Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-14-2003 Council Packet\ f Public A ttendance □XOUNCIL Meeting D ate > 1 □ Planning C ommission □ Park C ommission □ Other Please filloutthe information requested BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 1,^"TC\A 0v6Wvc\,'&s^ HXvvv(^\ 2.__-Vc hc.c^ ^tLO 7-e I 4:i. u Ur - N/ 3. iVwv 4. S /yy^ / ov\ . \ 5.. 6. 7... 8. 9. 10. 11. 13. 14. 15. ^ :Ud«nMMrati*e Snppocf^rnnMpfnMte AMMiiaa«t.«p4 J Cn»»•••.. APR 1 4 2003 AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, APRIL 14, 200S|7KM-K jII1>nu ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA ("■) Asterisk items arc considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet > located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL RECOGNITION 1. .Tan Berg - Planning Commission - Resolution 2. Sherokee Use - Parks, Trails and Open Space Commission - Resolution 3. Rick Meyers - Parks, Trails and Open Space Commission - Resolution CONSENT AGENDA 4. Approve/Amend APPROVAL OF MINUTES • 5. Regular Council March 24,2003 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Pauline Bouchard PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Liz Hawn PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 6. #02-2859 Blake and Mary Bicbanich, 332 Westlake Street - Variances * 7. #02-2863 Richard Kail, 3753 Casco Avenue - Variances - Resolution * 8. #03-2867 Daniel Adams, 1145 Tonkawa Road - Variances - Resolution * 9. #03-2874 Richard Kail, 3753 Casco Avenue - Vacation - Resolution * 10. #03-2877 Shane and Kristine Rudd, 601 Park Lane-Variances - Resolution * 11. #03-2878 Edward Hamm, 485 Orono Orchard Road South - Variances - Resolution 12. #01-2714 FredPuzak, 1340 Baldur Park Road-Review of Variance Conditions MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT 13. Accept Quotations for Heritage Drive Sewer Extension 14. Accept Quotations for Willow/TH12 TrafTic Signal Revisions CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 15. Pay Requests - Long Lake Fire Station 16. Application and Certificate for Payment No. 11 - Long Lake Fire Station 17. Bid Award - 2003 Insurance Package - Resolution 18. Appointment of Planning Commission Members 19. Personnel Matter COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, APRIL 14 2003 7-00 P M ORONO COUNCII. CHAMBERS, ?780 KELLEY PARKWAY. ORONoSwOTi CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 20. LICENSES Liquor Se‘.-Up Special Event Permits * 21. BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS mi 04/07 - Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. 04/14 - Council Meeting, 7;00 p.m. 04/21 - Planning Commission Meeting, 6:30 p.m. 04/23 - Board of Review, Wednesday, 7:00 p.m. 04/28 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 05/03 - Spring Cleanup Day, Saturday. 8:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. 05/05 - Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. 05/07 - Planning Commission Work Session, 5:30 p.m. 05/10 - Spring Cleanup Day ConslniOion Debris Only, 8:00 s, m 05/12 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 05/19 - Planning Commission Meeting, 6:30 p.m. 05/24 - Leaf and Grass Disposal, Saturday, 8:00 a.m. - Noon 05/26 — HOLIDAY, Observance of Memorial Day 05/27 - Council Meeting, Tuesday. 7:00 p.m. 05/31 - Leaf and Grass Disposal, Saturday, 8:00 a.m. - Noon 2.00 p.m. L t 0 APR 1 4 2003 CITY Ut- OHUNO h.v/r3 A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO JAN BERG FOR DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, Jan Berg has served this community with distinction during her ten years as a member of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, her years of service have been marked by exemplary dedication to the best interests of the community; and WHEREAS, she has earned the admiration and high regard of those with whom she has worked; and WHEREAS, the performance of her duties and responsibilities as a member ofthe Parks, Open Space, and Trails Commission has been characterized by excellent and constructive contributions to the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono does hereby express its sincere appreciation and thanks to Jan Berg for her distinguished service to the community and does also highly commend her for the manner In which she has carried out her duties and responsibilities. BE IT IURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council extends to her best wishes for continued success in her future endeavors. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 14th day of April, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor V i Cni APR 1 4 2003 A ftt:SOLtjTlON OF APPRECIATl8^I’^’^6 SHEROKEE ILSE FOR DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE PARKS, OPEN SPACE, AND TRAILS COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, Sherokee Use has served this community with distinction during her twelve years as a member of the Parks, Open Space, and Trails Commission; and WHEREAS, her years ofservice have been marked by exemplary dedication to the best interests of the community, and WHEREAS, she has earned the admiration and high regard of those with whom she has worked; and WHEREAS, the performance of her duties and responsibilities as a member of the Parks, Open Space, and Trails Commission has been characterized by excellent and constructive contributions to the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono does hereby express its sincere appreciation and thanks to Sherokee Use for her distinguished service to the community and does also highly commend her for the manner in which she has carried out her duties and responsibilities. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council extends to her best wishes for continued success in her future endeavors. Adopted by the City Council of Orono. Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 14th day of April, 2003. ATTEST; Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor 1 A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO RICK MEYERS FOR DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE PARKS, OPEN SPACE, AND TRAILS COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, Rick Meysrs has served this community with distinction during his four years as a member of the Parks, Open Space, and Trails Commission; and WHEREAS, his years ofservice have been marked by exemplary dedication to the best interests of the community; and WHEREAS, he has earned the admiration and high regard of those with whom he has worked; and WHEREAS, the performance of his duties and responsibilities as a member of the Parks, Open Space, and Trails Commission has been characterized by excellent and constructive contributions to the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City ofOrono does hereby express its sincere appreciation and thanks to Rick Meyers for his distinguished service to the community and does also highly commend him for the manner in which he has carried out his duties and responsibilities. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council extends to him best wishes for continued success in his future endeavors. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 14th day of April, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 24,2003 7:00 o’clock p.m. •• - ' 4 ROLL The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson; Council Members Jim Murphy, Jim White, and late arrivals Jay Nygard and Bob Sansevere; City Attorney Thomas Barrett; Representing staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, Planning Director Mike Gaffron, City Planner Wendy Bottenberg, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, Public Service Director Greg Gappa, and Recorder Kristi Anderson. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M. Nygard arrived at 7:03 P.M. Mayor Peterson invited Medina Council Member Jim Lane to step up and accept a resolution honoring him for his leadership, dedication, assistance, and friendship to Orono in his role as a member of the Fire Advisory Committee and work on the Highway 12 project for many years. Murphy thanked Lane for his 20 years of service and commitment to the Highway 12 project. He recognized Lane for his support, class, and friendship to Orono. He complimented Lane on his work with the MCWD in solving issues related to the highway project and his mediation of the Long Lake and Orono joint City Council meeting which established the overall design of the Long Lake Fire Station. Sansevere arrived at 7:0S P.M. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve/A mend Nygard added items # 9, 10,11,12,13,14,15, and 16 to the Consent Agenda. He commented that he would like the City to pursue with the County a turn signal at County Roiids 15 and 19, in addition to the semaphore proposed at Willow Drive. Although Sansevere felt item 8 should be tabled until the applicant could be present to comment, he asked if the City Council would prefer it be added to the consent agenda. Other Council members agreed the item should be tabled. Wliite moved, Murphy seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. ^ WE: Aves 5, Navs 0. Page 1 of9 (D MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 24,2003 7:00 o’clock p.m. 2. 7:00 P.M. - SCHEDULED ASSESSMENT HEARING - NORTH ARM LANE PAVING PROJECT I. ADOPT NORTH ARM LANE PAVING PROJECT ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION NO. 4940 2. ACCEPT QUOTATIONS FOR NORTH ARM LANE PAVING PROJECT - RESOLUTION NO. 4941 Mayor Peterson noted that the Affidavit for Publication had been made at 7:10 P.M. Gappa explained that the proposed assessment would be S2.400 per property for the seven properties that had driveway access on North Arm Lane. The assessment would be for a 10-year time period at an interest rate of 6.25% which results in an annual payment of approximately $325 per year. He pointed out that if a property owner wished to appeal the assessment, they had been sent a notice informing them to file that intent or attend this evening s public hearing. Gappa indicated that he had received no complaints nor had any appeals been filed yet that he knew of. Jim Neilson, 340 North Arm Lane, thanked the Council for listening to his concerns in the past and indicated that he had no further comments. Mayor Peterson closed the Public Hearing at 7:14 P.M. Sanseverc moved, Murphy seconded, to approve RESOLUTION NO. 4940, a Resolution adopting the proposed assessment for the North Arm Lane Paving Project. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve RESOLUTION NO. 4941, a Resolution accepting the quotation from Buffalo Bituminous, Buffalo, Minnesota, in the amount of $19,548 for the North Arm Lane Paving Project. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *3. Regular Council Meeting of March 10,2003 White moved, Murphy seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of March iO, 2003 as presented. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Irene Silber Silber stated that the Park Commission looked forward to an upcoming work session with the City Council and that she had nothing new to report. Page 2 of 9 kikaiui. L MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 24,2003 7:00 o ’clock p.m. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS, Continued Gappa stated that the playground equipment at Bederwood had been tested and found to be within the acceptable range for arsenic levels. He believed much of the wood had been weathered enough to decrease the levels. Nygard inquired whether it might be prudent to have the equipment shellacked to ensure safety. Sansevere concurred, and encouraged staff to varnish the equipment as soon as the weather would permit, as a precautionary measure. Gappa indicated that he would do so. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - J. Marc Fritzicr, Representative As several Planning Commission items were pending, Fritzicr indicated that he had nothing further to report. He noted that the Planning Commission looked forward to a joint work session with the City Council in the near future. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT *4. #02-2864 JOSEPHINE CARPENTER, 480 RUSSELL A\TNUE, VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. 4942 White moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4942, a Resolution granting a variance to permit construction of a 239 s.f. (I I.9'X20.r) detached garage closer to the front propert>' line than the principal residence located at 480 Russell Avenue. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 5. #02-2874 RICHARD KAIL - 3753 CASCO AVENUE - VACATION Bottenberg explained that the applicant was seeking approval to vacate 7’ of that portion of the unimproved dedicated alley adjacent to his property. The alley was orginally dedicated in the plat of Ca.sco Heights in 1911. She noted that the alley is 14* in width and 317.8’ in length. 'I he applicant was proposing to vacate half of the alley (7’), while the other 7’ would go to the neighbor to the cast. Bottenberg reported that the applicant had another zoning application pending, in which he had proposed to build a new single family residence on the property. Since the proposed structure was above the allowed 15% lot coverage by structures, the Planning Commission Page 3 of 9 Ii n MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 24,2003 7:00 o’clock p.m. 5. U02-2874 RICHARD KAIL - 3753 CASCO A VENUE - VACA TION, Continued approved the lot area, but denied the lot coverage by structures variance. The application was then heard by the City Council on February 24,2003, during which the Council discussed two options to increase the size of the property: vacating the adjacent alley or purchasing city owned land adjacent to the property. The applicant chose to pursue vacating the adjacent alley. The Planning Commission recommended by a 5 to 0 vote to deny the application for vacation, since the unimproved right-of-way may someday be used for stormwater drainage management, possible future utilities, and/or public access for the neighborhood to reach Lake Minnetonka. Bottenberg continued that, staff too, would recommend denial of the vacation application as proposed by Richard Kail. Sansevere asked the applicant if he could provide a more compelling argument that would overcome concerns expressed by staff in the packet. Kail stated that, currently, his structural coverage was 16.3%, if he were allowed to vacate the alley; his structural coverage would decrease to 15.07%. While both Planning Commission and City Council representatives wish to be good neighbors, Sansevere explained that there is a point in which they must follow the restrictions set forth in the codes and maintain staff recommendations. Sansevere indicated that his position would be small lots, small homes, big lots, big homes and he could not support the application. White agreed that, based on staffs opinion, he would have to support their position. Kail asked why the City felt the need to retain two alleys, and questioned the rationale for stormwater runoff when the water doesn’t flow thru his alley in the first place. Sansevere maintained that City staff had legitimate concern and issues with regard to stormwater drainage and utilities. He asked staff to explain why they felt the alley would be necessary. Gappa stated that no one knows what the future might hold with regard to stormwater, access, or utilities, and pointed out how difficult it often is to obtain easements later for stormwater ete. Kail indicated that he would grant easements back to the City, and was merely looking for enough land to cover his structural coverage requirement. Bottenberg stated that, even with the alley, the applicant would be 28 s.f. over with his plan. Page 4 of 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 24,2003 7:00 o'clock p.m. 5. U02-2874 RICHARD KAIL-3753 CASCO AVENUE-VACATION, Continued Nygard moved, Murphy seconded, to deny Application #02-2874, RirbftTd Kail, 3753 Casco Avenue, an adjacent alley Vacation. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Bottenberg pointed out that the vacation would come back as a resolution at the next City Council meeting. Kail stated that his next plan would come back with less driveway, two garages, and no deck. Gaffron indicated that the revised application may have to revert to the Planning Commission prior to City Council depending on the number of changes that are made. *6. #03-2875 SANDRA ANN BENSON, 1376 BALDUR PARK ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 4943 White moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4943, a Resolution granting variances to reconstruct and expand the roof of the existing principal structure located at 1376 Baldur Park Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *7. #03-2879 GARY HEGENES, 2675 SHADYWOOD ROAD - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 4944 White moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4944, a Resolution granting a side yard adjacent street setback variance to allow a 20.1’ setback where 35' is required to construct a 330 s.f. (15’X22’) single stall attached garage addition to the existing attached garage located at 2675 Shadywood Road. VOTE: Aves 5, Nays 0. 8. #01-2714 FRED PUZAK, 1340 BALDUR PARK ROAD, REVIEW OF VARIANCE C<‘NDITIONS. Mayor Peterson moved, Murphy seconded, to table Application #01-2714, Fred Puzak, 1340 Baldur Park Road, Review of Variance Conditions, until the applicant is able to attend. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/CITY COUNCIL REPORT White complimented the local newspaper for its informative and positive piece on the Navarre Town Meeting held March 13,2003. He was impressed by the spirit of voluntecrism, the pride, and energy displayed by residents at the meeting. Page 5 of 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 24,2003 7:00 o’clock p.m. MAYOR/CITY COUNCIL REPORT, ConHnued Murphy suggested a video be edited together from the meeting and also complimented the local paper on a terrific article. Mayor Peterson questioned the tree trimming job done on the Burwell property along County Road 15. She also indicated that she had received calls and letters regarding a home on Olive that has had a tarp on the roof for a number of years. Gappa stated that the City needs to discuss enforcement of Codes in this respect. Nygard suggested the City investigate how they could possibly help homeowners complete their work. He felt, if it's an economic situation, it would be nice if the City could provide the resources or volunteers to assist homeowners who ’ve fallen on tough times. White encouraged staff to investigate CDBG grants, which are designed to help people based on need, to get things done. He maintained that there are needs not being recognized in Orono. White stated that, while affordability shou'd start at home, one priority should be to keep the affordable homes we have and assist the elderly who can't afford many things. He believed Orono could tweak the CDBG formula in order to set more money aside for its people. Moorse indicated that Orono is one in a consolidated pool of a dozen communities who share the CDBG funds. In general, Moorse stated t lat approximately $300,000 is available each year. He pointed out that several years ago, Orono and Spring Park did receive about $130,000 in funding for housing rehab projects in h avarre and Spring Park. He indicated that staff could strive to identify certain properties in Orono and resubmit an application for a portion of the funds next year. He noted that additional funding opportunities exist and could be investigated. A key would also be to get information out to the people and residents who need it. Murphy suggested contacting local churches, as they would have knowledge of their most needy parishioners. Nygard agreed that, at minimum, the City should strive to maintain the affordable housing it has. Mayor Peterson stated that, oftentimes, proud people don't ask for help, however, the City should be there as a resource. Murphy stated that Mrs. McCarthy on Chevy Chase, had contacted him regarding her water going out last Wednesday. Sh.* suggested the City do more to notify residents, like Wayzata does, when work is goin'; to be done that will affect water pressure etc. She then noted that much rust had been stirred up in her pipes due to the work done. Page 6 of9 ‘ i MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 24,2003 7:00 o’clock p.tn. MA YOR/CITY COUNCIL REPORT, Continued Gappa stated that the street department was working on drainage problems and shouldn't have opened the hydrant, but inadvertently did, which stirred up a great deal of rust. Murphy reiterated the need for the City to shellac the Bederwood playground equipment and suggested the City dispose of the spent Christmas trees at Uackberry Park as well. Sanscvcrc stated that he had spoken to the head guidance counselor at Orono about the scholarships the City Council representatives w ished to donate to both Orono and Mounu schools, equivalent virtually to one paycheck from each representative. Nygard suggested the City investigate having those funds matched in the community. PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT *9. ACCEPT QUOTES FOR TURN SIGNAL AT WILLOW DRIVE White moved, Murphy seconded, to accept the quotation in the amount of $9,200 from Ridgedale Electric, Long Lake, Minnesota for completion of the Willow Drive/TH 12 Traffic Signal Revisions Project and approval of a budget adjustment for the Year 2003 State Aid Construction Fund to reflect this expenditure. \’OTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. * 10. LONG I.AKE WATER INTERCONNECTS White moved, Murphy seconded, to authorize a Joint project with the City of Long Lake for the installation of two additional w ater system interconnections w ith a 50/50 installation cost split between the two cities. Estimated Orono cost for this project is $60,000. Further Council approval will be obtained after the contractor has been selected and final costs determined. VOTE: Aves 5, Navs 0. White moved, Murphy seconded, to authorize proceeding with a project to install to interconnect the Industrial Park water serv ices and to investigate the feasibilitv of a new 12 ” Highway 12 watermain crossing to serve the Industrial Park. Further Council approval will be obtained after the contractor has been selected and final costs determined. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *11. SUPPORT OF NEW FUNDING FOR ROADS - RESOLUTION NO. 4945 White moved, .Murphy seconded, to approve RESOLUTION NO. 4945, a Resolution supporting the League of Minnesota Cities Study on Funding Street Construction and Maintenance in Minnesota Cities. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 7 of9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday^ March 24,2003 7:00 o’clock p.m. *12. SEASONAL EMPLOYEES FOR GOLF COURSE While moved, Murphy seconded, to approve a seasonal employee pay range of $7.72 to $8.43 per hour for the 2003 season. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT * 13. PAY REQUESTS - LONG LAKE FIRE STATION White moved, Murphy seconded, to approve the request for payment from Herc-U< Lift in the amount of $4,911.67, to he funded from the Joint Fire Account. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *14. AGREEMENT FOR FIRE SLRVICE WITH EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRICT White moved, Murphy seconded, to approve the Agreement and Contract with the Excelsior Fire District. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *15. PARK COMMISSION REAPPOINTMENTS White moved, Murphy seconded, to approve the reappointment of Debora Halvorson and Pauline Bouchard to an additional term on the Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission expiring on December 31,2005. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. White moved, Murphy seconded, to recognize Sherokee Use for her years of dedicated service to the community as a member of the Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission. VOTE: Aves 5, Navs 0. *16. APPOINTMENT OF PART-TIME CUSTOMER SERVICE ASSISTANT White moved, Murphy seconded, to approve the appointment of Barbara Silus to the position of part-time Customer Service Assistant at the Level 2, Step 11 pay rate of $13.67 per hour, effective March 31,2003. VOTE: Aves 5, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT Attorney Barrett had nothing new to report. Page 8 of9 r MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 24,2003 7:00 o'clock p.m. *17. LICENSES Kennel License Renewals: 1 . “The Dog House Boarding Kennels' D. Brian Fulmer 3505 W. Wayzata Blvd. 2. Bob Sansevere 745 Orchard Paric Road 18. BILLS White moved, Murphy seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Sansevere moved. White seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council Meeting of March 24,2003 at 8:06 P.M. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Cleric Barbara Peterson, Mayor Page 9 of9 4000 C 3600 D 3200 I I I 2800 F 2400 G 2000 H 1600 I I I I I ..M M I ---- 1200 800 K 400 I I s n WAY7*TA BLVO US. MWy ai mUY pntf. Luay MAT rprr i r —1200 -800 S' lumu! 1 1 \j 1 1 * OtrTTAl Mat » i1 / 1/ ^ \ ua icxatcsKA ^ .S •>'. Ili»5 4 -400 —240C AGENDA FOR COUNCI!, MEETING SET FOR MOn A y Wr A ^P5(i)3,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PAIg^^^ (O^ONO, MINNESOTA (•) Asterisk items are considered to be routine Items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL RECOGNTTIDN 1. Jan Berg - Planning Commission - Resolution 2. Sherokee Use - Parks, Trails and Open Space Commission - Resolution 3. Rick Meyers - Parks, Trails and Open Space Commission - Resolution CONSENT AGENDA 4. Approve/Amend APPROVAL OF MINUTES • 5. Regular Council March 24,2003 PARK COMMISSION COM.MENTS - Pauline Bouchard PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Liz Hawn PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 6. #02-2859 Blake and Mary Bichanich, 332 Westlake Street - Variances • 7. «02-28C3 Richard Kail, 3753 Casco Avenue-Variances-Resolution • 8. #03-2867 Daniel Adams, 1145 Tonkawa Road-Variances-Resolution • 9. #03-2874 Richard Kail, 3753 Casco Avenue - Vacation - Resolution • 1 0. #03-2877 Shane and Kristine Rudd, 601 Park Lane - Variances - Resolution • II. #03-2878 Edward Hamm. 485 Orono Orchard Road South - Variances - Resolution 12. #01-2714 Fred Puzak, 1340 Baldur Park Road-Review of Variance Conditions MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT 13. Accept Quotations for Heritage Drive Sewer Extension 1 4. Accept Quotations for Willow/TH 12 Traffic Signal Revisions CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 15. Pay Requests-Long Lake Fire Station 1 6. Application and Certificate for Payment No. 1 1 - Long Lake Fire Station 17. Bid Award - 2003 Insurance Package - Resolution 1 8. Appointment of Platming Conunission Members 19. Personnel Matter AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, APRIL 14,2003,7:00 P.M ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT 20. LICENSES Liquor Set-Up Special Event Permits • 21. BILLS upcoa \ung issues and E\TNTS 2m 04/07 - Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. 04/14 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 04/21 - Planning Commission Meeting, 6:30 p.m. 04/23 - Boaxxl of Review, Wednesday, 7:00 p.m. 04/28 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 05/03 - Spring Cleanup Day, Saturday. 8 00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. 05/05 ~ Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. 05/07 - Planning Commission Work Session, 5:30 p.m. 05/10 - Spring Cleanup Day-Construction Debris Only, Salurday, 8:00 a m. - 2:00 p.m. 05/12 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. Application Deadline: 1/8/2003 60 Day Deadline: 3/9/2003 Extension: 5/8/2003 APR 1 4 2003 CIT V Uf ohuno REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name: Jennifer Chaput Title: City Planner DATE: April 8,2003 ITEM NO. L Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#02-2859 Blake & Mary Bichanich 332 Westlake Street Variances Exhibits: A Revised site plan and floor plans from the applicant B Staff Report and exhibits of 3/10/2003 City Council meeting Application Summary: The applicants initially requested the following variances in order to construct a new house in the same location as a house exists toda^ 1. side yard setbacks: 11’ to the south and 19.3’ to the north where 30' is required; 2. iot width: 100.28 ’ where 200 ’ is required; and 3. lot area: 1.34 acres (58,659 s.f.) where 2 acres (87,120 s.f) are required. 1 he applicants have revised their proposal and now arc requesting approval for 20 ’ side setbacks per the Planning Commission ’s recommendation.__________ Pertinent Code Sections: 1. Section 10.23, Subd. 6 (B): Lot area, w idth and setbacks; The following minimum requirements shall be observed in the LR-1A One Family Lakeshore Residential District: lot area of 2 acres; lot widtli of 200 feet; side yard setbacks of 30 feet. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission recommended by a 6 to 1 vote to: Appro\ c the lot w idth and lot area variances as presented and to alter the side yard setbacks from those proposed to not less than 20 feet on each side, pemiitting up to a 4 foot encroachment into cither 20 ’ side yard for roof overhang but no other structural elements and requiring the removal of the existing shed in the 0-75 ’ hardcover zone, which applicant at his option may replace w ith a lock box of no more than 20 s.f. and 4 feet in height. The Planning Commission identified the follow ing hardships to justify the side yard setback variances: A. In 1993. the property owner con^bined two 50 ’ wide lots in order to create a lot that was closer to conformity w ith the lot area and width requirements of the zoning district; B. The applicant was permitted to connect two existing homes on the combined lots in 1993 with substandard side yard setbacks, lot area and lot width; and C. 1 he combined lot is very long and narrow, creating difficult conditions to build a home that takes full advantage of the lakeshore. 1 I HUL STAFF RECOMMENDATION; Stair recommends approval of the requested lot area and lot width variances with the condition that the existing shed in the 0-75 ’ hardcover zoned be removed. Staff can not support the requested side yard variances for new construction since, in staffs opinion, no suitable hardship can be identified. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the side yard variances. APPLICANT REQUEST: The applicant requests that action be taken on the Planning Commission’s recommendation. The applicant has redesigned the proposed home so that it can fit within the 20' side yard setbacks recommended by the Planning Commission. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Staff requests that the Council take the following action: 1. Approve the variances for lot width and lot area with the condition that the existing shed in the 0- 75 ’ hardcover zone be removed; 2. Take action regarding the request for side yard variances; 3. Direct staff to draft a resolution reflecting the Council's action for adoption at the April 28,2003 meeting. 1 REVISED SITE PLAN F • V 66HmAT16 UPPER LEVEL PLAN 1/8'" *1-0 ArpWD'/. lOSO^/F-T.■4 '403 ■ 'i f iTumiTiTnitiinirti 1/6 -\-0 •4 CA»S. 69A«A6 jE. L Application Deadline: 1/8/2003 60 Day Deadline: 3/9/2003 Extension: 5/8/2003 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name: Jennifer Chaput Title: Planner Item Description: DATE: March 4,2003 ITEM NO. Agenda Section: Zoning #02-2859 Blake & Mary Bichanich 332 Westlake Street Variance C t- B Exhibits: A Neighborhood area section map & Table Zoning Application #1791 1 Survey of existing houses at 324 and 332 Westlake Street 2 Survey of proposed addition to existing houses 3 Applicant's variance request 4 Staff report to the Planning Commission 5 Planning Commission meeting minutes 1/19/1993 6 Staff report to the City Council 7 City Council meeting minutes 2/8/1993 8 Resolution #323 1 Building permit record StafT Report and exhibits of 1/22/2003 Additional information from the applicant (March 3,2003) C D E 1 2 3 4 5 6 Letter regarding proposal Existing site plan Proposed site plan with existing house overlayed Proposed site plan with 15’ setbacks Site plan with 20’ setbacks (recommended by Planning Commission) Proposed site plan with 100’ wide lot to the south Pertinent Code Sections: 1. Section 10.23. Subd. 6 (B): Lot area, width and setbacks: The following minimum requirements shall be observed in the LR-1A One Family Lakeshore Residential District: lot area of 2 acres; lot width of 200 feet; side yard setbacks of 30 feet. Application Summary: The applicants are requesting the follow ing variances in order to construct a new house in the same location as a house exists today: 1. side >ard setbacks: 11 ’ to the south and 19.3* to the north where 30 ’ is required 2. lot w idth: 100.28’ where 200’ is required 3. lot area: 1.34 acres (58,659 s.f.) where 2 acres (87,120 s.f.) are required History: In January, 1993 (Zoning File #1791), the applicants requested variances to construct additions to the existing residences. At the time, the lots were not combined and two separate homes existed. The application proposed the combination of the lots and construction of additions, combining the two separate residences into one dwelling. The existing houses did not meet the side yard setbacks required for the zoning district (30 feet on either side) and they were not proposed to change with this application. The proposed application included the following: 1. A front porch addition (50 s.f. of hardcover) within the substandard side yard setback on the house to the south; 2. A basement addition on the house to the north; 3. Move the house on the north 10' closer to the lake, maintaining the existing side yard setbacks; 4. A tower of less than 30 feet in height to join the two homes; 5. Side setbacks remain as they exist: 20.1 ’ on the north lot line; 12.7 ’ on the south lot line The Planning Commission and City Council approved the application as presented in 1993. The application was clearly for additions to existing structures. Variances to the side yard setbacks were granted because the application requested changes to existing structures, already located at substandard setbacks. The house to the north was moved closer to the lake in order to construct a basement, positioned with the same side yard setback as it existed previously. The variances to the side yards were acceptable for the existing structures because it is not the City ’s practice to require that existing homes be relocated to meet required setbacks. Current Application: The current application docs not involve additions or renovations to the existing structures. The applicant is proposing to remove the existing home in its entirety and rebuild a home on the lot. The applicant is requesting the same side yard setbacks as were granted with his 1993 application. However, this application is for new construction which has. hisiorically, been treated difTerently from renovations of existing structures. The City ’s policy regarding new construction is that any proposed structure must confomi to the required hardcover, lot coverage and setback requirements for that zoning district. Since the lot is 100 ’ in width, a new home 40 ’ in width could be constructed with 30' side yard setbacks. When this area was zoned LR-1A in 1975, the apparent intent was to promote lot combinations and to discourage higher densities in the neighborhood. A number of lots have been combined since then, leaving only a few at w idths of 50’. The lot sizes and w idths are quite varied. Staff has researched the neighboring lots and provided lot area, width and setback information on an attached table and section map (Exhibit A). The most recent new construction in the 2 i neighborhood, 372 Westlake Street, met all of the setl?ack requirements for the zoning district without requiring a setback variance. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION; Planning Commission recommended by a 6 to 1 vote to: Approve the lot width and lot area variances as presented and to alter the side yard setbacks from those proposed to not less than 20 feet on each side, permitting up to a 4 foot encroachment into either 20’ side yard for roof overhang but no other structural elements and requiring the removal of the e.xisting shed in the 0-75’ hardcover zone, which applicant at his option may replace with a lock box of no more than 20 s.f. and 4 feet in height. STAFF RECOMMENDATION; Staff recommends approval of the requested lot area and lot width variances with the condition that the existing shed in the 0-75’ hardcover zoned be removed. Staff can not support the requested side yard variances for new construction since no hardship can be identified. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED; Staff requests that the Council take the following action: 1. Approve the variances for lot width and lot area with the condition that the existing shed in the 0-75’ hardcover zone be removed; 2. Take action regarding the request for side yard variances; 3. Direct staff to draft a resolution with the Council’s action for adoption at the March 24,2003 meeting. APPLICANT REQUEST; The applicant is aware of staff s position on the application. The applicant agrees with the Planning Commission’s recommendation with the exception of the 20’ side yard setbacks. The applicant requests that the side yard setbacks be reduced to 15 ’ on either side, as shown in the attached drawings, submitted March 3,2003. The applicant also wishes to present his information to the City Council at the meeting. •yjy ■*5^i : I /■ Oat A ft'‘'0*50' Dc/o« t*40a., 0. si^‘ . 0'^ qyl :• \.0fUO!A^ •<gy * 540.8 .*• g.^g^/rtgBT.OI i>>'\ I)533.22 457 'M22) 291 529.43 S(23)n» A^poftetf V’ 1 5 m_3i 525.64 (W) I < €?%'=cNXC^ V 521.85 (3^ 223.5 :. 8 o • 2?!.*, £ •.1 «(.> ■r»:G)ou> • .*» • . > • nu> • • • • - ,-w 0 • V. (25.T Cili5> ;9 2i3.j ALLE> T03.5 |i?^4 ..u (-12; " . ;<!(il2) ^ __ _ 213.5 • *0 .AC 6-9;56 S^ Q.b'^ (1^ Ega VAC OOC NO 2711665 • \\ \ 20 120) •^^■•V*. .mp3 N89* 3I'24 • I ■'3!LAL^S8a®MT (HIEOQIKIT 7^ Tabic I: Wcs|lakc Nciehborliood History (L>R-l^i^ning Distj*ict) Property Address Lot Area Lot Width Side Setback (North) Side Setback (South) Front Setback (Lake) Rear Setback Year liuilt Variaticc!i Lot Combiiiation.H Westlake Street 309 1.6 acres 150’45.2’12’167 ’ (street) 234’1950 (1995 Addition) l'ilel/1996 (1995: side yard setback) 3 lots combined (I996) (309.324.325) 325 0.517 50’none none none none vacant None None 332 1.34 acres 100.28’20.1’12.7’140’375’1906 (1993 addition) FilcWI79l (1993: side y*ard setbacks) 2 lots combined (I993) 340 0.67 acres 50.14’2.94’6.37 ’140*428’1946 None None 341 0.525 acres 50’4 8’16.6 ’216’200’1914 (1977 Kar.ige) File 8321 (1977: Rarage loc.ition) None 348 0.67 acres 50.14’8.4’10’128’415’I951 None None 349 0.71 acres 90*10*5’210’210’1908 None No record 356 0.67 acres 50.14’6.08*11.32’125 395 1930 (1986 remodel) None None 364 1.44 acres 233.74’none none none none Vacant (2000 demo) Pile «2465 (2000: lot area, avg. Inkeshorc setback) Lot line rearrangement (2000) 365 0.47 acres 100’19.3* (side street) 60*III’68.8’1924 File « 2369 (I998: variances prior to combo) Combination (1999) (365.373) 372 1.20 acres 307.79’96* (street)98’ (eiisi)79.6*30’ (north)2002 File U 2465 (2000: lot line rearransement) Lot line rearrangemeitt (2000) 389 0.63 acres 136’90*5’130’ (street) 40*I9I0 (1986 remodel) None No record (3 lots) Bayside Road 3845 0.194 acres 50’8.93’ (wesi)6* (east)78’42’I958 (1993 remodel) None None 3855 0.228 acres 50’8’ (west)15* (cast)100’50’1958 None None 3865 3895 1.917 acres 0.984 acres 225’60 ’10’170’100’I9I6 (1987 remodel) None 2 parcels, I address T.so’ (street) 60*20'100’ (street) 150’I97I None None District Requirements 2 acres 200’30 ’30 ’75’50’ > e)^i65nivJ^ Houses WkOfi-TO U/T Dt?vTie^W/\TlOf'J & KC€>mDrJ ! _ .. - >; 11.11D e-)^l<STl(J6^'i'^' •If wO ' . ^ • •* • • •*>* »*■. dsu SI VARIANCE REQUEST I own two adjacent pieces of property {32U & 332 W, Lake St.) with existing houses on each. One serves as our primary residence and the other as our guest house and seasonal storage area. My intent, if I receive this variance as requested, is to legally combine the two properties and then to connect the existing structures with an addition. Existing setbacks are 12.7 feet on the south side and 20.1 feet on the north side. I do oat need to change these setbacks as all of the work falls between these existing conditions. In fact, once the lots are combined, most of the addition will f.->est the 30* sideyard setback of the newer ordinances passed since the original structures were built. The hardship I face is that the lots are very narrow and the new sideyard setback requirements of 30' make it impossible to build upon them, i.e. a 50' lot with 30' sideyard setback leaves a negative 10' for construction. By ccflbining the properties I create a 100' wide lot, but the 30' setbacks are still excessive and the existing houses still do not comply. I am therefore asking for a sideyard setback variance to leave the setbacks as they presently exist, which met the requirements at the time the houses were built. Thank you for your help in this matter. Elake Bichanich BB/hks €^4 ^ To:Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Stephen Weckman, On-Site Systems Manager Date: Subject: January 13, 1993 #1791 Blake Bichanich, 332 Westlake Street Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA, Lakeshore Residential, 2 acre minimum Pertinent Ordinance Section 10.23, Subd. 6 (B) - Side yard setback. Existing Proposfcd South side lot line 12.7" 12.7' North side lot linA 20.1' 20.1' List of Exhibits A B C D E F G H I J Application Property Owners List Plat Map Existing Survey Survey with Proposed Addition Proposed Floor Plan - Lower Level Proposed Floor Plan - Main Level West Elevation East Elevation Variance Request Description of Request The applicant requests approval of side lot line variances in order to construct additions to an existing residence. Two adjacent parcels, 324 and 332 Westlake Street, are owned by the applicant who would like to combine the lots and construct an addition which would combine two existing residences to form a single dwelling. The proposed remodel of the house to the south includes a front porch addition of approximately 50 square feet within the substandard side yard setback. The addition of a basement is proposed on the north house which currently has a crawl space only. The proposed basement will result in no additional hardcover in the setback area. A tower is also proposed which would attach the two structures. The tower would not encroach into the setback areas and meets the 30' height limitation. J Zoning File #1791 January 13, 1993 Page 2 The proposed renovation would result in the followinq: Approximately 50 square feet of hardcover would be added within the side yard setback area. The maximum encroachment into the side yard setbacks will remain the same. The hardcover, including all proposed changes, is well below the required percentages with the exception in the 0-75' zone which has one existing shed covering approximately 67 s.f. Lot coverage for the combined parcel is at approximately 2%. Due to the anticipated combination of these parcels, the applicant has already been assessed for one sewer unit • Hardship Statement The applicant's hardship is the long and narrow nature of the lots. ^ The combination of these two lots will result in a 100.28' lot width while the zoning district requires a minimum of 200' Due to the 30' side yard setbacks, the allowable building envelope is very restrictive at 40' wide. The proposed changes result in no further encroachment into the side yard setback area, as well as the fact that most of the addition would meet the 30' side yard setback. The changes add only slightly to the .lot coverage in the setback area and should not be a significant detriment compared to the benefit of combining the parcels and renovating the residence. lev * i U MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JANUARY 19, 1993 ZONING FILE #1790 - CONT. It was moved by Chair Bellows, seconded by Cohen, to recommend approval of Application #1790, Minnetonka Center for the Arts, on the property located at 2040 North Shore Drive, for a variance to Install a directional sign along County Road 15. