot. excluding drainageways. flowage areas, floodplains, wetlands, marshland or slopes of 18 percent or greater. Lot area, imnimui -.im area required for each proposed lot as prescribed in chapter 78. In i».. *•... not served by sanitary sewer, each lot must contain a minimum of two acres of contiguous dry buildable land exclusive of wetlands, public and private rights-of-way, vehicular or pedestrian easements, surface areas below the ordinary high water mark of any surface w ater or areas at or below the floodplain elevation for a specific property. All rural lots must comply with chapter 58. article II. In urban areas served by sanitary sewer, each lot must contain contiguous dry build.iblc land equal to the minimum areas as prescribed in chapter 78 or half-acre, whichever ts less (exclusive of public and private rights-of-way. vehicular or pedestrian easements, surface areas below the ordinary high w ater mark of any surface water watlands or areas at or below the floodplain elevation for a specific property), and have legal access to the building site without encroachment of a watl^d or floodplain area. Lut of Exhibits A. Application B. Hardship Documentation Form C. Existing & Proposed Sur\cy/Sitc Plan Proposed Plans and Elevations Submitted Hardcover Calculations Building Footprint Illustration Old Survey dated 03-17-54 H. I. J K. D E. F. G. Wetland Delineation Report City Engineer Comments Prc-Application Meeting Form Letter Neighbor (2648 Casco Pt Rd) L. Suney for 2648 Casco Point Rd M. Propertv Owners’ List N. Plat Map FILE M4 M52 S«pMmb*f 13 2004 (»»9t3ofS Bacfcfr*«ad Eric Vogstrom is the applicant and ouncr of 2618 Casco Point Road. The applicant has requested lot area, lot wdth, hardcover, and side-street setback variances in order to build a new single family residence on his property. Tlic property contains 20,561 s.f. of non contiguous land, divided by Carman Day and wetland. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot ArcaAVidlii; LR-IC Rcuuired Actual 1.01 Area 2l.78Us f. C/jacTc) 20.561 s.f (0 47 acre) Lot Width 100’ 100' shoreline 80’ '3^75' setback Setbacks; LR-IC Required Eiisline ProiMised I.akeshore 75 ’75 ’ Rear 30’30’ North Street Side 15 ’10* South Side 10*10’ Average Lakeshore The home on propcrt> to the south is set back 86’* from the OHAk'L. the applicant’s proposal shows a 75 ’ setback Technically, the applicant needs an average lakeshore setback variance however, lake views from the property to Ute south will not be impacted by the applicant’s proposal. Struef ral Cos-eraac; Total Lot Area Total Structural Coveraee 20,561 s f. (0.47 acre) Approximately 16.400s f. not including the portions of the property to the East of Carman Bay Allowed; 3,084 s f. (15%) Proposed: 3,002 s.f. (14 6 %) Adiusled Allowed; 2.460 s.f. - 15» . of 16,400 s f Hardcoser CalcutatioHs; Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover EaUting Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 12,888 sf. 0-75 (including non'Os.f Os.f Osf contiguous property east ofCarman Bom (0%)(0%)(0%) 75-250 7,673 s.f 1.918 sf (25%) 2,028 $ f • (26 4%) 4.442 s.f (57.9%) AAer exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds ' i«r 1 ricE *04.MM 13 2004 P«9«4olS Side Street Setback Variance Bordering the applicant's property to the north is an undeveloped public right-of-way The applicant's property is approximately 80' in width. Allowing ft»r a 10* .setback on the south and a 15* side street setback on the north leaves a 55* wide buildable area A reasonable home can be con^uructed within this width. The City rnginecr s comments address the issue of house si/e relating to drainage. It is the Engineer s thought that the si/c of the home as proposed w ill need to be scaled back to allow for appropriate grading between the lots in order to avoid directing drainage onto neighboring properties. 1 he applicant's proposal brings about some challenging drainage issues for this property. Ilardcoscr \'ariaiicc Ihc applicant is proposing 57.0^o hardcover. The existing residence and hardcover are just above the allowed limit for the 75* 250’ setback /one at 26.4 “^ The existing home has an approximate footprint of 1,184 s.f. The applicant is proposing a 3,002 s.f. footprint to essentially “max out ” the l5"'o structural coverage amount based on the total dry land area. The total property area is 20,561 s.f; however this includes an approximate 4,000 s f portion separatt'd from the building site by an inlet of Carman Bay The contiguous land area is approximately 16,400 s.f.. The applicant is basing the structural coverage amount on the total non-contiguous parcel abo\ e the 029.4’ elevation Neither the lot coverage ordinance nor the Zoning Code definition of “lot area" clarify whether the lot coverage percentage should be based on contiguous area. The Subdivision Code definition of “minimum lot area*’ (Cite 82-2) would disallow non contiguous land as creditable toward lot area. The property to the south (2648 Casco I'oint Road) is similar in that it al.so contains a noncontiguous “island" of land. In 1985, an approximately 30(K) s f. home wa.s constructed at 2648 Ca.sco Point Road which, based on the contiguous area of this lot, is 10^0 lot coverage and 21*/o hardcover This lot is considerably larger than the applicant's property. However, the applicant's property is only slightly substandard in area and width. The IS'J'o lot coverage amount is a limit, not an allowance. On lakcshorc properties the limiting factor very often is the hardcover percentage, not the structural coverage amount. A similar sized lot, LolTler, 1690 Shadywood Road. Application ««)4-3009. was 80’-83' in width and 0.39 acre and was limited to 33f« 75’ - 250’ hardcover (the hardships included being on a busy County Road and needing a backup apron; the non-optimal lot shape; and the inability to move the house nearer the road due to negative impacts on lake views due to the location of adjacent homes near the shore). That house was reduced to 14.7^'o lot coverage in order to make the hardcover work at 33*o. For the applicant ’s proposal, a 3,002 s.f footprint. 1,225 s.f. of driveway, and 215 s f. of sidewalk make up the 57.9^^o proposed hardcover. There are no patios proposed and only one 18' X ir deck on the lakeside of the home. The driveway and sidewalks as proposed seem c.xccssivc at 31* and 8’ widths respectively. The curb cut of the driveway k not permitted at greater than 20' at the street. The driveway as proposed would need to be reduced at the curb, and would need to be substantially reduced overall to bring the \^iiy OT v/rono Variance Application r\ Street Address 2750 Kelley ParVway Orora. MN 55355 Man 952-249 4€03 fax 952-249^616 Mailing Address P O Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 5532 --ZOeS Application » 0^“’ Date Received Arrount Pa.d \j0O / Staff _Ai Fee Sc20 Rerewval S303 ardur^ After-the-fact S1 200 Doude Fee This application form must be completed m full App cant w.li be notified wiU'.m 15 days as to the status of tre application Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address ;?fc/9 cAsco pcihJT (?c >ad Property Identification Number (PIN) JLC - til- ooifj__________________ (Attach legal description to application if not me «ded on the survey ) Date Property Acquired (month/year); &-3P-tf / □ Yes. I own the adjacent parcels Present use of properly; J^Residential □ Other ______________________________ Zoning District; ___________________ APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Comp ete tega' rc-£s and r-a^taf status rccuired foe eacn .ntc'cstcd pa-ry) Name /=mj^ U06t^rvi.^ Phone (home) •-nH-e^t'^6 Phone (work).6Q-jqc-OSoO Address; OiZ/u>«-- Email /-ncr^_ g* l/06»u<? x/oc..c c r*i Fax;€>vCS OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete lega' rarres s's rra-.ta: stat-s requ red fa' eacn interested party; Name. Phone (home);Phone (work) Address; Email Fax •DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost • Describe the request in detail (attach additional sneets if necessary) 1^* AiJ t7e/vo « S' U)0<4n.i 70 Ccr r^c o/v iJri<^-rtrr /r •Off UutfPitjLtJ ^/UC ScrreA^c.ritl torooT or F'ceJ, P rhmg- A #0 rper cerr tShc#-rHt£. fS A#-*D r?it He^Sc.*>■ r >r c*^i *-ico *FAcni Housc ,T^tCiA. /U- Atit rhiZ . h /S As&r AAcjt . ! rfet/r>ve/»c4<V tr /b /oor m r<rj/e£> yvtso fK HfVAO co^oc , /»iy LCf rs FojiSco <^^0O0 supr. V c?o,st/ St- Ff CF tyyi-* oteje Pb,l •5»7TU4cTti#ltj: , tJwT OCT t=c^C rfAXOCC.>ciC rHt£ jc^3e^ X A**» AT ss*/a /s fire^KiT ................- 3/.. .......... L HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM Page 1 of 3 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 orde* 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 ha'dship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding ccmmunity To prove a hardsh p. 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 m determining a denial or approval recommendation If you leave someth.'*g out it will rot be considered Please address each of these hardsnip criteria as they re’ate to the request (some may not apply); ' 1^ "The property m question cannet be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls" Thtc ^tZtr ct? me. ter P cm»A>or r____________ facrr Ljirht rue. f 2.*') "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to h.s property not created by the landowner ’ /,or t<^ iiJ ntt£ _____________________________________ 0 "The variance, f granted, will not alter the essent a’ character of the locality * ^ 0 ~ Pez AT f\Cc“rth *^ uj.cc Hc.t-i'* HO.*ng u:Im T^it. 0•V. I "Ecorromic considerations alone shail not constitute an undue hardship if ^ reasonahte use for the property exists under the terms cf the Zoning Chapter * ; dgw>»Mc. iee^»s>Ais #3052 e. 9. Page 2 of 3 “Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to. inadequate access to dirert sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for ear^t shdtered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06. Subd. 2, when m harmony with this Chapter." "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone vKtiere the affected person s land is located * ‘The Board o' Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one*fami!y dwellng as a two*fami'y dwelling * "The special cond.t.ons applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property " ______Ttfcat: /<> /» cotti tHur /A.rt -rv.^______ c^~ n <, >cr 7i> iU^cr “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district m which said land is located ‘ •f </- ,’hu^ •The granting cf the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment cf a substantial property nght of the applicant.* CiClT f-'U Tt f fitsTij ■ A Sci - >r«- gu /=y~ c^i 74 7 2 rr l7j *iVK c ^/<ry^Ci ttrtHXixcji 'Tne granting of tne proposed variance will not m any way impair health, safety. coiTfort. morals, or m any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code" _____f. t: - CwC’w<->r> A»’C ;_______________________________ *7:i '.I-. f» i-f Page 3 of3 12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty “ ft. Lj-m rfic. 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 ue hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preveniing compliance Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary). _____________0^-7- /rr7?r^^^________________________ ' V <'i .i' > :• trC J ppppYW- IQ D 4UIl,rm□ □ Li m [T IIII □ID 'S^j^V/VTlcyO SETBACK ZOtiZi (CIRCLZ OfiT)0)rs-zsy “D-fwO* Fnrrr^cT -•a '-oco ^th 7Qv- A. Hcur« _______________ X 3. CBt{9 C CrivBway D. Sidm& E. P«da/Dock F. >«rfrxw UodBtxiB By PiuHc C. OdMT TCTTAi. HARDCOVER IM ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _ ^___ n ^ B 12 X 100 ^anpmam HAgi:<-‘OVKR m rum A. Hamm _______________ x Xrtciude^ prcpert a Cnee C Driv««i« a Sdrvaa E. PitkyDek UttlBtn By PtaCK C. Otisc TOTAL EARDCOVaR IK 2CSZ total PROPStTY AREA IN ZONE ♦ B _____X 100 530-:coir si S--. ft S^. s^. s^. , SJ-. S-*. ,s^. iF. ‘SJ. [SJ, ,SJ. SJ. A S-F. B<- % ^ t . o-f Ccxro^an .S-F. SJ. SJ, ■V'- ,iF. SJ% ,s^. BS. .SF. S.F. ISF. -SF. SF. ISF. SF. --Qjsf. £F. 10 :) CO =te L^T S^X) - ooo SQ e:i>Vfnr u>r/s-^o<£, S<kFT c?o,St| SQFT X /S% %nuiL^fie ^ SOBHStitFi pUpueJ , i_ J-asvt«Yo r/AV^*^ . ^X*^VtZk- ^'Ct>(VC^cA/ ^ :w'< »**«_ ' . 4’*'. >\ Mmr. / V:—^Z—^ M El r ' U. k. £ % ir* :> t r>*tX^.-■14' • {V'^I U't> ef v» j!44. / '<8* ^04 t ? / // :929.9 '.V \ ■' //X %v:»L9Jl>i ! - -/— _l _ Mhllll ^terr U 2618 Casco Point Road Qroiu>. MN Prepared by Svoboda r:coli»i!ical Resources for: 1^ Eric \d}*strom yyr; ■ -rye iVdflaiid Classification. Identification, and Delineation Fnijcct No. 2<NM-104-03 WOBOQ.- .•"». {t\\y - V r‘-i SVOBODA ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES Providing the Sharper Edge in Natural Resources & Environmental Consulting September 3. 20D4 Enc Voystrom 20840 Channel Dnvc Orono.MN 55331 RE: SER Project Name: 2816 Casco Point Road SER Project No: 2004-104-03 Project Location: A portion of the SE '/i of the NW ‘4 of Section 20. T 117N. R 23 W. City of Orono. Hennepin County, Minnesota Project Description: Wetland Classification. Identification, Delineation and Staking Services Dear Mr. Vogstrom, As requested. Svoboda Ecological Resources (SER) persorjtel visited the above referenced property on August 31.2004, to examine the site for the presence of areas meeting wetland criteria. Criteria for determining jurisdictional wetlands are as described m the 19S7 U S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (1987 Manual) as required by the Minnesota Welland Conservation Act. The project site is a small irregularly shaped one-acre lot separated by a small flooded inlet extending in a northerly direction through the center of the property from Caiman Bay in Lake Minnetonka. The lot is sparsely wooded on the western side of the property but becomes denser along the periphery of the flooded inlet. The property is relatively flat closest to the basin but has an approximate 15 percent incline on the w estern side of the property which extends further w est. The incline begins to level off after an approximate 12-foot increase in elevation. An abandoned single family home exists at the top of the hill on the w estern most portion of the property. The project site is bordered by Casco Point Road on the w estem end, private properties on its northern and southern sides containing singlc-tWrily homes and Carman Bay on its cast-southeastern side. The property lies writhin the SE •/* of the NW ‘/. of Section 20, Township 117N, Range 23W, City of Orono, Hcimepin County, Minnesota (F'gurc I). METHODS National Wetland Invcnlory (NWi) maps, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNK) Public Waters maps. Soil Sur\ey of Hennepin County^ and aerial photographs were reviewed prior 2477 Shadywood Road • ExceUior, MN 55331 (952) 471-1100 (0»e») • (952)471-0007 (Fax) 1 10 tlic Mttf vi>it to identify areas of eoneern. Areas iKiistratine evalcnce of wetland conditions were examined m greater detail durini: the field airvey. V'ceetalion. soils and hydroloey were exaiivned (as outlined in the I9S7 Maiiuaii and used to characterize wetland types and determine wetland boundaries. Sample transects were established in a representative wetland-to-upland transition zone in order to characterize the vegetation, soils, and hydrology of the site. The transects con>tst of one representative upland sample point and one reprc.scntative wetland sample point. The number of transects completed per basin depends on the size of the basin and/or the number of wetland types asisociatcd with each basin. Other samples wetc taken at unmarked loraiion.s to provide senfication of the wetland edge os needed. Information obtained from the sample points can be found on the field data sheets k>cated in Appendix A The wetland boundary was marked at the site by bl.izc-orange "wetland boundary*' flagginj! attached to 4-foot w ooden lath. The wetland boundary is considered to be the topographically highest exiuit of the wetland basin: ueax below the staked boundary met the three required wetland criteria while areas above lacked one or more of these criteria. Wetland classification followed methods described by Cowardin et al. (1979) and used in the NWI completed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife .Service. The Circular 3^ classification (Shaw and Fredine 1956) is also given. The indicator status of plants was determined using the iViirionnj List of Plant Species That Occur m Wetlands • Minnesota (Reed l9SSi. Explan.ttion of the pUrfi indicator categories is provided in Appendix B. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The NWI map (Mound Quadiangle) illustrates one wetland basin on the subject property. The NWI identified wetlands on the property consist of a Type 3/5 (PEMC/UBH) wetland on the southeastern portion of the property (Figure 2). The Soil Sur\ey of Hennepin County indicates three individual soil types on the subject proj^>crty (Figure 3). These individual soil types include: Hayden Loam (HbB and C). Klossner Muck (Ma). and Bellvillc Sill Loam (Lc). See Appendix C for a description of the soil series for each of these soil types. Of these soil types, the Klossner Muck (Ma) is classified as hydne soils (Hxdric Soils of the United States). The DNR Public Waters Map of Hennepin County illu'trr tcs one public water (913w) on the subject property (Figure 4) SER personnel examined the subject property for areas meeting jurisdictional w etland criteria during the site visit and delineated one area as being jurisdictional w etland Detailed veget f.'on, soils, and hydrology data for the v-ciland arc provided in the data sheets of Appendix A Basin 1 is located in the in the souiheasiem portion of the subject property (Figure 5). SER delineated the boundary of Basin I as a palusirine (P-) type wetland exhibiting cmcti .-ni (-EM-) vegetation with a seasonally flooded (-C-) moisture regime along the outermost portion of the bas.n and a palustrine (P-) type wetland with an unconsolidated bottom (-UB-) that is perma ently flooded (-H) in the central portion of tiie basin or a Type 3/5 (PEMC/UBH) wetland complex. The wetland bttundary was based on a dominance of Narrow Leaf Canail (T\pha (ingusitfolia. OBL). and Wild Mint (Mentha arxensis. FACW) on the wetland side of the t^undary and a dominance of Common Buckthorn (Rhamnns canhartica. FACU) on the upland side of the boundary. The boundary was also based on an abrupt decline in elevation from uplar«d to wetland and the fact that the soil was cither saturated to the surface or fiooded m seseral areas along the boundary on the wetland side SER used 20 lath to delineate the wetland boundary of Basin I Photographs I through 6 (Photo Log) depicts Basin I at the lime of the site visit. CONCLUSIONS SER examined the subject property and delineated one wetland basin, which exhibited a dominance of hydrophsiic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology. Basin I was classified as Type 3 5 (PEMC/UBH) wetland complex. RECOM .M EN RATIONS While the wetland boundary that SER has delineated is not official until approved by a WCA approved local government unit (LGU), SER advises the property owner to refrain from any filling, draining, or excavating, or any impact to the area SER has delineated a.< * .etiand. Depending on the location of the property, buffers around the w etland may also be protected. Any activities in the proximity of the w etland should be cleared w ith appropriate WCA regulatory agencies. It is also advisable to ha\c the wetland bounda.-y surxeyed by a licensed land surveyor, or located with a sub-meter GPS unit. Since the lath used along the boundary can be \ andalizcJ or inadvertently knocked over, a survey cr GPS location of the lath will assure the permanence of the boundary. The client should also be aware that approved wetland boundanes arc typically valid for only three years from the date of approval. Please feel free to contact Brian Burgner or Frank Svoboda at (952) 471-1100 if y ou have any questions regarding the information in this report. You will be receiving a follow -up phone call in tw o to three w ceks to see if there is anything else that is needed. SER 8pprcci2tes the opportunity to assist you with this project and we look forward to serving any future needs that you m'ght have. Sincerely. Svoboda Ecological Resources Franklin J. Svoboda, CWB, PWS Vice-President Brian K. Burgner Welland Ecologist DATA SOURCES MinncbOU Department of Natural Resources Protected Waters Inventory Map. Hennepin Countv. 1985. USD.A. Soil Surx ey of Htniepin Coiinry. June 1971. 159pp plus appendices. United States Fish and Wildlife Service National Welland Inventory Map - Mound Quadrangles. 1991. (Taken from May 2003 aerial photographs). uses. Digital Orthophoio Quadrangle - Hennepin County. Section 20. Township 117.N. Range 23W. uses. May. 2003. LITERATURE CITED Cowjrdin. L M . V Caricr. F.C Golet. and R.T. LaRoe. 1979 ClusMfktinnn of WeiUmds utiil Deepwaitr Huhitats nj the Untied Suites. U S Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-79/31 I03pp Eggers. Sieve D. and Donald M. Reed 1997. Wetland Plants and Plant Conmunities of Minnesota and Wisconsin. US Army Corps of Engineers. Si Paul Disirici 263pp. iinclassified Environmenial Laboratory’. I9S7. 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. US Army Engineer Water\%ays Expenment Station. Vicksburg. .Mississippi National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. 1991. Hydnc Sods of the United States. USD.A Soil Conservation Service. W'ashington.D.C.,Misc. Publication Number 1491 1991. Reed. P.B. I98S. Sational Ust of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Minnesota. National Wetlands Inventory. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. St. Petersburg. Florida. Shaw, S.P.. and C.G. Frcdine. 1956. Wetlands of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Circular 39. 67pp Figures M' ii-itiiliii r * •':i.r- ►;i'. f r.-.j s^ 5*“' ■' K*‘”'^"’.i| *. '• -t-v* * • • ‘i'?, National Wetland Inventory Overlayed on 2003 Aerial Photo I':V ,1 ' A-..V . '. ^ / L' w i I *■ lojiif.i'P.*-5r'..r '•:c’t ,1 = ''•»• » U‘ . lib ' wa. tv. Hennepin County, MN Soil Survey Ovcrioycd on 2003 Aerial Photo L_I • P.* : -I'.'i*'" ii c.t- ‘' . -M- .1 ♦ .'o . >> m t'y I'C '»! !! • Approximate Wetland Boundary Overlayed on 2003 Aerial Photo y?*SyOBODA t • Ecc'Io^iCtil Rt <r> jrcv« Ljl^-. .__ Xi;' » «> • K .* > I •.*>•• •'^•■:9 N »6*8 CfiSCc Po nt Ro<k3 f g^’e ? w Faserness Point Pelican Point Goose **' ieland !?XC»sco Map of Site ikSVOBODA P* Ecological Resources NA S 2616 Casco Point Road Figure 1 T[ Appendix A Field Data Sheets L SVnBODA ECOI.OGICAL RESOURCES WcfUimh i»nvnl>n\ A Di iiftcaU'in • ri\hi. ncs • H'lUlifc • \iiruml C<>»imtnuuc^ N j->! 2^ I * C.IM.H Pi’iiil R h ,k I IU«4« Af*l BjMtl I BKB P.uri UJ V:>rt!ir.i»rit» T>p»' An; }\ :hu WtT Ti.PC ^;5 PENtC LBH> Y.% Ktjiurw «f VEGETATION Doriinjntt •>:». ScikAl T' t'f’rt nnf Siuua LtY ;rr .Vfju H V $ T OBL II V S r H V s r M V s T M V s T ______ H V 5 T H V S T Non-d(mvnjfH» K ltirr.rut < Cll FACW S'riitia huLuiisJ^i'iu H V > T FACl M V S T M V S T M V S T M V S T M V $ T M V S T ✓ Vw____>50SolOom=wuFAC*.OBLir\C_________S \ s»n No vine or »hrub ipeciei obscved at this vairpfe locatior SOILS County Soil Survey Map Unit Hayden team Soil Settet •• on NatiOfUl HyOric S»il Li»t Ateairaprcd aidrp(mi»v or «rt tpo« on So.i S.r\r> fi#td QhirfvaTu^^i Hyeric Mil JUurrtJ pUnti vt OBL ind FACNV v-i iknUr.a i« abrupt Otfiiiit Soil^ Mificrjl Soil Honern. Depth 0 6“ ________ MiIIU.£fil8£ Tevture Peal EaSMEu 6:o-N : S'Otlev Sandv clav loam Hr<»>c Soil Prc««m'» ✓ Vti Now* L'nan^-ninciS jPf.inaf) ingtcaioaiP) Secoadap ir.d:;acfi .S'| D«p(b of umplmi 20 li*en« HYDROLOGY tmietUna. Depth cl Wtir (P) Free » boteho^. Depth trom vuiiate Wjtcr Mwli. EleiatiOh (P) Or>n Una oe SeditnciM DepovtU (Pi ____ OtidiMe Root ChhBMtom Upper 12 iaeliMtS) Dn^fUft PiiirtTi in WetUodi (Pi ^ WMct-IUinoi((4««(Sl Local Soi! S»ne« Data (Si •/ FAC • Srjtral Teat iSl Hydrelofy Criieiioii Met ’ ✓ Yea Othei Obiervaooni No free waicf obtefved in the borehote WETLAND DETERMINATION b the Sample Pomi e» Weilane ’ Yea ✓ K»____Undetermned _____ Diataoce ftooi Delincaied Cd|c 3 n. KiA Not« Welland cdte based on vcietaiion and iopo»raphic tine SVOBODA ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES ll’cthiiitls linx ntnn A Dclineutum • Ft.\heni:.s • H'llcllifc • Nuntral Conmutmues f llj* n AfwJ ZMH C.’.'cn Pit^ni Rii.iJ I BKB SjmpV; P * ‘*i ID (.•Mttmuriit ffptf A;-.* }l :0»U SP M LP LPLAND D<*iuit>cil ( undiiion ‘ ^ VEGETATION Dominants t>:u*. ♦ haoi »* jciuJ emcfj^.) SUJiiffl biiiM Pr«ti ptuttnui ___________ No:i-t1onvr.wili II V S T H V S T II V S T H V S T H V S T H V S T H V S T FAC- FACU tr> rtr.'.ir'i ciirr*•"» Sfii'ut *rp CV; '>'^11 Cut'll’^ 11 V S r H V S T ' H V S T ' M V S T ' H V S T ' M V S T M V S T FACW FACW FACU FACU^ DominiW* FAC gr >« ✓ Sj >50*''. rt Dcrrxj-w FACW.OBJ. iFAC-srifjl ten) Ye* Sa Notei No vine or shrub species obseved ai ihts sample location SOILS County Soil Sursey Map I’nil Havden loam Sail ScTitt 'S rr Naniru! Htinc Sail L.M Area maeped ai depreu.o.*. ot •et ipcn o« Sa.l Sum«v Hydt c *0.1 auatned teeaiu* plartu are OBL »rA FACW and >s«tU»d boundary la abr^ ^ Mineral Soil Otfana Soil Honzon'Dcpih 0-7- Matrix Color lOYR 4/3*Sandy loam Featutes 7-12-lOYR 4/3'Sandv loam Few/Fme/Promir.enl 5YR 5 3 lOSM* CommonCourseDistinci lOYR 2/1 I7-20’lO^-R 2/1 Sandv clav loam Hydi'C Soil Present’Yes ✓ No Undetermined Nates 'Iron Oxide Soft Masses |?rinut> inJicaiofsiP) Seccndar> indicators lSi| Depth ot samplmi 20 Inekea HYDROLOGY laundaicd. Ocptb el Water (P) free water in baiehole. Depth Horn Sartaec Water \Urks. Elesaiion (P) Drill Lines or Scdimcm Ocposiia iPl Osdiitd Root Channels tn Upper 12 m;nes ISJ Otainaie Pattern* m WciUnd* (Pi Wai«f.*u<acd Iraiei iSl Local Soil Sursey Data (S) FAC • Neutral Tot (Sj Hydrotogy Cnteiien Met’Yes v' No Other Observauoru So free water observed in the boiehole. Is ihe Sample Point in Wetland’ Yo WETLAND DETERMINATION No ^ UiHletcrrmncd Outanct from DchneateJ Edge 5 ft N'A Notes Welland edge based on vegeialion and topographic line Appendix B Plant Indicator Categories m ---- INDICATOR CATEGORIES* Obligate Wetland (OBL) - Occur utmost always (estimatedprobability >99^) under nuiural conditions in wetlands. Facultative Wetland (FACW) - Usually occur in wetlands (estimated probability 67^e 99%), but occasionally found in non-wetlands. Facultative (FAC) - Equally likely to occur in wetlands or non-wetlands (estimated probability 34% • 66%) Facultative Upland (FACU) - Usually occur in non-wetlands (estimatedprobability 67%. 99%), but occasionally found in wetlan... (estimatedprobability 1% • 33%). Obligate Upland (UPL) - Occur in wetlands in another region, but occur almost always (estimatedprobability >99%) under natural conditions in non-wetlands in the region specified. If a species does not occur in wetlands in any region, it is not on the National List. *Rcctl. PB I9tl Natioful Im of ptaiii ipctict thu occur IB »«tUndi Minncwix Naiioful Wetlandt lnv«nw<>-U S Fiih anU Wildlife Service. Si PetenSurg. Flondj Appendix C Soil Series Descriptions unrifimnfii ili, it, BELLEVILLE SERIES The Bcilcvit'c »ciic> «il ptmriy ili.itnoii mil ^cry p*mfiy Jf.mcd muN l.irmcJ m vinily unJcil.tm hy liumy yljwul or l.uu'trinc M'd:mcr)ts at 20 lo JO mehci Pcrnc.ihility ii rapid m ihc >and> tTulcrij!% arid moderately ^U)w m ihc toamy inaicnaU Slopes ran^c trom 0 to 2 pcrcctl Mean annual preetpilalion ahou! mtho. ard itwan anneal temperature i» ahr>u! dcjireci F TAXONOMIC CLASS: Sandv over loamy, mixed, xcniiactivc. tr.e>ic Typic Endoaquolls TYPICAL PEDON; Belleville loamy fine sand on a I percent slope in a cultivated ticld. (Colors arc for moist soil unless otherwise indicated ) Ap-0 to 11 inches; black (lOYR 2/1) loc.ny fine sand, dark gray (lOYR 4/1 ) dry; moderate medium granular structure, friable, common fine roots, mildly alkaline, abrupt smooth boundary. (I I to 16 inches thick) Bg--I I to 20 inches, grayish brown (2.5Y' 5/2) fine sand; few fme prominent yellowish brown (lOYR 5/6) and few fine distinct light gray (lOYR 6/1) mottles; single grain; loose; few fine roots, black (lOYR 2/1) coatings in root channels; mildly alkaline, clear wavy boundary. (0 to 20 inches thick) Cgl--20 to 30 inches; light gray (lOYR 6/1) fine sand; common fine prominent brown (7.SYR 4/4) and common medium prominent light olive brown (2.5Y 5/4) mottles; single giain; loose; slight effervescence; mildly alkaline; abrupt smooth boundary. (0 to 10 inches thick) 2Cg2--30 to 34 inches; gray (5Y 5/1) heavy clay loam; common medium distinct dark grayish brown (2.5Y 4/2) and f^w fine distinct olive (5Y 5/6) mottles; moderate coarse subangular blocky stnicture; firm; about I percent gravel; strong effervescence; moderately alkaline; clear wavy boundary (0 to 5 inches thick> 2Cg3--34 to 51 inches; dark grayish brown (2.5Y 4/2) silty clay loam, common medium distinct dark gray (5Y 4/1) mottles; m.i$si\e. f.rm; about 3 percent gravel, strong effervescence; moderately alkaline; clear wavy boundary 2Cg4--51 to 55 inches, gray (lOYR 5/1) silly clay loam, common medium prominent olive brown (2 5Y 4/4) mottles; massive; firm; about 5 percent gravel, strong effervescence; moderately alkaline; clear wavy boundary. 2Cg5-55 to 60 inches; gray (lOYR 5/1) silty day loam; few fine prominent dark reddish gray (SYR 4/2) mottles; massive, firm, about 2 percent gravel, strong effervescence, moderately alkaline. TYPE LOCATION: Wayne County. Michigan, about 7 1/2 miles south and 1 mile east of Belleville; 528 feet west and 2376 feet north of the southeast corner, sec. 34. T. 4 S.. R SE. KAN(;K in CHARACTERISTICS: The depih to the :C hotieon uiisc. Iinm :u to 40 inchCN. The solum rjnecs from sliehiiy acid to moderately alkaline. Rock fragments, dominantly gravel, ranges tron 0 to S percent by volume throughout the pedon The Ap hoiizon has hue of lOYR. value of 2 or 3. and chroma of I or 2 It is sandy loam, loamy line sand, loamy sand, line sand, or sand .A thin .AE horizon is present in some pedons The Be hoiizor. has hue of !0YR or 2 5Y. value of -i to 6. and chroma of I or 2 It is loamy line sand. loamy sand, fine sand, or sand The C horizon h.is hue of lOYR to 5 Y. value of 4 to 6. and chroma of 1 to 3 It t.s loamy fine sand, loamy sand, fine sand, or sand. It is mildly alkaline or moderately alkaline and h.is slight to strong effervescence The 2C horizon has hue of lOYR to 5Y. or is neutral, value ot 4 to 6. and chroma ot 0 to 6. It IS clay loam. loam, silt loam, or silty clay loam Thin lenses of fine sand or sand arc in some pedons COMPETING SERIES: There arc no competing series Similar soils are tne Breckenrid^e . Brevort. Burlei^. Comnna. Edmore . Esscwille. Gianbv. Pinconr.in;. Roscommon, and Wauseor. senes. Brcckcnridge. Brevort. Burleigh. Pinconning. and Roscommon soils have frigid temperatures. The Breckenndge and Corunna soils are coarse-loamy Edmore soils do not have moilic epipcdons and arc sandy Esscwille soils arc calcareous Granby soils are sandy. Wauscon soils are coarse-loamy over clayey GEUGRAPlilC SETn.NG: Belleville soils are on nearly level lake plains and till plains. Slopes r.ingc from 0 to 2 percent. The soi':; formed in sandy glaciofluviurn under! tin by loamy glacial or lacustrine sediments at depths of 20 to 40 inches The mean mnual precipitation ranges from 29 to 37 inches, and the mean annua! lenjpcrature ranges from 46 to 50 degrees F. GEOGRAPHICALLY ASSOCIATED SOILS; The ^vcll diaincJ and moderately well drained soils and somewhat poorly drained Selfridge sods arc ia a drainage sequence with Belleville soils In most landscapes with the Belleville soils are the Corunna. Granbv. Oakville. Pewamo. Tedrow . and Thciford soils. The Oakville and Tedrow soils do not have loamy maicnal. The Pewamo soils do not have sandy material The Thetiord DRAl.N'AGE AND PERME.ABILIT\’: Poorly and very poorly drained Surface runoff IS very slow or ponded. Fcrmcabihiy is rapid in the sandy horizons and moderately slow in the 2C horizon. USE AND VEGET.ATION: The greater pan of these soils is cropped to corn, soybeans, and small grains. A few areas of these soils are in pasture, idle land, w oodland, truck crops, or sod production. The wooded areas are chiefly low land hardw oods. DISTRIBUTION AND EXTENT: The southeastern ran of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. The senes is of moderate extent. MLRA OFFICE RESPONSIBLE: Indiatupoliv Indiana SERIES ESTABLISHED: Wayne Coumy. Mjchigan. 1974 REMARKS: Classificadon was adjusted to agree with ST Issue #17 on 7 Sept 94 by CLG. Diagnostic horizons and features recognized in this pedon are: molhc epipedon the zone from the surface to 11 inches (Ap horizon); aquic moisture regime. HAYDEN SERIES TIh: Hjydcn v:ric» nl deep «k-eU JrjineJ vnU itut turmed ta tjU.arei»u^ liuniy jI till on morjinen and nil plain* Thc*c miiI* ha*e nunkroic pcrtneahility Their »lope« tan^e irom 2 In •»') percent Mean annual prctir'ialinn i» about 2.S lachc*. and mean annual icmpcraiurc •» about 46 decree* F TAXONOMIC CLASS: Finc-Ioamy. mixed, superaettve. mc.MC GIosmc Hapludalfs TYPICAL PEDON: Hayden loam with a 6 percent conxc.x Nlopc on a terminal moraine in a deciduous forest (Colors are for moist soil unless otherwise noted ) A-0 to 2 inches, very dark gray (lOYR 3/1) loam, weak fine granular structure, very friable; about 5 percent coarse fragments, neutral, abrupt smooth boundary. (1 to 4 inches thick) E-2 to 9 inches, dark grayish brown (lOYR 4/2) light loam; weak thin pl.ity stmciuic; very friable; few very dark gray (lOYR 3/1) woim casts in upper p.irt; about 5 percent coarse fragments; slightly acid; clear wavy boundary'. (0 to 12 inches thick) BE-9 to 14 ir.whes. brown (lOYR 5/3) fine sandy loam; weak fine and medium subangular blocky structure; friable; many distinct coatings of clc.in sand and silt particles on faces of peds; about 5 percent coarse fragments; medium acid; clear wavy boundary. (0 to 8 inches thick) Btl"14 to 28 inches; yellowish brown (lOYR 5/4) loam; moderate fine and medium subangular blocky structure; firm; few faint coatings of clean sand and silt particles and few faint dark yellowish brown (lOYR 4/4) clay flints on faces of peds; about 5 percent coarse fragments; strongly acid; clear wavy boundary BI2-28 to 38 inches; yellowish brown (lOYR 5/4) loam, moderate fine and medium prismatic structure parting to moderate fine and medium angular blocky; firm; many distinct dark yellowish brown (lOYR 4/4) clay films on faces of peds; about 5 percent coarse fragments, few prominent black clayey fillings in root channels; strongly acid; clear wavy boundary. Bt3-3S to 43 inches; yellowish brown (lOYR 5/4) loam; few fine prominent reddish brown mottles; moderate fine and medium prismatic structure; friable; few distinct dark yellowish brow n (lOYR 3/4) clay films on faces of peds; about 5 percent course fragments; slightly acid; abrupt wavy boundary. (Combined thickness of Bt horizons is 12 to 30 inches.) C-43 to 60 inches; light olive brown (2.5Y 5/4) loam; few fine faint grayish brown (2 5Y 5/2) and light olive brown (2.5Y 5/6) mottles; massive; friable, and 5 percent coarse fragments; slight effervescence; mildly alkaline. TYPE LOCATION; Rice County, Minnesota; about 4 miles north of Faribault; 1.920 feet cast and 30 feet north of the southwest comer of sec. I.T. 110 N.. R. 21 W. RANCI-: IN CHARACTKRISTICS: Solum ihicknc^s and depth to tree carbonates range trom 24 to 54 inches CoaiM.* fragments of mi\ed lithology compiise 2 to S pcrccri of the volume of the control section The A horizon has hue of lOYR. value of 2 or 3. and chroma ol I or 2 Tttc Ap horizon has value of 4 or 5 and chroma of I or 2 and value of 6 when dry The E hotizon has hue of lOYR. value of 4 or 5. and chroma of I or 2. The A and E horizons tvpicallv are loam, silt loam, sandy loam, or fine sandy lo.im. but include clay lo.iin. if eroded They are ncutial to medium acid The Bt horizon has hue of lOYR m e upper part and lOYR or 2 5V' in the lower p.trt. value of 4 or 5. and chroma of 3 through 5. Mottles arc present m the lower subhorizons in some pedons It typically is clay loam or loam, but sandy clay loam is in parts in some pedons. The argilhc horizon has IS to 35 percent clay and 30 to 45 percent sand It is slightly acid to strongly acid. Some pedons have a BC horizon. The C horizon has a hue of lOYR or 2.5Y, value of 4 or 5. and chroma of 3 through 6. It IS loam or clay loam. It lacks mottles in some pedons. It has 15 to 25 pcrcrnl calcium c.»rbonaie equivalent and is mildly or moderately alkalikne COMPETING SERIES: These arc the Amanda. Bclrnom . Belmoie. C-hj-muU. CM. Coggon . Conestoga. Douds . F.l Para. Gallman. Grcllton . Hebron. Hickory. High G,i_r. Hollinger . Kalam.izoo. Kanawha. Kend.allvillc. Kidder. Kosciusko . LcRcy. l,etog. Lindiev. McHcnrv. Mandcvillc. .Maitinsville. Miam.i. Mifflin. Military. ^’^Ime. Ocklev. Owoss o. Pecatonica. Pnneeton . Rawson. Relay. Rgnova. RicJjlir.d. RuM5. Rockbridge . Roseville. Sisson . Strawn. Stitr.mitville. Tcanawav. Theiesa. Wa_w^ee. Westville. Whalan. and Woodbine soils in the same family Amanda horizon soils have more illitc in the B and C horizon; Belmont soils have redder hue in the B horizon. Belmore. Chili. Kalamazoo, and Ocklcy soils formed in glacial oatwasn and have sandy or sandy-skeletal 2C horizons. Chcnault soils have chert fragments in the solum and arc underlaid by limestone bedrock. Coggon. Gallman. Hickory. Pecatonica. Renova. Riddles. Summiiville. and Wcsivillc soils have thicker sola. In addition. Coggon soils have low chroma mottles in part of the B2 horizon. Conestoga. Kendallville. Lctort. Richland, and Rockbridge soils have more coarse fragments Douds. El Dara. Kidder, Sisson, and Wavvasee soils have less clay and more sand or silt in the lower p.irt of the B horizon and in the C horizon. High Gap. Hollinger. .Mandcvillc. .Mifflm. Military. Norden. Roseville. Whalan. and Woodbine soils have bedrock bcginnmg between depths of 20 and 60 inches. Grcllton. Hebron. Lindlcy. and Raw-son soils have more silt or clay or both in either the lower part of the B honzon or C horizon or both. Kanaw ha soils are formed in alluvium from acid shale and arc in an area of higher rainfall. LeRoy and Strawn soils have thinner sola. McHenry and Miami soils have more silt or clay, or both in the upper part of the solum. Maninsville soils have redder hue in the B horizon and formed in stratified o iiw ash or lacustrine sediments Nodine soils have thicker sola which is more stratified and leached of free carbonates to greater depths. Owosso soils have more sand and less silt or clay in the upper part of ihcir sola. Pnneeton soils formed in aeolian sediments and have siraiified C horizons Relay soils have hue of 2.5Y or 5Y in all parts of the B horizon. Teanaway soils have firm sandy clay loam C horizons with ^______________i redder hue. Thcreva noi Is formed panly in loess and have 2C horizons with 40 to 60 percent calcium carbonate. GEOGRAPHIC SETTING: Hayden soils have plane or convex slopes on gently undulating through .steep glacial morainc.s the Des Moines and Grantsburg sublobe of the Late Wisconsinan glaciation. Their .slopes range from 2 to 40 percent and mostly are 80 to 300 feet in length. These soils formed in calcareous loamy glacial till. Montmonllonite is the dominant clay mineral in the glacial nil. Mean annual temperature is 4S to SO degrees, and mean annual precipitation is 27 to 33 inches. GEOGRAPHICALLY ASSOCIATED SOILS: These arc the Ames. Dundas. Harr.cl. Luther, and Nes.scI soils which arc members of a topo.scqucncc w i;h the Hayden soils. Moderately well drained Nessel soils have plane or slightly convr.x slope* Poorly drained Ames and Dundas soils have slightly concave to slightly convex slopes with gradient of less than 2 percent. Poorly drained Hamel soils are on toe slopes. Organic soils are common associates in some places DRAINAGE AND PERMEABILITY: Well drained. Runoff is medium and rapid. Permeability is moderate. USE AND VEGETATION: Mostly cleared and cultivated to com. soybeans, small grain, and hay. Native vegetation was deciduous forest of maple, basswood, oak. and elm. DISTRIBUTION AND EXTENT: Southeastern Minnesota and in central Iowa. Extensive. MLR.A OFFICE RESPONSIBLE: St. Paul. Minnesou SERIES ESTABLISHED: Hennepin County. Minnesota. 1929. ADDITIONAL DATA: Refer to Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station Central File Code No. 967 for results of some laboratory analysis of the typical pedon. KLOSSNER SERIES The Klii\»ncr nl very Jeep, very ptmrly Jra^neJ >t?iU l»>fTTeU ir well Ueei)mp<»'H:U nr^aniw nuterul 16 lo 50 in^hev ihiek uvetiymy Kuiny Jepfw;tv on mrrainev. till plairv. lake plunv, IliniJ plainv. amJ hillviJc veep arcav They have niojeratcly v Idw tn mnJeratelv rapid pcrmeahilitv in the orj;anie iiuieiial. and mtxlcraic or mudcratcly vK'w pcrmeahiJiiv m the h.amy nutenal S!opc' range Iront 0 to 5 peaeni Mean annual prceipiution i» ahu>ul 28 inchcv. Mean xnnuai temperature i> aN>ut J? degreev F TAXONOMIC CLASS: Loamy, mixed, euic. mesic Ternc Haplosapnsis TYPICAL PEDON: Klos.vncr muck - wuh a 1 percent ^lopc in a cultivated field. (Colors are for moist soil unless otherw ise staled.) Oap->0 to 10 inches; black (N 2/0) muck, very dark gray (lOYR 3/1) dry. about 20 percent fiber, less than 5 percent rubbed; weak fine subangular blocky structure, very friable; many very fine roots; moderately acid; abrupt smooth boundary. Oa-lO to 26 inches; black (lOYR 2/1) muck, dark gray (lOYR 4/1) dry . about 60 percent fiber, about ^ percent rubbed, weak fine subangular blocky structure; very friable, many very fine roots; moderately acid; gradual smooth boundary. (Combined thickness of O horizon is 16 to SO inches.) 2AI-26 to 36 inches; black (N 2/0) mucky silty clay loam; weak medium subangular blocky structure; friable; few very fine roots; slightly acid; gradual smooth boundary. 2A2-36 to 48 inches; black (N 2/0) silty clay loam; massive; friable; few dark reddish brown (SYR 3/4) iron oxide concentrations in root channels; about i percent gravel; neutral; gradual wavy boundary. (Combined thickness of 2A horizon is 8 to 4S inches thick.) 2Cgl-4S to 6S inches; olive gray (5Y S/2) clay loam; massive; friable; dark reddish brown (SYR 3/4) Fc oxide concentrations in root channels; many medium prominent yellowish brown (lOYR 5/6) Fe concentrations; about 1 percent gravel; slightly effervescent, slightly alkaline; gradual wavy bounday. 2Cg2-6S to 80 inches; gray (5Y 5/1) loam, massive; friable; many medium prominent light olive brown (2.5Y 5/4) and yellowish brown (lOYR 5/4) Fe concentrations; about 3 percent gravel; slightly effervescent; slightly alkaline. TV'PE LOCATION: Nicollet County. Minnesota; 26(X) feet north and 2300 feet east of the southwest comer, sec. 12. T. 110 N.. R. 28 W.; USGS Nicollet quadrangle; lai. 44 degrees 20 minutes S3 seconds N. and long 94 degrees 8 minutes 28 seconds W., NAD27. RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS. The thickness of the organic material ranges from 16 to SO inches It is derived primarily from herbaceous plants. The organic matter content ranges from 25 to 60 percent in the organic surface and 5 to 20 percent in the 2A honzon. The reaction of the organic material ranges from moderately acid to slightly alkaline. Some organic layers contain free carbonates. r Litt The O hofuon ha\ hue of lOYR. 5YR. or neutral, value ot 2 or 3 anu chroma ot 0 to 2 It IS (.lominanily muck (saprie nuieiial) however, some pedons have tlim layers ot hemic m.iieiMl. IcNN than 10 inches thick Some pedons ha\c highly organic mineral plow layers The 2A horizon nas hue of lOYR. 2 5Y. 5Y or is neutral, value of 2 or 3 and chroma ol 0 to I It Is loam, silt loam, sandy clay loam loam, clay loam or mucky modifiers of these textures It is modctately acid to ^ . aJKalinc Some pedons contain thin layers of coprogenous e.irth. The 2Cg horizon has hue of lOYR. 2 5Y. 5Y. 5GY. or is neutral, value of 2 to 7 and chroma of 0 to 2 It is loam, silt loam, silty day loam, day loam, sandy day loam, sandy loam or fine sandy loam, or their gravelly or cobbly analogues It is slightly acid to moderately alkaline The upper 12 inches of this horizon averages less than 35 percent clay Some pedons contain thin strata of Tine sand, loamy sand, or silt Gravel or cobble sized rock fragments range from 0 to 25 percent by volume. Some pedons contain free carbonates. Sandy substratum and ponded phases are recognized COMPETl.NG SERIES: These are Linwood . Medo . P.iltns. Philhon and Sh.ilcar senes. Unwood soils have well expressed granular structure to depths of more than 12 inches and formed mainly m woody fibers. .Medo soils ha%c sandy lexiurcs in the lower part of the scries control section. Palms soils have organic matter content greater than 75 percent and do not have an A horizon directly below the organic material. Philbon soils have fibric and hemic material in the upper 12 inches. Shalcar soils ave less than 26 degrees difference between mean January and mean July temperatures. GEOGRAPHIC SETTING: Klossner soils arc in basins that were formerly lakes or ponds, lake plains, till plains, flood plains, or moraines. They are also on hillside seep areas in moraines and sideslopcs of river valleys Slopes range from 0 to 8 percent. *ntc soils on nearby uplands arc generally loamy. The mean annual temperature ranges from 45 to 50 degrees F. The mean annual precipitation ranges from 24 to 32 inches. Frost free days range from 110 to 160. Elevations above sea level range from 800 to 1400 feet. GEOGRAPHICALLY ASSOCl.ATED SOILS: The main ones are the Cinisteo . Harps. Okoboti . Glencoe . Muxkego and Houghton soils. Canistco and Harps soils are on the rims of depressions. Glencoe and Okoboji are at the outer edges of the depressions .Muskego and Houghton soils are in larger depressions. DRAINAGE AND PERMEABILITY: Very poorly drained. Surface runoff is negligible. Permeability is moderately slow to moderately rapid in the organic layers and moderate or moderately slow m the loamy materia). USE AND VEGETATION: The greater pan of this soil is cultivated to com. soybeans, small grains and specialty crops such as vegetables or grass sod. Other areas are in vegetation of grasses, reeds, sedges, alder, aspen, or willow. Some of the hillside seep areas are set aside as natural areas and catted fens. - , DISTRIBUTION AND EXTENT: The south central and southeast part of Minnesota and possibly northern Iowa. The .senes is e.xtensive. MLRA OFFICE RESPONSIBLE: St. Paul. Minnesota SERIES ESTABLISHED: Nicollet County. Minnesota. 19S9 REM.ARKS: Diagnostic horizons and features recognized arc: sapric soil materials from the surface to about 26 inches; loamy mineral material from 26 to 50 inches or more, aquic moisture regime. This soil was formerly included in the Palms Series in Minnesota ADDITIONAL DATA: Refer to MAES-CFC#‘s 2697. 3251. 3400 and 3475 Photo Log ; m m fj. 1: .1 ■> f ff* ril<»IO I: lt.(''n I 11-. i;".* 1*'a i-.l ( .rn;.i:; !t iv .i* *' r-ipii I kAJ % \ im ¥. r.-; > r ' ’•V'-SS.:• /• ••!.£■, ■. ■ V;v-t SniA-vh 'i.: . vv; ■<K5* •“ '^ . . •* V • run 10 2: !t: : ! :.k i. fj:»sVOBODA 1 * tcolof.icai R» r jr:^' riMiioui«;<)i MiF :t-n • j.i • i*. u:T H >.uj •f.w.'t ’\1-, . •., r,*. '1;; ‘ i k .» . tl !*v.* i>'j r BL rilOlO .^; HiMifi I. f'jctrii iM * aii*T.^' n<>i?h;.rit *>l K>i.' ii.:‘ JA- ^ '"L ¥ Ifti- \\{ V ! C 'f^ < - •'■ ;' it Vr •i • ’ : V \< • .. .. ^ ■ i s-> ■ ______: !*IIU IO I: I a» Tij: al.’iic ri.**:!i.rn v*»ii:f »’l the K .:»«! !i> PIIOIOIIM.OI Mil •'•.kSyOBODA > • Ecological P.e«ourc€f C^l'Ca-vi iVm! R.’aa *A ('I mm^ •|HMO< lii' » i ••. V • :-^vV' \ i \ ■:: ■e 4^'W '• > j' ■ ‘Tv r .•^'' * ••'/*. ‘/ ’ ./T~,*\Z *l I- • . i- ' i:;:i:.'^4?f« ' \ ■':cn'^:)mi '■ '■ "■■' ■.■-■-'■'■I .• ‘ftiJMwJ 1*110101.: |i.|. ! I !a. »';.,V\'()!:^0^/ . • F«rv'*'opic :! k* I ;r'. IMIOIO1 <M.ni Mil ;»•!*« 4- }• JA ¥ ..! Bonestroo Itoscne Ancterlik& I Associates CnQtnccrs & Ardutecti 2335 Vl^it Mtghwiiy 36 • St Paul. MN 5Sn3 Office 65I-636-4600 • Fi»A 65! 636131) w wwDonevtroo com Sqncmber 1.2004 Ms. Melanie Cunis Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 '^•%0 2618 Casco Point Road FilcNu. I39-o4^;C0 Pbt No. 04-3052 Dear Melanie: We haw reviewed the proposed grading plans for 2618 Casco Point Road. The proposed improvements include rebuilding an existing home and regrading the lot. We have the follow ing comments with regards to engineering matters: • The proposed grading plan does not provnde adequate information relative to existing contours and adjacent home elevations. A new survey should be submitted showing existing contours extending at least 50-fcet beyond the lot lines of the subject property. The revised survey should identify any structures within 50-feet of the lot lines and show elev’ations around the structures along with first floor elevations. • It appears that the proposed new home is nearly twice the size of the existing home. This building footprint does not appear to provide adequate room nonn and south of the home to allow for positive drainage towards the lake. It is likely the proposed building footpnni will need to be scaled back to allow for the grading of swales to contain the storm drainage on site and direct it to the street or lake. • The final grading plan should provide swales or drainage wav-s that contain all storm water on ’he subject property. Storm drainage should not be directed onto adjoining properties as shown along me sou* cidf cf the hemr. • The final plans should include erosion and sediment control details, planting and restoration information, and overall site restoraiion details If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSFNT. ANDERLDC & ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Otppa, City of Orono • Sr. Paul. St. Cloud. Rochester, wuimar. MN • Milwaukee. Wi • Chicago. IL ANvMtiM O0p9n»tnnt .-Ju BffhBfT cr City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form (This form .s to be completed by a City Planner dur.nj ycur pre-aopi cation meeting *) Street Addresz 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Mam 952-249-4600 Fax 952-249-4616 Maihrg AddreiS For 0*fice Use Only PO Box66 C -yP.ar.rer I i K Crystal Bay. MN 55323-C066 r,dee:ng Daie/T^me 7^* r /y l~1 f ! ! /t/M PC Date ____________ IfV/iet /s the purpose of a pre^appUcation 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; CASct^ __________________________________ Property Identification Number (PIN):_______________________________________________ Zoning District U2.\L Size of Property ________________________ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:^^^ □ Average Setback El Side Y^d Setback □ Rear Yard Setback ^Hardcover □ Lot Coverage □ Lot Area ^ Other; □ Front Yard Setback □ Lot Widtn awii^tut tv ami hAy/Ut\'^t ‘ to at'xA rt> nircp ' Applicants Initials: HARDSHIP: Applicant has received the Hardship Documentation Form, understands it as it has been explained to them, and is aware that it m^st be completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal variance app''cation OTHER INFORMATION: *Please note: Your variance applicati^ will NOT be accepted vyithout a pre-applica:.on meeting during which this form wilhbe iomp^ted by City staff. Applicant Signature:Date: i^dO h2 BMiBir Id. City ofOrono 2750 Kelly Ptrkwty, PO Box66 Crystal Bay. KIN 55323 Atteniion ^fichael P. Gaffron Re 2618 Casco Point Road (Vogsirom site) Dear Mr GatHron, I In-e at 2648 Casco Point Road, the neighbor to the south of the referenced property I have reviewed the survey with City staff and have a number of concerns regarding the application for a variance to the hardcover ordinance > Drainage The natural drainage of the Vogstrom site is to the south, toward my property The sur\ ey does not show any contour lines of adjacent pruperti^ but the elevation of my improved property is substantially lower flic 10-fool side yard set back does not allow for and the surv^- docs not show any provision for the evacuation of rainwater runoff from the site There is a low area in Casco Poim Road in front of my property I deal with huge amounts of rainwater ninolT from the City street crossing my property A proposed driveway on the south :.idc of the Stic would exacerbate this runoff problem Adequate provisions must be made to deal with on site water ev acuation either with the installation of an adequate swale or a catch basin and storm drain > OffStreet Parking Casco Point Road is a heavily trafficked street Visitors and homeowners park on both sides of the street (often on adjacent properties) causing a dangerous condition Off street parking should be required for all new construction Any additional parking would create even more hardcover > Tree Protection The surv ey shows a large footnrint for the proposed house Thif amount of hardcover may require the removal of a number of mature trees for construction and to enhaiKe the view corridors There arc large oak and maple trees along the property line that may be compromised by the construction The City should require a tree inventory indicating which trees are to be removed and wdikhJrces arp to be protected during construction -------------------- aflii-Casco Point Road r Ml ol lo»* 14 thrm)(li .’7 All of IM ) anil that |>«ri of lm« i. s. a. T, «. «. in and II Ivmt ^lii af Ihe Koitli W.l«i r»rl thrrrof. (m jt ccmt) I m H I III! I ll|^l RUNOATE VIV2IH IS J0il72)2«002« •ROf ADOR 2649 CASCO fUlMT RO )WNERNAME JUUANMEMSCHFRVFN rAXPAYER JUUANMEMSOiiiRVEN 4AML'A00R CASCO POWT RD WAVZATAMN SSJ9I M 2011723240032 •ROPADD3 2623 CASCO POINT HD 3WNERNAME T P KURALAK A P M KIIBALAK TAXPAYE R THOMAS P/f ATWC IA H KUUALAK 9AME/ADOR 2623 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATAMN 33391 38 20II7232400M PROP ADOR 26lt CASCO POINT Ri) 3WNERNAME JOYCE A TWEDT TAXPAYER JOYCEAT3REDT NAMfe/ADOR 761 ■ CASCO POINT RD WAYZATAMN 33391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PACE I U 2011723240030 PROP ADDR 2643 CASCO POIN1 RD OWNER NAME N J CREtNE A A K CRT FNE TA XPAYER NORMA GREENE A ALAN GREENE NAMWADDR 2643 casco point ROAD WAYZATAMN 33391 31 20II72''40035 PROP ADOR 2617 CASIO POINT RI) OWNER NAME G LMARQIIAROT/I M MARQOARDT TAXPAYLU GARY 1. A K)AN M MARQUARDT NAMF/ADDR 2617 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATAMN 33391 31 2011723240039 PROP ADDR 2641 CAMX) POINT RD OWNER NAME IWAIiJESSTN TAXPAYER JFEEREY A DARtlARA ESSEN name /addr 2641 casco PTRD WAYZATAMN 53391 3t 2011721240031 PROP ADDR 2633 C/vSCQ POINT RD OWNER NAME MARILYN B THORNE TAXPAYEJt MARILYN B THORNE. NAMEyADDR 2635 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATAMN 33391 31 2011723240036 PROP ADDR 2601 CASCOPOINTRD OWNER NAME BRUCE 1 HFDBU)M ET AL TAXPAYER HRm E J HEDBIOM AND NAMF/ADDR CAROL 1OTNE III DBU)V 2601 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATAMN 53391 31 2011723240042 PROP ADDR 31 ADDRISSUNASSHiNFD OWNER NAME PAt'Ll A MARY E RASTER TAXPAYER PAULi RASTER NAMF/ADDR 2600 CASCO PIHN T RD WAYZATAMN 33391 31 2011723240043 PROP ADOR 2600 CASCO POINT RD OWNER NAME PAUL J * MARY E RASTER TAXPAYER PAUL JR MARY E RASTER NAME/AOOR 7400 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATAMN 33391 5 I CERTinr THATTHF. FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACL'WIATE AND TRUE REPRESENTADONOFINFORMADON AS IT APPFJ3RSTEIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OFTHI.ICPWEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES rePARTMDOV^ DIE am y / J #3052 BfHBTAi Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department I i dso. / \ \ /"I Ccisco Po\r,t S 392J*00" € -211.10 — North lino of Bfoe* Ji Whah^M Suhd. of Lot t. Spring Park 2nd AMtHon 5T73 aC< Z0^•2: (CiaClS C.NZ) VT yyf vc; gtit^cp^T^ rv A. Krai _____________ X 'WvQ' 5v0-:::r 1. Gs»|« X S. SI^r»»Ik f1rcS» S. -MarM ^oatTcf* Uodirtlii By Ptticc O. Oter TOTAL KARDCOVO IN ZONE TOTAL BROFERTY AREA IN ZONE ♦ B _____X 100 •Qoarwxp iTAPpgovra w ZQNt A. Houm _____________ * & GstCff c Drinewwf D. Sdmik I. fwicntA Utuieiss By Pl«a a ctK TOTAL HASCCCVa IS ZZSz total property area is 2CS3 ♦ 3 _____z ICO ■aiin 11 Tmti Tn n«fr!iiflllriiltl -S-*- _S-“. _s-’. SJ. SJ. SJ. s». SJ. t?. i6 SJ». s^. sx SJ. 7t»7> L7. A S^. B SJ. ,SJ. s^. SJ. 9v» ij. __________5-F. S-'- SJ. SJ. $J. A/. SJ. XB I ^ S-g. A ‘ SJ. 3 ,.J r-*r<»«rKCnt>T MW* ' w< MAIN FLOOR PLAN 2065 tqft ;ir»i'r*-^-r Li.: *044042 October II, 2004 Po|0lor4 Dot* AppUcatkM Rtedved: 7-21-04 DM* AppIktilitNiCoiiiMortd 01 Complete: lO-S-04 60-Ikiy Review Period Eipirts: 12-7-04 Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Janice Gundlach, City Planner^ ^PLEASE VISIT SITE* Dale: Subject: October 14.2004 04-3042, Pillar Homes on behalf of Roger A Carol Rovick, 1625 Bohn’s Point Road, Aftcr-thc-Fact Conditional Use Permit for Fill, Public Hearing Zoning Dtetrict: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - IB, One Family Lakeshorc Residential District (1 acre min.) 1.691 acres (73,679 s.f.) 127.5 feet @ shoreline, 130 feet @ 75’ setback A/^icaiiott Summary: Applicant requests an aRcr-the-fact conditional use permit to allow 3,940 cubic yards of fill when 1,650 cubic yards was approved at the issuance of building permit and 500 cubic yards requires a conditional use permit. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends tliat the Planning Commission determine if the additional fill creates a negative visual situation for the directly impacted neighbors and neighborhood, and v^iether or not the additional fill, above 1,650 c.y., should be permitted. Staff reconunends that the final approval stipulate conformance with the City Engineer’s memo, attached as E.xhibit F. and that a plan meeting those stipulations is submitted and approved by the City Engineer, prior to final approval by the City Council. A final Certificate of Occupancy will be held up until that approved plan is implemented. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-1286. Topographic alterations/grading and filling. (2) For movement of more than 500 cubic yards of material within the shoreland overlay district, conditional use permit approval by the city council is required in addition to the required land alteration permit. Sec. 78-966. Prohibition. (a) It is unlawful for any person to perform or have performed the following land alteration activities without a conditional use permit issued by the council: (1) Remove, fill, use for fill, dredge, store or excavate rock, sand, gravel, dirt or similar earth material within the limits of the city. (2) Fill or reclaim any land by depositing such material or by grading of existing land to elevate or alter the existing natural grade. (3) Build, alter or repair any seawall or retaining wall, or otherwise change the grade or shore of lakesbore property. (b) All land alterations involving filling and grading shall be performed only M4-3042 OrlotMr 1t.20M P»t>2of4 with clean fill as defined in section 78-1. Granting of such permits is subject to other regulations and prohibitions of this Code and other applicable statutes or ordinances of other governmental bodies. Sec. 78-967. Exception. (a) The requirements of section 78*966 arc not intended to govern the following land alteration activities: (1) Normal and customary grading in the area of an existing or a newly constructed building, or the grading of the driveway serving such building. (2) Any earth movement under 500 cubic yards which docs not adversely impact the existing drainage. (3) Gr^ng, filling or excavating of ten cubic yards or less within the shore setback zone of all lakes enumerated in article IX of this chapter. (b) Such grading and earth movement shall be subject to approval by the building inspector at the time of issuance of a building permit, provided that a plan showing proper drainage and protection of adjoining property has b^ submitted. Where such earth movement is not being performed in conjunction with a building permit, a separate land alteration permit shall be required. Any unusual land alterations, including earth filling, removal or grading, proposed by a builder shall be subject to a conditional use permit as provided for in this chapter. The following land alterations shall be considered as unusual land alterations: (1) All excavations for foundations in excess of 12 feet average depth if any amount of the excess material removed below 12 feet depth is to be stockpiled on the site. (2) Any additional fill brought on site in excess of 500 cubic yards, except for fill required to raise grade for adequate frost footing protection, the intent being that structures shall not be artificially raised above the preexisting surrounding topography. (3) Grading or alterations that would propose any changes in elevations within five feet of adjacent residential lot lines except for drainage swales and ditches. (c) The building inspector shall have the authority to refer any requests for land alteration permits to the city council for review ai:d approval in instances where the land alteration appears to potentially create negative impacts or be not in keeping with the goals and policies of the community management plan. Sec. 78-968. Permit, An application for a conditional use permit shall be accompanied by a drawing made by a registered surveyor or other competent person showing the location of the proposed excavation or storage and shall state the amount of material which is to be removed, excavated or stored, filled or graded, and such other information as the council may require. Applications shall be filed with the city administrator and shall be accompanied by a deposit to be determined by the city, v^ch will be used to of&et the cost of processing the ^plication. Any unused portion will be refunded to the applicant. Ocl»bw It. XOM rail J of 4 Ltot of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applications Exhibit B - Applicant’s Narrative Exhibit C - Grading Approved w/Building Permit Exhibit D - As-Built Grading Permit w/Fill Calculations Exhibit E - Memo from Building Official Exhibit F - Memo from City Engineer Exhibit G - Letter from neighbor at 1595 Bohn ’s Point Road Exhibit H - Copy of Temporary Certificate of Occupancy Exhibit I - Photographs Exhibit J - Property Owner’s List Exhibit K Plat Map Backgrovsd Exhibit E outlines the evenu that have occurred on this site up until this point Generally, the Building Official maintains that a site plan was approved at the building permit stage, that plan was not followed, and prior to getting a resolution on the grading a temporary Certifreate of Occupancy was issMd to permit the home to participate in the Parade. That temporary Certificate of Occupancy, attached as Exhibit G, stipulated that a fmal CO would not be issued until the grading issues have been resolved. The home is now occupied and the owners are aware of the grading problems and the potential changes that may be required. A final CO will be issued upon a resolution on this application. Condllional Use Permit Analysis Section 78-1250 of the Zoning Ordinance states that conditional uses, specifically within the Shoreland area, are evaluated based on the following criteria; (1) Evaluation criteria A thorough evaluation of the water body and the topographic, vegetation and soils conditions on the site must be made to ensure: a. The prevention of soil erosion or the possible pollution of public waters, both during and after construction; The required grading improvements would be on the north and south sides of the home, not the lake yard During these improvements the applicant would be required to install and maintain silt fences in an aitentpt to prevent soil erosion and pollution into Lake Minnetonka. b. The visibility of structures and other facilities as viewed from public vraters is limited; Not applicable. The areas of the property where the grade needc to be corrected are not view able from the lake. c. The site is adequate for water supply and on-site sewage treatment; and The property is in excess of 1.5 acres and served by public sanitary ■•4-JM2 OctobM-11.2004 Pa(t4»f4 d. The types, uses and numbers of watercraft that the project will generate are compatible in relation to the suitability of public waters to safely accommodate these watercraft. Not appUcabk Sections 78-966, 78-967, and 78-968 of the Zoning Ordinance outline a number of circumstances where unusual fill or fill in excess of 500 cubic yards requires approval by the Council, usually in the form of a conditional use permit No specific conditions are outlined, however the ordinances states that the site must maintain proper drainage and protection of adjoining property. Staff finds that the amount of fill brought onto the site can functionally work if swales along the north and south sides of the property are corrected. However, the amount of fill does create a change of character not only to the two most impacted neighbors but also along Bohn's Point Road. The Planning Commission should discuss this issue and determine if the visual impacts created by the additional fill are grossly negative where the fill, in excess of the 1,650 c.y. approved with the building permit, should be removed. The most impacted neighbor to the north has submitted written comments, attached as Exhibit G. The Building Official and Building Inspector have indicated that if the excess fill is removed the grading can still work on the property with the improvement suggest by the City Engineer. It should be noted, that the house meets all requiremenu outlined within the Zoning Ordinance in relation to setbacks, hardcover, lot coverage and building height (measured from existing grade) and that this property has received no variances. Imucs for Consideration 1. Does the fill in excess of the 1,650 c.y. approved create negative impacts on neighbors? 2. Should the fill in excess of 1,650 c.y. be allowed? 3. Should the grade be allowed to be substantially altered when all other requirements are met? 4. Is the Planning Commission comfortable stipulating the recommendation on submittal and approval of a plan by the City Engineer meeting the City Engineer comments (and possibly additional PC comments) prior to review by the City Council? 5. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Stair Rccomncadation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission determine if the additional fill creates a negative vistial situation for the directly impacted neighbors and neighborhood, and whether or not the additional fill, above 1,650 c.y., should be permitted. Staff also recommends that the final approval stipulate conformance with the City Engineer's memo, attached as Exhibit F, and that a plan meeting those stipulations is drafted and approved by the City Engineer prior to final approval by the City Council. A final Certificate of Occupancy will be held up until that approved plan is implemented. CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION EXHIBIT A Application# ^ 2^ Data Racalvad ( ' // i P Cj Amount Paid^ f fiO-l /y:? PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address__/MS' P'f‘ PJ Type of Application to be Filed_________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) y 7 // 7 3 I \ r>r V) 3 APPLICANT Name __ Phone (home) Address 0 7/ iht Phone(work)____ LAkj^ ^ Ui_______City Zip SS~3?/ OWNER (if p Phone fhome) 47/ - Address Jlo'^K Ah PJ Phone (work) City___G£iMil^ lOLLlaX jrceis of land. Date Property Acquired I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of FEES • CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $600.00 Residential Accessory Use $600.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $600.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $600.00 Duplex Credit/Bidg $600.00 Commerciat/industrial Use ’ $600.00 Land Alteration + Permit Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 76’ of lakeshore . PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule , $250.00 Renewal Fee (nc change from original application) [ After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee Zip I (month/year) OTHER APPLICATIONS ______S600.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) ______$600.00 Vacation ______$600.00 Easement Vacation ______$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ______$600.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ______$600.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ______$100.00 Appeals ______Other - see Fee Schedule’ #3042 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. ] Describe request in detail. .Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' of the subject property, labels and plat map. Li®*, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance. Government Center, A-603 300 South 6” Street, Minneapolis, telephone 612-348'5910). ^Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. _ Attach legal description to application if not included on required sun/cy. ^Topographic survey (existinn and proposed cor aurs) if land alterations ~ involve changes in elevation (grad iS). _ List of the legal names (include mama! status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). _ Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). ~ As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other " persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 3 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS AND 1 COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (II*' X17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require scaled drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application Is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff;_____________________________Date__________ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date zhli OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature _____________Date 7 /jL-i AoDlicanl must have ail submitta's int^e City offices 25 days before the Planning Commiss on Mooting.Applicant must have all submitta's int Planning Commission Mootings ara held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meebngs of the Planning Commission and Council If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. vv 3 ,i City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form (This form Is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application meeting.*) SfrMf Address 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Mailing Address P O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 For Off.ce Use Only City Planner ___ Meeting DatenTime PC Date ■ft If I ill Main S52-249-4600 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 cf the procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION: ^ n/ i Site Address: rr m Property Identification Number (PIN): / 7//~7 J p r: ^ 3 Zoning District: ____________Size of Property: ________ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: □ Res. Access. Use □ Institutional ^ D^est Mouse / .^st Apt □ Duplex Credit/Bldg □ Comm / Indust Use □ PRO / PID ^ Land Alteratiou ” '' □ Other. __________________" ________________ □ Comm Site Plan Review OTHER INFORMATION: "Please note: Your application will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this form will be completed by City staff. Applicant Signature:Date: 7/o^ o n Ah- L. EXHIBIT B riLLAR HOMES PARTNER Date: July 21.2004 Re: 1625 Bohns Point Rd. Conditional Use Permit Application This is a very large home site, with lakeshore to the west, frontage on Bohns Point Rd. and a street side pond to the east Upon receiving a building permit on 10/13/03, Pillar Homes started construction of a new home on this site. The home w*as placed and built exactly in accordance with the home plans for the lot submined for permit. This home is nestled next to a small knoll or hill on the north lot line, with additional dirt raised around the home. Most of the dirt was hauled in and placed on the east (non-lake) side of the home in the fall of 2003, and has been allowed to settle over the winter. Months later, after a very thorough, professional landscape plan was created which included final grade and planting schedule, retaining walls etc, we submitted the landscape plan to the Orono staff, not knowing that wc needed a review for grading and/or dirt brought in in excess of 500 cubic yards. This CUP grading request is now before you already vigorously reviewed by Staff and all changes requested to the original grading plan have been implemented on site and approved by Staff and City Engineers as instructed. Since the original grading plan required a large amount of dirt to be brought to the site, and the house plan was approved, we simply backfilled the foundation that was approved to be installed. We had no plan to deviate from our original survey. However, our foundation wall height that was on the approved surv ey was misinterpreted slightly on the original elevations on the permit survey. This unknown difference was discovered on the landscaping plan, and all changes that staff required to prevent improper water flow were implemented. Drainage swailes and retaining wall, draintile and other requests were fair and implemented on site, to assure all code and regulations were met We therefore request a conditional use permit for grading of dirt brought to the property in an amount in excess of 500 yards. Thank you for your consideration. Carol & Roger Rovick 1625 Bohns Point RxL KC Chermak Pillar Homes PILLAR HOMES PARTNER, 125 Lake Street West, Wayzata, MN 5391 Phone: 952.473.2351 Fax: 952.473.8317 www.piUarbomes.com FROn : GRO«eRQ & PSSOCIflTES FRX NO. -.952 473 4435 Sep. 15 2004 eetsenn pi FAX Ion* 9-/s-a ‘f TO: Phonm FajePhoiM 1 IVMerofMOWtlricftjiinocoMfs/iMf 1 FROM: Grontierg & Assoc., Inc. 445NVmjw Drive Long Lake, MNS5356 Phono (9S2) 473^141 Fax Phono (9521 479-4435 • • . ^... . RBIKARKS: O Urgent For your nview □ Reply ASAP □ Please Commer^ /H14A yysyaf? lor s, jind. firs. i/o. 3*f9 u/e cstct4i4i€o omcfA/i*. o^ fr/ic TO ss /ssc c. y. o^ SAdUTi^C (AeofTia) /O’la^oy9 TAl€ e£rAit*^T /tr“Ar4**-T aaiu^^a^c^ A^dtf€0 r/l04*res 3JYo c.y. of ir/4.i . •■; : { r EXHraiTE D«e; 10-14-04 Memo to; Janice GtindUch From; Lyle Oman Re; 1625 Bohns Point Road -Fill On 10-13-03 the city issued pennit #P06835 for a new residence at 1625 Bohns Point Road. The plan was reviewed and approved by staff and the city engineer Tom Kellogg. StaCf noted that fill would be brought to the site. The amount of fill seemed appropriate for the site and ihs pn^sed house, and a calculation of the amount of fill was not done. Toward the end of the project it was discovered that much more fill was brought in than was originally approved. The contractor had the home scheduled to be in the parade of homes and they were ready for sod. Staff decided to allow them to place the sod for the parade and to apply for an afier the fact C.U.P. to seek approval if they didn’t want to remove the excess fill. The home was issued a Temporary certificate of occupancy with the removal or approval of the fill as the only outstanding issue. L Boncstroo Roscne Ander1ik& I Associates t, ArcMtKit 233S U^St H>gttM»y 36 • St P»Ji MN SSI13 on ce 65I-636-4600 • Fa* 6Sl-636-l3n •.V4^wtor«j!roocci*i EXHIBIT F October 12.2004 Mt. Jaaicc Oundlach Plainer City ofOroito Port Office Bo* 66 Ciystil Bay. MN SS323 «62S Bohns Point Road t ;leNo 139-04^ PUi No. 04.3042 We have reviewed the proposed and as-buih grading plans for the home constnicted at 1625 Bohns Point Road The applKanti engineer calculated the amount of fill brought into the site at 3940 cubic yards. The previously approved grading plan estinated that 16S0 cubic yards of fill would be brought onto the site to construct the home. The additional fill has raised the grades in several areas and has impacted the drairuge across the property We have the following comments with regards to engineering manets: The as*built grading plan does not agree with the building petmit grading plan in several areas, particularly along the north lot line. The a:ca bet * eer ' pool and the north lot line was defined at a high point with swales routing water easterly and westerly or tot bu’*^»tg perm.* Trading plan. These swales were meant to keep drainage on the subject property and convey flows either wcorriy to the lake or easterly to the existing pond. The as-built grading plat; does not show that these swales were constructed u planned and it appears some water it directed northerly from the high point onto the adjacent property. In addition, water traveluig eoster ly to the pond crosses over the north lot line onto the adjacent property approximately 3 S to 40 feet west of the point shown on the building pennil grading plan. The defined swale shown on the building permil grading plan westerly from the high point wu not constructed. We reconnieod that the applicant regrade along the noith lot line to conuin water on die subject property to the extent shown on the building petmit gradrng plaa The proposed swale along the south side of the home shown at (he 932 contour on the building permit grading plan wu not constructed. This area should be regraded to direct water towards the lake and to dram the low area between the subject property and the property to the south. The City should review and inspect any grading revisions and verify that the changes agree with the ptev lously approv^ building permit grading plan. Silt feiKC and any other necessary erosion control measures should be irutalled, inspected and approved by city sufT pnor to any work on site. If you have any questions plesse call me at (6SI) 604-4863. Yours very truly, BONESTROO. ROSENE, ANDERLOC db ASSOCIATES. INC. Cc. Greg Oappa, City of OroM Bruce Vaag, City of Oraoo • St Paul. St C*oud. Rocnetter. Wiiimar. MN • Milwaukee. Wi • Cnicago. IL f a>Mi S»»«»y»« OwnM VJ r EXHIBIT G William G. Cornelias 1595 Bohns Point Rd. Orono,MN 55391 October 11,2004 Ms. Janice Gundlach, City Planner 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Dear Ms. Gimlach: This letter is in reference to land use item 1. #04-3042 to be reviewed by the Planning Commission on Monday, October 18,2004.1 live at 1595 Bohns Point which is immediately north of the property in question. 1 would like to appear in person. However, I have a previous commitment that evening. In place of my public comments please accept this letter. I understand the city approved a grading plan along with a building permit before this house was built. Moreover, the plan included a certain amount of fill. In some cases, perhaps quite a few, it is not unreasonable that someone building a new house may exceed the parameters set by the city, especially if the builder is in close contact with the city officials and his respective neighbors during the building process. Nevertheless, in this case the nature of grading and the amount of fill brought in grossly exceeds the specifications approved in the builder's plan. These excesses were never reviewed by me, the neighbor, nor to my knowledge were they approved by city officials. The amount of fill approved for this project was 1,650 c.y. It is my understanding that the actual amount brought in was 3,940 c.y. TTiis is an immense amount of new material, more than double what was in the original plan. Much of this fill was placed in the east yard in front of the garage resulting in a new hill. The proposal has this area rising as much as 6 feet. It is now as much as 10 feet higher than the original grade. This immense increase in height has changed the natural drainage pattern. Because of the very steep grade the water in tliis area now runs rapidly on to my property rather than gradually into the pond as it did in the past. When it rains the water accumulates at the base of this northerly hill (my southern boundary). The ground becomes saturated and virtually mucky. 1 believe (although 1 am m not sure) because of this problem a small retaining wall was built toward the bottom of the hill. This does not solve the problem. In addition, a partial swale was constructed parallel to the wall. There are two problems with this swale. First, the depth along the wall is almost non-existent. It is perhaps an inch or two deep. Second, the swale beer me' quite defined at the eastern end of the wall just as it takes a very sharp and pronounced turn into my property and then into the pond, rather than continue across the property in question and then to the pond. This sharp departure was built on my property without any consultation or permission from me. A similar problem was created at the back of the house, namely around the northwest side of the house and pool and the south end of the pool. The original contour rose to about 938 feet. The building plan shows an elevation of approximately the same height. Tlie actual elevation is between 942 and 943 feet or some four to five feet higher than the approved plan. In addition, there is a significant wall above this fill to accomm^ate tlie pool itself Instead of water running parallel down the lot line toward the lake it now runs oiTa very steep embankment into my yard. At some point rocks were placed along side the pool. 1 believe this to be a very weak attempt to slow the run off. In short, I believe too much fill has been added to this property. It is understandable that a developer may exceed the approved specifications by 5 to 10 percent but in this case the excess is more than 100 percent. What was once a fairly level yard (looking from my property) is now a highly inclined hill. Water drainage should not be diverted to my property because of this excessive addition of fill. Nor should a .swale be built on my property. Thank you for your consideration of this letter. Sincerely, William G. Cornelius TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANcV^ IBIT 11 City of Orono Buildiiig and Zoning Department DATE APPROVED: HEADDRESS myER tAlLlNC ADDRESS 1625 Bohns Point road R 4 C Rov-ck P.I.D. BUILDER 7/2/2004 1711723110003 Piliar Homes 1625 Bohrs Point Rd.BUILDING PERMIT: iVO. P06B35 DATE ISSUED 10/13/03 THE FOLLOWING ARE NOTED AS INCOMPLETE OR MISSING. THESE MUST BE CORRECTED OR COMPLETED AND REINSPECTED WITHIN 61 DAYS OR THIS CERTIFICATE WILL BE VOID. Failure to correct these deficiencies will cause occupancy violation citiations to be issued. ;v September 1. 