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#5) #1791 BLAKE BICHANICH, 332 WESTLAKE STREET - VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 7:65 - 8:00 P.M. The Affidavit of PubI ication and Certificate of Mai I ing were noted. Mr. and Mrs. Blchanlch were present for this application. Weckman explained the applicants own two adjacent parcels, for which they propose a 50 s.f. addition to the south side of the residence and another addition of a basement lower level to the north side of the residence. They are proposing to move the northern structure 10* closer to the lake to enhance the view, and a tower Is proposed to join the two structures. The property has been assessed for one sewer unit. The hardship Is the narrowness of the lots. Johnson asked the setback from the take. Blchanlch noted the houses are approximately 150’ to 200’ from the I ake. It was moved by Chair Bellows, seconded by Cohen, to recommend approval of Application #1791, Blake Blchanlch, 332 Westlake Street, for side lot line variances to construct additions to the existing residences. Ayes 5, nays 0. (#6) #1792 DON GRONBERG, 110 LEAF STREET - VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:00 - 8:15 P.M. The Affidavit of PubIIcation and Certificate of Mai IIng were noted. Don Gronberg and Mark Gronberg were present. Mabusth briefly reviewed the areas of lots within the neighborhood and two area variances approved since 1975 based on current rural standards. The property now has sewer available. However, the shoreland regulations require the residence to be setback 75’ from the edge of the tributary is opposed to the 26’ setback previously required. This requirement reduces the building envelope, as well as the need to dedicate right-of-way for Leaf Street. ^ . j f • t^lo TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor Callahan and Orono CouncUniembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator Stephen Weckman, On-site Systems Manager February 2, 1993 SUBJECT: #1791 Blake Bichanich, 332 Westlake Street, Variance - Public Hearing Discussion of Application The applicant requests approval of side lot line variances in order to construct additions to an existing residence. Two adjacent parcels, 324 and 332 Westlake Street, are owned by the applicant who would like to combine the lots and construct an addition which would combine two existing residences to form a single dwelling. The proposed remodel includes a front porch addition on the house to the south of approximately 50 s.f. which would lie within the substandard side yard setback. The addition of basement is proposed on the north house, which currently has a crawl space only. The proposed basement will result in no additional hardcover within the setback area. A tower is also proposed which would attach the two structures. The tower would not encroach into the setback areas and meets the 30 ’ height limitation. The proposed renovation would result in the following: Approxiinately 50 s.f. of hardcover would be added within the side yard setback area. The maximum encroachment into the side yard setbacks will remain the same, 20.1 ’ north side lot line and 12.7 ’ for the south side lot line. The hardcover, including all proposed changes, is well below the required percentages with the exception of the 0-75’ zone which has one existing shed covering approximately 67 s.f. Lot coverage for the combined parcel is approximately 2%. Due to the anticipated combination of these parcels, the applicant has already been assessed for one sewer unit. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission unanimously approved the variance application with the following conditions: 1. The two parcels, 324 and 332 Westlake Street, must be legally combined prior to the issuance of a permit. 2. This residence must be hooked up to the City sewer as soon as possible and before new construction is occupied. Please review ti:e Planning Commission packet for further detail. The enclosed approval resolution has lH*en drafted per the findings and conditions set forth in the Planning Commission ’s recommendation. p-^ MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8, 1993 ZONING FILE #1790 - CONT. Jabbour felt It better to allow the directional sign than to have vehicles trying to turn around In the area. I* was moved by Qoetten, seconded by Mayor Callahan, to adopt Resolution #3230 for Application #1790 Minnetonka Center for the Arts, 2040 North Shore Drive, for a variance to allow the installation of a directional sign on a residential property. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#6) #1791 BLAKE BICHANICH, 322 WESTLAKE STREET - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3231 Blake Bichanich was present. Weckman reviewed the two properties are owned in common and the applicant proposes the addition of an entrance to one structure, and a basement to the other. A tower will Join the two structures together. The property has been assessed one sewer unit, and connection will be a condition of approval. Goetten asked If the shed In the 0-76* zone is movable. She noted the structure Is considered non-conforming. Bichanich stated that has been there a long time and could not easIiy be moved. It was moved by Jabbour, seconded by Kelley, adopting Resolution #3231 for Application #1791 for Blake Bichanich, 322 Westlake Street, approving a side setback variance for the renovation of existing structures, noting the non-conforming status of the structure In the 0-75’ zone. Ayes 4, nays 0. (#9) #1792 DON GRONBERG, 110 LEAF STREET - VARIANCES Mark Gronberg was present. ^6^6110402 ^6 >4^ CITY of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CnT COUNCIL NO.3231 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE #1791 WHEREAS, Blake Bichanich (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 332 Westlake Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and leeallv described as follows: * Lots 4 and 5, Block 1, Hillside Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and rr . ^ . WIffiREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of additions to his existing house within a substandard side yard setback. The maximum encroachment into the side yard setbacks will remain at 20.1 ’ to the north side lot line and 12.7 ’ to the south side lot line where the required side yard setback is 30 ’. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono. FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1791. 2. The property is located in the LR-IA, Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on January 19, 1993, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based on the following TRANSFER ENTERED C?P«0P£Rrv lAX t PUeUCR£C0«0S findings: JUL 2 1993 Page 1 of 5 faeSMIvil { f CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3231 4. 5. A. B. C. E. A combination of the two parcels will bring the property closer to conionnmg to 2 acre minimum requirement. The narrow lots severely restrict development on the combined parcels. The maximum encroachment into the side yard setback area will remain the same and hardcover additions within the substandard setback will be limited to 50 s.f. in area. D . The hardcover including all proposed changes is well below the required nercentaees in all hilt th(^ n.7^'7nnA tuhiAk ...:n_/percentages in all but the 0-75 ’ zone, which will not be intensified. Lot coverage for the combined parcel is approximately 2%. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and reco^endations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to It and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon c.ie or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to the Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the constniction of additions to the existing home subject to the following conditions: 1. Two parcels, 324 and 332 Westlake Street, must be legally combined prior to the issuance of a building permit for the proposed construction. Page 2 of 5 iMa«; s CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCtt 3231NO. 2.The residence must be connected to the municipal sewer prior to the final inspection by the City inspector of the new construction. 3.Applicant is placed on notice that the accessoiy structure located within the 0-75’ setback zone is non-conforming and subject to all pertinent ordinances. Any structural repair will require City approval. 4.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (February 8, 1994). 5.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 8th day of February, 1993. Edward J. Catfahan.'Jr., Mayor ^ M l^irA Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 5 Mm CITY of ORONO RESOLUnON OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.3231 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instnimeni was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of February, 1993, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. m ’^9* t 0^0000^ Notary Public My Commission Expires \ Page 4 of 5 ‘iik CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss« COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this id day of , 199 3 before me a Notary* Unrmrr Public within and for said county, personally appeared m. A;d\arMch 4 filarn 6 .SaniiC o ',ct ctjng.y ef frcpe/'if known to me to be the person(s) describ^ in and'Who executed "" the foregoing instrument, ai^ acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. i NOTARY^«Su^» HwwrapTA HENNEPIN COUNTY y/ My commisilon txpIrM t-t2*9B STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of Public within and for said county, personally appeared 199__before me a Notary known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 5 of 5 T • ,• « I Permit Mol •.'V. ^7 ^asz. 9-az 6<An> Silas' PERMIT RECORD Date . • to~^U>~'ipSx. *. • /O/S-9^ hn-^^ l/t '•/ 3S3l CO. ds^oJc^ -i^hjLiiJ- O Type of Perml'^ 'P/iJUtnnhiii •• •• •• /^.0..4^nff ’Cy UJ/iP •5a^ r ppr' I ■ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Chair Smith and Oroiio Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Jennifer Chaput, City Planner January 10,2003 #02-2859 Blake and Mary Bichanich 332 Westlake Street Variances — Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-1A One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acre) 1.34 acres (58,659 s.f.) Exhibits: A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. Analysis Worksheet Application Hardcover Calculations Survey Plat Map Location Map Proposed Site Plan Proposed Grading Plan Proposed House Elevations Proposed House Plans Property Owner’s List Photos of Property Pertinent Code Sections: 1. Section 10.23, Subd. 6 (B): Lot area, width and setbacks: The following minimum requirements shall be obser\ed in the LR-1 A One Family Lakeshore Residential District: lot area of 2 acres; lot width of 200 feet; side yard setbacks of 30 feet. Application Summary: The applicants are requesting variances in order to consta'ct a new house in the same location as a house exists today on the property. In order to rebuild a home on this property within the same dimensions as previously granted, the following variances are required: \. side yard setbacks: 11’ to the south and 19.3’ to the north where 30’ is required 2. lot width: 100.28’ where 200’ is required 3. lot area: 1.34 acres (58,659 s.f.) where 2 acres (87,120 s.f.) are required <*02-2839 Blake and Mary' Bichanich JS2 Westlake Street k-l'23/2003 Page 1 of 4 t Resolution #3231 (Zoning File #1791), recorded in 1993, permitted the applicants to construct additions to the existing home on this property with the following variance: side yard setbacks of 19.3 feet to the north and 12.7’ to the south where 30’ is required. Two parcels were also combined at that time to bring the lot width and area closer to conformity. Discussion: By the current Zoning Ordinance, the existing house is non-conforming. Since the applicants are proposing to move the existing house off of the property and build a new house, the new structure should be constructed as close to conformity as possible. The proposed plan eliminates a detached garage which is currently situated over the lot line and onto the neighboring property and proposes an attached garage 10’ from the lot line. Since the proposed garage is attached, it is considered to be part of the principal structure, requiring a 30’ setback instead of 11’ for a detached garage. An accessory structure exists within the 0-75’ hardcover zone. This structure was also identified in the 1993 application, referenced above. The resolution stated that this structure was non- conforming and any structural repairs would require City approval. The applicant is not proposing to change the structure from how it currently exists. Hardship: The applicants have included their statement of hardship in Exhibit B. The applicants should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Issues for Consideration: 1. Variances granted on a property for past construction are not applicable to new construction on the same property; 2. Granting the requested variances for new construction on this property will set a precedent for redevelopment of the modest-sized properties to the immediate south (pictured in Exhibit M); 3. The hardcover requirements in each zone are met with the exception of the existing accessory structure in the 0-75’ zone; 4. The non-conforming detached garage, currently located over the property line, is removed with the proposed plan; 5. The attached garage is considered part of the principal structure and should be evaluated according to the setback requirements for a principal structure; 6. The applicant combined the adjoining lot in order to increase the lot width and lot area to be closer to conformity as required w ith their previous application; 7. Most other lakeshore lots in this slowly redeveloping neighborhood are less than 1 acre in area and less than 200 in width; therefore, requiring the full 2 acre side setback standards ^02-2859 Blake and Mary Bichanich 332 Westlake Street 1/23/2003 Page 2 of 4 ' • / if may not be appropriate; 8. Other issues rais^ by the Planning Commission. Staff Recommendations: If the Planning Commission feels that the applicant should be able to maintain the setbacks permitted from previously approved variances on the pioperty to construct a new house, the application should be approved. However, if the Planning Commission feels that the new house should be built to meet the required side yard setbacks and not set a precedent for future redevelopment in the area, the application should be tabled to allow the applicant to present an altered plan. Options for Planning Commission Action: 1. Recommend approval of the requested variances. 2. Recommend denial, stating reasons. 3. Table. 4. Other action. W2-2SJ9 BltAt and Mary Bichanich 332 Wtsdakt Straet 1/23/2003 Pagt3pf4 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Hardcover Calculations: LR-IA Lot Requirements: U02-2859 Blake and Mary Bichanich S32 Westlake Street 1/14/2003 Page 4 of 4 A Distance from shoreline Total area in setback Allowed hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75’7,521 s.f.Os.f.67.45 s.f.67.45 s.f (0%)(0.89%)(0.89%) 75-250’17,500 s.f.4,375 s.f.3,710 s.f.4,369 s.f (25%)(21.2%)(24.96%) 250-500’25,000 s.f.7,500 s.f.2,500 s.f.3,079 s.f (30%)(10%)(12.3%) 500-1,000’8,638 s.f.3,023 s.f.850 s.f.880 s.f (35%)(9.8%)(10.2%) Dimensions Required Existing Proposed Lot Area 87,120 s.f 258,659 s.f 258,659 s.f (2 acres)(1.34 acres)(1.34 acres) No Change Lot Width 200’100.28’100.28’ No Change Side Setback 19.3 ’ North 30’19.3 ’12.7’ (at the house) South 30’12.7’1 r tat the earaee) Accessory Structure Setbacks (Detached Garage) 10 ’0* (on neighbor ’s property) No detached garage proposed ha. tpVi CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) S^ariance for non-cdnfonning structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Apphcation U ^ Date Received /3t Amount Paid PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Property Identification Number ff.I.D.) C5T-11q - I (do) (^o^n^ also own Ac adjacent paxMls of land. ’ (month/year) Present use of property: residential Zoning District: other (specify)^ Address:_5^5a./i ^ City: APPLICANT Name_BLAHg,a./y7A2,y ^ - Zip:_ fVy ^ j cei,L OWNER (if different than applicant) Name __________ Address:City:. Phone (home) Phone (work) - Zip:. (attach additional sheets if necessary) ' ‘------------- VARIANCES REQUIRED _X- Area Lot Width Setback:Front XSide Hardcover Rear .Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS DMcribe undue hardship or practical difficult or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zomng Code requirements: (attach additional sheets if necessary) J • * I required submittals ..........fail.. M- .a. I. Completed Application Form Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-5910). County .Department of Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed survevort mul inrfna- u. 4 SilS “ ■'“' '• “ <» “»> the property. This would include name(s) ^ “ *"'®^®** *" AS an addendurn to tins .PPHcation,'^?^aL'rcn'®;^:,Tof ^ persoiw you wish notified of this application. ^ ^ “ Additional items as may be requested by City staff. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this aoDlication Pi4.cc- i. larjance applitatign h not complete if the above infnr.n^^j^n has nnt AP.PLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or reaues^H hv tK. 7 • Admimstrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time no?covered ^ and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this apolication ^anH^r i-r * information supplied is trae and correct to the be^f his/hen knowledge. ^ Date l^ln/nHApplicant’s Signatun OWNER'S SIGNATURE cm;r.r at;r cit members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature _Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 dav. h-r«r- »k- di • Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held L the tWrd mouth. Applicant, must b. prent at all .cheduW r.vl Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend . t’a*! 4^ ■ *^'*“‘“* make anangements to have an authorized agent attend in vour ni»- "’4'?'’ pl«»se & Zoning Office of this clmng. prior to !he rneiSg w r December 17, 2002 Variance Request To City Staff, Planning Commission and Council Members: In May of 1988 we purchased 324 and 332 Westlake Street. Each parcel had 50’ of lakeshore and was approximately 600’ deep. 324 Westlake Street had a three- season cottage on it. and 332 Westlake Street had a small year round heme. Our intent was to eventually combine the two properties and build a new home. In 1993 we applied for variances to build what was substantially a new home on the p'operty (portions of the original structure were incorporated into the new construction'. The Planning Cornmission and City Council voted unanimously to grant the variances for lot area, lot width, and side setbacks as requested. We then legally combined the two properties into a 1.4-acre site with 100' of frontage on Lake Minnetonka and built a new home. We are now back requesting the same variances that were previously granted in 1993 In order to build a new home on the property. The proposed home is sited in virtually the same posiron as the existing structure. It will be sited approximately 144’ from the 929.4 O.H.W. aivJ meets the average lakeshore setback. We are asking for variances to maintain the existing 12.7’ side setback to the South, and to maintain the existing 19.3 side setback to the North. Please note that the existing detached garage currently extends over the south property line and 2.3 ’ into the neighbor ’s property. We propose to remedy this condition by siting the new attached garage 11’ from the south property line. The proposed hardcover remains 67 s.f. for the 0-75’ zone and will be less than the allowable areas for the 75-250’, 250-500’ and 500- 1000’ zones. Hardship Statement The hardships for the site remain the same as stated in 1993. Even though we combined the two lots which resulted in a 1.4-acre lot 100.28’ wide we still do not meet the 2 acre minimum or the 200’ lot width that current zoning requires. Due to the current zoning requirements for 30 ’ side yard setbacks, the allowable building envelope is very restrictive at 40’. We therefore ask for the reasonable variance to maintain the current side yard setbacks of 12.7’ to the south and 19.3 ’ to the north in order to build a new home that is the same width as the current home. We also ask to be able to build an attached garage 11’ from the sout.i lot line instead of the detached garage which currently extends 2.3 ’ over the south property line. We respectfully request that you grant the variances for lot area, lot width, and side setbacks as requested. Thank you for your help in this matter. Sincerely, EWARIANCE REQUEST.POC HA >coverjcalculation WORK ;eet SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 75-250* 250-500* EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House V _ 500-1000* Length Width B. Cange C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic O. Other ftHtP ^*t> X X X X X X X X X X X X I A A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ B 7^2-1 ____________ B X iOO - X 100 - PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONK A. Hou«e Length Width X X X B. Cange C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other S3 SB X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _Gl if - B _ :100 • • *.< o r\V •; r.,>-1 .S.F. «.F. S.F. , S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SJ. S.F. S.F. S.F. hn* ^ r S.F. . S.F. S.F. S.F. , S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ST. S.F. S.F. S.F. Cd7. ^ r*~ S.F. S.F. A ST. B 56 ¥IJ f^--V HJ ’>COVER CALCULAT SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLc. ONE) 0-75'WORI TEET ^50-500*SOO-1000' EXISTING HARl A. House fiJNLZONE 32>2 '2#2.4 u)«W€:—^----'n)u€<em^ Width X X X B. Oarage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck pgct.5*m X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X O. Other .. ■ X I'OO TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE A A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _SlD 'L + B B X 100 -- X 100 PROPOSED HAP1 A. House »JPLZONE Length Wkfih X X X B. Oarage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE * 0 S.F. Me ___6.F. S.F. >SL> S.F. 5«t S.F. I, 0T>O S.F. S.F. 9-OM S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ^ elves' SF. .‘2>'^\0‘ Lf ST. A S.F. B % ST. S.F. S.F. S.F. O ST. ST. __ S*F• S.F. ST. I ST. ^ ST. ST. ST. ST. 0 S.F. S.F. A Q ST. B i: 'i r. HA 'ICOVER CALCULATION WO|H SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLk. ONE) 0-75* 75-250* EXISTING BAR] A. House :r in zone 1 SET 500-1000’ cm Lcfifth WMih X X X B. Oange C. Drivewty X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Undertato By Plastic X X X 0< Other A A TOTAL HARDCX)VER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE __ B S^CiDOO X 100 - __ + B ___________ X 100 » CPU PWnPOSF.n HARl A House HMVi:fi/mZONE Length Width X X X B. Oarage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. OthCT ‘TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _ + B DCits X 100 TOTAL PRC ';xtc:b0 I oo/> 307^ S.F. .«.F. S.F. S.F. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. A S.F. B SI. SI. SI. SJ. S.F. S.F. SJ. S.F. S.F. S.F. S-T. S.F. SJ. SJ. S.F. 2d 72_sj. A SJ. B 1 i ff'<''■ ' ? ,'v •', V ’•.-• < ••• '*j. ’»■•^* • - - )• -' ..V ^ y‘ ‘ ; -^ . :4 .' * i£ K) Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department * . • • . *.i ^ t 44^ * f “7^^ i• ; »w / *S ‘I J" •-........ a * *(33)a * *"*(3*i r^a uii 9 mt fo (26} •; jij$ If tiil —^ V*J • :4jf • a V ft Tsn— *•(42)a IT itjf a *• *•(27) a taot •irtf f a 2, lUf a 9! saa a :•art r 2 9• a IM4J j s‘ ®* ffJ ia mte 4 e \/ a ftlf u « V /\ a iff 01 f (13)_ _ ^•; r /a <r f»4ir ruj / •: -a trssa • ffS! •otr t a: to / p ■•*'*f0 enr ' • r f - /•• ; M-*; t fi MJf M3;4?/ / /at / a • f t fi easrs V:’/ P*MTQf(Utt <n 1 'CLAREMONT HEIGHTS' AM M ^RLSN0 576a VAC0CCaC/*frM4 - ■- /(7- ^3<5^ reel Information Parcel ID 0511723230039 House Number 332 Street Name WESTLAKE ST TNslsnotalegaByncof^map.ttf^f9S0ntstcoa^aationoHnfynn*tion and data from City, County, and Stata mad authoriUas and othar sources. 5 •1A!.'I ST* OAR ST « iyj 9V1ED3iNA >•• •• 4 12C0 • * •« ». I*. ( IREEKWOOD TR 800 % * . # / ^ *•»«' “•••. .• ^«v* ••** •-* * . , 1 (T) B- ---- (/) * I • I 400 Classen Lake CHIPPEWA LA 8AYSIDE OFORICIR 0 ee '* EILEEN ST OROMO HIGH WATERrO CHRIS>iNE OR WN RO NORTH 400 2 » '’■\*^00o ap r* • EAST LAKE ST '> UJ • .V-£!h BAYS Golf Course WEST BRANCH RD Stubbs Bay, FOX 8CC OAKiA @ Cw •H- ^ - i? H I f'-®' /f^f, Hibite afimii^li ft HI -- - ■T'/s rj.vvV" JE3fLE&:.l6e KECJlDOK\ iCHLMATlC LOWEPv LEVEL Pim NT-6. !&.• IS* oe. in k t'.. 59-15 Q Vay »»j HTS. 4cHE±lKi:\C; FIMl5lIXVElZ„aAH IT s CQ 6ChK-HMIC UfPER UVEL FIAM ■frT6;i-o"IZ.I20S. nil ■ I ■ f^ u p t f :imd^ RUN DATE lZ/ll/«2 BATCH SDS HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATXON SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PIA3M01 PACE 7 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR M 05-117-23 23 0009 03S95 BAVSIOE RD JEFFREY E STRANOBERO ET AL JEFFREY t CAROLYN STRANOBERO 3895 BAYSIDE RO LONG LAKE NN 5535* 3B 05-117-23 23 0010 03B*5 BAYSIDE RO D • K DIANIS DAVID DIANIS 579 NE PLANTATION RO R910N STUART FL 3*99* 3B 05-117-23 23 0013 00340 WESTLAKE ST C K HARRER » T R HARRER CYNTHIA K < TIMOTHY R HARRER 340 WESTLAKE ST LONG LAKE NN 5535* PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 0014 ST SB 05-117-23 23 00348 WESTLAKE ROBERT A OLSON ROBERT A OLSON 348 WESTLAKE ST LONG LAKE NN 5535* 38 05-117-23 23 0015 0035* WESTLAKE ST E C ANDERSON ETAL EDWARD ANDERSON 35* WESTLAKE ST LONG LAKE NN 5535* 38 05-117-23 23 0022 00325 WESTLAKE ST ROOERT D ERICKSON ROBERT 0 ERICKSON 15500 WAYZATA BLVO B754 WAYZATA NN 55391 1 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR 38 05-117-23 23 0023 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ROBERT D ERICKSON ROBERT 0 ERICKSON 15500 WAYZATA BLVD B754 ' WAYZATA NN 55391 38 05-117-23 23 0024 00341 WESTLAKE ST ROBERT 0 ERICKSON ROBERT 0 ERICKSON 15500 WAYZATA BLVO 8754 WAYZATA NN 55391 38 05-117-23 23 0025 00349 WESTLAKE ST C R NCNAO IRC NCNAB ROBERT I CYNTHIA NCNAB 177 PENINSULA ROAD NEOICINE LAKE NN 55441 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AODR 38 05-117-23 23 0039 00332 WESTLAKE ST B N BICHANICH I N B JANSSEN B N BICHANICH I N B JANSSEN 332 WESTLAKE ST LONG LAKE NN 5535* 38 05-117-23 23 0040 00309 WESTLAKE ST‘ GREGG S I BETTE J PERL GREGG S PERL 309 WESTLAKE ST Lmc LAKE NN 5535* TOTAL BATCH 503 00011 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND 'RUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO JMF BEST date/-'^*^-^ o£ ^ Tr. *u 'm cV irtliNi V kjL^ .r, ^ *ii; .............. ?»*^rTrr\^- * --r\ — mK- ~'-V.'^ l^-'V^:S.; fflf:iill V.. » . ■ I ' - V :*/ , - •. *. ’ •• i A ; - V't? ■> A;.*«Ai'^. -» ''-' \ \ . ■ - "■ I w 'a * ‘ ' *T‘> !K fv y . . .'. I # ^ -s» ' iWJ^'' 1 > . • aic- n -VISTIW^ Ar/'P:<>fV7^Y c;?XJA/,Ti ;J^ VVIIHIM NK>r- • J ‘a- V. ^ f ^ •" -• j - \.\ >A *^'Ov r^^-5 -f ;■ - --V ^r-, .‘ r-'> >t^ jKrT? ^ • ><•;; - ‘ • ^ • ri j c^ c-». •*'ir D'/V^ r ^ fT-'' \ > ' - #v ifl 'TflMPL .-■"^W TO: DATE: RE: cc: Mayor Barbara Peterson and the Honorable Members of the City Council March 1.2003 332 Westlake Street Proposal City Staff History of the property In retrospect, it seems we would have been better off to ouild a new house on each of the 50' wide properties, and then combined them into one. This would have allowed us to have 10' side yard setbacks to the nor*h and south, and when we combined the two separate houses we would have i.ad an 80’ wide house on a 100’ wide lot. Statement of Hardship The rezoning of our neighborhood in 1975 to LR-1A with it’s 2 acre minimum. 200' of lake shore, and 30' side yard setbacks is in itself a hardship because it did not recognizing the existing conditions or the character of the established Westlake Street neighborhood. The Westlake Street neighborhood was composed mostly of 50' wide lots at the time it was rezoned to LR-1A. Not a single lakeshore property on F AHLERS.NEIGHBORHOOD SOLUTION DOC In 1988 we purchased 324 and 332 Westlake Street from two separate sellers, with the intent of eventually combining the separate properties into one and building a new home. We lived at J32 Westlake Street in an existing home from 1988 until 1993, at which time we bu.lt the home that exists today. In 1992 we met with City staff members Jeanne Maybusth and Mike Gaffror, who were at that time the zoning and assistant zoning administrators for Orono. We discussed our need to expand the size of our home in order to meet the demands of a growing family. We were encouraged by staff to combine the two properties and / lild across therr. Staff felt that .“ombining the properties would bring them closer to the LR-1A zoning requirements, and that this would be looxed upon favorably by both the Planning Commission and City Council when they were asked to grant variances for lot area, lot width, and side yard setbacks (the exact same variances that we are asking for today). In 1992 plans for the new home were drawn up. A portion of the existing house on 332 Westlake Street was to be retained (a 12' x 28' section that was originally the kitchen and bedroom, and are now the dining room and entry). This portion was 12.7’ from the south property line. A new foundation with a greatroom above was added on the lakeside, and a new kitchen and covered entry porch were added on the street side. The existing house on 324 Westlake Street had no basement, so we proposed to move it and build a walkout basement with a recreation room on the lower level and an owner's suite above it on the main level. In addition, a sunroom was added to the lakeside. We designed a stone lighthouse tower as the central form of the house, and it bridged across the property lines. The existing garage, which crossed over the neighbor s property line by 2’. was added onto to create greater depth for the cars. Westlake Street was able to meet or conform to the new criteria at the time of the rezoning. Had the line separating the LR-1A district from the R-1A district been drawn just to the north and included Westlake Street, we would be required to have only one acre. 140’ minimum lot width, and only 10’ side yard setbacks, as do the homeowners on Tonkawa with similar lots We feel that the rezoning has placed undue hardships on our neighborhood, and restricted our rights as property owners. A neighborhood solution Granting variances which allow 15 ’ side yard setbacks for a 100’ wide lot promotes lower density by encouraging other lakeshore property owners in the Westlake Street neighborhood to combine their 50' wide lots irto larger parcels. Enforcing more restrictive side yard setbacks is likely to force the design of homes to become more massive and vertical in nature in order to take advantage of lake views from as many rooms as possible. In addition, the more restrictive the side yard setbacks are, the less economic incentive there is for property owners to combine their lots. Due to the more highly restrictive side yard setbacks imposed on a combined property the value of the combined lots would be less than the value of the two separate 50 ’ parcels if they were to be sold separately. Precedent The precedent that would be set by g'anting variances which allow 15 ’ side yard setbacks for a 100’ wide lot in the Westlake Street Neighborhood is a positive one in that it promotes lower density by providing incentives for property owners to combine their 50' wide lots into larger parcels. We respectfully request your support on this issue. Sincerely, ^ it''/A.. Blake and Mary Eichanich If you have any questions or would like to meet me at the site to review the project please call Blake Bichanich at 715-828-8037. r vAHLERS NEtOHBORHOOD SOLUTION DOC ► EXISTING SITE aAN SCALE r = 50'-0“ PROPOSED SITE PLAN WITH. 15* SETBACKS SCALE-r = 50'-0" 100* APPROVED SITE PLAN 20* SETSACKS SCALE: r = 50-0" Application Date: 1/08/03 60 Day Deadline: 3/08/03 Extended Deadline: 5/07/03 APR 1 4 2003 ClIYui- umuvu Department Approval: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title City Planner REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: ITEM NO.: 7 AgendaSection: Zoning Item Description: t/02-2863 Richard Kail 3753 Casco Point Road Variances Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (.5 acre) 16,095 s.f. (.37 acre) List of Exhibits: A Last proposed residence submittal to City stafT B Resolution C Staff Report and Exhibits of 2/10/2003 Application Summary: This application was tabled at the February 10,2003 City Council meeting to pursue ways to increase the size of the property in order to meet the 15% lot coverage by structures to construct a new residence on the property. The applicant decided to go forward with an application to vacate the adjacent alley in hopes of increasing the size of the property. The vacation application was denied at the March 24,2003 City Council meeting. The applicant is requesting lot area and lot coverage by structure variances for construction of a new residence to replace the existing foundation and detached accessory' building left on the property after the residence was destroyed by fire. Planning Commission has recommended approval of the lot area variance and denial of the lot coverage by structure variance. The last revised plan staff received from the applicant is still over the 15% lot coverage by structures at 2.631 s.f (16.3%). Discussion: Approximately 4 years ago the residence on the subject property burned and all that remains on the property is a foundation and accessory structure (detached garage). In 1995 the applicant applied for and was granted a lot area variance to construct a new residence on the property. The variance expired without the applicant applying for a building permit. Since that lime the ownership of the subject property has changed between family members. The applicant again owns the property and has applied for variances to construct a new residence on the property. r^'t' .'I Lof Area: The lot area is 16,095 s.f. (.37 acre) in the LR-IC zoning district where 21,780 s. f. (.5 acre) is required and where existing lots of record would be required to meet 17,424 s.f. (.4 acre) or 80%. In 1995, the applicant was granted a lot area variance to construct a new residence on the property. (Res. if3573). Lot Coverage by Structures: The proposed redesigned residence is 2,631 s.f. (16.3%). The lot coverage by structures is OVER the allowed amount. Hardcover: The subject property falls in two hardcover zones, 250-500’ and 500-1000’. The construction of the residence is located in the 500-1000’ setback zone. The proposed hardcover in the 500- 1000’ .setback zone is 4,624 s.f. (44%) and exceeds the allowed 3643 s.f. (35%), the applicant has not used alt of the 1706.25 s.f. in the 250-500’ setback zone. The City does allow credit for unused hardcover allotment to be transferred to zones further from the lake. This is referred to as transfer of hardcover allotments from zone to zone. Therefore, a hardcover variance in the 500-1000’ setback zone is not required. PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 6 to 0 vote to: Approve the lot area variance but deny the request for a lot coverage variance. Planning Comnussion indicated that there is no hardship to support the lot coverage variance. 1 he applicant would have to downsize the house in order to obtain a building permit. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution which reflects the recommendation of tlic Planning Commission. COUNCII. ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. ft c OR; RICHARD KAIL tCHOClL • MADSOM, MC. ^ OWMORS • WRVEYVB • RUNNOIS SOL 1CS1M0 • OMRONMOITM. BMCES 109W VMVZATA MMUEVIMO. SUHE 1 MMNEniNK^ MN 8S308 «2>SW-7m FAX: tS2-S4«-«»S i CASCO A - 17351 sq.ft. 0.40 Acres HOUSE = 2631 sq.ft. DRIVEWAY « 1993 sq.ft. :D cover = 24.6X :r for lot to proposed house 51 sq.ft. 0.40 Acres HOUSE = 2631 sq.ft. tRAGE » 15.1% 953 5 * BITUMINOUS ROAD COMM RISER AVENUE T 9541. um 2 K 957 4 X ~ EDGE BIT EAST 100.00 *(957.9) *957.9 1 (951 7)* 951.7* / V y V 0 ^ ^ ' I L ! ^ rcL J ^f} M 20 *)956.2 vii; jjII,50 TO 3E (954 4)* 957 0* y-yy • • • • L..W : 60 37 10 (^;|^/52 50^ /A g?ev;.J?>./*(9H0l/ ~1 )r(954.4; X950.2 //* PROPOSED HOUSE. D75 S?3. EXt5I ‘N^ CONC S lab >3 BE PEMQvtD QENO ho )llowing abbreviation denotes estimated diameter (/) three feet above ground level. The second f ony) denotes the number of trunks at that I denotes a dead tree). >llowing shrubs denotes it's diometer in feet. deck __________________ _^/AC->9 0^ ■-|-x94i£_----- /* fi/ 00 CD ' ' 1,^ fgo cri I oi I, 1f 10.00 - tes deciduous tree, tes Maple 937 4* (937 4)k | V‘ y t ^ - r>s LOT 8 °iml / beeri checked and day of ®6i5(M) N 84*36*24* »933 I *(938. J) '4-H' I 63903-001 627/39 (122-99) ADDRESS 3753 Casco Avenue Orono, MN 55391 BENCHMARK Top of iron monument as shown Elevation = 957.21 (NGVD-1929) GENERAL NOTES 1. Orientation of the bearings used for this survey is based on an assumed datum 2. • - Denotes iron monument. 3. x890.0 — Denotes existing spot elevation. 4. x(890.0) - Denotes proposed spot elevation. — Denotes direction of surface drainage. Proposed garage floor = 954.7 7. Proposed top of foundation = 955.0 8. Proposed basement floor =: 944.0 9. House is 0 Walkout 10. Date of last field survey; 12/17/02 11. x(890.0)CP — Denotes critical point elevation. 12. 179.0 (P) Denotes Casco Heights plat 12. 178.57 (M) Denotes Field meosurement SPECIAL NOTE Only eosements shown on the recorded plat of CASCO HEIGHTS are shown on this survey mop, unless otherwise noted. The survey upon which this map is based was performed without benefit of either an attorneys title opinion or a title commitment. DESCRIPTION Lots 7 6c 8. Block 4. Casco Heights, Hennepin County, Minnesoto. I hereby certify that this survey was prepared under my supervision and that 1 am a Licensed Land Surveyor under/tReslows of the StqJte of Minnesota. Oany R. McGibbohl^s Iwl w\^9 I Date: ^ 200 3 License No. 18883 A RESOLD I ION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) AND DENYING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14(C) FILE NO. 02-2863 WHEREAS. Richard Kail and Diane Supemalt, husband and wife, (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 3753 Cusco Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: I.ots 7 and 3, Block 4. “Casco lleights'MIennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) and Section 10.03. Subdivision 14 (C) to allow construction of a new single family residence to replace a pre-existing residence on a .37 acre lot in the LR-IC Zoning District where a .5 acre minimum lot area is required; and to allow said new residence to be 3,262 s.f. (20%) of lot coverage by structures where 2,414.25 s.f. (15%) is allowed; and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice .iccordance with Minnesota Statutes and the C'ity of Orono Zoning and IMaiming Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 22. 2003, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were gi\en the opportunity to speak thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RE.SOLVED bv the Citv Council of Orono. Minne.sota: FINDINGS 1 . 1 his application was reviewed as Zoning I ile /*02-2863. 2. Ihe pro|>erty is located in the I.R-IC Zoning District, where 0.5 acres is the minimum required lot area. The property consists of approximately 0.37 acres. Page I of 5 3. The property contained an existing residence foundation and detached garage originally built in 1950, whicii vv,os dc itroycd by fire in 1998, leaving only the foundation and a detached garage. 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on Januarj- 22, 2003 and recommended approval of the lot area vaiiance and denial of the lot coverage by structures variance by a vote of 6 to 0. The Planning Commission made the following finding of fact; 5. 6. A.The lot area of 0.37 acres is sufficient to allow reconstruction on the site, where a residence has previously existed for many years. B.Removal of the existing foundation and building a new residence is new construction requiring that all lot standards must be met. C.There is insufllcient hardship to support the requested lot coverage by structures variance. The need for extra storage and lack of land to combine suggested by the applicant as a hardship, can be ameliorated by downsizing the design of the residence to meet the required lot coverage by structure limit.iti ?n. Furthermore, while the land adjacent to the subject property is a plattcv! alley, the City does not intend to vacate it. 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 variances will not adversely aflect traffic conditions, light, air. nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely scr\ e as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary' to prcser\ e a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping w ith the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the Citv. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City Staff, comments by Uie applicants and the eltect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the communitv. Page 2 of 5 Mt »?•* CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to allow construction of a new single family residence to replace a pre-existing residence on a .37 acre iot in the LR-IC Zoning District where a .5 acre minimum lot area is required; and to deny a variance for lot coverage by structures for said construction. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.No variances other than lot area are granted by this resolution. The applicant must provide construction plans meeting all city lot requirements in order to obtain a building permit. 2.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or these variances will expire on that date (April 14,2004). 3.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City or Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of April, 2003. AlTliSr; Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mavor Property Owner (s) Page 3 of5 .......... «■ ;■ STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknow ledged before me on this 14th day of April, 2003 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of April, 2003 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of ,2003,personally appeared before me, ____ who is personally known to me ____ whose identity I proved on the basis of whose identity I pro\ed on the oath^affirmation of credible witness ..a and w ho executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 Juadi STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this __day of appeared before me, 2003,personally who is personally known to me whose identity I proved on the basis of whose identity I proved on the oath/afTirmation of credible witness ..a and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public Pages of5 ■lUiM Application Date: 1/08/03 60 Day Deadline: 3/08/03 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: DATE: Name Wendy Bottenberg ITEM NO.: ^ Title City Planner AgcndaSection: Zoning Item Description: #02>2863 Richard Kail 37S3 Casco Point Road Variances Zoning District: Lot Area: LR“1C One Family Lakeshore Residential District (.5 acre) 16,095 s.f. (.37 acre) List of Exhibits: A Resolution D Staff Report and Exhibits of I /22/2003 Application Summary: The applicant is requesting lot area and lot co\*erage by structiu^ variances for construction of a new residence to replace the existing foundation and detached accessory building left on the property after the residence was destroyed by fire. Planning Commission has recommended approval of the lot area variance and denial of the lot coverage by structure variance. Discussion: Approximately 4 vears ago the residence on the subject property burned and all that remains on the property is a foundation and accessory structure (detached garage). In 1995 the applicant applied for and was granted a lot area variance to construct a new residence on the property. The variance expired without the applicant applying for a building permit. Since that time the ownership of the subject property has changed between family members. The applicant again owns the property and has applied for variances to construct a new residence on the property. Lot Area: The lot area is 16,095 s.f. (.37 acre) in the LR-IC zoning district where 21,780 s. f. (.5 acre) is required and where existing lots of record would be required to meet 17,424 s.f. (.4 acre) or 807c. In 1995, the applicant was granted a lot area variance to construct a new residence on the property. (Res. #3573). Lot Coverage by Structures: The proposed residence is 2,856 s.f. and a porch is 406 s.f. for a total 3,262 s.f. (20%). The porch is covered, therefore is included in lot coverage by structures. The lot coverage by struchires is OVER the allowed amount by 847.75 s.f. t Hardcover: The subject property falls in two hardcover zones, 250-500’ and 500-1000’. The construction of the residence is primarily located in the 500-1000’ setback zone. A small portion of the residence and porch are located in the 250-500’ setback zone for a total of 408 s.f. Even though the proposed hardcover in the 500-1000’ setback zone is 3,960 s.f. (38%) and exceeds the allowed 3642.63 s.f. (35%), the applicant has not used all of the 1706.25 s.f. in the 250- 500’ setback zone. The City does allow credit for unused hardcover allotment to be transferred to zones fiirther from the lake. This is referred to as transfer of hardcover allotments from zone to zone. Therefore, a hardcover variance in the 500-1000* setback zone is not required. PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 6 to 0 vote to: Approve the lot area variance but deny the request for a lot coverage variance. Plaiming Commission indicated that there is no hardship to support the lot coverage variance. The applicant would have to downsize the house in order to obtain a building permit. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. • •• « A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) AND DENYING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C) FILE NO. 02-2863 WHEREAS, Richard Kail and Diane Supemalt, husband and wife, (hereinafter "the applicants") arc the owners of the property located at 3753 Casco Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lots 7 and 8, Block 4, “Casco Heights”, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter “the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) and Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to allow construction of a new single family residence to replace a pre-existing residence on a .37 acre lot in the LR-IC Zoning District where a .5 acre minimum lot area is required; and to allow said new residence to be 3,262 s.f. (20%) of lot coverage by structures where 2,414.25 s.f. (15%) is allowed; and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 22, 2003, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #02-2863. The property is located in the LR-IC Zoning District, where 0.5 acres is the minimum required lot area. The property consists of approximately 0.37 acres. Page 1 of 5 , •! 'i fl ‘ \ 3. The property contained an existing residence foundation and detached garage originally built in 1950, which was destroyed by fire in 1998, leaving only the foundation and a detached garage. 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on January 22, 2003 and recommended approval of the lot area variance and denial of the lot coverage by structures variance by a vote of 6 to 0. The Planning Commission made the following finding of fact: A. The lot area of 0.37 acres is sufficient to allow reconstruction on the site, where a residence has previously existed for many years. B.Removal of the existing foundation and building a new residence is new construction requiring that all lot standards must be met. C.There is insufficient hardship to support the requested lot coverage by structures variance. The need for exua storage and lack of land to combine suggested by the applicant as a hardship, can be ameliorated by downsizing the design of the residence to meet the required lot coverage by structure variance. Furthermore, while the land adjacent to the subject property is a platted alley, the City does not intend to vacate it. 5.The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances will not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air, nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and woul • be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the 6.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City Staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 5 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section I0.2S, Subdivision 6 (B) to allow consUuction of a new single family residence to replace a pre-existing residence on a .37 acre lot in the LR-IC Zoning District where a .5 acre minimum lot area is required; and to deny a variance for lot coverage by structures for said construction. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.No variances other than lot area are granted by this resolution. The applicant must provide construction plans meeting all city lot requirement in order to obtain a building permit. 2.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or these variances will expire on that date (February 10,2004). 3.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City or Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 10th day of February, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner (s) Page 3 ofS a r i { STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 1 0th day of February, 2003 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this______day of February, 2003 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of .,2003, appeared before me, ____ who is personally known to me ____ whose identity I proved on the basis of________ ____whose identity I proved on the oath/afTirmation of, credible witness jjersonally ..a Md w ho executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as hi&lier/their free act and deed. Notary Public Page 4 of5 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this__day of appeared before me, , 2003,j)ersonally who is personally known to me whose identity I proved on the basis of whose identity I proved on the oath/afhrmation of credible witness ..a and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public Pages of5 1 V i II TO;Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner DATE: January 15,2003 SUBJECT:m-2863 Richard Kail 3753 Casco Avenue Variances -- Public Hearing Zoning District: I '>t Area: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (.5 acre) 16,095 s.f. (.37 acre) Exhibits: A Analysis Worksheet Application Hardship Statement Survey Hardcover Calculations Elevations Floor Plans Photo of Property Plat Map Property Owner’s List Resolution #3573 B C D E F G H I J K Pertinent Code Sections: 1. Section 10.25, Subd. 6(B): Lot Area: The lot is 16,095 s.f. where 21,780 s.f. is the mitrimum lot area for the LR-1C zoning district. Lots of one acre or less serviced with public sanitary sewer and platted prior to the adoption of the zoning chapter are only required to meet 80% of the lot area requirement (17,424 s.f.). 2. Section 10.03, Subdivision 14(C): Lot Coverage: In all zoning district, for all lots of 0-1.99 acre in total area, the total combined footprint areas of all principal and accessory structures shall not e.\ceed 15% of the lot area. To permit 3,262 s.f (20%) structural lot coverage where 2,414.25 s.f (15%) is allowed. Application Summary*: The applicant is requesting lot area and lot coverage by structures variances to construct a new residence on the property. Discussion: Approximately 4 years ago the residence on the subject property burned and all that remains on the property* is a foundation and accessory structure (detached garage). In 1995 the applicant applied for and was granted a lot area variance to construct a new residence on the property*. The variance expired w*ithout the applicant applying for a building permit. Since that time the #02-2863 Richard Kail 3753 Casco Avenue !/I5'2003 Page I of3 J ownership of the subject property has changed between family members. The applicant again owns the property and has applied for variances to construct a new residence on the property. Lot Area: The lot area is 16,095 s.f. (.37 acre) in the LR-IC zoning district where 21,780 s. f. (.5 acre) is I**?!!!? existing lots of record would be required to meet 17,424 s.f (.4 acre) or 80%. In 1995, the applicant was granted a lot area variance to construct a new residence on the property. (Res. #3573). Lot Coverage by Structures: The proposed residence is 2,856 s.f. and a porch is 406 s.f for a total 3,262 s.f (20%). The porch is covered, therefore is included in lot coverage by structures. The lot coveraee bv structures is OVER the allowed amount by 847.75 s.f Hardcover: ^e su^ect prope^ falls in two hardcover zones, 250-500’ and 500-1000’. The construction of the residence IS primarily located in the 500-1000’ setback zone. A small portion of the residence and porch are located in the 250-500’ setback zone for a total of 408 s.f Even though the *he 500-1000’ setback zone is 3,960 s.f (38%) and exceeds the allowed 3642.63 s.f (35/o), the applicant has not used all of the 1706.25 s.f in the 250-500’ setback zone. The City does allow credit for unused hardcover allotment to be transferred to zones forther from the lake. This is referred to as transfer of hardcover allotments from zone to zone. Therefore, a hardcover variance in the 500-1000’ setback zone is not required. Detached Garage/Foundation: There eimntly is a detached garage and part of the old foundation on the property. If the proposed residence is approved and constructed, both the garage and foundation will be removed. Statement of Hardship: ^e applicant has included their statement of hardship in Exhibit C. The applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Issues for Consideration: LA single family residence existed on the property for over 50 years prior to being destroyed by 2. The property is served with municipal sewer and water. «02-2863 Richard Kail 3753 CaKO Avenue 1/15/2003 Page 2 of3 3. The applicant’s proposal does meet City ordinances for new construction regarding hardcover, setbacks and height requirements. It does NOT meet City ordinances regarding the lot coverage by structures requirement. 4. There is no other land to acquire to increase the size of the property. S. The properties in the immediate neighborhood to the applicant’s lot are also undersized and most do not meet the required area in the zoning district. (See olat map). 6. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the lot area variance. Based on city regulations staff recommends denial of the lot coverage by structure variance. If the Planning Commission feels the applicant can meet all the requirements, including lot coverage by structures, then a recommendation of approval for the lot area variance would be appropriate. The application would then move along to Ae City Council for review. Options for Action: 1. Reconunend approval of variances. 2. Recommend denial of variances, stating reasons. 3. Table, giving applicant direction. 4. Other action. *vV ■ :rt m S02-2863 Richard Kail 3733 Caxo Avenue 1/13/2003 Page 3 of 3 ft ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Lot Area: LR-IC Lot Area Required 21,780 s.f. (.5 acre) Actual 16,095 s.f. (.37 acres) Hardcover Calculations: Distance from shoreline Total area in setback Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 250-500 ’5,687.5 s.f.1,706.25 s.f (30%)408 s.f (7.17%) 500-1000’10407.5 s.f % 3,642.63 s.f (35%)3,960 s.f (38%) Lot Coverage by Structures: Lot Area: 16,095 s.f Allowed: 2,414.25 s.f (15%) Proposed: 3,262 s.f (20%) r 4 . I e> Application U C^Q-Q^(j?3> Date Received ' Amount Paid ^ tPSO,co CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 (SSO.OO per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 Afier-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address ? Cascc P."operty Identification Number (P.l.D.) -11^— V - S Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired tAfrck P002.(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property; residential ___pother (specify). ZoningPistrict: iil- tC-___________________________ APPLICANT Name k.tC Address: 3 $66 Phone fliome W^‘^^/‘^^36 ^ _____ Phone(wx)rk )^yj-«?ro-y<*^ 3 City; A'ir Zip; OWNERiif different than applicqqt) Phone (home: K \ cWcvrg Ka! \ ^ 0t\L. Supcrfi^tt Phone (work) Phone (home). Name Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $_________ Describe request in detail: ^ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED >C Lot Area ___Lot Width Hardcover t Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) ILiRDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:. (attach additional sheets if nec 7 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 1 iaVu>i j must obtain this list, labels and man frnm u ^ ** Finance. A^!03, Qovt Center MW27I) C">»>«y Department of reproduction. ^ (0 *^opy BY.” x 11” for the property. This would include namcfs) of^L|ic~,S^?“ ,™* "" '" As an addendum to this anDlicafinn if not current owner(s). persons you wish notifi^rlS .^.S,"”''' “ Additional items as may be requested by City staff. ^«Sc"tnT,pi' rvk nAPPLICANT'S SIGNATURE and/or consultent axpenis incu^I^d J ” information supplied is tme and coaect to the best of^is/Je?taoXdg“ Applicant's Signature J) Date M ’/(•-^COSL OWNER’S SIGNATURE e’^.^y^Xm" •"-. <taher authorizes reasonable members for purposes of investiMtio'n and ^ficX" of ririniquw 7^CJ "Owner’s Signature Date O -/(»'Joc X 9 i • • ' / • Applicant must have all subminals into the Citv nc .. Commission Meeting. Planning Commission offices 25 days before the Planning month. Applicantf Commission and Council. If an aoDlicani u ki ^ meetings of the Planning make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend yvo*i^'"i* ® meeting, please & .Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. ^ Building a* *.• • V,8 a separate list of any other Please remember that vour has not been inc|n or requested by the Zoning ?d by original fee payment) ion, and certifies that the vvledge. ate urther authorizes reasonable lion members, and Council lest. O ’/(t'Joc X- lays before the Planning the third Monday of each Dcctings of the Planning scheduled meeting, please and to advise the Building ii 111 OR! RICHARD KAIL • J.LL « MADtON, MC. DNMOM • tUR«V0RS • RUNMRS SOL icnw6 • OMRONMINTN. KRMCSS 10810 mtZATA Mucmm. ajm i MNNCTONKA. MN 85305 fAX t52-54«-M65 ■J rm lA - 16095. sq.ft 0.37 Acres HOUSE - 2656 sq.ft. 406 sq.ft. DRIVEWAY - 1106 sq.ft. RD COVER - 27X :R FOR LOT TO PROPOSED HOUSE 95. sq.ft. 0.37 Acres HOUSE - 3262 SQ.ft.(tncludlnq Porch) C t^RAGE - 20X 60 ^os been checked and doy of ____. 20____ 5• • • • \.z: BITUMINOUS ROAO.* O A S C 0 X 953.5 COMM -•m-954.1 937.4 x (937.4)* W86.00 i938 1 *(938.1) /H* •« * I HABDCOVER CALCULATION WORKS SETBACK ZONE: (C1RCI£ <E<E) 0-75* 75^0* (^O-SOOL:^ ^EMSTPTG HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. Hwuc/iQM^A .. X ___ 500-1000' • • • '<-lol iMlt B. *0*raje ’ C. DtlvewiQr p. Sldewilk E. Pado/Dcck F. I;udsc^e Uadediin By Flutie Or Fibiie « s • •• • . . • • -• .4 • ,• • • i .• • * X- X X X • • • X X X X X X X X X • • • «t m f • • • *•* * . •- ____ •• »* ■__________ S.F. ___ . » • _____S.F. S.F. • S.F. S.F. 5.F. S.F. _S.F. _S.F. _S.F. — S.F. __S.F. __S.F. • S.F. O. <Odier TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTV AREA IN ZONE • - • -_______■ . B . S.F. S.F. *• •xlQO (rK'l. S.F.n in • % FRQFOSEP HARDCOV^ IN ZONE ' A. House ijKjdi VTidih B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk• • •^ • E. Patio/Deck F; Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric % X X • • • X X X X X X X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. S.T. S.F. S.F. ’S.F. m S.E. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. O. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERDT AREA IN ZONE ’ A _____________ + » .xlQO - S.F. S.F. S.F. BAXO)COV£R CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-7S* 75^0’ 250-500'500-1000t rOHAR A. Hott*y^e^ KIN ZONE . X XjMIfft WidA S.T X- X X S.F. ,S.F. S.F. B. ‘Oanje •*. ^ • • . V • • i • • • C, Dtivcwqr • • ••• 5‘X t'-.* •• • • • r • •• •• • •••• • . • • / >• • •S.F. • • X- X nrxn S.F. ____________S.F. D. SldtwiQe X X S.F. S.F. E. Fado/Dcck X X S.F. S.F. F. Lindsc^e Uoderlila By Flucle Or Fab ric X X X _5.F. _S.F. • S.F. O. Odber S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL FROPcRTV AREA IN ZONE A ._ _ + B : .xlOO S 9L' O S.F./aurv.-^ s.y.:..ks—€ PRQFOSED HARDCOVER TN ZONE ‘ A. House ____________ X S.F. LkjA X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Oaraje C. Driveway S.F. X X S.F. S.F. 1 D. Sidewalk X X S.F. S.F. t • pi111ii^i ii■«;:s$ ■ilii« iK-SS? iilSlfcl:, iir 11:ill » m lif HMli iii #% ||pili;-ii§ ••I?:::? ♦•••••••*«*•«* •••«••••••••««■' i;:*; SSfiS • • « • .iir ill *ii111:., ..lil w ••«11n■WxV-; ijiiSiS is; iir 11 iiliiSli ::wv>•x-x-v:X'X'Xv ■SSiSi; m » m w W5;i- s/sfur 533 // T~T=y i LL T‘ 1 ‘ i ^IL T~L V ■ M TTT I Vcs: I I T I 1 TV Tznj Tl 1 I » I ! MI T I 1 4^- T i • r I ■ I M I IL Lj. rr I ) tmi T T 06. 11 I I TT I / SHAW &IDiAJ<f CTYfi^ j T ' UlOOt? ^LfCOl^SfiMf. ohip CAP irrp) I i I 1 ! I I • I 1 r J T 1 1 i M J=^ !l X•^^^' '•**•*•*•*• » • iS ill x*;’x'*x m BSa SAOCft &CAP £<T 'Cavt •STtf/ 1 - "J r rp jss osreKM^Afeo PSfi ACTC^A .............— __I iiiiii^ I :cj>r^Krx 13T pVATION LEFT ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8’’;1’*0" r <r A'^/ ''i lir -W «8 ;>>:•••••*> k:;® X; • • • • • •••• p;ilip * 5:-:>y * :*x*:*:v ... .*!•: ■•1 §1 ^*4 :liP MW ■ii ?li mmpi! • pi »., *rv:-:v:‘ "pii r iis ✓ ' 1^ DATE • • i r /f j.; Is I in Vr ■ 1 1 Si ‘’/i ISM <?a 4 fh I t.■ , • t ■#' ■■’ * AiI ii P’f p li' V I , f. *» /s s (.*t \ f ,‘/./ > I •1^ > V mf il'Vila ■j, i «S’’.•'■■ni® I £ ■ i i ?■ f'/^’'‘ V fe^. =:r.‘.3^i -dfer. CiCr-^z: »J i ^f■ ■- ■ - f-;,', - 'lH':^;''f'll! » •' ' •'“ ^'."tV’.i- : ■' V' B -. ;‘. ■'. «V*p’:' *.'■ • - I : .•i -:-r;. • •' ■ '. • ' < •' <v 'HiiiU mB. •. i — *- •. .* \ V ‘■ -S ' ‘/f fe '»* * m • # -' ' *■ * *. 4-.-. ^ /-\ >7 V3 (/ s r Ijn^pin County -faxpayer Seryk^s^P^feMig f ■ • ..V-, , ; W" ’2,0- nn- I ^ V ^ Parcel Information • * *■ >. w*. V* ..; * N < .4*. •••.« • •.; ■ * w-:; : *. : %.* . Pare«l ID 2011723310009. ' Houm Number 3753 '' ' "'.‘VX'/S" Struct Name CASCO AVe . v ^ TNalsnol»hgallyt9cofdtdmap. ltnpns0nu»compila^jotlnfofmalim’:i and data from Ofy, County, and Stata road authoriUaa and odioraourcaa..4.. : :V- V. ^ ^ ■ ’5 r V ‘ -. ■fe*,- ii \, V. •w.* mui DATE 12/1$/§Z BATCH 5B7 N»tfEPIN COUNTY PBOPEIITY INFOBHATZON SYSTEM PBOPE.1TY OHNEBS LIST REPOrr NO; PZ4S5A01 PAGE St 4 PROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 36 2t-7.17-2S 2A tOtO 02735 CAROLINE AVE D J t D R NEBXG DONALD J t DAMN R HEBX6 2735 CAROLXNE AVE HAYZATA m 55301 36 2t-U7-23 2A 0010 027A0 . ETHEL AVE L L VXCKNAIR I R L VICKNAXR LANCE L I RNODA L VICKNAXR 2740 ETHEL AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 36 20-117-23 31 0003 03730 CASCO AVE M H KOCH XX 6 J R FUCLESTEN JXLL R FUCLESTEN HXLLXAH H KOCH XX 3730 CASCO AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR OVNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 36 20-117-23 31 0009 03753 CASCO AVE R L KAXL t D N SUPERNALT RICHARD L KAXL 3646 SUNSET DR SPRING PARK HN 55364 36 20-117-23 31 0010 03759 CASCO AVE BRUCE D HADDEN ETAL BRUCE D HADDEN 3759 CASCO AVENUE HAYZATA HN 55391 36 20-117-23 31 0«11 00036 ADDRESS UNASSXCMED DEAN V GREXHANN DEAN V GREXHANN 3779 CASCO AVE HAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 36 20-117-23 31 0014 00036 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CXTY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL DAY HN 55323 36 20-117-23 31 0015 00036 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CXTY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 36 20-117-23 31 0016 00036 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CXTY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 PROP ADDR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 36 20-117-23 31 0056 03721 CASCO AVE D R HELTY t H H JIN D R HELTY I H N JIN 3721 CASCO AVE HAYZATA HN 55391 36 20-117-23 31 0062 02740 CAROLXNE AVE S L I J H ROSSTEDT SCOTT 6 JANET ROSSTEDT 2740 CAROLXNE AVE HAYZATA HN 55391 36 20-117-23 31 0067 02666 CASCO POINT RO CHARLES F NELSON I HXFE CHARLES 0 LUCY NELSON 26b6 CASCO POINT RD HAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 36 20-117-23 31 0071 03750 CASCO AVE HARTX LYNN HARTX LYNN 3750 CASCO AVE HAYZATA HN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 507 00013 X"' 1 V* ”• ) •- • :j) ,('j _y V.. l; run date 12/U/E2 BATCH 5B7 *■ m' /i >v=:^^^;•• .:-^- / '-:• -r- vV. :;v rv: mm . .. ■?'V.- n, r_. ■>■■ •( HCNNCMN county PROKOTV INFOUItATION SVSTEN fROPERTY ONNERS LIST » O Q REPORT NO. PX4354R1 PAGE 51 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AM tfniBATc «un -rm,^ OATE^'/^'^ F 1 r . ♦ CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^57 8_____ A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE NO. 2027 WHEREAS. Richard Ue Kail (hereinafter "ihe applicanO is *» property located at 3753 Casco Avenue within the City of Otono and legally desen follows: Lots 7 and 8, Block 4. Casco Heights. Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance » Mumcipal zoning C^e section,0.25 Minnesota: 1. 2. 3. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono. ‘ FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2027. The propert>’ is located in the LR-IC Ukeshore Residential Zoning District requiring onc-balf acre in area. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 19. 1995 and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following umque fmdings and hardships: A single family residence has existed on the properu ’ for over 50 years. B The propert}* is ser\'cd with municipa, sewer and water. r There is no adjacent land avaUable to acquire except for the 14* unimproved public alley to the east. If alley were to be vacated, applicant would receive 1,253 s.f. of additional area. Page 1 of 4 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. S 5 7 8 5; 4. 5. D. Existing improvements on the property encroach into the public ri»ht-of- way. ® E. F. G. H. The existing structure is located 18 ’ from the street lot line where a 30 ’ setback is required. The existing structure is located 0 ’ from the east side lot line where a 10 ’ setback is required. The subject property is consistent with the size and width of other adjacent properties in the immediate neighborhood. The new construction will have no impact on residential development as all drainage will drain directly to a ponding area on land owned by City to south and west. 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 variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not ’ merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, repons by Cit>’ staff comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and w’clfare of the community. CO.N'CLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono Cit>’ Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a residence on a property that does not meet the required area for the zonin<r district and grants a variance of 6.135 s.f. or 2855 (per Section 10.03, Subdivision 16 (A-1) variance of 1,779 s.f. or 10%), subject to the following conditions- <r Page 2 of 4 1. 2. 3. GITYof OROXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 573 Upon application for a building pcimit, applicant shall provide a “"‘f wetland at the southwest comer and propose^ house. Applicant shaU also provide detailed grading and drainage plans. The concrete pad located within public alley to be removed prior to the Usuance of a building permit for new construction. Aoolicant to obtain a demoliiion permit for the removal of both the garage and house The Building staff shall determine if deuched prage can the oeriod of constniction of new residence. Per Section 10.03, Subdivision 7. VpHcant may apply for a permit from the City that wUI allow applicant to reside in the existing residence for a three-month period. di Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the aPP\»c^* S^^^Tr^petSssive only and must be exercised by application for a building pemit within one year of the date of CouncU approval, or this variance will expire on that date (June 26, 1996). ^ Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of tWs variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be pumshable as a misdemean . ^ The undersiened applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assign, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Cham of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Otono. MinnesoQ at a regular -.eeting held on the 26th day of June. 1995. JSth7Tn^#rCity Clerk Edward J. Callahanyir., Mayor Property Owner (s) Page 3 of 4 i:r m K. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^8 5 7 5? STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 26th day of June, 1995 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. JAMIE L60SMA NOWtVRJBUC-MNNESOtA HENNCPIN COUNTY My Counisslon Eipins J». 31.2000 Notary STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On thisc^9^^day of ______, 199^ before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally atfeaifed ^ known to me to be the person(sHwscribed in and who executed the fbre^^g^s acknowledge d that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. instrument, *nd mast JAMIELBOSMA NOTARY neuC^HNNCSOn HENNEPIN COUNTY A*y Ccmmisslcn Eipita Jin. 31,2000 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this dav of , 199 before me a Notarv Public within and for said county, personally appeared __________________________ know n to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument.and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 4 t ______ Application Date: 1/24/03 60 Day Deadline: 3/25/03 Extended Deadline: 5/23/03 > 4 200} Department Approval: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title City Planner REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 4/9/0^ ITEM NO.: ^ Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: t/03-2867 Dan Adams 1145 Tonkawa Road Variances Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-1B One Family Lakeshorc Residential District (I acre) 41,685 s.f. (.95 acre) List of Exhibits: A Resolution B Staff Report and Exhibits of 2/19/2003 Application Summary: The applicant is requesting average lakeshore setback, hardcover within 0-75’ setback zone, hardcover within 75-250’ setback zone, and structure within 75’ of the lakeshore variances to remodel, add a second story and attach the existing garage to the residence. Pertinent Code Sections: 1.Section 10.22, Subd. 1(B) and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (C); Strucnire within 75’ of lakeshore: To permit construction of a second story/dormers 64 ’ and a screen porch 70’ from the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka where 75’ is required. 2.Section 10.22. Subd. 1 (B) and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (C) (6): To permit an encroachment into the average lakeshore setback. The total encroachment is approximately 17’. 3.Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd (16) (L)(l): Hardcover in 0-75’ Setback: To permit 1,215 s.f. (10%) s.f. of hardcover within 75’ of Lake Minnetonka where 0 s.f. (0%) is allowed. 4.Section 10.22. Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L)(2): Hardcover in 75-250’ setback: To permit 9,092 s.f. (33 ‘e) of hardcover in the 75-250’ setback zone where 6,866.25 s.f. (25%) is allowed. Discussion: I'he applicant wishes to remodel and update the residence by attaching the detached garage, adding a second story with dormers, and converting a deck into a screen porch. The second story will be over the entire residence including the garage. The space that currently exists between the house and garage will be filled in. The garage will be squared off, enlarging it slightly. 3 Structure within 75’ of Lake Minnetonka: A portion of the existing residence is located within the 75’ setback from Lake Minnetonka. At the closest point it is 64’ u me OIIWL of Lake Miiuieiuiika. The second story addition will also be above this portion of the residence. Also, a small portion of the proposed screen porch is located within the 75’ setback from the lake. Hardcover: 0-75’ setback aone - A portion of the existing residence is located within the 0-75’ setback zone. The second story addition/dormers are located v/ithin this setback zone. The haidcover will not increase with the addition. To decrease the amount of hardcover in this zone, the applicant has agreed to the removal of the concrete shuffleboard. the brick next to the shuffleboard surface and half of the patio located by the residence. These removals reduce the amount of hardcover in this setback zone to 1,215 s.f. (10%) from 1,730 s.f. (14.3%). 75-250’ setback zonc- The rest of the existing residence, garage and driveway are located in the 75-250’ setback zone. Currently, there exists 10,254 s.f. (37%) hardcover in t.he setback zone. The applicant is proposing to remove the brick apron, some of the sidewalk pa\'ers, a deck, and a gravel area by the driveway. These removals reduce the amount of hardcover in this setback zone to 9,092 s.f. (33%). The driveway on this property is fairly extensive and accounts for a large amount of hardcover. Because the lot is long and it would be difficult to back out onto Tonkawa Road, a circle in the driveway is appropriate. Because this residence is on Tonkawa Road, there is a fair amount of traffic and difficult sight lines, it is important to have a turn around on the property so the homeowner can drive straigh. onto Tonkawa Road rather than backing out. The applicant has agreed to remove portions of the existing driveway, while leaving enough to still be functional. Average Lakeshore Setback: The existing residence is located 17’ into the average lakeshore setback. The second story addition/dorniers will not change the location or encroachment in the setback. The existing topography, the layout of the neighboiing houses and existing vegetation screening all suggest that the proposed addition will not be within the visibility of either neighboring property and will not encroach on any existing view ot the lake. PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 5 to 0 vote to: Approve the proposed plan with the following conditions: 1 . Screen porch and deck approved as proposed. 2. Ground level patio (lakeside) to be reduced to half the current size. (Remove 128 s.f.) 3. If the foundation in the 0-75 should need repairs the project will come back to the Planning Commission for further review'.I 4. There will be no more encroachment in the average lakeshore setback ever. 5. Denial of the proposed bay window and eave protrusion into the 0-75 ’ setback. 6. The circle portion of the driveway will be enlarged for more green space. (Remove 25 s.f.) 7. The gravel section located by the driveway to be removed (703 s.f.). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. Ik A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 (B), SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2, SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (C), SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (C) (6), SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION (16) (L) (1) and (2); FILE NO. 03-2867 WHEREAS, Daniel Adams and Roxann Adams, (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1145 Tonkawa Road w ithin the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit A, (hereinafter “the property"); and W’HEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1(B) and 2. Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C), Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C)(6), Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(L)(1) and (2) to allow construction of a new second story to the existing house to be 64' from the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka where 75' is required, a screen porch to be 70 ’ from the OHWL where 75’ is required, an average lakeshore setback encroachment of 17’, to allow 1,215 s.f. (10%) hardcover in the 0-75’ setback zone where 0 s.f. (0%) is allowed, to allow 9,092s.f. (33%) hardcover in the 75-250’ setback zone where 6,866.25 s.f. (25%) is allowed; and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 17,2003, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #03-2867. Page 1 of8 2. 5. The property Is located in the LR-1B Zoning District, where 1.0 acre is the minimum required lot area. The property consists of approximately ,95 acres. 3, The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on March 17, 2003 and recommended approval by a vote of 5 to 0. 4, The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A, The existing residence was built in 1966, prior to city adoption of the current 1 acre zoning standards. B. The adjacent neighbors ’ view of the lake will not be negatively impacted by the second story addition. C. Lot coverage by structures will be 4,231 s.f,, (10.1%), below the 15% allowed by City ordinance. D. The proposed addition is in character with other properties along Tonkawa Road. E. Hardcover in the 0-75’ setback zone will decrease by 515 s.f. Applicant shall remove 128 s.f Iron the ground level (lakeside) patio, the shuflfieboard deck and the brick pavers around the shuffieboard deck. F.Hardcover in the 75-250’ setback zone will decrease by 1,162 s.f Applicant shall remove 703 s.f of gravel located by the drivewaj, 25 s.f from the circle portion of the driveway, the brick apron and deck. G.The applicant has requested to add to the existing house rather than build a new structure c the property. The owner has slated the existing foundation will not be removed or altered as part of the remodeling plan. 1 he City Council finds that the conditions existing on this propcily are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances will not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air, nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serv'e as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is Page 2 of 8 t-✓ necessary to preser\'c a substantia] property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent ''‘'‘he Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6.The City Council has considerer this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning' Jommission, reports by City Staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and wcltarc of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 1 0.22, Subdivision l(B) and 2, Section 1 0.56, Subdu'ision 16(C), Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C)(6), Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(I.)(l)and(2) to allow' construction of a new second story to the existing ’'ouse to be 62* from the 01IWL of Lake Minnetonka where 75 ’ is required, a screen porch to be 70 ’ from the OHWL where 75 ’ is required, an average lakeshore setback encroachment of 17 ’, to allow 1 ,21 5 s.f. (1 O^o) hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone w here 0 s.f. (0%) is allowed, to allow 9.092 s.f. (33%) hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback zone where 6.866.25 s.f (25%) is allowed. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant attached to this resolution as Inhibit B. Any amendments to the site plan may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2.If it is determined the existing foundation which is located within the 75' lake yard setback is required to be replaced, all variance approvals shall be withdrawn by the City of Orono and a new variance application shall be submitted by the applicant. 3.There shall not be anymore encroachment into the average lakeshore setb,»ck by future additions or remodeling. In order to meet the hardco\er levels approved by this resolution, the applicant shall remove 515 s.f of hardcover in the 0-75 ’ setback zone prior to final inspection. The removals shall iioclude 128 s.f from the ground level (lakeside) patio, the shuftleboard deck and brick pavers around the shuftlebi^ard deck. Page 3 of 8 4 i 5. The applicant shall remove 1,162 s.f. of hardcover in the 75-250’ setback zone prior to final inspection. The removals shall include 703 s.f. of gravel located by the driveway, 25 s.f. from the circle portion of the driveway, the brick apron and deck. 6. The applicants shall remove 2,004 s.f. of plastic from rockbeds on the property as shown in Exhibit B prior to final inspection. 7. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or these variances will expire on that date (April 14,2004). 8. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 9. The undersigned applicant has read, understands and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the I4th day of April, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner (s) Page 4 of 8 f STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 14th day of April, 2003 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and s,';id instrument was executed on behalf of the City, Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEFiN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of April, 2003 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this dav of ,2003,personally appeared before me. ____ who is personally known to me ____ whose identity I proved on the basis of whose identity I proved on the oath'affimiation of credible witness ..a and w ho executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/lhe*y executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notar>' Public Page 5 of8 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this__day of appeared before me, , 2003,jjersonally who is personally known to me whose identity 1 proved on the basis of ^^ose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of _ credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public Page 6 of 8 i' ■ ■ iI Exhibit A Lepal Description of Premises; Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 853, and that part of Lot 7, Auditor’s Subdivision Number 217, lying southeasterly of a line drawn parallel to and 160 feet southeasterly, measured at right angles from the northwesterly line of said Lot 7 and its extension, which line is marked by judicial landmarks set pursuant to Torrens Case 14974, and northwesterly of the northwesterly line of Registered Land Survey No. 853 and its extension, which last-described line is marked by judicial landmarks set pursuant to Torrens Case 13978, (the easterly line ol said premises is marked by judicial landmarks set pursuant to Torrens Cases 13978 and 14974). Page 7 of 8 dan ADAMS TDA^T a r%% ^ ____ RAPT^AF i nV and.?J AUO. SUB. NO. 217 HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA ^ LAKE north arm i.' •H Xi •H•cXua 929.4 CONTOUR LIC l.omf Suf¥«y No(.w-------------------IHt ootlorly MINNETONKA -UCAl PCSCaiPTlON Of PPfuicrc . • ■ dtnoUt Iron imrh*r OAd tho llo?oi?ln"a? o?l*0?riii'I of Iho obovo dotcrlboil nr==:i-^l___ T-- '■ p'aru^ri'r; °?£NPERG it ASSOCIATES, INC. ^ Wivevon *TC PiMHon «« wiw wutm tmt. iohb un; im sum • •tm cmnr imf im Hm rrimt m i *oumm m u«<f m uao MU 1 1 02-451 1 f • Completion Date: 1/24/03 60 day Review Date: 3/25/03 TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Coitimission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM; Wendy Bottenberg, City Planner DATE: March 10,2003 SUBJECT:#03-2867 Dan Adams 1145 Tonkawa Road Variances — Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) 41,685 s.f. (.95 acre) Exhibits: A Analysis Worksheet B Survey C Hardcover Calculations D Floor Plans E Elevations F Structural Engineers Report G Staff memo and Exhibits PC Meeting - 2/19/03 Application Summary: This application was heard at the February 19,2003 Planning Commission meeting. The application was tabled with direction given to the applicant's representative. The applicant has submitted a new site plan w ith minimal changes from the prior plan. The variances required and the changes as proposed are listed below. Also included is a picture depicting what the proposed changes will look like on the residence. Pertinent Code Sections: 1. Section 10.22, Subd. 1(B) and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (C) (1): Structure withiir75’ of lakeshore: To permit construction of a second stor>/dormers 62 ’, a screen porch 70 ’, and a bay window 69 ’ from the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka where 75’ is required. 2. Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (B) and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (C) (6): To permit an encroachment into the average lakeshore setback. The total encroachment is approximately 17'. 3. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd (16) (L) (1); Hardcover in 0-75’ Setback: To permit 1,343 s.f. of hardcover within 75’ of Lake Minnetonka where 0 s.f. (0%) is allowed. % #03-2867 Dan Adams II4S Tonakawa Road 2'14/2003 Page I of 4 4. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L)(2): Hardcover in 75-250’ setback: To permit 9,117 s.f. (33%) of hardcover in the 75-250’ setback zone where 6,866.25 s.f. (25%) is allowed. Discussion: The applicant wishes to remodel and update the existing residence by attaching the detached garage, adding a second story with dormers and wider overhangs, and converting a portion of an existing deck into a screen porch. New Plan: The applicant has submitted a new revised plan. The changes from the prior plan are noted below: 0-75’ setback zone: 1,155 s.f. (9.56%) where 0 s.f. (0%) is allowed. Change - Existing deck on lakeside of residence stays. (Increases hardcover by 188 s.f. irom first plan) 75-250’ setback zone: 9,117 s.f. (33%) where 6,866.25 s.f. (25%) is allowed. Change - Remove 703 s.f. gravel area by driveway. Reducing hardcover by 703 s.f. from first plan. Structure within 75’ of Lake Minnetonka: Screen porch - To be located 70’ from Lake Minnetonka. First plan indicated it would be moved back out of the 75’ setback. Lakeshore Deck: At the Planning Commission meeting in February there was discussion regarding the decks located by the lakeshore. A permit was not issued for the decks themselves. However, in 1994 a permit was issued for a lift which goes from the lakeshore up the hill to tlie residence. The two smaller decks are w here the lift connects to the ground as landings. Air photos from 1993 and 1994 show the larger deck connected to the smaller deck. Engineer ’s Report: The applicant did have the structural engineer look at an unfinished wall in the basement. The engineer has indicated the foundation is able to handle the additional load of the second story to be added. Staff has reviewed the report and does not have issues with it. #03-2867 Dan Adams 1145 Tonakawa Road 2/14/2003 Page 2 of 3 t staff Rccommcndatiott: Staff recommends approval of the required variances to allow the second story addition over the existing residence and garage with the following conditions: 1. If during construction it is determined that the portion of the foundation within the 75’ setback needs to be repaired the application must come back before the Planning Commission and City Council for Airther review. 2. If the larger deck located by the lakeshore should need repairs or replacement, it is non- conforming and would need the necessary approvals to remain. 3. Planning Conunission should review the hardcover in the 75-250’ setback zone for further removals if necessary. Because the screen porch and bay window are new structure to be located within the 75’ setback, staff is recommending denial of these two proposals. ^03-2867 Dan Adams I MS Tonakavva Road ri 4/2003 Page 3 of3 V •i ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Lot Area: LR-IB Lot Area Required 43,560 s.f. (1 acre) Actual 41,685 s.f. (.95 acres) Hardcover Calculations: Distance from shoreline Total area in setback Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75 ’12,075 s.f.0 s.f. (0%)1,730 s.f. (14.3%) 1,343 s.f. (11%) 75-250 ’27,465 s.f.6,866.25s.f (25%) 10,254 s.f. (37%) 9,117 s.f. (33%) 250-500 ’2,145 s.f.643.5s.f. (30%)127 s.f. (5.92%) 127 s.f. (5.92%) Lot Coverage by Structures: a- Lot Area: 41,68"'s.f.Allowed: 6,252.75 s.f. (15%) Existing: 3,438 s.f. (8.2%) Proposed: 4,231 s.f. (10.1%) LAKE MINNETONKA f fciA#5«UKjBfl(“ NORTH ARM 929.4 CO^iTCXJR LWC o > ?oo > o O O C iz; H ?do >o :z: o CO Oi S' r 1 CERTFiqATE OF SURVEY FOR DAN ADAMS pWL0\''7^®A\iPsM.7HENNEPI^ county , MINNESOTA LAKE MINNETONKA north arm.. ' . "f 929.4 CONTOUR LtC JJQAt CtSCTiPTitRf Of fWtUlff^ 0 hi^ I r I nr I iin ^ «____* ' **F \ J associates, INC. B V • • • (•, 0 00^ J ^ ~rrr52ijsa?2r I 9t.f$ ts-tf«m I* f •» V - ^ -. '--^ piif I ,|i» «i »,i *•■ r. ', ^ • • * ■ CO. RD. NO. 135 TONK.<\WA ROAD I S ?4*07'CC" E 150 .'30 ■mu iKMHlAil xD 03 -rr« h- # • § *.• V.*^ u» a: I— 135« f •:IWffiSS % 4 t5.-mm -itco O fO P mi . -,VT^ ysfii w? •« i; v^S ' •r-■.•■ftgi l';r-'\ WT. ,V --J'’ f,- ■: ‘:3 ■^■m 3 n c**9 ' TTiO I 4». i- <>* i.q4i^lr^4»e^'»4> uiI 'V 'g >*.1 4 1 I & COUNTY ROAD NO. 135 TONKAW.A H0,\I) ,■!S ?4»0;*C0' C •i:ejI'M V » -t i i O C>* *■*> r* • 1 ^■m /4‘»»A\V (p> pi^i s 5 5?