2004 pply for C U P, for fill in front ya*d_____ hereby agree to make the above corrections and to call for reinspcction within the time allowed: Ttviier/Comractor Dote HARTBILLISC FOR: City Sewer si BuU^titg Offidal Thundty, July OS, 2004 WkUtr OmaHSuMv Gratn. BUItng Ottk VtOow fU§ 1 J ;s i’kt--'>'-■ -ii' •r. — ^0. rTTiriw^:®:: ^mmrnfUir^-->s?r'4'ir > RUN DATE :«BrXD« 31 011172)440014 nUTAOM 15)3 BOHNS KWTRD OWNER NAME JACOi MLNOCS Of BOMHS ft LLC TAXTAVER iAOOO MLNDOS OF BOHNS FT UT NAME/AOOR *0 FORD RD ST LOUIS FARK MN 55426 M 09II72)J)OOOI PROFAOOR 1510 BOHNSKMNTRD OWNER NAME R L ROVICK * CIROVICK TAXFAVfcR *■ "O^ICK NAME/AOOR DW UOMNS KNNT RD WAYZATAMN 55)41 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LISTT )| 0«II72)4400I5 FROPAODR 1545 BOtfNSrOINTRD OWNFRNAMr WILUAMO CORNELIUS TAXPAYER WILUAJ4 0 CORNELIUS NAME/AOOR I002NOSTNE MINNEAPOLIS MN 5541) M 161172)2)0001 PROPADOR 1600 BOHNS POINT RO OWNER NAME CONNIE RSWEfcN TAXPAYER CONNIE RSWELN NAME/AOOR 1600 BOItNS POINT RO WAYZATAMN 55)91 PACE M 04l|72)))0007 PROP AODR 1540 BOHNS POWI RO OWNER name MARY jane HAUSER taxpayer MARY jane HAl»tR NAMF/AUOR IMO BOHNS PO:n T RD WAYZATAMN 55)91 )l 161172)220002 PROP ADDR 1640 BOHNS POINT RD owner NAME TLTRAFrRLMTKArFCOTRS TAXPAYER T DRAFF NAMWADDR 1640 PTHNS POINT RO WAYZATAMN 55)91 ]« 161172)220004 PROP AODR 1720 BOHNS POINT RD OWNER NAME DENNIS D ANDERSON TAXPAYER DENNIS O ANDERSON NAME/AOOR 1720 BOHNS POINT RD WAYZATAMN 55)91 M 171172)11000) PROP AOOR 1625 OOHNS POINT RO owner name RLROVIOCBC) ROVICK TAXPAYER ROGER LB CAROL) ROVICK NAME/AOOR 1625 OOHNS POINT RD WAYZATAMN 55)91 U 1611/2)220006 PROP ADDR 1 725 OOHNS POINT RD OWNER NAME W L HOEFT B A D MOEJT TAXPAYER WEHOtrrBADHOlirr NAMC/AOOR 1725 BOHNS POINT RO WAYZATAMN 55)91 )| 1711/2)110004 fROPADOR M AHORESSUNASSIGNED OWNER name DENNIS 0 ANDERSON TAXPAYER DENNIS D ANDERSON NAME/AOOR UNKNOWN M 171172)110002 PROP ADOR 1655 BOHNS POIN T RD OWNER NAME 0 K NEWMAN IR B M M C NEWMAN TAXPAYER CRAYOON K NEWMAN JR NAMt/AODR MICHtLUMrNLWMAN 1655 BOHNS POINT RD OHONOMN 55)91 )l 171172)110005 PROP ADDR )629 BOHNS POINT RO OWNER NAME RANO a U. ACREEN taxpayer RANDALL a OREI N NAMT/ADDR '679 BONUS POTNT RO ORONOMN 55591 J« 171172)110006 P1KVAOOR 16)5 BOFB4S POINT RO OWNER NAME S P MOSELEY B S P MOStLEV TAXPAYER STEPHEN P B SUSAN P MOSELEY HAMb'APOR 16)5 BOHNS POINT RO WAYZATAMN 55)91 3» 171172)110009 PBOPADDR 51 address WASSIONtO OWNERNAME 0 X NEWMAN JR BM MC NEWMAN TAXPAYER CRAYOON K NEWMAN JR WftMB/APP* MICHELLE M C NEWMAN 1653 BOHNS POINT RO ORONOMN 55)91 )| 171172)110007 PROP AOOR 1645 BOHNS POINT RD OWNERNAME PJA K A MALLORANTROSTEES TAXPAYER PATRICK B KATHLEEN HALLORAN NAME/AOOR 1645 BOHNS POINT RD WAYZATAMN 55)91 )| 171172)110010 PROP ADOR U ADDRESS UNASSKNEO OWNER NAME C K NEWMa N JR B M M C NEWMAN TAXPAYER CRAYOON X NEWMAN JR NAME/AOOR MCHELLEMC NEWMAN 1655 BOHNS POBCRD ORONOMN 55)91 )| 171172)110000 PROP AOOR )l ADDRESS UNASSICNED OWNERNAME C K NEWMAN JR B M M C NEWMAN taxpayer CRAYOON K NEWMAN JR NAMt/AUOR MICHELLE M C NEWMAN 1655 BOHNS POINT RO ORONOMN 55)91 M 171172)110011 PROP AOOR )l ADDRESS UNASSICNED OWNERNAME 0 K NEWMAN JR B M M C NEWMAN TAXPAYER CRAYOON K NEWMAN JR NAME/AOOR MICHELLE MC NEWMAN 1655 BOHNS POINT RD ORONOMN 55)91 tr2 5 H •UNIMTE;V>nOM 31 1711723110013 niOPAODR 30 address UNASSIONEO OWNCRNAME CKHCWMAN« AM MCNEWMAM TAXTAYER ORAYOON K NEWMAN « NAME/AOOR MICHELLE MC NEWMAN l*SSiO«NSK)**TRD ORONOMN S31*I 31 riimiiooii PROf ADOR 31 ADDRESS UNASSK3NEO OWNER NAME G K NEWMAN JR A M M C NEWMAN taxpayer GRAVDON K NEWMAN JR HAME/AOOR MICMEIUMC NEWMAN lAU BOHNS POINT RO ORONOMN 5SJ9I PACE ; 2 OF^HEWOTN^oilj^ ? OF MY KNOWLEDOEANDBEUEF.^^^^.>^^^ C:» v;> A.» I* • i- #30 42 •04-3054 October !■. 2004 P«|cl of4 Datt A|»plkalioa Rfcdvcd: 9-174H Halt Applkation CoaoMcrctl at Complete: 10*17*04 OO-Oay Rcvkiw Period Eipirct: 12-11-04 Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator Iron: Date: Subject: Janice Gundlach, City Planner October 15.2004 04-3054, Jon &. Gail Blackstone, 4475 Forest Lake Landing - I^t Width Variance, Accessory Building Location Variance • Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: I-R - IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (I acre min) 0.886 acres (38.596 s.f.) Area meets 80% administrative approval criteria 1 10 feet (140’ required) Application Summary: Applicant requests the following varian'-es in order to construct a new residence on an existing, vacant parcel: 1 . Lot width variance to permit a lot width at the public roadway of 1 lU feet when 140 feci is nonnally required. (112 ’ is required to meet administrative approval criteria) 2. Variance to pennit the existing accessory building to remain on the lot in a location closer to the street or front lot line than the proposed house. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends: 1 . Approval of the lot width variance as a house existed in the past, the lots were legally formed, and the lot width would not be inconsistent with the area. Deni^ of the accessory structure location variance as no hardship inherent to the land exists to allow it to remain in its current location. A new accessory building could be constructed in a conforming l« > ation on the property 2. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-330. Area, height, lot width and yard requirements. (b) Lots The following minimum requirements shall be observed: Lot Mxea Ut Width (fNt)Front Yard (feet)Side Yard Adjacent to Another Lot (feet) Rear Yard (feet)Side Yard Adjacent to Sued (feet) 1 1 146 35 to 30 35 Sec. 78-1435. Location. No detached garages or other accessory building shall be located nearer the front or street lot line than the principal building on that lot except on lots which have frontage on a lake and rear yard adjacent to a street, accessory buildings i- N04-3054 Octobtr II. 2004 Fait loro located within the street or rear yards of such lots are subject to the setback requirements of section 78-305(b), section 78-330(b) and section 78-350(b); except that detached garages may be locat^ ten feet from the street or rear lot line when doors face away from the street and a turnaround is provided on the site. This section shall not apply to lakeshoie lots divided by roadways or comer lots. LislorExhibito Exhibit A - Applications Exhibit B - Hardship Documentation Form Exhibit C - Proposed Survey Exhibit D - Ha^cover Calculations Exhibit E - Proposed Elevations Exhibit F - Proposed Floor Plans Exhibit G - Aerial Photograph Exhibit H - Property Owner’s List Exhibit I-Plat Map Backgroond The applicants own and reside on the property to the south of this lot. They wish to retain this property and allow construction of a house for their parents, while remaining owners of the land. Prior to submittal of this application, the applicants allowed the fire department to bum the existing, old house down for a training exercise. Through this process a demolition permit was never applied for. Upon notification to the City that the old house was tom down, the tqiplicants were required to apply for an afler-the-fact demolition permit. At this stage in the process the applicants were informed that the property consisting of two separate tax parcels needed to be legally combined and that a lot width and accessory structure variance would be required prior to applying for a building permit for a new residence. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot Arem/Widlh LR-IB Lot Area Lot Width Required 43,560 s.f (1 acre)140 ’ Actual 38,596 s.f. (0.886 acres)110 ’ Setbacks LR-IB Required Existing Proposed Front 35’90’-house 8 ’-shed 200’-house 8 ’-^ Rear 30’230’40* M04-3054 October 1b. 2004 Pate 3 of4 Left Side (south)10’21’40’ Right Side (north)10’63’ - house 8.6’-shed 10’-house 8.6’ - shed Structural Coverage Total Lot Area 38,596 s.f. (0.886 acres) Total Structural Coverage Allowed: 5,789 s.f. (15%) Proposed: 3,924 s.f. (10%) Hardcover Calculations Hardcover Zone 75-250 250-500 Total Area In Zone 7,917 s.f. 30,679 s.f. Allowed Hardcover 1,979.25 s.f. (25%)____ 9,203.7 s.f. (30%) Existing Hardcover 0 s.f.* (0%) 3,517 s.f.* (11.46%) Proposed Hai^covcr 1,283 s f. (16.2%) 7,694 s.f. (25.08%) Aftn e.xclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Lot Width Variance The applicants own the two existing vacant lots to the north of their home at 4465 Forest Lake Landing. They have combined these lots and removed tlie house tliat existed on the southerly lot. F.ach of these lots is 55 feet in width at the roadway and once combined the width becomes 110 feet. The lot width requirement of the LR - IB zoning district is 140 feet. Because the applicants do not meet this requirement and wish ;o redevelop the lot. a lot width variance is required. Had the lot been 112 feet in width, administrative approval could have been granted, which was the case with the lot’s area. .Accessory Structure Variance lire uppitcaiits have proposed to keep the accessory structure located in the northern comer of the lot. Prior to combination of these lots, the old house was located on the southerly lot and this accessory building existed without a principal stmeture. Only lakeshore lots are permitted accessory buildings located in front of the principal structure and non-lakeshorc lots must locate them behind the principal structure. Because these lots have been combined and redevelopment of the lot is proposed, all accessorv buildings must meet Zoning Ordinance requirements. A variance is required in order lo allow the existing acccs.,ory structure to remain closer to the street than the proposed residence. Hardship Siatement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. M4-J0S4 Ortebtr 11.2004 rage 4 or 4 Hardship Aoalyftb__________________________________________________ In cnnsUtrtng •ppUcttiontfor vnrtnnee, Ae Ptannlng Commiuion sMt conskkr the effect of the pnpoiei vnrimce upon the henlth, utfety and welfare of the community, extiting and anticipated tn^ condMomt, Ught and air, danger of fire, risk to the public lafety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Coumission shail consider recommending approtal for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code In Instances where their strict ettforcement would cause undue hardship beeauu of circumstances unlgue to the Individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when H Is demonstrated that such actions win he In keeping with the spirit and brtent of the €hono Zoning Code. Staff finds that a hardship inherent to the land exists in order to grant a lot width variance. The tots (prior to combination) were only SS feet in width and a house existed on one. Now that they are combined the lot width is much more conforming at 110 feet. In fact, lot widths on Forest Lake Landing range from 50 feet, 60 feet, 75 feet, 80 feet, 90 feet, and 95 feet where 110 feet would be the most conforming on the street Staff finds that because a bouse existed in the past, the lots were legally formed, and the lot w idih would not be inconsistent with the area, the City has an obligation to support a lot width variance request when all other Zoning Ordiiumce requirements can be met. Staff finds that there is no hardship inherent to the land to support approval of a variance for an accessory structure. Acknowledging that the building has been there absent a principal structure, the property must still come into full compliance during the rebuilding process. From staffs perspective, if a lot lends itself for construction of an accessory building in a conforming location, one should be permitted. If the lot exists where an accessory building can't fit in a conforming location, then it shouldn’t be permitted as there are never hardships to allow construction of buildings not considered necessities. Issues for Consideration 1 . Are there any negative impacts relating to the lot's width, which could be minimized? 2. Are there any hardships to approve the accessory building variance? 3. Should the fact that the accessory building existed tor some 20 years in this location without a principal structure, gi\e weight to approval of the variance? Is this a hardship? 4. Are then any other issues or concerns with th*s application? Staff Rceomnaendation Approval of the lot width variance as the property is a legal record lot where construction of a residence isn’t prohibited when all other Zoning Ordinance standards have been met, subject to City Engineer approval of a grading plan prior to City Council approval. Denial of the variance to allow the existing accessory building to remain in a location closer to the street or front lot line than the proposed residence as no valid hardship to the land has been demonstrated. City of Orono Variance Application EXHIBIT A S:net Adiress 2750 Kei'.ey Parkway Orcno. MN 55355 Ma^n 952-243-4600 fax 952-245-4516 Ma 'ing Address PO Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323--OS6 Application # Date Received Amount Paid ikcc Cc Staff. __________ Fee:S600 Renewal $300 After-tne-fact Si 2C0 Jcus e Fee Tnis application term must be completed m fuG App cant v.nu be nctified wiOrn 15 day* as to the status of tr’e application Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: , . , Site Address; <^V~7ST LMn.e^t i _ Property Identirication Number (PIN): P 7 -/I7 t (AUach legal description to application if not inc uded on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year): _______Qd Yes. I own the adjacent parcels Present use of property; l5*^Resldential □ Other_________________________ Zoning District; \ _________ Cl APPl iCANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal na-es and rrantal status required for each interested party) Name: <.u3, iatV^ >..7________________________________________________________ Phene (home); Address; ___ Email; _____ Phone (work); OWNER UJ4FORMATION: JComptete legal names e'd mantai status requ red fdr each interested party) Name; ■^C^cuV ^\rytJcST>iiV iiV-AL Phone (home); ~ ;^s~^s ___ Address- l-<r/v^V L u\lo (/.v»ngfiA Email; V c> cc . > la S Psx; Phone (work): ^9 7^~7 0 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:Estimated Project Cost $ Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): _ LcA" LOu.MOv uvO-»~ *r 4jc • tah p? ______ \acn'X-**i:X riA ~i.^ ef^ ..iia iiifeifei 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, connpleted by a City Planner. □ Completed Application Form □ Completed Hardship Documentation Form □ Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150‘ of the subject property, labels and plat map List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance. Government Center. A-603 300 South 6*'"’ Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 □ Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting a'l the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5“ x ir 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 1 r X 17“ for reproduction. □ Sketches or plans of fioor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17“) □ Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. * APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge The applicant recognizes that hc/shc Is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so. the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regar^ess of its poteptiafmerit. 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. consultanU. agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification o^thisT^est. , Owner ’s Signature; (.______________Date Owner's Sign Jture: Date; Applicant must have all submitta'l^ into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Comm ss on Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please maKe arrangements to have a*' authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project 4 City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form (Th.i form i« to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-app >031.00 meeting •) For Qf^tce Use Only CityPtanrver^trB9t Addnss Mailmg Address 2750 Kei:ey Parkway P O Bo* 66 ---- Orono MN 55356 Crystal Bay. MN 55323*00oo Meet.ng Dale/Ttrre PC Data r ~! Mam: 952-249-4600 Fa* 952-249-46A6 W/iaf is the purpose of a pre-application meeting? Pre-appiicat.on meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal, inform .hem of .he procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Addre: ' ' 75. / *> O f * / Property loentification Number (PIN); Zoning District Size of Property py. //%• / > V - * DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: □ Average SelbacK □ Side Yard Setback □ Rear Yard Setback □ Hardcover O Lot Coverage □ Lot Area □ Other; □ Front Yard Setback 'a.Lot Width # y7/ Applicant Initials: /9A HARDSHIP: Applicant has received the Hardship Documentation Form. '10 understands it as it has been explained to them, a id is aware that it must be completed and subrr itted m conjunction w th their formal variance application. OTHER INFORMATION; ‘Please note: Your wariance application will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this form will be completed by City staff. Applicant Signature: ^ 0>\. Date: i^-1^,0 54 B III liiitaittlirii iggjjjgaiigjtiitjam r r SST3ACK Z0N2: (CT^ICLE ONE) O-TF FXT.mNn f-A-mcovra tn 20?^ A. KcuJ« ___________ - * HAPJ5C0'V“ER CALCLXATION WORXSHSZT EXHIBIT D I50.M0*5OO-I0CO ’ B. Ctnss C Drivewiy D. Sidewalk E. PadorDeck P. Liiuhcape Underlaia By Plasde O. Other total hardcover in zone TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE r> + B i. i..X 100 - yttOP*^tP hab ™*ovt w in tone A. House B. Garue C Driveway D. Sidewalk E. PadoTOesk F. LndsciTf Underlaia By P1«X a Other ftpV \vU\ « ----------- total hardcover in zone .-prr:'s.?. S--. S-“. s^. sJ. .SJ. s^. ■ Sr. S.F. S.F. SE. .SJ. S.F. O S.F. A C'7 S.F. B -PJ- S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. \SJ. SJ. SJ. S.F. S.F. SI. 3.7. S.F. X 100 - SJ. A ----T~~ S.F. 3 ' lfc. Zr-Y» a-itoi iilBii A n Jil— m I '~! ■BI i« jg u.acr- (/MEXCAVATEP (^6«. ^MU>«iC /^Vt) ■fl/OOP' fU>»i ' 'it: -A-' ^ ;i: :'■ t ' .... '"^■•W«rVs¥ 7,-. Vy., < 'J ■' ' J » V *% % . *1% « » »\ ■V... ^ - •:» - 4 , • ;. -.... >%y ,5f, ^a,--A. ti! * 'f S «• I^.V* f j'VvfS' ^■•'o., ■ , ' V-' ■'^-Subject Property ‘ X".•^jy'7. . ■ .’’’• ,t" • ■ ' ’■■•. . ' ^ imi'- RUNiJA.. ittVMM U 1172324000) ROfADOR 4.. rORESTLAICELAMMNO »WN»NAME T»r;THYMARItLEMUIlE AXfAYER TW40THYMUMIUCE IAME/ADDR 444) FOREST lake LANWNO MOUND MN ))]04 llLNr.IIMN f t y I v i‘.f c »km a : svsi FM rjUjTIJtl YOIA'NLRS LISI FA(iL i U Ji7ll72J?40«»t PROFADtMl ll»A WiUNtt'RSriR OWM R NAME U l> RAYMtSStN-S I RASMUSStN 1AXPAYFR DRUN U A SANDRA J RASMUSSEN NAMt/ADUR • *»6 WII tMIURS^ TR MOUND MN )))M U 0T|IT2U4Oi:iY PRttI- AlHM 44VJ fORISl I ARE JAMilSO OWMR NAME P V MAR IlNSUNtM MARI tNSON TAXPAYER Pni R VVARIISV.S NAMbADDR 4460 lORlSI lARf LANDINO MUUNDMN 31 0711723240016 ROP AOOR 44)0 FOREST LAKE LANDING IWNERNAME R Eft V A WOLFF AXPAYER ROBERT L A VELMA A WOU? iame /addr forest lake UNDINC MOUND MN ))3M 31 0711723240024 •ROP AODR 447) FOREST LAKE LANDING IWNERNAME J HLACKnONF. A G BUCKSTONE 'AXPAYER lONAGAILBLACKSTONE IAME/ADDR 446) FOREST LAKE IAN DINO MOUND MN ))364 U 0711723240031 •ROP ADOR 446) FOREST LAKE lANDIMi IWNER NAME K)N D BIACKSTONE ET AL •AXPAYER KIN DBLACKSTONF, 4AML ADDR 446) FOREST LAKE LANDING MOUND MN ))364 31 0711721240017 PROP ADUR 4440 lOREST LAKE LANDING OWNER NAME 7 TINE A 1. UNE TAXPAYER IIMOIIIVAUIRIIUNI NAMI^AUDR 44l)IORESTlAKEIANU»NO MOUND MN ))3b4 31 07II72J240027 PROPADOK 1146 WIUWIURST7R OWNER NAME ACI. PROPERTIES EEC TAXPAYER ACI PROPERIIESELC NAMI/ADDR )46) STATE IIWY NO 169 N PlYMOUrilMN )V4«; Tl 07II721?40C»40 PROP ADOR 4470 lOREST LAKE lANIMSG OWNER NAME SEPRAWER A JCPRAWtR TAXPAYER STEVEN t PRAWER NAMUAOOR IIIIWIRANKIJN STIOLISPARKMN )V426 31 07 1172124002) PROP ADDK 44 7) FORFSI LAKE LANDING OWNER NAME ) III^CKSIONE A G lll-ACKSTONE TAXPAYI R XIN A GAll. IIIAfKSTONC N AMF/AODR 446) IORLST LAKE I^NOINO MOUND MN )M(r4 ]l 0711721240017 PROP AODR 44J) POKES r LAKE LANDING OWNER NAME S W A M 11 RIKSON TAXPAVIR SANFORD A MARGARET FRIKSON NAMF/AOUX 44MIORIST LAKE LANDING MOUND MN ))IM II 07ll72)74fK>4l PROP ADOR lO'/O WtLUMURSI IK OWN! R NAME DRADLI Y I A l( D;III A LARSEN TAXPAVIR RRAOtl VIA lUOlIM ALARSEN N a ME/AUDR 1U<M WIIDIlUMSt TR MOUND MN DIM ri ' c') •' / ^t II 0711723240042 •ROP AOOR 4410 FOREST LAKE lANDINO IWNERNAME tORENFSCHOENZEITCT AE lAXPAVUt 4AME/ADDR LOREN F SCHOtNAEIT 6416 TIMBER RIDGE EDINA MN ))439 II 071172)240044 PROP ADOR IIM WIIDUURSTTR OWNER NAME MR HAELS WEAR A BRIT S WEAR TAXPAYER MICHAEL S WEAR NAMI2ADDR »' i* WlLDHURST TR MOUND MN ))364 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACFS REPRESEMTED ARK AN ACClfRAlE ANI3 TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS T IflS DATE ON THE RFCTIRDS OFTHE imNNEPIN COUN^TY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMI-NT, TO 1HE BEST ^ OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BEUEF. _ ^ DATE BY 77 2 H FILE ilM-SOSS 8 0ctoter200« Page 1 Of 4 Dele Applicalion Rccehcd: 09-20-04 Dele AppIkatioD Considered ns Complete: 10-04^ 60-Day Review Period Eipircs: 12-04-04 Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Melanie Curtis, City Planner October 8. 2004 \|A 04-3055, Mark Riner of Exterior Design Studio for Dr. Manila Spencer, 1005 Willow Drive S, -V^arianccs -Public Hearing Zoning District:RR-IB, One Family Rural Residential District 200* width & 2-acre minimums Lot Area: Lot Width: 95,002 s.f. (2.2 acres) 260’ measured at a line parallel to the shore Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a lake setback variance to allow a 1 gazebo within 150’ of the OH WL on a natural environment lake and a hardcover variance within the 0-75* setback zone in order to construct the gazebo and paved walkways. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends denial of the variances as requested. Hardship: There is no hardship to support further encroachment of the OWHL or increase in hardcover Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-1217. Classification of public waters. The public waters of the city liave been classified below consistent w ith the criteria found in Minnesota Regulations, part 6120.3300, and the protected waters inventory map for the counlv: OHWL (fern Hioiected U’eterv inventorv I D * (1)Saiural Enuronmtnt (\E) laUs LaLp CU.t»n 974 5 162-P Dicke) Uke 985 5 161-W French Lake (South Butn only)9300 I40-P file 0O4-3OSS 8 Octotwr 2004 P«9t2o(4 See. 78-1279. Placement of structures on lots. When more than one setback applies to a site, structures and facilities must be located to meet all setbacks. Structures shall be located as follo^^'s: (1) Srrucrure and on-siie seueragt system setbacks (in feet) from ordinary high water level______ P«Mic Water Clattincalioai 'Iribvtao Slraclare I'aiewrred 100 100 Sewered Sewace Treat Ment Svnem 150 Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (a) No hard cover or impervious surface shall be placed, located or constructed within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of any lake or tributary, except for stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in this Code. (b) Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OHWL, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Between 250 feet and 500 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 30 percent hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1.000 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 35 percent hardcover. List of Exhibits A. Application B. Hardship Documentation Fomi C. Pre-Application Meeting Form D. Existing & Proposed Surv'cy/Site Plan E. Submitted Hardcover Calculations F. PC Report. Council Memo & Resolution from previous \ ariancc 2004 G. Property Owners List H. Plat Map Background The existing home at 1005 Willow Drive South is located entirely within the 150 ’ structure setback for French Lake, a natural environment lake. Additionally, half of the home is located within the 75 ’ setback from the OHWL of French Lake. Any additions or alterations to the existing home would require a lake setback variance, a hardcover variance or both. in June 2004, lake setback and 0*75 ’ hardcover v'ariances were granted in order to construct decks over existing patio hardcover resulting in a slight reduction in hardcover within the 0-75 ’ zone. applicant has advised staff that the current request was intended to be part of the previous variance application but the City did not receive any of the information regarding this portion of the proposal it FILE •04.3055 80ctoba«2004 Page 3 of 4 LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot ArcaA%'idih; RR-IB Lot Area Lot Width Required 87,120 s.r (2 acre)200’ Actual 95.002 s.f. (2.2 acres)260’ (parallel to shore) RR-IB Required llxistine Proposed Lakeshore 1 50 ’ (Natural House 50'± from OHWL House 50'i from OHWX Em ironmeni Lake)Patio 4 5’1 from OllWL Deck 45’± from OHWL Rear 50 ’57.7’57.7’ North Side 30 ’92.7’92.7’ South Side 30 ’90 ’90 ’ Average Ijikc'hore No encroachment No encroachment Stnictural Coverage; The property exceeds 2 acres, thus structural coverage is not considered. Hardcover Cakwlations; Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed llardcoscr Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75 19,984 s.f.Osf (0%) 1.532 s f.* (7.7 %) 2,338 s.f (117%) 75 - 250 22.847 s.f.5,711 s.f. (25%) 4,260 s.f (18.7%) 4,260 s.f. (18.71.) • After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Lake Setback Variance French Lake is a Natural Environment lake which lias a setback icquirement of 150’ from the OHWL for all structures. The existing home is located entirely within the 150’sctback with the closest part approximately 50* from the OH>^’L. Hardcover Variance The existing home is located approximately 50’ from the OUHL and the newly constructed decks arc set back 45'. The total hardcover existing is 8% hardcover within the 0-75’ setback. The applicant is proposing an increase in hardcover for the 0-75’ setback of A°/o. With the previous variance approval the applicant was required to remove all fabric from the landscape areas which would result in a 75’-250’ setback zone hardcover below the allowed 25% at 18.7%. Hardship Statement Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding Ute application L. FILE C04-306S e OctatM> 2004 Ps9«4of4 Hardship Analysb In cnnsUering nppikmiions for vorionct, the Ptonning Commission skoO consUrr the effect of the proposed voriance upon the health, safety and welfare of the commanlty, ejdsting and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger offire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending appro%al for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hard^lp because of circumstances unlgue to the individual property under consideration, and titatt recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono 7*tning Code. The home u-as constructed prior to the adoption of the Shoreland Overlay Ordinance (1992) which identified French Lake as a natural environment lake requiring a ISO' setback. Prior to adopting the Shoreland ordinance the home was in a conforming location, as it was only subject to a 26* wetland setback at that time. Staff finds that due to the location of the existing home and patios, thc^c was a valid hardship for granting the lake setback and hardcover variances for the conversion of concrete patios to smaller decks. The resolution granting these variances stated on page 3 of 5 item *2 "...any fiiiure requests to increa.se hardcover or change the nature of existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover". However, staff does not find that there is a hardship to justify granting lake setback and hardcover variances for the gazebo or walking paths proposed with this application. The gazebo could be relocated to a conforming location on the property and the walking paths arc not necessar}' in order to access the property. Issues for CoBsidcralioB 1. Docs the Planning Commission feel that the gazebo and walking paths are a property right of the applicant? 2. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff RecommeBdation Planning Staff recommends denial of the variances as requested as there is no hardship present to support the request. City of Orono A Variance Application_____ Sfreef Address 2750 Kefley F .rkway Orono. MN 55356 Main 952-249-4600 fax 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: P.O Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-:066 CW-30SSApplication # Date Received. Q«ZQ-C:>H Amount Paid _________ Staff: Fee;S6C0 Renewal; S303 After-tne-facL S1.200 Douoie Fee This application form must be completed in full App .cant v»rill be notified w.tnin 15 days as to the status of the applicauon Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: _______ loo<; Ofxu-L ___________________________________ Zoning District: APPLICANT INFORMATION; (Complete legal na-es and marital status required for each interested party) Name: a«Vv<r P<-Uriey^ p____________________________ Phone (home): m /A__________________.-Phone (work): ------------- Address:TVJi- <1,^ Email: • <^o >v>_________Fax: OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names s'd marlta: status required for each interested party) Name* •dr )rYv\rX^\^^ _______________________________________Name' Or. _______________________ Phone (home): -SiHi_____________Phone (work): Of//* Address; \o6 ir->i WouJ ^ , (9rrv\0 . >^irQ _______ Email;fj/A Fax: A//A DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST; Estimated Project Cost $ V.Hoo Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): _________________________ locL- <pgv.L<o tv.yj ujc»iIcuoojJ& Crcm ctoo r- dtck- ^ ------- f^a\t\3o 4 ■■ ■■■■• ? ‘ ^ f"' • ;r.^ .-r fpSt: “• ~ -.s-,X'. 4 ^ t •• t \ I REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be processed. □□□□ □□ O□ Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. Completed Application Form Completed Hardship Documentation Form Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150’ of the subject property, labels and plat map List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance. Government Center. A-603 300 South 6*'’ Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8 5" x 11" or 1 r X 17* for reproduction. Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet) Topographic survey - Including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8 5* x 11" or 11” X 17" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17"). Adcitional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project * APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so. the staff has no alternative but to r^ct it un til it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardjfiss^cnts p^^nUal merit------- Applicant ’s Signature; ____________________________________Date; Applicant ’s Signature; _____________________________________Date; ^ 'fAj' OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. ^Owner ’s Signature; Owner ’s Signature: f Date. Date 9 //T> Applicant must have all submittals Into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Cemmission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council, if an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project • / ,v->. , * = # inAlrilllt 6K. & Hardship Documentation Form 1. “The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls.” The official control for this property will not allow the homeowner to create a safe environment. After 22 yrs of living at this residence it is not as easy to get around the yard so we would like to correct the slope with walkways with steps and a patio that will create level areas to walk and sit for the enjoyment of the property. Also, with all of the diseases insects carry, a screened gazebo is to be built to create a safe area away from the insects of the wetland area. 2. “The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by tlie landowner.” True, the existing grade of the property is unsafe and unusable for family activities. 3. “Tlie variance, if granted will not alter the essential character of the locality.” We arc still allowing the propert)' to retain the natural character of what exists: we are creating an area for the homeowner to enjoy the beauty of nature. 4. “Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter.” 0% hardcover docs not allow us use of the backyard, for the fact of grade changes and an unsafe and unusable environment due to insects from the wetland area. 5. “Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy s> stems. Variances shall be grant^ for earth sheltered construction as defined in Miruiesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd.2, when in harmony with this Chapter.” N/A 6. “The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.” No, it is not. 7. “The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one- family dwelling as a two-family dwelling.” N/A 8. “The special conditions ^iplying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.” liifiiiiifrir City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form (This form is to be completed by a City Planner durng your pre-appiication meeting *) Streef /^ddres5 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 For 0**.ce Use Omy . . ^ \ , > City Plarr.er \^{« -r / a Mailing Address PO Boxes , ___________________j__ Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Meeting Date/Time lC> t PC Date /v4 Main 952-249-4600 Fax; 952-249-46t6 What is the purpose Of a pre-application meeting? Pre-applicalion 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: /DO^ l/\/tlllfW UlT Property Identification Number (PIN): Zoning District: Size of Property:V . 'L n DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: . v . e .v. . □ Average Setback , □ Side Yard Setback □ Rear Yard Setback □ Front Yard SetbacK jjlHardcover 0-'-f □ Lot Coverage □ Lot Area □ Lot Width 'd Othec, I—rnojhfAh.i Ix/i'h’Ci^ r>//i/:M i n( i _ mf J^CTa a hfu Alhcn 'W . fCiri I'l I ih pJi/r f Applicant's Initials: OTHER INFORMATION: HARDSHIP: Applicant has received the Hardship Documentation Form, understands it as it has been explained to them, and is aware that it must be completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal variance application. *Please note: Your variance application will NOT be accepted without a pre-appliwtion meeting during which IhisJojpweHttiejompteted by City staff. / . Applicant Signature: _____________________________________Dale: rr 5X i:f).i: •5=^ D & MMMtMW •rnmmmtm* TtST msm^ssssu^----- L lsAJOV.U> UA1.V.C1-A1J.W:> VM-»tvrv^ STT3ACX ZONZ: (CISCLZ 75-lf-y £. 1 KC- ryje'.’tvc: ~*^r>covr7^ r>»' rev- A. K:uj 8 3. C-KVfie C CnvTflfiy D. Sidr»«a E. Pilic/Dcck F. Ltcdscace Undercut By PluTie C. Oltwr TOTAL HARDCOVER W ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ♦ B ____X 100 f anpospn hardcover in zone A- House wua B. Gance C Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Pa*S«yDe=k By Pbsdc G. Otfier ■TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZDNs TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IK ZOKa * 3 _____ X 100 ^ r.-C . % i *" ^ jj O' eA- E- //^? S-». S-*. S--. SJ. SJ. //S^SJ. SJ. SJ^. 5-” "2-1/S-" s«. S.F. SJ. SJ. S.F. IS3Z- S.F, A I qSJ. B n\n H lioA S.F. SJ. SJ. S.F. SJ. SJ. SJ. S.F. S.F. .S.F. S.F. 'SJ. SJ. -SJ. A 1*1 .*iy¥~"sj. 2 11.1 H *1/1 (./»+' e^. P- CITYOFORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Cr)’Slal Bay. MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING HLE 04-3030 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: July 27,2004 TO: Craig Lagorio COPIES:Dr. Martha Spencer 7155 Cahill Rd 1005 wniou Drive S Edina, MN 55439 Wayzaia, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variances DATE OF MEETING: July 26,2004 VOTE:5 FOR 0 AGAINST Please arrange to sign the 3 original resolution copies at the City OfFices (Monday through Thursday, 7:30 to 5:00 and Fridays 7:30 to 11:30). All persons svith an Interest in the property must sign the resolutions. Variance approval is limited to the extent show:, on approved plan and as noted in the approval resolution. Changes in approved plans are subject to further review by the City. Variance approval expires one year after date ofapprova*. A building permit must be obtained no later than July 26, 2005. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Cl^'k 9nH AfinraVAl bv the Citv Council.after review and approval by the City Council. If you have questions please call Mclaatc Curtis, City Planner, at 952.249.4627. t InMSl Date Appllcalion Received: 06-03-04 Dale Appllcallon Comidered at Complete: 06*29-04 60-Day Review Period Eapircs: 08-30-04 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: July 22. 2004 Item No Department Approval: Name: Melanie Curtis Title: Citv Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: <>04-3030 - Craig Lagorio for Dr. Martha Spencer. 1005 Willow Dt S Variances - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: RR-IR, Single Family Rural Residential, 2 acre/200' 2.2 acre 260* shoreline List of Exhibits: A - Resolution per Plaiuting Conuuission Recommendation B - PC Action Notice dated July 20, 2004 C - PC Memo & Exhibits of June 29, 2004 .^pplication Summary: The applicant is requesting a lake setback variance to allow grade level decks within 150' of the OHWL on a natural environment lake and a hardcover variance for 8.0% hardcover within the 0-75* setback rone where 0% is normally allowed and 9.2% exists in order to construct lakeside decks over existing oatios____ ___ Planning Commission Recommendation On July 19,2004, Planning Commission voted 7-0 to reconomend approval of the lake setback and 0- 75' harfeover variances. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution COUNCIL ACTION REQLTISTED Adopt or amend the attached resolution. A RESOLLTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-1279 SUBDIVISION 1 AND 78-1288 SUBDIVISION A HLE NO. 04-3030 WHEREAS, Martha Alice Leigh Spencer, a single person (hereinafter “the applicants ”) is the owner of the p;operty located at 1005 Willow Dnvc South within tlte City of Orono (hereinafter the “City ) and legally described as follows: Attached as Exhibit A, (hereinafter the “property”); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 Subdivision 1 to allow construction of lakeside decks 45’ from the OHWL where a 150’ setback is normally required and the existing house is set back 50 from the OHWL; and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1288 Subdivision A in order to allow a 0-75 ’ zone hardcover level of 8% where 0% is normally allowed and 9 2“u currently exists in order to construct lakeside decks over existing patios within 75 ’ of the NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application w-as reviewed as Zoning File #04-3030. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB, Rural Residential Zoning Disuict w'hich requires a minimum lot area of 2 acres and a minimum lot width of 200 ’. The applicant ’s property is 2.2 acres in area with approximately 260’ of wiudi measured at the ^reline. Page 1 ofS The Planning Ccnimission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on July 19, 2004 and recommended approval of the variances based on the following findings: French Lake is a Natural Environment lake which requires a 150* setback from the OHWL. The existing home is located approximately 50* from the OHWL. entirely within the required 150’ setback Prior to the adoption of the Shoreland Ordinance in 1992 establishing a 150* setback from Natural Environment lakes, the home was subject to only a 26* wetland setback, at which lime all structures were in a conforming location The applicant has proposed to a net reduction of 1.2% hardco\cr witliin the 0-75* zone. Tire 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 co.mmunity. 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 serxe as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessar)’ to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserxe a substantial property right of the applicant, and would be in keeping with the spirit atKl intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the p'*'*vc findings, the Orono City Council aereby grants variances to Orono Munic'*'al Zor : Code S^ons 78-1279 Subdivision I, and 78-1288 Subdivision A to allow iiardcover within the 0-75* setback zone of 8% where 9.2% currently exists and a lake setback variance to allow* decks to be set back 45* from Page 2 ofS i. !he OHWL of French Lake where 150’ is norniatly required, subject to the following conditions. 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submmed by the applicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B. Any amendments to the site plan which arc not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review 2.Hardcover in the 0-75* zone shall not increase above the level of 8% or 1,604 s.f. Hardcover in the 75*-250’ zone shall be limited to 4,260 s.f. or 18.7®/o per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depicted on E.xhibit B. Applicant is advised that any future requests to mcrease hardcover or change the nature of cxisting^appiovcd hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcoxcr will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. 3. Applicant shall remove all plastic or fabric liner material from the decorative landscape beds on the property to ensure their penneability as non-hardcover surfaces. Required removals of structure and hardcover shall be completed by the footing inspection for tlie proposed decks. 5. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are pennissivc 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 (July 26, 2005). 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. 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 26* day of July, 2004. ATTEST: Lindas. Vcc,City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property OwneKs) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 26* day of July, 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 Page 4 of5 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instruraeni was acknowledged before me on this ___ day of . 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal ’corporalion and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HEN'NEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this. by Martha Alice Leigh Spencer, a single person day of.,2004 Notary Public Page S of S FILE «04.3030 29 Jur>t 20C4 P»«e 1 ot4 Dttc Application Received: 06-03-(M Dale Application Considered at Complete: 06-29-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 08-30-04 Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Melanie Curtis, City Planner June 29.2004 04-3030, Craig Lagorio for Dr. Martha Spencer, 1005 Willow Drive S, -Variances -Public Hearing Zoning District:RR-IB, One Family Rural Residential District 200* width & 2-acre minimums Lot Area: Lot Width: 95,002 s.f. (2.2 acres) 260* measured at a line parallel to tire shore Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a lake setback variance to allow grade level decks within 150* of the OHW’L on a natural enviromnent lake and a hardcover variance within the 0-75’ setback zone in order to construct lakeside decks over existing patios. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the variances as requested. Hardship. The existing home is located entirely within the required 150' lake setback and half is located within 75 ’ of the OWHL Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-1217. Classification of public waters. The public waters of the city have been classified below consistent with the criteria found in Minnesota Regulations, part 6120.3300, and the protected waters inventory map for the county: OHULtfee:)Pfoiecte<: \kaseis Inver.lor> ID * tl)Xatural Environmerit (S£) lakes Lake Claiser.974 5 162-P Dtckey Lake 985 5 161-W French Lake (South Baain only)930 0 140-P FILE aOiOOM 29 June 20C4 Page 2 of 4 Sec. 78*1279. Placement of structures on lots. When more than one setback applies to a site, structures and facilities must be located to meet all setbacks. Structures shall be located as follows: (I) Structure and on-site sewerage system setbacks (in feet) from ordinary high water level._____ Public Wairr Cla«ificalion_ Tributarv Sfifeasla Structure Untrwered too 100 ScMsgc Treatment Sewered S\ftem 150 75 Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (a) No hard cover or impervious surface shall be placed, located or constructed within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of any lake or tributary, c.\ccpt for stairways, lifts, landings and lockbo.xcs as regulated elsewhere in this Code. (b) Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OHWT. there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Between 250 feet and 500 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 30 percent hardcover. Beuveen 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 35 percent hardcover. List of Exhibits A. Application Hardship Documentation Form Existing & Proposed Survey/Site Plan Submitted Hardcover Calculations Aerial Photo Property Owners List Plat Map B. C. D. E. F. G. Background The existing home at 1005 Willow Drive South is located entirely within the 150 ’ structure setback for French Lake, a natural environment lake. Additionally, half of the home is located within the 75 ’ setback from the OHWL of French Lake. Any additions or alterations to the existing home wuuld require a lake setback \Tiriance, a ver variance or both. The applicant has proposed to construct decks over existing patio hardcover result.- t in a slight reduction in hardcover within the 0-75* zone. The property is surrounded by mature trees. PfettrtnafWMi __ FILE «04-3030 29 June 2004 Pa9c3of4 LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET RR-IB lx)t Area Lot Width Required 87.120 si (2 acre)200’ Actual 95.002 s.f. (2 2 acres)260' (parallel to shore) RR-IB Required Exisline Proposed Lakeshore 150' (\aiuial EnvirotU'tent Lake) House 50‘± from OHWL Patio 45from OHWL House 50'± from OHWL Deck 45'± from OHWL Rear 50'57.7’57.7' North Side 30’92.7’92 7' South Side 30'90’90' Average Lakeshore No encroachment No encroachment i Siructural Coverage; The property exceeds 2 acres, thus structural coverage is not considered Hardcover Calc ilations: Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allossed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75 19.984 s.f.Osf (0%) 1.847 sf* (9.2 %) 1.604 sf (8 0 %) 75-250 22,847 s f.5.711 s.f. (25%) 4,260 s.f.* (1 8 7 Vo) 4.260 s f. (18.7%) After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lmcd landscape beds Lake Setback Variance French Lake is a natural environment lake which has a setback requirement of 150* from the OHWL for all structures. The existing home is located entirely within the 150’setback with the closest part approximately 50’ from tlic OHWL. Hardcover Variance The existing home is located approximately 50’ from the OWTiL and the existing patio is within 40*. The applicant has proposed to remove the existing patios and replace with a slightly smaller deck. The total hardcover existing is 9.2%, and the applicant has proposed a reduction to 8% hardcover within the 0-75’ setback. The 75’-250* zone is below tlic allowed at 18.7% not including tlic fabric lined landscape beds. Hardship Statement Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. FILEfW-3030 29 June 2004 Psge4of4 Hardship Analysis In comlderbtg applications for varlanct, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safely and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of 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 otily when It is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. The home was consirucicd prior to the adoption of tlie Shoreland Overlay Ordinance (1992) which identified French Lake as a natural environment lake requiring a 150’ setback. Prior to adopting the Shoreland ordinance the home w’as in a conforming location, as it was only subject to a 26’ wetland setback at that time. Staff finds that due to the location of the existing home and patios, there is a valid hardship for granting the lake setback and hardcover variances. Hardcover within the 0-75 ’ setback will decrease as well Issues for Consideration 1. Will the new decks over existing patio areas have any negative visual impacts as viewed from the lake? 2. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval of the variances as requested with the following provision: I. Removal of all fabric and plastic landscape liners. mi. 7.KCU 952'- -.-PEDS E«3 9?3 1761ii^cap £ - &4HwrA kiJ 5,J SSJ 17tIlU»OSCAPEv;iiy OT Orono Variance Application W. 5C2 il 62 Sf^sef Addrfss. 2760 iteTey Pa'<w8/ 0-5-2. V\ 55356 Ms- SS2:45-45CQ fac 652-243-4619 MiPinj AiiCrtst. . p 0 Box 66 Cryita' 9a/. MN £5323-:C55 Ap:ii;at^r.# 04 D ks RsceNec Arouit Pa'd- 6tsP; Fes: mwi; »v. > Aftar-tha-fact M?0 _S^2:; Cc.= c =ee Th:« ap?:ica-jcn 'orm must be completed li fa". App'cani w;i be n5i»-ied wfth.n 15 days ss lo *re fa’ts o' t-e ippfiMiio.-i. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. Ovt. So PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: Zoos' ______________________ Propo.-ty Wenlificat!cn Nu.r.bcr (PiN): /r f/lLS//l (Attach lags! description to application If no: irc’.Ced on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (montVyear): /is-2. □ Yss. I own the adjacent parcels. Presort use of property: ^Residential ^ Ot-.er Zening District; ___________________ “ APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Compwe iscai fares and marital status reqjlred fc- each Jntefeeted pa-ty) Name: CCA /O' ui-t^-K > o Phone (hemo): -/g -Kt Address: 7/r?' Email: Phone (work): C c OWNER INFORMATIO^IConpiete ;e5Ql names ir.d me-'.ta: status reej-.’red for each Inlereatad osrtvt N jiiH. _y^ ^ Auic.fc. Sf^A4ig/2-»________( Phone (home): ^S’2. Phono (v«rk): Address: looy uon-<c6i0 or . SO lrU/»>i7yvrv» Email: <p/»j«v.r>Aj^ pArY.n"^ce £j-rn> Fax: S'ibT DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost Deser bethe request in detail (attach additional sheets ’f necessa7): % fjc.r — c^J Acyf-C. rA /^tt*rr k jMAY. 7.20Ci; 4:<5PM 952?' '-?EOS ENCO S52 953 1 75h lancscaps •\0.5C2 f 3*: e3 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following Information must be tubmitted by the application deadihc date in order for ycu' application to be processed. n□□□ □□ □c Pre-Appilcafon Meeting Fomn. comp’eted by a City Planner. Completed Application Form Completed Hardship Docunantation Form Certified Property O/me's List - owners v/ith’n 150 ’ of the sjb.ect p'cpe'ty, labels end plat rac. Ust. labels and map nay be obtained from Hennepin Cojnty Dopartment of Fr.sncs Government Canter. A-503 3C0 South 6^*' Street, Minneapolis, telephone 012*348-5S1O Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the reouirsmerts I sted with'H this packet, including hardcover calcula'Jons. Also provide one copy 6 5 ’ x 1 V 0* IV X 17' for reproduction. Complsted hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided v/lihln the var'ance packet). Topographic survey - Irciudirg exish'ng and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 6.5' x 1 V or IV X17" for reproduction. Sketches or plana of floor end elevation viev/s (provide one copy 8.6" x 1 V or 11" x 17"). Additional Items rray be requested by Cty Staff depending on the scope of the project " APPLICANT'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Tne applicant h«5ii>y agrees to p'ovlde all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agr'.^'a :u tay additional fees (sta^time not covered in the original foe payment) ard/o* consu'tant expensr^ Inrj.'red In review of tnis appreatbn and certifies that the infc-matlon suppilsd is true and cer»'ect ^ '.hes pest of his/her knowledge. The applicant recogniaoc that he/she la solely reapor\6fble Kr a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so. the staff hat no V but to reject it until it is complolo or to recommend the request for denial c.f the requi^tr^yegardleae of its pot^tial morit Applicant s Slgnalur'k-._ Applicant’s Signature; =7^ 4/ Date; Date; •rlSWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTf ^8 cv/r.'er hereby acknowleogae and egrees lo this application and fjhher authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Membe-s for purposes of Investigation and vorification of this requesL Owner ’s Signature: Ovner ’s Signature: Date: C^'5 Date Apdiicant must have a'l submittals into the Cily cffices 25 days before the P anning Commissicr Mcfitrg, Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each mentn. Appllcar^ls must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a schedu'ed rroeting, pleaso make arrangements lo have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your proJecL #303 ycHiTtfiTb HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM Page 1 of 3 This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application wUl f>ct be considered complete or placed on any meet n^j agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City __________________ Minnesota State Statue Section 394 27. Subc.vis cn 7 requires that a hardship be demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted. The hnrdship must be unique to the property as variances run with the land and not the land OAoer. Persona' and economic Sftuations are not considered /a!id hardships. In order (o'- an application to be heard by the Planning Comm.ssion 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 hardsh.p, address ail the relevant points l.sted below and answer then 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 wil' 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." i4j(' */r nHt.' uv>’c\- “The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to h^s property not created by the landowner." vA-y V// /w/z.r~ /'C/f/C . 1 •The variance, if granted, will not a ter the essem a! character of the locality 4."Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under tne terms of the Zoning Chapter.* __________________________________________________ #30 30 Page 3 of 3 •The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a conven.ence to the applicant, but is necessa^ to alleviate demonst'-able ha ’-dsh p or d fficulty." c* // rr _ZZ__ Hardship Statement Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be described in the above entena, describe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance With Zoning Ordinance requirements in the fol'owing lines (attach add«t onal sheets if necessary) ©cHr««i>(T "p RARDCOVER CALCEXATION WORKShxilT SETBACK ZONE; (CIRCLE ONE) f,xi?rnNc hardco ver in zone 75-250*2S0-500'500-1000' A. Houis uoS LtnrA Wid'Ji S.F. S.F. SF. B. Cans* C. Driveway S.F. SF. D. Sidewalk S.F. S.F. E. Pati»T)eek SF. S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic SF. SF S.F. C. Other ifc-h UAll IV7 /f, yg V SF. ppnprxpn HAPOCOVER IN ZONE wo^ A. House Un|3i S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Carage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck S.F S.F. S.F. S.F. 377 SF. SF. F. Landscape Underlain By Plasdc S.F. SF. S.F. G. Odter total prop St?ar £a in zone ^rc * B______X ITO • \>«0* SJ. A I* S.F. B _ ».o #303 A. .4. HAR^ -O'vtR CALCLXATION WORX5E T SETBACK ZONZ: (CIRCLE ONE) O-TF m-CTTNC: PtRDCQVER T>' ZONE A. Kcia# ______________ X B. 0»n|t c Drivf^»y p. Sidcw»3c E. P*UaTJetk F. Undscipt Underlain By Ptutie C. Other Q.*\. U.Vl TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE * B ____ X X X X X X X X X X too pP^pyyFn HARDTOVER in ZOPtE A. Home ______________*WMdi B. Cante C Driveway D. Sidewalk E- PxiWDeek Uaderlan By Pltsic a Odier total hardcover in zone total property area in zone - B ____ ■3O-10C0' 1031. SF. 57. SI. *2.6*02, S7. S7. ZZ.9 VT S7. 5F. SF. . SF. SF. ■ SF. ■ S.F. S.F. / ■ S.F. B SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. -SF _S.F. SF. SF. SF. 5.r. S* I v.l •SF. A SF. B % 1 5/»5/o'^ 1 lUNOATE yiMOM HENNI-l*INtOUNrY PROPERIY INPORMATIONSYSILM PROPERTY OWNERS LISP ]l IOIIUMI00O4 PROP AOOR lOM WtLUJW OR S OWNER NAMe L R KLOMUIESAIA KLOMUIES TAXPAYER UNOSAY r</1l ANNA KLOMUILS NAMOADUR 1000 WILLOW OR S WAYZATAMN UJ9I M IOIIOOIW06 PROP AOOR JIM rRLNCII LAKE RO OWNER name ERICSOORRELL TAXPAYLR ERICSCORRELL NAMDADDR fR1J«C»* LA^E RO WAYMIAMN JSJ9I » 101172)210009 PROPADDR JD) CARRIAGE LA OWNER NAME bCOTI A NANCY REIO taxpayer !»con reid NAME/AOOR 2IM CARRIAGE LA WAYZATAMN JM9I 3i 1011711230004 PROP AOOR 3« AUURESS UNASSICNLU OWNER NAME CLARK J WINSLOW LT AL TAXPAYER SHARON A Cl>RK WINSIjOW NAME/ADOK i>0} FRENCH CREEK CTK WAYZATAMN 33)91 J8 101177)2)0003 PROP ADOR J« ADDRESS UNASSIGNLO OWNER NAME KCANLUX TAXPAYER RODEKICA NANCY LUX NAMTMDDR ‘209 FRENC H CREEK DR WAV/AIAMN 33)91 ]| 101172)240012 PROPADDR 1003 WILLOW OKS OWNLRNAME MARIIIA LSPLNCER taxpayer MARTHA ALICE UKillSI’ENCtH NAME/ADDK P 0 ^0* CRYSIASUIIAYMN 55313 31 101172)2400)0 PROPADDR 121) BRIARSr OWNER NAME T E FRANK ABE FRANK TAXPAYER THOMAS A BAKIIAKA FRANK NAMUADDH 12)3 BRIAR ST WAYZA1AMN 33391 )B 101172)2400)4 PROP ADUR 1033 WILLOW OK S OWNLRNAME OAJKAYE IAXPAVEK R A JOAN KAYE NAME/ADDR 1033 WILLOW DR WAV/AIAMN 35)91 )l 101172)2400)7 PROPADDR 2123 CARRlAtH.I> ONVNIJINAMn K ASIIIOLLYAK AMALETTA TAXPAYER KIRKSIIIBLEYAKIMMXLEIIA NAMLJADUR 2123 CARRIAGE LA WAYZATAMN 33391 ICFRTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENIEU ARE AN A(XURATli AND ____ TRUE RhPRESEN FATlON OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON 1 HE RECORDS OF T ME HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICTiS DEPARIMEhTT. TOTHE UF5T OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF liUtPAKIMtWI, lu iimuwi ^ nAi i uv ^ 7/ O CQo CO ©cHlBir Hennepin Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department #3U30Parcel Information •> ' Parctrt ID 1011723240012 ■ k HouM Number 1005 - j . :'8trMtNam«mi4JdWOpt;4.\^^ ■ ''ms /s n«e <ega^ recorded m«p. n rwpitsmils aeon^ston^Mjrrilsifcn- . . ^rfote<hxnCffy/Covn(y.o«xfStit»rDe(fa>itfKy«iMa>itfc<^ V raE flOA-Msa 11 OctoOct 2004 p»3« 1 of 3 Dale AppNcalion Received: 09-2MM Dale AppUcalion Cooskkrrd ai Complete: 1IMI8-04 60-Dajr Review Period Eipire*: 12-08-04 From: Date: Subject: Chair Rahn and Planning Commisbion Members Ron Moorsc. City Administrator Melanie Curtis, City Planner |[(/ ^ October 11. 2004 04-3058, Timothy Zu^an. 3970 North Shore Dr, - Variance - public hearing Zoning District: LR-IC, One Family Lakrshore Residential, 0.5 acre/100' Lot Area: 0.23 acre (10,000 s.f) Lot Width: SO' Afi>tication Summary: The applicant is requesting hardcov cr, lot area and lot width variances in order to build a new 1,350 s.f. single family home on a lot 10,000 s.f. in area and SO’ in width where 21,780 s.f. in area and 100' in width arc required and hardcover within the 75’- 250’ setback of 36% where 25% is normally required. Staff Rtcommeudation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the lot area and lot width variances and approval of a level of hardcover variance as the Planning Commission deems appropriate. Hardship Exisling lot area and width Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-350. Area, height, lot width and yard requirements. (b) Lots. The following minimum requirements sliall be obserxed: 1 Lot Am (acre) Lot Width (f«t|Front Y»rd (feet) Side Yird (feet I Real YvJ (feet) Side Yard Adjacent to Street (feet) loi 100 30 10 30 15 Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (b) Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OMWL, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Between 250 feet and 500 feel of the OHWI. there shall be no greater than 30 percent hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1,000 feel of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 35 percent hardcover. List of Exhibits A. Application B. Hardship Documentation Form C. Existing & Proposed Surx ey/Site Plan D. Submitted Hardcover Calculations E. Alternate Site Plan F. Property Owners List G. Plat Map FlLEf04-30M 11 October ?0O« P»9e 2 O' 3 BackgrovBd Timothy Zu'art is the applicant and property owTicr of 3970 North Shore Diive. Mr Zwart has proposed to rebuild a new single family home on his property. In order to do so lot width and lot area variances are required. The applicant has also requested a hardcover variance within the 75’ - 250 ’ setback in order to place his home 112 ’ from North Shore Drive. LOT ANALYSIS WORSIIEET Lot ArcaAVidth: LR-IC Lot Area Lot Width Required 21.780 s f. (0 5 acre)100’ Actual 10.000 s f. (0 23 acre)50* Setbacks: LR-IC Required Existiae Proposed Front 30’26.5’ (house) 18.5’(deck)112 ’ Rear 30’136 ’41 ’ (house) 10 ’(shed) Wcsi Side 10*26 5’10 ’ East Side 10’4.6 ’10 ’(house) 10 ’(shed) Stnictural Coverage: Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverace 10.000 s.f. (0 23 acre)Allowed 1,500 s f. (15%) Proposed: 1,091 s.f (11%) Hardcover Calculaiioii*: Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existiag Hardcover Proposed Hanicovrr 75-250 6250 s f 1562 5 s.f (25%)I/I2274 s.f (36 %) 250 - 500 3750 $.f 1125 s f (30^.) s.f* (%) 1098 s.f (29%) * After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Hardcover Variance The applicant is requesting a 75’> 250 ’ hardcover variance for 36% hardcover where only 25% is normally allowed. The proposal is for a front yard setback of 112' from North - i. FILE KMOOSa 11 OcloMf2004 Pag* 3 ol 3 Shore Drive for the new residence with a 10’ x 12* shed behind. The location of the proposed home is set far back on the lot requiring a 112 driveway which results in 1856 s.f. of 75 ’ - 250 ’ hardcover. The driveway could be reduced slightly in width in order to achieve a slight reduction in hardcover as I have indicated in Exhibit F. Lot Area A Lot Width Variance The applicant ’s lot has 50 ’ in width and 10,000 s.f. or 0.23 acre in area where the LR*1C requirement is 0.5 acre and 100 ’ in width. Variances are required in order to build a new residence on the property. The applicant has proposed a 1,350 s.f. home which meets the zoning district setbacks. Hardship Statement Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit D, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analyses /« CMuMrfiwf appfiemtiom for tmriamet, Hte Hmmlnt Commtalon thail cvmUer the effect of the proposed tmritmee upon the hemkk, sefety mnd wefftre of the comomotty, extuiog ond amiMpaied troffk eoodlttotis, tight omd otr, dmttger of fire, risk to the public lafety, mod the effect on ‘•oluc of property tm the turromuibtg oreo. The Floimlng Commission shotl consider recommending appro ml frr toriance: from ate Uterol proiisions of fhe Zoning Code In Instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship boemuse of circumstances unique to the individual preperty under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it Is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds that there is hardship to recommend approval of the lot w idth and lot area variances, and should the Planning Commission find that there is a hardship present in order to justify granting some level of hardcover variance for the 75 ’* 250 ’ setback an appropriate level should be discussed. Issues for Considcratioo Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff RccoaBBendatioa Planning Staff recommends approval of the lot area and lot width variances. City of Orono Variance Application Street Address 2750 Ker.ey Parkway Ofcno. VN 55355 Man 952-243-46CO fax 952>249-4616 Mad.ng Address P O Bex 66 Crystal 3ay. MN 5532:-:C55 Apc'icaticn # Date Recaiveel /^ipj Qi-l Ameunt Pa d Staff /.* ■/’/ / /'//:- Fee _^C0 _________ RerewalKerewai S3 03 _____________ After-tne-*sct St 233 D:-j; e Fee Th'S apolcaton (orm must be compietea n fj3 Aep ear.t wiii be rot '>€3 w,tr.*r 13 cays as to tre status of ire appication Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: Property Idenljfxatior. Number (PIN): (Attach legal descnpiicn to application if not mcl-dcd on the survey )I wv 9W>*^S«W»» SW ** •■W* OIWWWWW was »• « W J / Date Property Acquired (month/year); □ Yes. I own the adjacent parcels. Present use of property: □ Residential □ Otner ____________________________ Zoning District / C - _________ APPLICANTJNFORMATION: (Complete legal ns-es and manta ’ ^status required fo' each interested party) Name: .. C~ 7L ' StAJOi^_ / Phone (home); Address: Email. Phone (work) Fax- OWNER INFORMATION: (Corrptete legal names e*3 rrartai status reqj.rea for eacn irterestea party) Name Phone (home): Address- ___ Email: Phone (work) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Est.mated Project Cost Describe the request m detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): ~r^ ^ .1.1 S Z'Sl .c" 'Sf', L 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 Applicat on Form Completed Ha-dship Documentation Foim Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150 of the subject property, lab^s^i^ piat mac List, labels and map may be oh ^ined from f.ennepin County Department or Finarce, Government Center. A-603 300 South o Street, Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting all the requirements listed w'thin this packet, including hardcover calculations Also provide one copy 8 5 " x 11' or ir X 17” for reproduction Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet) Topographic survey - including existing and proposed elevations Provide ore copy 8 5" x ir or 11” X 17" for reproduction Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8 5” x 11' or 11” x 17 ) Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. * APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information requred or requestei^lip ^ia^nirg Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered m the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and cemfies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knov;ledge. The applicant recognizes that hc/she is solely responsible tor 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 thesrJieo|«MBt for denial of the request regardless of its potential merit Applicant's Signature: Applicant's Signature; Date Date 2 / '/ OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknov/Iedges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members for purpeies of investigation and verification of this request. ^ ^ Owner ’s Signature; Owner ’s Signature Date: Date /•'V Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Comm-ssion Meeting Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements ti.* have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. j i Page 1 of3 HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application will not be considered complete or placed cn any meeting agendas u''M t^is form ;s complete and submitted to the City Minnesota State Statue Section 394.27. Subdivision 7 requ-res that a rardsh.p te demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted The hardship must be unique to the property as variances run with the .id and not the land owner. Personal and econcm>c situat’ons are not considered valid hardships in order for an application to be hea'd by \ne Planning Commission and City Courc:l a hardship having rrert must te demonstrated HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP? Th.s form has 12 points outlm.ng the bas.s City staff uses to deterrr. re if a hardshp exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community To prove a hardship, address all the relevant pemts listed below and answer them as dearly as possible Since you are requesting the cede except.cn. you have the burden of proving that the variance is Justified. Tne information the City receives s what is used in determining a denial or approval 'ecomme-'dation If you leave sometm-g out it will rot be cor.sicered Please address each cf these hardship ente*' a as they relate to tne request (some m.ay rot apply) 1. “The prope.iy m question cannot be put to a reasonable use 'f used under conditions a'lov^ed by the official controls " ^ ^ fj <"... ^r>~r < V ^ “The plight of the landowner is due to arcumstances unique to his property not created by th^landowner.' / /» /• f r '7. .!» . •' n •. w 3 “The variance, if granted, will not aite' the essentia' character of the locality *. t./ «Vn <• r f r.^ t f yfC, - ■ “Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for tne property exists under the teims of the Zoning Chapter." I \ .7 S .T. Page 2 of 3 •Undue hardship also includes, out is not limited to. inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be grantedjcr ear.h sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes. Section 11SJ C3. Subd 2. whe'* harmony with Ujis Chapter." a f> C> : f //'C •The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located * ___________________________________________________ “The Board or Counal may pernr.it as a variance the temporary use cf a one-^amily dwelling as a two-family dwelling * e. < t.'c_______^_________________________________________ •The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to 8uch.property or immediately adjoining property “ 9. “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." ___________________________________________________ 10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preserval cn and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." y-».^ . /> 7^ •• /( ^ i- •The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any ether respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code" y // ^ £'T~ ____________________________________________________________ #r- EAST 50.00 . C\ 8 8rM 11 \umsmut i9c«**> ar 139 K'MCii uc \ \ ^ oosTwCy^ CAiucr v:; CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR TIM ZWART OF LOT 11. HICKORY HILL HENNEPIN COUNTY. f/INNESOTA LCC*L D£SCi?PT>CN or Pi^tVSES.- Let 11, HCKC«r rCLL 0 d#''0tes i''oe' marker Beorings enown ore Bosed upon or» osiurreo tfolurr Th» turvey iterds la s^ow t‘‘e BOcroaries o' cfcove descr oed p-operty. tf'# of on •I ilmg hocse ond ^acge, ond the locotipr* of ol vitio'e *ncrdco*ef" me'ecr’. *t oce» not pu^pcrt to »ho» orry ether .n,;3'owe-en:» o' e-coochmerts '-WEST 50.00 • H.C.S.A.H. NO. 19 • k. flDmi|tenioaH.Nie ^ ■UHBU.an.Kun 1 m*t mVt M !■ inf. •»■*•••»*«« »•*- iW f9 M 1 fi • Mr Iffumti CM ■< WwM ^1--20* M an 9 M S!«t 9 QATf 5-1-01 ^ mmmami mbulbui ^ MKOVIWI jam *0 01-147 ilk.!«I-M7 &q4rTlfJ&l ~T iaa, UA1U)C0VER CALCULAT10> \\0PJCSJ1£ET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A, House LcflCJi 8- Ctrage C Dnsesviy O. Sidewalk E. Ptho/Dcck F. Lindscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric G. Other 0.75* TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A - B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A Ho.'se ______________ L*n(th \l.p B. Garage C- Dhveway O. Sidewalk E. PaiicOeck 75-250' C2^0»S0j^ 500-1000* X 100 WiCiH lO.Q SF Sr SF SF SF SF. ,SF SF >F SF SF SF. SF SF, Vs etr, or. Muw'-i: .SF. , o “ XtiiZul SF SF SF SF -^ST 50.00 • / -J: I /-■ §ooCM PROPOSED' 15,55 "5^'^ ^----qiOUSE ^ N, T wtl&n fc: CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR TIMOTHY L. ZWART f' of lot 11. HICKORY HILL / HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA 5R0PCS£0 G“?AG£pr^cposra tcp or focnoatijn-sss 2 s 8 ?s f/t legal DESCPPT iCN pp-:\.<5ES Lot .T. HC<0Pr KlL 0 der^otes '"O'! rrorke' ___ cerotes enistm^ contour i'’«. fTOfTr city «rops ce"'3tej c'3pc$ed co-'tcj*' 'f'e Bewngj sno.n ore Dcsed upo^ 3s»u-ed sot.i'n T*> j *u'v*y t*’* souic:* e» of t^e oeove cescr t#a SToptfty z•^ t-« prcpcsea 'occt 0*' of o prcsoses mcjic ctiS s^e3 th«reon tt dees "Dt ou'part to Sfio« cny ct'’*' ir*prove'r«''(t$ of ec'c'tocfv^-ents WEST 50.00- y • H.C.S.A.H. NO. 19 • NORTH SHORE DRIVE -(|)- GRONBERG AND *»^ ■• **^ "^ ^ **■ ®* “"*•***■ r»20 ’ ASSOCIATES. INC.0*Tfz_^ CO»«M.1«lOIM^iAi »-21-04 y A«8n**VAN*«AS ■uf y y y-y m__«i«0 -------WfKMQM Kiw— t1ti9 04-363 /\L-naewATF PUM'f Fo/~ Otyvfes/AV HUNUAM. inv.'UM Ml NNi i*iN (ouviYPRorr^n imormaiion svsn m PKOl ’LKIYOWNI RS LISI PAUC I II oiin^miMjii) PROrAUM Jl AOPRCSS lINASSWiNIUJ OWNLK NAME Cl R LA ^UriEKCi AMR LANDIIl RG rAXPAYER (MIFRAMARIERLANDOIRG HAMPyADOR IM MAPLE PL MOU.''n»iN I51M )l 0»II7?)POO)J PRUPAODR 31 ADDRESS UNASSIGNLD OWNER name G R MNDIIERG AMR LANDDI.KG TAXPAYER GAU: R A MARIE R LANDllEKti NAME/ADDR IM5 MAPLE PL ^ MOUND MN M3M 31 0III771310O63 ^PROPADDR mSMINNIEAVG "OWNER NAME T E A EII MANWAHRI M X TAXPAYER tony E A USA II MANWARRI N Inamuaddr m3 MINNIE avf MOUND MN 333M 31 0111731)10061 PRUPAUIM 1970 NOR1IIMIORE UK OWNER NAME HMOTIIY E ZWAR f TAXPAYER TIMOIMYLZWARI NAME/AOOR WIO NORTH SHORE. DR MOUND MN M164 II 0III771130UM PROP ADDR 1360 NOR III ARM DR OWNER NAME PAIRCIA M LAWLESS TAXPAYER PAIRICIA LAWLESS NAMiyADDR I3M NG^TII ARM DR MOUND MN 33)61 31 i;ilT3)270U09 PROP ADDR 3993 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME RUOLRT I) PIEILR TAXPAYER ROBERT UPIEPER NAME/ADDR 3993 NOROI SHORE DR URONOMN 33)64 L )• 0lll?7l)MXni PROP ADDR 31 AODRISSUNASSR.NI D OWN! K NAME U R lANDTII RG AMR LANDIIl RG TAXPAYER GALL R A MARIE RLANDUIRG NAMt/ADUK 1345 MAPI E PL MOUND MN 33)64 31 0III72)))00)4 PROP ADDR II AllUKISSUNASSKiNI.I) OWNER NAME G RI ANOHERG AMR LANDBliRO TAXPA' I » gale R a MARIE R I ANOHERG NAEAE/ADDR 1343 MAPI E PE MOUND MN 33364 II Ul 1172) DOOM PROP ADDR 1343 MINNII AVL OWNER NAME DIANE EEC DUNIAP TAXPAYER DIANEEIE. UUNI AP NAMOADDM 1343 MINNIE AVL MOUND MN 3DM D OIII73DI0069 PROP ADDR VrtO NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME LFAII MARIE VK KERMAN lAXPAYER EEAHMVKMRMAN NAME/ADDR NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 33161 )« (I3II;MI)UU?4 PROP ADDR 1330 NOR III ARM DR OWNLK NAME MARGAKEl PIE^OIA TAXPAYER MAROARinPUTOLA NAMUAODR 1330 NOR III ARM OR MOUND MN 33)64 )i oxiir2)))no)2 PROP ADDR )l ADDRtSMJNASSIGNf D OWNER NAME O R I^NDHEKG AMR IjSSOHERG lAXPAYER gale ; R X MARIE R UNOHERC NAMI jADDR 1343 MAPI I pi MOUND MN 33)(>4 )l 0lli;’D!(IO)3 PROP ADDR )l ADDRESS IJNASDGNED OWNER NAME G R UNOHERG AMR lANDUl RG 1AXPAYI R DAI ERA MARIE R IANDHI RO NA 1EMODR 1343 MAPI I PI. MOUND MN 33)64 )l 0»II7.’M»0067 PROP ADDR )930 NOR HI SHORE DR OWN! P NAME R IMXHON A M HOIXOMIIE TAXPAVI R RAOUL HOOION/MUEEY HOUXIMIIE NAME.'AOOR 1930 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 33)64 II 0SII72)n007| PROP ADDR 1370 NORTH ARM DR OWNER NAME MARY K RK E TAXPAYER MARYKRKL NAMUADUR 1370 NOH III AHSUJK MOUND MN 33164 V<v.. I ID )S 1«II7*1))0<J73 PROP ADDR 1340 NORTH ARM DR OWNER NAME EDDIE A UNtXiREN TAXPAYER EDDlEALINlXiREN NA6TE/ADDR •'«> NOR III ARM DR MOUND MN 33)64 c J ^ 4 Dale Appllcalioa Received: 9<2I*(M Dace Application Considered as Complcle: 9-21-IM 60*Day Review Period Etpircs: lt>2l4M Chair Rahn and Planning Conunissioners Ron Nfoorsc, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Mike GafTron, Planning Director, October 11,2004 ^04-3059 James Render, 1335 Tonkawa Road - CUP - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IC Single Family Lakeshorc Residential, 1/2-acre miii. 0.80 acres Application Summary: Applicant requests CUP approval for a cupola extending from the eastc' roof peak of the residence. Staff Recommendation: Approval as presented. List of Exhibits A • Application & Description of Request D • Survey / Site Plan C - Elevation View D • Airphotos of Proposed Location E - Staff Sketch Showing Relationship to Neighboring Properties F • Plat Map G • Property Owners List Pertinent Code Section Section 78-1366: Height of Structures (A) Tlie heiglil limitations imposed by other provisions of this Chapter may be increased by conditional use permit by 50 percent when applied to the following structures: 1.Church spires.8.Flav poles. 2.Belfries.9.Chimneys. 3.Cupolas and domes which 10.Smokestacks. do not contain usable space 11.Parapet walls extending not more than 4.Monuments.three feet above height of the building. 5.Water towers.12.Cooling towers. 6.Fire and hose lowers.13.Elevator penthouses 7.Observation towers. iB) Heights in excess of those allowed under Subsection A above for the uses enumerated in that subsection may be permitted only by conditional use permit granted pursuant to the procedures as set forth in Article V, Division 2 of this Chapter. lit Ld4lt< ••*•3059 1335 ToakjMa Koad OclalMr II. 2004 Pit«2 DUcnslioB The City Council rcMCwcd the hciglil issue for this proposed residence in Sepiemher as an appc.il of an adminisuativc decision to deny a building pcmui based on exccssis e hciglit. Counc il cone luded that the height measurement policy using the average of the higlicsi \Miidow and the peak, was \ alid and appropriate. Council also concluded that the lower measuring point should be establislied at 940’, wliich matched the original grade at the west side of the cunent lot before the adjoining home w as ra/ed. Council suggested that the proposed design could be revised to meet the hciglit code, and applicant could make revisions to the peak feature and apply for a CUP for a cupola under Section ?8-1 306 CUP Standards. Section 78-1366 docs not contain any specific standards for approval of a CUP, but does reference the general Conditional Use Permit standards of Arucle V. Di\ ision 2 (Sections 78-911 thru 78- 922). The pertinent e.xcerpt is 78-916(a) which states: (I) Tlic flaiilliNC^9"i'**tul«a ma> rrcommciHl and theCouncil ma> t^anl a rondlllonal u%r |>rrmil at Ihr uvr pcmiil« at applirti for or in modlflrd form, if on the batit of (hr applic allon and ibe rt idrncr tubmiiird. ihc Clly makrt ibc follow in| flndinKt: Thai lh« propntrd location of the conditional utc it in accord with the objcctitn of tbit Chapter and the purpotet of the dittrict in w hich the tite it located and Comprehentlte Municipal Plan; I hat the propoted iocalion of the conditionai ute and the propoted condition under w hich II w ould be operated or maintained w ouid not be detrimental to the public health, tafett or welfare, or materially injuriout to properties or iniprotementt in Ihc ticinil); and. That the propoted conditional utewillcomplt with each of the applicable protitiont of thit Chapter. Staff IS on record as being reluctant to support this application, based on a pa^t history of fielding con^)lainls by residents, Planning Comnussioners and Couixil members about cxccssin c residential building heists in the City. How c\cr, ifPlanning Commission concludes that any negative unpacts of the e.xcess height associated w iih the cupola can be suitably mitigated by attaching reasonable conditions to an approval, or ifPlanmng Commission finds that there are no ncgain c imp Kts associated w iili the proposal, then a recommendation for approval may be in order. Comp Plan Policies. The Conununity .Management Plan (CMP) in P ut 3 A, the Env ironinenial Protection Plan, states the follow ing policy under “Urban Policies for Na'ural Resource .Managemcnf “2.Retentioo ofailural vcgelalion w ill limit the impact of urbaoUatlon as vbible from the lake. Building heights w ill be limned to less Uian tlie typical tree height .Minimum green belts will be provided with prohibitions against clearcutting or excessi%e thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation w ill be preserv cd on slopes. Retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in w hich case they will be screened with natural vegetation.” ■04-3059 I33S Tooka^a Koad October ll.20b« rag* 2 DbcHikioa The CityCouncil rcMcwcd the height issue for this proposed residence in September as an appeal of an administrative decision to deny a building permit based on exccssi\ e haghl. Council concluded that the height measurement policy using the average of the highest w indow and the peak, was valid and appropriate. Council also coiKluded that the lower measuring point should be established at 94U*. which matched the original grade at the w est side of the current lot before the adjoimng home w as ra/ed. Council suggested that the proposed design could be revised to meet the height code, and applicant could make revisions to the peak feature and apply for a CUP for a cupola under Section 78-1 3b6. CUP Standards. Section 78-1366 does not contain any specific standards for approval of a CLP, but docs reference the general Conditional Use Permit standards of .Article V. DiMSion 2 (Sections 78*911 thru 78* 922). The pertinent c.xcerpt is 78-916(a) which states; (a) The FUnnlngCommiitlon ma> recommend and IheCouncil ma> grant a condiilonal ute permit at the ute permit %* at applied for or in modified form, if on ihe batit of Ihe appiicaiion and the et idrnce tubmiilrd, lii* Cll> makci ihc follotting flndingt: That the propntrd location of the conditional ute it in accord Mith the ub)cclitet of thii Chapter and the purpotes of the dittrict In tthich the tit* it located and Comprchcntlt* Municipal Plan; I hat the propoted localion of the conditional ute and the propoted condition under tt hich it would be operated or maintained would not be delriinenlal to Ihe public heatih, tafett or welfare, or materially injuriout to propertiet or improtemcnlt in the ticinll); and. Thai Ihe propoted conditional ute w III comply w iih each of the applicable prot itiont of ihit Chapter. Staff is on record as being reluctant to support tins application, based on a past history of fielding complaints by residents. Planning Commissioners and Council members i^ut exccssix e residential building heights in the City. How ever, if Planning Commission conclude that any negative unpacts of tlie excess height associated w iih the cupola can be suitably mitigated by attaching reasonable condiiions to an approx ol, or if Planmng Commission finds that there are no negam e unpacts associated w itii Uic proposal, then a rcconuncndation for approval may be m order. Comp Plan Policies . The Community .Management Plan (CMP) m Part 3 A, tlie Environmental Protection Plan, states the follow ing policy under “Urban Policies for Natural Resource .Management'* -2.Retrotiofl of aamral vegetatkHi w ill Unit the impact of urbaniaotioo as visible from Ibe lake. Building heights will be limited to less than the typical tree height Minunum green belts will be provided with prohibitions against clearcumng or excessixethumingof vegetation. Natural vegetatxm w ill be preserved on slopes. Retaining w alls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in w hich case they will be screened with natural vegeution.** r-- MM>3059 1335 Tonkawi Road October II. 3004 f*|t3 Cupola Heiehi Perspectives. The proposed cupola will have a peak elevation of just under 983’. The bulk of the proposed house will have a peak at 966'-96T, or 3’ below that of Render's existing house just to the cast The adjacent Fasching residence to the immediate w est and slightly uphill from this propert)', has a continuous peak elevation of978*. Tlie new house at 34-10 North Shore Drive, uphill and to immediate southwest of the site, has a confomiing gable roof ss-stem w ith a peak 40*-*- in length at an elevation of 9S0*, or just 3' below the proposed cupola. Staff estimates that typical tree height in the neighborhood ranges from 40* to 70^, with a few mature trees probably in the 80' range. The canopy elevation as viewed from a distance probably is in the 970’-990' range. The lot itself is somewhat open, such that from certain angles the peak ma>- be more \isiblc than from others. As viewed from the west side ofNorih Arm Bay (Loma Linda access), applicant ’s existing house appears to be perhaps 10-20' below the general area canopy. The visual impact of the heiglit of the cupola will be somewhat softened by the higher natural topography of die surround ing neighborhood, and by the higher trees in the immediate ncighborixxxl. Slaffw ould conclude that from a distance, from most angles, the cupola peak will not extend higher than the general canopy of the area, alihougli from certain angles it may be visible througli openings in the canopy. Issues for Consideration 1 . Docs Planning Commission have any specific concerns with the proposed cupola? 2. Will there be any impacts to the surrounding ncigjiborhood if this request is approved? If so. w hat reasonable conditions can be established that will mitigate those impacts? Staff Kecommendation Staff recommends approval of the CUP to allow construction ofacupola extending b.7 feet above the peak of the house per the submitted plans. Planning Commission should determine v\ heihcr any specific conditions need to be added to the recommendation. Vvi.v A/ Application# Date Received *7/2 / Amount Paid Sicr.c oc CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address_____/^ 5‘ja Type of Application to be Filed Prrinoptx/ Irlontifiratinn Niimhpr Ac.A Q-gc./ Type Of Application to be hiied______ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ^ Lt -S. A 4 1 OS' - // 7 • COM APPLICANT Name ^ V 7/ £ 7Phone (home). Address Phone(work) __City (0 ■» "-i - jryy- Zip VI OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _________________________ Phone (home). Address_____ 3aJfiProperty Acquired_____A-/g^ /V9y (S^(do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Phone (v/ork) _ City______ (month/year) FEES --CON S DITIONAL USE PERMITS - $600 00 Residential Accessory Use $600.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $600.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $600.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg $600.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $600.00 Land Alteration + Permit ____Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $250.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) Afler*the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS ______$600.00 Commercial Site Plan Reviev/ (♦ consultant fees) ______$600.00 Vacation _______$600.00 Easement Vacation _______$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ______$600.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ______$600.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _______$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule j REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. ‘ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance, Government Center, A-603 300 South 6‘^ Street, Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for ’ survey information. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations "involve changes in elevation (grades). _ List of the legal names (include manta! status) of all persons with an interest in "the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) If not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). '* As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 3 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS AND 1 COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (If X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require scaled drawings of all documents, plans, etc to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:_____________________________Date__________________ applicants SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Date ihjjij.Applicant’s signatyre^ OWNER S SIGNAT^ The owner hereby EWmowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of Investigation and verification of this request. DateOwner’s siqnafbfcl!^^_______ __ Applicant must have^TsiEmittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting issidn MMtii rewow^ee planning Commissiij^ MMtings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled rewow^eetings 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 piace and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. ^ ^ Crons'’ t ■iJli‘LJ Description of Request Applicant requests a conditional use permit to construct a cupola 7 feet high by 10 feet wide at iu base atop a single family residential structure to be built at 1335 Tonkawa Road, Orono Minnesota. Sec attached plan for exact location and detail. / /CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR . JAMES D. RENDER OF LOT 2. BLOCK 1. TONKAWA SHORES 2ND ADD f. HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA V SHMOJC AS SNmW ON TIC PLAT & n.VSMND's FAIW-%^ '/'V J V/> //•-V* SHMO^ AS LOCATED C*f D-21-n / VV / / a-:-V v*vV / X / / / /' ,/^'^-^SURVEY k •“•'a' / / LINE 7 V 4 7.<s"/ EXISTING HOUSE (AS-STAKED) ❖ / / / »■ tniAOiuC'- 7 • t 7 7 PROPOSED « •■flOUS^-ijai;. #ms X rV, \ •\. I 7 BtfclTY « 7 V 7" 47 FA1» A'-'proposed cway / \. BS EXISTING HOUSE \.0^"r'N ICCAL OCSCWIPTIOM or PREMISES . Ul 2. Sleek 1. TCMMM SHORES SCOONO MXHTIGN N » Hi6Hesr f(K4»JLA^ • : Senetee irenmerker fWJ|t Seneiat a>lflie« e^al v<avatlati. even tea level Selim faflb* Sanelet RraRaaeA aeal alaveltae. weae aaa level Selim ..•n--------- Seeetea eelelln« caeteiir Ilea, iman aaa level Salim Aeeelaa RraRaeeS caelayr line, iman eae laval 4alim ■ear I eta ahaan era Saaa4 nfMe an eaauieS Salim. PROPOSCD ELEVATIONS ; 1) Gorogs -(E^Zkiw E^im 2) Top ol foundation — IMl.ll 3) Boiorrant ■ liMJI 4) Firil R oot - B3EJ /••.so' 6R0IIBKB6tiSS0CUTES,INa I itMinr cdnrv thut tmb vum . satcrcAraM. cm k *crt •«t MCPMCS Sr ME OS ISCOI UT OSCCT BJmvBDM AM TNIT I Ml A OAV UOOOD SWHSS0W4. OOCIR Md LMO weffiiiOBi Id I«»y»t n’t cr Maggie r-X /iir IL UF :jUKVLY h UK JAMES D. RENDER OF LOT 2. BLOCK 1, TONKAWA SHORES 2ND ADD /. HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA V vA V. ••/ •• ssw.t'g^gyaj! SHOmuC AS LOCATED OK D-21-98 / JZ'A' \J//.'/ ^••7 X 77 7^ . \ ■&f '■■■■ 7 \/m / ,.• //^'--^SURVEY,'' \ \ / •«'»■• line / / 7:....... X.\ ^ y TV IK- \ / EXISTING HOUSE (AS-STAKED) 7 X ’\'X*--y^ •■ A'-V7'7X proposed y . 7\' iL' 7 7' •\7li ' 7 4 7 % 1 *. ypfwpmio XDRIVtWAY/ 4 7 PAin x--'^ EXISTING ssr HOUSE LECAL DCSCSIPTIW OT PSD4I5ES ; lal 2. Slack 1. TONKMM SHORtS StOONO eOOITlOM HiGMfsr ^tVi*fTV'’f- f (n4#4LA-- '-»/) o : danelea Iran imrkar (KCJ)i daoalsa svlalln| apel alavelian, a»an ate laval dolim moil danalat aroeataC teal aivvallen. a«on avo lava’ dulim -•IT-*.*-: danalat aiiallnt cenlatir lint.frean ata level Calim -(HD : dtnelat a'epa>v4 eonleyr lint, naan a«a laval dalim Baoringt aHoavi orv bated upon an etayrod dvlim TMl tuivair thoat th« boundoriof of Ihv abevt daicr lead prapv'tv and in* propotad local Ion o( e ptopottd houi* thvvion. II eavi ui M— pufpa»t lo vhoa any olhvv inpravaranlv Of oneroachrnonlo PROPOSED CLgVATIONS : 1) Goroge SHSea* 2) Top of foundation »tBtyn 3) Bosement tig?*?l 4) Fir^l rioor [444 T) /•X2ry GRONBERC k ASSOCIATES, INC. .caoitK Docss. wo suMms. sne fudos 445 N. VXLOW DA LONG LAKt. IM 5A356 952-473-4141 I »4euii cteirt t.v»t i.« vi*k ip»r.»«.»rr». no Hv;n’ ■at pnCFAWO w K M iK<* ur «dcT siatav’iCN ohj TH4T I Ad A QUIT LCOlStO PMriSVC».aL tHTMCie A« ItJC SIKT« 'iOP K »»« » "• IT*t or MKtcte V7 lit icoct MAMm C*'l 12-20-03 *m HO 03-500 S'AC.iA^v'rTt^ —•BSw*'41diSlL^------ PillBPiNildfFBCtBfi e-i VI 6"^ / '■ftiwl pdffiUnf tiW futon ■pdlfactor ; a-O TEAj Ard)kects rBSC Render ReiWcnce Dciip Develepaeni Driwinis Sootk EUcriw EkfitiM All L. •mmw-::::;: j:.: *•- |j|ll||PLfJ« JR J *'* ”i11*1 i^i '!i:!ir;!!;!'.:: 111)11 II.•• ii;n lisoi^ i::::|:::: :ti: l^i'ii »ii •*•<• 'JL' i'*!;! 'll w’lii"' li!!! li:! A^.2. lii (Vll 1 Vj iti i ^ <2 ■Residence 335 Tonkawa Road Orono, Minnesota /.\ .i;:. .;>f V- V-./ ■.--E§=«K-:h'^-« - T‘,-r • ------^ Ii»»i ill mm .......................j..................................::.::::::-:;::-*:*.;::::::::v;;;:;::;;;;; S«urH F^c^w^ AI d CTM etUk^ CMfotJK P T A f I f tl f • • J t / 5^ «** .< #''W4- ■■ T' !*•,/■ .'•/ I* > > ^ y / -\# > 1^ ' .V '• / . •:■ \ ‘A 4 •U / V ' ''■ / ' ‘^ ^ ^ Xf> - •?• V .'"^y ■'* • •■-' ,'<■: ^,tV -x •», ... V */f\ $■ k'. :. • m , .. u‘ ■ 'i-v.' . :-.v'^"-.. V J/ ■/ ^v.'v>-,' ■ . ■/ •C*.\ '’■ ; .yi*" y^‘‘ -vVm^Ai !•'('•*-.,.i; . >■<% / % ;1-> <jdl& r ^/isnN6 }'HS TOniom/j*./^iS" -TZJMtcAuM (^t>oes AJ«T rH-flwJ y P/tofocc^ OJfOt^ fAZCWltJi. e^X'ST?M4 ISS^" <TD/^)iiA.Ujii( r RUNDATi MV20M II 0III72)IJ00II ntOPADOR 110) lONKAWAHD UWNKRNAMt NASMITHA1 MSMmiTHSTrik TAXPAYER THOMAS H A NANCY A &MITK NAME/APDR 1103 TONKAWA RU LOMOLAKEMN SUM n OIIITIMNOO) PROP AOOR 3366 NORTH SItORE (M OWNER NAME STATE OP MINNESOTA TAXPAYER ONK REAL ESTATt MOMT NAME/ADDR ATTN Dl.HBIE CURTIN SOOLArAVLTTE RO ST PAUL MN 33133 31 0IIIT2M700II PROPADDR 1333 TONKAWARO OWNER NAME JAMES ORLNOLM TAXPAYER JAMES ORLNOLR NAME/AODR 3120 FOINA INDUSTRIAL BLVD LOINAMN 3343* 31 0III7234300I7 PROP AOOR 3410 NORTH SHORt OR OWNER NAME DANIEL ^ RLCAN A WIIE TAXPAYER OANIILTRIOAN NAMI7ADDR 3410 NORTH SHORE DRIVE WAYZATAMN 33391 31 Ml 1723430020 PROP AOOR 3442 NORTH SIHJRF DR OWNLRNAME GERAU3 J RAY FTAL TAXPAYER GERALD J RAY NAME/ADDR 5442 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 33391 31 MII723430023 PROP AOOR 3430 BIRCH LA OWNER NAME E R ENGUR A R ENGLER TAXPAYER EOWAROR A BONNIE ENGLER NAME/ADDR 5430 BIRCH LA WAYZATAMN 33391 lirNNhPiN coirvn* propthtty information svstlm PR()Pl.HTYOVkNKK.Sl.lS'l PAGE. I 31 0IHI72I4^XWI PROP ADDR 1220 TONKAWA RD OWNER NAME MK'HALl i LIILR1/. TAXPAYER MR HAH 11 HI RIZ NAMUAUUR i WO TONKA WA RO LONG LAKE MN 33336 31 0RII72H201M2 I'HOP AllOR 3198 NORIII SIKIHE DR OWNLRNAME STAELOE MINNUSOIA TAXIAVIR OSRREAI.LSEAII MOMT NAME/AODR ATTN DEHBIE UJREIN 3001AEAVLIEERD SI PAUL MN 33133 31 0011723420009 PROPADDR 31 ADDRE^SS UNASSkiNE.U OWNLRNAME JAMESDRENDER TAXPAYER JAMES D RENDER NAME/AODR SIJOtDENAEKOUSERlALBIVD EDINA MN 33439 II MII72342O0I0 PROPADDR 1333 lONKAWA RD OWNLRNAME MlLHAtLCAIXUNIFASCHlNG lAXPAYLK MR-HALLCA LtJXNIFASTHING NAME/ADDR 0*3 TONKA WA RD WATZAIAMN 33391 II ’•‘.3 31 Ml 1723420012 PROPADDR 013 TONKA WA RD OWNER NAME JAMES 0 RENDER TAXPAYER JAMtSO RENDER NAME/ADDR 1313 TONKAWA RO ORONOMN 53391 38 081172)410016 PROP ADEJR 3400 NOR EH SHORE OR OWNER NAME K R STEIN A DJSTIlN TAXPAYER KENATHRAEXJNNA JSTEIN NAME /AOOR 3400 NOR EM SNORE DR WAYZAEAMN 54)91 O' II MII723t)OOII PROPADDR M20 NOR III SHORE DR OWNER NAMl NANCY A ALEORO taxpayer nancy a ALEORO NAME/ADDR 1420 NOR IH SHORE OR WA5Z.AEAMN 55)91 H Ml 172)410019 PROP ADDR )440 NUKEII S»M)RI. DR OWNI R NAME DAVID J I rNOHI HO TAXPAYER UAVlDiUNDUERO NAME/ADDR 3440 NOREH SHORE DR WAYZAEAMN 55)91 )l 0lll72)4>002l PROP ADDR 3450 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAML WIUEAMCODDEN TAXPAYER WILLIAM C OODLN NAMt/ADUR 3450 NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATAMN 55391 )l 01117234)0022 PROPADDR 3444 NOKUl SMUKI DR OWNER NAME. WILLIAM D ROBINSON TAXPAYER WDROUINSON NAME/ADDR »444 NOR 'H SHORE OR WAYZATAMN 53391 31 Ml 172 3430024 PROP ADOR 3441 NORTH SHORE OR OWNER name j R M LRLER TAXPAYER IAMES A MARY ERLER NAME/ADOR 3441 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 35391 niEt04 3«1 aooo(N«?oo4 Paot 1 0(3 Dale AppIkalhM Rerch'cd: 09-224M Dale Ap^kalioa Cornkterad at ConplHc: ICMM4M M-Day Rr»tew Ptriod F.ip(m: IIMW-M To: Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator From: Melanie Curtis. City Planner -1 |l Dale: 8 October 2004 Sttbjccl: 04-3061. Ciwy Hansen ofliansen Hometcch Inc. on behalf ofDill & Robin Grierson. 1989 Fageracss Point Rd - Variance - public hearing Zoatag INsfrid: I.R-IC, One Family Lakeshnre ResMential, 0.5 acre/100* widlb Lot Area: 0.48 acre (21.217 s.f.) Lot Width: 1 30' (a) OllWL (west) & 135’ @ 75’ setback 69’ (fil OHWL (cast) & 104’ @ 75’ setback Appticatiom Summary: llic applicant is requesting a 75’ - 250’ hardcover variance in order to construct a 35’ x 14 ’ addition to the existing home._______________________ Staff Itecommend^aioit: As part ol any hardcover variance approval the Planning Commission deems appropriate the proposed addition be rc-designed to meet the 75’ lake setback. Hardship The 0- 75 ’ setback existing on two sides of the property limitinn the developable area _________________________________________ Pertinent S^ning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78<1288. Hard cover limitations. (b) Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the Ol IWL, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Between 250 feet and 500 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 30 percent hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 35 percent hardcover. ListorF.ihiliits A. Application B. Hardship Documentation Form C. lixisting & Proposed Survey/Site Plan D. Proposed Elevations E. Submitted Hardcover Calculations F. Aerial Photo G. Property Owners List H. Plat Mop r FILE W4 3061 SOctobef 2004 PigeSof 3 Hardcover Variance The property is located on a point and has lakcshore on two sides. The 0-75’ zone area is 16.455 s.f., while the 75’ 250’ setback zone consists of 4,762 s.f.. The applicant is requesting a hardcover variance in order to construct an addition to the existing home. The proposed addition will increase the hardcover within the 75’ - 250’ area by 490 s.f. or 7*/*. The applicant has proposed that the new addition encroach 7’ into the 75’ setback. Staff feels that the plan could be redesigned to meet the 75’ setback. Additionally, the survey shows a rather large patio located within the 75’ setback that could potentially be removed or reduced should the Planning Commission feel it would be appropriate. The hardcover calculations shown have been adjusted to account for the removal of the driveway which serves the ncighlniring property and removal of fabric or plastic lined landscape areas. The land.scapcd areas account for 1,052 s.f. within the 75’ - 250’ zone ;ind 1,448 s.f. within the O’- 75’ zone. The applicant will remove the hardcover from those areas as part of this request. Hardship Statement Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Fonn attached as F.xliihit B. and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the applic,ition. Hardship Analysis /n con$MeHitg a/^kmHont for rorianct. the PtonmiHg Commttiion shalt coitiUer the effect of the propoted vmrionce upon the health, safely and welfare of the commanity, existhtt aad anticipated traffic condMoru, Htht and ah, danger offire, risk to the paNie safety, and the effect on v«/«ei of property in the sarroandlng area. The Flanning Conunhslon shall conilder recommending approval for variances from the literal provislotu of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement wouid cause tindne hardsh^ because of circumstances unique to the individual property under conslJeratkin, and shall recommend t^proval only when it is demonstrated that such actions wUl be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Planning Staff feels that this property has unique circumstances with regard to the t)-75’ zones and the Planning Commission should determine what level of, if any, hardcover variances are appropriate. Staff d(KS not find a hardship in order to encroach into the 75* setback, and feels that in conjunction with any hardcover variances within the 75’-250' zone all or some amount of the nonconforming hardcover existing within 75* of the lake should be removed. Issues for C'onsidrniuon Arc there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation If the Plaiming Commission feels that the nature of this property on a point is a significant hardship there may be justification for some level of hardcover variance in order to approve this request. City of Orono Variance Application Sfreef Address 2750 Kelley Pathway Orono. MN S5356 Mam 952-249-4600 fax 952-249-4616 Mading Address PO Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-:066 App! cat on # ~ ^^07 Hate Received ______ •.rro'.'nt Paid Staff Fee Renewal vT S600 ■$300 After Ihe-fMt SI.200 Doub e f ee This application form must be completed m fuP App cant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the appucaiion Incomploto applications will not bo placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: , Site Address t^^N Property Identification Number (PIN): (Attach legal description to application if not included on the syryey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year):________□ Yes, I own the adjacent parcels Present use of property: Residential □ Oiner Zoning District: ________________________ APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Comofete legal ns.-es qrd mantal status required for each interested party) Name: ^M f t»^c^_ Phono (home)! ‘jSt ■{ _____________ Phone (work): (r\'L 5v Address Ti2^c* Kray<g.Yit»*T; iffO <T\A»«Ano*jrN ivw Email: ^(< t> «<^i-Fax:*,s/-«is*f <Uro'^ OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names c'd mantal status required for each interested party) Name: (t«.>u ___________________________________________________ Phone (home); •^o\- v.tr^V Phone (work): Address -pr-.foT- Trr> Email _________________Fax; DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary) *TO .CT3 *TC ^ ^ V"T\\V- -At:?C3>~no3 \»aC»w>.'T‘s A»>.u'c As Tc’Cm'^P*»»~T, cf A^yxv\w P-u-iy-;CfM <~..rbF ^Frr«’.«~r /iP.> n. ______Ttf\>/g. h Tc-«;-rX»-**j"r cF taA sc>FT Tt? THC s^Ay #3061 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline dale in order for your application to be processed. V 1 O Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner, i P Completed Application Form Completed Hardship Documentation Form Certified Property Owners List - owners v^ithin 150’ of the subject properly, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance. Government Center. A-603 300 South 6*" Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed sun/eyor). meeting all the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5“ x 11" pr 11 ’ X 17 ” for reproduction. Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet) Topographic survey — including existing and proposed elevations Provide one copy 8 5" x 11" or 11" X 17“ for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 1j" x 17 ‘). J Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project • 'V □ □ a□ APPLICANT ’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that hc/sho Is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon faiiure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of its potential merit. Applicant ’s Signature: Applicant's Signature :■ Date; Date OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request Owner's Signature: Owner's Signature: /C /-Y-t .r- A JLaJL Date Date: 7 • / V V l Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. J c .., ^ ‘ ’•'* V* I. ^ iV'.Vi ir'T; r Page 1 of 3 HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application wilt not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City. '1 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 no* the land owner. Personat and economic situations arc not considered vatid hardships In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Counal a hardship having mer t 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 ar>d how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a hardship, address all tho relevant pants listed below and answer them as clearly as possib ’e Since you arc 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 someth r.g out it will not be considered Please address each of these hardship enteria as they relate to the request (some may not apply): 1. "The properly In question cannot be put to a reasonable use if ucod under conditions allowed by the official controls * fvJn __ •Tho plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner " ro C cl’ •The variance, if granted, will not atter the essentia! character of the locality." s-m-i IM *T>\r Lor.^rno ,j g»>-AuVra ~TVt^ v>J«v •Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter •eaMOi r ■ . . /fV, «<! •h«- -'Tk ir A. , *A . V •rj f 'i-i- I Page 2 of 3 ‘Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06. Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter." *4c>~r_____________________________________________ *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." 7 11. ‘The Board or Counal may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling " 'The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property." -'r.nvV ...... str pwT r\ '• SffjM-vr u.m r.ttw i-vvi-/’r»r“ <-tt r "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." ~TH’1 Vk~ I : * »-V •f ■ ' I •**«» >*V__IT* i« < 'f «». {■•'■I ,___ ‘The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property nght of the applicant." \i FS^ T>i A g’-^^ .ur.u. rv\nC.E^ r^o»ti<g. 'pi.l.i4 , ^ "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 ‘ Oo«.^£CT . _________ fSOBl Page 3 of3 ■Tb® granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difftculty." _______________________ Should you feeTthTh^ cannot fully be described in the above criteria, describe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compl ance with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary): . . JU ^ r VICO ■.s Q- c - r-e ----- V*.' T f i"c.g r p ^j.v. t*-, f..t •ni;^ TH<c-ri.c._ i f L‘ . »■ - V W i ____I •• liUr;; x~! •••• .“ ■ O-t t f"? *« ■ we Apg I r^~pPrV»»«l \'i iiJ "n*r: '% rn'r^tf’*r> W"I f ^ :y“'.1 \ r ^— ------—. - -t,,-----------------’ *_ir • -T-*^- ’ ' r —;-. : . - 3i_i_T7 7-1 ^r~ rTa,: i! w II: iliiilli ',44 ..Tj-rk ^Ji7aV7:4rp7PSiPim s54|4:i4.'nvfe445V^ "■Tik'--’-'4IlTi S51C ata.V,4 iMiaajtefta'jif 'r 1 £: i^»*= .! ■ lY' i :‘t^T uxc ii ^8 a 8 • l|S' *5n NORTH FACING *>^1 HARDCOVER CALCULATIO SETBACK ZONE: (ORCLE ONE) FItlSTIWr: HA«P A. Home IN ZONE (3^HEET 75-JSr BM>r 250-500*50O-I0OT Wid* B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Palio/Deck F. Landscape UnderUin By Plastic O. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____________ A ___________ ma - B B XIOO X 100 -xpzm PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House_____________ LCAftfl WuXb B. Oarage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. PatkVDeck F. Landscape UnderUin By Plastic G. 0*er TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____________• B xlOO SF SF. SF. S.F. S.F. SF. SF. SF S.F iriru) SF. S.F. SF. SF. S.F. H % S.F. SF S.F. na/tb S F 045-1) SF ^ SF. S.F SF SF S.F. S.F. SF 31 If: i r L HARDCOVER CALCULA SETBACK ZONE: (CIMCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOYEK ZOWF. A. Hotac _______ NE) / •*75’ J ONE MEET V^T 75-J5«*2Se-5M*SM-lMir ^4- B. Gmge C Driveway D Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____________ * B A _____________ ♦ B X 100 X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________ X Wi«h B. Garage C. Driveway __ D. Sidewalk E PatioDeck F. Landscape UnderUin By Plastic G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____________xlOO Ml ■B- S.F. S.F. SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. SF S.F. A S F. B 7b H SF. SF. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S F. A SE. B H ( X. w' ,• fk ' , ■’^ . fe'-;-• »m . *.. ^Vir*/ -'• C ^ V, ^••i r ■UN DATE l/n/M*HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE:I 31 iinmiAmn PROP AOOR IW PACERNESS POINT RD OWNER NAME WAORIERSONR R WCRICRSON TAXPAYER WILUAM A GRIERSON NAME/AOOR in« FACERNESS POINT RO WAVEATAMN 5J39I 31 1111723140003 PROPADOR 1917 FACERNESS PO»ITRD OWNER NAME MRMItXERAJL MILLER TAXPAYER MICHAEL RMIIXER A NAME/ADOR iUWTH L MILLER I9«T FACERNESS POINT RD WAVZATAMN 35391 31 1111733140004 PROP ADOR 1915 FACERNESS POINT RO OWNER NAME A IOPHEIM A M V OPHEM TAXPAYER ALAN IOPHEIM NAME/AOOR 19*5 FACERNESS POINT RO WAVZATAMN 53)91 31 IIII7234IOOOI PROP AOOR 1991 EAGERNESS POINT RO OWNER NAME GLASLMiaiREN TAXPAYER GUV L A SAUV L MILLIREN NAME/AOOR '«• FACERNESS POINT RO WAYZATAMN 55)91 OFTHE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMI^nj^ THE BBT OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BEUEF. DATE® f\ • V - AppUcalton Date: September 22,2M4 M-Dty Review Etplratloa (SHe flu ): Nmetnber 21,2004 120 Day Rcvlet« Eiplratien (SubdtvtolM): January 20,200S From: Dau: Subject: ChairRahn & Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Mike Gaffron, Planning October 15,2004 tK>4-3062 “Stonebay Lofts" - Outlot E, STONEBAY ("2670 Kelley Parkway! • Public Hearing: 1) RPUD Amendment / Site Plan & Building Plan Appioval 2) Final Plat Approval Smmmarv of Rcoucit Applicants request an amendment of ihe Stonebay RPUD for changes to llic condominium (“Lofts") building and site plan, requesting final site plan and building plan approvals as well as final plat approval for Outlot E as a single 2.S acre lot for the condominium building. Property Owncr/Dcveloper: John Terrance Homes LLC Planncr/Enginecr: Land form ArchliccI: Architecniral Works Villard, Inc. ]. Staff Recommendation: Planning Commission should review the list of potential issues and determine whether these and/or additional issues require discussion. An option is to review this site plan further at your October work session. Key to your review is to determine whether the major revi.e^ens are acceptable. If Planning Commission concludes that the proposed revisions are ace* “aV then a recommendation for approval would be in order. If Planning Commission concludes tl... one or more of the topics identified in this memo requires further consideration, then tabling wou’.c be appropriate. «04<3062 Sloncbay Lo(t> October IS. 2004 Pagc2 List of Exhibit! A - Application & Letter of request B • Applicants Submittals: 1 - Elevation View Depiction 2 • Comparative Front Elevations 3 - Plan sheets: CO. I ’ Title Sheet Cl.I - Existing Conditions C2.I • Revised Site Plan C3.I - Grading Plan C3.2 - Enlarged Grading Plan C4. / • Driveway Plan and Profile L2.I ■ Ox'crall Landscape Plan 4 - Final Plat Drawings 5 - Building Plans: A-i: Garage & First Level Floor Plans A-2: Second & Third Le\’el Floor Plans A~3: Ele\ations A'4: Unit Plans A’5: Typical Building Sections A-6: Typical Wall Sections C - City Engineer Comments 10-5-04 -D”»-StafFSketelV" Duilding-lleight-C-ioss SecttoirComp arison' E • Excerpts from Original Stonebay RPUD Approvals: 1 - Document Excerpts ^^a^-GencraFC-oncopt Plan Ap proval-RcsoiuttoirK074S5r b) General Development Plan Approval Resolution No. 4915 c) PUD 4 Agreement 2 • Plan Excerpts F - Plat Map G - Property Owners List #04-3062 Stoncbiy Ufll October 15.2004 Page 3 Buildiog Location and Design Changes Please review the applicant’s letter of request. The primary changes to the Lofts building include; 1) Main building peak height is higlicr than originally proposed. 2) The two buildings previously connected only by the underground parking level have been connected above ground by a ‘central core ’ which provides space for a variety of facilities and amenities for the residents. What originally appeared as two separated pcrpardicular buildings w ill now appear as a single L*shaped building. The ‘central core ’ includes a tower w ith peak hciglit of 1084.4', or 10' above the peak of the main rooflinc 3) The originally approved building was 80 feet from the west lot line witlt porches 72’ from that line. The new plan has the building and porches at 74’. 4) Tlic elevation plans Itavc been revised sigirificantly to incoqwratc different amounts and locations for the usage of cultured stone, horizontal lap siding and other facade elements. Building Design and Location Tire tw o onginally proposed 3-siory buildings w ere perpendicular, the front building parallel to Kelley ParkN%aybcingapproximatcly 260’longby75’wide, and the perpendicularbuildingbcingapproximalcly 230* X 75 ‘. These were to share a below -grade garage that connected the two buildings, but were visually separated by a distance of about 40-45 ’. •Central Core ’. Tltc new proposal connects these with anew enclosed “core area’’ to provide space for a number of amenities not provided in the original concept. These include a Hobby room, a Guest Room, a Business Center, a Family Dining room, a large Conununity Room, individual tenant storage cubicles, Activities and Craft rooms, a Library and an Exercise room. My assumption is that any ‘community’ use of these is intended for the condominium owners, not for general Orono community use. Building Length. Wliile the Lofts remain at a total of 62 owner-occupied units, the building now will have a visual front (south) facade of 370’ and an east facade of about 236’. Tlie southeast comer w ill 'riclude a’tower ’ feature extending i O'above the main roof system peak. The building will have essentially flat facades with three-level deck bump-outs, providing some visual relief. 104006} SiMtbay LoRt Ociobcr IS. 2004 Page 4 Tlie building is proposed in approximately the same location as onginally approved; however, the original appioval required an 80* setback at the west end (facing the Public Works site) with an allowance for protruding decks at 72'. The new plan indicates the \isual west end of the bui Iding at 74' from the lot line, with decks for the end units incorporated into the building (See Sheets C2.1 and A-3) Planning Commisuon should consider whether this revision meets the original intent ofmaintaining separation between the Lofts building and the Public Works si’e. Site Circulation . Access to the garages, and the exterior parking layxnit, remain as originally approved. The exterior front parking lot ranges from 3 to 6 feet above street level, with a 3 :1 landscaped slope betw ecu the street sidewalk and the parking area. Tlic g.n age entrances are for tw e way trafTic, w hilc the pai king lot is one-way, w itli angled stalls. northerly 3 sides of the nonh w ing It appears that most of the individual walls will not exceed 4‘, although in some areas there arc three tiers of w all totaling as much as 10’ in height as view cd from the cast or northeast. Tlic City Engineer has indicated that for any wall or wall swein exceeding 4‘ in lit Iglit, a scpar.itc engineering design and detail must be submitted for approval. Tliese walls aie nccessar>' to acconunodate walkout access and an exterior perimeter sidewalk These walls as depicted do not appear to encroach into tlic required 26' wetland setback, I at do result in some fill within the 26' setback zone. This filling was anticipated during the earlier PUD approvals, and is acceptable subject to returning it to a vegetated st.*\;c after w all construction is completed. UuUding Height Original Approval. The Lofts building was originally granted a variance to the 30 ’ RPUD height limit, allowing a 38' defined height. Tlic building height as originally rcxicxvcd by staff used an estimated garage floor level of 1019* and a peak roof elevation at approximately 1066'The .ipplicant has submitted a comparison sheet depicting the south elevations of the preliminarily approved plan and tlic current proposal. While this comparison sheet sliow cd an old garage floor ele\ ation of 1016.S', it docs generally match the original approval with a peak elevation of1066.8'. The onginal PUD approval grants a height variance for this plan for a defined height of 38' measured from “final average grade at high side". Because this is a RPUD, and due to the topographic issues w ith the intent to revise grade over much of the site, the height variance was deemed appropriate. New Proposal. The new proposal has a majority of tlie overall roof peak at an elevation of 1074.4', or oboiit 7.6 feet higher than the original approval. This is dn* to two apparent factors • the addition of 3* in height due to! creasing ceiling heights from 8' to 9*. and the need to have a minimum garage floor elevation of1020^ as a result of final gradingf'stoim water system overflow parameters fix the devclopmenL •04>3062 Stoacbay L«fts Oclobtr IS, 2004 PagtS The turret at the southeast comer will have a peak height of 1084.4 ’, or about 62 ’ above the centerline of Kelley Parkway at tliat comer. Applicants have suggested that grading 3' higher against the soutli facade sliould make up the diflcrcnce, althougli the site grading plans do not clearly indicate this is proposed. With the front parking lot at 926 ’-928’ and the first floor elevation at 931’, there is at least a 3*5’ elevation diflcience to make up betweai the parking lot and the front wall of the building, in a horizontal distance of 10' behind the sidewalk. The bottom line is tliat if the front grade is left at approximately 1029* and the homes each have a 2-3* stairway drop for their walkout doors, the defined height based on using "final average grade at high side** and the “average height of the highest gable" (which is 1068.8* based on the primary roof system and ignoring the tun^t and the other peaks that jut above the main peak) will be 39.8', but if the front grade is brought up V \»it Vtowthe first floor elevation, i c. up to 1030.5 ’, then the defined height w ill be(1068 8- 1030.5»38.3 ’ j.: .»i;pror,imatcly meeting the numerical variance previously approved. From staC. • ^rutX to.ivc, the 7.6 ’ increase in peak heiglit is partially unavoidable due to sue siomiwatcr management c Ktshits, but partially avoidable due to the applicant not initially designing to meet markr deman J:>. Est •: .ihinv a front grade at 1031', or 8'-9’ higher than the road at a point 80 back from the road, seems somewh „ontrived, but perhaps not unexpected given the higli watcrlablcs, minimum stonnwater elevations, and the design that includes three stories plus underground parking. Planning Commission should determine whether the visual impacts of the added heiglit are positively or negatively affected by the increased length of the building. Also consider whether the location within the development and the other uses proposed along Kelley Parkway have an effect on the visual impact of this building. If Plamiing Commission concludes for some reason that the peak heiglit increase of 7.6 ’ is unacceptable, this should be discussed with the developer to detennine what measures can be taken to reduce the height or its impacts. a Bunding Materials Facade. Tlie building facades arc intended to include 40-50®/ o coverage by cultured stone, three difrcrcni styles and shades on various elements of die building (sample boards will be available at the meeting); with the balaiKe to be of fiber cement siding (‘Hardy-board’ t>p). Soffi., fascia and trim will be maintenance free pre-finished metal, shingles will be commercial grade asphalt, and windows are proposed as pre- Cnished metal clad ‘single hung* (my assumption is that these arc casements or sliders). Viatial Rlementi. The architectural renderings provided show 4-pane and 6-pane divided windows Ifaraui^xMit the building, »vith certain building elements using more or fewa panes. These divided windows, the gable end details, half-moon w indows in certain areas, etc. all add to the visual acceptability of the 0O4-3M2 Siontitay Lofts Octob«r IS. 2004 PtftO building, and substitution or exclusion of these feattires would likely reduce the quality of appearance. It should be made clear to the applicants that the City’s expectation and requirement will be to include iD of the detail elements as shown on the renderings and elevation views, in the final building construction. Landscaping, Lighting, Signage, Parking, etc. Landscape Plan . Planning Conunission should review the landscape plan. Preliminary review by staff indicates substantial plantings of trees and shrubs, although the colored architectural rendering docs not match the tree locations as depicted on Sheet L2.1 . Tlic City’s landscaping consultant will be asked to comment. In general, the 37,000 s.f. building requires I deciduous tree per 1,000 s.f. footprint, or 37 such trees. Applicants propose 6 ash, S maple and 13 quaking aspen, plus 4 spruce and 18 ornamental trees (which count 2-1 toward the overstory requirement); doing the math, the total of 37 is met. The building would also require 123 slirubs as a minimum; this standard is more than met, with approximately 600 shrubs shown on the plan. tJ^ting. The developa sliould be asked to describe all outside lighting proposed for this building other tlian the typical street lights, and provide a lighting plan sheet for such lighting. Signage. TIic developa should indicate any identification signage intended for the building. Some site traffic signage is noted on Sheet C2.1; the City Engineer has called out the need for a variety of additional signs (See City Engineer ’s Comment Letter). Parking Requirement . The City has a parking requirement for 2.0 stalls per unit. Staff finds that the plan sets provided indicate a total of 9 1 standard and 2 HC accessible stalls in the garage level; and 2 1 standard and 2 accessible stalls in the defined parking area on site. Adding the 7 parallel stalls directly abutting the site on Kelley Parkvs'ay, the total is 123 stall or 1.98 per unit, rather Uian the 2.1 indicated on the plans The City requiremau is 2.0 stalls per unit; the plan appears to be one short, so applicant sliould define where an additional stall can be found, probably inside the building. Proposed exterior parking meets the required 20* lot line setback. Imncmous Surface Coverage . Impervious surface coverage in the RPUD District is limited to 50%. While Sheet C2.1 indicates the Lofts site has 52.7% imperx ious area, the Stoncbayprojcct in its entirety has an impervious area well below the 50% Umit, so this is not an issue in staffs opinion. Engiaeer*i CoronieaU Please review the City Engineer ’s comments. Exhibit C MM-3M2 SMntkayUfU OcMbtr IS.M04 ra|e7 HaalPUt Outlet E was created specifically for the Lofis,. ad needs to be final platted as a Lot i n order for it to be used as abuilding site. The final platting process est^lishes the necessary perimeter drainage and utility easements which were not required of it as an outlot The required wetland Conservation and Flowage Easement was established during the earlier subdivision approvals, so that need not be required; however, the wetlands should be shown on the new plat drawings. This approval process is functionally approval of Phase 2 of the Stonebay residential development Plrase 2 final pi at approval will include payment of park fees, sewer and water connection ftes, and stomiwater & drainage trunk fees established within Exhibit M of the PUD 4 Agreement. Conclusion A public hearinghas been scheduled for this proposal at your October IS meeting. Planning Commission members are encouraged to identify for the benefit of staff and the developer any additional specific concerns you believe need to be addressed with the site plan. Topics you should address in your recommendation to Council include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Acceptability of building expansion and attachment (‘central core') and its visual impacts. Acceptability of increased building height. Acceptability of proposed building materials and building design. Acceptability of location in relation to west lot line. Signage (Ifproposed), building lighting, parking and landscape plans Final plat. Any other issues of interest or concern. Staff Rccommcadation IfPlanoingCommission concludes that the proposed revisions are acceptable, then a recommendation for approval would be in order. If Planning Commission concludes that one or more of the above topics luquires further consideration, then tabling would be appropriate. ApptIeation9 CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION Date Reeolvod Amount Paid /?oc» c t; PROPERTY LOCATION Site Adores* Outlot E. Stone Bay _________________ Type of Application to be Faed Amendment to RPUD_ Property Identification Number (P.I.D) 33»116-23-12-0010 APPLICANT . Name John Torrance Homes ILC Phone (home)_______________ Address 7745 Polans Lane _____ Phone (work) 612-275-^295 City Map!e Grove Zip 55311 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name John Terrance Homes Phor^e (home) Address 7745 Polaris Lane Phone (work) 612-275-8295 ________ City Maple Grove Zip 55311 Date Property Acquired 07/03 ____________________ I X do do not also own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS _______5600.00 Residential Accessory Use _______5600.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _______$600.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _______5600.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg 5600.00 Commercial/Industrial Use _______5600 00 Land Alteration ♦ Permit _______Grading and filling - designated wetland or ftoedp'am _______Grading and filing - 501 cu yd. or more _______Gradtr>g, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of takeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule _S250.00 Renews Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - douWe current application fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _______$600 00 Commercial Site Plan Review (♦ consultant fees) _______5600 00 Vacation _______5600 00 Easement Vacatxjn _______5100.00 Easemenl Vacation wnh Subdivision _______5600.00 Rezoning (PUD-refer to Fee Schedule) _______5600.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _______5100.00 Appeals X Other -see Fee Schedule #f^G62 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. __^^complel0d Application Form. 4. 5. e. _j,^^^scribe request m detail. fx^erlified Property Owners List of owners within 350* of the sub;ect property, labels and plat map List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance, y'Government Center. A-603 300 South ^StreeL Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-591 0). _ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. Attach legal description to application if rot mduded on recuired survey. ____Topographic survey (existing and p'oposed contours) if land altcratons involve charges m /elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include mar tal status) of ail persorts with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of appl»cant(s) if not current owner(s). 8. 9. .Construction plan, if appficable (see staff for requirements). _As an adder>dum to this application, please attach a separate hst of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 3 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS AND 1 COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17*’ OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require scaled drawings of a!l documents, plans, etc to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please romennber that your application 'a not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff;,____________________________Date________ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide at! information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by originai fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred In review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Appricanfa signature Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowiedges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of UVis request Owner's signature Date •L.- Appicsnt must hsvt sU subfruOd^ into tns City otfess 25 esys bofor# PlSA/wg Cocnniisston Planning Commission Meeb-ngs are held on ms third Monday of each month. Applca.'^ts must bo prese’t at all scheduled review meetfvgs of the P.annir>g Commission and Council. If an apprcani is unable to attend • scheduled mtstirg. olease make arrangements to n»ve an auU-onzcfl ajent attend m v-jur place an^ advise me B;<4d ng & Zoning Office of this change pher to me meebng. Subdivision Application Str^: Ae<irt8s: 2750 Ke!**/ Part.