^4-* v' £r. .- ♦ P**V»-i! *N B (Ao-ir ■tiiiwB F i ( • • r • • • • / D ak Amms iZ-/7-0Z HARDC0V£]^i;^LCULAT10N WORKSHEET SETBACK ZOKKi (CDtCLIWlS) A. Hont wtom 75^' OP IHACI H, KL.-> Pi Cy •• S00.1000' SIB sj.-Hgc»SE X X B. Oartge •«* • C. Drivxwqr X X D. SidcmDc X X 3&: oeac AT E PaiioA>«k 207*- MgtfSg • ••• • • X X iss-.tS& mi., •• F. Landteap* 'liadcrlab QjrPiMiie OrFdbrie X X X 7 O. Olher \oz TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A \nbo ♦ B \%6l^ xlOO - * 12- 1»V^3 lAffl PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE ’ A. House _________1_ X Alti^ Ltfiflh wi^ui X X X B. Oarage C. Driveway • •••••a • • X X D. Sidewalk E. PaiioCcck ikdc^ :SiiCSJx. - F. Landsea^ Underiain ByPlasdc Or Fabric X X X m m ¥ G. Olher inz TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A B \T.|nng> I X100 • I \Zion& Sf.-jSJw® Sf. «9apAC. &F. SJ. SJ. EF. ^ICKJNE ZJ.-COr*C* ■ TP^u»r SJ.-0EiCf<.S sE-epicj^ BATIO H* RPOC Of sj7 Rock ^ s,F.-vypoO ec SE A RF. H ■K SI. S.F. S.F. SI. SI. SI. S.P.- • SJ. s.f. ISJ.bncli pv SF. SJ. S.F. SF. SF. -A SF. B % i'JiXi. ’ t . -•V ______________I r p ) •. • e m Dw /\dam5 C^ SOO.IOOO* 1^47 S j - HOOSU • • • • — W' ,^?J^COVERCALCUlA'nQJlWORICSIIEETg^gSL^gSL -» A* fiOSW B. Oarage • • • • C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E PetkiA)^ F. Landiqpc Unferlaiii BjrPlasiG OrFdiric 0-75* X au X X WMi 0. Other X X X X X X X X X vn IQM 54?4SO ~7/7^ 307 AfROrl • • 9m • sj.-etflcKiDP. .SE-GrR/^/eu• • « -^v SiO&f/AUC _S.F. •• _S.F.-D£C)4 _S.F." • % TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA INZONE ■ ^ ll, 34ft ------ . ♦ B _ V7MT X100 331 SE ROCICAWD SE'weoo $0RXt « %EF. A 10^ I- M'. B* EBfi£ A. Heuee lHARDCOVKlHN»nw« bid- B. Oarage C. Orivew^ ••MM • • D. Sidewalk E PaUo/Deck F. IjodiMpe Undcrtaia ByPlaatie OrFAric O. Other X X WUA :Zfil2k-SE Hoa/^. * 9 m • _ ^i0*\ r.j. ____ .SE ,SE.\mi o.proY'-e- yin^ SE S.Fr ii?- S.F. 4^'k ________SF. .SE 0.4^1^ .SE .SE.rocA Cr p\v. .SE ' SE • iy^H^W>C<)VH»NZOKE . * -?r>.4<jg> X100 - SE total PROPSTY. AREA IN ZONEA —SBiLain ♦ f f C '' SE. -A B % ^v-', 'V' ' 'SAkiu« - ..5 I* i-- ;■• ' .)•' 4 i L f ' (• • l . .‘ I* 4:: * • • ^ I • fw » U . ■*«•••# • % / . i 4. .• .• <• rf- » i t • i# I , < ;• • • f |- r !►* ....................................................... * -------- • * • ^4.. . . • • • •• t Id ^ A O’O f • , 1 <i V1. ^■•.:f^yj ^mS;i s?*'^FJWjMm >tvai t a^vc ^ spUM" wr-to. ^'- 1'. i I- f.Sl^'Sljv r. I %M i: >'.' <'‘m ■Uri. -<;>'. 1^ .!. .*#«. .J/r* ft:’®-, rV ‘ n ii IRr^‘iHl ^ '-'o'. >^j:» ^••' ^‘v •j'^i ^-‘.'=(-...-;rN. ^ >- .'ii! ^p^ii ^•4- i'XANDER DF-Sir.N OROl )P \ mi mm Si a. pP '.Hf/- f#a feM w \ 'X I Ir I .• ^ * •• w .1 *9 WX p..4:1Ww rt . T.f '6 S? .X/ / rzvi' • c f ' f »-j>. # ;r •Jrv-5)!\>, WI9 fl^U . ^ -.'o'- -#^ ,>-^, •■ v:IK ..M. - :». i", I>'l ALEXANDER 1 D^SK a . ,R< M I «« Ml •p; r* *Dr> t; f « MflR-l4-2003 13«23 ULTEIG MPLS CCmSUUINO INOMEERS SINCI 1t44 miff 7635711168 P.02/05 ULTCIG ULTEI6 ENGINEERS, me. OTHER OFFtCfS: rargo .no SISMARCK.no SIOUX FALLS, so m 6201 EAST RIVER R0A0,SUlTe 3M PHONt- 763471-3800 MINNSAP0US.MN 86421 FAX 7*6871-1166 WEBSITB: <nw.iMg.oom REVISED March 14,2003 February 13.2003 Alexander Design Group 401 East Lake Street Wayzata. MN 55391 Attn:Kathy Alexander Subject Adams Residence 1145 Tonkawa Road Orono. MN Project No. 03-6447 Dear Ms. Alexander The purpose of this letter is to report the findings of a structural feasibility study for a proposed addition at this residence. ASSIGNMENT Uiteig Engineers, Inc. (UEI) has been retained to provide a structural feasibility study for a proposed addition to the existing residence located at 1146 Tonkawa Road in Orono, MN, as directed by Kathy Alexander of Alexander Design Group. BACKGROUND Alexander Design Group wishes to know the feasibility of constructing a second-story addition to this residence. DESCRIPTION The stmeture is a single story home with a full basement. A garage exists along side the house and is attached by roof only forming a covered patio area. The structure vras built in 1966. The proposed remodel includes a second story addition over the fbil length of the house and the garage. iCUAL oPNNmNNTV MfiR-14-2003 13S24 Almandar DMign Group Fobniary IS, 2003 ULTEIG MPLS 7635711160 P.03/05 OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS 1. A site visit was conducted by Craig Oswell of UEI on February 6,2003 to review the existing conditions. The following items are noted: a. The overall width of the house is approximately 28 feet. b. Roor Joists and roof rafters span the 28-foot dimension and bear on a center wall and header line. c. The frame walls at the house vary in thickness but average approximately 6.5* in thickness. The walls are plastered and may be built from either 2 x 4 or 2 X 6 construction. d. The frame walls at the garage are 2 x 4 in thickness. e. The foundation walls are 11 course high 12* thic^ concrete masonry block. The foundation walls are plumb and show no signs of significant distress or settlement. f. The main floor level at the front of the house is level with grade. The rear basement level is walkout. g. Several openings exist at the bearing walls. The openings on each story generally align with each other. h. A brick chimney extends the full height of the house and protrudes several feet above the existing roof. I. The exterior walls have full height brick veneer at the rear and height brick at the front. 2. Alexander Design Group provided design sketches of the proposed addition. These drawings were reviewed and the following information Is noted: a. The new roof wilt span the foil width or the existing house. b. The proposed second floor wHI be built into the new roof tmeses. c. Additional deck and porch stmctures are being added. d. Stone veneer will replace the existing brick veneer. 3. The chimney is to be extended to protrude above the new roof. 3. A stmctural engineering review of the structure was performed and the following is noted: a.Assuming an allowable soil bearing capacity of 2000 psf and an existing footing size of 18" wide by 8* thick, the footings are stmcturally adequate to support the design loads of the proposed addition. Assuming the existing foundation walls are ungrouted and unreinforced 12* thick concrete masonry units, the wails are structurally adequate to support the design loads of the proposed addition. • • MftR-14-2003 13:24 ULTEIG MPLS 7635711160 P.04/05 Alexsndtr Dttign Group February 13,2003 c. ri. With the possible exception of the garage door headers, the existing framing is structurally adequate to support the design loads of the proposed addition. The review assumed minimum interior header sizes of (3) 2 X10 and exterior sizes of (2) 2 x 10. Frame walis are assumed to be a minimum of 2 x 4's @ 16* on center for the garage waiis and either 2 x 4*8 at 16* on center or 2 x 6 ’s at 24* on center for the house wails. Special header and bearing conditions, such as the extension of the fireplace and the garage door headers, will require additional review once the exact structural layout is complete. This review can be performed during either the design or construction phase of the addition. PROFESSIONAL OPINION 4. It is my professional opinion that f a. The overall construction is in sound condition. V / b. The existing footings, foundation walls, and wood framing are stmcturally 1 1 adequate to support the design loads of the proposed addition. I V c. The proposed addition to this residence is feasible and can be consbucted.^ GENERAL 5.The information, observations, and opinions stated in this report are based on an inspection made by Craig Oswell. The inspection consisted of a visual walk­ through observing exposed elements and those accessible without the removal of finished materials. 6.The opinions expressed in this report are based on my professional engineering Judgment and professional practice, as well as bie visual inspection. 7. 8. No other engineering was performed or requested for this project. This report is a feasibility study for the addition of 3 second floor. The final details of construction will be addressed at a later date. If the observations of this report are found to vary from the actual conditions, please notify UEI for review and comment. 9.Once available, please forward UEI a copy < A the final construction documents for further review and comment as required. 10. If further engineering assistance is required, please contact UEI. MflR-14-2003 13*24 ULTEIG M3LS 7635711160 P.05/05 Alnandar Dttign Group Ftbrutry 13,2003 If you have any queationa, pleaae contact me. Sinoeraly, ULTEIO ENGINEERS, INC. Craig Oawell, P.E. CO:ta I hereby eertny that thie plan, epecHleatlon or report waa prepared by me or under my direct aupervlelon and that I am a duly Ucenaed Profeealonal Engineer under the lawe of the State of MInneaota. G,JL// Craig Oawell Date: Mlnneaote Reglatration No. 42341 r • • - •Cr TO: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Wendy Bottenberg, City Planner DATE: February 14,2003 SUBJECT:#03-2867 Dan Adams 1145 Tonkawa Road Variances — Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1B One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area: 41,685 s.f. (.95 acre) Exhibits: A Analysis Worksheet B Application C Hardship Statement D • Survey E Hardcover Calculations F Elevations G Floor Plans H Photo of Property I Plat Map J Property Owner’s List Pertinent Code Sections: 1. Section 10.22. Subd. 1(B) and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (C) (1); Structure within 75 ’ of lakeshore: To permit construction of a second story/dormers 62’ from the OHWX of Lake Minnetonka where 75 ’ is required. 2. Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (B) and Section 10.56, Subd. 16(C)(6): To permit an encroachment into the average lakeshore setback. The total encroachment is approximately 17’. 3. Section 10.22. Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd (16) (L)(l): Hardcover in 0-75 ’Setback: To permit 1,155 s.f. of hardcover within 75 ’ of Lake Minnetonka where 0 s.f. (0%) is allowed. 4. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L)(2); Hardcover in 75-250 ’ setback: To permit 9,821 s.f (35.75%) o* hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback zone where 6,866.25 s.f (25%) is allowed. Application Summarj*: The applicant is requesting average lakeshore setback, hardcover within 0-75 ’ setback zone, hardcover within 75-250 ’ setback zone, and structure within 75 ’ of the lakeshore variances to remodel, add a second story and attach the existing garage to the residence. S03-2867 Dan Adams 1145 Tonakivva Road 2/14/2003 Page I of4 m f Discussion: a slight^ (.pproximately 200 s.f.). The garage rvas added in 1983. Cit^corf^dS'e'^^^^ “ '* ”• Becauae a second story is being add^ to the - «atr*d go to the property to look at the existing foundation. The applicant is alsoKl load of ” seSllJof " *' Lot Coverage by Structures: A variance is not required for lot coverage by structures. Structure w ithin 75’ of Lake Minnetonka: A 385 s.f. portion of the existing residence is located within the 75’ setback from Lake s»“n wiiUlst&^M proposed screen porch is located within the 75’ setback from the lie " • i, k «„^i.ec. regarding redesigningor.^^^^^^^^ A variance is required for structure located within 75' of Lake Minnetonka. Hardcover: 0-75’ setback rone - story addhion^dormer?aIIt«”dttrnMrsSrzo^^^^ #03-2867 Dan Adams 1145 Tonaka^va Road 2/14,'2003 Page 2 of4 . . . » t because of the addition. To decrease the amount of hardcover in this zone, the applicant has suggested removing the concrete shufifleboard, the brick next to the shuffleboard surface and a portion of the deck located by the residence. These removals reduce the amount of hardcover in this setback zone to 1,155 s.f. (9.56%) from 1,730 s.f. (14.3%). A hardcover variance is required to allow this amount of hardcover in Ihe 0-75’ setback zone. Note; A permit was not issued for the deck located by the lakeshore. A 1983 survey is in the street file. The deck located by the lake does not appear on the survey. Staff does not have a picture of the deck due to snow cover, so the condition of the deck is unknown at this time. 75-250* setback zone- The rest of the existing residence, garage and driveway are located in the 75-250’ setback zone. Currently, there exists 10,254 s.f. (37%) hardcover in the setback zone. The applicant is proposing to remove the brick apron, sidewalk pavers and an existing deck. These removals reduce the amount of hardcover in this setback zone to 9,821 s.f. (35.7%). A reduction of approximately 798 s.f. The driveway on this property is fairly extensive and accounts for a large amount of hardcover. Because the lot is long and it would be difficult to back out onto Tonkawa Road, a circle in the driveway is appropriate. However, there seems to be other areas that would be appropriate to look at for removal. This lot is very close to conformity in lot area and lot widtk (.95 acre and 150’ wide where 1 acre and 140’ wide is the standard in the LR-IB zoning district). Areas of the driveway that could be removed are by the garage and the gravel area. Because this residence is on Tonkawa Road, there is a fair amount of traffic and difficult sight lines, it is important to have a turn around on the property so the homeowner can drive straight onto Tonkawa Road rather than backing out. A hardcover variance is required to allow this amount of hardcover in the 75-250’ setback zone. Average Lakeshore Setback: The existing residence is located 17’ into the average lakeshore setback. The second story addition/dormers will not change the location oi encroachment in the setback. The existing topography, the lav out of the neighboring houses and existing vegetation screening all suggest that the proposed addition will not be within the visibility of either neighboring property and will not encroach on any existing view of the lake. An average lakeshore setback variance is required for the proposed addition. #03-2867 Dan Adams 1145 Tonakaua Road 2/l4.a003 Page 3 of 4 i Ana 1 r 5L Statement of Hardship: C- •"» applicant should also h. Issues for Consideration: I. ■">« existing residence wu built in 1966. prior to axisting zoning standards. Z Pl.lCclm!l”nrlZe^s a*:^^ I>oes 75-.fUheMinne.onha7 Shou.dd,e'’^KsZr^^^^^ ion of Are 5. ren^wd? "’* *' "Pai^ »r replacement then be 6. Lot coverage by structures will remain at 9.6%. well below the 15% limit. 7. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation: Options for Action: 1. Recommend approval of variances. 2. Recommend denial of variances, stating reasons 3. Table, giving applicant direction, d. Other action. ^03-2867 Dan Adams 1145 Tonakawa Road 2/14-2003 Page 4 of4 3 • • • • 6 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S25O.t)0 (SSO.OO per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee SI50.00 (no change firom original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 Afler-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application # 0 3 Date Received | -3Lt — Amount Paid PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address [\4^ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) oeal j o______ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Prope I(do) PrcsenVxisrof property; .^residential PrMej2y_Acqui ^(^ TOt)^lso own the adjacent parcels of land. uTiscof oroc .(month/year) Zoning District: Lg-lfe other (specify). APPLICANT Na*me U4^ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Address: lV«4grr> Phone (home) Phone (wx>rk)_^Q,-Qit£-^_^22^ _____ Zip; Phone (home) 4^ I Phone ^vork) (o rzJ-n t Lo _<Steg»^r. Zip; DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimat Describe request in detail: [^{^\ak(Ll eA m keu //> ^ (attach additimal she^ ifi VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ok qfe ^ , H4J1 (grVi. MTf Mf remtIf nK«ss«y)rf Setback: ___Lot Width Front Side Hardcover ^ Rear Lot C Average L; Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERD' CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventins compliance with Zoning Code requirements! ^ (attach additional sheets if necessary) ‘i m \ b c. (/> ^^4cha I J2^4t>is_ •hruiA oo sSHb;tok 4, (h4 remcd^ ^ kJhfcl. cX^ h^KM ^ 4/d a- Ui^A. <fH4 AOuC6z ^. >-/ ■ (Adlnd^cil %£/M^ Vo ^ hs¥M^ ^ (/pdiCtJl Hsi fciADpmA^ ro^ rR) :srwofcaci? ^ a/S4iJtJiciy ^ IkJhoax (xL^ oou (ttl A^i^t2bnLe< 0~7S^ aj\(^ nS xfxi ^60 . kJd2 Moa/^ sJ^£Mer>j^c(l 9^ fUcyiA^U^ -fifsyr\ i4.sz% Vt> oau/ VO 1^ <2b,"7S®/i . do ^ 'cQwIc (;C^/TCAy 4^ 4;6l/W^05Uy r^c^juf >4 /?cPULf btCOAV^ M /q V d)wua^7 9- J^mcyo . ^V- j^ ^ CK^^yt oyliN- CC(ACf^^- fcs;****-- *. • • 4-..V- I i ......... CL;.’Trjc or jUiwly for DAN ADAMS OF TRACT A. R.L.S. NO. 853, PART OF LOT 7, AUO. SUB. NO. HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA LAKE MINNETONKA NORTH ARM 929.4 CONTOUR UNC tCCAt M'.cniPTiai or wrui'.r*; : Trod A, RoQlttffod Loud Survoy No. B53, ood Ihot port of lot 7, Audi lor* • Subdivision Niffbor 217, lyinp southoosltr ly of o lino drown porollol to ond IbO fool •ouinoostorly, rmosurod od right onglos from Iho norlfwptstorly lino of sold Lot 7 ond its oitonsion, which lino it msrkod by ludiclol lonilnirlis tot purtuont to Torrons Cost 14974, ond northwostorly of Iho northwotlorly lino of Rogiotorod Lond Survoy No. 0S3 ond ilt odontion, which lott*dotcrIbod lino Is morfcod by Judleiol londmriis oot purtuont to Torrons Goto 13978, <tho oostorly lint of idid promisot Is nvrliod by Judleiol ionOnorks sot purtuont to Torrons Cotos 139/8 ond 149/4). / o : donolot iron morkcf O * donolot Jittliciol lon«ynork found Uooringt shown art botoO upon on ottunod dolun. This survoy inlondt to show Iho boundorios 9f Iho obovt dotcribod proporty, Iho locolion of on OHlstlng houoo ond gorogo, ond Iho locotion of off viilblo **hordcovor* Ihoroon. It doos not purport to show ony olhor Inprovwnsnts or oncroochmonto.J-STlMdr 0*0 IUUW9. •• »i .* • • V ■J IJ 1 • - ■ ■ ________________• •• GRONBERG & ASSOCIATES, INC. I itmm WMVi Oof ow «uo wverc«twi m WMtr •a noMoo Of w M wMO oT taut mmmmm «w WOT I m m mAf lauoto Mtrttwwa ■oowif— StMtw Miunwia ootZ/acLSi k.«i I--JV UH tt-49f Ot-Otl • Vw*rV VC I ^ TRAHT a di cPART^of^i a 4- ®53, AND urui^ih?! NO. 217HENNEPIN COUf>ITy, MNNCSOTA lake Minnetonka north arm 029.4 CONTOUR LIC- ■ICCAt OCSOUPTIOM or pwruitrt ■ TRACT © / • AM A AAV •««« (i I ^ ^ mmtMtm m mtmt ^Tt3T] *^-*^** tlFIAlWBB ^i--» j — “-------imT***•Ml 1 tt-rt-tti •f-431 / • I » • ./ • • / D ak ^oaaa 5 H-/7-CZ• • • • HARDCOVER^LCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZOrfEt (CIRCLE ONE) (p!^ 75-2S0’ • 2S0-S00’ t?«STlNC HAUnCOVER IN ZONE ^ A. House Lcaftfi Wish B. Otrage •• • • C. Drixtway D. Sidewalk E Paiio/Deek •«>••• • • F. LandKape ' ‘Underiain ByPlastie OrFabrie O. Other 90 «X X . X X X X X X X • X X X X Of lUACt Ku> Pj 500-1000' SI 8 S.F. - S.F. -5S;«!SJ __________S.F. _____ST. ?2L 4^2- / \02. S.F. «• • S.F. S.F. 6R>Ck: NEk S.F. - S.F. - COHC. j; t s.f.-OKKS S.F.-(3«lCK PATIP S F. Re>0< O/v S.F.- PtASTiC Rock ah S.F.-W^^O r f k' \ g) It • # « mm • D/m /A0AM5 ^Z^i7^0t SETBACK ZONEi (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75 -.r7rctf.':« Ltngth JU X X B. Oar«|e • m m • • C. Dri\*eway X X D. SidtwaQc X X E Patio/D^k •»••• • •X X F. Landscape UmkrUin By Plastic OrFabne X X X 0. Other A -t? O-Ift + B mPPSEP hardcover IK A. House LtnfUi B. Oarage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Lar^ea;e Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric O. Other •m • • r£5Si^2S0-S00' VVidJi SOO-1000 ’ S.F.- HOOiE 321 .S.F. S.F. S F *• 0R'Cld • APPOr/ «r4go SJ. S.F.-81/CldlOp S.F.- ^RAVeU 307 «r f p SiOEv /AUC_S.F. SF.-ogcid S.F. • tsgy—!LHoa:ow S.F. 331 KOOiAtvO S.F-W0OO Bosce/ej 77,4^5' xlOO ^ * Width • s F A 10^2zM£Es f. b ^ . V. iqcf sj. SJ'. S.F. SJ.\ba . c«.pn3v->k■© -^*^'7^ SF dr.-vt.r«. ■5^5a_s.F. r)0< sp-rr:^, ..; ' 213=----Sr. ________S F. ‘ S.F. S.F. • ® r > j; .•..'•!,S.F. ‘ S.F. . total HA.«tDCOVER IN ZONE total property tjLREa IN ZONE SF. <0?231 SF. A Lr7.4L#gp xlOO >■^-7 SF B 03fe__W ‘7' . 7... - r - • • ••• •• D ah A oa ^5 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKS PP TBqcTA^KLSH^e ^ *n\jn\ A\Mi HO 2 SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A House _____________ Length 0-75' X 75.250'500.1000' Width B. Ovtge • •• • C. DriNfway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck ••••• • • • F. Ltndscipe Underltui By Plastic Or Fabric •*.T* X X X X X X X X X X X SF. S.F. S.Fn SJ. \Z7 S.F. S.F. • DiTiVC Wl SEf^PCK BORO S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.- • S.F. S.F. S.F. r J/.. o .....'.. I■•■, d I ^ • I f ^ /' « . ••"'v • # • ; ’ / • • ^ n n i/* • 'i • 4.f I • •• *tt ‘ h» ■ .?.fc•1^ \!) .i! • / • *%•• :‘ I 'J *. '/.••f..g|V k.r‘.'"y'’ r ) . .’ ;* m' .c^i^\AA«au .k t dMOlk ‘--V 1. *1 1\A A*. .r \ ' / *• ’.•'. ^ t * V ‘ yiftiuiiiyiiiuifft r a H- -fjs i'' 3' //VS ~rc-i^Lc\-^ci> •3^’ 3>-:- s?r^: viSs.-rf-Cvv., •• ^>'1 ■ £u' V-V.-.C'.' •;:'.v;i£ •f % wjp /• ¥? '■ " V I # V“ >. r' [('<-IC: 3>(rtC^ V (C-L<_' i INS 'ToKlUi.iOii /i.{ • V??-" • - ^ "^'#*1 t* ••* :5S ■'.I'-''•'■•- » • •« *-r’ «L^. t . !■ ‘ ' I'liV:*:}' %T.-! - -Vi' ■ • • ,ynS'! ■ ■'-. -r-it _ • •• ■■vtl. A jt v>^ * ^•*» * . ^ - ■^Ft t .; - ;>'JWiJJii«BeH8i •■•■ ■’*'•: ^*1*? :??'*'?.~i I** ^ •1 ^ V ( ' ,. ‘ • #1 ./•'i i» riv I i I CKyy^1 ;.! •4® ^ «• i» • ?^ ..* i'^ ’ivSr:M r* \ ’• t k*,- •' ' • ' [ : • i vi '.•. ' ^ J ’iK - -'i4 \'4<^ r-'|y-if^ic.'.w 71*I ' :..,c ‘ ^ ^ -•:;5 I ^ '-'AC.-—^ f ^ .^S^l2 ' * 1- L^* -k * •« r,-* •'..::V'•;i/ y '*• I j. ;.►', •** ./ *» ;. ^' V -■; / < >** • *^" ^ k • *-*-^.. *« r ^ I • •' •• /^v/a Syio I it i Vi Ff n HHS Tni. ^cuu’- w ^■"i'si fi.^fj{)p. .*• s * 1 !b ■ m: tV^ r^f I.’ .! ■ ,.v . ..... . r • . . . u; %% v^'.-••*• .x•.M^:^2J •;.v;-- r- '• e , >*• i - . •• • -•*• *: l jj i %\*S^^4r:fflf k • VcV "ft* :r 1. *"'•* •" *^ »• V V••.w *•*•-- . ,T> **•— • • ••• •_ •#•V* . • *;*•' • A • k . 9 ■ .^ •• t» "•iii LI '1.‘. •15*y>* • •• ;• *®tte6g V-‘•- . •... A 3h-i.c+ l(t(.c' M*ir " , • , I I , it -fob-d-lol IN^ ~To-)'~ IceuOa fU MM •*• ,r.' • • ■ w n 'fHtilP'; i|ii% * e^?:sj «. r V ^ r' - • L. ^ ■ 1 /, .• 7H r If: ’F<* • % #1 * 'M -m ,;U'j K:>y ;(< fiii > fil i; '^i .■'-ravvJ, '^■T ' ■ V L , t 1 ' '■^:;i;i tjfii i 1 f • • c • ^ • I ate Side. [,ccC r /f - I ••I V ZZ~^.^ ' ^ - »’J - ^.J^.. «. ,-y — ^ ■ > ;-Jl,. :.^^ : -‘v. >. I'-i ^// Vr:-: y V- .:; •'■. •■;. - : !t^v‘• — . . ^ ^ ’"i'.- i. ;r.V|^,‘7;5-r^.‘r .? -V *?:. ,;V^ :.-' r ’V * U •- ', '^ . V * • .V .. ■ .'■ • /v*” M *•7 •T' • •• *^** • •-t*. i.--'Nte* • r S/)'-^ I i £ ‘-.*3' Mir rMIHillTM itT a County Taxpayer Services pepartii^in^^ 1/ ’ • ^ ,y * Oi-lC7~ Z3-(2) .-r'r^w I? A' ------- '.»•;i>3 •>- ■ Parcel Information U Parcel b 0811723130016 House Number 1145 ».*• •• . • , ,••••. *. • . • •• • ■ street Name TONKAWA RO Thl$lsnot9l9gaiiyneofd0dmtp.itnpf9Stntsaccmf)a$tionofMiofmaBon ■ and dM treaty. County, and St»fntd$uthodti9$ and mar aeureas.' tuLmi f DUN MT8 nns/n •ATtN S*4 OMNt* NANe TANTAVER NANE/ADDR PROP AMM OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR PROP ADOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER ■NANE/AMR PROP ADOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR SO •••IIT'ES IS RAM •lltS TONRAWA RO JOIM 0 NIUER I WIFE JOIRI 0 NILLER SRR9 UNIVERSITY AVE N E HPLS NN SM21 SR RR-llT-SS IS RRR9 •112R TONKAWA RD J > A RENOT JOHN 0 t ANNE L RENOT HER TONKAWA RO LONO LAKE HN 55SSR ,SR RR«n7-2S IS RRIR R119S TONKAWA RO DANIEL OSCAR AOANS DANIEL OSCAR AOANS URS TONRAWA RO LONO LAKE NN SSS5R 'j HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INPORNATION SYSTEN PROPERTY OWNERS LIST SR RR-117-2S IS RRR7 RUM TONRAWA RO P T t S K STEVENS PATRICK T S SUSAN K STEVENS UAR TONRAWA RO LONO LAKE NN SSSSA SR RR-117-2S IS RRIR RRRSR ADDRESS UNASSIOIED HARVIN OORHAN ETAL NARVXN OORHAN SSRR NORWEST CENTER NPU NN S54R2 SR RR-U7-25 IS RRI7 RllRS TONRAWA RO N T RENARO SOS RENARO N T RENARO t 0 S RENARO URS TONRAWA RD LONO LAKE NN SSSSR 0 9 TOTAL BATCH SRR RRRR9 REPORT NO. P14SS4R1 PACE IR ^ 9 SR RR«U7*2S IS RRRR RIIAR TONKAWA RD ' J ROLAUn PAVER TRUSTEE J ROLAND PAVEK IMR TONKAWA RO LONO LAKE HN SSSSR SO 9R-117-2S IS ORU RIRRR TONKAWA RD HARVIN OORHAN ETAL .NARVIN OORHAN SSRR NORWEST CENTER . HPLS HN SS4R2 ■ SB RB>117-2S IS RRIR R12RS TONKAWA*RO N A SHXTN R T N SNITN TRSTES TNONAS K R NANCY A SNITN. 12RS TONKAWA RO LONO LAKE NN SSSSR ■ X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE ‘ REPRESENTATION OF XNFORNATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTNENT OF PROPERTY TAXAnON, TO THE BEST OF NY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. . . DATE V /' pnr s•*.*» • • /; •L I I A i a Application Date: 2/20/03 60 Day Deadline: 4/21/03 1 4 200S CITyOFOHoivo Department Approval: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title City Planner REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: ITEM NO.: 9 AgendaSection: Zoning Item Description: #02*2874 Richard Kail 3753 Casco Avenue Vacation Zoning District: Exhibits: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (.5 acre) A B Resolution Staff Report and Exhibits of 3/24/2003 Application Summary: The applicant is seeking approval to vacate a portion of the unimproved dedicated alley adjacent to his property. On March 24, 2003, the City Council voted 5 to 0 to deny the vacation application and directed staff to draft a resolution reflecting the Council’s action for adoption. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. L A RESOLUTION DENYING A REQUEST FOR VACATION OF A PLATTED ALLEY BETWEEN LOTS 6 AND 7, BLOCK 4, CASCO HEIGHTS FILE NO. 03-2874 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Richard Kail (hereinafter the "applicant") on Fcbruar>’ 20, 2003 completed filing of a formal application with the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") for vacation of a platted alley dedicated within the plat of Casco Heights, such alley being legally described as follows: That part of the alley within Block 4. Casco Heights. Hennepin County. Minnesota, dedicated to the public in said plat which lies between Lots 6 and 7. Block 4. Casco Heights, lying between the northeasterly lines extended of said Lots and the southwesterly lines extended of said Lots: (hereinafter “the alley"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 17, 2003 regarding said alley vacation, at which time ail persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, after due standing and consideration, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the requested easement vacation, and the City Council of the City of Orono finds that said casement vacation, as proposed, is not in keeping with the public interest in consideration of the follow ing findings: I.The alley w as dedicated in the plat of Casco Heights in 1911. The alley was dedicated for the public use. and while it may have seen minimal public use in the past, certain aspects of its location suggest potentially greater use in the future. The alley provides a 14' wide continuous straight corridor between Casco Avenue and Casco Point Road. Page 1 of 3 3.The alley provides a potential pedestrian connection from the Casco Avenue / Caroline Avenue / Ethel Avenue neighborhood to the City beach at Carman Avenue. 4.While a portion of the alley south of the applicant ’s property may be wetland, the possibility for use of the alley in the future via a walkway through the wetlands, or for cross-countr>’ skiing and snowshoeing access to the Lake via the beach in the winter, should not be minimized. 5.The property adjacent to the alley directly behind the applicant's property is City- owned undeveloped land, used for stomiwater drainage purposes. The City cannot predict the value of this alley as a corridor for future stormwater needs, but the City should not eliminate any possibilities. Likewise, as City land, the area behind the applicant ’s property may have potential park uses that are currently not envisioned, and this alley provides potential access for such use. 6.While past utility use of the alley may be minimal, the City cannot predict the need for future utility use of the corridor, and because it connects two main residential streets, there are likely po.ssible future uses for public utilities (such as sewer & water, gas, telephone, electric, cable TV, or other communications needs) that are as yet unknown; and WHEREAS, the City Council in recent years has gained a strong awareness of the value of public access to the lake. This corridor has potential to provide connectivity between an off- lake neighborhood and the lake. The Council is generally reluctant to vacate public rights-of-way that are in u.se. especially in Orono’s defined Urban Area (the V2- acre and I-acre zones, including Casco Point). While this alley may have had minimal use in the past, it has significant potential for future public use. I he Orono 2000-2020 Community Management Plan. Pages 4A-32 & 4A-33 regarding preservation of lake access, supports the maintaining of lake access corridors and is applicable to this request e\ en though this alley does not directly abut the lake. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the petition of Richard Kail for vacation of a portion of alley w ithin the plat of Casco Heights is hereby denied. Page 2 of3 % :• il i •* I : Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 14th day of April, 2003. • ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mavor S l Al E OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this__day of , 2003 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf cf the City, Notarj' Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of ,2003 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk ot the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipa . corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the Citv. Notary Public Page 3 of 3 J Application Date: 2/20/03 60 Day Deadline: 4/21/03 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: DATE: Name Wendy Bottenberg ITEM NO.: ^ Title City Planner AgendaSection: Zoning Item Description: MI2-2874 Richard Kail 3753 Casco Avenue Vacation Zoning Dutrict: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (.5 acre) Exhibit: A Sta ff Report and Exhibits of 2/19/2003 Application Summary: The applicant is seeking approval to vacate T of that portion of the unimproved dedicated alley adjacent to his property. The alley was originally dedicated in the plat of Casco Heights in 1911. The alley is 14 ’in width and 317.8’in length. The applicant is proposing to vacate only the portion adjacent to his property. Not the entire distance between Casco Avenue and Casco Point Road. Half of the alley (7’) would go to the applicant and the other 7’ would go to the neighbor to the east, 3721 Casco Avenue. Pertinent Code Section.<i: 1. Section 10.12 (process &. standards for vacating streets and alleys) History of application: The applicant, Mr. Kail, has another zoning application pending, application #03-2863. This application was heard by the Plarming Commission at its February 19, 2003 meeting. The applicant is proposing to construct a new single family residence on the property located at 3753 Casco Avenue. Application #03-2863 is for two variances, lot area and lot coverage by structures. The proposed structure was above the allowed 15% lot coverage by structures for new consu-uction. The Planning Commission approved the lot area variance, but denied the lot coverage by structures variance. The application was then heard by the City Council at its February 24, 2003 meeting. The City Council discussed two options to increase the size of the property in order for the proposed structure to meet the 15% lot coverage ordinance: vacating the adjacent alley or purchasing city owned land adjacent to the property. Vacating the adjacent alley is the direction the applicant wished to pursue. Application #02-2863 was tabled in order for the vacation application to be acted on. Neighborhood: There have not been any vacations of alleys in the Casco Point area. There have been vacations, but only where the dedicated right of way was between the lake and the residence on the property. Neighbor to East: Staff has talked with the neighbors to the east, 3721 Casco Avenue, regarding the vacation of the alley. They do not have any objections or issues regarding the vacation of the alley. Criteria for Vacation: Zoning Code Section 10.12 governs the vacation of streets, alleys and public grounds. In past vacation requests, the City has determined that vacation may be appropriate when; 1. # 2. The vacation doses not affect access to or use of any adjoining property. The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve or use the dedicated right-of-way as road except for utility purposes. 3. The unimproved dedicated right-of-way as it exists serves no public purpose. It is staff s opinion that these three conditions are not applicable to the segment of alley adjacent to the property. The Public Works Director has been asked to review the proposed vacation. He stated the City should not vacate this alley. The alley is necessary for the following reasons: stormwater drainage management, possible future utilities and public access for the neighborhood to reach Lake Minnetonka. The Planning Director has been asked to review the proposed vacation. His comments are attached as Exhibit E of the Planning Commission staff report. The gas, electric, telephone and cable t.v. utilities have been notified of this request. They have all responded and none of them have any concerns or issues with the vacation. PLANNING COMMISSION: Planning Commission recommended by a 5 to 0 vote to: Deny the application as presented for the following reasons: The unimproved right-of-way may someday be used for stormwater drainage management, possible future utilities and public access for the neighborhood to reach Lake Minnetonka. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the vacation application as proposed by Richard Kail for the property located at 3753 Casco Avenue. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Direct staff to draft a resolution reflecting the Councirs action for adoption at the April 14, 2003 City Council meeting. L..... { TO;Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planncr March 12,2003 SUBJECT: #03-2874 Richard Kail 3753 Casco Avenue Vacation of Lake Street — Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC Single Family Lakeshorc Residential District, .5 Acre, sewered, Exhibits A Application Site Plan/ Survey Plat Map Property Owner’s List Planning Director’s Comments U C D E Pertinent Ordinance: Section 10.12 Application Summar}’: The applicant is seeking approval to vacate T of that portion of the unimproved dedicated alley adjacent to his property. The alley was originally dedicated in the plat of Casco Heights in 1911. The alley is 14’ is width and 317.8’ in length. The applicant is proposing to vacate only the portion adjacent to his property. Not the entire distance between Casco Avenue and Casco Point Road. Half of the alley (7’) would go to the applicant and the oticr 7’ would go to the neighbor to the east, 3721 Casco Avenue. History of application: The applicant, Mr. Kail, has another zoning application pending, application #03-2863. This application was heard by the Planning Commission at its February 19,2003 meeting. The applicant is proposing to construct a new single family residence on the property located at 3753 Casco Avenue. Application #03-2863 is for two variances, lot area and lot coverage by structures. The proposed structure w as above the allowed 15% lot coverage by structures for new construction. Tlie Planning Commission approved the lot area variance, but denied the lot coverage by structures variance. The application was then heard by the City Council at its February 24, 2003 meeting. The City Council discussed two options to increase the size of the property in order for the proposed structure to meet the 15% lot coverage ordinance; vacating the adjacent alley or purchasing city owTied land adjacent to the property. Vacating the adjacent alley is the direction the applicant wished to pursue. Application #02-2863 was tabled in order for the vacation application to be acted on. ^02-2&74 Richard Kad 3753 Casco Avenue t'acalion 3/12/03 Page I of 2 3 Neighborhood: There have not been any vacations of alleys in the Casco Point area. There have been vacations, but only where the dedicated right of way was between the lake and the residence on the property (i.e. Lake Shore Avenue). (Exhibit C). Neighbor to East: Staff has talked with the neighbors to the east, 3721 Casco Avenue, regarding the vacation of the alley. They do not have any objections or issues regarding the vacation of the alley. Criteria for Vacation: Zoning Code Section 10.12 governs the vacation of streets, alleys sid public grounds. In past vacation requests, the City has determined that vacation may be appropriate when: 1. • 2. The vacation doses not affect access to or use of any adjoining property. The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve or use the dedicated right-of-way as road except for utility purposes. The unimproved dedicated right-of-way as it exists serves no public purpose. It is staffs opinion that these three conditions are not applicable to the segment of alley adjacent to the property. The Public Works Director has been asked to review the proposed vacation. He stated the City should not vacate this alley. The alley is necessary for the following reasons: stormwater drainage management, possible future utilities and public access for the neighborhood to reach Lake Minnetonka. The Plaiming Director has been asked to review the proposed vacation. His comments are attached as Exhibit E. The gas, electric, telephone and cable t.v. utilities have been notified of this request. They have all responded and none of them have any concerns or issues with the vacation. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the vacation application as proposed by Richard Kail for the property located at 3753 Casco Avenue. m-2874 RichardKatt 3753 Casco Avenue Vacation 3/12/03 Page 2 of 2 i •4 AppUcation U 63-QJSl^ Date Received ^ "/S-Cj Amount Paid , CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 3"^-S~3 . Type of Application to be Filed Altc^f mam. mm . • ^ ^ ^ *. v au»\ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) APPLICANT Address Phone (home ) ^ Phone (worl rt ^ /t jh^ ZiD OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Address City Phone (homeX Phone (work). Zip, Date Property Acquired P^6 ZL I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$250.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$250.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$250.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _____$325.00 Commercial/Industrial Use _____$250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of lakeshore _____PRD/PED - see Fee Schedule _____SI50.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) _____After-thc-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee (raonth/year) OTHER APPLICATIONS _____S275.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) X S300.00 Vacation _____S250.00 Easement Vacation _____SI00.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____S350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____S3 75.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____SI00.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule 7/ required submittals Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certifled Property Owners List of owners within j t 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. — aai/wia OilU map E • A-603, Government Center, 348-3271) --------' ■ *0 h»dou, for survey ■ T^’' ‘'f-' '» Wlication if not included on required survey chil^rto'elevS List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an ♦ • u=^r;,".5s,.rr;rs>£” 'As an addendum to this application, please attach a seoarate lict «r persons you wish notified of this application. ^ ^ ^ ^ SUBMITTED. (Stsif will reoute to souw SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS submitted.) ’ ‘'™*'"** “f ■'ocuments. plans, etc. to be appIicaSon is nor^mitaeTf lSTb"vrilSo!jL''’noi^^^^^^^^^ wSciel?stff' « '»">P'««-*— -----------------------------------Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATLTIE IdmiSmt^ a?:^ and/or unusual expenses incurred in review o/thic covered by original fee payment) supplied is true and correct to the b^of his/her fa3edge°"’ >nfo™«tion 'PApplicant’s signature Date OWER’S SIGNATURE entry onto the prone^° by Cky Ttaff^o^nsuU^s authorized reasonable members for puU Of -embers, and Council Owner's signature ^ Date D£?o'^ Nt“ ~o„ Meet., the Planning Commission and Coi^n *"‘*i?*‘ ^PPh'"** *»e present at all scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an auih«Jt^^' *" eppheant is unable to aRend a Building ii Zoning Office of this change prior to the meetii^ ^ P**'® *« s . ' //.f . • ' V ./if SURVEY I ^iCHARD KAIL I 639C 62 VOO I tCtlOeU 4 MAOtON, Mc!> ■MUM (122-99) NAI«a COVIN TOTAL AREA - 17351 tq.ft 0.40 Aer.t PROPOSED HOUSE - 2631 PROPOSED DRIVEWAY - 1993 tq.ft AOORIM 3753 Co*co Avenu* Orone, MN 55391 CASCO »'ni««~ous "o« A V E N U E TOTAL HARO COVER - 24.6% COMM mscR 95«l •9^1 4 -coa eiT HARO COVER FOR LOT TO PROPOSED HOUSE LOT • 17351 tq.ft 0.40 Acres PROPOSED HOUSE - 2631 tq.fl. (951 7)i| 951 7i j TOTAL COVERAGE - 15.1% EAST 100.00 2 fgg I Rt»f0*.c5 ■(957 9) ■937 9 (954 4}i Fp. 9570i BOtCKMAim Top of Iron monument ot shown □ovation • 957.21 (NGVD-1929) OENtRAL MOTES 1. ! n:\9 S sS S • • i w TREE LEOENO rs Ri gS!^ Numbtf roflewlng abbrt.1etlon dwietn ttUrngltd dlotn.ltr m in Inch.., (hr.. f..t obov. around l.vol. Tbt McondeJ Vio--------1 7 wwwww wwfiw ivvvi. mv vvwony number Of ony) denotes the number of trunks ot thot location (1 denotes o deod tree). Number followinq shrubs denotes lt*e diameter In feet Denotes deciduous tree. M Denotes Maple Evomple: Om 20 •31 «> (•37 «)■ I LOT 11 5. 6. 7. 6. 9. 10. 11. 12. 12. Ofientotlon of the beorinqs used for this survey Is bosed on on ossumed datum 2. • - Denotes Iron monument 3. k890.0 - Denotes existing spot elevation. 4. x(890.0) - Denotes proposed spot elevation. I ,kist.#4‘: :cnc in Ad K 6E iCMOvtl - C«n*lM db-Mtlon of surfoco drohogi. Propcaod gorogo 6oor - 954.7 Prepotad top of foundotlon - 955.0 Propoaod boaomont floor > 944.0 Houm la 0 WofluMt Dot* of lo«t fWu mtryy. 12/17/02 M(89aO)CP - Oonotta crtticol point olOMtion. 179.0 (P) Donoto* Coko HtIgMa plot 178.57 (M) Donotoo Hold mooauromont 9 1000 SPECIAL NOTE Only oosomonta aho«n on Uio rocordod plot of CASCC HQ(!HTS or# aliown on tbla ourvoy mop, unless otharwisa netad. Tho auryoy upon «tilefi this mop Is bosod ms porfOrmad •Ithout bonoflt of olthe- on ottomo/s Utio opinion or o Utlo commitment DESCRIPTION Lota 7 0 8, Bloch 4, Coaco Halghta, Hannaptn County, UInnoaota ■nis drovino hos ba«i chochad ond rtj^wad this f4»*T doy of ee.iwi N 84T36'24* w /ajoV - I haroby corMfy thot this survoy «oa proportd und«^ my supervision ond that I am o Uconaad Land Surveyor under *-------' - **• Ucenee No. 18883 X Herjheplh County T^payer Servi<«mb|M«S r 7 *f’**^>. ' ' -V5 • • ' .#' S ’2.0- n'7' .V i. •••** -^.v;7 V ••• V .•«• :•.;;\ * •.. -y>’ Parcel Information • ..»• •••.,.^» Parcel ID 2011723310009./' House Number 3763'' ' • f''^ street Name CASCO AVE ,. TNs is not a hgstty racotded map. It raprasants a compiiatioin’ofMoanitkit':i ■ and data from City. County, and Slata road authorlUas and othar tourcas. '.\4. 