-\way Ordno. MN SS3S6 Rene^rat Main 952-249^600 far. 652-249-4616 Mailing Addnss P.O boxes Cr>'i*.al Bay. M.N 55322-0C55 This application form must be completed in full. Apptcatcn a Data Received _ Arnoint Paic ___ Staff _______ Fee ______ PROPERTY WFORMATION: Site Address: OutolEStoneBav Property Identification Number (PIN): 33-118-23-12-0010 (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year) 07/03 ______ x___Abstract or Present use of property; x____Residential ____Oiner ____ Zoning District: RPUD_________________________ Torrens, please chnrK one APPUCAKTMFORfyiATXM: (Complete legal names and mantai status required for each mterestod party} Name: JohnletranoeHomes.ILC_______________________________________________________ Phone (home). _______________________ Address: 7745 Polaris Lane. Maple Grove. MN 5531 1 Email: _________________________________ Phone (work): 612-275-8295 Fax; 763-420-3051 OMNERtf^ORMATION: (Complete legal names and manlal status required for each Interested party) Name: John Terrance Homes. LLC_________________________________________ Phone (home):_____________________ (work): 612-275-8295 _________ Address: 7745 Polaris Lane. Maple Grove, MN 5531 1__________________________ Email; __________________________ Fax: 763-420-3051__________ EX6TMG LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size;Acres Dry Land Acres Wet LacMf 'Acres TOTAL, all parcels Present Use (check one) Present Zoning District ,Residential. Number of Units: Other; (Specify) vacant RPUD Proposal: ____Division for Tax Purposes ____Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) ____Subdivision for New Building Sites _____Existina UnitsNumber of Building Sites Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) New Units Jotal Units ~Units per Acres _Square Feet Dry Buildable Land ^Residential Other (specify) Final plat -10- kjSaiLk. 1 . Paymenl of fees (refer to ’’eppiiceSon fees" listed below). 2. Conpieted apprestion form. 3. Preiimirtsry ptat •i>temMtron on Certificate of Su.*vey. CartiSad Property Owners List cf owners w^Nrt 350* (you mur. obtain t.is list from Her.rep-n Cojnty Deparvncni of Fnanoe. Govemrnant Canter. A403 3C0 South 6''* Sveet. Muireapoiis, ta!ep^on• 612-3<&*5S10). e As an eddendu.'n to l^<s apt^cation, please ebach a sepa.'aie 1st of ary other perss.ns you vr^h nctif sd of th<s application WINIMUie MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETg FINAL APPLICATION ^ Payment of fees (refer to Prcwrur ary Subdivision Approval resoluton end pa'k fees if appi cab e). 2. Signed Certificate ot Survey or mylar cop>es of forma) plat 3. Title opir^ion 4. Easements, covenants, etc 5. Developers Agreement and Ler.er o' Cred.L APPLICATION FEES (Zorvng AanVmtrator 10 ChetA pcj mose wmich 83d»y) A. Application Base Pees; ____SiicIchPtm Review (CtasLe&11l)S3S0 00 ____SubdmsionoraljolljneRearrangemer«S600 00 Svbrfrvaion AppLcal«n (Class I 4 It) S600 00 ____Pralrfrwwry Subd>v<s<)n Application S7S0 00 ♦ S30 OOAot (Cass HI & nofV'es<don|.ai) ____RnaPWAoc*cabon(Oass lUlsaoOO ____Legal Review and Fang ____Subdwison only $1*0.00 7QIALS 600 _SuOdrvts)on w/aasements and covenants, rrunimuni $280.00 • any adCitionar costs _Padi Fees (to be detarnwwd per Sedan 82*227) \egal and Eng nccnng Review Fees (as incured) "Renewal of Class 1.11. A ill Subdivision and of a Lol Line Rearrangement Apprcalcn $300 00 B. Special Improvement Fees: Pfooosad Pnvele Roads $650 00 ♦ $.50 per fineal fooL ____Proposed Pubhc Roads $950 00 • $.50 per hneei foot. _tn n X 50 ■ S tin fL k.SO ■ $ _Request for City lo Accept Ensting Pnvato Road $950 00 IProoosed Saratarv Sewer Main EKtension $276 OO « $25/stub .Prooosed Wstermain Edenson $275 00 * $2Vst’jb ^Proposed Slorni Sewer System (eiduding culverts) $250 00 On-Stte System. Site Evaiuaton Rev.ew (applicable to rural subdiv sions) SEO^ldX, C. Fleilbia Application FaesIMiscallanaous Fees Variance $600 00 ____Vacat . of Pubbe Road $75 per benef>tng property ($600 m rurum per appUcalion) ____Easement Vacatert Associated with a Subdivisan $100 00 ____PRO Apploation wen Subdivisan $35 00 per dwebng un< new lots The applicant hereby agrees lo provide all Information required or requested by PiamDeparinent Staff. City Engineer. City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to p': ess this application and fuithor agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant’s Signature: Owner's Signature: Data: Date: e‘ . • :>y ' • y Applicant must have all submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Ptr. ,nq Commission meeting. Planning Commission meetings are held on the third Monday of ' m'-.r.kn. Applicants must be present at ail scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commis' i v . Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangem-.-;!': lave an authorized agent attend in your place and lo advise the City Pianner assigned to your project of this change prior to the meeting. •11* ^'5 LANDFORM September 21. 2004 Michael Gaffron City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway PO Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 RE: StoneBay Condominium Plan Amendment Dear Mr. Gaffron. On behalf of our client. Landform is pleased to submit this application for RPUD general plan amendment and final plat for Outlot E, StoneBay, located north of Kelley Parkway on the western portion of the StoneBay development. We are requesting approval of an RPUD general plan amendment for minor changes to the condominium building. As we have moved through the design process we have Identified several Improvements to this condominium building that we would like to incorporate into the plan. Building Design The owner-occupied condominium project still includes 62 units as onginally approved. While the original concept Included two buildings joined by a common underground parking area, the new concept includes the same shared underground parking, but links the two buildings above ground to provide larger living spaces and additional amenities. The central core area was added to create a single building and provide niany new facilities for community use by the residents. This core area includes amenities such as a Hobby room, a Guest rou.n. a Business Center, a Family Dining room, a large Community room. Individual tenant storage cubicles, Activities and Craft rooms, a Library and an Exercise room. These added amenities allow for an improved quality of life, which is essential in today’s competitive market and will help the developer continue StoneBay’s commitment to quality in the Orono community. Another essential interior building amenity is to provide 9’-0" ceiling heights on all 3 floors to address market demand and current construction standards for this type of building. The Increased ceiling height is mitigated by the fact that the grade around the building was raised to maintain the approved 38-foot building height. The building will be finished with maintenance-free materials including: •M MTU* ttfiveifts tie mST MIMwC M0«TN MlMCAVOilt. M |«40S isa tOTO *** tia ata.MTT r«t i ICchaaiOaftan Pm#2 Re Stof^ay Condominium Sepiamoer 21. 2004 • Stone. Approximalely 40% to 50% of the exterior of the building will be finished with cultured stone. In addition to using two different stone colors, two different types of stone textures will be used. Fiber cement siding. The balance of the exterior of the building will be finished with fiber cement horizontal siding. In addition to using two different siding colors, two different types of siding textures will be used-textured lap siding and cedar shingle siding. • Pro-finished metal. The soffit, fascia and trim materials will be a pre-finished metal maintenance-free system. • Windows. windows. The windows will be pre-finished metal clad single hung wood • Shingles. The roof shingles will be a commercial grade asphalt shingles. We have also revised the unit types to address market demand and maintain consistency with the rest of the StoneBay development. The following table summarizes the changes to the unit types and sizes: Orioinal Plan Revised Plan Unit A 6 units 8 units SQuare (ootaoe 1.522 sq ft 1.080 so ft Bedrooms 3 1 (plus den) Battvooms 2 1 Unit B 52 units 31 units Square footaoe 1.234 sc ft 1.224 sq.ft Bedrooms 2 2 Bathrooms 2 2 Unite 2 units 10 units Square footaoe 1.170 sq ft 1.300 sq ft. Bedrooms 2 2 Bathrooms 2 2 umtD 2 un»fs } 7 units Square footaoe 1.031 so ft 1.455 sq ft Bedrooms 2 2 (plus den) Bathrooms 1 2 urne None 6 units Square footaoe 1.770 sq ft Bedrooms 3 Bathrooms 25 # .f «60 SUTLER NORTH euaowo 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MNNEAPOUS. MN 55409 OFFICe: 612ZS2J070 FAX: 612 252-9077 ««wm landfamt net MctwelGafton P»g«3 R* StontSay CondoRtnun Strtambtr 21.2004 Building Setbacks While the building design has changed slightly, we have retained the original building footprint area. We have modified the western setback slightly to incorporate the new architectural elements. The original approval required an 80-foot setback from the west property line, but allowed the porches at a 72-foot setback. The new plan shows both the building and porches at 74 feet where 35 feel Is normally required. The change to the building design actually results in the porches being two feet further from the western tot; therefore, we believe this is consistent with the Intent of the previous approvals. Final Plat We are also requesting approval of a final plat to plat Outlot E as a single 2.5-acre lot for these condominiums. We request approval of the RPUD General Plan amendment and Final Plat. It is my understanding that this Hern will be scheduled for Planning Commission review on October 18*’ and City Council action on November 8*'. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me or Steve Johnston at 612.252.9070. Sincerely, LANDFORM* Kendra Lindahl. AlCP Principal Planner COPY: Terry Dahlstrom, John Terrance Homes, LLC John Hassler, John Terrance Homes. LLC *tandlorm Englnetnng Company doing bus.n«ki as Landform .• -V V' •• , M ”• * % •* 4 tso SUTLER NOflTHSUltDtflO S10 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MMNEAPOUS. MN S5403 omces fttSSaJOTt) fax 612252.9077 wmiwtandfawinal E- .v“ .’ c ‘i “ •'pAiM,mi -T^ - -^-* ruM.r'" ’ .. ' * ^ee fit /■:'., p/Li-c'-c Vf -'•<’ LAMJfOaM Stonef^ of f)rono .•=!• “' )• i*. ■• •’ A rchitectural Works ViLLARD.INC. John Terrance H omes B-z VU. vJC _______ 'Si!! ____- - 'a va,!^5>>j-i!;: :. -. : :■■■:■. v: Yi I *'"i^i*t*V y-n^t - - -k — . . r> ^^ 'I -A-'i^-' ' ‘-|—I I M 1 [ . iir^*-*i-fYi^^*-■*T^'“ ^1 ^ If t,'^ .^*..->^ ^. .g*^' ^ V i it-*i r ^ * i i V ->r;.»l4 ■-• *-• y//. M yf /i fOl^.H* v' ' i • ''-1 • ‘•’> ffiE3B-B sjeaffisnESM r, •' ^V<- ^'<C*»C%£D LCr? B--ri*0 EiEv •lO^I 'i«‘ ■ r - 0* IAREA LOCATUN MAPI STONEBAY cmr OF ORONO, Minnesota JQHKTIRIU.HCEHIMSLLC lABBREVUTlOKSI I I ii-I IIII t i;FIf" err '£: r“ •««M ^ .W* __ w »■■■■ *•Kir--** ««« •<«E-_ ih « s- i. * * •o fihIP*.* #%♦ i:,i:\ I«• . .*« ft r ii. S’* ******rU *ij' • •• :#H' r* 3 ir..^ i.1^-.- W-- ^!=r fe.„. =55= 1:“*^ |i tru M». I=- |i. “ CDDRAWIKC SYMBOLS^aSSLSZ **-•% f»« E> o!# w .'•« «M« casiTC 9YUB0Lsac3s:;i EE^ •Kl • CA‘-0*A «t *«*•« I ••^— r:r % In.^* «M A-*# «»• #*• )CJK>SIOII COSiTROt. SYUBS'i^l CBIEC\L descrif »t:onc Ga»SURVTY SYMBOLSCCCfiaKraBSa • T •Mtr «%«* *•%*• # *• #> ««t I «A •»«• I o BEDSITt/imUTY CONTACTS (—rmT3 »!■«> r • 'jef-A-' •M- «*^•4;r.v... «• pean r b*a 2I/*icai I f Jii«it V w I« • ^V 1 J ii«a f 1 «■>#>« n rC«TK1. i? .: v=-»- 1r.r,*^r' "■* i::'iVu':r;v.rTj. «A-*t .-•• •• fe?=;|.*Ci« IMM 'i^r- •tt.*# . . , „[ •**^ • --•VV'M H BENCHMAnOOBSKafiatM tW« «»t «• ««t Gopher State One CaB tm»«iu «a» » -ege n tt #3062 r :.- ---t •«S.«£t VMWMI tiMn atfvow j=5=T.:=v:3T=r MINOR AMENDMENT TO ArntovEO Rruo (CONDOMINIUM eULCNNO) scrTtvacK 22. aoo4 STONEBAY OHONa MINNCSai'A LANDFORM fxvce tncfifrcn CO.l IIXCAL DtSCmPTIMl j(Hnim«iiifsii£ tm II iiii’-— ■KOTEsam^BOMBKaiia M«M. «■ ■««» *-«■» ««.»«—»»» w.»q» — *■<»>■ ’ 5 7SH rl-uT- #%«• v: ^ .. t C:^ —- liSis^- SrTi--?U*.j ^ LANDFORM »c*.f » fit: Cl.l r- L G>NORT i4 CETA u (i> »%«•••-* w < Pi jt Z lib- “S2ES^J!!!liS _____ar-. Cliwoask ■j=nr“.Tj=ja=:i:^ MINOR AMtNDti ro ArrKOvuD « (coN^oMiNijM eon __ttrrtrk 'M.R -.u. 2C ••OtC! SrONLB OKONO. MINNi: tUEST PETA'L . .. - y Kill 89 i» rn r liiMa&ss. INOTCSI rjv^’Tw 5 *^Tsr.':s - f <p»>aB •• ,M* ». •-. *. •••tOM • S3 STC? “• ** " •• *r . £» • . fiM»» te>9 tt ^ •>*».;« .4M«« » MWM. If « vw •«■ ft Mft i «r ft» »# • fc *<c«rM p>- » ft***.^ « *«««* Vv^tfXrftft «wr /m*« •/ craftsft Psvaaft ^ w£Sf jitJ*^-W»»-;*«•••»»-••••*•<• •Ml*. • «<»• «1 e'*—€w> T !■«•« »%»< Morn •«•» •» • ••• •» !’'•• ■••« •«■ «». a >•»« *«t'« w» •cn-Mk >• •« o OaSTOIUI SEWER TABULATtONI W4S I03» •030 r:» 10:0 CASCADE C RCLB VS - V Qooher State C*0 Cal tCJLf »•. *0Moe r • *• vM L ! I04S '070 JOHNTERRA!ICEHOICSU£nanMwrarw «unicarHt.M<«ii «• »«ct ««o HSE *•{4^ lAAMMt WfNftia =Tiar-r rrij STONEBAY OKONO. MiNNCSOI A 4l^ LANDFORM *255ttr' KMMmAM•rvona C4.1 1 NOTES) IIAKDSCAPC NOTES I 4 ' . ... »< « ■* Ml) ''> «44» « .. .«• 4 ...a. I., , .,».. ................... ^T...’«V '..!T’*/4.,"?'«"»i‘',I .l.*^** ■■‘”* ■■*• ’'”"• •* *• *» •»» -<•• ,. ■ ,:i.-.iV:;'’* •'•'^ " vr.-*.,.. - rjTii t:^' -........... • - - • *• '••• •»• •• —•■•••'■ — - * •2'4T’iVU<w SIZlI'-Tf.*'''^* •'■'** •’••^■•••■'» '•••••»^4 » * 4:.'ir.‘,-a: u .iT':!^:^ "•• *-* •' •• BEEPREUMINANY PUNT SCHEOULEI -- -- — -k* ;s SSr-ST”'— • % 4t» t« 1^* •I*' iv'*«^ ■ A «p •« «jwi»^.r • •*• «A4*»«.« *.!« »V% «*#•*«.« MLCMtf WV.-'V^ ’•V- «M«* *•••» ••«*• '4^ C*nat • J% <04«a « • »AI «# • M.'W •• « !•*» • lk«»a •*•« tk>*«i 9 «»1 4i« ..r*'» *!>■»■■< t^n» lAMEKOEO TAU nt SEED MIX! 1^ W i**«) 9k\ ?jf !ilaC*)S5*uiSr!J?Eii"^ I?. JSr a ; ? rH.~«rr 5; ir=::u2;.2:ss:tr-" ;;— :s JAaTT .n 'S^^crr.!^.. :« y ” * ^ 4 »#4 ^*5;;;“" v,«. ^ f A uy^ M««0«9 Jtt* •9 Mn>* « «M*t*J**lv'«HM ' 0 -• arvi^^> • M r«««* 4».^« ^<4 }.*. •■»** •• 4k»« »«> »-A •«* ^ M .'i-f','- tM •«* • ^ i#4r ___ ____ ^ A«4a#•«# ^ 5»S?asL?iLLrTrf«^^ ■OFtRENNlAL PUNT LIST I «rs- SSa'/jr* *5ir^ikyM OTi?*-» arjrSI**'*" SKS* ■*arri" *.-^4 «M •■ »•« I WV hJ".)J «c kau w mt t-M.'1 «M%W^- StfSCSTS TWIS 'O-'•X.C 4*.M4*49 ;• Ca.•M «••»• G>I> S) •:%VMw*tr <A •'••“• g>d 0 •—t# 4A IM •*•■ •»• EO ccMOMn ma ••Ylui***1llm *•• •• E>(D ™. 04VAKCTU. THUS 0 •ITM MV cty ^«V MM4 M# ir «%..»•.«. E«D MU (du« 1 0 •wrvn itmt 2L5!?**bV <%•#*•»• • •• ©G>1 . Ajr Mosuous mn« ••s=^-t:«»•••• (KD iJLM •«Y MM* MtM9 «m«V -mMI t.A #1**• • •• [DID •a* 0 -■*««* Mn%*« W*M M%9y *•»• [DD •«4 .ajB 0m nS? JScaM M*...... (D(D •Ab 9AM cemmova aioivM 0 MM C^19 %VaM4 • MM -•• CDff> 0 »M MM MMA9M IC4»•9*»-••. Q>^ ••»«f 4A *r •• • •• iryr>.-..-a- e }•«V • %4i >«A *••.. LFXD 0 J*MCMi MM f ^.... OXD ••— rotwBaii AM .M • <A trxD cpny«y« un eMweovuia ••H»%M M»>c%.ivr ••.I. (DG^*«* CAM KWtiVV ^MACirmyyt JOHN TBRANCE HOMES LLC ftAlt jMCJnoM ni»ia«A«« 49C MMU car»^ •» 9»*i IB;. M »4 «t4<»«J»4«»‘3i» i~—-------~ <«&«■ <wnMM IfMT* nttsoiaa MINOit AVtNDMENT TO Arrr.ov^D Kruo (CON70VINIJM DUIICXNC) 5tnMQC4 22. 2004 > •*iAT STONEBAY OtONO. MINNCSO I A LANDFORM MiMalactl4f •«•(«!■ •^riSr -5=??? a«««»4_____________t£raa^ 'MAc'i mn <Nnuu lAWsCArtriAN I J.UIL L2.1 INOTESC BBLAKDSC a FE M07CSflem^B5BHBHKBBHKS5^SEQKiSBl2B ••«•» *♦• • -«»• « « t' I 7 V"*"!"^ '* - ' \;' •” c. 0 ■■S'!:r m ! «B.U!r PA*c \ / \ /' \ V \ ; UflOCO HEKHT MXSIC SEES UIXaaBBI i w M w ^ oMr« ^ • « M «»*« • « «W «^ «.*«• (•-------------- -: r ea««t ,*^fi iuAit^ t«nHfc •«•»« r - —.w —--- • fit»M «i* 4*MAirM. *A *# • Mt» »*•«•«» • ^/W« ^r. Mrai«: ‘<- 2>:u;;v r.-,•=«.T'.*. .T, . .V ;■;:-- ^ ^ ... •• ••■“ • •• • ^ » ♦ ,» •■*\i • •>• » ^ ^ ^ i:z,\ w - ?jTi Jr • -.............. -............. • Vi^.v - * ■5i‘jr/crr.%rt..i‘. :rjrv-~.'t.3.:*t*.'-:; %r::i ' -Vi r.;?.-Ji-JL:';r ,rr?is j; vcr.x.*^ •" ''•• •-*—«- — ••'■" CPREUICNASY PU»T SCHEDUIEJ _ , t?jP^CA*CAOe o«ciB , ,, 'y^y '^-'' ''/-'^ ■ '''})•/'; /, / 5S-^. **!k I'M .•»« i««r« «»*••%• fs. [mmm i» 4 <• »«• aM« «^***< •m »•« aw* ,’S I .'* iO iwtf n» 1^1 • n «k4»« «« 1^. «*•> c.v^aji sV%«*»# •A ^.«C &AA«.V iMr«<7 • ^ ft* («iU»«A f ikK«lA «A#«^ M.1 • ^ i*«r< >—»»». II a (U^t 4«n «•«••• «**t^ * •M «dU%» a>M* « t/Y «# • vt.'^r •••«•• • STiy '•« “• •» »t M ••>«« Ei * • - '-ssis^ssj-i LU.'r'j',-'* «•«•• »VS%« '■3?tSEXV:AL plant list I *'“» '• ■ <»—m »•«•«, lAMENDED TAU VET SEES M:X H W •«• ••• MM >• t*’«l » f> ■> > ii~<r lam^^ mnw m i •«• CM^ «0• ^ CM^ «0 IP A ai*a ^v*#* *1 • r Kiv u^ \Mtm <^i" pi A futf ^ MMI em^ mt •tf* «i«ap^ iM« mtu*9^ »#i M# #•« m*wvi w $m mm »iM>u »-» ■ tita* tti ««a Ml lMM €««•«* 1 »«• ^-olP HAP mm smm mm ammm %**^«p mu ••a MW«t «M « "• 1^. mu» *• • r. •««« •uvi* I 4*pi< <_ A t!Tf*f«pS?.SS>*«S7«j I# PaitfUV a«M MiM «• k^»*# •!•« •!%• «<v«.«ap«l IM 4 •a •*A m» mr. mm* mmmf^ Tr^r ««4 ••-.___ urn mum amm *a Ptt*p4« ^ m>*«pn vA *<a•••14 ABa*^* «■• ^ !*•• CJMi 4^ #%&*■ •M BA m»m mrnm^ mi«i*m •A «B«aM waaiai **^va «*«.. im turn* mm mmm** ^-mm tm mm mi«mi ^ mrn^ «i*^ BM afc »• •• • MSi4 •• • MB «» vJUvM •» m *rv«ifwi Snw A. •ggy»^y«i SSTi**" ^IK iblICiOl UH •c nu —>•mm 'J 1 •«-«...l*s* 1 -gr f,sry?;i •Celtaccacsvi Titti •mm PMaj flM —mm •BA*« B*AV mmmm • (B mu v-.«, ^2> ^ • fV L •IB* Mirmm BM MB4 triB 9m w.».•iL“*o •—t» 4^M — ••• 2>Z>• •« «.B ■•—‘a 1 icoartaavi mm a •Vb *i**^-•••• •• E€>— oiiuiiBrtL non o •«PM« mm Ctai ^1 < MM •r <%Pa*rA«'j Q •IMBtAait .BABB".t» <«•p ^••« E>Z>•«» .A« DRSUOM MRIH a *•M* msmrnt MMI jrijl •••P- 1 99 *•• •• QX!>•M «A.«I•#f mcm* frnmm mmu M|4» •AMM M**«#1 •9 *• • ••»M <A4P 0 *1 minm |bBi ap »%B t'M Mill >CB 9,m ' • '• CDiD •M .aa o m 9mm «r •MV^ fMmrnm CJM 1 mm «••• [T>2>•M ma i cmn9oi:a anivM 0 '■'•m^u0 IMPlMto • rnmm 9m "• •• CD5>MM^ar* o N M MW 1 4b 9m *•••• [i>v>i>M<a»i •M ^SSmum §4a 9m ♦• • •• rry«Y ••MAtM e m fmrnm ••tBM • 4%9m •- •.. li>S>MIKM o m mmmvmrnmmrn 1 AB •m -. •, QXD •M4A«M nuMOAU o »•»•MM I4B 9C HXDMl “iBl III e«jl1 MO eMV«00«Ua ••yy M •4%.«pr ••. •• [DO •*• 4aa muLttfmsnM JOHN IBIUNCE (IMS ILC rX«« J IK •• %••«•« P« TitiS 1^1253 *«&iK* MMMMt t|VT« rrr.iir-5STiv MINO«? A*w*tNDMENr TO ArrpovHD Rrot> (CO nsoviniju DunnisiO) SCnMflCl 22. 20T4 STONEBAY OHONO. MINNCSO I A LANDFORM w mm . t •■»ot • I ■ OITXAU kWOXVKPlAM L2.1 ^ !■ rr T *t. w ~ - --••-• •C-=r" Architcctoral Works ViLLARD. INC •_“___S‘J^ k-h in,.- mff I •■tgsftnal.rr-T—zI #»n*«scT imwiM bt-rt^ t>B> *«. I H»tL: :t*a«4a rw—1 ipMTi 1 KMVfUAU S«gaeli' "V /-v'jtx,__ - —--•: " _____7. --- - —T - _ J- /rTT*»>. rr»y>-. R "rn53 'Rgr^mqrof;^Rir»r¥r-FFFi s iriilil iliili • ^ ^ -> •• ’iMi *.*-1-1-.............—1-----------—------- t r?r»irt -------------r ' • I MfAA n<*0- \I — -■-aa.g ;—' i g~--;--''--'^|Ra-i'R'■-iR R| ^ IP rm *L. ‘ =--rtr r------'jirr'I I ^ ARCHrrecnjRAL Wows ViLLARD, INC ’ 3artfa “iaw'a«r-- 9 «« 'r^ •anr.i .A-3 oUNTTD TWOBED«OOM»DgW-2BATH • Jyt»r4r Miitr /C\UWrETWM8BED»OOM-2l/2BATH vSU. iB« /^WTTA ONE BEDROOM * DEV • OVF. BAD! \^y»r-r-r umii ~ -------- ©s;WITB two bedroom ■ 2 BATH T'T UMU ©UWTC TWOBEDROOM»2 BATH ijHir jL o A O lY c ■) w' O ^ OlMCEHOMES Stone Bay I/ift Gxidomirjumt Orono.MN John Terrance Homes John Terrance Homes ARCHrrecruRAL VWjrks ViLLARD, INC. m Mrf/ ■aMw b»i Unit Plans m* StMtlnrofOraeo A4 ARCHTiEcmRAL Works ViLLARD, INC zttat ■ —•-r________■:33Qrarr **•*♦*»<• rif ■ •«• ARafTTEcrim VM drks ViLLARD, INC * *•““ txuuA4„airr.MM<9iia4 • ^ *. • ■ •'A . J A-6 WM, <pgna4_:fi. .y-r- l/]jBonestroo ^^.Rosene Andertik & I Associates Engineers 4 Architect! 2335 WtiX Highway 36 • St Pau». Wf^l S5tl3 Office 65I-636-4600 • Pas 65'-636-»3:i wwwhonettroo con October 5.2004 Mr. Mike GtfEron Pluming Director City of Orono Post Oflice Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN SS323 ocf 7 aw Stonebay Lofts Flic No. 139-04-000 rist No. 04.3062 Dear Mike; We have reviewed the preliminary grading, drainage and erosion control plans for the proposed Stonebay Lofts. The site is locued along the westerly side of the Stonebay subdivision north of Kelley P.irkw ay and adjacent to the City’s Public Works Building. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-J863. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. TomKenogg Cc: Greg Oappa. City of Orono • St Paul. St Cloud. Rocheiter Wii'maf. MN • Miiw/»ukee. '.vl • Chicago. IL c • Sheet C3.2 shows proposed reuining wall coiutniction along the north end of the proposed building. Some of the walls shown exceed 6-fcct m height. All retaining walls that exceed 4-feet in height require a separate engineered design and deUtl submittal for review and approval. • Stop signs should be added for outbound traffic from the undaground parking accesses. • The plans should include a pedcsuian crossing sign at the crossing shown near the middle of the outdoor parking area. • The applicant should provide the City with the project SWPPP for the Phase II Construction Site Permit and a copy of the Notice of Coverage Certificate pnor to startmg work on site. • The grading plan should include erosion and sediment control details and notes. Items such as fiber blanket installation and location, inlet protection, stockpile locations, silt fence maintenance requirements, constniction entrances, and any other issues relating to erosion and sediment control should be clearly shown on the final plans. • I he linai plans snouid loentify ttie name ana pnonc numorr tor engincenng contact pci son regaroing erosion and sediment control issues. ^ ■ '2- U CITYof OROXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^ T t Provision of evidence to the City of Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnaJOT) drainage permit approval for construction of the regional storm water pond within MnT30T right-of-way. and of MnTDOT permit approval for consmiction of public street, street amenities and utilities within the Mn/DOT righl-of way. Payment to the City of Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fees for the development of the Property in the amount established in the Development Fees Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B. Payment of Sewer and Water Connection Charges in the amount established in the Development Fees Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B. Payment of Park Dedication Fee in the amount established in the Development Fees Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B. W HERE.4S, the City Council, City staff and consultants have reviewed the plans for thjs PUD application and hereby specify approval of each Plan Sheet attached w'iOiin Exhibit F and identify them as part of the official record for Planned Unit Development No. 4. ^ I THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL^^ED that based on the findings of Resolution No. 4S52 and on the findings enumerated in this Resolution, the City Council of the City of Orono does hereby gram Preliminary Plat Approval and General Development Plan Approval for Planned Unit Development No. 4, subject to the following conditions: I. General Development Plan Approval is granted subject to conditions established within Resolution 4852 and enumerated herein, and subject to the conditions to be established within the Planned Unit Development No. 4 Agrccraenl and other pertinent documents. RPUD Development Standards and General Conditions. a) The total number of residential dwelling units shall be 162 units including 62 Lofts units, 47 two-story townhomes and 53 rambler townhomes, as configured on the approved site plan, Sheet C2.1, Revised Site Plan dated 1-24-03. Page 4 of 18 a.. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. d 9 1 4^' 4t 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 approved by the City Council. Public street lighting along Kelley Parkway shall be installed and maintained by the utility company through a standard agreement between the City and the appropriate public utility company. Interior private street lighting shall be at a low level consistent with the surrounding rural residential character while providing the necessary level of security. Such lighting shall be of a style, number, height and location approved by the City Council. Interior street lighting shall be maintained by the homeowners association. Final decisions by the Developer regarding colors, types and qualities of building materials shall be subject to City staff approval, and shall be in conformity with the sample colors, types and qualities documented by reference in Exhibit C. Final building designs shall be reviewed by the Planning Director prior to issuance of building permits to ensure compliance with the architectural standards of the RPUD District. The separation distances between townhome buildings are acceptable as shown on the approved General Development Plan, with the majority being at least IS' at the nearest point with greater separation as the building walls diverge. Within each Phase of development, if any changes to plans result in separations less than 15', such plans shall be subject to review by the City Council and Developer shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Council that suitable architectural styling, building orientation or other methods w'ill be used to mitigate the lack of separation. Any revisions to building separations, hydrant locations or fixture sizes/t>pes deemed necessary by the Orono Fire Marshal as required for fire-protection purposes shall be made by the Developer. The berm along the Public Works site east boundary may be extended eastward as shown on Sheet C2.3 to assist in establishing a buffer to the Lofts; however, any buffer walls, plantings or other improvements shall be located on the Lofts site as shown in the approved General Development Plait The Developer shall take extraordinary efforts to minimize impacts on existing vegetation and enhance screening and buffering in the area nonhwest Pages of 18 4- CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^ ^ ^ ^ of the Lofts west building. The City ’s Public Works operation maybe a 24- hour operation dependent on weather and other emergency situations A disclosure regarding the Lofts buildings proximity to Public Works shall be required of Lofts buyers to help limit the expected complaints about City activity and noise from the Public Works site. g) All residential buildings including the Lofts shall have pitched roofs as showm on Sheets A1.2, A2.2 and A3.2 to maintain a rural residential character. Roofs for the Lofts units shall be low-pitched rather than steeply pitched to decrease the impact of excess building height. h) Developer shall submit proposed conditions for development of the commercial outlets to maintain the natural amenity values of the pond and protect the perimeter of the pond from encroachment by commercial development. i) Final landscaping plans shall be subject to the recommendations of Wallace Case as enumerated in his letter dated 11/6/02 as revised or amended per the Memorandum by Tom Kirby dated January 17, 2003. The pertinent Homeowners Association(s) shall be responsible for permanent maintenance of landscaping per the Landscaping provisions of the RPUD District. As a condition of the PUD No. 4 AgreemenL Developer shall provide landscape performance security as required in the RPUD District standards. j) The following variance to the RPUD development standards ishereby granted: Building height variance for Lofts building from 30* to 38* defined height (measured from firul average grade at high side) Building setback for rambler lownhome Unit 27 to be 20’ from the north property boundary and for rambler townhome Units 28-29 to be 10* from the north boundary' where a 35 ’ setback is the standard, as depicted on Sheet 2.1, Revised Site Plan dated 1-24-03.. Page 6 of 18 3. 4 Oullol B, Willow Properties Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except Parcel 201 and 201a Minnesota Dcparlraenl of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 27-57 Chereinafter the "Property"). Property Descriptions after Platting. The property descriptions after planing and dedication of right-of-ways for Kelley Parlcway, Willow Drive and Highway 12 shall be as follows: Lots I through 46, Block 1; Lots 1 through 10, Block 2; and Outlots A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J and K, STONEBAY, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Zoning. The portion of the Property located north of Kelley Parkway, comprising Lots 1 through 46, Block 1, Lots 1 throu^ 10, Block 2, and Outlots E, F, G, H, I, J and K is zoned Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) District. The portion of the Property located south of Kelley Parkway, including Kelley Parkway and Outlots A, D, C and D is zoned RR-IB (PUD) Single Family Rural Residential District, and shall remain zoned RR-IB (PUD) until such time that the City approves a rezoning Permitted Uses. Within the Property the permitted uses are as follows: a) Within Lot 46, Block I and Lot 10, Block 2, the permitted uses shall be common open spaces, private streets and driveways, utility systems, sidewalks, retaining walls and other landscaping features ancillary to the residential development, including approved signage and lighting. No accessory buildings e.xcept as indicated on the approved plans shall be allowed within 46, Block 1 or Lot 10. Block 2. b) Within Lots 1 throu^ 45, Block 1, and Lots 1 through 9, Block 2, the pennitted uses shall be attached residential dwelling units. c) Outlots E, F, G and H shall not be used until they are platted into Lots and Blocks. After such plaiting has been completed, within the designated conunons Lots permitted uses shall include common open spaces, private streets and driveways, utility systems, sidewalks, retaining walls and other landscaping features ancillary to the residential development including approved signage and lighting. No accessory buildings except as indicated on the approved plans shall be allowed within the commons Lots. Within the areas to be platted for individual ow nership, the pennitted uses shall be attached residential dwelling units. d) The maximum numbers of residential dwelling units within the residentially zoned portions of the property north of Kelley Parkway are 62 Lofts units, 49 two-story townhomes, and 51 rambler townhomes. Page 2 of 19 Developer Initiall^^ City Clerk Initial h y e) Outlois A and D shall not be used except for public recreational Uail use until such lime that they arc planed into Lots, at which time their pcnnitted uses will be funher designated, except that Outlot A may be used for a temporary sales trailer and parking area for the residential portion of development until such lime that the trailer can be moved onto the residential portion of the property. f) Outlets B and C shall be used for regional stormwater ponding purposes and public recreational trail purposes. No other uses will be pemtitted for Outlets B and C. Other uses shall not be allowed except by amendment of this PUD agreement. Site Access. The only residential access to adjoining public streets shall be onto Kelley Parkvvay, except that future development within Outlot K shall be allowed one shared driveway access onto Willow Drive. Access driveway locations shall be as shown on the approved site plan, Exhibit A. A right-in/right-out access &om Willow Drive to Outlot A may be used to access the parking area for the temporary sales trailer until such time that the trailer is moved onto the residential portion of the property. Future long-term access to Outlot A from Willow Drive shall be dclcnnined at the Ume Outlot A is developed. Future access to Outlot D shall be solely from Kelley Park-way. No direct access from Oullots A and D shall be allowed to Highway 12 Internal circulation for the Property shall be via private driveways, sidewalks and parking areas within the defined common areas. Building Design and Construction. All residential buildings on the Property shall be constructed according to final plans which shall first be certified by the Planning Director as being in conformity with the approved plans attached as Exhibit G to ensure compliance with the aichitcclural standards of the RPUD District. Final decisions by the Developer regarding colors, t>pes and qualities of building materials shall be subject to City staff approval to confirm their conformity with the approved sample colors, types and qualities documented by reference in Exhibit G. Construction of all buildings shall be in conformance with the building codes and regulations adopted by the City of Orono. Any substantial changes to the gross square footage, footprint/wall/roof dimensions or defined building heights shall require a prior amendment to this Agreement. “Substantial changes" shall include, but not be limited to, (1) an increase in gross square footage or foolprint/wall/roof dimensions of any unit so as to require a rcplatting to keep the unit within its ownership Lot; (2) any increase in building height for rambler townhorae units or two-story townhome units that would result in the need for a variance to the standard 30’ height liinit, or (3) a one foot or greater increase in height of the loft building above the 38’ defined height approved per Resolution No. 4915. The separation distances between townhome buildings shall be a minimum of 15' except where specifically shown u less than 15 ’ on the approved General Development Plan. Within each Phase of development, if any changes to plans result in building separations less than 15 ’, such plans shall be subject to prior review and approval by the City Council. Page 3 0(19 Developer Initial City Clerk Initial 8. Landscaping, The approved landscaping plan attached ;o this Agreement as Exhibit E shall be strictly adhered to, with the following conditions: 0 The bcnn along the Public Works site east boundary may be extended as sho^^■n on Sheet C2.3 to assist in establishing a buffer to the Lofts; however, any buffer walls, plantings or other improvements shall be located on the Lofts site as shown in the approved General Development Plan. The Developer shall take extraordinary efforts to minimize impacts on existing vegetation and enhance screening and buffering in the area nonhwest of the Lofts west building. Final landscaping plans shall be subject to the recommendations of Wallace Case as enumerated in his letter dated 11/6/02 as revised or amended per the Memorandum by Tom Kirby dated January 17, 2003. The Homeowners Association(s) shall be responsible for permanent maintenance of landscaping per the Landscaping provisions of the RPUD District. Prior to commencement of each Phase of devcloptnent, Developer shall provide Landscaping Performance Security for the landscaping associated with that Phase in the form of a Letter of Credit in an amount equal to one and one-half times the value of such landscaping improvements as determined by the City. The letter of credit shall provide for reimbursement to the City of all expenses incurred by the City for engineering, legal, contracting or other fees in connection with making or completing such improvements should the Developer fail to complete them. In the event that construction of the project is not completed within the time prescribed by building permits and other approvals, the city may, at its option, complete the work required at the expense of the Developer and the surety. The Letter of Credit shall be provided prior to the issuance of any residential building pennits and shall be valid for a period of time equal to two (2) full growing seasoni after the date of installation of the landscaping. The City may allow an extended period of time for completion of all landscaping if the delay is due to conditions which are reasonably bey-ond the control of the developer. Extensions which may not exceed nine months, may be granted due to seasonal or weather conditions. When an extension is granted, the city shall require such additional security as it deems appropriate. Lighting. Site lighting shall adhere to the approved lighting plan attached to this agreement as Exhibit H. 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 approved by the City Council. Public street lighting along Kelley Parkway shall be installed and maintained by the utility company through a standard agreement between the City and the appropriate public utility company. Interior private street lighting shall be at a low level consistent with the surrounding rural residential character while providing the necessa.’y level of security. Such lighting shall be of a style, number, height and location approved by the City Council. Interior street lighting shall be maintained by the homeov>‘ners associatiotL Page 4 of 19 Developer Initial City Clerk Initial P... 10. Signage. Signage on the site shall be liiniled to the required traffic control signage, building designation signs, and the approved monument signs as shown on the approved Signage Plan attached hereto as Exhibit 1. Parking and traflic control signage shall be installed subject to City staff and City Engineer approval. Additional Conditions of Approval are documented in the Special Conditions Memo anached to this Agreement as Exhibit K. B. Development Phasing 1. STONEBAY is intended to be developed in a number of sequential Phases over a period of 3-4 years. The various Phases have been designated as Phase One and Future Phases A through D, per the Phasing Plan attached hereto as Exhibit L. The sequential order of development of the various Future Phases has not been absolutely established, but relics to some extent on market conditions and demand. Therefore, this Agreement will pertain primarily to the Phase One improvements, and shall be amended as necessary prior to commencement of improvements for each Future Phase. 2. The Phase One improvements include the construction of Kelley Parlcw ay and associated curb and gutter, sidewalks, lighting signage and landscaping; construction of municipal sewer and water mains and facilities within the right-of-way of Kelley Parkway; construction of stormwater piping and facilities including the regional pond south of Kelley Parkway; construction of private roads and driveways as well as private and public sewer and water lines and facilities within the area designated as Phase One as shown on Exhibit L; and general site grading for Phase 1 and future Phases. Phase One of the development includes the construction of 28 two-story tov^-nhome units and 26 rambler townhorae units. 3. Coiiunencement of Phase One improvements shall not occur until Developer has made payment to the City of the prorated portion of the Development Fees (Park Dedication Fee, Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee, and Sewer and Water Connection Charges) for Phase One. Commencement of Future Phase improvements shall not occur until Developer has made payment to the City of the prorated portion of the Development Fees associated with said Future Phase. The Development Fees for each Phase shall be based on the proportional acreage or number of units within each Phase depending on the method of calculation of each fee, relative to the total project. The schedule of Development Fees is attached hereto as Exhibit M. 4. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to prohibit the commencement of Future Phases prior to completion of earlier Phases, nor to establish a specific sequence for the various Phases. Completion of Phase 1 improvements shall be required before commencement of any Future Phase, except that Phase 2 grading and utilities may be commenced prior to completion of Phase I improvements. Pages of 19 Developer Initial City Clerk Initial 111 C. Co VCD ants f The Developer shall establish covenants governing the development and containing as a minimum the following elements; 1. 2. 3. 5 6. Creation of Homeowners Association(s). Establishing rights & responsibilities of HA's) and/or others. Granting of the various required easemtnts as noted within this and other approval documents. Addressing properly maintenance responsibilities, including maintenance of the common areas, private roads and other facilities, and the stormwater pond. Establishing use restrictions. Establishing architectural and landscaping standards, including maintenance thereof. Establishing specific covenants to address the following: The City’s Public Works operation may be a 24-hour operation dependent on weather and other emergency situations. Covenants shall include a provision requiring disclosure to Lofts unit buyers regarding the Lofts buildings proximity to Public Wor ’ics to help limit the expected complaints about City activity and noise from the Public Works site. Further, a disclosure regarding the proximity to potential Public Works operations of the most northwesterly units of the rambler townhomc.s shall be required of the buyers of said units to help limit the expected complaints about City activity and noise from such operations. Language should be incorporated that documents police department accessibility (righl-of-eniry) and rights to enforce parking or other laws or ordinances on private roads or common areas. Incorporate into the language an acceptable definition of ‘'Drainage and Uulities Easement ” as used on the plat drawings. P. lostallatiou and Maintenance of Improvements 1.Improvements: In accordance with the policies and ordinances of the City of Orono, the following described public c: private improvements (hereinafter collectively called the “Improvements ”) shall be constructed and installed by the Developer according to the terms and conditions contained in this PUD Agreement. Maintenance of all improvements shall be as described under item 13 of this section. Specifically: Phase I improvements shall be as outlined in section B.2. of this document. Site grading, streets, driveways, concrete curb and gutter, parking lots, sidewalks, retaining walls if required and all necessary erosion control measures per the Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan attached hereto as Exhibit B (hereinafter called "site grading improvements"); Page 6 of 19 Developer Initial ^ (^0 City Cleric Initia l »UNOATEtl/IWaX }• 10004 FROrADOR 76J BOULDER OR OWNER NAME OAHLSTROM DEVELOfMENT LLC TAXTAYER OAHLSTROM DEVLU)PMtNT UC NAME/AOOR TWPOLARJSLAN maple GROVE MN SUU it 331112)1 lOOU propaoor 3* address unassicneo OWNER NAME OAHLSTROM OEVElOPMEKT UC taxpayer OAHLSTROM OEVEIOPMENT UT NAME/AOOR T74S POLARIS LA N MAPLE GROVE MN JS)H 31 3)11123110067 PROPAOOR 36 ADDRESS UHASSICNEO OWNER name OAHLSTROM OEVELOPMEmU-C taxpayer OAHLSTROM OEVEIOPMENT LLC NAME/AOOR 7743 POLARIS LA N MAPLEGROVLMN 35)11 31 3)IIIUIT0009 PROPAOOR 31 address UNASSICNED OWNER NAME OAHLSTROM OEVELOPMtNT LLC taxpayer OAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT LLC NAME/AOOR T743POLARIS LAN MAPLECROVEMN 5»ll 36 PROP AOOR 3t OWNER NAME DAHLSTI TAXPAYER 0^ NAIAE/ADOR 774 331112)11000) (CNEO VELOPMENT UC VELOPMENT lLC HENNEPIN COUNTY PkOPERTV INFOkMATION SYSTEM HENNEPIN yowners list PAGE I 33)11 1 14 1)1112)110003 PROP ADDR 765 BOULDER DR OWNER NAME OAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT tlC taxpayer OAHLSTROM OEVEIOPMLNT LLC NAME/ALDR 7743 POURIS LAN MAPU GROVE MN 33)11 )| ))l162)1!00*9 PROPADDR )l ADDRESS UNASSKiSEO OWNER NAME OAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT LLC TAXPAYER OAHLSTROM OEVtLOPMENI LLC NAME/ADOR 7745 POLARIS LA N MAPLECROVEMN 33)11 )| }))112)11006) PROPAOOR Jl ADDRESSUNASSIGNtD owner name OAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT UC TAXPAYER OAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT LIT NAME/AOOR 7743 POLARIS LA N MAPLECROVEMN 33)11 }| )]I)I2)II0063 PROP ADDR il ADDRESS UNASSICNED OWNER NAME OAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT LLC TAXPAYER OAHLSTROM DtVLLOPMENT LLC NAI^tE/AOOR 7743 POLARIS LA N MAPLECROVEMN 33)11 )l )))162)120007 PROPAOOR 2700 KEUXYPKWV OWNER NAME H R A OTY 01 ORONO TAXPAYER HRACITYOf ORONO NAME/ADDR ) 3)3 brown RDS WAYZATAMN 33)91 it ))III2)I20006 PROP ADDR 2743 XELUY PKWY OWNER NAM E PROFESS»NAL PROP ORONO LLP taxpayer PROFESSIONAL PROP ORONO IIJ* NAME/ADDR 8J3PARTFNWOODRD LONG LAKE MN 33136 3t 3)1)62)120010 PROP ADDR )6 AOORLSS UNASS)CNED OWNER NAME OAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT LlC TAXPAYER OAHLSTROM DEVFIDPMENT LUT NAMt/AOOR 7745 POLARIS LAN MAPLECROVEMN 53)11 it ))III2)I700II PROP ADDR n ADDRESS LPiASSiCNED OWNER NAME DAHUTROM OEVEIOPMENT UC taxpayer OAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT LLC NAMC/ADD6 7745 POU3RIS LAN MAPLECROVEMN S3?H C-..; V- OFMY KNOWLEDGEANDBEUEF.