20-117-23 24 0005 J. H. Kadlec & P. L. Bernhardt 2726 Caroline Ave, yzata, MN SS391 20-117-23 24 0010 Lance L. and Rhoda L. Vicknair 2740 Ethel Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 240015 Robert & Linnea Boyd 2725 Ethel Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 24 0018 Donna L. Lile 2765 Ethel Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 24 0040 John W. & Joyce Hamblet 2720 Ethel Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 . *17-23 31 0003 Jill R. Fuglesten William H. Koch H 3730 Casco Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 31 0009 Richard L. Kail 3866 Sunset Dr. Spring Park, MN 55384 ?0-l 17-23 31 0020 ?enny J. Saiki 2874 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 31 0040 James W. & Patricia Dongoske ' 700 Casco Ave. .Vayzala, MN 55391 17-23 31 0057 V. -emary Iversen 2S35 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 <03-PS'7-/ 20-117-23 24 0007 T. Rejzer & L. Rejzer 2715 Caroline Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 24 0013 Julia S. Jensen 2700 Ethel Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 24 0016 Benjamin R. & Lisa A Jensen 2745 Ethel Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 24 0019 Dale A. Christensen 2750 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 24 0041 Charles & Susan Percival 2732 Caroline Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 31 0004 John F. Klick 3703 Casco Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 31 0010-. Bruce D. Madden 3759 Casco Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 31 0023 Penny J. Saike 2874 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 31 0054 Lawrence D. & Katherine Elsen 2879 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 31 0058 D R Welty & M M Jin 3721 Casco Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 24 0008 Donald J. and Dawn R. Hebig 2735 Caroline Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 24 0014 Lawrence D. Pillar 6827 Cardinal Cove Cr. Mound, MN 55364 20-117-23 24 0017 Michael D. Rutherford 2755 Ethel Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 240020 Dale A. Christensen 2750 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 31 0002 Roy Schrader 3704 Casco Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 31 0005 Robert Presler 3709 Casco Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 31 0011 Dean V. Greimann 3779 Casco Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 31 0039 Roy Schrader 3704 Casco Ave. Wayzata, NJN 55391 20-117-23 31 0056 R.E. Wolfe 2871 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 31 0062 Scott & Janet Rosstedt 2740 Caroline Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 ! 20-117-23 31 0066 Dean V. Greimann 3779 Casco Avc. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 32 0006 Mark E. & Patricia A. Thompson 2824 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 32 0009 Ronald & Margaret Demshar 2871 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 ’r: • • * 20-117-23 310067 Charles & Lucy Nelson 2868 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 32 0007 Bryce E. Peterson and Mary Pat Peterson 2829 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 32 0017 Tammy L. Woodis 2818 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 31 0071 Marti Lyiui 3750 Casco Ave. Wayzatc, MN 55391 20-117-23 32 0008 David J. Yorks 2825 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 20-117-23 32 0021 Rosemary C. Iversen 2835 Casco Point Rd. Wayzata. MN 55391 ^3-2g-7<j riiinnii liKiaJi unnJbJtMflWAli nfmart n I I r ' i To:Wendy Bottcnberg, City Planner Chair Smith and Planning Commissioners, From: Date: Mike Gaffron, Planning Director March 11.2003 Subject: Proposed Vacation of Alley Adjacent to 3753 Casco Avenue Mr. Kail has requested that the 14* alley located between his property and the adjacent property at 3721 Casco Avenue be vacated. The apparent purpose of the vacation is to gain land as credit toward the 15% lot coverage allowance, to allow construction of a larger residence. This alley was dedicated in the plat ofCasco Heights in 1911. The alley was dedicated forthe public use, and while it may have seen minimal public use in the past, certain aspects of its location suggest potentially greater use in the future: 1.The alley provides a 14* wide continuous straight corridor between Casco Avenue and Casco Point Road. 2.It provides a potential pedestrian connection from the Casco Avenue / Caroline Avenue / Ethel Avenue neighborhood to the City beach at Carm-n Avenue. 3.While a portion of the alley south of the Kail site may be wetland, the possibility for use of the alley in the future via a walkway through the wetlands, or for cross-country skiing and snowshoeing access to the Lake via the beach in the winter, should not be minimized. 4.The property adjacent to the alley directly behind the Kail site is City-owned undeveloped land, used for stormwater drainage purposes. We cannot predict the value of this alley as a corridor for future stormwater need.«-, but we shouldn ’t eliminate any possibilities. Likewise, as City land, the area behind Kail may have potential park uses that are currently not on the radar screen, and this alley provides potential access for such use. 5.Past utility use of the alley may be minimal. However, we cannot predict the need for future utility use of the corridor, and because it connects two main residential streets, there are likely possible future uses for public utilities (such as sewer & water, gas, telephone, electric, cable TV, or other communications needs) that we cannot now envision. The City Council in recent years has expressed a strong awareness of the value of public access to the lake. This corridor has potential to provide connectivity between an off-lake neighborhood and the lake. In recent years the Council has expressed a general reluctance to vacate public rights-of- way that are in use, especially in Orono ’s defined Urban Area (the '/j- acre and 1-acre zones, including Casco Point). While this alley may have had minimal use in the past, it has significant potential for future public use. 1 would refer you to the attached excerpts from Orono ’s 2000-2020 Communits Management Plan, Pages 4A-32 & 4A-33 regarding preservation of lake access, which has applicability even though this alley does not directly abut the lake. Vacation of this alley would in my opinion not be in the best interests of the City. CMP Part 4A. Transport«.ton Plan lake population, however, the extent of lakeshore available to the public generally and the means of public access to the take have diminished and ther^ore become increasingly valuable from year toyear...we must not forget that the public Includes persons other than those In the Immediate vicinity. The general public has a true concern in the recreational facilities offered by the lakes which nature has so freely given us In this Knfr, Their generous sharing by all will make for a healthier pnd happier people. The many not fortunate enough to be able to acquire the advantages of ownership of lake shore properties should not be deprived of these benefits. This we would do If we permitted streets leading to the lakeshore to be vacated... "The loss to the public of 150 feet of shoreline out of a total of approximately 100 miles may to the Baldwins Stem Inconsequential or even Infinitesimal and nothing to be disturbed about But, of this 100 miles of precious shoreline, onfy a small fraction has been reservedfor the public; and If the courts should create a precedent by permitting a single Inroad, however small, upon the public’s share of the shoreline, other Inroads will Inevitably follow, until tht. aggregate becomes a real threat to the public’s free access to the lake. To avoid any possibility such a result, the courts should with equal vigor repulse thefrst, the second, and every other assault upon the public domain." Less than 1% of Orono’s lake shrreline has been dedicated as public access corridors. Nearly all the rest is privately owned, and not available to the public for lake access purposes, save for the DNR Maxwell Bay Access, Hennepin County’s North Arm Access and the City ’s Summit Park on Long Lake. Hennepin County’s Noerenberg Gardens Memorial Park, while abutting Lake Minnetonka, has deed restrictions that disallow use for docking or launching boats. With shoreland abutting a dozen separate bays in Lake Miimetonka, Orono has a commitment to maintaining access via the dedicated access corridors. Lake Access Policies It is the City ’s intent to petman'*ntly retain for public use all existing lake access corridors and fire lanes, regardless of the current level of use or maintenance. To this end, the City will follow these policies: 1. Requests for vacation of dedicated lake access right-of-ways will be denied in all cases except where equal or better lake access will be granted nearby in return. 2. The City will identify and take necessary action to preserve the public’s right to use of any such accesses which exist but which may not have been formally dedicated. 3. The City will endeavor to work with property owners adjacent to lake access corridors to ensure that both the rights of the public and the rights of the private landowner are upheld. Orono’s lake accesses are enumerated in Table 4A-6. ? * City of Orono Community Management Plan Stpiember 2000 Page 4A-31 t APR 1 4 2003 Application Complete: 60 Day Deadline: 2/20/03 4/21/03 Cn Y ur OmONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name: Jennifer Chaput Title: City Planner DATE: April 7,2003 ITEM NO. 10 Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description:#03-2877 Shane & Chris Rudd 601 Park Lane Variances Exhibits: A Resolution including revised survey showing hardcover removals B Revised I lardcovcr Calculations C Staff Report and exhibits of 3/1 7/02 Application Summary: The applicant requests the following variances to pennit a 219 s.f. first story garage addition with a second story bedroom onto the street side of the existing home and to reconstruct a main entry landing on the south side: 1 . rear yard setback of 28.3’ where 30’ is required; 2. side yard setbacks of 8.4’on the north and 6.5 ’ on the south (for main entry landing) where 10 ’ is required; 3. an overhang encroachment of 2.5 ’ on the north and south substandard side setbacks; 4. a decorative wall, located 2.5 ’ from the south side yard setback where 10 ’ is required, encroaching an additional 1 .5 ’ with overhang into a substandard setback; 5. 3,508 s.f. (67.2%) hardcover within the 75’ to 250 ’ lakeshore setback zone where 1,305 s.f. (25%) IS permitted; and 6. I')t coverage by structure of 2,175 s.f. (24.3%) where 1,500 s.f. is permitted.________ Pertinent Code Sections: 1. Section 10.24, Subd. 5 (B): Yard Requirements: The following minimum requirements in the l.R-l B zoning district shall be observed: rear yard, 30 feet; side yard adjacent to another lot, 10 feet. (Request: To permit a rear yard setback of 28.3‘ where 30' is required and side yard setbacks of 8.4’on the nor ’h and 6.5 ’ on the south where 10 ’ is required; and a decorative wall 2.5' from the south side lot line where 10' is required). 2. Section 10.22. Subd. 2 and Section 10.56. Subd. 16 (L)(2): Hardcover within 75 ’ to 250': Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OH WL there shall be no greater than 25% hardcover. (Request: To permit 3,508 s.f. (67.2%) hardcover within the 75' to 250' la'ieshore setback zone where 1,305 s.f. (25%) is permitted). 3. Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C): Lot Coverage By Structure: 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 1 5% of the lot area. EXCEPTION: Regardless of lot area, every' developed lot shall be allowed at least 1 ,500 s.f. of lot coverage by a principal residence and garage structures. (Request: To permit 2.1 75 s.f. (24.3%) oflot coverage by structure where 1.500 s.f. is permitted) i 4. Section 10.03, Subd. IS (A): Non-Encroachments: The following shall not be considered to be encroachments on yard requirements: chimneys, flues, belt courses, leaders, sills, pilasters, lintels, ornamental features, mechanical devices, cornices, eaves, gutters and the like, provided they do not extend more than 1 '/z feet. (Request: To permit overhang encroachments in a substandard side setback of 2.5* on the north and 1.5’ on the south). PLANNING COMMISSION: Planning Commission recommended by a 5 to 0 vote to: To approve the application as presented, with the following conditions: 1) The proposed addition must not be closer than 30’ from the rear lot line, with side setbacks of 8.4 ’on the north and 6.5’ on the south, accommodating the reduced landing deck; 2) Overhangs on the proposed addition will not encroach more than 1.75’ into the side and rear setbacks, reducing structural coverage on the property; 3) The proposed decorative wall must be made compliant, with building plans for the revised wall to be submitted prior to City Council review; 4) Hardcover in the 0-75’ and 75’-250’ hardcover zones must be further reduced from the proposed by eliminating portions of the existing brick patio on the lakeside of the home, leaving no more than a 4 ’ wide walkway; 5) Building plans shall include rain gutter and down spout locations, directing water away from adjacent properties; 6) Erosion control shall be installed, inspected and approved prior to work on the site; and 7) The proposed hardcover and structural removals must be complete before footing inspections are approved. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation and recommends approval of the enclosed resolution, which incorporates the revised survey showing the hardcover and structural removals, 30’ setback from the rear lot line, and to keep the decorative wall. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. t A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B); SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2; SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L)(2); SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C); AND SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 15(A) FILE NO. 03-2877 WHEREAS, Sliane and FCrisline Rudd, husband and wife, (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 601 Park Lane, within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally desciibed as follows: Lot 14, Block 6, Minnetonka Summit Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter “the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances from Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B); Section 10.22, Subdivision 2; Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L)(2); Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C); and Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (A) to allow a 219 s.f. first story garage addition with a second story bedroom onto the street side of the existing home and to recon. .:uct a main entr> landing on the south side, with a rear yard setback of 28.3’ where 30’ is required; side yard setbacks of 8.4 ’ on the north and 6.5’ on the south (for main entry landing) where 10’ is required; an overhang encroachment of 2.5’ on the north and south substandard side setbacks; a decorative wall, located 2.5’ from the south side yard setback where 10' is required, encroaching an additional 1.5’ with overhang into a substandard setback; 3,508 s.f. (67.2%) hardcover within the 75’ to 250* lakeshore setback zone where 1,305 s.f. (25%) is permitted; and lot coverage by structure of 2,175 s.f. where 1,500 s.f. is permitted, in the LR-IB zoning district; and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 17. 2003, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Citv C ouncil of Orono, Minnesota: Page 1 of 6 FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #03-2877. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB Zoning District, where I acre is the minimum required lot area. The property consists of approximately 0.21 acres. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on March 17, 2003 and recommended approval by a vote of 5 to 0. 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A. The existing residence was built in 1990, prior to the current zoning ordinance; B. The 8,950 s.f. (0.21 acre) lot with a 50 ’ width docs not meet the minimum lot area (43,560 s.f. or 1 acre) nor lot width (140’) requirements for the district; C. TTiere is no hardship to support the proposed 28.3’ setback from the rear lot line. Therefore, the proposed addition must be located no closer than the required 30’setback from the street, further reducing hardcover and stnictural coverage on the property; D. The application proposes to reduce hardcover from 374 s.f (10.03%) to 337 s.f (9.03%) where none is permitted in the 0 to 75’ hardcover zone by removing a shed, deck and brick patio; E. The application proposes to reduce hardcover from 3,508 s.f (67.2%) to 3,396 s.f (6,^ 06%) where 1,305 s.f (25%) is permitted in the 75’to 250’ hardcover zone by removing brick patio and reducing the main landing deck; F. The application proposes to reduce structural coverage from 2,239 s.f (35%) to 2,016 s.f (22.53%) w'here 1,500 s.f is permitted by removing a deck, shed and by reducing the proposed overhangs to an encroachment of no more than 1.75’; G. The side setbacks will remain 8.4’ on the north side and increase from 5 ’ to 6.5 ’on the south side with the application; H. There is no hardship demonstrated that would support the variances for the proposed decorative wall encroachment, and allowing it would decrease views of the lake enjoyed by t!ie neighboring property owners. Page 2 of 6 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property arc peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances will not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air, nor pose a fire hizard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Cede and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council has considered this application, including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City Staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safely and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances from Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B); Section 10.22, Subdivision 2; Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L)(2); Section 10.03, Subdivision 14(C); and Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (A) to allow a 168 s.f first story garage addition with a second stor>' bedroom onto the street side of the existing home and to reconstruct a main ent.y landing on the south side, with side yard setbacks of 8.4’ on the north and 6.5’ on the south (for main entry landing) where 10 ’ is required; an overhang encroachment of not more than 1.75’ into the north and south substandard side setbacks; a revised decorative wall, meeting the required height limits for a fence in the side yard (6 ’ maximum); 3.396 s.f (65.06%) hardcover within the 75’ to 250’ lakeshore setback zone where 1,305 s.f (25%) is permitted; 337 s.f (9.03%) hardcover within the 0 to 75’ lakeshc ” setback zone where none is permitted; and lot coverage bj structure of 2,016 s.f where 1,500 s.f is permitted. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. Council approval is based on the revised site plan submitted by the applicant as attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Any further amendments to the site plan may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. Approval is subject to the following conditions: a) Building plans shall include rain gutter and down spout locations, directing water away from adjacent properties; b) Erosion control shall be installed, inspected and approved prior to work on the site; and Page 3 of 6 r n. c) The proposed hardcover and structural removals as shown on Exhibit A must be complete before footing inspections are approved. 3.Authorities granted by this variance nm with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council appro* ’:.l, or these variances w ill expire on that date (April 14,2004). 4.Violation of or non-con<pliance w ith any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City or Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 14tli day of April, 2003. ATfEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara .•\. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner (s) Page 4 of6 3 STATE OF MINNESOTA COIJNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledge i before me on this 14th day of April, 2003 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary- Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of April, 2003 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of ,2003,personally appeared before me, ____ who is personally known to me ____ whose identity I proved on the basis of whose identity I proved on the oath/afilrmation of credible witness ..a and w ho executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that hc/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 , 2003,.personally STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this__day of ______ appeared before me, ____who is personally known to me ____whose identity I proved on the basis of___________ ____whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. ..a r ' Notary Public / - V ; ' ■) ' . T ' • ■ V: ■M Page 6 of 6 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR SHANE & KRIS RUDD Oh LOT 14, BLOCK 6. MINNETONKA SUMMIT PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA UCAi ocsotimoN or pwoiisgs ; Ul H. Block ft. yiMCrOMU SUftilT PARK 0 : dtfiolfi Iron nvrktr CMtJ): dtfioloo kP** tl#»oHoo, rmon itvtl do tun Oocrlngi fhooo oro boMd upon on oiiinod dolun. Inlo^t to obeo th# boondorlo* of |h« o6o«o proporlf. |»m locolien of on •■itiino hooto ond ond Ih# proposed* propotsd Oddi I ion thereon. II doos not purport” lo shoo onjr oi or inprovomsnlt or ortcroocNronlt L 03-Oft3A GRONbERG 3c ASSOCIATES, INC. ®***->HJ OiGMm LM« SURverORS, STC RUMCRS MORIN MUOR ORM, LONE LANC, Mi Ml-473-4t41 VyntrSyji ufY"* • t^Ti' iMsi I sM A HIT utMB PoertnHo^ MS^MpiS •••wimm mumm m. iisc 9 ■itm o*«o*« tO-2B-a Oft-4)6JA ' rn*k I AAflikT- SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House zevifieD 4-4-03 HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET (75-25lj3 M INN£:T»/\;iZ«Q i 0-75' X 250-500' Length V.-.dJi X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X a a 500-1000' S F ' H005£ IB96 SF. SF. SF D. Sidewalk X S3 SF. X m 13 SF. E. Patio/Deck IZZ-aEAA Wi/u' X oZ“ .If uoO-^.f ■184 SF. -• X m S.F. F. Landscape X m SF. Underlain X m S.F. By Plastic X B S.F. Or Fabric G. Otlicr X •M 97 SF. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A - B • X 100 = 352S- szzo sr. S.F. % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE ’ A. House X SF. -Length X \Vij:n SF. X =S.F. JtfiS X =SF. B Garage X _SF C. Driveway i.€fiCv( x j.SF. tmm X s S.F. D. Sidewalk X SF. X a SF. E. Patio/Deck /?ir’(»c*fr€t /x m -h 3S S.F. oLt) ofnc i-trAi>r m - ys S.F. F. Landscape X XX SF. Underlain X s SF. Bv Plastic X s SF OrFabnc G O'-her REMW/E RatCiZ PAT/n x M ^{\0 SF. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONT •J5ZS - 132. r ?39»SF. TOT/tl PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A - B • X 100 » S22 0 SF. % SF. eiA^oP S F." Off»v£v»«) SF. $lOE’»v'/AU^ W»0 f A B I i I k ^ l£ HARDCOVEIUIALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 75-25U' 250-500* EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE Sovakt R«(2 500-1000* A. House Length X X X B. Garage C. Diivcway___X X D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck > y.3 X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other WALL< TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____ - B PROPOSED RARDCQVER IN ZONF/ A. House X Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Paiio/Deck ^CAiat/f j'/A'Q />eck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G, Other RF mpv C PATtO x TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____________ ♦ B Idik Width 8 S /// JjA. „ yj^ooo IP '\bO S 54 3730 X 100 = WiJth 81 8 8 a 8 - /*// -37 SS4- in X IOC - 331 373 c SF SF. SF.i S.F. SF. SF. SF. SF.I SF. SF.Patu Pf/ SF. SF. SF. PfrAlN»N(5 S F. - W/» ___S.F. A _ •'> F- B I4.85~ % S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. SF SF SF. SF S.F. SF S.F. S.F. S.F. SF SF. A B % Application Received: Application Complete: 60 Day Deadline: 2/19/03 2/20/03 4/21/03 TO;Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Jennifer Chaput, City Planner DATE:February 26, 2003 SUBJECT:#03-2877 Shane Rudd 601 Park Lane Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1B One Family I .akeshore Residential District (1 acre) Lot Area: 0.21 acres (8,950 s.f.) Application Summary: The applicant requests the following variances to permit a 219 s.f. first story garage addition with a second story bedroom onto the street side of the existing home and to reconstruct a main entr\' landing on the south side: 1. rear yard setback of 28.3’ wheie 30 ’ is required; 2. side yard setbacks of 8.4 ’on the north and 6.5’ on the south (for main entry landing) where 10 ’ is required; 3. an overhang encroachment of 2.5’ on the north and south substandard side setbacks; 4. a decorative wall, located 2.5’ from the south side yard setback where 10 ’ is required, encroaching an additional 1.5’ with overhang into a substandard setback; 5. 3,508 s.f. (67.2%) hardcover within tlie 75 ’ to 250’ lakcshore setback zone where 1,305 s.f. (25%) is permitted; and 6. lot coverage by structure of 2,175 s.f. (24.3%) where 1,500 s.f. is permitted. The proposed 219 s.f. addition is for the e.xpansion of garage space on the main level and living space (master bedroom, bath and closet area) on the second level. A new steeper pitched roof will be constructed from the main entr> (located at the south side) eastward. TTie existing roofline will remain as-is west of the entiy door. The majority of the interior of the second floor will be remodeled with the addition. The plan view shows a decorative wall on the south side, jutting out from the garage. This wall has an opening which leads to the main entr>' of the house. There is no structure behind the wall and it is not shown on the sur\ey. It is essentially a false facade. U03-2877 Shane Rudd 3/19/2003 Page I of 7 iu Exhibits: A Analysis Worksheet Application Sur\’c Hardcover Calculations Proposed Elevation, Floor Plans, Roof Plan and Decorative Wall Detail City Engineer’s Comments Topography Map Plat Map Property Owner’s List Permit Record Photos of Property B C D E F 0 H 1 J K Pertinent Code Sections: ... 1. Section 10.24, Subd. 5 (B): Yard Requirements: The following minimum requirements in the LR-IB zoning district shall be observed: rear yard, 30 feet; side yard adjacent to another lot, 10 feet (Request: To permit a rear yard se»back of 28.3 ’ where 30 ’ is required and side yard setbacks of 8.4 ’on the north and 6.5 ’ on the south where 10 ’ is required; and a decorative wall 2.5 ’ from the south side lot line where 10' is required). 2. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L)(2): Hardcover within 75’ to 250 ’: Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the 01 1 WL theie shall be no greater than 25% hardcover. (Request: To permit 3,508 s.f. (67.2%) hardcover within the 75’ to 250' lakeshore setback zone where 1,305 s.f. (25%) is permitted). 3. Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C); Lot Coverage By Structure: For all lots of 0-1.99 acres iri total area, the total combined footprint areas of all principal ard accessory structures shall not exceed 5 /o of the lot area. EXCEPTION: Regardless of lot area, every developed lot shall be allowed at least 1,500 s.f. of lot coverage by a principal residence and garage structures. (Request: To permit 2,175 s.f. (24.3%) of lot coverage by structure where 1,500 s.l. is permitted) 4. Section 10.03, Subd. 15 (A): Non-Er4croachmcnts: The folio wing shall not be considered to be encroachments on yard requirements: chimneys, flues, belt courses, leaders, sills, pilasters, lintels, ornamental features, mechanical devices, cornices, eaves, gutters and the like, provided they do not extend more than 1 Vi feet. (Request: To permit overhang encroachments in a substandard side setback of 2.5 ’ on the north and 1.5 ’ on the south). Discussion: Rear Yard Setback I existing home is located 38.3 ’ from the rear lot line. With the proposed addition, the ^ -__ . oo s - - ___1-1 'or tVx*'*' rxrrstructure moves 10 ’ closer to the lot line or 28.3 ’ where 30' is required. However, the proposed overhangs are an additional 2.5 ’, encroaching into this substandard setback. #03 ‘28y7 Shane RiuU 3/19 2003 Page 2 of 7 Side Yard Setbacks North side setback: The proposed addition follows the existing house line, located 8.4’ from the side lot line where 10’ is required. With 2.5 ’ overhangs, the overhangs are 5.9 ’ from the north side lot line. South side setback: The proposed addition on the survey follows the existing house line, located 9.5 ’ from the side lot line where 10’ is required. However, the addition also includes a decorative wall, shown on the elevation and floor plan with a width of 7’ and a 1.5 ’ overhang, further encroaching into the side setback. The total encroachment of this wall and its overhang is 8.5 feet, leaving it 1’ from the lot line. On the south side of the home, the applicant proposes to i educe hardcover and structure by decreasing the size of the existing mam entry landing dei k. The exi.sting 75 s.f. landing deck and steps will be removed and replaced with 35 s.f of Irnding and steps, located 6.5 ’ from the south side lot line. However, there exists a large overhang completely covering the existing entry deck that w ill not be changed. Even though the landing below will be reduced in size, the overhang remains. From the building line, located 10’ from the side lot line at this location, the overhang is 5 ’ in depth. Therefore, this overhang will continue to encroach 5 ’ into the required side setback where only a 1.5 ’ encroachment is allowed. Hardcover Existing hardcover exceeds the maximum permitted within both the 0-75 ’ and 75 ’-250 ’ hardcover zones. Even though the proposed addition is located in the 75 ’-250 ’ hardcover zone, it has been the City ’s practice to request removal of hardcover in the 0-75 ’ zone when excesses exist. 0-75 ' Hardcover Zone: There exists 554 s.f (14.85%) of hardcover within this zone where none is permitted. The applicant proposes to remove an existing deck at the shoreline (111 s.f) (located next to the neighbor’s shed) and shed (69 s.f), reducing the hardcover to 374 s.f (10,03%). Remaining hardcover includes one set of brick steps less than 4* in width to access the lake, and retaining walls (keystone and wood). 75 ’-250 ’ Hardcover Zone: There exists 3.528 s.f (67.58%) of hardcover within this zone where 1.305 s.f (25%) is permitted. The changes to the house and deck and steps on the south side, some of which is already hardcover, result in a net decrease of 20 s.f or a total of 3.508 s.f (67.20%) of hardcover w ithin this zone. I.ot Coverage By Structure Lots less than 10,000 s.f in area are allowed 1,500 s.f of structural coverage subject to other more limiting standards. The applicant proposes to remove a shed and deck. located within 75 ’ of the 011WL of Lake Minnetonka, and reduce the size of the side deck. With the removals and •>03-2877 Shane RuJJ 3 t4Q00i Rage 3 of 7 proposed addition, the applicant hoped to have the structural coverage rentain as it currently exists. However, both the proposed addition and existing home have overhangs that are greater than 2’ in depth. The overhangs on the existing home are 3.5 ’ in depth and the proposed addition shows overhangs of 2.5’ in depth. The zoning ordinance considers “all but the outer 2’ of roof overhangs included in the calculation of lot coverage ’’. The side deck, although proposed to decrease in footprint, is covered by a large overhang which is not proposed to change. The overhang protrudes 5 ’ out from the structure. Therefore, 3’ of the overhang is considered to be structure covering the deck. The following is a breakdown of the existing and proposed structural coverage; Existine Shed 69 s.f Deck (attached to neighbor’s shed)111 s.f. House 1,648 s.f. Deck (lakeside)122 s.f. Deck (main entry) (3’ of existing 5 ’ overhang covering landing considered structure) 27 s.f. (3’ X 9’ width) Overhangs (1.5 ’of existing 3.5 ’ considered structure) 262.2 s.f.(174.8 ’x 1.5 ’) ^excludes side deck overhang) TOTAL 2,239.2 s.f. (25%) Proposed House (existing)1.648 s.f. Deck (lakeside)122 s.f. Addition 219 s.f. Deck (main entry) (3’ of existing 5 ’ overhang covering landing considered structure) 27 s.f. (3’ X 9’ width) Overhangs (0.5 ’ of proposed 2.5’ considered structure) 51.5 s.f. (102.91 xO.5) (excludes side deck and landscape wall overhang) Overhangs (not proposed to change) (1.5 ’of existing 3.5 ’ considered structure) 107.8 s.f. (71.89 X 1.5) (excludes side deck overhang) TOTAL 2,175.3 s.f. (24.3%) Other Comments: City Engineer The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed plan and has the following comments: 1. building plans should include rain gutter and down spout locations, directing water away from adjacent properties; and 2. erosion control should be installed, inspected and approved prior to work on the site. U03-28~7 Shane Rudd 3/N/2003 Page 4 of? History: In 1967, the property owners appeared before the Pla*.ming Commission and City Council to determine if the lot was buildable. AHcr a finding that it was buildable. the existing cottage was razed and a new home was built in 1970. Since this time, there have been no building permits or zoning applications on the property. All of the properties along the lakeside of Park Lane arc less than the 140 ’ minimum width and less than the 1 acre minimum lot area. The property to the north, 583 Park Lane, was granted variances in 2000 for a second story addition to be located 3’ from the side lot line and to maintain 65% hardcover in the 75’-250’ hardcover zone and maintain 21.7% of structural coverage. The property to the south, 605 Park Lane, was granted variances in 1986 for additions to be located 7.7 ’ from the side lot line, 3.5’ from the rear lot line. Hardship: The applicants have included their statement of hardship in Exhibit D. The applicants should also be asked for ♦' eir testimony regarding this issue. Issues for Consideration: 1. The existing residence was built in 1970, prior to the current zoning ordinance; 2. The application proposes to reduce hardcover in the 0-75 ’ zone and the 75’-250’ zone; 3. The proposal will decrease structural coverage on the lot; 4. The existing overhangs on the home are 3 '/j' in depth. The proposed addition reduces the overhangs to 2 '/i*, still exceeding the 1 '/i’ overhang encroachment into setbacks permitted; 5. All but the outer 2’ of roof overhangs are considered structure; 6. The south side main entryway landing is covered by a building protrusion of more than 6 ’ above ground that will not change with the new deck; 7. The lot does not meet the minimum lot area and lot width requirements for the LR-1B zoning district; 8. Other properties along Park Lane have been granted variances for substandard side and rear yard setbacks; 9. Does the Planning Commission agree that the decorative wall tends to add to the building's massing, and reduces the openness in the neighborhood? 10. There are no building permits on file for any structure on the property besides the house; 11. In regards to lot coverage, are the tradeoffs of shed and deck sufficient to allow the second story home additions given the already excessive lot coverage percentage? 12. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Staff Recommendations: If the Planning Commission feels that the applicant has showTi undue hardship and should be able to construct an addition on the street side of the home and reconstruct a main entry' landing on the south side of the existing home, then the requested variances should be granted with the M03-2S77 Shane Rudd J/1 4/2003 Page S of 7 i following conditions: 1) Denial of the proposed decorative wall and approve reconstruction of a main entry landing 6.5 ’ from the lot line to acconunodatc the reduced landing deck; 2) Building plans should include rain gutter and down spout locations, directing water away from adjacent properties; 3) Erosion control should be installed, inspected and approved prior to work on the site; and 4) The proposed hardcover and structural removals must be complete before footing inspections are approved. If the Planning Commission feels that there is no hardship to permit the requested variances for additions on the property, then the application should be denied. * As of 9:00am on Friday, March 14,2003, the proposed overhangs have been changed to 1.75 ’ from 2.5 ’. Given time constraints, this will be further discussed at the meeting. m-2877 Shane Rudd S/14/2003 Page 6 of 7 A ANALYSIS WORKSHEET LR-IB Lot Requirements: i Dimensions Required Existing Proposed Lot Area 43,560 s.f. (I acre) 8,950 s.f. (0.21 acres) 8,950 s.f. (0.21 acres) No Change Lot Width 140’50’50’ No Change Side Setback North 10’8.4’.9’8.4’-9’ No Change Side Setback South 10’9.5'(house) 5’(deck) 9.5’ (house) 6.5’ (deck) Rear Setback 30’38.3’28.3' Decorative Wall (South Side) 10’Not Existing 2.5' (1' with overhang) Overhangs l.S’ encroachment permitted 3.5' encroachment on each side 2.5' encroachment (1 '/j’at the decorative wall) Hardcover Calculations: Lot Coverage By Structure: §03-2877 Shane Rudd 3/14/2003 Page 7 of 7 Distance from shoreline Total area in setback Allowed hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75 ’3,750 s.f.Os.f. (0%)554 s.f. (14.85%) 374 s.f. (10.03%) 75 ’-250 ’5,220 s.f.1,305 s.f. (25%)3,528 s.f. (67.58 %) 3,508 s.f. (67.2%) Permitted Coverage Existing Coverage Proposed Coverage 1,500 s.f 2,239 s.f (25%)2,175 s.f. (24.3%) ^Yi> CITY OF ORONO • VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 Afrer-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application # Date Received 1^-0'^ Amount Paid ^LSO, oo PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired______ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential ___other (specify). Zoning District: ________ .(month/year) APPLICANT Name "Rut^i Address: (gn| 'Th.rlLLajt/* Phone (home) ____ Phone (woric) City: Lun^Lakf V73 ' ^73 zip;:i^ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ________ Address: Phone (home). Phone (work)_ City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ H^fOdD Describe request in detail: AtIffICRgp ___________________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED _ Lot Area Lot Width V Setback:Front XSide Hardcover <nvar y Lot Coverage 2L Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: SJS£ ATP^if^ ______________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) 6 mJ.T / V o. y/ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form and plat map (you must Gov, Ccmeois^tlSJ ®°'" A-«>3, Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover 4>radu“ton.“ 'W * II" for « if any changes in existing gradewe proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8/j" x IT for reproduction ^ (provide one (1) copy 8‘/," x U") List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an intereL in the property^ Th.s would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not curient^^S <>•''" P— Additional items as may be requested by City staff. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE We applicant hereby agrees to provide all informalion required or reauested hv ih. 7.. • supplied is Je and correct toJi^sSesrof W ““ ‘"“■' Applicant’s Signature Date OW’NER'S SIGNATURE Ju,‘ry°Io tt'X“'chy s"aV «lha'';‘‘ “'"’""''r mcnrbers for pu,poses of^iga,i„„’u„d verinca,'ioronhifrequ«r" Owner's Signatui Date k/o5 Applicant must have all submittals into the Citv officen /iat« .u m ^ Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on th^ Applicants must be present at all schedniL A i " ° ^ Monday of each month. Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a «rh'!iT? ”** **** Planning Commission and have an authorized agent attend in your place and lo aA’ arrangements to change prior to the rneeting. ^ ^ ^““***"5 * OfRcc of this .» / Lf V S* r it e>^2> Varitnce Request for 601 Park Lane Kns ft Shane Rudd need to add a bedroom to thnr house for their fiunily. Th^ wish to foe Sirfed *®***®**^"‘*®®^***®^**®^ 1. Side yard on north aide from 10* to 8.4 ft to foUow existing house line. 2. Side )fard on south ade from 10’ to 8.8 ft to follow existing house line. 3. Rear yard (street) from 30’ to 28.3’ 4. Lot Coverage to maintain exisdqg lot coverage at 2044 sq ft. Rudd’s have design^ a compact addition that nunkniTey the impact on the ndghboiliood, keepiqg a low profile. The current lot coverage would be nmintaii^^ |)y removing a deck and a shed a^ changing the side dedc. This inq)ioves the lakeade and reduces hardcover in zone one by 180 sq. ft.. Statement of Hardship 601 Park Lane is an extrem^ small and narrow lot, .16 acres in a Vi acre zoning district current houw was built in 1970 prior to the present zoning code. The lot has steq> rise on the lakeside. ^ • I .* fr ^ fj J /J J i)Al!L •4Ck,% (MMirt •0%-i V »i4«M ■•'"...................... rco « — —- — - €OlO MSG r . ••• »•« • m SnAHe. f Kc»‘S kVoD /0 ‘lt oL^ 2-n-03 Lo\ * '3u.»i..«. Mimm£Wm/<a SomakT P<'(?V; HARDCOVE^XALCULATiON WORKSUEET SETBACK ZONE: (CmCLE ONE^ (O-^ 75-250* 250-500* 500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER T.\ A House ______________ X ■ ___ _________S.F. t>V: Lcnitfi X • X X B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck Jfffir > 9.5 X • X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other 14-Z- WALL< TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ______________ B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE* A. House Len^ X X B. Oarage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E Palio/Dcck r//Cc A€mp^€ d>eck X X F. Landsctpe Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ^ ^_______|B/r>v widai m c c c s c b / /'/ J.L± ,n WOOD IP * W/O L\.<t \60 S5^ X 100 Width - /V/ S5^-/80 =37^: 373 c rr S i X 100 S.F. SF. S.F. SF. SF SF. SF. SF. SF. S F.-Bcicjc. Pa'^io, •pfPS/w/HJL S.F. S.F. S.F. RfFAiMiN^ S.F.- ___________S.F. A 37-in S.F. B 14.85 % SF. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. _________SF. /■?. 0 j Vo A B • ^ t • • •. • f SETBACK ZOr<rE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN TOhn? A. House ^ 16515 kTODfi /O •If-aZ. g-ffj HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET 0-75'75-250'250-500’ Ltngth Lot i I fNNC 500-100C S F - H<^c;5£ Width X X X 8 8 B. Garage C. Driveway X X s 8 l?96 D. Sidewalk X X E. Palio/Deck 172 #P x •.(S'* OP Moi/<r )84 F. Landscap^i. Underlain ByPIutic Or Fabric X X X C. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____________ - B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE' A House _____________ X Length jiPtf t r^ctu X X X B. Oarage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck A/€u^ Y*fC< i<//-fAf x Xf oLt Of CP t-tiTfer F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE •J#2S7“ Wi 97 355^ 5Z70 X 100 Width -/9P •t* 35 - ys 55ZS X ICO -2.C r 3Scg 57?. O SF. SF. SF. SF BLAOiTOP S F." D<ii''^CWAY SF. e<z<ac S F. 'S»D6V>/’‘AU< S.F.-v/poo 5T(;P; S.F. “ 06CIZ S.F.-eSiAhf PAf'IC Sioew-AU< S.F. S.F. S.F. W0d>D f Pt^’Ck S p.a Btx?r ____S.F. A ____S F. B 67.5 g % S.F. _________S.F. _________S.F. y 2/9 S.F. S.F. SF. SF. SF SF. SF. SF. SF SF. SF. ___S.F. __________SF •5"7.20 y. A B r p^CAc^^ ( .1 • ; Vv^ 4 ^IIP£) yf ck)I i^>Wc:z>\ite. n^ce $c/>c< /*'5 !♦ • r Ui ’ 1 e^i€VMioi C%vieirtviiv6P w'ft'PCU ■ I FIRST FLOOR AND UPPER FLOOR 601 Park Lane BASEMENT & OARAGE LEVEL mP'601 Park Una 1/1 Bonestroo g^Rpsene Anderlik & ^ I Associates Engineers & Architects ■«n«itroo. HoMivt. Ai»d«fUli and Aitociaicf. Inc. It an Afflrmatlv* Acilon/Cqual Opportunity Employer ‘ and Einployee Owned ^rlnclpali: Otto C Bonestroo. PC • Marvtn L Sorvala. PE • Glcrsn R Cook. PE • Robert G Schunicht. PC • Jerry A. Bourdoa PC F Senior Contultantt; Robert W Rosene. PE • Joiepri C Anderlik. PE • Richard E Turrwr. PE • Susan M Eberlm. C PA Asioclalt Principalt; Keith A Gordon. PC • Robert R Pferferle. PE • Richard W foster. PC • Oavid O loskota. PE • Mark A Hanson. PE • Michael T Raulmann. PE • Ted K. field. PE • Kenneth P Arxlerson. PE • Mark R Rolfs. PC • David A Bonestroo. MB A • Sidney P Williamson. PE. I S • Agnes M Ring, MBA • Allan Rick Schmidt. PE • Thomas W Peterson. PC • James R Malarsd. PE • Miles B Jensen. PE • L Phiilip Gravel III. PC • Oarvel J Edgerton, PE • Ismael Martirsei. PE • Thomas A Syfko, PE • Sheldon ! Johnson • Dale A Grove. PE • Thomas A Roushar. PE • Robert J Devery. PC Fcbniary 27,2003 Offices: St Paul, St. Cloud. Rochester and Wilimar. MN • Milwaukee. Wl • Chicago. IL VMtbiItt: WWW bonestroo com Jennifer Chaput Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 601 Park I anc File No. 139-03-000 Plat No. 03-2877 Dear Jennifer: We ha\ e reviewed the certificate of survey and proposed house addition plans for the property located at 601 Park Lane. The plan proposes to construct a 220 square foot addition to the east side (street side) of an existing home. Most of the addition will be built over an existing bituminous driveway. A portion of the proposed addition (approximately 20 square feet) is thown being constructed over an existing non-hardcuver surface. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters; • The additional new hardcover created by the proposed addition is relatively insignificant in terms of generating additional storm water runoff from the site. • Plans should include rain gutter and down spout locations. Down spouts should be located to direct storm water away from adjacent properties. • Erosion control should be installed, inspected and approved by the City prior to any work on the site. If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN 55113 • 65t-636-4600 • Fax: 651*636*1311 i %i «r iP «< immu ms: TW- U«KJ^ MEI^Hr^ojiHtTCD •M'Hf pnepfh County Taxpayer Services Department ? ' ■!. I if k ‘••w. wf.fs 9 //7- 2J5- • •r Parcel Information Pmicei ID 0011723410048 Houm Numb«r 601 8tmt Nam* PARK LA 1hl$ k not a Itgaty ncordtd map. ItiapiaaanlsacompilaPonoUnhnnalbon and data Imm Cdy. County, and Stata mad authoritias and odmaouKas. St . RUNOAT£:M4/2(D) M 31 06II7234I000I PROPAOOR 3« ADDRESS UNASSICNEO OWNERNAME RICHARDRRUDO TAXPAYER RICHARD R RUDD NAME/ADDR 607 PARK LA LONG LAKE MN S53M 31 06II7234I0047 PROPAOOR 913 PARKU OWNERNAME DINAR NELSON TAXPAYER OINA R NELSON NAME/ADDR 513 PARK LA LONG LAKE MN 55356 3S 0611723410084 PROPAOOR 594 PARK LA OWNERNAME SEASNBURGER TAXPAYER SCOTT E A SHANNON N DURGER NAME/ADDR 594 PARK LA ORONOMN 55356 38 0611723440005 PROPAOOR 649 MINNETONKA HOLD LA OWNERNAME SVSWANTEKAPGSWANTEKTR TAXPAYER STEPHEN A PATRICIA SWANTEK NAME/ADDR 649 MINNETONKA IIGLO LA LONG LAKE MN 99356 38 0611723440017 PROPAOOR 607 PARK LA OWNERNAME R RUDD A K RUDD TAXPAYER RICHARD A KATHLEEN RUDD NAME/ADDR 607 PARK LA LONG LAKE MN 95356 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 Ool 1723410045 PROPAOOR 567 PARK LA OWNERNAME AUDREY OVERBY TAXPAYER AUDREY OVERBY NAME/ADDR 967 PARK LANE LONG LAKE MN 99396 38 0611723410046 PROPAOOR 577 PARK LA OWNERNAME DENISELOUENOW TAXPAYER DENISE L OUENOW NAME/ADDR 577 PARK LA LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 0611723410048 PROPAOOR 601 PARK LA OWNER NAME SHANE R A KRISTINE M RUDD TAXPAYER SHANE R * KRISTINE M RUDD NAME/ADDR 601 PARK LA LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 06II7234I004V PROPAOOR 605 PARKU OWNERNAME SEAN DALY TAXPAYER SEAN A LEAH DALY NAME/ADDR 60S PARK U LONGUKEMN 55356 38 0611723410085 PROPAOOR 584 PARKU OWNERNAME HENNEPINFORFEITEOLAND TAXPAYER CmrOFORONO NAME/ADDR POBOX66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 95323 38 0611723410086 PROPAOOR 584 PARKU OWNER NAME HENNEPIN FORFEITEO UNO TAXPAYER CITY OF ORONO NAME/ADDR PODOX66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 0611723440014 PROPADDR 630 PARKU OWNERNAME R D ANDERSON & N L ANDERSON TAXPAYER RICK O ANDERSON A NAME/ADDR NANCY L ANDERSON 630 PAR*'. U LONGUKEMN 55356 38 0611723440015 PROP AOOR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO OWNERNAME C E FLEMING JR A L P FLEMING TAXPAYER FLEMING NAME/ADDR UNDIVIDED J CERTIFY THATTHB FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPE/LRSTHIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OFTHE HEFMEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT. TO THE OP MY KNOWLEDGE AND BEUEF. _ r') DATE^-^r-<^JS by PAGE: I nw * 1 / -o ir* ■ ^ / r-i> 'i.'/ tf i OO/ RECORD Perait No Date A*4t% 70^»-7O Type ot Permit £>>^g COYn^^^fc" MSajj.- Aits __________________ ______/0-9g-"7O _______ 5£7>.___II' n- 70 _/0 - 9y- 7fa —^^JUiAfiiL_C>LS«_ 5A&__________ i±l±L7i?. J . fJi tteuse {;u?cfraoKi ^ pieoft^seD ^oovtiom) \\mf .......:: 1 'I ifii|W''!|i ^!if’ii' ill -ji m " ^ . ■ '-^^ imk: -i j<SirJ:< 4 ? * V -v ^ ^ iM »T oi ei-WlS<2,9lDe <SF foC?l pp(ye{t if^e C ff\jgJce\^\ve -2^r^Kic^ \ * i i i i -A m f*/ i M'P >r^ . «»<. jf »j t I '1 . •• * - • *• -i ^ •W u-^'* _ '•Hit A*>r A'*■ . 9* .«J,\v •• • A •*■ ■ .# r* r . V ,7 ... *% •HoUL<^ "to South c <^ (oO\ ?fv^ ih^ ibos Ff^ui} <S5n2eer 9ioe y/\eW ;r • .1 *<CA ^V r *> ■• V . , w 1 ♦ V va i'll': ::••-• 1'' '1ii IKU'IPUB yi if!t'^ ^OWrtVi 5\D5 V^C<- ■66 BSpiACeO <r r Lj^JU^y ^,'">7t-, '..K)\ 1 . ii\i. iiLa. Id ■ L: -tfT“ =p*t™:-.''''^TL.• ••. ■"“?Nj.:4:r*. iKi.j •' , -___ lT" • • t I * .. f • IW 0''^^'^O^J't 'TO R6M0 v1££) 1 •.m - '"*ik- A D ihJ 0' '=16 ' sere^c!^ -ro eemcD KM kk:e^lD& OP PCV£ r { --------- APR I 4 2003 chyofohomo Application Date: 2/20/03 60 Day Deadline: 4/21/03 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: DATE: Name Wendy Bottenberg ITEM NO.: 11 Title Planner AgendaSection: 2^ning Item Description: t/03-2878 MacDonald & Mack Architects on behalf'of Edward Hamm 485 Orono Orchard Road S Variance Zoning District: RR-1B One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre) List of Exhibits: A Memo from Fire Marshal B Resolution C Staff Report and Exhi bits of 3/17/2003 Application Summary: The applicant is proposing to construct two monuments and gates on the property at 485 Orono Orchard Road S. One monument and gate will be at the driveway entrance and the other will be at the pedestrian entrance 300' + to the south. The Planning Commission approved both monuments and gates at the March 17, 2003 meeting. Since the Planning Commission meeting the applicant decided to reposition the pedestrian monument and gate. It now meets the 50 ’ front yard setback, therefore a variance is no longer required for the pedestrian monument and gate. Pertinent Code Sections: 1. Section 10.03, Subd. 15(C): Driveway monuments exceed allowed height of 3 W. Main entrance gate: The main entrance gate will be for the principal drive into the property and will be setback a minimum 25' from the existing fence which is approximately 6 ’ inside the property line north of the driveway. The metal gate and monument at its highest point will be 7’ high. Pedestrian gate: The pedestrian gate will serve a sidewalk from the main house to the road and w ill be constructed 50' from the front property line. The metal gate at its highest point will be 6 'A' high and be supported by a brick and stone monument of almost 13’ in height. A variance is not required for this monument and gate because they will meet the principal structure setback. PLANNING COMMISSION: Planning Commission reviewed the requested variances and site issues at a public hearing held on ■\ Wednesday, March 17,2003. Planning Commission recommended by a 5 to 0 vote to: Approve the monuments and gates as follows: 1. Monuments and gates to be T in height. 2. Move the pedestrian monument and gate out of the right of way. 3. The drive monument and gates to be 20’ in width for emergency vehicles as recommended by the Fire Marshal.* 4. “Knox box’’ be installed on driveway gate for emergency services access. *The Fire Marshall and the representative from MacDonald & Mack Architects discussed the approved 20’ in width of the gate for emergency vehicles. Other monuments aiid gates approved within the City of Orono have been required to be 14’ in width. The fire marshal revisited the property and the width of emergency vehicles. He has revised his initial recommendation of 20' in width and now is requiring the gates/monumento to be 14’ in width. (See attached memo from Fire Marshal). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. 1 FIRE MARSHAL CITY OF ORONO 4/2/2003 To; Lyle, Bruce, Planning department Re; Security gates installation, Hamm residence, 465 Orono Orchard Road, So. Recently I have contacted by the architects representing the Hamm estate regarding the installation of security gates at the main entrance to this residence off of Orono Orchard Road. The problem encountered and discussed was that the existing security fence that runs parallel to Orono Orchard Road is very close to the roadway and would require a gate 25 to30 feet wide in order not to impede the turning radius of fire department vehicles. (Fire trucks don ’t turn as sharp as cars) The solution discussed and 1 am acceptable to is the setback of the actual gate itself 25 feet from the existing fenceline. The driveway will be 20 feet wide at the roadway and reduce to 14-foot width at the gate opening. The setback will only be at the entrance area to the residence. They are also aware that plans must be submitted and approved by planning department before any work is suuled. If you have any questions please contact me Sincerely, William Meyer, FM, City of Orono L, A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION IS (C), FILE NO. 03-2878 WHEREAS, Edward H. Hamm*, (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 485 Orono Orchard Road South within the City ofOrono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit A attached, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (C) to permit a T monument and gate at the driveway entrance to be constructed within the 50’ front yard street setback where a monument and gate of 3 Vt feet is allowed; and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 17,2003, at which time all persons desiring to be heard crmceming this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1 . This application was reviewed as Zoning File #03-2878. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB Zoning District, where 2.0 acres is the minimum required lot area. The property consists of approximately 21+ acres. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on March 17, 2003 and recommended approval by a vote of 5 to 0. Page 1 of 5 ♦as Trustee under the Trust of Edward H. Hamr originally established on August 14, 1992, as subsequently amended and restated In Its entirety by Amendirent and Restatemetn cf Trust of Edward H. Hamii dated October 10, 1995, and as further attended and restated by Amendirent and Restateirent of Trust of Edward H. Hamm dated February 26, 1999. p 4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact: A.The proposed structure includes entry monument and gate on either side of the driveway entrance to the property. B.The proposed monument and gate structure at the drive entrance will allow adequate width for emergency vehicles access. C. The entrance monuments and gates are in character with the neighborhood. D.The property is in an area where the general development is consistent with other properties in the locality. The relationship of the property is unique because of the property being 21.4 acres in size. E.The hardship that supports the variance includes the need for security and limitation of foot and automobile traffic onto the private property. The height variance is necessary to allow construction of a structure of a size and scale to be a deterrent in itself. 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 variances will not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air, nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty: is necessarx' to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations ol the Planning Commission, reports by City Staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the communitv. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Page 2 of 5 variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (C) to permit a T monument and gate at the driveway entrance to be constructed within the 50’ front yard street setback where a monument and gate of 3 Vx feet is allowed. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.Maximum height of the entrance monuments shall be 7’, per the proposed plan shown in Exhibit B. Any changes will require further Council review. 2.Any lighting associated with the structure shall be directed downward so that the source of light is not directly visible from neighboring properties. 3.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or these variances will expire on that date (April 14,2004). 4.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicant has read, understands and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of April, 2003. AITEST: Linda S. Vee. City Clerk Property Owner (s) ^ ^ ... nirffci STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this I4th day of April, 2003 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Nolaiy' Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of April, 2003 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City ol Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of .2003, appeared before me. ____ wiio is personally known to me ____ whose identity I proved on the basis of personally whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of, credible witness .a and w ho executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the some as his/hcr/their free act and deed. Notary Public Page 4 of5 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ,2003,.personallyOn this __day of______ appeared before me, ____ who is personally known to me ____whose identity I proved on the basis of__________ ____whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their tree act and deed. ..a Notsuy Public EXHIBIT A 1. That part of the Southwest Quarter, which lies North of the South line of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, of Section 2, Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian described as follows; Beginning at the northeast comer of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 2; thence South along the East line of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter a distance of 434.3 feet to a point designated and hereinafter referred to as “Point A”; thence northwesterly deflecting 101 degrees 43 minutes to the right from last described course a distance of 182 feet; thence northwesterly on a tangential curve to the right with a radius of 4,687.5 feet a distance of 60 feet; thence northwesterly on a tangential curve to the right with a radius of 222.45 feet a distance of 200 feet; thence northerly on a tangential curve to the right with a radius of 237.56 feet a distance of 175 feet; thence northerly on a tangential curve to the right with a radius of 527.42 feet a distance of 50 feet; thence northeasterly on a line tangent to last described curv'e a distance of 62.55 feet to a point in the South line of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 2 distant 360 feet West of the point of beginning; thence continuing northeasterly on an extension of last described course a distance of 48.55 feet; thence northerly on a tangential curve to the left with a radius of 181.4 feet a distance of 100 feet; thence northwesterly on a tangential curve to the left with a radius of 283.7 feet a distance of 125 feet; thence northwesterly on a line tangent to last described curve a distance of 267.4 feet; thence northwesterly deflecting 2 degrees 23 minutes to the left from the last described course a distance of 169.3 feet; thence northwesterly and westerly on a tangential curve to the left with a radius of 61.13 feet a distance of 64.62 (43.01 measured) feet, more or less, to a point designated and hereinafter referred to as “Point B”, said point being in the West line of the East Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 2 exclusive of highway upon easterly side thereof, said East Half being ascertained after taking from the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said section said highway upon easterly side, and which “Point B” is 636.66 (625.61 measured) feet North of the southwest comer of said East Half so ascertained; thence North along the West line of said East Half so a.scertained a distance of 679.85 feet to the northwest corner thereof; thence East along the North line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 2 to the northeast comer of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section; thence South along the East line of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section to the point of beginning. Subject to and together with an easement for right of way for driveway purposes over a strip of land along the southerly and westerly boundary lines of the premises above desciibed and extending from above designated “Point A” along said boundary line to above designated “Point B", said strip of land being 16 feet in width, 8 feet on each side of the line forming the southerly and westerly boundary of the premises hereinabove first described. Also subject to public easement in existing highways. 2. Also that part of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 2, Towmship 117, Range 23, described as follows: Beginning at the northeast comer of the West Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 2 e.xclusive of the highway upon easterly side thereof, said West Half being ascertained after taking from Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of f i • said Section 2 said highway upon easterly side; thence South along the East line of said West Half so ascertained a distance of679.85 feet, more or less, to a point distant 636.66 feet North of the southeast comer of said West Half; thence deflecting right at an angle of 83 degrees S3 minutes on a line bearing South 83 degrees 53 minutes West a distance of 33.68 feet; thence South 82 degrees 41 minutes West a distance of 66.32 feet; thence northwesterly in a straight line 710.6 (721.11 measured) feet, more or less, to a point in the North line of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 2 distant 237 feet West of the point of beginning; thence East along said North line 237 feet of the point of beginning. Subject to an easement for right of way for driveway purposes over the southerly 16.5 feet of said last described tract. And together with an easement for like purposes over a strip of land 16.5 feet in width lying southerly of and immediately adjacent to the southerly line of the premises hereinabove last described, and between the southerly extensions of the easterly line and westerly line of said premises last described. •405U3¥lXBO OVDVaWO • ! iftw li Al i MacDonild AMack Aichitccts,LiD nght-of-way ( 7 Application Date: 2/20/03 60 day Review: 4/21/03 TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Wendy Bottenberg, City Planner DATE:March 12,2003 SUBJECT: #03-2878 MacDonald & Mack Architects on behalf of Edward Hamm 485 Orono Orchard Road Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-1B One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acre) Exhibits A Application Hardship Statement Survey Plan/Elevations Photo of Property Plat Map Property Owner ’s List Photos of monuments and gates in Orono B C D E F G H Application Summary: The applicant is proposing to construct two monuments and gates on the property at 485 Orono Orchard Road S. One monument and gate will be at the driveway entrance and the other will be at the pedestrian entrance 300+ to the south. Pertinent Code Sections: 1 , Section 10.03, Subd. 15(C): Driveway monunients exceed allowed height of 3 ‘/j’ Main entrance gate: The main entrance gate will be for the principal drive into the property and will align with the existing fence which is about 6 ’ inside the property line north of the driveway. The metal gate at its highest point will be 8 'A' high and be supported by a brick and stone monument of almost 11 ’ in height. The monument and gate are proposed to be located 6 ’ from the street property line. #03-2878 MacDonald & Mack Architects/Ed Hamm 48S Orono Orchard Road S 3/12/7003 Page t of4 Pedestrian gate: The pedestrian gate will ser\e a sidewalk from the main house to the road and will align with the existing fence which is about 3’ into the right-of-way at this location. The metal gate at its highest point will be 6 ‘/j’ high and be supported by a brick and stone monument of almost 13’ in height. The monument and gate are proposed to be located 3’ into the right-of-way to align with the existing fence. Discussion: These entryway gates are apparently becoming quite popular, both from the standpoint of security that they provide as well as being a decorative fixture. Staff would note for the record that if these monuments and gates were located more than the 50’ from the front lot line and did not exceed 6’ in height, they would meet zoning code and there would not be a need for a variance. Research: Staff has done extensive research regarding entrance monuments and gates throughout the city. There are numerous properties that have monuments with gates. However, most of these monuments and gates are either on lakeshore lots on county roads which are allowed 6’ in height and/or meet the setback requirement. While others are not lakeshore lots on county roads and meet the principal structure setback, therefore not requiring a variance. Many of these monuments/gates have exi.sted for many years, prior to revisions in the zoning code and consequently have been grandfathered in. Pictures of many of the entrance monuments and gates are attached as Exhibit K. Three examples which are similar to this proposal are located at 480 Deborah Drive, 450 Orono Orchard Road S. and 2710 Pence Lane. In all of these examples the applicants were proposing monuments and gates which were more than the allowed 3 ‘/i’ within the required street setback with the highest being 7’. 450 Orono Orchard Road S - (2001) (Approved) Proposed 6 fence and gate to be located within the front and side yard adjacent to the street setbacks where a 3 fence is permitted. The application was approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. The application was approved with hardships which included securitj concerns and the fence w'ould be heavily landscaped along the property on Orono Orchard Road and Dickenson Street. #03-2878 MacDonald S: Mack Architects'Ed Hanun 485 Orono Orchard Road S 3/12 2003 Page 2 of 4 480 Deborah Drive - (1990) (Denied and tabled at City Council) Proposed T in height and to be located 30’ from property line rather than required 100 ’. 'fhis application was denied at the Planning Commission due to lack of hardship and tabled by the City Council. The applicant did not complete the review process. However, the monument/gate was constructed at the required street setback and at 6’ in height. 2710 Pence Lane- (1988) (Approved) Proposed 7 ‘A’ in height and to be located 10 ’ from the side lot line and 14’ from the defined rear lot line. The application was approved by the Planning commission and City Council. The application was approved with hardships which included security and limitation of traffic onto the private road serving only two residences. The height variance being necessary to allow construction of a structure of a size and scale to be a deterrent in itself and the setback variance necessary to keep the structure near enough to the entrance of the property to deter unwanted traffic from entering the property. Fire Marshal: William Meyer, Fire Marshal, City of Orono has advised that the required opening excluding the gate portion of the structure at the proposed setback must be at a minimum 20 ’ based on width of fire emergency vehicles. Also, as gates will be electrically controlled, the emergency agencies ask that a lock box “knox box ” be provided for ease of access by emergency vehicles. Manual override instructions in case of power failure should be posted inside lock box. Statement of Hardship: Over the years the applicant has been quite concerned about security. As the applicant has stated in his hardship statement, the gates will be added to provide an increased sense of security for the property. Also, the gate at the main entrance is proposed at its location to minimally disrupt the border of mature trees along the edge of the drive. The applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue, Issues for Consideration: 1. The existing fence has been in place for many years and will remain. Currently, there arc not plans to replace it. Should the pedestrian gate be allowed 3’ into the right-of-way? 2. Arc the entrance monuments in character with the neighborhood? t»03*3878 MacDonald & Mack Architects/Ed Hamm 485 Orono Orchard Road S 3/12/2003 Page 3 of 4 F t. 3. The property is in an area where the general development is consistent with other properties in the locality. 4. If the monuments/gates are set back to meet the required street setback, but over the allowed 6 , they would still require a variance. They would be considered an accessory structure and be located closer to the road than the principal structure. 5. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation: Based on the numerous monuments/gates located throughout the city, staff recommends denial of the monumen^gates as proposed. If the applicant wishes to redesign the proposed monuments and gates keeping the hei^t to 7’, moving the pedestrian gate back out of the right-of-way and meeting the recommended 20’ tvidth by the fire marshal, then a recommendation of approval would be justified based on past approvals by the City Council. O03-2878 MacDonald & Mark Architects/Ed Hamm 485 Grono Orchard Road S 3/IZ7003 Paged of4 1 1 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 (SSO.OO per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 Afrer-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application # Date Received o3 Amount Paid , oo PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 485 Orono Orchard Road South, Orono, Minnesota 55391 Property Identification Number (P.l.D.) 02-117-23-32-0001___________ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired circa 1950s________________________ T|dfli)c(do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. .(month/year) Zoning District: RR-IB APPLICANT Stuart MacDonald Phone (home)651.698.1845 Name MacDonald & Mack Architects,Ltd. Phone (work)612.341.4051 Address: 712 Grain Exchange Building (Ility^Hlnneapolls, Mn Zip: 55415 AOO South Fourth Street OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home)952.473.3605 Name Edward H. Hamm, Trustee Phone (work)651.227.6675 Address: A85 Orono Orchard Road South City:Orono, Mn Zin: 55391 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 60,000 Describe request in detail: See attached continuation sheets_____ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback: ___Lot Width Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore X Other (specify) Fence/gate more than 3j* In height within 50' of property line HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or vnusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: _______________________________ See attached continuation sheets (attach additional sheets if nece - • # * i 7r o REQUIRED SUBMITTALS to YW? ^ "** *PPlNtl.)|i rteadll.. J... I., Tr-r JL_ Completed Application Fonn ~ M »0 (you n.us, Govt Center, 348-5910). ^ Hennepm County Department of Finance, A-603, ~ SSora °L a^itfon •“"loover reproduction. one (I) copy 8H" x 11" fyr are proposed. In ^^S^proWdYXe^'l^y^^^^ in existing grade JL. Sketches or plans offloor & elev!.i„^ M- *'?. " *®' "Production,r icp «f ♦!.- 1 I . * elevation views (provide one (1) conv R'A” v 11«\ - p4T™s w3d\^r:r^“ r ji_ As an addendum to this 800110^,^1 ^ current owner(s). you wish notified of this application*^ * separate list of any other persons ^ Additional items as may be requested by City staff. ysm APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE Admin*iPtrator, agrees^to pandditiPnTfeestltaff ^ h ^^e Zoning consultant expenses incurred in review of thi« , Payment) and/or supplied is true and correct to L best 1. 0 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Applicant’s Signature rcci lo liic best of his/iki ammA Date 18 February 2003 OWNER’S SIGNATURE cX°:r ttX““l“ "’-’"“■r «"<• «•«-« .n.i.orirca rca^nabic members for putposes of investigation ’and verincadoToTthifr^lsr" Owner’s Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into thf rjtx/ j change prior to the meeting. ^ ®'*''‘®® **>® ®“'>ding & Zoning Office of this .*■ . vV . ' —V S •• J • 'v* f*-- . •* CITY of ORONO VARIANCE APPUCATION for 485 Orono Orchard Road South Continuation Sheets Description of Request: The proposal is to add two gates to the property, one pedestrian gate and one main entrance gate for automobiles (see accompanying site plan drawing Al). Both would be within the 50-foot setback from the Orono Orchard Road right-of-way and both are proposed to be more than 3Vi feet in height; therefore, a variance is requested. The pedestrian gate (see accompanying plan and elevation drawing A2) would serve a sidewalk from the main house to the road and is proposed to align with an existing wire fence that is mostly obscured by hedge and shrub material. The new metal gate would be 6'-6"± in height replacing an existing metal gate (see accompanying photographic image). The supporting brick and stone piers would be 12'-8"± in height. The main entrance gate (see accompanying plan and elevation drawing A3) is proposed for the principal drive into the property which, at present, is not gated (see accompanying photographic image). Substantial scotch pines closely border the north side of the drive. The proposed gate will either align with existing wire fencing, also mostly obscured by plant material, or will be set back into the property to safely allow one or two automobiles to queue at the gate while awaiting entry without blocking Orono Orchard Road. The new metal gate would vary in height from 6’-0"± to 8"-6"±supported by 10'-ir±high brick and stone piers. Hardship/Description of Unusual Property Conditions: The owner desires to add the gates to provide an increased sense of security for the property. The proposed location of the main entrance gate also is intended to minimally disrupt the scotch pine border along the north edge of the drive. 1 it (v,O ■irfc iim~f S i CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR HAMM ESTATE IN THE SW 1/4 OF SEC. 2-117-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA s wrarsa* t" .ISI.'S-JP /Fifl&a i » 17Sa78 ^■soo-ayaa-E 2»aoo • ■ORONO ----------------------------- I I i !i txsim •4 % V * 'X MI.13 ^ *Mo*irSo«\ L*«UI«.< '4 • % rsH»'-h4 ‘-------------------- gjyUg***’-'^I • I. LAKE . IMCTONKA wAlO 09^9 —g H 0a*4t’M* c N 01*35* 56* W v/ 4,ili • « • • V..V ''»v";v ■''FEKs • « 5 • ••• V.‘*# ^ •• 3 •* . . *•. I • • EXISTING HOUSE i HOUSE DETAL %• m» tCAlC jnicsir25SiJrsi?iiSs^^ ZT^I?) ^Smm •( »4 *art— M (*<2T.iLi«£2^iI33«ILS^tMMoimLtC^ in)•f*>• Sortkmmd 9^»") ftCT ^^M^arniitMAmMia . •• 4«iiotM . .... •! %M It •ftfn !>*»>■« f<w(|WI/€)irMrf T^ 4«tcrlM !•«»••••••«• #r-'"'V i‘^- *'■ fvrfMi L. .. »m-m •*•••••••“ Ul ! S :tE •Si I *5 EHII AN GATE #— — Iw> 1 1••r1.81§ -fo netAAifJ) ORBNGORe ^ 50'-0" g o CPo CP 01 # \ I I ENTRANCE GATE t I » I 1 1 t —X< fence Gta “ CN4 CS CN V: t up i stone piei~ :LEVATION Tietol sign & netal gate- PEDESTRIAN GATE Scale: 1/4"=r-0' UL ____»w- w-r" .. rf- r: d iV- '•• y:‘-^ •** S> . V, r V * * V 's?;."^ :£ ■ i'-'X» . V, r V,, ^S. r ?J - Ml -r' ■=-;X V ^ < :.^fLi ' > *• ^ • *, V v» ;S>.-.(-Xv- ^i' *.♦ ' ♦ *^. )t-'->"^' ■ "it-- r-’ » • *. .T' ‘ 1 •./i %v ' ;. ■ " >.' I < j • ' ffi ffwi MgMHKS ' «<;3^ '.*i a# mi iX. <^#C F fc O ' Q n ^ y I •? / rivv VIr I'k^ W'EjmVF^ 'Wfe ‘ :,-i ;■ feilV tei ®i-fc. -/\\’ V-* . r* ' •*;.'»! » . \ * ■' '. '' MiniiSSeesssSSSi 1I : I Pl •a:> . •iT -‘.s. > - • •.■■.•.■*-* ‘Va •'.' ';‘ vM f. *♦• • • **. • J 1 i •. » • Jf^ -:i- ■•' -. • ^ • v -< - H7li A ^ uCL. J i -sr. . x^-- ..‘ /S'v- 1 .' iL*. • 'r. 4" fr.,> <r s ■ ■ u.vi*» /• > « rj: /v ' f r^l ^ w • f i i« «t -'... Existing Condition at Proposed Main Entrance Gate --------- i I 1 sm. * ■ V % • • "* ^ ' • • -« T . - ■• - V -ll vli^ • r..' V . r • 4* '- v-w^; ^ « :•' S f-Vv ‘> '%''' I *\ 7?:.^ «X- ' - -—^ * ‘ '' . «.'A‘Wif^'i • .* : ,, X.5. . • h ’ i>i»'V’ • /v; . *•■" '^IRK r ji;.,Jj»wi|f ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ; MH||| jjj i fliHiiii!11 . I : • '^ -A'* Existing Condition at Proposed Pedestrian Gate Ir. . • '/. \'U-^ >i c> " - • •% » (*. •. *> •*< ^ ^ I «CV 1^ j RUN DATE: 2/11^3 38 0211723230006 PROP ADDR 387 QRONO ORCIIARl^ RDS OWNER NAME DOAKM MACMILLAN TAXPAYER DAVID D MACMILLAN NAME/ADDR PODOX5628 MPLSMN 55440-5628 38 0211723310005 PROP ADDR 540 ORONO ORCHARD RD S OWNER NAME SANDRA S LARSON TAXPAYER SANDRA S LARSON NAME/ADDR PC BOX 546 WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0211723310011 PROP ADDR 570 ORONO ORCHARD RD S OWNER NAME ROGER J HAWKINSON TAXPAYER ROGER J HAWKINSON NAME/ADDR 370 ORONO ORCl lARD RD S WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0211723320001 PROP ADDR 485 ORONO ORCHARD RD S OWNER NAME EDWARD H HAMM TRUSTEE TAXPAYER EDWARD H HAMM NAME/ADDR 408 ST PETER ST 8434 ST PAUL MN 55102 38 0211723120006 PROP ADDR 1540 FOX ST OWNERNAME WMACMILLAN ETALTRUSTEES TAXPAYER WHITNEY MACMILLAN NAME/ADL v PO BOX 5628 MPLSMN 55440 38 0211723330001 PROP ADDR 1485 FOX ST OWNERNAME W P HENNEMAN A A D HF>4NEMAN TAXPAYER W P HENNEMAN A A B HENNEMAN NAME/ADDR 1485 FOX ST WAYZATAMN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAiiL: I 38 0211723230007 PROP ADDR 1580 FOX ST OWNERNAME WMACMILLANETALTRUSTEES TAXPAYER WHIINEY MACMILLAN NAME/ADDR PO BOX 5628 MPLSMN 55440 38 0211723310006 PROP ADDR 550 ORONO ORCHARD RD S OWNERNAME PAULETTE PICKARD STUURMANS TAXPAYER PAULETTE PICKARD STUURMANS NAME/ADDR 550 ORONO ORCHARD RD S WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0211723310047 PROP ADDR 450 ORONO ORCHARD RD S OWNERNAME KEVIN GARNETT TAXPAYER KEVIN GARNETT NAME/ADDR 601 CARLSON PKWY 8615 MINNETONKA MN 55305 38 0211723320002 PROP ADDR 1520 FOX ST rWNERNAME E J CONUN A J DCONUN TAXPAYER EDWARD J CONUN NAME/ADDR 1520 FOX ST WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0211723rjua/ PROP ADDR 1570 FOX ST OWNERNAME iDPENICK&RCKURTH TAXPAYER MYNE DORSET PENiCK NAME/ADDR RANDY C KURTH 1570 FOX ST WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0211723330002 PROP ADDR 1465 FOX ST OWNER NAME K A BIRKELANDA: A BIRKELAND TAXPAYER KAARE A CYNTHIA BIRKELAND NAK1E/ADOR 1465 FOX ST WAYZATAMN 55391 38 021172324U006 PROP ADDR 360 ORONO ORCHARD RD S OWNERNAME SAHOSBORN TAXPAYER STEELE B OSBORN NAME/ADDR 360 ORONO ORCHARD RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0211723310010 PROP ADDR 1390 FOX ST OWNER NAME JONATHAN D A GRETA M WITCI lER TAXPAYER JONATHAN A GRETA WITCHER NAME/ADDR 1390 FOX ST WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0211723310049 PROP ADDR 500 ORONO ORCHARD RD S OWNER NAME S S A J E WEBSTER TAXPAYER STEVEN S A JO ELLEN WEBSTER NAME/ADDR 500 ORONO ORCHARD RDS WAYZATAMN 55391 V00 {. 38 0211723320003 PROP ADDR 1540 FOX ST OWNERNAME J A NOLAN A J A NOLAN TAXPAYER JOI IN A NOLAN A JOAN A NOLAN NAME/ADDR 1540 FOX ST WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0211723320008 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNERNAME W MACMILLAN ETAL TRUSTEES TAXPAYER WHITNEY MACMILLAN NAME/ADDR PO BOX 5628 MPLSMN 55440 38 0211723330013 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNERNAME HENNEPIN CO REGIONAL RR AUTH TAXPAYER ALFRED HARRISON NAME/ADDR 1410 SHORELINE DR WAYZATAMN 55391 J ■f -•VV'.’ ,'^ ' -i • '•• r mjNUAit:M>" ••ui M 02II72JJ400I9 PROPADDR M AOORCSS PliNOINC OWNERNAME PATRICK IMCNAUOHTON ET AL TAXPAYER PATRICK J MCNAUCIITON NAME/AOOR 2J6CIRAROAVEN MPISMN 3940S J HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPEP-^ INPOKMAI ION SYS I EM PROPERTY OV SLlSr 38 0211723410009 PROP AOOR 31 ADDRESS UNASSICNED OWNERNAME HENNEPIN CO REGIONAL RR AUTII TAXPAYER HENNEPIN CO REGIONAL RR AUTII NAME/ADDR 4I7 3THSTNP320 . MINNEAPOLIS MN 33401 38 0211723340014 PROPADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME HENNEPIN CO REGIONAL RR AUT11 TAXPAYER HENNEPIN CO REGIONAL RR AUTII NAME/ADDR 417 3TH ST N 4320 MINNEAPOLIS MN 33401 I CERTIFY THATTHE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS TT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OFTHE HEhMEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND DEUEF. DATE*^- PAGE: 2 • . { ■ : -\ •. . -/y * •• A *---- i I ^ is: ■:: ■•: !: -'jr., ■ , . . V, - *V?**|^ ’/• .' > y^' } ■■ M’ . f- I] '■ J:, '• • ili:- • ’.' •/ • 5 ' ^ . '. -i ii' ,1•/;• \ . r: v-\> :'i- : .-rSJ] 7V>' ' >•,'/ 'V.f. -nfi? . a n . J .I A, • V'V’ > ' !■. /• •// \/l'J k I ' w / f|. / ^ f - - ismmrnwm*- ’' ' «« »*,■'■«? , • • n •1^, ^ • r ik. . r* *:.•:: ■ • i- •. ■ »r7^-V^fu • /,' / • < o' lu -• . 'I •■••^) I af¥^i Mnn-m J % 'V. Ta i ’•^^ ^ M m.m m ■> . <• %f< *« rv.c»;j».yrfi.v.. vf- Jv* > -r >& ' V« u* ipi • V y . ./ • y. •. , ^ 7r.-7m r'.- t . N '4Ciln C_ ' k.r if'’ r" 'f\ I :t* r ------r • W - - T5^rx- -^,», • /.V- -ow- t-•ij * ^*4 'I * ‘ * '^4. rv * ‘I WMwmm . m i?' *w ■ *•••- .;■• , lir',' • fc,^ /''/(’ C !m( ( r'-.t r I . r I ( ’» ■ . i' ( ^ ' k '(v//^. K#i>^ f * JN l^<. l\ I . %, - -vT ' *. * ^ r*^ ^:-.r -'•-' 'r*r.\T - ^ - ,..»• '•‘VN* • t ^ ^ - —*-- ----- - — ;vrc ^(' ^ic f i 0 \ ( ;a «■.,/f / ) ^ (<- I ^ i I ■ '. ■ kj‘ j!< rtC .Z .1'.> JU 1*. S.T..U1 • 't i/- , \t m illiii m r,. %•'',. , **'»* *^ - r-— -V ^ ^•* :i:r-. '^i ^ V <^-»Vi *1^ i^-:'' fv-v- •.••• ^4 >%y| Zi:i -v,' '••;.■ - r •: «♦*• :tli^ -■ ----—’_r_L ____,l-'?ii' Vw 1 _ ,v> i W«fo'? jte I ti|^, 1^^.: ^im , - I ^ G7,; SfJESf TXinir- d2L?fe4/wjfl8r' ' '* < iil ' Y^* ii « ' V ' ' ’• V ('■I ./ (-.■■I I ' - >. ' >■ ' I 'L 1 » - khW:. ri: # ■^•;'- , >'■/'-fVr 'V- 4'^'^ '■.• 1'»'.'''7<'’2^-'-'V^ '■- c:y. ■'■■■-t- i 9 : *’ •»:; ■■vrpi • » ft- V -,W- ./•. V 'IVv ‘■Jvt^ ( u-'mUcui>t.-) ( (y h y-iUi i\- 'I -» '• A-' f• «•' .. •• :• ?• •rr .. ^ *>?r' > >i3;'.'i ^:l-(tv ''J-> '"i' / f(ui\< (t M ) Ul - /•■ '•'' ^ k /■ft . • A mki ^"•- »• li-ca '^i-'‘*y2 \]j-' /■' •• ^ ,-"5l^ V ’.Vi •.,)' Millu -4rf.1 5| 1^*. ; * jtt-i 4 . • ^ ■ * */f ■' : - V* ••: \ .^J.9 A • . • •- ' 4 I kl > • ^ • - *.’ 'f V ’0- J>. ,i?" ■'- '• -v'l •.’ .V-'. i- '•M •rrt- ___: >: ; ?;V . lHHlMHLd«iiiu ii, r^* !•>*» S-VS-- ’t!^\vi\]^y 's. '.•*./? .i>^r-'0' /V>. ^ T)i ‘. ’ Sd :■! /.'i ■d W'2 Pi .'A'' '/Sik • • 'V, ¥ •>/ f/ ’■."•■• i’v- -r.r ^;. * * • '■ ^ \'■ V % >^< V.. - . \».w •-" '. -I . f ‘U ' V i.l- • r • •'V % v«kn *.44 ®iV'J, »‘^ ;>iSr5R.ii T_ *mB>v«n*.44 'te>« Htel-’-uii:1; j-y u h,»r:iV - i-V ■'V iteAcii5<-- ‘V ;:(rS;T ( vVC^ I'<-'- ') [ (V 9 L P T. Kv h\ x;)v '^• s i. ‘' ?l®:lfcfe‘''':''l;''''':. '!■»■:-! i'? ■ ,1. ■>>^ ■'• '■' ■■ ».>■%. iv rf '■ illLlLk&i7;'£^']r. ;'f^^ SKII^eii • <'■' V ♦ I lif! % * ->«*i f'* •: . • » »> 1■t. r ■(,' • .w ■W. ^ / • a;' r. . *•* • ».• • •• -V t • , V/ ' - t \ r. C •- ' ‘ * I ’' 0» ■ f. ^ «, i ^ • t t• *vH* ..%4 • V« ''4'- 1 #•V/»v / p' r:'-.- ^■.'. -4. TT-'? •£^d M'- ■/ 'ir^'^C-’ V<*r.lIIV. % V'r Si ji •*V ■f. ^ 3 ,.uL-.' » e'r:. HkJ I _ L •< H ('>c (vC Iwu y Sh ^ •^ ^ (<r . / J <' mL*«. *,T. • .f» •• : y. ' A' *► m'. .>>: • ^wmm \'S .' ' "i\ • -i r* till II' i.i.'.i.'.y -‘-'•- .■V t-'L'.'a ■<. V' I ■ -llniaHa'kMH \ ±. I •»' l' V t, . :i . ■ .t •■ —M*i h I f. * *1 — m% , ir vi-w-* — y- '.• . r ' ^ V.* -•^) H ,‘\ ■ ' I '.1 \ I ■ 'y'( f . . c H f: ♦ w ■ ■■ " i AK'«5 mm«. * ^-»V • .. 4.= f 'V'rV.- _ . ■ «^ru i. > '» m >-J <v .» ,. .'.- ..».* . . ,, 'pyi^>-■ V. - ‘■-<f ■>-■ ' %<■ .i7l. . 'jn . ,-a- • ' :. V - g:i'K^ ^ jr t ) I \ .x I'r-' -=.' n i V A *: 4 •.« • r=rr.:>^- .VV^WWiv ■■"“•—••* * - ■ •••.•••.r •» »JS / JV.. ■»' . ^ C f \ • . '. ' (/.’U ^>. i*- ( » iV*t •>rer- r •—•'■•vx'-'■rr~. • : S’ >J • ■? '•» « V t* * ** ill., 'mm ‘ t i ••'V* - ^. * i:iif »-•■ . -*4£‘ ^ W : r'* ■ — ‘t ■• »T-TvS;*^ ’^‘vC .>- 3i ‘5 Tcivltcuv^ 'iV.cvfL ( Oi t\i\c ^ »iTmfiliin*ffMri mmm 4, P ;? U.1 & :■ill - :t * . . ' * ^ V*“ ^wStVsfZ^ ittif; ;• K ' ‘ V*'” *n * • > A. •' y^. ‘ - v.ST^T I-.-,'Vr. ''" f"»'itij cv.\'«4; • . “T • .• ■ m r ■ \ ‘' f V-Ai *; J » •!' - /T -- iS.- i :>/.'V(Aj«r?^‘ :.J f f N i' L« l4=r'‘ . f V •*;• ’^-** i\ V • 7- •»*> -r 'IcwMii^y^'d Qcacl / •• • • • ^ • '. i< ’ / >vV 1 • •^T* rPfh ■ r{T il¥ yl^/.fi::\ ,. ifllia f^h- . i r 1 *. s • •'• Vi.'’ S'' r>'.• ’■' * .** \. ii'.-. * '/ r 1 ' s‘»;c^ mT< .V : ’ ^ ’ « •17^'.' 1 4' ^ ^• * 1 * • K < '•S'Sv. lit'*' ''•# • '* • < .A « •Ai V '.Jkl4 ^ > %. • •i m ■:■■ iii: iiii iil!ll^ k* ,T ' i’ Vrv • BSSA v ' rr •>! I -^V^l U'’ -V.V45 *« .11 '.’W )(l'Co K \ it \ .v\.‘ 1, .j.r»’^^ {■:■- h .I'l ! 0t md ' 'A" ' • " » ^ . X '*• ' • / »>• •iV /vi. - .M .. »* • ^ V ' V <i >-\r .V* ;■• '»; [y • \- k <' >V.,‘v • . i’ ' S \ r -«'• • V- N' i ■V. I• •■; .-^r i' --' A . V' tS Vm yWm^--'y" /< , •.^.' ■ '•' W r-'-' .<y >*/7« .‘7?^- ' 7/ - I / ' . 4 • % 'mss^-.Sy yyy»Hl4h4»f4< >;44i-i*;i I .rJ-* m ti’ifm ■t^'j (4^ I Vi . :\f • •»• .* ' -T. I I . • ^ ^ ;l' H .-V. - i ?•„•■ "•. .“:• . r-stJ" * • /- ir *^- ,;- ' /- ■■"• • : , ' . *' < •' ‘.-r %/ <[/» ^ ■ »*r ;'ai r*.^K* / » •/ ./•' I • / ! • ’ • V « • ( '. ) •■ wit ?;: •'. ..* Ik *':■ '■ « L I I ,-. ieS^33?T:ki. *&2feL-j:>>*v.^ 4 -S'- * •'-»i^*.*>^.* •-^*i; V^*. 1 i|5f.‘ finvc' ( (-t' ) msataa. 955:4- &:■./t JJS^x >y^. .- 1\|'.C ) f I I- „||,| I I I ' y ^ ■' '• r Vjl^r.vr li'f |P^|^Mj|ifli||Hijj|^^ ■ ■' ■'|V9 r?. ..•' jgpas. * • * V*' wmm nm wmmmmmr:' I^HT mtH iHm *•.— »*^ 4KiiHiitt ife "‘^pte'g ‘ *• ’'k" * j> t!-v<:difl mmm „i- 'i.^ r N ^ ■ ' ^] ' * at ■ y ■^sk? ■M, « ir^ ! v: ♦ • V.D» »s r mk..- i .V:t|r*vV|‘‘=5* ... 5..^. •,* *4 1?.V .**• m • -s: . > *^ • .• Vv .» 4 « • ^*1 . - ^A': O'jl K-Cilh 1:'".ia;.'.'R(:f»c( r .rnf^rm *■ *4 y ■ . . • , * * . I */• r Vv* ‘ - t':»H'v .• - *:•■.■:•: • •^.. ?* • •'• • :'t ‘./y'. ?v ..fi ''LWk^sr.- MS(^s^vvy.,fei-'.v te- ?= ik V' i|;•J.fc E,.i;ii]aii;5 5fof-o 1 "\ i I •> V* .T4 wi . c j^i.i.*,, ^ ■ «*»■'» ■y'3^' .Vi •■. ♦ • •v-i ..; .:• \^4\ \X •■ « • J* . '^ U'^ 4.--‘-'. <•. »• '•• i'’^ir .'v ’ir« f* i '. ' • ir».. >/ ^ »%; liM J»r ^ Jvli / j* ' * f» %/ './••;#/ .’y V ♦>• # • OMklWL'. I' *. •• . .^. V ^ » 1 * j • I . V l V * . - V r.r' 1 /T"mr M;''isi''; I <'vt 'NV*r ^ '' ^ - ' '-’^ -• ’ r^"'----------»-■«*■» Ftia !^ -... . ; U ,yu--r. -.- >#4li, 45 . ! ri?:- %'• V' i'4^^rx ViV- 'i' , .•J/’j/r/:'... V V V.. # . I' •• — • I I III I liui JiWiliTiV'f:4i iTiU iliTiBfiV-n Ilii ly.Ti -III!:. 1 mill l■l|l1ll I iTiIi iliTiM4iBiI.4.iIi iro^ih lllll 11^;. \ ^t. • < "'■ > I D ';• ’...■ " REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION APR 1 4 2003 ciir oi -ohonc ) Date: April 9,2003 Item No.: /2_ Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. GafTron/ Title: Planning Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #01-2714 Frederick Puzak, 1340 Baldur Park Road - Variances - Review Conditions of Resolution No. 4720 List of Exhibits A - Notice of Council Action 3-25-03 B - Memo and Exhibits of March 19,2003 This item was tabled at your March 24 meeting because neither the applicant nor his representative were present. Staff is advised that Mike Sharratt will be representing the applicant at your April 14 meeting. Please review the attached memo and exhibits. i CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 952-249-4600 ZONING HLE #01-2714 /I NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: March 25, 2003 TO:Frederick N. Puzak 1340 Baldur Park Road Orono, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Request for Variance Amendment DATE OF MEETING: March 24, 2003 Council took the following action: Motion to table because applicant was not present. yo/e: 5 in Favor, 0 Against (Note: Council was presented with your letter of March 24 requesting action on your requested amendment in your absence. Council indicated they did not wish to discuss the matter without you being present. This will be rescheduled for the Council meeting of April 14, meeting begins at 7:00 p.m. Please confirm that you can be present at that meeting - contact Mike Gaffron at 952-249-4600). If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder afler review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call Planning Director Mike Gaffron at 952-249-4600. is f # B REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: March 19,2003 Item No. Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. GafTron Title: Planning Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #01-2714 Frederick Puzak, 1340 Baldur Park Road - Variances - Review Conditions of Resolution No. 4720 List of Exhibits L. A - Staff letter to applicant of 3-7-03 w/attachments B - Applicant’s letters of request 6-20-02,10-21-02,2-17-03 C - Resolution No. 4720 D - Septie Design Approval 6-27-02 £'•0 fOO Summary of Request - Applicant requests Council approval to eliminate the variance approval condition requiring connection of his proposed new residence to sewer. The new septic system constructed in 2002 for the existing house does not have design capacity to serve the proposed 5- bedroom home. In addition to the need for a formal variance renewal (variances expired 11-13- 02), the Resolution language provides for Council review because sewer connection is not feasible and construction using a septic system is not consistent with the variance approvals. Background Applicant was granted a number of variances for construction of a new home partially within the 0- 75' lakeshore setback zone, to replace his existing residence, on November 13,2001 . Resolution No. 4720 required that the new residence be connected to municipal sewer, as the property is in the MUSA and within the defined Urban Area of the City. The ability to connect to sewer was predicated on the adjoining property owner. Bill Franklin, granting an easement for extension of the municipal sewer lines. The Resolution contains language indicating that certain conditions will trigger further review by the City Council, i.e.: a) if it is determined that connection to sanitary sewer is not possible; or b) r' :t is found by City staff that the final construction plans are not consistent with variance approvals. The variance approvals expired last fall without a building permit application being filed by the applicant, and must be renewed before building permits can be issued. However, a number of subsequent factors suggest the need for further Council review of the original approval. These factors p «01-27I4 -1340 Baldur Park Rd. March 19,2003 Page 2 include: 1.City has been unable to obtain proper sewer easement from Bill Franklin. The status of the easement is as follows: Mr. & Mrs. Franklin signed an easement document in late 2001, which the City staff forwarded to the City Attorney for filing. After obtaining Franklin’s Certificates of Title, the Attorney in April 2002 concluded that the easement could not be filed without minor language revisions documenting the Franklins’ marital status. Greg Gappa subsequently sent a revised easement document to Franklin on August 8, 2002. Franklin never returned it. Gappa sent out a second copy on November 8,2002, which has never been returned. These never were returned to the City by the Post Office, so we must conclude that Franklin received them. In January 2003 Gappa then attempted to file the easement which the City Attorney had rejected, and the County Registrar would not accept it because the Franklins’ signatures were in black ink and could not be confirmed as original. 