^^^ V/\ o*>/t mm m4 u*%mm e** m BCSJLS^m C«r«t MA.Oe4 Mt«C (iii“N- R»4^kA* t» S- —— y ZeLot/.y \ Lof^TS-^ P^/tuc wpn-KC. C^ /'TV— PE5 C*S GrU n;Fl INE____ \jy BOULDER DKIVE SECTION 5!S erfr SK5K.'.S -4^10»T» PESItW gjUIDEUNE [ISISk 3 k^-Si. y Bf^n:rst3T pi -i m f mUKTMRMMflMf '=Mf^ CON91KUOXW OOQIMOr JUNE2A W» STONEBAY ORONO. MINNCSOr/ LANDFORM > MKi A»oi. I ft . ^Mo m • -a55g CCK>ouerMRA /^O ^ IL AppHcMIon Date: 9/22/04 I oconplMt Letter Scat: 10/4/04 40-day DraOliM: Rt%tew ferted Nat Started ai ariO/l 2AM TO:Chair Rahn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator FROM: DATE: Mike Gafliron, Planning D.rcctor October 15,2004 SUBJECT: #04-3063 WJM Properties LLC (Momes Automotive Group) - 2605 West Wayzata Boulevard • Minor Amendment to Industrial Site Plan List of Exhibits: A - Application & Letter of Request B • Incomplete Notice I0'4/04 C - Revised Site Plan/Survcy D - Most Recent Approved Site Plan/Survcy E - Partial Lighting Study Pro\ided 10-12-04 F - Chronologv of Recent Zoning Applications G -Plat Map H - Property Owners List Application Summary ’: WJM Properties requests the following: 1.Revisions to the approved lighting plan (4 light standards) to add eight additional standalds for a total of 12. Evtrnsion of the deadlines for construction of the approved Site Plan an additional >*ear i a December 31,2005. Additionally, please note that staff has granted administrative approval for minor revisions to th parking lot layout in conjutKtion with reconstruction of drainage and storm sew er systems on thi site. These changes are noted for your information. Staff Rcconmeadaiioa: Approval of the requested extension to December 31,2005; table request for lighting expansion pending additional information. Mfaitaiiteaaifltei •M.3MJ WJ.M Praprrttn LLC Ortrtir IS, 2t04 Pit*) ParkiBg Lot Llgbling The applicant has indicated in the August 16.2004 letter from attorney Peter Johnson that 'Tu-o new li^t poles are proposed". This has since been verbally modified to arequest for nvelvc (12) tuin head poles, 2S* in height, using 1000 watt bulbs, spaced throughout the site as shown in Exhibit E. This partial lighting study was not accompanied by any detailed information about the fixtures proposed. Staff is advised by Mr. Johnson that the need for additional lighting comes from the applicant's insurance company, but no written information has been provided regarding the extent of the need or die insurance company's minimum requirements. The lighting study is incomplete from the per^xxtiv e of staff and the City Engineer, and the following information should be provided in order for staff to make an informed recommendation to the Planning Commission and Council: 1. Detailedrequestfiomapplicam ’sinsiirancccon^iyspecifxingiiidetail what initiinuun lc\d of lifting is required. 2. Detailed q)eci(ications on the txpc oflighting fixtures prqx>sed, including st> le, shielding, etc 3. Analysisby theapplicant ’slightingcompanyofotheroptions for lighting, including but not limited to one or more of the following: • varying the wattage of the fixtures - varying the height and/or number of fixtures - varying the placement of fixtures 4. Information on whether any building mounted lighting is proposed. 5. Elevation-view cross-section of parking lot from Highway 12 to back of parking lot, to show the relative heights of fixtures in relation to their visibility from Highway \2. Please note that it has been the City’s philosophy and policy that commercial and residential Ugliting he limited to only the extent necessary, to reuin the da^ night skies characteristic of this rural area. Extension of Approval Tlmcfransc Due to ongoing discussions w ith MCWD regarding the w elland status of the ditches on the site, applicant has ixM been able to make all the intended site improvements as quickly as anticipated. Staff has no problem with extending the approvals to December 31,2005. Staff Rccomnicndalion Staff recommends approval of extension of the timeframe for applicant to meet the conditions of approval ofResolution No. 4845 to December 31.2005; staff recommends Uiat the lighting request be tabled until the above-noted infonnation has been received and reviewed. CITY OF OROMO • GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION Application# CM- Data Racahrad Amount Paid (kjo oq PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 26C5 West Wayzata B<^le\>ard, OrcTiO, Minnesota Type of Application to be Filed Anerxicd CJP 33-118-23-n-0015Property Identification Number (P.I.O.). APPLICANT Name H3M Properties, LLC Phone 952-797-1 34F~ Address 12520 Wayzata Blvd. Phone(v^>~ ^5j-t75-l9Q-? U-our.sol >' __City Minnetonka Zip 55305 ______ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home)_ Address Date Property Acquired. Phone (work) _City______^ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS . $600.00 Residential Accessory Use . $600.00 Institutionai (church, school, etc.) . $600.00 Guest House/Quest Apartments . $600.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg .SSOOrOOCommerctal/Industrial Use - A.*:endnwnt . $600.00 Land Alteration ♦ Permit ____Grading and filling • designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining waits within 75* of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule J . $250.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) . After-the-Fact Fee • Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS X $660K)0 Commercial Site Plan Review (♦ consultant fees) ______$600.00 Vacation ______$600.00 Easement Vacation ______$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ______$600.00 Rezonir)g (PUD - refer to fee schedule) ______$600.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ______$100.00 Appeals ______Other - see Fee Schedule 1 #3063 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 5. 6. 8. 9. . ^mpleted Application Form. . Describe request in detail. .Certified Property Owners List of owr>ers within 350* of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance. Goverrvnent Center, A-603 300 South e” Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-346-5910). . Certificale of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. .Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. .Topographic survey (existif>g and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). . List of the legal names (include marital status) of ail persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). . Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). . As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIREO TO SUPPLY 3 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS AND 1 COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require scaled drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant arvJ Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:___________________________Date ________________ APPLICANTS 8I0NATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied isjrue ar^rairoct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature ^ _/ /I ^_____Date _1 OWNER’S SIGNATURE ^ The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the properly by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this Owner's signature ^ - _______Date /om Applcam must havs aS submiitais iniolhe^y offices 29 days belm the Flaming Conun/sKxi Mteting PlanningCommissionMMlirigsarahaldonthelhirdMondayofeachtTvxSh. Appkcanlt must be present at all acherkied review meelvi os of the Planning Convniaaion and CounoL If an applicanl is ufwMa to aland a scharkiad meatmg, plaasa maka arrangaments to have an aulhoruad aganl aSand in your plaoa arvl adviM lha Bulding A Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting #fl063 /!\4ici.tLA~*-Jl' "to t-.itn A ^ - ^^A. ?*lc^ + Cl^t.V/U^<J-vJV. lUuXi. LdU Pjr*- t. - AdAvi-.-^cJl Uol- ^ 4,W<»,oU4.<i «i\<-«.VcAv. - P/^csy-v«d SVcrw^ W«A ^C-Udu^ U.-Aic^4 ^S.Wci-'^ A^/<J^ t .;. J i /'2- PETER W. JOHNSON ATTORNEY AT LAW Thii i<Mm» b; tppoUitmcot onljr: ZMS COMMERCE ROtLEVARD ^lOtND. MINNESOTA SSM4 TELEPHONE (9S2) 49S-I9I0 FACUMILC (Ml) 4n-um PIcaM dtnct aQ cormpaadcacc/laquiriM lo l«SS E.AST W AYZATA ROLXEVARD. StTTE J0» WAVZAT A MINNESOTA SSJ9I TELEPHONE (952)47S ISIS FACSJNIILE (952) 475 0311 EMAIL - PJOHNSONat" At ZATALAW COM DIRECT DIAL: (952) 475-1907 CELLITAR: (612) 741-1907 August 16.2004 HAND DELIVERED Mr Mike Gaffron Senior Planning Coordinator City of Orono 2710 Kelley Parkway Orono, Minnesota 55356 Re: WJM, L.L.C. Property at 2605 Wayzata Blvd. West, Orono; Conditional Use Permit Modifications Dear Mr. Gaffron; WJM, L.L.C. asks that it be allowed to make minor changes to its approved Site Plan and Drainage Plan. Most of the proposed changes are a response to drainage prot^ems that have arisen since the property north of Wayzata Boulevard has begun to develop. As we've discussed, suface water has been b^ing up through the existing storm sewer lines into the loading dock area and under the footing and floor along the north side of the existing building. To address the drainage issues. WJM has replaced the storm sevrer lines that ran from the building and drained water into the ditch along the eastern boundary. The new storm sewer lines are in place and continue to dram the same surface water to the eastern ditch. The only significant change in drainage is that the storm sewer lines have more capacity and the north line now enters the eastern ditch approximately 3(X) ft. north of the point where the storm sewer line previously drained into the ditch. A schematic drawing showing the changes is attached as Exhibit A. r.f 4 p Mr. Mike Gaffron August 16, 2004 Page Two On Wednesday, WJM, L.L.C. will begin to resurface the large parking lot on the east of the building. The storm sewer lines under the parking area are constructed very shallow. Unfortunately, the invert elevation at the eastern drainage dit^x. s such that it was impossible to lower the storm sewer lines Consequently, WJM p • jses to create a green space at the mid<point in the parking area to create a surface drainage condition and to avoid driving and plowing over the storm sewer line. The shallow storm sewer lines wM be left in place, but the invert at the eastern drainage ditch will be moved south approximately 20 feet. The green space will indude five trees that will create a visual break in the eastern parking lot. WJM proposes to replace the lost parkirig spaces at the south end of the existing eastern parking lot These changes are depicted on the revised Site Plan which is attached as Exhibit B. Given the changes to the configuration of the parking area, two new light poles are proposed. These light poles are depicted on the revised Site Plan and would be constructed consistent with the approved lighting specifications. Finally. WJM. L.LC. requests that deadlines for construction pursuant to its approved Site Plan be extended through December 31.2005. WJM, L L.C. was only recently advised that the wetlarxls on the southwest of the property have been exempted from MCWD regulations Because of the lead times necessary for interior improvements, the new parkifkj area on the southwest and the new driveway would not be needed until 2005. Please let me know if it will be necessary to present these proposed changes to the Planning Commission and City Council. Very truly yours. Peter W. Johnson PWJ/pm enclosures C.IOocunwiil* tea StRaigiVU UMnOocumennWy OocunwntaZVMiMiAeBwVMonWt OronoiGanron 1 doe tififi'itiasiftwswi I- GlTYoTORONO 1 > 'f.Mitniclpd Omcts Sb«iUMrttt: 27SO Kelley Pa/tiway Ofono. MN 55356 ■Mti IMrttt: PO Bd6S Crystal Bay. VN 55323 0fl«6 October 4.2004 WJM Properties, LLC 12S20 Wayzala Boulevard Minnetonka, MN 55305 REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION SUBJECT: Zoning Application i»04-3063 The Cityof Orono is required to notify>T>u u-ithin fifteen (15) business da>-s of \-our initial application as to the status of your request for an amendment of ytsur commercial use Conditional Use Permit for the property located at 2605 West Wa>*zata Boulevard. Your incomplete application was received on September 22, 2004. Your application requests the following; 1.Approval for re\nscd site plan and draiiug&'grading plan, including revisions to tire storm sewer system, and revisions to the parking lot layout. Revisions to the approved lighting plan (4 light standards) to add tw o additional standards for a total of 6; wc are also advised verbally that you wish to double this to a total of 12. 3.Extension of the deadlines for construction of the approved Site Plan an additional year to December 31, 2005. Below is a list of items the City of Orono requires in order to complete review of your application. o Confirmation that the two attached sheets provided to the City on 6-29-04 accuritely depict the requested changes to the site plan. o Provision of a proposed site liglitmg plan depicting the locations, sizes, and styles of the proposed lighting fixtures as w ell as a lighting smdy to establish the need for the additional lighting proposed. Application #04-3063 isincoroplete. Your application has been published for a public hearing at the October 18 Planning Commission meeting; how'ever, this item can remain on that agenda only if the requested information is submined in a timely manner, i.e. no later than Monday, October 11, to allow adequate time for review. Please call me at (952) 249-4600 if ytyu have any questions. Sincerely. Michael P. Gaffron Planning Director cc: Peter Johnson ■Wtphaoa(»«)24M«t • in(9S2)24M«li irmr rl aniaa ■■ ■■ ri.*r V <:• ll C' (^’ hit 53 oi>-5 *—< U. UJ LO TT n 00 TT inm lor* os CO CDCN l&^irmiiiiiin'Tiiir si n“lllmiiiiiiLQ/IITiiiji|i||||irniiii[|||| (lUi iTlTH II m: 8l*5L. ~i PL/WlINC' SCHEDULE iTo^R: * (SssyfSsy ^ t ijagr t •/»'/» 0 tma t *n/»i •nvn r . ^MM/ H/»’ EXISTING BLDG, (0P«- STDHV) 176.247 SS. «s ■A __ ~\ ---- ----- r^OBIHS itoasi ojL nm — \ V —1i I- sst nK3> rMNB mA m wteat r^- iNG Bid JUMINC bed: E THE ' EYOND /^3E * / © 1 1 2 2^ /0x>o vJA.rT' /O-lz-ot/ a/ f^oT-CAh’t^'-^ 4 a>‘»-«-'^J'? /0-!'Z-O‘/ A $ 4 * ?•• 3: 3; i: 1- ]i 3; • *»< > »* 1 * j» * t t »* t* •» • 11 • 1 j* • »• • * * t t * S I* * » * » t * S 4 *44 *44 * * t * t 4 •l4 i I t 4 i.j 4 4 * t A, * t 4 i I f I i|i I Tn ,i(i j i|j ‘|i * 4 4 •;t * «|j 'I * 4 4I, 4t * 4 j{ i < l(i I 1 I « . •444 * 4 4 4 *j, , ^« <1 « < 4 *; 4 4 * *1 4 4 •'4 4 J r 4*4 -444 * I J J * « «la < * • * j » a » 4 4>4 4 * 4 4I4 4 4 4 4 T • 4 4 4 t 4 i 4 i 4 I 4 > 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44444 * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 •4444 44444 4 4 4 m, •44,4 4 4,44 4 4,44 4 4 4 4 4 44444 4 4 4 4 4 4 4,44 4 4 4 ,4 * 4 4 4 4 i I 4 J J 4 I I 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 • 4 4 4 .1 4 4 ,■ t t , i* ••• 4 4 4 4 A, 4 4I ....... * HTj ; j ;tTfS * *" • 4 4 4 t i 4 t 1 \ ‘ i 4 4 •4*444 * * •\4 4 4 4 , 4 , ,44 f ■ - , , **\***4l,4,^ •444 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 , • 44 I ••}••• 4 4 4 4 4 4 % • f, 4 4 4 , \ 4 4 , , • 4 4 4 4 1TTT7 • •* * * 1 i J I I I I ‘ t ' ' * ' I i I *¥•4 * » t ft i t **»4 »tt^ttt Jr:[ “ M ^ * I 1 J J s s '• • • * 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 -i-i *J * 4 4 4 4 4 4 t 4 4 t 4 i I • I J * • I ^ ^ i J J Hi 4 I I i J i I J I f I I * **‘**44 **1****4444 •4444444 •i* • i • 4 4 4 4 4 , . ••'{•• 4 4 . 4 4 4 ••[••444444 ‘ • i ! i t J J J < J *44 *44 • 44 • I » •444 * 4 4 4 , * 4 4 4 4 *4444 *444 • t ::*y '•••}*••••• * p BRIEF CHRONOLOGY OF ACTIVITY & APPROVALS Morrtes Fleet Sales, etc. 2605 Wa}^ta Boalevard FILEJ02-2795 May 22.2002 June 17.2002 August 12.2002 August 22.2002 August 27, 2002 September 2002 FILE #03-2902 April 23.2002 May 19. 2003 June 9,2003 Submitul of Application #02-2793 requesting comm’l site plan and CUP approvals Planning Comm. PH and 7-0 recommendation for approval Council adoption of ReSoNtioa No. 4845 (Document No 3706S43) - reference approved site plans and building elevation plans attached as Exhibits B and C of August 5,2002 Weinberger slaiT memo to Council • reference approved grading plan dated August 7, 2002 per City Engineer Kellogg letter of August 14.2002 Weinberger memo to Council indicating minor text revisions to Resol. 4845 were being made to allow phasing of the approved improvements. The memo was in the Council’s 8-26-02 packet as information only (no action required). DO discussion resulted, hence the changes were deemed accepted; however, the phasing language did not get added to the City record copy nor to the copy recorded at Hennepin County as Document No. 3706843. Nevertheless, the phasing language should henceforth be considered as having been approved. MPCA Letter of No Further Action Determination MCWD letter indicating permit approval subject to a number of conditions requiring action and subminals by Morrie’s Submittal of Application #03-2902 requesting amendment to prior approvals, to include: 1) CUT for motor fuel station; 2) Refinishing west side of building with EIFS; and 3) Approv'al to construct 40* bituminous driveway from east parking lot to east property line. Planiung Comm. PH and S-0 reconuiiendalion for approval Council adoption of Resolution No. 4993 (Docur.iem No. 3916367) - reference Exhibits of May 19,2003 Gaffron memo to PC .Mm M«rrfas CkfWMiog PateZ Fn j- August 20.2003 Submftl&I of Application W3-2948 requesting 16-monih extension of the approvals granted in Resolution No. 4845 due to inability to obtain MCWD final permit approvals in a timely manner; and that a 5* fence no less than 50% <^>aque. be substituted for the screening benn and plantings required the north and northeast wnd of the cast parking lot. September 15,2003 Planning Comm. PII and 7-0 recommendation for approval October 13,2003 Council adoption of ResolalJoa No. 5059 (DocumemNo 394i7S9) - reference Exhibits of September 10,2003 Gaflron memo to PC FILE «03-29fi3 October 22,2003 Submittal of Application #03-2963 requesting commercial site plan approval for a 20* % 75’ addition to the existing detached garage on the property. November 17,2003 Planning Comm. PH and 6-0 recommendation for approval November 24,2003 Council adoption of Rcsolulion No. 5084 (moi fUed as of 9/17/04) - reference Exhibit A attached to resolution December 11,2003 P. Johnson letter to MCWT3 re: .MnDOT drainage &. wetland issues December 24,2003 MCWD (Wyatt) letter to Johnson indicating that while permit was conditionally approved by MCWD board it was never issued because conditions were not satisfied; and noting Monies needs to get MnDOT approval to use pond capacity... March 31,2004 W>-att correspondence re: be disagrees isith Svoboda; W> att concludes that the ditch is ooi exempt and is subject to buffers, etc. Mid-summer. 2004 Kellogg. Gappa, MPG met with Johnson and Maurice Wegener to discuss drainage ditch issues along east boundary, etc. MPG gave verbal approval for change in parking lot configuration to create large swalc/pond in middle of lot, allowing lost s.f of parking area to be replaced in kind (same s.f. as that lost) at the south end of the main east lot. M«rrta CluwMiag rigt3 August 16,2004 Peter Johnson letter to MPG re: 1) Looking for fomul ^proval for grading and drainage changes as earlier disctissed. iiKluding relocation of stonn sewers and addition of a green space in mid-parking lot, adding 5 trees to this space to break up the parking lot. MPG has administratively approved this very minor revision to the site plan, Peter wants written OK; 2) Wants to add nvo light poles (with double heads) to the existing 4 poles approved at 25' height for a total of 6 light poles in the east parking lot, 3) wants deadline for construction extended to December 31,2005 since not all work approved with Resolution No. 4845 can be accomplished by 12-31 *04 due to delays as a result of discussion with MCWD regarding wetland exemptions. September 17,2004 MPG phone discussion with Johnson - now they are looking to increase lighting in the east lot to 12 fixtures; MPG indicated if they can reduce pole height to 15' w e w ill have no problem with that change. September 20,2004 MPG call to Johnson to notify him that he should apply for a CUP amendment by noon Wednesday 9/2204 for the October PC meeting, for the lighting changes and the extension to 12-31-05. FILEJ04-3063 September 22,2004 Submittal of Application #04-3063 requesting amendment of CUP to allow revisions to parking lot grading/drainage plan and for increased parking lot lighting. r—T/vf* — - OM-3C<;0 // 38 3311823110003 Dahlstrom Development LLC 7745 Polaris !^c Maple Grove. MN 55311 38 3311823120008 Professional Prop. Of Orono LLP 835 Partcnwood Long Lake. MN 55356 33 3311823130002 Ace Properties LLC 5465 Stale H\^'y 169 N Plymouth, MN 55442 38 3311823130011 VCI Capital Inc. P.O. Box 375 Long Lake, MN 553S6 38 3311823130012 VCI Capital Inc. P.O. Box 375 Long Lake, MN 55356 38 3311823130015 WJM Properties LLC 12550 Wayzata Blvd Minnetonka, MN 55305 72 311823140005 Church of St. George 133 Brov^-nRd.N Long Lake. NfN 55356 72 3311823140018 Metrotech Products LLC do Tek Products Inc. P.O. Box 547 Ung Lake, MN 55356 38 3311823310010 B N & Santa Fe RR Co. Property Tax Dept. P.O. Box 961089 Fort Worth. TX 76161 •OtiscAUaAV ® 72 3311823140011 Etco Properties Inc. 15500 Wayzau Blvd. #754 Wayzata, MN 55391 72 3311823140019 City of Long Lake 450 Virginia Avenue Long Lake, MN 55356 38 3311823420008 Speak The Work Church 515 Jersey Ave. S Golden Valley, MN 55426 AbiAV-oo-oori 72 3311823140015 Rothgreaves Holdings LLC 3085 Casco Point Rd Wayzata. MN 55391 72 3311823140020 Lartch Development Co. Fred Hanus 15801 West Oaks Minnetonka, NfN 55345 38 3311823420013 NfN DOT Director of R/W Operations St. Paul. MN 55155 ,09is iirwwai *»n 6ui)uu^ *«j j ui*r MIMTESOFTIIK OKONO ('OM>iissio> mf.ktim; Moflday. Sc|tfcinb«r 20. 2004 6:00 o ’clock p.m. OI.D BISIM SS 3. 402.2830 cm' OF OKONO. BI'II.IIIX; IIFIOIITS. COI>F A>IFM>\IFNTS. 6:06 pjn.-6:ll p.m. Gundiach noted this item was renewed at the last Planning! C'ommission work session (lundlach indicated the Ctt>' of Onmo is requesting that the current building height code he amended to relicct the cunent policies which base been in place since 20«J1 or earlier and which have been written asa ptilicy statement since November of 2*K)2. (iundlach indicated it was the intention of the C'lty in November of 2002 tluii the policy statement would eventiuilly be incorporated into the code, which is the action that Staff IS proposing at this time. Gundiach indicated the proposed new building height language has changed slightly since the last review by the Planning C'umnus.sion. w ith SlatYelectmg t«i amend every single height code m each zoning distnct rather than uy mg to clanfv the 2-1 2 story limitation and the .0).|vHit limitation within the building height definition. Gundiach indicated Stall felt the amendment to each zoning district was a clearer clanrication and that Staff has alsti defined the half-story separately rather than dctming it in the building height definition, (iundlach noted the word median has replaced the word average in the definition of building height, which was discussed at the work session. In addition, the highest point for measuring was further clarified when dormers and windows evi.st in the upper story or half story, with the upper nx'asuri.ig point being the median pviint betw een the top of the w indow and the top of the jvak •Staff IS recommending appmval of the language a> outlined in the Plamicr ’s Kcporl dated SeptemKT 20.2004 There were no public comments regarding this application. Bremer commented she prefers the new language l-cshe stated he concurs v% nh Bremer, and commenle«l that in his opinion the proposed language is more consistent with vvhat the onginal intent wxs when 2-1 2 story v»r .'O-fiKii was initially drafted Ralin moved. Bremer seeomlrd. to recommend approval of the Building lleigiil Code Amendment for the ( ity ofOrono as oulUMd In the .September 20. 2004 Planner ’s Report. VOTF: Ave«6..Nav%0. 4. 404-3024 Cm OF OKONO. (IP FOR VFIIK I F STOR \( JF - (OOF A.\IFM).MK.NT. 6:12 p.m.-6:45 p.m. Gaffron m>ted this is the latest version of the aiTX'ndment to tlw City's large vehicle storage for vehicles exceeding 14.000 pounds gross weight. The Pbnmng ('ommission at us .August .11” work session reviewed the pros and cons of allowing large vehicle storage as a conditional asc Gaffron indicated he diKs not feel a conditional use permit is the best approach to this situauon since a condiuonal use permit in a code generally means that that is a use that is allowed in a district provided certain conditions are met. Gal Iron noted the Planning Commission at its work session dtu express some concern whether it is legal and advisable to limit the conditional use permit to just those existing users llur ( ity Attorney PAGE 2 Milfc ittiiftai rtmiii* ■ MIMTESOFTIIE ORONO PL/%.»'l>iG COMMISSION MEETING Moaday. Scfdcmbrr 20.2004 6:00 o’clock p.i«. (MM-3024 ('Ity of Orooo, Cl'P for Vehicle Slorate - Code Ameadment, Coatlaued) has subsequently reuevsed the amendment and has indicated that he believes the cunditiunal use permit ean be established for just the existing users (iaffron indicated the City Ati»>mcy has recommen led that langtiage be included to allow existing users or people who currently store large vehicles be allowed to prove they have stored large vehicles for some prior period of time. Gaffron stated he has drafted a new version of the current exlenor storage section of the code and also created language fur a cundiuonal use entry that would be incorporated into the two acre and five acre /ones. The language relating to parking of vehicles in *'R ‘* districts in excess of I4.0<J0 pounds gross vehicle weight has been amended to include language that discusscs the variety of potential negative impacts on the surrounding neighborhood that the City is attempting to address with this amendment. GafTron suted in order to oddrevs the existing siiuaiion.s in the C ity, the language in C'lMidition A has been amended i.. read. “For any pnipcrty at lexst 2 acres but less than 5 acres in area. v*here it can be showed that pnor to the effective date of this ordinance such a vehicle was previously stored on a regular basis pnor to and after January 1.2004. a Vehicle Storage conditional use permit may be granted subject to the conditions established for such conditional use permit if allowed in the respective Toning distnet in which the property is located.” Gaffron staled a minor clanfiealion was also made to Condition D. “Vehicle must not be visible from neighboring propcrucs and public streets....” Gaffron reviewed the draft language for a conditional u.se permit entry to be added to appropriate residential districts. Gaffron slated the pro.oscd language to be added is as follows; Vehicle Storage. The siivrage or parking of one or more vehicles with a Grow Vehicle Weight (GVWj in excess of 14.000 pounds on a property at leo.sl 2 acres but less than < acres in area, where it can be shown that pru.. to the effective date of this ordinance such a vehicle was previously stored on a regular basis pnor to and after January I. 2U04. Approval shall be conditioned on the following: No such use shall be allowed on a lot less than 2.0 acres in area. b. Property owner must be vehicle owtk*t or operator. c. Vehicle must be set back 50 feet from property Imes Gafl'ron noted the Planning Commission should consider w hether the 50<fiHit standard is acceptable if large vehicle storage is allowed on a lot smaller tiun 5 acres. d. VchK'le must not be v tsiblc from neighbonng properties and public streets; vegetative scrcenmg is preferred. e Maintenance of said vehicle shall iwcur w ithin an enclosed building. f. The vehicle shall not constitute a nuisance at any time: and g. In a shared driveway situation, the City must have on file on agreement signed by all current dnveway users. Gaffron noted this version u different from w hat was discussed at the last work session, and that the Planning Commission has the option to either table the application or make a recommendation to the Council based on w hat is before the Planning Commission tonight. Ifiere were no public comments regarding this application. PAGE 3 MIMTES OF THE ORONC) PLANMNC; COMMISSION MEKTINO MoMlav. September 20.2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. (#04-3024 Cil>’ofOrooo.CT'Pfur Vehicle SlorsKv -f'mle Amrodmenl,Cootioued) Fnt/lcr inquired whether the gro&s vehicle weight would he cunsidca*d the licenMrd vehicle uctght. <iafTn»n stated it would he Fnt/Jer inquired whether equipment that is nut licensed is also addressed, such as graders and htihcais (iundlach stated if the vehicle or equipnKnt is not licensed for transp«>rtalion over a public roadway, hy state statute it is defined as special mobile equipment, which is the definition that the City follows, (iundlach indicated the equipment would also need tu be stored mdoors. leslie inquired what the City’s definition of nuisance is in a situation such as this, l.eslie mquired whether then; were legal standards that con.stiiute what a nuisance is. (iaffron stated under public nui.sance, as defined in the Municipal Cixle, it includes ’‘maintaining or permitting a condition w hich unrcas«inably annoys, injures, or endangers the safely, health, morals, comfort or repose of any considerable number of members of the public; or inicrfcnng with, obstrueiing. or rendenng dangerous for passage any street, public nghl-of-way. or waters u-sed bv- the public: or any other act or omission declared by law to be public nuisance " (iaffron stated to his recollection the code diK's not specifically define nuisance but only public nuisance. l.eslie inquired whether it is redundant t. ha e nuisance ipc'’ ded within the Cl ’P if there is already a provision fur nuisance. (iaffron pointed out that if it were listed as a public nuisance, it would lessen the language becauM; a greater number of people would need to be a*Tccted and complain about the situation. (iundlach staled in the City’s code there is a provision regarding the maintenance of private proper!), junk, debns. refuge, litter, (iundlach stated that section als<i covrrs noxious weeds and tither public health or safely hazards, (iundach noted that section calls any violation of this section a nuisance and a public and safely hazard, which also is not defined as a public nuisance. Ciundlach suted the provtsiun for storage of junk cars, furniture, inoperable motor vehicles, is also declared to be a nuisance by the environment chapter of the code. (iaffron stated if the Planning Commission would like to use the word nuisance in the proposed language, he would suggest that language be included to say that a violation of this is by definition considaed a nuisance (ialTron suted another option coi I be to add to that section of the properly mainteruTK'e vehicle sitirage that does not meet this proposed language. l.eslie ptiinted out that section cuncnilv e«'sts as a regulation for all property owners, and that in his view another reference to nuisance dsics m>i expand any of the expectations that the (iiy would have on property owners. I.-she stated eliminating Subpomt f does not mean that a nuisance is allowed. It would simply mean that the City is not adding another inierpreution to the word nuisance. Leslie inquired whether in the shared driveway situabon there would be a new agreement that would be required if the conditional use permit is allowed. FACE 4 MIMTESOFTHE URO.NO PLANNENC; COMMISSION MEETING Monday. ScpCenibcr 20.2MM 6:00 o'clock p.m. IMM-3024 my oTOroao. CT’P for Vehklr Siorof* - C'odc Amendment, Conikined) Leslie recummendcil that in addition to documenting hou long the ust* !uis existed on a certain property, that the number of vehicles currently being used be d«K-umcnied. Leslie stated in his opinum the use could be expanded unless it is restricted. Rahn inquired \shciher a particular vehicle sh«>uld be specified rather than a vehicle of a certain vseighl. Leslie stated in bis wc* that would be dilTicull sii.ee the ('ity is try ing to accommodate people who li\r here and arc m a business that requires a large vehicle. Fntzler noted that a 14.000-pound vehicle is not a dump truck and that a l4.000-p<iund vehicle is basically a one-ton dual pickup. Bremer suggested the number of \ ehicles be limited and that the number of vehicles that cunently exist would be the maximum amount allowed on that property. Jurgens inquired whether the nonconfonnmg use section in the code conluins something relating to nonexpansion of the use. Gaffron stated there is a nonconforming use section that says expansion of a nonconforming u.se is not allowed, but noted that it is diificult to define what is considered an expansion. GalTron stated in this case increasing the number of trucks could be wntien into the conditional use permit Jurgens stated in his view language should be included that allows replacemenl wiih j similar vehicle. Brenwr inquired whether there is a liniii on the maxinuim weight of a vehicle that would K* allowed. Gadfon stated this amendment applies to existing users only that can be over I4.0U0 pounds if they meet all the conditions. Gaffron stated with a vehicle over l4.(M)n-pounds. the negative impacts on the neighborhood would have to be considered. Kahn noted these situations would be looked at individually. Kahn inquued whether that review would be done administratively. Galfron stated since it is a conditional use permit process, each application would come before the Planning ('ommission and specific conditions could he recommended at that time. Ixslie inquired what the best process would be to incorporate the recommendations nede by the Plarming Commission tonight. Gaffron suggested the Planning Commission table this application to allow him time to draft the new language and to allow the City Atuimey time to review the changes. Leslie inquired w hether there w as a way to speed up resolution of this amendment PAGE? MIMTESOFTIir ORONO pij^nmm; c mf.ftim; Moaday. September 20.2004 6:00 o'clock p.m. (MI4*J04t Sle^ea fer^a, t'oacteacd) PcTMan staled they would like to store personal items in there, muing at the present time he has two trailers sitting ouLside, personal ATV's in the garage, and other items sitting in the yard. Persian indicated he would like to have all those items stored inside. Kahn commented a number of residents w ithin the City base the same type oi items, and noted that the proposed structure is the si/e of four, four-car garages. Rahn inquired what the sidewall height is tW this building Persian stated the sidewalls are 12 feet. Rahn inquired whether the slope of the roof would he 4-12. whteh would make the peak of the nwif IS feet and the median height IS feet. Persian indieatcd that is eorrect. Gundlaeh stated the height ol the structure is restneted by the height of the principisl structure and cannol c.\eccd the pnneipal structure. Jurgens inquired w heiher .Xeel's easement .states that no buildings can he constructed within the eascHKmt or whether there is a height rcsiriciion. Per lan indicated he was informed that he could not construct any budding within 75 feel of the center Imc. Persian noted ihcir mound system is constructed within a portion of the co-sement. Fnt/lcr stated he is not in favor of that si/c building un a l<M that is 2.9 acres in site. PerMan inquired what the thought priKcss is behind allowing three or four smaller huiIJings raiha than one brger building Persian slated he is aware i l a property on Ochord Park Road that exceeds the schedule for building si/c that is visible from County Rood 6. CiafTron stated to his rtcollection that building was based on housing a vehicle and the minimum si/e and length fur that vehicle was pan of w hat drove the approval for that spccilic vehicle. Persian stated to his know ledge the vehicle docs not fit within the building Gafl'ron indicated that is alssi his understanding at the present time, but that the st/c of the building was approved S4i that the vehicle could fit within the structure. Kempf commented one of the reasons for limiting the si/e of the structure is the visual impact. Kempf stated m his view the visual impact docs not apply here given the amount of trees on the property . Kempf stated it is difficult to functionally find at ylhing wrong w ith the applicant ’s proposal and that it comes down to the issue of protecting the code Persian stated he understands this type of structure would not be appropriate ifhc was living in a neighborhood where there were neighbors in close proximity , but that he believes it is more aesthcbcally pleasing to have one building rather than three. Persian stated in his opinion only the roof PAGE It L MIMTES OF 1 HF. ORO.NO planmm ; commission meetim; MoMlay. Scpiembtr 20.2004 6:00 o'clock p.m. <004-30411 Sleveo Pcniu. Continued) of the proposed structure may be visible Ihim his dnveway. miting that the grade ui the lot dues slope down somewhat. Persian indicated the surrounding vx'gclation would remain. Pasian staled their grul would be to construct one building for storage. Rahn inquired whetha the applicant was w illing to pursue whether the alterrule septic site could be sw'appcd with the building locaiion Persian stated he has submitted one perk lest already and that another perk lest may be necessary if the sites arc swapped. Persian indicated the ctmeem he ha% with swapping the sites is the location of a pressure line that be would prefer not to dnvr any motonzed vehicles o\rr. Rahn stated in his view the structure could he located in a conforming locution w ithout the need for a setback variance. Fnt/lcr commented no hardship has been dunon.«tTaied fur the vanoiKC. Persian staled he interprets the ordinance as trying to protect the integnty of the neighbors and that, despite the size, is not a nuisance to the neighbors. Fntzlcr stated the hardship has to validate the variance, and that he is mil in favor of a variance ftir the setbacks or for the size. Jurgens noted the iiorth line is the property line that abuts the railroad right-of-way. Jurgens inquired whether the setback is necessary due to the size of the building as w ell as the need to access the building and avoid the mound. 'ersian stated mat is correct, and that the builduig was also pushed back because of the .Xcel easement on the property. furgens indicated he is not in favor of the setback vananee since there are other locations whae the structure could be constructed on this lot. noting the budding could possibly fit north of the dnveway turnaround, w hieh would eliminate the need fur one of the setback variances. Jurgens stated simply because one location is not as desirable as another docs not eonsiiluic a hardship. Jurgens indicated he also has a concern w ith the size. Jurgm.s inquired whether the setback requirements change w iih the size of a structure. Gundlach indicated if the building is 750 square feet, the setback is 10 Icci from the side or rear, if it is between 750 and 1000. it has to be 15 feet: and if it is in c.xccss of I0(M) square feet, it has to meet pnncipal structure scibacks. Jurgens stated two structures could be cunstruclcd rather than one large one. which would meet the setbacks and w ould not encroach upon the mound system. Jurgens indicated he is not in favor of the mirth side yard setback and the oversized accessory structure area variance. Gaffrun noted there is a 50-faot separation between the lot ime and the railroad easement. PAGE II j r MIMTESOFTIIF OROMI PI^NMNCiC’OM.Ml.VSION .MEKTIMi .Moadav. Scplraibcr 20.2004 6:00 o ’clock p.m. |«04-304S Sirtea Prr%iaa. Caatiaard) Kcmpf inquired whether there is any plan to construct a trail in that area. GafTron Mated he is not aware of any plans lo consii act a trail m this area by either the Ciiy or the homcowTiers association. Leslie staled in his opinion it is a dangerous precedent to judge priipcrtics based on how s4mKthing looks when the code is very specific on what is allowed and what is not allowed. Leslie commented several optioas have been discussed that would allow the applicant to have the storage he is requesting. Bremer stated she is not opposed to the ItKation of the structure, but that the si/e of the building is excessive. Bremer stated what the code is trying to prevent in part is to have a property that appears to have two houses on it. Bremer indicated the intent of the code is to maintaui the rural integrity of the properly, and that there may be other residents that would like to construe a similar si/e structure on lots that do not have the significant number o'' trees on it as this lot dtx*s. Bremer commented the proposed ItK'alion makes the most sense for this lot but that the size should be reduced. Leslie stated two buildings would accommodate wnai the applicant is propiuing to store in the «hed and that a hardship has not been demonstrated. I eslie staled in his view the building can be reduced, which w ould reduce the setbacks and comply w ith the code. Bremer staled it might be better if the tests on the alternate septic site w ere av ailable hcfiHC a final dccuion is made on this application. Jeff Gon, .Miirton Buildings, noted that there is a vegetation bufTcr on three sides of the building and that It would be more aesthetically pleasing to have one building rather than multiple buildings. Rahn inquired what the purpose is for having 12*foot sidewalls Gon staled with 12-fool sidewalls, the overhead door would be 10 feet, noting that on a resideniial home the overhead diHK is seven or eight feet, (ion indicated the 'allcr sidewalls would accommodate a larger iient Rahn staled he still has a concern regarding the m/c of tlw structure, and that if two buildings were constructed, the need for the vananccs would be climinaled. Leslie suicd in his view two smaller buildings would be more attractive rather than one large industnal liMiking structure. I.eslic noted that the appearance of Mmicthing also tends to be in the eye of the beholder and can vary from person to person. Rahn suicd the Planning lommission has lo grant variances based on a hardship, which has nut been demonstrated. Leslie stated even if the alternate septic site cannot be swapped with the structure, a number of the Planning Commission members have a concern regarding the size of the building. Leslie staled the viability of the alternate septic site should be determined before a final decision is made PAGE 12 MIMTIuSOFTMi: ORO.NU PLA>.MM; CO.MMISSIO.N MEETING .MMday, September 20,2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. (W04-304S Sierra Per^bw, C'oMlatted) Kahn indicalcd the applicant has the option of tabling his application until the results cortK* back on his alternate septic site or have the Planning ('ommission vole on each of the vanances Kahn inquired what the setbacks wmild be if the building w ere reduced to 1200 square feet (iundlach indicated any accesssiry structure over |t>00 tcet has to meet principal structure seibacks. Leslie noted the setback wuuld be 15 feet if the structure were reduced to lOUU square feet. Jurgens indicated he would be willing to make a motion approving the vanance to permit tiv.' propo.sed storage shed to be located nearer the front or street lot line but denying the variance for the north side yard setback and the oversi/ed accessory structure area variance. Bremer indicated she would al.so he in favor of the vanance to permit the pitvposed storage shed to be located nearer the front since that is in her view a more pnvaie location Persian stated his concern with the smaller si/e structure is that the building would Ih* full and that he would prefer to have all of his stuff stored inside. Jurgens commented the applicant would have the option to construct another building if he is stil! in need of additional storage. Jargeas moved. Bremer seconded, to reconunend approval of a vuiaace to permit the proposed Blorage shed to be located nearer the front or street lot line Hum the prkKip^ baiMlax. ami to recommend denial of a north side yard setback variance and oversicH accessory stractare area variance for the properly located at lOOS Hunt Farm Road. Ciundlach stated the applicant would be able to construct a INM square fiHii building but would have to meet the 30*fout setback on the nurth side. VOTE: Ayes 4. Nays 2. LesNe and Fritrlcr Opposed. Leslie stated he wi old prefer to sec the structure built in a liKatiun that meets the C'lty's setback requiremcnt.s Frit/ler indicated he would prefer to vote on the application as a whole rather than on the individual variane-8. 6. *04.3049 WOOOIIILL t Ol NTRY CLl B, 200 M UUUIIILL ROAD - ( ONDITIONAL I SE PERMIT. 7:21 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. Mark Albrecht appeared on behalf of the Wuudhill Country Club. GafFhei stated the Woodhill Country Chib is currently undergoing major remodeling of the mam club facilities and is requesting approval for temporary placement of a trailer to be used as an office during PAGE 13 MIMTESOFTIIF ORONO n A.NM.Xf; COMMISSION MEFTINCJ MoMlay. Scplemb«r 20,2004 6:00 o'clock p.m. (IV04-3049 MoodkUl ( oaalo Chib. Coaiiaacd) the construction. Iltc trailer will be located along the west side of the tennis bam. which is appruumatcly 450‘ front the nearest property boundary and more than «MJ' from the nearest residence. (iaffron mdicated Woodhill C'ountry Club is requesting a conditional use permit to allow the trailer to remutn in place for a period not to exceed mi>c mtmihs. (ialtr«m stated the City's cihJc does ihm allow for licensing or another method of approving a lemporary use like this (iat fron noted the ( ouniry Club has had a conditional use permit for a number of years. Stall recommends apptiital of the conUiUonal use permit anwodment to a!U>w the u.se of the propo.scd trailer olhcc module to be located adjacent to the teruos bam for a perntd of nine m«>nths. with the condition that the trader be removed followmg coiLstruction In addition, the trader would need to meet an> accessibility codes or budding codes applicable to temporary structures Ihere were no public comments regarding this application .Mbrceht stated the nuin reason for the trailc*r is the fact tlut the mam club house will be inaccessible dunng the remodeling and there needs to be an area for stall to answer ph«mes. etc. Albrcvht n»>ted the deadline for occuparvy is Jime 30'*’. and the> winild like to hasr the trader removed as soon as the construction is completed. Albrecht indicated v ery little grading would be needed for placement of the :r :iler in this location. Kempf inquired whether there would be any plumbing in the trader. Albrecht indicated ihere would not be. Breoicr moved. I.cslic sceoaded, to recummcBd approval of the eondiiioaal uve permit amcndmcBt for the Woodhill Country Club, 200 M oodhill Avenue, to allow the uve oftbe proposed trailer offlee module to be located adjacent to the tenaU barn for a period not to evceed uiacrooatbs. with the trailer to be removed by June 30. 2005. VUTII: .\vr% 6. NayaO. 7. INM-3051 KKVIN AND JI I.IK HT7.PATK1CK. .3.^ W K.ST I.AkK .STRKET - VARI.\NCi:s, 7:30 p.m, -11:211 p.m. Kevin and Julie Fti/patnck. Applicants, w ere present (iundlach stated the applicants are requesting three variances m t»rdcT lo construct a new residence «*n an existing lot The first vananee is a lot area variance in order i«i pemnt constnKiion of a new residcTKC on a lot that ts .643 acres in si/c when two acres nomuily is required Ihc second vanonce being requested is a lot width variance to pcmiit coiisiructior. on a lot that is 5U 50'm width at the shtireliiic and 75’ sctbick when 200* is normally required. Ijisily. north and st>uth side yard sciback variances arc hemp requested lo permit side yard setbacks of 10* whra .30' is mnmally required. Staff recommends approv al of the variances since a hixise has existed on the 50-fooi wide lot since 1957; the aT^ltcanis are not able to acquire any additional land; the lot was legally formed at the time it was platted; and if the 30' side yard setbacks were enforced, the lot would be deemed unbuildabic PAGE 14 MIM TES OF THE oKo.No c'u.mmissio.n .\ieetim; MuniUy. SrpCenbcr 20.2004 6:00 a’clock p.m. (004-3051 Kr«iB aad Julk Fll/pairick. roatinurd) (iundloch iiklicalcd the applicants have met all structure coverage, bkc sctKick. a\cra|:c lakcshorc setback and hardemer requirements I he building inspector and city engineer have reviewed the propvised grading plan and recommended several changes, which the applicants have met (iundlach noted the two neighbors to the south have submitted a letter objecting to the proposed variances. StatThas reviewed the letter in detail, and while stafl'agrees with the neighb«>rs' ptisiiion in theory, a property owner's nght to devehip ebshes with this theory StatThas included excerpts Irom the ('ommunity .Management Plan regarding the (Tty's policies on land development Stair further finds that denial of the varunces would be a significant change in pvilicy as these tvjKs of requests are oHen made and approved, (iundlach indieu.-J there are several neighlwirhtHHls where the (Tty could have prev ented rebuilding in hopes of land conMilidation but never did. StalTis therefore recommending approval of the application. Kevin l‘it/patrick staled based on his review of Planning Coninussion minutes and (Tty Council minutes, it ars that the ('ity has typically approved lot urea, lot width, and side yard setback vanances on 50-fiMit lots in the past, and if the vananccs arc denied, it would be a significant change in policy and would negatively impact this lot as well as the two landowners to the north of this property who also own 50*f«Hit lots and other similar landowners throughviut the (Tty Fit/putrick indicated they have also come to understand through working w ith staff the idea of preservation and other rationale u.sed by the City for when new con.struction happens. Fit/patnek noted the structure was svild as a kiuKk-doun K*cau.se of its faulty electrical system, deteriorating structure, and water in the basement. FTt/patrick staled he hopes their proposed improvements will help bnng this property more into compliance with the (Tty's code. Fit/patnck noted the hardcover is being eliminated in the 0-75' /one and is being reduced in the 75'-250’ /one from .^5 percent down to 2.^ percent. In addition, rc'storation of the takeshore is k‘ing proposed along with improved dtainage in the neighborhiNMl Fit/patrick stated the Community Management Plan outlines the rights of a property owner, with the plan stating that all landowners mast have equal land use opponunities. No landowner should he denied the right to develop his or her land by any stage growth, land banking, or no-growth policy, prov ided the develi'pment can be done consistent w ith the Community Plan. FTt/patnek stated in hi% opinion isolating these lliree lots on West Fake would constitute land banking that would significantly restrict their ni^ts to develop the property as well as the rights of other owners of 50-foot parcels throughout the city. FlU'patrick indicated the second principle that drew his attention contained in the Community Management Plan is the preserv ation of neighborhoods FTt/patnek stated they wae drawn to Orono for Its neighKirhiKHls and schtHiIs and the diversity of htiusing located within those neighb*irhtH*d«. FTt/patnek stated they are m agreement with the statement conuined in the ( ommunity Management Plan that says must of Oruno's existing urban neighborhixtds are homogenous consisting of newer and older homes, intermingled with an occasiorul vacant lot or a large municipal lot. Fhcrc is no single neighborhoixl that is in need of complete reiKwol or rehabilitation. Fit/pa*nck suted the dominant land ownership on one street or complete rehabilitauon of West Lake is contrary to the City's intention. PAGE 15 MIMTESOFTIIK OROM) ri.A.\MM; (*mi.MISSIO% MKFTIMi MuniLiy, September 20, 2004 6:00 o'clock p.m. (M)4-305l Ke%ln and Jnllr FiKpalrick, < ontinued) Kii/palrtck staled he was unable to find any history requinn^ lots to he accumulaie«l or combined in tirdcr to create a larger lot. Fii/pairick staled the central character of West Ijikc consists of older homes, sitme large lake cottages and some small cottages, some rental homes, and some family homes, and that diversity sh«mld he preserved. Fii/patrick indicated the character of lh«' neighborhotid has a lot to do with the pcv*ple living there, which is an essential character worth preserving as well Michael ('•onar.. XWW Wot Bu-h I akc Rt»aJ. BUx>mmg:«>n. indicated he i> here on behalf of .Michael and c Shields and Riihert and l.isa I.nck>on I’nman stated the Shields and Fncks«ins arc opp*»sed to the construction of a new residence i»r. this Uh. and noted that it is difl'icult to oppose new neighbors coming into the neighborhood. C'ronan indicated their opposition is based on two cases. First, the extreme aggressiveness of the proposal that the Fit/patncks have brought forward to rebuild on this site, and secondly, the whole question of the future of West I ake. t'ronan stated the current home that exists on that lot is a modest home with a Hat roof t'ronan stated the proposed residence with a ps'uked nmf is going to be a major change m the neighborhiNid as well as the lot coverage, the massing, the bulk and height of the residence. Secondly. Cronan noted there is no mitigation being olTered at all. Cronan slated no landscaping is being proposed between the two residences and that the Fit/paincks have not provided the ( ity with elevations ol the stiulh or north sides of this property. C'ronan stated the Planning i'ommission should also consider the planning fulua* of West I akc. t 'rinun indicated there is a trend in Orono to cons4»lidaie small lots, particularly in this ncighborhvHid. Cronan stated at the time West I ake was originally pbltcnl. there were 26 .^O-foot lots (Her tinK that vision tif having 50-ftNil lots has changed more towards that of the I R-I.\ Atning distnct. which has two-acre k>Ls with lOO-fcK»t frontage Cn>nan stated Oronti's code says it prefers two-acre lois. and that presently there only exist nirve lots m this neighKwhiMtd. with all of them being larger than 50 ’ lots Cnman pointed out a new home in that neighborhtHHi has not been c«mstructed for met 50 years and that there has been a trend in the past years to move towards complying w ith the ctnle. C’ronan stated the issue is redevelopment, not first development ('nman siaicxl alth«»ugh the existing home IS very modest and may not fit the Fit/paincks’ needs, it docs have a reasonable use that can cimtmue to be used if it is nuiniaine ’ Cronan explained they are not asking the Fit/patncks to land bank this lot Cronan stated in Ins opinion statTs di.scu.vsion concerning policies deals more w ith expansion of the MlfSA line and first dcvclofvment type issues rather than the redevelopment i»f substandard lots w ithin the city. C’ronan stated in hts opinion there is a difTercnce between redevelopment and development and someone wailing for c.xpansion of the MUS.A line. Cronan noted the Shields and Fneksons have more than twice the money as the Fit/patncks invested in their lots and that a million dollar price tag is not a bad price for a lakeshore lot in Orono. C'ronan stated PAGE 16 Ml.MTKSOFTIIK OKO.NO V VNM.M; <'0.\I.\1I.S.SI0> ^IKKl iNc; %*'-iday, SeplrmiH-r 20.2004 6:00 o*chick p.m. (M4>305I Kr«in aid Jalkr Fit/palrick. foBtiaacd) the history of the neighhortuHid i> that tho>e snull lots have been aettutred and combined sluiviy in order to creale ’he larger lots. Tronan slated it is not out of the ordinary to request the Kit/palrcks to try to comply with the I.R*I A standards, and that redevelopment should not happen in a significant way unless a larger lot is combined and 30-fool side vurd setbacks can be provided Cronan staled the combination of the history of redevelopment along West I ake and the aggressive nature of this proposal should give the Shields and iinckstins some confidence that this application will be denied. C'ronan pointed out there aa* three findings that ore required by the Planning Commission: and that is. that there is something very unique about this property, that this uniquctH.*vs creates a substantial hardship, and that there w ill be no harm to the neighbors ( nman stated these same conditions have been slured by others, are enfoaed by the I.R-I.A zoning standards, and have been upheld by the bst four decisions on West l ake by the C'lty. Cnman suicd the required seventy findings deal w ith the fact that the property m question cannot be pul to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the ofncial controls. Cronan staled in his opinion the existing hrimc is a rcax^nablc u>e that can continue In addition, it is not a substantial nghl to he able to construct a dream home on a S0-fotii lot C'ronan pointed out the shed K'ing pmpt»ed now spans the property and is a two-stoiy building with a peaked riMif I hc longest continuous wall on the north side currently is .^0 feet and on the Miuih side is 50 feel, with the proposed structure being 76 feet in that required selhaek. I he currenl structure is 1 1 feet tall, w nh a 3K-ftHU sinKture being proposed tor the residence and a 20-fiNit tall structure for the garage, w ith the bottoms of the caves being propi*sed 20 feet off the ground for the residence. C'ronan stated in his ivpinion this is a substantial change from what currently exists and constitutes a rc/immg. C'ronan stated by approv ing ihesc variances, the two U»Ls lo the north of this property would also be cntiiled to those same variances and that the Shields and itncLsons arc in opposition to that avoning Tim llarrcr. 340 Wc-xi I ake Sireel. indicaicd he is the tmner ot the pr««pertv hKaied two ht»uscs o the north of the Fil/patncks’ pnipcrty. llarrcr stated m hi> opinion the cuaeni house has met its useful life and that the proposed structure by Ihc Fitzpatricks is a g«M>d improvement lo the ncighborhiKxl. llarrcr indicated he has seen the pbns for the proposed structure and he is not opposed to the project. llarrcr stated the a*devclopmenl that has iKCurred within the recent past atimg West lake has been largely the elTorts of one mdividiul. and that this individual also had ihe up|Hinunily to acquire this property. Ilaner staled in his opinion the Fit/|ulncks have a right to develop this properly, and that a policy of development based uptm the ability of one person to acquire additional property to creale larger lots is not giHid public policy. Harter staled the nghis of a property owner to redevelop a pn>perty should stand, and if Ihc variances are denied in this situation, his nghts to redevelop his property would bIno be resincted. Ek)b Olson. 346 West lake Sueel. indicated he is the owner of the property to the north of the Filzpatncks and has resided in this area for the past 1 1 years OI>«>n stated the trend to consolidate smaller lots along West lake is basically the trend of one person, and that a person has the nght to own a small lot and develop it just as a person with a larger lot has a nght to develop that property. Olson P.AGE 17 MIMTES OF THE ORO.M) N-A>M>G C OMMISSION .MEETING ^loMday. September 20.2004 6:00 o’chKk p.m. (#04*3051 Ke\la Md Julie Ht/palrick. C'oniiaMcd) indicated he enjoys the closeness of the lots in this netghborhtMkl and u ould like to maintain the smaller lots. UKson noted he d«KS not intend to .sell his property in the near future Mike Shields, West I ake Street, indicated he has met u ith Kevin ritrpatnck and tried to reach an acrecmcni a uhilc bock hut was unsuccessful. Shields staled over the past 12 years he has invested money into aci{uinng sescral small lots alimg West t ake and caMtinu larger lots Shields slated at the lime he purchased hi% property he uas aware of the restrictions of the lot and that other owncTs of small hits should learn to li\e within those restnciions. .Shields indicated he diKs not base a problem with 50-foot lots, but that he is opposed to basing a larger structure closer to his residence Shields staled he Is iHit opposed to remodeling the existing stiueture but that he would prefer not to have to iu\e a two-story building so close to his lot. n<ib I ncks4in. West I ake .Sireel. indicated he als«» is the owner of the lots al .Ml and 36.^ U est I.ake Street, which are the two amial pri periies liKated on West I ake. lirickson recounted his past c.\pencnce in real estate, noting that he has dealt with properties in xnnous cities close to Orono hnclcsiin staled the cities UKaied in the western port of the suburbs tend to have larger lots and that the standard lot in Orono lends lo be two acres, which alKiws for bigger houses and m*irc space between the houses. I'rickson commented Orono's ordinances and Compreheasive Plan ha\e inlluenced the t\pe of liresiylc and housing in this city and that he is happy with the two-acre zoning and the vision that Oron*i has hir low -density hou.sing I nckson noted the lot at 341 is made up of three 50-foot lots, w ith one house connected lo sewer al that ItKaiion. |-nekson stated by combining those three lots it has allowed him to come closer to iIk two-acre zoning that is preferred b> the C'lly’s (’omprchensise Plan I nckson indicated he is nut the only person that has combined lou in this neighborh«H>d and tha* tl happened exiensivels prior lo him reliKating to this area, hnckson noted ihai he also does not base the money or intent to acquire the three remaining 50-foot lots in this ncighKirhood Hrick.S4m sUied his concern with the I ilzpatncks’ proposal is that the structure is much larga and higher than what currently exists, with the lot courage increismg from I.H00 ki 2MK> square feet, which is approximately three times what is there at the pa*sent time, hneksim sUted what currently exists on that lot IS a noneonftirming use. and that by approving these xanonces. the nonconforming use would be expanded l-nckMin stated the proposed size of ihe structure affects his view and open space t .nckson stated in his opinion this proposal dties not meet any of the 12 criteria t«ir a hardship and that the applicant could ha\e acquia*d a larger piece of property on which to construct this residence. Hnekson noted economic factors are not a factor in determining hardship l-nckson indicated the proposed residence on this 50-fixit lot is close to the size of his residence on his lot. a lot w hich is tw ice as big and six times as wide, and is totally out of character with the neighborhood. Lrickson requested the Planning Commission follow the xision and diivction given in Orono's ordinances and Comprehensise Plan. Kahn inquired whether a lookout facing the lake is still part of this proposal. PAGE II MIMTCS OF Tin: OROM) riJ^NMNG COMMISSION MKFTING Moaday, September 20.2004 6:00 o*dock p.m. (004.3052 Frk Voftirom. C'oMkiMd) from the building site by an inlet of C'arman Bay. The contiguous land area is appro.ximatcly 16.400 square feet. The applicant is ba.sing the structural coserage amount i>n the total noncontiguous parcel above the 929.4’ elevation. Neither the lot coverage ordinance nor the Zoning Code definition of “lot area” clanfy whether the lot coverage percentage should he based on contiguous area. The definition of minimum lot area found in the .Subdivision Code w ould disallow noncontiguous land to be credited toward lot area. Curtis stated the applicant is proposing a 3.U02 square foot ftHiiprini. 1.225 square feet of driveway, and 215 square feet of sidewalk to nuke up the 57.9 percent hardcover There arc no patios pioposcd and only one 18* by 11 ’ deck on the lakeside of the home. Curtis noted the driveway as propos^ would need to be reduced at the curb and would need to be substantially reduced overall to bring the hardcover down to a reasonable level. Suff finds that there is no hardship inherent to the land that would justify the side street setback variance or the hardcov er variance as proposed. Staff believ es that the 55-foot w ide building envelope IS very reasonable and that a setback variance to the side street is not justified. If the Planning Commission concludes that the applicant should get credit toward the structural coverage for the dry land on the noncontiguous portion of the property, there may be some appropriate level of hardcover vanance to support some rea.sonablc level of development of the site. Stair recommends approval of the av erage lakeshorc setback vanance and recommends denial of the side street setback v ariance and denial of the hardcov er vanance. StalT also recommends remov al of the existing gravel dnv eway w ithin the city right-of-way and restoration of the area hack to vrgclalion as part of the rcdevrlopment of this lot. Curtis noted the grading and drainage plans have been revised since the issuance of the letter by the ('ity Knguiecr. and that the applicant has addressed the grading and drainage concerns that have been raised. Vogstrom noted the road is unimproved to the north and requested the Planning Commission allow the ctKroachmeni in the nghlnif-way. Vogstrom stated the existing structure encroaches into the right-of-way by 14 feet. \’ogstrom e.\plained the existing hardcover calculation docs nut iiK'lude anything for a pad and driveway, which cxi.sts on the north side. Vogstrom indicated at the present time there is no way to access the garage without going over the nght-<if-way. Vogstrom noted the current structure u IcKatcd 21.8 feet away from the street and is nonconforming. N ogstrom indicated he w ould be w illing to restore the nght-of-way at his expense if the city is willing to work with him on the hardcover. Vogstrom stated in his opmion he has a hardship due to the amount of w ater on his property and the fact that his land is not contiguous. V ogstrom stated in his opinion the proposed residence conforms more w ith the rest of the neighborhtMtd than w hat currently exists. Vogstrom noted the property at 2601 Lafayette Road was granted hardcover m excess of 25 percent Vogstrom stated the current structure is 1 1 84 square feet and is figured at 26.4 percent hardcover. PAGE 21 MIMTESOFTHE ORONO PI^XMNG COMMISSION MEETINC; .MoMtov. Scptcnber 20.2004 6:00 o'dacli p.M. (#04-3092 Erie \ »t^roiiL CoatkiMO) Barbara Essen. 26JK C'asco Potni Rood, stated thc>* have spoken uith the applicant reiurding the issue •>f drainage and that the applicant has indicated be is more than willing In ensure that drainage from this lot will not affect their lot. Jeff hssen staled the first plan did not show a swale, w iih the recent plan show mg a swale, hssen suted the applicant has also indicated he would he installing gutters and downsptiuLs. which would also help to allesiaie their concerns regarding runoff Barbara lissen slated the>‘ arc not opposed to the larger dnseway since parking along C'asco Point Road IS a problem at times. Essen indicat^ the applicant has also expressed a willingness to preserve the nicer trees on this lot. noting that a number of larger trees were lost as a result of a storm in 1997. V’ogstrom staled the preservation of the trees is also one reason why he would like to have approval of the 10-foot encroachment into the nght-of-w ay. Vogstrom stated the majonty of the trees arc l«K*ated on the south side of the lot. Alan Greene. 2645 Casco Point Road, staled he is located across the street from this lot. and that in his opinion the proposed hardcover for this lot is excessive. Greene staled his residence is approximately 1200 square feet on a lot that is approximately the same size and that the lot in question is being overbuilt. Vogstrom slated Circcne's fuotpnnt is 1374 square feet and his garage is 695. for a total footprint of over 2.0(K) square feel. I-ritzier stated he dvtcs run see the need fur the 57.9 percent where 25 percent is allowed and 26.4 percent currently exist.s. I•^t/lc^ stated he diKS not see the hardship for the increase in the hardcover Fritzicr stated he is alsvi opposed to the lO-fotit setback. Brema inquired w hat number l-nt/Icr would like to see for this lot given its restrictions. Ent/ler stated he would be willing to approve 27 percent hardcover for this lot. but that he does not see any jusUficalion fur the additional hardcover or encroachment Kempf stated he is ui agreement with Ent/ler and that the plan appears to have been laid out w ithout any coruideration for the hardcover restrictions Kempf inquired whether the applicant would be adding a deck or patio in the future. Vogstrom stated a deck is mcluded m his current plans and that he dues not mtend to add a patio in the future. Bremer indicated she feels the 27 percent is low given the restnctions of this lot Rahn commented he also feels this is a hardship lot but that it does not jusufy the 57.9 percent hardcover being proposed. Rahn stated m his view more effort needs to be made to reduce the hardcover and that the structure could also be reduced to eliminate the need for the side street setback variance. PAGE 22 MIMTESOFTlie ORONO f lannlm ; commission meetlng Moaday, Scptwbcr 2d. 2WM 6:M o’dacfc p.m. («04.3dS2 Erie Vafilroa, Caallaacd) Leslie staled the cncruachmcnt is uuld be reduced if the size of the structure is reduced. Vogstrom inquired whether he would be better off remodeling the existing structure. Rahn stated that decision would he up to the applicant, but that the Planning Commission appears to be opposed to the proposed amount of hardcover. Leslie pointed out that a remodel is considcTed to be less than 50 percent of value Rahn mquired whether the dnsrway eould be reduced. Vogstrom noted there is no driveway figured into the existing hardcover calculation, and if a dnvewav was added imo the hardcover, that wxHild increase it to 34 or 3S percent. Curtis staled the property currently is accessed from the nght-of-way. Paul Kaslcr, 2600 Ca.sco Point Ruad. indicates he owm the property on the other side of the fire lane. Raster slated the fire lone has been filled in over many years and that encroachment on the fire lane in his opinion should be granted because it would alleviate some of the construction problems the applicant is facing on this lot. Kaslcr stated the fire lane currently is not very pas.xablc given the vegetation and that allowing the fire lane to be used would have very little impact on the neighborhood. Vogstrom staled the hou.se w ould also be angled and w ould only erwroaeb in a couple of spots. Leslie stated in his view the hardcover could be reduced, which may in turn resolve the side street setback. Leslie inquired whether the Planning Commissum could ofTcr some suggestions on what they* would like to sec the hardcover reduced to. Fntzkr staled he believes the hardcover could be reduced to 27 percent. Leslie stated m his opinion some of the hardcover for the fire lane should be applied to thu property. Jurgens slated the fire lane is a public nght-of-way and that the applicant has a nght to use that fire lane. Jurgens suggested the applicant consider a sidc-Ioadtng garage if the City allow s the fire lane to be used. Gafiron stated as far as the driveway is concerned. Staff has not looked at sight lines and other issues relating to safety, which need to be considered. GafTron noted there is a slight cune on Casco Point Road that may dictate where the dnveway is located. Rahn staled it appears the Planning ('ommission would like to see the proposed hardcover reduced and that the Plannmg Commission at this time is not prepared to set a definite percentage. Rahn suggested the applicant consider tabling his application to allow him time to redesign his plans. Rahn stated anolhCT option would be for the applicant to decide whether he would like to remodel the e.xisting stnicture. PAGE 23 MIMTESOFTHC ORO.NO M.ANMNG COMMISSION >IF.F.TIM; .Moaday. Scptcmbrr 20.2004 6:00 o'clock p.m. (M4-30S2 Eric VoRttroM. Coallaacd) Vofslrom inquired whether the Plaruiing Commi»sian wcHild allow the I0>r<iut side street setback itnen the fact that the Arc lone is heasily wooded and not used. Jurpens requested the property markers near the street be delineated. I cslie staled the applicant will need to make the decision on how to reduce the hardcover, and that the encroachment may be reduced once the hardcover is anluccd Leslie indicated it is impossible to say definitely whether the encroachment would he allowed given the fact that the plans need to he revised. Rahn stated the Planning Commission needs to look at the plans overall, and recommended the applicant continue working with stalTio reduce the amount of proposed hardcover I.eslie indicated it appears likely that there nuy be some variance granted for hardcover given the rcstrictioits of the lot. but that the applicant needs to take steps to reduce the hardcov er down to iomcthing that is more reasonable for the lot. Ketnpf staled he generally is in favor of setback variances that have no negative impact t>n the neighbors. Rahn reiterated the Planning Commission needs to look at the plans as a whole, and inquired whether the applicant wxwld like to table his application. Vogstrom requested his application he tabled. lUlin Moved. LesMr iccoadcd, to loMr AppNeolioo i64>3052. Erk Vofvirom. 2618 Coseo Point Road, to nMow the apfrfknnt IlMC to revise kb plaas. VOTE: Aycs6.Nn>i8. PLANM.NG CO.UMISSIO.N C'U.M.ME.VTS 9. REPORT OF PI.ANNINCi €'O.M.\||SSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDI.NC COl'NCIL MEET1.NGS Al ca ST 23 AND SEPTE.MBER 13.2004 Lciltc indicated he anended the August 23"* Iduncil meeting w here a member of the public had inquired about the steps being taken to address the coyote problem. Ihe resident had indicated that an increasing number of domestic animals have been disappcaruig. Leslie noted this matter has been referred to the police department Leslie staled one of the Council members had thanked the Planning Commission for their efloru at addressing the issues coming before the City. I.eslie noted the Council does limit public comment to five minutes at their meetings, w hich may help people in attendance at Planning Commission meetings streamline their comments. Gaffron stated that language could be added to the Planning Ctmimissum agendas. PAGE 24 MIMTESOFTHF ORONO PLANNING rO>IMISSION MFFTING Moaday. Srptrmbrr 20.2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. (Plauiaf C'oouniMkMi ConiincaU. CoatiaMd) Jurgens indicated some other cities require a card to be filled out. which conums language that thes* arc allowed fise mmutes for comment, but that additional Ume may be granted if requested. Rahn concurred that a time limit for public comment may be helpful. Bremer commented that people could be asked to lima their comments to fisc mmutes at the beginning of the meeting. Jurgens indicated iw an«-ndcd the September 13'^ Council meeting, noting that the variances for tlic property on Cherry Lane were denied. Jurgens staled the Council aliai discus.scd ivsues adating to determination of building height. (iaffron noted the Council did abide by the integnty of the policy and that steps arc being taken to incorporate the City's policy into the ordinance. Jurgens stated he did inquire of the Council w hat direction the Planning Commis.sion should take regarding the storage of large vehicles, with ime council member suggesting that a grandfather clause ho considered. Leslie noted he did receive a phone call concerning this item and that the caller indicated they arc attempting to sell the truck at the present lime. 10. OTHER ISSl KS FOR DISCl .SSION None 11. Pl.ANNINC CO^IMISSION APPROVAI. OF hllNlTFS FOR AIGIST 16.2MM Raha nosed, FrRxIer Mcaaded, lo approve Ike Plaaaiag Commivsioa awetiag mloofet of Aagasl 16,20f4.asMbnittcd. VOTE: Ayn6,.NaysO. 12. SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CTH COI NCII. MEETINCkS ON SKPTE.MBER 27 A.ND OCTOBER 11.2004 September 27 - Kempf October 11 - Rahn ADJOrRN.%1E.NT Rain noved. Leslie sreoadrd. la adjoara ike PtaaaiagCiamiiilna aMciiag a< 9:26 paa. Ilicre bemg no further business to discuss, the mectmg was ad[)ounicd at 9:26 p.m. David Raha. Chair PAGE 25 jjyuBflMaiaRk Page 2 of 2 SMHMb 2618 C mco Pom Road #04 3052 Goodmomino I om vwrUing lo provide you wth o recent devetopmeni on o properly you I be reviewrig for Morvlay'i meelino (vwhich wm tabled in Sept) Eric Vogtirom at 2618 Cotco Point Pood - hordcover vanance lequotl. It appean thot Mr Vogttrom hos dear cut eiseni«o»y o« of the i»e« on the property within 75 of the fake, irxrluding the trem out on the point oao\\ the boy Mr vogitrom dkJ not obtan permits for these removals arxj is in violation of our City Codes regordmg vegetation removal As the vonorKo oppication was tabled to Morx}r?y's meeting from September. Mr. Vogstrom has proposed a lower amount of hardcover. r>ol 25%. bu* reduced from the 59% which was September s request to 39%. At this lime staff mainlains our recornmer>dation that the appicani meet the 25% hardcover hmil - os we hove not chorsged our position. I would encouroge al of you to visit the sHe again lo famikoriTe yourselves with the level of tree removal as staff wil require a restorat«n plan in con)ur>clion with |if| any level of vorionce approved Pteose cal me with ony queslkxtt • Melanie Melanie Curfh City Ptonrser. City of Oono 2750 Keftey Parkway. Oono. Mf J 55356 Phone; 952-249-4627 Fa«; 952-249-4616 WWW a orono mn ut Ifin'ii ■ I It II 10/15/2004 Pane 1 of 2 From: To: Cc: Bout: SuBioct: lyManio Cufttt' <MCurttsttci orono mn us> <r|ufgon«^aMhawl( com> Dove Rahn* <drohn^minnolonka com>. Dynltiio Bremer* <ctNemer9flynnBeskins com>. “SerKlra Smilh' <«ii«tticomOgoldengate i>et>; *Ralph KempT <relphkempfQrealtor com>. 'Janice Berg* <jberg^blongMe com>. ~J Marc Fritzler* <|morc4^s< com>. ‘Jim Leeke* <lMM^mMhvave.com>, ‘Janice Gundlacti* <JGundlach^d ororw mn u«>, *Mlke Gaffron' <MGalkon^d.orono mn if»> Friday. October IS. 2004 0:54 AM RE: 2B10 Caaco Point Road #04-3052 !' 1 . v<i > ii»- *. 1 ij" *• V. " O • I • 1* I * TVJ .# • »• y,. , ** J* jf> j« < A»“9 •►hj .i*t • y • . • A-i, Trv5 O'•?'>:» n 'I aa i»w» J »» T-1 A'** .* •♦?••••.* i. !*• h» «vj> t.icj j'I*-’.;''** I V* • I?** r yn j -j‘ f rtlniec' t<*rS j»-j •» i* J* • » •, t» I e**. • = ■ t ♦*•»» ;♦* •♦•t: t.' jr A- i«^*. ♦ » !*»’•»•»» M ;j». t'jV • ♦••• ♦r«T y j'':j '-o*'? ? Ai. j ?* <»'r»»»r*- i* *r r*'3 i »»»*•! » f«*S‘'vrSj'jA?f. .♦» f !»•%;. ij* jr .-j/. I, r . ,v »rv A ^ r y,l A-r. r* . A. 3km r V t 1 jf»*v r-irr*K r * •*'’•i aha ?»l•^ •» iH i*e*i"r.«r • a»'.i »•■«>•. *f» ^ ■ ‘ i •»'.i •• ir •fuj 'Jt »yv^i7, {-ifV'fg i>o »«4 >. v*»» r itAj u .• i •..rn?*'. r» i* •• *»-i * v ' *•■.}.* I'-jwCiie Iho * AO'e .*>rt'■••j I'ti v ^' 'wi *• •> fv r*" r»'i*» f'• 1 1 *0 n-iO V ’r-n * Air r *nj .• » *♦© ft j . J t«'otrv ' .f< ) *kiAi jk*> 1-. •>« V ’* •'*» rikKjfi Jfi. YM« r • —Oiginat Message—-• Ffooit Roland Jurgens [ma4to:r)urgens9nifrax)om] Soot: Friday. October IS. 2004 9:33 AH Tot Mdtonie Curtis foMict! RE: 2618 Casco Point Road #04-3052 Melanie twk a look at th.it piopeity yrstciday and I got to talk to Itie neighbor to the north He was quite unhappy Mo sa»d that the tree service was down there yesterday working I don t think they weie cutting trees but cleaning up and looting aiound with the botx-at out on the pornt I thougfit they wheie fed tagged on the 12th I ahm ioali/e<l Itiat the tie*, timimei s truck is paikcnj on the Right of way (fue lane as every calls it) I bebove that Oiono has a ordinance that prohibits l ommeicial vehicles to be parked in Righl ol -way foi moio that 24 houis Maytic a call lo them is in order Wo ateo need to gel them to markup the piofierty fcnes it looks like he cut some trees that were not hiv. to cut Roland •Oiginil Message-- Frowt Melwtie CurtB (maito:MCuftisOd.oronojnn.u5) SMit Wadnadiy. October 13. 2004 10:28 AM T#: CyniMi Brewer; David Rehn; J. Mve Frtiler. Janice Berg; Jfen Letfe; RMpb Kempr; RolBfid Jurgens; Sandra Sm«b Cc: Mike Gaffron; Janice Gurtftocb; Melanie Cwtis 1(VI 5/2004 10/18/2004 Ms Melanie Curtis City Planner City of Orono 2750 Kelly Parkwav Orono. MN 55356 Re Request for Variance at 2618 Casco Point Road Dear Ms Curtis. After speaking with you and the City Administrator today I feel it necessary to prepare this letter and have it included in the public record of the Planning Commission meeting of 10/18/2004 The o\sner of 2618 Casco Point Road. Mr Eric Vogsirom has applied for a hard cover and side yard set back variance I have expressed the following concerns to him and you w I>ainage between his proposed home and my home > Trimming of trees to enhance his siew r Protection of established trees > Off street parking Mr Vogstrom and 1 discussed these issues and he agreed to install gutter, downspouts buried drain tile and a swale between the properties to control drainage He also agreed to work with me on tree trimming to enhance his view, and to protect existing trees Last week Mr Vogstrom hired a tree service, which in addition to illegally culling trees on his own property and neighboring public property, came onto my prop^y and cut down mature trees that impacted his view without a permit or my permission These trees were cut down even after I pointed out to Mr Vogstrom and his tree service exactly where the property line was located (surv’ey stakes were clearly visible) As a result of his actions I do not believe he will voluntarily honor any of his prev ious commitments regarding drainage or tree preservation and 1 am stron^y against granting the requested variances Additionally 1 request the City Engineer make note of these concerns during his review of the Vogstrom «te plan and drainage plan as part of the construction drawing review process to protect neighboring properly owners Sincerely "7 2648 Casco Point Road Orono MN 55391 irvri iMt or sent «• «cM(s Movi mf II L ill£ili*iiilL