2.Construction of new septic system last fall. Last fall the applicant had a contractor install a new septic system to serve the existing residence. City Inspector Matt Bohemian confirmed that the new system has design capacity for only a 3-bedroom home, and that there was not room on the site to construct primary and alternate systems for a 5-bedroom home as was proposed and approved in Resolution No. 4720. It appears that both conditions a) and b) have come to pass, since the applicant can’t connect to sewer absent an easement, and construction of a new home to be connected to a septic system is inconsistent with the conditions of approval noted in the resolution. Applicant's Request The applicant requests that the variances be renewed but with removal of the condition requiring connection to sewer. This request first came to staff in late October 2002 but followup was delayed due to Paul Weinbergers leaving. It is staff's conclusion that a formal variance renewal application is necessary, but the request for changes to the conditions of approval suggests a review by Council is warranted as "old business ’ for discussion prior to processing a formal lencwal application. Staff Kecommendation Staff recommends that applicant be advised to I) redesign the house to a 3-bedroom configuration, and 2) to make a new (not renewal) variance application for a revised house plan and connection to the existing 3-bedroom capacity septic system rather than to City sewer. As an alternative, to preserve his 5-bedroom design, staff suggested to applicant that he might again request that the City condemn an easement for sewer. Staff is requesting Council direction as to whether there is any support for proceeding with a condemnation. Once an easement becomes f i li usiaBaaAiOBfaAiUtU akrmmiimiiiii ifimnr . m iiRiaiM urn (VOl-2714 -1340 Baldur Park Rd. March 19,2003 Page 3 available, the issue remains as to whether the sewer construction would be a private project involving both Franklin and Puzak, or whether it would be completed and assessed as a public project. Another alternative would be to allow construction of the 5-bedroom home connected to the 3- bedroom septic system, and require that the house be connected to sewer as soon as it becomes available. TTie obvious risk is that this or a subsequent owner might overuse the system and cause it to fail. The variances granted on November 13,2001 expired on November 13,2002 because no permit was applied for nor obtained before the expiration date. The City notified applicant twice in writing of the expu^tion date and the need to sign the resolution copies to validate them before building permits could be issued. Applicant never signed the resolutions. From staffs perspective, despite applicant ’s ongoing discussions with Paul Weinberger, the variances have technically expired and a new application must be processed. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Provide direction to applicant and staff regarding the following: 1.Should applicant be allowed to construct a new home without connection to municipal sewer? 2.If so, should the house be reduced in size from 5-bedrooms to 3-bedrooms to match the design capacity of the septic system? 3. Is there any basis to allow variance renewal without going through the formal review process? * . II irMiri C^f^y CITY of ORONO Municipal Ofliccs Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Fred Puzak 1340 Baldur Park Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Re: Variance Extension Dear Mr. Puzak: I have reviewed with pertinent City staff your letter of February 17 requesting amendment of Resolution No. 4720, as well as your October 22 request for review by the City Council. Unfortunately, when Paul Weinberger left this was one of a number of items for which followup was delayed, and I apologize for the inconvenience. % There are a number of issues potentially for discussion with the Council, including: 1. City’s inability to obtain proper sewer easement from Bill Franklin . The status of the casement is as follows: Mr. & Mrs. Franklin signed an easement document in late 2001, which the City forwarded to the City Attorney for filing. After obtaining Franklin ’s Certificates of Title, the Attorney in April 2002 concluded that the easement could not be filed without minor language revisions documenting the Franklins ’ marital status. Greg Gappa subsequently sent a revised easement document to Franklin on August 8, 2002. Frai^lin never returned it. Gappa sent out a second copy on November 8,2002, which has never been returned. These never were returned to the City by the Post Office, so we must conclude that Franklin received them. In January 2003 Gappa then attempted to file the easement which the City Attorney had rejected, and the County Registrar would not accept it because the Franklins ’ signatures were in black ink and could not be confirmed as original. 2. Construction of new septic system last fall . Last fall you had a contractor install a new septic system to serv-e your existing residence. City Inspector Matt Bolterman confirmed that your new system has design capacity for only a 3-bedroom home, and that you did not have room on the site to construct primary and alternate systems for a 5-bedroom home. 3.Variance expired November 13.2002. The variances granted to you on November 13,2001 expired on November 13, 2002 because no permit was obtained before the e.xpiration date. The City noti Tied you twice in writing of the expiration date (attached letters by Deputy Clerk Rachel Dodge dated January 29, 2002 and June 5, 2002) and the need to sign the resolution copies to validate them before building permits could be issued. You have never signed the resolutions. From my perspective, despite your ongoing discussions with Paul Weinberger, the variances have technically expired without action by you to sign them or obtain a building permit. Tdepbone (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 wwwxi.oronojnn.us r Fred Puzak March 7,2003 Page 2 4.Variance renewal packet mailed to you February 10. Wendy Bottenberg mailed you the variance renewal forms on February 10, as it is staffs conclusion that you need to file for renewal of the variances. 5.New variance application required. Variance renewal applications are accepted with a reduced fee when there are no changes proposed. However, you apparently will be requesting to not have to connect to sewer, which is a change from the original approval. Therefore, your application will be considered as a new request rather than a simple renewal. I would assume that some of the Exhibits from your prior application will still be applicable; however, a I also assume that you will be providing a revised house plan, given that your septic system is capable of supporting only a three bedroom home, and the plans we have on file indicate a 5-bedroom home. Resolution No. 4720 contains language indicating that certain conditions will trigger further review by the City Council, i.e.: a) if it is determined that connection to sanitary sewer is not possible; or b) if it is found by City staff that the final construction plans are not consistent with variance approvals. It appears that both conditions a) and b) have come to pass, since you can’t coruiect to sewer absent an easement, and construction of a new home to be coruiected to a septic system is inconsistent with the conditions of approval noted in the resolution. Therefore, I will place your request on the City Council s March 24 meeting agenda. My recommendation to the Council will be that you be allowed to redesign the house to a 3-bedroom configuration, and that you be advised to make a new varimce application for a revised house plan and connection to the existing 3-bedroom capacity septic system. As an alternative, to preserve your 5-bedroom design, you might again request that the City condemn an easement for sewer, however, this will undoubtedly slow things down. You had requested a copy of the City’s file on the proposed development of the adjacent lots. No formal application for such development has been submitted to the City, and there is no known application pending. I have no file to forward to you. Regarding your 4 item request of June 20 as to platting requirements: 1) 2) Replatting would be classified as a Class in subdivision as you correctly noted. Baldur Park Road was originally platted in 1912 at a width of 30*. Neither the platted right- of-way nor the paved width of Baldur Park Road meet current City standards for public roads. The current standards are 50* right-of-way and 28 ’ paved width for a local street that serves 3-10 dwelling units. Lands abutting Lake Minnetonka above the 929.4 ’ OHVVL contour line have historically been credited by Orono toward area requirements, except when such land is determined to be wetland. The City does recognize that portions of the area of the Flood Fringe (between 929.4 ’ and 931.5’) are occasionally inundated, and allowed uses within the Flood Fringe are limited by the City and other regulatory bodies. Wetlands would be subject to conservation easement dedication. in M* iin-M-.Mi II inauObklrTAiMuaiLwtaui Fred Piuak March 7,2009 Pages Development involving the creation of new building sites is normally subject to an 8% Park Dedication (8% of the land or equivalent in cash) as well as a Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee of $4,050 per acre in the acre zoning district. Sewer Connection Charges on a per unit basis mi^t also apply; however, it is likely no such charges would apply to replatting of Franklin’s lots because he would be incurring the cost of extending the sewer to serve his properties. I hope this provides you with some long-awaited answers. Enclosed is a variance application packet for you to use in making your new request. The next deadline for applications to be submitted is Wednesday* March 19 at noon for review at the Planning Commission ’s April 14 meeting. City staff are available to meet with you to discuss any aspect of your project prior to the March 24 Council meeting. Please feel free to call me at 952-249-4600 if you have questions. Planning Director end. cc:Greg Gappa, Public Services Director Lyle Oman, Building Official Wendy Bottenberg, City Plaimer Rachel Dodge, Deputy Clerk Mike Sharratt t TJ-', 'Li iTi S<ia\ ogam 6^^) 1^01. GITYof ORONO Municipal Offices Street Mdreti: 2750 Kelley Perkwiy Orono. MN S5356 Mallinf Iddress: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MiN 55323 0066 August 8,2002 Mr. William Franklin 1730 New Brighton Blvd Minneapolis, MN 55413 RE: Baldur Park Easement Dear Mr. Franklin; In March of this year, you had signed and returned to the City an easement agreement for utility purposes across your property. Thrs easement could not be recorded, at Hermepin County, because your marital status wm not listed on the document. The City Attorney has provided a new easement form that he would like signed. This is a newer form that has been revised from the original form that you had signed. However, the intent of the document is still the same, to provide the City a permanent easement for the installation and niainteniince of public utilities across your property. Pleas sign and return this easement document at your earliest possible convenience. Please contact me at 612-249-4621 should you have any questions regarding this easement. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Sincerely; 0 Gregory A. Gappa Director of Public Services Tdcpbooc(95^MM600 • Fas(B52)24M416 wwwxLonuHUBiuu HINSHAW & CULBERTSON A'2 'S-19-0% BEiUVnXI.ILUNOU CHAI4PAXON.aUNOn CMCAOO.ILUNOfS CBYSTAL LAU. D.UNOI5 lOLST.ILUHOlf USLB, ILLINOIS riOMA. ILLINOIS ltOCXFOU).ILLlNOCS SPUNOniLD. ILLINOIS WAUICKaAN,ILLINOtS msfArriAYTowss sumsioo 123 SOVTN NINTH YTUET IONNEAPOIAIIINNSSOTAS5402 S13JI3J434 TmFAXIlUJLiia YHOCNXXAtIZONA SAN FBANOSCO.CALlFOtNU rr. LAUDEtOALI. nOUDA IAC1CSONVILU. rLORIOA M1A34LVLOIUDA TAM7A« FLORIDA SCKERSRVIU.I. INDIANA ST. LOUIS. lOlSOURl AfFLETON. WISCONSIN LC.WAURSE, I^SCONSLV April 9,2002 WMim omcT DIAL wa 612-334-2S16 nuNa 754868 Gregory A. Gappa Director of Public Services City ofOrono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323>0066 . ^ Easements Dear Greg: Enclosed is an easement form that we prepared some time ago for the City of Orono. I am retumiqg the Franklin easement. When individuals sign a real estate conveyancing document, it is necessary to designate their marital status (either single or husband and wife). This is necessary so that the document can be recorded. Would you like to redraft this easement on the prescribed form? If you want us to do so, we can. Please call Very tiul Rolfe A Worden cc: Thomas J. Barrett, Esq. (w/enc.) Hoesv V Msscior.vi «Mon j I A-H GITYoT ORONO Municipal Offices Strait Mdrtts: 2750 Kelley Parhwiy Orono, MN 5S3S6 Mailiag Address: P.O. Box 66 Ciystal Boy, MN 55323-0066 SECOND REQUEST June 5,2002 Frederick Puzak & Julie Thometz 1340 Baldur Park Road Wayzala, MN 55391 RE: Variance Resolution Dear Fredrick & Julie; 4 A resolution #4720 located at 1340 Baldur Park Road was approved by the Orono City Council on November 13,2001. The variance expires November 13,2002, it is important that this variance is signed before it expires. Please stop by the City offices located at 2750 Kelley Parkway, to sign the three copies of this resolution, so the City may then proceed with filing procedures. Before issuance of any building permits, your signature is required. Please reference Resolution #4720. If you have any questions, please call me at (952) 249-4600. Sincerely, Rachel Dodge Deputy Clerk McpliOM(9S2)24M<M • Fu(«»)34M4li r t A~‘^ CITY of ORONO MiiakliMl Offices SlmtMdrats: 2750 Kelley Pitliway Orone. MlH 55356 MeMiii Mdnss: P.O. Box 66 Ciystel Bay. MN 55323 0066 Frederick Puzak & Julie Thometz 1340 Baldur Park Road Wayzata, MN 55391 RE: Variance Resolution Dear Fredrick & Julie: A resolution #4720 located at 1340 Baldur Park Road was approved by the Orono City Council on November 13,2001. The variance expires November 13,2002, it is important that this variance is signed before it expires. Please stop by the City offices located at 2750 Kelley Parkway, to sign the three copies of this resolution, so the City may then proceed with filing procedures. Before issuance of any building permits, your signature is required. Please reference Resolution #4720. If you have any questions, please call me at (952) 249-4600. • ^ Sincerely, Rachel Dodge Deputy Clerk 1Uq*OM(iS2)24M<M • Fai(M2)24MiM h /I-S' V GITY^ir ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address; 2750 Kelley Paihway Orono. MN 55356 Melling Address: P.O. Btn 6$ Ciystel Bay, MN 55323 0066 Febniary 10,2003 FredPuzak 1340 Baldur Park Road Wayzata,MN 55391 Mr. Puzak: Please find enclosed an application renew your variances. Also included in the application is the submittal list and deadlines for submittal. The next deadline is February 19,2003. If you have any questions, please feel free to call at (952) 249-4600. % Sincerely, I in Wendy Bottenberg City Planner Enel. 1UcpboBe(9S2)24M600 • Fai(«S2)S4M<li 8' 1340 Baldur Park Rd. Orono, MN 55391 Mr. Mike Gaffion City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 CERTOIED MAP. RETURN RECEIPT V. February 17,2003 Re: Amendment to Variance Resolution #4720 1340 Baldur Park Rd. (Lot 30, Block 1, Baldur Park) Dear Mr. Gaffion: This letter is a follow-up to our letter filed October 22,2002, copy enclosed. During a telephone converMtion with Mr. Weinberger last October regarding the ongo'mg lack of city sewer availability, he recommended that the Resolution be returned to Council for amendment, and assured us that City staff was aware of our ongoing file. He said there would be time for this to be handled prior to the November 13,2002 renewal date, and said that it would be put on the November 12,2002 Council agenda. It has been over four months since that conversation, without any response from the City. As our request for amendment was filed October 22,2002, this issue should have been returned to Council as old business. Please let us know when you can have an informationai package prepared for Council. We are requesting that the Resolution be amended to delete any reference to city sewer, as the sewer remained unavailable and we now have a new, state-of-the-art CODE private sewer, as was recommended by City staff. Additionally, we sent a letter June 20,2002, also enclosed, requesting clarification of issues regarding the proposed neighboring subdivision, which has not been answered. In all fairness, a response fiom City staff is long overdue. Sincerely, Frederick lie Thometz Enel. Copy: MikeSbarratt 1 f • • •. Frederick Puzek ft Julie Thometz 1340 Baldur Park Rd. Orono, MN 55391 . ••• • < • • I• • • «•«' Mr. Paul Weinberger Chy of Orono 2750KeUeyPkwy. Orono, MN nf;T ? •; %r,r> UlUUrOHOjyo October 21.2002 Re: Variance Resolution #4720 Dear Mr. Weinberger: As you may remember, we were granted variances to construct a new home last November vmh the condition of hooking up to city sewer. We have now waited another a utility easement across the neighboring property, as promised by its owner, Mr. Bill Franklin Out of necessity, we are now proceeding with the installation of an ^'of ^ nwnth^***'*"* Private sewer system which should be completed by the As the Planning Commission recommended approval of our plans upon installatiofi of a code compliant septic system, we ask that the variances be renewed for another 12 months without the condition of city sewer hookup. As residents of Orono for the past nine years, we greatly appreciate the quality of life here, and would now like to proceed with our plans to accommodate our growing family. If possible, we would like to biirig this old business to City Council on October 28th Please advise. 952*471*9229. Sincerely, Frederick Puzak Julie Thometz B'2 -W -o3 . I 6-a Frederick Puzak BoxlSS Spring Park, MN 55384 im; IS£. Mr. Paul Weinberger City ofOrono 2750 KcUy Pkwy Orono, MN 55356 yox, . ^ June 20,2002 r « Re: Franklin/Hessburg Development Lots 21 - 29, 31 - 33 BOc I, Baldur Park W form 3S17, Mar. 1989 Dear Mr. Weodwrger: complei^p^oraiB City^ on uKte lots, mcluding stair notes and recommendations. Also, please confirm that the following requirements would apply 1. ) RqilaUing wouU be classified as s Class in subdivision due to the exlensatn 2. ) Minimuin public right of way tequiied is 50’ (2*’ pavement width) and maxiinom cul de sac length is 1000' (11.33 subd. 4.). Does Baldur Park Road meet these requirements? 3. ) Flood plain (below elevation 931.5) and wetlands shaU be dedicated as conservMion ^mmts and not be utilized for computing the area requirements for any lot (11.41 sub. 2 .E and 3.B.4). 4. ) Purs^t to Sw I L62, prerequisite to approval of a final plat is the dedication to the public of 8% of the land being platted, or equivalent cash contribution be made by the developer (e.g. 8% of $1 million = 180,000). Also, please confirm that Mr. Franklin has not provided a utility easement “free of charge ” as he promised eight months ago at the Chy CouncU meeting on October 22, 2001. * Thank you for your clarification of these matters. Sincerely, Fiederick N. Puzak rtiiiiwiii’wiiifiilUftliimin I t C o; o\ Wm IW ^ >* GITYof OROXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 4720NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2; SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISIONS 16 ANT) (L) 1 AND 2; AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8 FILE NO. #01-2714 WHEREAS, Frederick Puzak and Julie Thometz (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 1340 Baldur Park Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 30, Block 1, Baldur Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Plaiuiing Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 17, 2001 at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) to permit 1.675 s.f. (9.8%) hardcover within 75' of the OHWL of the lake where 2,113 s.f. (12.4%) exists and no hardcover is allowed; Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (2) to permit 2,885 s.f. (63.6%) hardcover where 3,219 s.f. (70.9%) exists and 1,135 s.f. (25%) is allowed; Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 to allow construction on a lot of 0.495 acres where 0.5 acres is required; and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to permit replacement of structure within 75' of the lakeshore for construction of a new residence on the property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. •7 This application was reviewed as Zoning File #01-2714. The property is located in the LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District where 0.5 acre is the minimum lot area requirement. The property has a lot area of 0.3 acre. Page 1 of 9 MMmi GITYof ORONO ’^Bswy RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. k 0 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 17, 2001 and recommended approval on a vote of 7 to 0 to approve variances as requested based on the following findings: A. B. D. E. F. Property owners propose to remove the existing residence and construct a new residence. The property is located at the end of the Baldur Park peninsula. Because the lot is located at the end of the peninsula most of the lot area (79% of the lot) is located within 75' of the lakeshore. Only a small portion of the property is located outside of the 75' setback. Due to setback requirements, most of the 75' - 250' setback area is not buildable due to street setback and side setback requirements. C. The property is located in the MUSA area. The applicant’s house is the only house on Baldur Park not connected to sanitary sewer. The property is not served with sewer because the sewer se^ice stops at the end of the public maintained Baldur Park Road. The existing residence is not connected to sewer because an easement for utility or sewer purposes would be required across the adjacent properties to Baldur Park Road. The property has an easement for driveway purposes only. The Council approved a preliminary plat subdivision approval in 1982 for two lots between the subject property and the end of the maintained Baldur Park Road. Using the preliminary subdivision approval from 1982, the City can assume there is a possibility that there are two building sites south of the property. Based on this assumption, a total of 3 lots will ultimately require sewer connection. The property also has an easement over Lot 31 for private septic purposes. There is one system located on Lot 31 that is listed as compliant because it is more than 3' above the seasonal water table. The system is nqj compliant with all regulations because the entire drainfleld site is located within 75' of the lakeshore. Occupancy of a new house requires the septic to be replaced. Page 2 of 9 1 F > t ir" CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO, 4 ? 2 0 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. G. The proposed structure does not exceed 15% of the lot area. The property is located wthin the Metropolitan Council defined Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA). Only properties within the MUSA are permitted to have sewer connection. The Baldur Park peninsula was part o< the 1965 LS #1 sewer project. The house is located on Lot 30, Baldur Park about 500* to the existing municipal sewer line in the Baldur Park Road right of way. Completing the connection to the municipal sewer line requires a public utility easement over the adjacent properties to the east. All of Lots 21 through 33, Baldur Park were in common ownership at the time sewer was installed in Baldur Park Road. The house located on Lot 30 was required to connect to sewer following final installation of the sewer. In 1974 Lots 21 through 29 and Lot 33 were sold separately from Lots 30 and 31. Lot 31 was later sold separately. Before Lot 31 was sold separately an easement was granted in benefit of Lot 30 for a private sewage disposal system. The existing private sewage disposal system located on Lot 31 for the house on Lot 30 is non-compliant due to the system being located within 75’ of the lakeshore of Lake Minnetonka, The properties east (Lots 21 through 29 and 31 through 33) are under common ownership, although separate ownership from Lot 30. At the October 8, 2001 City Council meeting the property owner of Lots 21 through 29 and 31 through 33 has offered to grant a public utility easement to allow connection for Lot 30 to municipal sewer, and a willingness to share in the expense for sewer construction. 10. The City of Orono has adopted a sewer policy as part of the 2000-2020 Comprehensive Plan. The sewer policy states the following as it relates to areas in Orono that are within the MUSA: A.The primary method of sewage treatment and disposal within the Urban Area will be municipal sewer. Page 3 of9 A.CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ___Af 2 0 II. 12. 13. 14. B.Orono will provide municipal sewer to lakeshore areas and non-lakeshore areas within the MUSA when it is determined that municipal sewer is preferable to long-term use of on-site sewage treatment areas. C.All sewer-serviced properties must be connected. Consistent with the regulations of the Miimesota Health Department and the MCES, every building intended for human habitation, occupancy or use shall be provided with suitable sanitary facilities and shall be connected to the municipal sewer system whenever a sewer lateral serves the property or is wdthin a reasonable distance of the property. Municipal Code Section 12.30 regulates individual sewage treatment systems for the City of Orono. This section requires that building permit applications for new residences require Code Systems. The existing system is not a Code System because it is located within 75' of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. It is the position of the City of Orono that a new residence should connect to municipal sewer service following extension of the sewer line from Baldur Park Road. The existing house was required to connect to municipal sewer following the 1965 LS 1 project and did not. The property is located within the MUSA and in the Shoreland Overlay District. In the Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan (CMP Part 4 (C)) a principal goal of Orono s planning program is the protection of natural resources and environmental amenities, particularly the water quality of Lake Minnetonka. The major pollutants affecting Lake Minnetonka are contained in sewage effluent and stormwater runoff. Orono ’s sewage treatment policies are directed at minimizing or eliminating pollutant sources. The Council finds that connection to municipal sewer is the only viable long term solution to protecting the water quality of Lake Minnetonka. A private sewage treatment system, on the point of the Baldur Park peninsula would have lakeshore on three sides of the system. Page 4 of 9 f CITY of ORONO I RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 ? ^ 0 15. 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 variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 16. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Baseu upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (1) to permit 1,675 s.f. (9.8%) hardcover within 75' of the OHWL of the lake where 2,113 s.f. (12.4%) exists and no hardcover is allowed; Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (2) to permit 2,885 s.f. (63.6%) hardcover where 3,219 s.f. (70.9%) e.xists and 1,135 s.f (25%) is allowed; Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 to allow construction on a lot of 0.495 acres where 0.5 acres is required; and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to permit replacement of structure within 75' of the lakeshore for construction of a new residence on the property subject to the following conditions: 1.The existing non*compliant septic system is required to be abandoned per state and local requirements and a new residence shall be connected to sanitary sewer. If it is determined connection to sanitary sewer is not possible additional review of the variances by the Council is required. Page 5 of 9 MM GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 ? 2 0 2. 3. 4. 5. Any amendments to the individual site and building plans shall require Building and Zoning Department Staff approval. Staff findings shall be made that the final site and building plans are consistent with the approved plans. The Building and Zoning Staff shall refer any plans to the City Council that are found to not be consistent with the variance approvals. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will e.xpire on that date (November 13, 2002). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Page 6 of 9 i i m GlTYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 4?>«0NO. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 13‘*’ day of November, 2001. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Property Owners STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13lh day of November, 2001 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. DENISE M.l£SKINEN HOTAIWW«UC.I«»«WtA / Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of November, 2001 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. DENISE M-ttSKMEN Page 7 of9 GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ 4 7 2 0 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of -.20 .personally appeared before me, who is personally known to me whose identity I proved on the basis of whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of _______________, a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their &ee act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of .20. personally appeared before me. who is personally known to me whose identity I proved on the basis of whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of _______________, a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. Notary Public Page 8 of9 iftftillfififfiiMiirri If 111! / 4720 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR . FRED PU2AK OF LOT 30. BLOCK 1. 0ALOUR PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ^ R*oR5S«) Ho^-e CXUl&ir A LAKE Minnetonka w.tnrT:«t • -/N/ z ; •. r •»•• vV 1% LgCAL OCSCWIPTCN Of PREU5CS r « Lei 30. 6>0€li I. Boldur Poek, lo^tlhtr mt\h on tostmtnl for prtvelt tt*tf system pireeici ovff tot 3t. 9cch f. ”8ddur os contotntd In Coc Mo. 1440581. f»99 of of Ti'llft, Htnntpio Co(/^ty. M*iontsote AJJ k W lb* 2001 p^eceo <.TeA/AfMD Mo //tfC'Pteo CO. fta.'>«vAiJce sJi2>M‘TrM^ P^/^=D QST 5-tool o ct^t) donetfS Iron morktr denotes eaislinq spot t'e«ot»on. meon teo level doti^ « « .S«4.« - : denoUs te'slln^ conteir in#, mten sco lt*el dotuni nqtC Beorirgs tho»n ere beitd u^^oiT oiiGn^ ddtw^------------------ This contour Infcrmot^ is ..lAifl-Jtom our 4ott«i n-g-a I. This t(#vty Int'ends to sho« U«# bo«e^its of the obovt dtscfBtd property., th# tpdotlon of on tilstinB house, end the lecoHon of ^ **hvdeovor* thoreoii. II does not pt^porl to show ony other improvtmonis or sncroodvnvits. i e**f liwr<» n38-1 '.CB • . • •401 •e COWH t OMHIIIK!, IHC • •e^et MM Ml nwttr* Arm mno *m 9» mm woot m iwtct nwv • M e icCMio m ■i nt Uit 9 nt o*is m 9TM f r-2(r “TBT- SEPTIC SYSTEM APPROVAL // it it ''X \ ORONOCOPY T> . \ ■• >■ ■ '-v^/ CITY of ORONO Munkipal Offices Street Addreu: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066 Owner Ff € i)_P 0 Phone (Home) Address \‘^MO h:K iJ City <^fc^O (Work) State Zip Site Evaluator KcU.-» tfcX State License # Phone# 3iiyl Type of ___Sini^^ Fai^v V Multi Family_______ y^^BBBnercial^ Gallons Per Day_______________ C^No. Potential Bedrooms 3________ ^ope: ~~______ Soil Sizing Factor I. i Perc Rates P-1 514 P-2 li.\ P-3 iS A P-5 l>.4 P-6 P-7 B-5 B-6Restricting Layer Depth B-l 3.*7 B-2 3 > B-3 3.^ B-4^___ ___ ___ Type of Treatment System: Standard Ic Alternative___ Other___ Performance_____ Pressurized Mound System______________ At-Grade System_____________ Gravity Trenches System_______________ Pressurized Trench System_____ Gravity Trenches W/ Lift_______________ Pressurized Bed System ^____ Holding Tank W/ Alarm_______________ Septic Tank Size i ______ # of Tanks ^ Lift Tank Size ICcO Pump Brand_______________GPM LiO Treatment System: Minimum “7SO Head ~^<eund Bed Square Feet with C inches of rock below pipe Mound Treatment Area THIS IS NOT A PERMIT. This is a design approval form which must accompany the site plan. A permit must be issued to a licensed septic contractor prior to installation. NOTICE TO INSTALLERS: Any changes to the approved plans must have prior approval of the inspector (952-249-4600) Call for inspection 24 hours in advance. ALL DRAINFIELD AREAS MUST BE FENCED OFF prior to building site excavation and fencing must remain in place until final site grading. Approval to pour footings will not be granted until the Inspections Department has verified the primary and alternate sites are protected. NO VEHICLILAR TRAFFIC OF ANY KIND is allowed within 20' of tested drainfield sites ever. ACCEPTED DENIED______By the City ofOrono subject to existing regulations and the following conditions: «\\\ VVjVt- S.\v Matt Bolterman, On-Site Systems Manager Date lUephooe (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 www4±oroao.mn.us iaamti i- APR 1 4 2003 Cl IY Ur U mOnu REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: April 14,2003 ITEM NO.: / 3 Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services Director’s Report Item Description: Heritage Drive Sewer Extension Introduction In 1998, an assessment gravity sewer project was completed for the Shoreline/Heritage neighborhood. This project was one of the ten 1995 MUSA expansion areas which were sewered because of failing septic systems and inadequate replacement septic sites. All of the costs for this project were assessed to the neighborhood residents. When this project was completed, the two properties at the west end of Heritage Drive were removed from the project because of strong objections by the property owners. These two properties were isolated from the rest of the project area and would need to be ser\ ed by a pressure sewer system because of the low elevation of the properties. The intent, in 1998, was to complete a pressure sewer extension project to serve the two properties at the end of Heritage Drive, at a later date, when requested by the property owners. Project Assessments and Connection Fees The assessment for the Shorcline/Heritagc project was $15,500 for a 15-year period at an interest rate of 6.25%. All of the properties in the project area were provided gravity sewer with the exception of five properties at the eastern end of Heritage Lane which required a pressure sewer system because of the low elevations of these properties. These five property owners had to install a pump station to pump into the pressure sewer. The fi\e properties that required a pump station were assessed $15,500 and then provided a check from the City for $3,500 to help pay for the installation of a pump station. This resulted in a net cost of $12,000 for provision of a pressure sewer service to the property line. Page 1 of 3 rjRA-SiAfTA' n r fcnMnani«a%lTA^n*MaffHKMmu<KiamH«n The two properties at the west end of Heritage Drive have both been sold, since 1998, and the new owners are interested in connecting to sewer. A new house is being built on one of these properties and a variance approval condition was connection to sewer. The other property owner is experiencing septic system problems and is also interested in connecting to sewer and has requested to be assessed for the project costs. The current connection fee, in the 2003 Fee Schedule, for the 1998 Shoreline/Heritage project is $I 8,545 and is based on the project assessment that has been adjusted for a cost of living increases on an aimual basis. This connection fee is based on the project assessment for connection to a gravity sewer. The five properties in the project that were served by a pressure sewer received an assessment rebate that was used to help defray the costs of installing a pump station. We are recommending that, in the interest of fairness to the residents in the Shoreline/Heritage sewer project, the two properties on the west end of Heritage Drive that will be served by this pressure sewer extension project be charged a connection fee that is based on the Shoreline/Heritage project assessment. These two new properties should V charged a connection fee based on the costs incurred by the five properties in the original p.\ eel that are served by a pressure sewer. The 1998 assessment for a pressure sewer service to the property line was $ 12,000 which equates to a $ 14,400 cost today. Based on the fact that the two current property owners on the west end of Heritage Drive are new since 1998 and were not involved in the objections to the original Shoreline/Heritage sewer project, and the connection fee is not needed to fund the debt service on the bonds used to finance the original sewer project, we are recommending that these owners be allowed to either pay an up-front connection fee or request to be assessed for the project costs. The property owners would need to sign an assessment waiver, so we would not have to conduct the formal public and assessment hearing proce.ss. The recommended assessment would be $14,400 for a 15-year lime period at an interest rate of 6.25%. There is an adequate cash balance in the Sewer Fund to pay for this project, and our recommendation is to fund this project from the sewer fund and the project revenues then are put into the sewer fund. Project Quotations Plans and specifications have been completed, and we have sent a Request for Quotations to three directional boring contractors that have previously completed City projects. The estimated construction cost for this project is less than $50,000, so the solicitation of quotations is an acceptable method to select a contractor to complete this project. The deadline for the receipt of quotations was 11:00 a.m. on Monday, March 24'’. A tabulation of the quotations received is show n below. Page 2 of 3 11 laiiiiiri iiiiTi i EJ Mayers Inc., Corcoran, Minnesota Red Pederson Utilities, Hopkins Minnesota MinComm Utility Construction, Mora Minnesota $13,125 $14,850 $20,875 We are recommending acceptance of the quotation from EJ Mayers Inc. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to establish a $14,400 per property connection fee for the connection of 1955 and 1980 Heritage Drive to the Heritage Drive pressure sewer extension project w ith the provision that the property owners can request to be assessed for the project costs at a 6.25% interest rate for a 15-year time period. Motion to accept the quotation in the amount $13,125 from EJ Mayers Inc., Corcoriin, Minnesota for completion of the Heritage Drive Sewer Extension project with project funding from the Sewer Fund and approval of the appropriate year 2003 budget adjustment to reflect this expenditure. Page 3 of 3 r /f^JTiaF NEIGBBOR.|A(»O0 VUA5 IKt Tun hAOS^ fXPANSWU AHEA. j ^RITAGE DRIVE ^HERITAGE DRIVE ORONO, MINNESOTA SANITARY SEWER 139I004.0WC 2/20/98 figure 4 COMM. 139 j 00 Bonestroo S5 AnderUk & lul Associates 8 Artftoetf I APR 1 4 2003 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Oil r ur OHONO DATE: April 14,2003 ITEM NO.: y y Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services Director ’s Report Item Description: Revised Acceptance of Quotations Willow/TH 12 Signal Revisions Introduction We are working on a State Aid-funded project to add leR turn arrows to both the northbound and southbound Willow Drive approaches to the Willow Drive/TH 12 traffic signal. There are existing left turn arrows on both Highway 12 approaches to this signal. This is a very busy intersection and there are peak hour traffic queues for left turning vehicles on the Willow Drive approaches to this intersection. This condition will worsen with the new Stone Bay development project, and the new Highway 12 project will also impact this intersection as the number of railroad crossings will be limited to only two during project construction. A project to add a northbound left turn arrow to the Old Crystal Bay Road/TH 12 intersection is also planned for this summer. Both of these projects will also include changing the existing incandescent signal bulbs to LED bulbs. The LED bulbs have an eight to ten year life in comparison to a two-year life for the incandescent bulbs, lliis will result in both an increase in safety at the signals and reduced costs for changing light bulbs. The LED bulbs arc also more efficient with a payback of about three years from reduced costs for electricity. Cities are responsible for the electric costs on traffic signals. The Willow Drive signal currently has an Emergency Vehicle Preemption (EVP) system. An EVP system will be added to the Old Crystal Bay Road Signal, and the new Brown Road signal will also have an EVP system. Project Quotations Plans and specifications have been completed, and we have sent a Request for Quotations to three contractors that specialize in traffic signal projects. The estimated construction cost for this project is less than $50,000, so the solicitation of quotations is an acceptable method to select a contractor to complete this project. Quotations were received atl 1 :00 a.m. on Monday, March 24th from three traffic signal contractors. Page 1 of 2 Jl 1 r At the March 24*’' Council meeting the quotation from Ridgedale Electric was accepted, since then we have discovered that the project costs provided in this quotation were not in conformance with the Request for Quotation requirements. Correction of this cost error results in Ridgedale Electric not having the lowest responsible quotation, and we are recommending rescinding the acceptance of this quotation. The lowest responsible quotation was received from Egan-McKay, New Hope in the amount of $12,550, and we are reconunending acceptance of this quotation COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to rescind previous acceptance of the quotation from Ridgedale Electric and to accept the quotation in the amount $12,550 from Egan-McKay New Hope, Minnesota for completion of the Willow Drive/TH 12 Traffic Signal Revisions Project and approval of a budget adjustment for the Year 2003 State Aid Construction Fund to reflect this expenditure. Page 2 of 2 1 k APR 1 4 2003 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION I r ur CHONO DATE: April 10,2003 ITEM NO: / Department Approval: Name RonMoorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Payment Requests-Lon^ake Fire Station The City has received six invoices for payment related to the fire station. Connectivity Solutions, for speakers and cabling for training room, in the amount of $ 1,560.15. GME Consultants, for the summary report regarding all testing and soils corrections on the site, in the amount of $127.00. Manor Electric, for installing cord reels in the vehicle bay area, in the amount of SI .350.00, and for adding seven electrical receptacles, in the amount of $765.00. SEH for design of wetland mitigation and preparation of erosion control and storm water plans, in the amount of $8,836.00. BKV Group, for additional engineering work related to the soils correction work required for the site, in the amount of $12,000, and for reimbursable expenses in the amount of $50.32. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the requests for payment in the amounts of $1,560.00 to Connectivity Solutions, $127.00 to GME Consultants, $2,115.00 to Manor Electric, $8,836.00 to SEH, and $12,050.32 to BKV Group. CmeeiMn smiims % INVOICE PAGE: Cmminlt*tionSt$nm 6250 Sycamort Lane North ■ Suite 500A Maple Grove. MN 55369 Phone; 763.424*7300 • Far 763-424-5408 INVOICE NUMBER: INVOICE DATE; 0007927-IN 03/25/03 CITY OF LONG LAKE 1964 PARK AVE LONG LAKE MN 553S6 SALESPERSON: SALES TAX CODE: CUSTOMER NO: JOB NUMBER: CUSTOMER P.O.: SHIP VIA: TERMS: KEN OWEN liN CITYLON 1020085 MICHELLE MORSE UPON RECEIPT CONTACT: MINNESOTA SALES CD DESCRIPTION QUANTITY PRICE AMOUNT LONG LAKE FIRE STATION CHANGE ORDER # 2 TO CONTRACT REPLACE COMMON AREA SPEAKERS WITH VLN SPEAKERS. CABLE ALL TV LOCATIONS IN TRAINING ROOM. EXTEND PROJECTOR FEED TO HEAD END. ADDED THREE SHELVES IN AV RACK. LABOR MATERIAL 16.000 1.000 65.000 520.150 1,040.00 520.15 NET INVOICE: FREIGHT: TAX & MISC.: 1,560.15 .00 .00 TOTAL DUE;1,560.15 ZOO/ZOO‘4 LX91*amr 9.-101 io aixo ZZ96 9L9 Zit 6S:iI COOZ.LO'HdV .^0 1 NW#7699 ?.O.Bsxl4SO MiuiB90lt,MN SS4I5 Phoae 1.8QO-79MS23 Fn 763«S59>0720 AorU 03.2003 Statement of Account Giy of Long Lake 19MPaikAv«Ba0 P.O.BOX 606 LoaKUko.MNS5356 Anemioa: Accoonts Payable aientD: '^ONll City of Loog Lake fitijgct Invoke 9310B IGU Type bvoiM Dm Dua Dm brraka AnouiM PtyoMMi/ OteOiis Fiaoee Balanct Cbti|i »wwate»ft»rai«tumm«yii^lhrLflByL>lttFirtStaiiaaiBLoMLikfcM<ni>ttoaflirl>Mptrio4ofDK»iribir 1.2002 OMoall MwpM, 3003 Pr^MC BnfiMH: Ry» Sdnidt lavoka OSnOaU 04/l8A»1137.00 S0.00 $12700 Tool Dua 137.00 rtaJcctToate. $13700 $0.00 $12700 (MW 127.00 SMiwuTocak:$127.00 S0.00 $137.00 aoo 137.90 'FINANCE CHARGES MUST BE PAH3 IF YOU HAVE CHOSEN TO DELAY TIMELY PAYMENT. THANK YOU. •*••**•••• TKEEZHr' APR - 7 200 Qtv of Long lake Z00/Z00*6 1.Z9X#SBYI ONOT 10 Alio ZZ96 911 ZS6 0»!SI COOZiii’T^V STATEMENT PAGE . 1 CITY OF LONG LAKE H P.O. BOX 606 B LONG LAKE, MN 55356 CU8T. NO.100469 DATE 03/06/2003 \ TELEPHONE 952-473-6961 r STAH NT CVCCOUNT AGING 1 CURRENT 31-60 DAYS 61-90 DAYS 91-120 DAYS 12UDAYS TOTAL OPEN 1875.00 1875.00 f j. uo j:7 10325 eg/jy7lo o3 02/11/2003 > MANOR ELECTRIC, REFERENCEINSTALL CORD Ki. INSTALL (3) REC Payment Activit iWer DESCRIPTION EiliS EPTAC y from C?/01/2003 8 IJ 23 455 WILLOW DRIVE NORTH LONG LAKE, MN 55356 LAST PAY DATE LAST PAY AMT. M - IM 18 u NET 10 DAYS CUSTOMER: 004 69 CUST. NO CITY OF LONG LAKE CURRENT BA1> 1350.00 525.00 DATE 03/06/2003 PAY THIS ll!l/5.00 ______________AMOUW ^ ___________ PLEASE DETACH THIS PORTION A RETURN WITH YOUR REMITTANCE. p- MANOR ELECTRIC, INC. 455 WILLOW DRIVE NORTH LONG LAKE, MN 55356 Phone: 952-473-4701Fax: FAX 952-473-3396 INVOICE 10430 INVOICE NUMBER miVA LU (jiTi or IjUNC j P.O. BOX 606 LONG LAKE, MN 55356 ORDER NUMBER: 2778 OUST. NO. T00469 LONGLA DATE UJ/14/200J REFERENCE LONG LAKE FIRE V TELEPHONE 952-473-6961" Soidby: ^ p n nnx RnA JOB LOCATION ann RprjrPTarT.p JOBUJfirXAlib&Tir PMPoriPMrv LONG LAKE, MN 55356 LIGHT. lOWG : FIRE STATION ADD (4) RECEPTACLES FOR ENTERTAINMENT CENTER. RELOCATE EMERGENCY LIGHT. LABOR - 2 HOURS MATERIALS 195.00 45.00 BE rV.sms. MAR 1 8 2003 Cit\' of Long Lake Page 1 VMANQR ELECTRIC. JNC^ PAY THIS CITY OF LONQ4¥ftSMIf^$ C40.0(» ^455 WILLOW DRIVE NORTH LONG LAKE, MN 55356 NET 10 DAYfr 100469 Inv #: 10430 CUSTOMER CUST.NG03/14/2003 DATE: PAY THIS fc, AMOUNT ^ 240.00 TERMS: PLEASE DETACH THIS PORTION & RETURN WITH YOUR REMITTANCE. • «t» • I •*.••• •• • • • PLEASE NOTE OUR NEW REMITTANCE ADDRESS FOLLOWS: AS t • • BKV GROUP, INC. P.O. BOX 1691 MINNEAPOLIS/MN 55480-1691 •• . ? ro o» m IS>o o o CD • • «o a* fo o% <n fo fo YOUR ASSISTANCE IN CHANGING YOUR RECORDS GREATLY APPRECIATED.# • •• • • i • *.Bkv CROUP, INC. . •• •.* . “ s' • *I'' O K O § Q g BflUDg Group 0A3 ToUb: Bflfinf Group ftfiniB Totelts 900/t00*4 l6»Ti Projuc 1S1S.0I Febnury25.2003 Pags2er3 Outside Services Exponite Mifc. ConsttlCiAt tk^tlC^r>£c Outside Services Totals Chuift 12.000.00 $12,000.00 BHUnf Group Tool: BllllagGroiip: ttWTMp $1ZOOO.OO Contract#; Reimbursables Copy Paper 8 1/2 X 11 ExproN Mail Servioec Fax Long Dist Telefdioae Chrgs Mileage/Travel Foatage Reiinbursables Totals □UDB 6.60 3.46 040 0.09 3843 1.34 $5042 BUling Croup Tool: Project Totals: ♦♦♦ Invoice Total **♦ SS0.32 $12,05032 4 sinri oNoi io aixo 3296 9L9 ZS6 ITtSO C008.9Z ‘«vh Ptojecc 151SA1 FAnury25.2l Pve3of3 1 Cunot gflflt JI qH Ptatetlonal Services S0.00 $213,444.97 $213,444^: Rdatmnable Expenses:SS0.32 $15/143.51 $15,493.83 Outside Services:S12.000.00 $11,655.03 $23,655.03 Other Sendees nd Fees:$0.00 $0.00 $0.0( $0.00 $0.00 $0.0( Taxes:$0.00 $0.00 $09C Total S12.05032 S240J43.51 S25'»593.82 900/S00 ’< I6YI#ax\n sNoi io X1I3 un ny Zi6 Li’-io eooz.9Z*inm r sett • •• at w ■ ^ ^ 10901 RtO Cini* Oflv*. Suiti aoo, MnftUMka. HN 9S343-M01 953.913.3600 9524134901 FAX •TtkUMan • ngtnintaf • tnaUtamtnial Hmit Fiymint Ti: 5535 Vadnals Cinur Dfivi, Sl Flul, MN SS1tO>Sl96 FEIN: «loai309 > 651.4904000 • 600.335.3055 BKV GROUP ATTN: DAVID R. KROOS 222 NORTH SECOND STREET MINNEAPOUS MN 55401 CITY OF LONG LAKE FIRE STATION - EXTRA SERVICES rrttffBii«en>l StvIcon! NovdmbTl. 2002 throueh April 1. 4002 Professional Personner PRINCIPAL PROJECT MANAGER SR BIOLOGIST LEAD TECHNICIAN SR TECHNICIAN TECHNICIAN SR RESIDENT PROJECT REP SURVEY CREW CHIEF ' INSTRUMENT OPERATOR SURVEY ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF Totals Hours 17.00 10.00 2.00 36.50 19.50 6.00 13.00 24.00 22.00 4.00 7.00 161.00 Total Labor Relmbursabie Expense EMPLOYEE MILEAGE • EMPL TRAV/OTHER PROJ EXP EQUIPMENT EXPENSE Total Reimbursables Billing Limits Total Billings Limit Adjusbnent Current 16,540.06 Prior 0.00 February 14,2003 Project No: ABKVGR0201.01 invoice No: 0097218 Amount 3.031.61 1.783.30 217.94 3.561.62 1,363.64 413.64 1,299.48 2,050.18 1.j74.24 280.60 503.37 16,118.62 251.44 135.00 35.00 421.44 To-date 16,540.06 12,000.00 Shon Etton Heidrlclaon tne. • YourTraiMnMeufcf • EemOpponunityEmploytr 900/900*4 I6ITI ax\n 9N01 io Azzo r 16.118.62 421.44 (4,540.06) Total this invoice $12,000.00 • aBMa 8296 9L> 896 LliBO C008.98*1IVK 1 10901 Red Circle Drive. Suite 200. Minnetonka. MN 55343-9901 952 91^2600 952.912^1601 FAX archiiedure • engineering • encironmenial * Iransporlalion February 14,2003 RE: Long Lake, Minnesota Long Lake Fire Station Request for Additional Fee SF.M No.: A-BKVGR0201.00 BKV Group Attn: David R. Kroos 222 North Second Street M'nncapoHs, MN 55401 ’ Dear Mr. Kroos: Our original proposal for the design of the Long Lake Fire Station included only fees to complete the civil design and provide drawings and specification sections to supplement the BKV Group bid documents. We have completed this work and have invoiced BKV Group. After further investigation of the soil conditions for the proposed site, Ron Kirk, the Program Manager, decided that a separate soils correction bid package would be a more efficient way to en^ur.' the scheduling of the construction for the building. Therefore, we developed a separate bid document for Bid Package No. 1 Site Excavation and Engineered Fill. We did this work at no additional cost to the project. As you know, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) became heavily involved with the project upon the recognition of wetlands associated with the proposed property and the need to impact the wetlands with Bid Pacl^ge No. 1. Our personnel immediately attended to the needs of the MCWD board and staff, delineated the wetlands, received acceptance of the delineation, integrated MCWD design compliance issues into Bid Package No. I Bid Documents, and applied for and received a permit for Bid Package No.l. The fee for these services has been invoiced to the City of Long Lake and the fee has been paid. The difficulties encountered with facilitating the Bid Package No. 1 MCWD pemiit immediately caused a chain reaction. To accommodate the timely scheduling of Bid Package No. I., some design modifications needed to be made to insure project compliance tluuugh Bid Package No.2. Although some of the modiHcations were included in a separate proposal in the amount of $8,836.00 for the design of the wetland mitigation and preparation of erosion control and storm water permitting subi^itted to the City of Long Lake, the relocated horizontal and vertical alignments for the proposed Access Road were not. Until bids for Bid Package No. 1 were received, we were unaware of our needed involvement during construction of Bid Package No.l. We did plan to ha^e involvement with construction of the basic civil site work, such as general grading, parking lot construction, and utility connections. This work has been completed. However we had not budgeted any time for construction services during a major soils correction project such as occurred with Bid Package No. 1. Our involvement included the following scope of work: A.Prepared Construction contracts and organized and conducted a pre-construction meeting for Bid Package No. 1. B. Provided services during the construction phase of Bid Package No. I that included: 1. 2. Interpreted contract documents and assisted with changes to the contract. Made recommendations for field orders, change orders and pay requests. Short Ellioll Hendrteksofl tnc. * Your Trustad Rosourc* * Equal Opportunity Employer I tk J BKV Group February 14,2003 Page 2 3. Recommended acceptance of the project at time of completion. 4. Provided limited services of field resident project representative. 5. Surveyed Settlement Plates. 6. Computed as-built Earthwork Volumes. C.Organized and provided information to accommodate the changed site conditions and implemented them into Bid Package No. 2. 1. Organized X, Y and Z coordinates of surcharge and engineered fill. 2. Developed as-built grading contours. 3. Updated existing Site Topographical Survey Drawing. 4. Designed modular block wall to save Pine trees at north end of site. In total, the requested additional fee for construction services for Bid Package No. I and preparing new information for Bid Package No. 2 is $16,540.06. This i.ncludes surveying necessary to complete the record keeping for the settlement plates through April 24,2002. We recognize that this is a sizeable request, one that was difficult for us to quantify considering the continuing requests for additional services, llie final construction cost for the Bid Package No. 1 soils correction was $225,000.00. The construction cost is approximately 9% lower than the Engineers estimate of $246,881.00. Our requested additional fee is $ 16,540.06 approximately 7% of Construction Cost. We have had periodic discussions with Ron Kirk regarding these additional services. 1 understand he or Bill Wolters has notified you that It would be acceptable to submit our request for additional compensation to you and that the request would be favorably received by them. However, I understand that they arc willing to approve extra compensation limited to $12,000. Enclosed is an invoice for this amount. We are available to discuss this request at your convenience. If you have any questions please contact me. Sincerely, SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC ^DaKid R. Box/ud City Engineer c: Michelle Morse, City of Long Lake Ron Moorse, City of Orono Ron Kirk, Kirk Program Management, Inc. liVMRfniMiMvpoiV'UviKnOIVaqMk CTP archiigtl3r$ • mgtAurtag • tHgiroHmtina 3SaSVUnaitCMnr0rtvt,6L^al. MNSS110-Sl9e eSl .490.^ 661.4802190 FAXnmtntai • transparutlan rew:4l-12S12U • 651.4902000 * 800.329.20S5 CITY OP LONG LAKE ATTN: MICHELLE MORSE CITY ADMINISTRATOR 1964 PARK AVENUE LONG LAKE MN 553S6 Revised Mer^ 5,2003 March 14,2002 Project No: ALONGL0204.00 Invoice No: 0086^7 *T ;“-*r rr II ’ 0 2C03 ijjjjl .......... J'J WETLAND MITIGATION DESIGN AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS ^ Profeeeionat Sanrloee; February 1.2002 through PttHTiffTY Task: 31000 DESIGN DEV • WETLAND MITIGATION WETLAND MITIGATION DESIGN Professional Personnel SCIENTIST STAFF ENGINEER SR BIOLOGIST LEAD TECHNICIAN SR TECHNICIAN Totals Total Labor Hours Rale Amount 48.S0 158.34 3,400.00 16.50 50.69 1,233.87 10.50 50.69 1,111.53 2.00 50.69 198.40 18.00 50.69 .1,270.08 95.50 7,213.88 Raimburaable Expenses COMPUTER EXPENSE Total Reimbursables 225.28 Total this ttsk 7,213.88 225.28 7,439.16 L Task: 31100 DESIGN DEV > EROSION CONTROL EROSION CONTROL PLAN Protaealonal Personnel PROJECT ENGINEER STAFF ENGINEER LEAD TECHNICIAN SR TECHNICIAN Totals Total Labor Hours 10.00 19.50 2.00 8.00 39.50 Amount 1,091.90 1,414.92 198.40 664.48 3.269.70 Total this task Bluing Limits Total Billings Umlt Ad|uatment Current 10,708.86 Prior 0.00 10.708.86 8,836.00 Slion 0900 HsidricKMn lae.YsurlhHBd Auavrei Total this Invoice Equa Opponuiuy Emplo)(« 3,269.70 3,269.70 -1,872.86 8,838.00 100/800*4 I89TI aXYI OHOl iO AXIS 8896 9X» 896 8S«60 e008.TrX4V r 9CTP 10901 R«U Circle Orlvi. Suite 200. MInnetcniei, MM be343-930l Md2.yi2^eUu taa Ufchiteeturt • tn^imerinf • insironmtntal • trafup$rUiion Febraary 14,2003 •I* •« • •••* BKV Group Attn; David R.Kroos R£: Long Lake, Minnesota Long Lake Fire Station Request for Additional Fee •r’SEHNo.; A-BKVGR0201.00. . • • • • • ^ .1 • f I _ ^ 1!•F55 1 7 2CC3 t; •* it I . 222 North Second Street____.....__^ Minneapolis, MN 55401’i /1 1 I Dear Mr. Kioos: Our original proposal for the H»-$i£n of the Long Lake Fire Station included only fees to conplete the civil rie^ign and provide drawings and speciflcatiou sections to supplement the BKV Group bid documents. We have completed this work and have invoiced BKV Group. After ftirther investigation of the soil conditions for the proposed site, Ron Kirk, die Program Manager, decided that a separate soils correction bid package would be a more efficient way to ensure the schedoling of the constniction for building. Therefore, we developed a separate bid document for Bid Package No. 1 Site Ysxcavadon and Engineered Fill. We did work at no additional cost to the project. As you know, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) became heavily involved with the project upon the recognition of wetlands associated with the proposed property and the need to impact the wetlands with Bid Package No. 1. Our personnel immediately attended to the needs of the MCWD board and staf^ delineated the wetlands, received acceptance of the delineation, integrated MCWD design compliance issues into Bid Package No.l Bid Documents, and applied for and received a permit for Bid Package No.l. The fee forthese services been invoiced to the City of Long Lake and the fee has been paid. The difficulties encountered with fimilitating the Bid Package No. 1 MCWD permit immediately caused a chain reaction. To accommodate the timely scheduling of Bid Package No. 1., soine desi^ modifications needed to be made to insure project compliance through Bid Package No.2.jAi^ugh some of die /"mbdificacioas were uici xd in a separate proposal in the amount of 5Ki36.uO foFthe desim of the wetland I mitisation and preparation of erosion control and storm water permitting submitted to the City of Long Lake, ‘ "the Treated horizontal and vertical alignments for tbe propos^ Access Road were not. ^ Until bids for Bid Package No. 1 were received, we were unaware of our needed involvement during construction of Bid Package No.l. We did plan to have involvement with construction of the basic civil site work, such as general grading, parking lot construction, and utility connections. This work has been completed. However we had not budgeied any time for construction services during a major soils correction project such as occurred with Bid Package No. 1. Our involvement included die following scope of work: A. Prepared Construction contracts and organized and conducted a pre-constmetion meeting for Bid Package No. 1. B. Provided services during the construction phase of Bid Package No. 1 that included: 1. 2. Interpreted oontram documents and assisted Mtitfa changes to tbe contract. Made recommendations for field orders, change orders and pay requests. StiMT EJFon HsAdricnon Inc.Y(W/TrunedRlSOu<Ct eQitH Oopaminiir ^npioyer »00/e00*d I89If a^nn onoi lo axio ZZ96 9Z.9 296 29^60 E002iII ‘HdV ON.V vjroup February 14,2003 Page 2 3. Recommended acceptance < <f die project at time of completion. 4. Provided limited services r f field resident project representative. 5. Surveyed Settlement Plate t. 6. Computed as-built Earthwork Volumes. C.Organized and provided information to accommodate the changed site conditions and implemenied them into Bid Package No. 2. 1. 2. 3. 4. Organized X, Y and Z coordinates of surcharge and engineered fill. Developed as*built grading contours. Updated existing Site Topographical Survey Drawing. Designed modular block wall to save Pine trees at north end of site. In total, the requested additional fee for eonstrucdoo services for Bid Package No.l and preparing new inlbnnation for Bid Package No. 2 is $16,540.06. This mchides surveying necessary to complete fee record keeping for fee settlement plates through A|ml 24,2002. We recognize feet this is a sizeable request, one that was difficult for us to quantify considering fee condnuing requests fer additional services. The final consiructioa cost for fee Bid Package No. 1 soils correction was $225,000.00. The construction cost is approximately 9% lower fean fee Engineen estimate of $246,881.00. Our requested additional fee is $16,540.06 qiproxifflately 7% of Construction Cost We have had periodic discussions with Ron Kiric rogarding these additional services. I understand he or Bill Woken has notified you that it would be acceptable to sobmit our request for additional compensatioo to you and feat fee request would be favorably received by them. However, I understand that they are willing to approve extra compensation limited to $12,000. Enclosed is an invoice for this amount We are available to discuss this request at your cooveruence. If you have any questions please contact me. Sincerely, SHORT ELUOTT HENDRICKSON INC ^3amel R. Boxhid.'PE. City Bns^er c: Michellb Morse, City of Long’Eake^ Ron Mooise, City of Orono Ron Kirk, Kirk Program Management Inc. l00/»00*d 1891*axvi 9N01 JO A1I3 ZZ96 9if Z96 Z$:60 COOZ.lT’UdV REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^....................... APR I 4 2003 u.. r ur ORONO DATE: April 10,2003 ITEM NO: / ip Department Approval: Nimc RonMoorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Application and (%rtincate for Payment No. 11-Long Lake Fire ^’tation Rochon Corporation, the General Contractor, has submitted Application and Certificate for Payment No.l 1 in the amount of $48,259.40. This application has bwn certified for payment by both the Architect and Project Manager, and a lien waiver related to the amount of this payment has been provided. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Application and Certificate for Payment No. 11 from Rochon Corporation in the amount of $48,259.40, to be funded from the Joint Fire Account. «• * WAIVER OF CONSTRUCTION LIEN, PAYMENT BOND AND LIEN FUNDS March 1,2003 For good and valuable consideration, the undersigned hereby irrevocably and uncon'^ilionally waives and releases any and all (a) rights and clainis for a construction or other hen on land and buildings being constructed, altered, erected or repaired and to the appurtenances thereunto, (b) rights and claims on any payment bond(s) furnished in conjunction with said construction, alteration erection or repair, and (c) rights and claims for lien on money, bonds, or warrants due or to become due to the prime contractor therefor. The property covered by this waiver is oumed by City of Long Lake (owner), is located at 340 Willow Drive. Long Lake, MN is desetibed as L ong l.ake Fire Station and this waiver pertains to a portion of the work to be performed by R«~chon Corporation (prime contractor). This waiver covers all labor, material and supplies for construction, alteration, erection, and repairs APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT (SUBSTITUTE AIA DOCUMENT G702)ONI 0# J 1 TOiOWMIll Dtv of long 1M4 A««nu« PfIOJICT: long loko rki Suifon 340 W«o«r Drivt Ufif l*k« MN S5)Se APPlfCATlON MO 11 PCMOO TO 38 Fo^Ol TROM iCONTRACTOPI RochOA C o*PO«M<mi 38&0 Aiwtopol.t l«n« No«th Surtt 101 Plr^noulA. Mff S&44 7 VIA lARCHtTCCT) 8RV 0mm 222 fAmrt 2a <j Stfott lAnroapokt. MN SS401 ARCHiTfCT S PROJtCT NO 151501 CONTRACT TOR CoAOfN C oao Iaici ^a • MotoAN CONTRACT OATf CONTRACTOR S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY ChOAQO Ofdo«« *pp«o«td <A P«4v>OU« moAlhl by Oa AW TOTAl Apo»o«04 UoAih liuAibot Oott Apg«o»«d totals MOOfTtOffS 221 708 49 000 OCOOCTIONS 000 N«l C^»A9« by CN«AQt 0»dtt«737.708 49 Af <<ation IS m«<7« foi Pj«m«nt. as shSAin b«(OM. *n conn«ci«OA Iht Contract. Coni.rviai*on Sn4«f. Sobst'twie AlA Oocurnent G703 ts aiTacnad Ta « uo44«Si0Aed CoAtracio* tn«t to iNt b«»i oi in* r.oAii*cto«'i kAo«yi*tf9« «tfoAA*i«A and b«4«t trv« Work covartd by inn Appacanon for Pa»«A#Ai bPtA c(ynpiti*d acto^daiK* A»th it# C oai »#ci OocuAipAti that aa an«owr\ts hav* b«*n paat by in* C poukio* for Work tor yyh<n pftvKKJt C#*1i1<tly» for P#»rn*n| «i*ry tt$v0d pa»A*»Al* **c*iv*d from th* OAftpr and lhai Currard paymani thOArA hart«« •» r»o a duO CONTRACTOR Oai* March I. 7003 1 original contract SUM ............................. • 7 Nat Cnar'Ot by CKana* 0»dar» ................................ • 3 contract SUM TO OATC ilrp I *7 31 ............... t a total COAiPUTCOA STORtO tOOAfC................. % iCoK^nn 0 OA G703l 5 RllAiNAGl a of Comp**tad Work iCoA^nn 0 • C on Q703I b if Siorad Maranai iCoiumA r on G7Q31 Total RaikiTtaga Uaia 5a • 5b o» Total m CoiuAv I of 07031 ................................ I e total IARTrtO USSR!TAlftAGT ........................... • iLina 4 last Lina S Toiaii 7 lfSSPR€VtOUSCCRTinCAT|SrOR PAYMiNT ILna 8 bom p«w« C*rl*f<at*l t 8 CURRCNT PAyMCrrT OUf . . I 9 HALANCC TO fifpSM Pius aiTAiNAGf I ana 3 «tl* ina 6J Sial* of MmnakOia C(r«mty of Hamapm S«ibtciR*d and tAO«n to ma 1«t ■S»t of M»:h 2003 1.980 970 00 227.208 49 2.208.178 49 2.150 441 S3 i 53.176 78 2 097 264 79 2 049 005 35 48 259 40 110 913 74 *y N *a»y Pwb*c , ✓s^.VW cc ^ XP My Commi%&on t*p-«r« Jan, */»31 2vXJ5 ARCHTTICT 8 CIRfifiCATI TOR PArMCNT In a<.co*a^Ka A*in m# Conn <i Oocumanit batad on on i«a ot%**»ation» and iria data co#rp»»»ng ir»a jto»a appKaion iha AicMaci c*»Mai la i^a Onnai ihai to »b* bt«* r: i»ia A»ch*tait t knoAtadg* a>»oimalion ptd taWi iTd Wo«» na» progittktd aa mdKaiad ina QwaM« of ma Wo»k >t a» accordanca M-in tna Cont*aci OrKianam* a<»d ina Connattor t% ani.iiad .o pa»mani of ma AMOUTrt CIRTiTiiD AMOUNT CfvrifICO ..................... • lAitach atp»jp<7«>nli amount ca*t*i>ad m4zs‘i Thts cartuKata iST^ nagotiabia Tn* AMOUNT CCR^ID a pmM onTy to iha Coniiactor naf^ap rvt<avi iau«anca paimant and accaprarvo of paymani art Aithout pramdca to any nghii of tha Uai ^ or CorUraclor undyr Ifv* Cor^UacI 1 PACE 2 OF 2 CONTINUATION SHEET SubttituU AIA Oocumtnl G703 LONG LAKE FIRE STATION AmiCATtON NUMtlM: AAniCATION OATt MfUOO rROM TO CONTAACTOA S MOJECT NO: It t Ma« C) 1 2t 020A COC« o«ooc onw 0220C 02EOC 02SI3 02%»6 024BC 0330C 034tc 042CC 0344C 0%’Ot 3560C v<noc ytioc 3e40c 07SK 07»«C 0790C 0810C C830C 3838C 0830G 0881C 088(X 092K 09 ICC o9sgc 096 0980C 0990C I03SC >08CC •owe «020< •062'. tO»oc: «C44C « ISOC « J49C • ;6v: ’3»0t m jc I460C I»40C »600C OENl AQMTS BONO EARTHWOAK SJTf OTlllTHS ASPHALT PA VINO >jTE CONCntTI.SiOEV. 4 cANOSC APING CONCAITI PRECAST CONCAfTf MAS074RV ARCH precast steel pabrkiaticn STEEL ERECTION carpentry carpentry mat LS MiLLMVOTNl ROOEINO (VATCRPROOEING CAVAKIT4G ^ OOORS.HOMR ACCESS DOORS SEC’ CVCRMCAO DOOR COILING DOORS .*.0O0 VYINOOYYS LASSOLA2if^l CRVWALL CiES ERAMiC/QUARRv TiiE acoustical CEK.INO T CARPET,ViN»i Tile EPOAV FLOOR PAiNTifiG/VINYL »LAG POLES TOSET PAP’lTlONS TQiiET ACCESSORIES lOCAChS lOUVERS » «E Ea T.n GuiShCRS HAIR TACK BOARDS centiiyino devices Rf SiOCNTiAL EOU»P .V>NOOM BitNDS HOOR MATS • circle curtain PROJECTION SCREEN hVAC PLUMBtfuO » R€ PROTECTION ELECTRICAL subtotal *CE total SC.K1CUUD VALUE 86 S68 30 IS 607 00 197 389 04 117 233 00 es 038 7S 18 129 20 SO 981 00 es 497 16 t 73 663 00 I1S.8I1 00 S 87700 74.889 7S 27.9S4 00 35.968 SS 9.422 47 29 130 48 120077 70 S30 00 7.16SOO 2S.063 00 2«6 87 40 000 00 3 865 00 29.740 07 14 280 00 S5 850 00 14079 00 8648 00 27 797 00 29 728 00 31 204 00 1 837 SO 2 768 00 2 8S3 0C 21 675 00 1 095 00 458 00 1 1120C 3 855 80 1 625 20 2 082 00 2 315 00 2 695 66 181 05 130 7S0 0G 177 327 29 30 526 60 191 760 30 PREVIOUS APPlCATnUi 2 108 9J6 54 99 241 95 2 208 1 78 49 86 568 30 15 607 00 197 389 04 T17 233 00 58 910 22 '1.699 *0 27 738 00 85 497 16 173 663 00 115.811 00 5 877 00 74 889 75 27.954 00 35.966 55 9 422 47 29.130 48 120 077 70 530 00 7.165 00 25 063 JO 258 67 40 000 00 3 865 00 29.740 07 4 280 00 55 650 00 14 079 00 8 648 00 22 797 00 29 728 00 33.304 00 1 837 50 2 ^66 00 2 853 00 21.675 00 1.095 00 458 00 1.11200 3 6SS 60 1 625 20 2 082 00 2 J1S00 2 695 68 181 OS 130 750 00 177 327 29 30.S28 80 191.780 30 iHlS APPICATCR 2 353 1SS4I 97 288 13 2 150 441 53 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 oco 0 00 ooo 000 oco 000 000 000 ooc 000 0 00 000 ooc 000 ooc 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 ooo 000 OCO ooo ooo 0 CO STCRIO MATf AUi total TO date % •alaaci fOIRRSM RCTAAiACf ) oco 86 568 30 1PC 0 X 2 164 20 1 ooo 15 807 X IX ox 3X 17 1 ooo 197 389 C4 IX OX 3 828 4 7 1 ooo 1 1 7 333 X ICC OX 2 9X83 1 ooo 58 910 33 «9 36 138 S3 2 945 51 1 ooo 1 * 699 X 65 8 439 60 584 98 > ooo 37 738 X 54 23 233 00 1 386 X 1 ooo 85 497 16 ICC ox 2 13743 ooo 173 663 X IX ox 4.341 58 1 ooo 115.811 X IX ox 2 839 25 1 ooo 5 877 X ICC ox 146 9J ooo 74 889 75 IX ox 1 872 24 ooo 27 954 X ICC ox 898 85 oon IS 968 SS IX ox 899 18 ooo 9 432 47 IX 0 X 235 56 ooo 39 1X 48 ICC ox 728 28 ooc 130 077 70 ICO ox 3.X1 94 ooo S30X IX ox 13 75 ooo 7 16S X iCv ox 179 13 ooo 3S X3 X IC*.ox 626 58 ooo 3S6 67 TC ox 6 42 ooc 40 0XX ICC ox 1 ox X ooo 3 86S X ICC ox 96 63 ooo 29 740 07 ICv ox 743 50 coc 14 2XX ICC ox 357 X ooo SS 6XX ICC ox 1 391 26 0 00 14 079X ICC ox 351 98 ooo 8 648 X ic:ox 216 20 ooc 22 797 X 1C,ox 569 9.’ ooo 29 738 X ICC ox 743 20 ooo 33 204 X ICC ox 830 10 0 00 1 837 60 ICC ox 37 80 ooo 2 766 X 1C-.ox IS 0 X 2 8S3X 'C-:ox - 1 33 ooo 21 875X IX ox 541 88 ooo 1 XSX ic;ox 0 'lo ox 468 X IX ox 11 45 ox 1 112X ICC ox 27 80 ox 3 8SS 80 ICC ox 91 40 000 1 62S 20 IX ox 40 63 ox 2 082 uu ICC ox 52 05 ox 2 315 X ICC ox 57 88 C X 2 895 66 IX ox 64 88 0 X 181 OS IX ox 4 53 ox IX 7XX ICC ox 1 826 11 0 X 1 77 327 29 IX ox 4 433 18 ox X -^20 00 IX*ox 763 17 ox • 91 7M X IX orj 4.794 01 ox 2 0S3 1SS 41 97 SS 781 13 SO 744 62 ox 97 286 12 91 1 955 83 2 432 18 1 0 X 3 'SC 441 63 97 57 736 94 53 176 78 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION APR 1 4 2003 C mYOFORONO DATE: April 14,2003 ITEM NO: / '7 Department Approvah^ ^ / Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Tom Kuehn ^ City Administrator's Title Finance Director /j^/^ Report0 Item Description: 200? Liability Insurance Policy and Worker Compensation Insurance Policy Premium Tabulation and Award Recommendations, with Resolution to Not Waive the Statutory Tort Limits for Liability Insurance Attachments: (1) Liability and Worker Compensation Insurance Premiums Tabulation (2) Worker Compensation Plan Estimated Premium Quotation (3) Resolution Not to Waive the Statutory Tort Limits for Liability Insurance A comparative tabulation of the 2002 and 2003 renewal insurance premiums, and the 2003 budgeted amounts is presented for your review. At this time v\c are recommending award of all the policies as presented. The City wilt continue to carry an umbrella excess liability policy of $2 million and will not waive the statutory limits established under Minnesota law. The LMCIT has specifically requested that Council adopt a resolution stipulating whether the City will or will not waive the statutor>' limits under the law. The estimated cost for all policies for 2003 is $165,108 compared to $173,659 for 2002, and $160,428 for 2001. I hc City will place all coverage with the LMCIT program. Worker Compensation Coverage: The renewal premium quotation for worker compensation insurance reflects a gross initial premium for 2003 of $69,026, which is adjusted by our experience mo.’l.ication of 1.04, increasing the premium to $71,787. That figure is then adjusted by a premium discount of 8.84%, resulting in a net initial premium of $65,442. This is an increase of $6,684, or 11.38% greater than the 2002 initial premium. The higher premium is a result of a 10% rate increase across all worker compensation classifications, and an increase in the total estimated payroll from 2002 to 2003. X mp I - April 14,2003 2003 Liability Insurance Policy and Worker Compensation Insurance Policy Premium Tabulation and Award Recommendations, page Liability Insurance Package Policy and Eacess Liability The package policy and excess liability policy premiums total $ 99,666 for 2003, compared to $114,937 for 2002, and $110,450 for 2001. The decrease from 2002 to 2003 is $15,271, orl 3.3%. The premium decrease is due mainly to a reduction in the average amount and severity of claims for the prior five year period. Staff recommends the award of the 2003 insurance coverage as presented in the attachment and the adoption of the attached resolution. COUNCIL ACnON REQUESTED: (1) Award of the 2003 insurance package effective January 1, 2003 to the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust for worker compensation coverage, S65/i42; comprehensive municipal property and casualty package, $76,495; umbrella excess liability, $18,976; petrofimd reimbursement, $257 open meeting law, $713; boiler and machinery, $1,703; surety bonds, $959 and golf course liquor liability. $563. (2) Adopt Resolution No_ Insurance Purposes. ,, Not To Waive The Statutory Tort Limits For Liabiluy U \Word PcrfacfNMcmo-CouaciLActMMUOOJVlimiranccTab wpd tuaftitTimrihiirr INSURANCE POLICY PREMIUM TABULATION A«a«-Tik 111 Policy Awarded To: Actual Premiums 2002 Renewal Premiums 2003 Insurance Premiums Budget 2003 Worker Compensation LMCIT SS8.7S8 $65,442 $56,560 Comprehensive Municipal Property and Casualty. Property Vehicle Liab/CollAJM/Equip Inland Marine Crime (incl) General Liability LMCIT SI2.3I8 16,902 2,104 59,082 $11,691 14,587 2,360 47,857 Total Comprehensive Municipal Property & Casualty S90,406 $76j495 S87.830 Petrofiind Reimbursement LMCIT 246 257 570 Open Meeting Law LMCIT 880 713 720 Employee Dishonesty Bond LMCIT 977 959 860 Boiler LMCIT 1,652 1,703 1,600 Umbrella Excess Liability LMCIT 20,213 18,976 20,440 Liquor Liability for Golf Course LMCIT 563 563 650 TOTAL $173,695 $165,108 $169,230 ?! t-: (J I ’ IJf li »» ? ^ i League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust Group Solf-Intured Worker ’s Compensation Plan 145 University Avenue West - St. Paul, MN 55103-2044 - Phone (651) 215-4173 Information Page CITY OF ORONO P. O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY. MN 55323 Agreement No.; Agreement Period From; To; 0200036218 01/01/2003 01/01/2004 ■STIMATED PAYROLL RATE PER $100 PR CODE DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED PREMIUM $416,190 4.84 5506 STREET CONTRUCTION $20,144 59,350 2.65 7520 WATERWORKS 1,573 1,109,300 3.31 7720 POLICE 36.718 14500 3.32 7722 POLICE RESERVES 481 406,630 0.47 8810 CLERICAL OFFICE EMPLOYEES 1,911 36,940 2.29 8831 ANIMAL CONTROL 846 80,850 1.63 9060 CLUB-COUNTRY/GOLF 1,318 504,660 1.18 9410 MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES 5,955 18,200 0.44 9411 ELECTED OFFICIALS 80 Total Manual Premium Experience Modification Standard Premium Managed Care Credit Deductible Credit Premium Discount 1.04 0% 0% 8.84% Net Deposit Premium $69,026 2,761 $71.787 0 0 (6.345) $65^442. <At US It. Ai. I ■ fsriMsn-^i ks Ifk.. p ii A RESOLUTION MAKING A SELECTION NOT TO WAIVE THE STATUTORY TORT LIMITS FOR LIABILITY INSURANCE PURPOSES WHEREAS, pursuant to previous action taken, the League of Minnesota Cities Insur­ ance Trust has asked the City to make an election with regards to waiving or not waiving its tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04; and WHEREAS, the choices available are as follows: to not waive the statutory tort limit, to waive the limit but to keep insurance coverage at the statutory limit, and to waive the limit and to add insurance to a new level; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orono City Council does hereby elect not to waive the statutory tert liability limit established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held April 14,2003. ATTEST: Lin Vee, City Clerk Barbara A, Peterson, Mayor WFWlNiAWn)OCS\tOMUMl^^ wpd i 7 ^ 4 200J REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION c.. r uf O honq DATE: April 10,2003 ITEM NO: / ^ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Planning Commission Appointments/Reappointments The current Planning Commission terms of Jan Berg and David Rahn expired on March 3 i, 2003. Jan has served the maximum three terms as provided by ordinance. She has indicated she would like to continue to serve the Planning Commission as an alternate. Because David Rahn was appointed to fill an unexpired term, he is still eligible to serve three full three-year terms. David has indicated he is interested in continuing to serve on the Planning Commission. Jule Hannaford and Stephanie Zugschwert, who are both alternate members of the Planning Commission, were contacted regarding their interest in serving as a regular member of the Planning Commission. Mr. Hannaford indicated that, due to other commitments, he would prefer to remain as an alternate member at this time. Ms. Zugschwert indicated she would be interested in serving as a regular member of the Commission. ITie Council has interviewed both Stephanie Zugschwert and David Rahn regarding their appointment/reappointment to the Planning Commission. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motions regarding the appointment of Jan Berg as an alternate member of the Planning Commission, the reappointment of David Rahn to a three year term on the Planning Commission, and the appointment to fill the vacant seat on the Planning Commission. ----riNG REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 1 4 2003 ORONQ DATE: April 1L 2003 ITEM NO: / f Department Approval: Nine RonMoorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Personnel Matter The Council will be asked to take action regarding a personnel matter. The information regarding the personnel matter is confidential. The information has been provided to the Council under separate cover. The information regarding the final disposition becomes public after final action is taken. The process to be followed in addressing this matter is to close the meeting for discussion, then reopen the meeting for action on the matter. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the staff recommendation regarding the personnel matter. iJfekajai ; •• ■ — —• REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^ 4 20lj. DATE: April 10.'2003°^°'''^ ITEM NO; M Department Approval: Nime Lin Vec \;jl) Title City Clerk I Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: List of Licenses for Council ApprovalOuncilA Agenda Section: Licenses SET-UP LICENSE 1.Dan Scherven Navarre Lanes Inc. 3435 Shoreline Drive SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT 1.Fred .'»"d Eleanor Winston (Wedding dinner and dance) 765 Spring Hill Road COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approvc/deny the above listed licenses. r L r State of Minnesota County of Hennepin City ofOrono License No: | 2003-12 Amount: I $100.00 o\/o 1.1'(OO?'.-'I * v Consumption & Display Permit (Set-Up) Upon investigation and satis^ory evidence of the qualification of the licensee, this license is granted and pursuant to application and payment of fee thereof, and is subject to all the provisions and conditions of the laws of the United States, the laws of the State of Minnesota, the regulations and ordinances of the City of Orono. and the rules and regulations of the Liquor Control Commissione.^ pertaining to such; and subject to revocation according to law for violation thereof. This license is not transferable except by consent of the issuing authonty. Granted To: Business Name: Business Address: Commencing: Terminating: Business Description Dan Scherven Navarre Lanes 3425 Shoreline Drive April 1,2003 March 31. 2004 Bowling Lanes Issued by authority of the City Council of the City of Orono. Minnesota on: April 14. 2003 Attest: Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk ■ ■■ « i'V/ • '■ '■ 1 I MlUMeilt CITY OF ORONO SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT Date Issued: Date of Event: Time: April 15,2003 Sunday, May 25,2003 5:00 p.m. -12:00 p.m. Midnight Name of Person(s) And/or Organization Sponsoring this Event: Fred and Eleanor Winston 765 Spring Hill Road Wayzata, MN 55391 A Phone:952-473-7218 Location of Event: 765 Spring Hill Road Type of Event: Wedding dinner and dance with live music for approximately 250 guests The following documents are required and on file at the City Administrative Offices: • Certifleate of General Liability Insurance • Approval from Orono Police Department The following conditions have been placed on this event: • This special events permit is subject to immediate revocation by the Orono Police Department upon violation of any City Ordinances or identification of hazards to safety of the public. • A noise exemption will be granted for live music which is played between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 12:00 p.m. Midnight. • Notification of the event to be provided to the residents on Spring Hill Road, East Long Lake Road, Hollander Road and Old Long Lake Road, indicating the hours the band will play, purpose of the party, and the date of the event. • Parking is restricted to private property. Approved at City Council meeting on: April 14,2003 (City Seal) Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66. Ciysul Bay, MN 55323 Phone: 952-249-4600 / Fax: 952-249-4616/www.ci.orono.im.us % ' Ms *r" CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® ---------04/11/03 10 38 AM Page 1APR 1 4 2003 Cl ry OH ORONO C^j) APRIL 2003 Check Amt Invoice Comment 10100 Primary Ceeh Paid Chk« 075673 4/4/2003 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE E 602.49450.322 Postage $195 59 040403 1st qtr 2003 E 651.49910.322 Postage $328 88 040403 1st qtr 2003 E 101.41900.322 Postage $133 29 040403 1st qtr 2003 E 601-49400-322 Postage $78 24 040403 1st qtr 2003 Tout UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE $736 00 PaidChMt 075674 4/4/2003 COLUSION CORNER E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $4,055 50 4315.1 Repair - Squad 190 McNichols Total COLLISION CORNER $4,05650 Paid Chk# 075675 4/10/2003 MN CHIEF OF POLICE ASSN E 101-42110-433 Memberships & Subscnptions $75 00 Membership/K associate membership/KE Tout MN CHIEF OF POLICE ASSN $75 00 Paid Chk* 075676 3/21/2003 MN DEPT OF REVENUE R 601-39610 Miscellaneous Revenue $15 00 2/2003 Sates Tax 2/2003 0 613-20806 Due to Govts-State Sales Tax $2 00 2/2003 Sales Tax 2/2003 R 101-34210 General Taxable Sales/Service $2 00 2/2003 Sales Tax 2/2003 ToUl MN DEPT OF REVENUE $1900 Paid Chk# 075677 4/14/2003 10,000 LAKES CHAPTER E 101-42400-437 Training & Development $60 00 061903 seminar bldg officials/BV Total 10,000 LAKES CHAPTER $60 00 Paid Chk# 075678 4/14/2003 ANDERSON, KRISTI E 101-45200-319 Other Professional Services $165 00 4/7/03 Park Minutes 4/7 E 101 -41300-319 Other Professional Services $140 00 4/7/03 CC Minutes 3/24 Total ANDERSON, KRISTI $305 00 Paid Chk# 075679 4/14/2003 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $57 46 6013-311524 coffee E 101-42110-439 Meeting Expenses $54 50 6013-311525 Coffee E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $57 30 6013-311526 coffee Total ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES $169 26 PatdChke 075680 4/14/2003 ARMOR HOLDINGS FORENSICS, INC E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $434 52 69087 ToUl ARMOR HOLDINGS FORENSICS, INC $434 52 File Cabinet Handles Paid Chke 075681 4/14/2003 AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES E 601-49400-321 Telephone $11 03 3419397 E 602-49450-321 Telephone $11.03 3419397 E 101-41900-321 Telephone $28 83 3419397 Total AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES $50 94 Cell Phones Cell Phones Cell Phones PaidChka 075682 4.14/2003 AUTO ELECTRIC SPECIALISTS E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $170 40 1611 E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $110 89 1612 Total AUTO ELECTRIC SPECIALISTS $281 29 alt/ for sweeperf460 bearings, regulator Paid Chk# 075683 4/14/2003 BFI OF MINNESOTA, INC E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds E 613-49830-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $251 17 1307420 $28 93 1307461 $7890 137115 SoRd Waste Service Solid Waste-GC Sokd Waste - Bederwood F CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® ' H t APRIL 2003 Total DPI OF MINNESOTA. INC ChecfcAmt Invoice Comment $359 00 04/11/03 10:30 AM Page 2 i Paid Chki 075664 4/14/2003 BIFFS INC. E 10145200-415 Other Equipment Rentals $110 26 W185407 Biderwood/biffs Total BIFFS INC.$110 26 ^akl Chfc# 075665 4/14«003 BLOOMINGTON, CITY OF E 601-49400-489 Other Miscellanecus Charges $9 00 3G1/03 Wate Testing E 601-49400-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $M00 3/31/03 Water Testing Total BLOOMINGTON, CITY OF $99 00 ^aklChk* 075686 4/14/2003 BOBZIEN,SUE E 101-42110-226 Clothing & personal equipment $5198 033103 uniform pants Totel BOBZIEN.SUE $53 98 PaidChk* 075687 4/14/2003 BUDGET PRINTING E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $43 72 25403 postcards E 101 -^2110-201 Office supplies $104 76 25597 envelopes for PD E 101-41900-201 Omce supplies $2332 25624 copies E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories $8520 25725 no parking signs E 101-42110-201 Office supplies $3994 25782 business cards Total BUDGET PRINTING $2^94 PaidChk* 075688 4/14/2003 CARGILL SALT E 601-49400-216 Chemicala and Chem Products $2.32079 720403 Softener Sait E 101-43000-224 SIreat Mainl. Materials/Supply $1.892 92 722408 Road Salt Total CARGILL SALT K213.71 Paid Chk* 075689 4/14/2003 CENTER POINT ENERGY -GC E 613-49830-381 Gas & Electric $333 59 539004161700 Gas Service ToUl CENTER POINT ENERGY - GC $333 59 PaidChkill 075G90 4/14/2003 CENTERPOINT ENERGY E 101-41900-381 Gas & Electric $1.622 52 060006750600 Gas Service E 101-41900-381 Gas & Eleciric $652 42 060006750600 Gas Service E 101-42110-381 Gas & Electric $533 81 060006750600 Gas Service E 601-49400-381 Gas & Electric $957 52 060006750600 Gas Service E 602-49450-381 Gas & Electric $79 52 060006750600 Gas Service E 601-49400-381 Gas & Electric $270 42 060Q06750600 Gas Service E 602 49450-381 Gas & Electric $811 26 060006750600 Gas Service Total CENTERPOINT EKERGY $4.927 47 Pakl Chka 075691 4/14/2003 CHAMPION AUTO STORES E 101 43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $14 89 D185853 Parts • Sweeper Total CHAMPION AUTO STORES $14 89 Paid Chk« 075692 4/14/2003 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint Auto Equip $129 47 23382 Themostat#l90 E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $3013 23508 Oil Change • 91 Cutlass E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint Auto Equip $56 00 23509 Check Door Locks i193 E 101-42110A02 Repairs/Maint Auto Equip $84 00 23513 Diagnostics #192 E 101*42110-402 Repairs/MamtAuto Equip $70 00 23541 Check Light #189 E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $66 03 23546 Oil Change. Diff #195 E 101 -42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $7105 23547 Ign Override #191 E 101 *42110-402 Repairs/Matnt*Auto Equip $30 23 23593 Oil Change #190 E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $87 84 23594 Oil Change. Bub i192 CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 04/11/03 10:38 Page 3 Total CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO PaidChk# 075693 4/14/2003 CULLIOAN £613^9830^03 Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip Tout CULLIGAN APRIL 2003 Check Amt Invoice Comment $624.75 $8 07 101-09083676- Softener Service $8.07 PaidChke 075694 4/14/2003 DAVIES WATER EQUIPMENT CO. E 602-49450-406 Repairs/Maint-Swr lines/lifts $141.94 3154187 ToUl DAVIES WATER EQUIPMENT CO. $141.94 pump repair PaklChk# 075695 4/14/2003 OCA-WIRE ONLY G 101-21719 DCA/Spending Accounts Total DCA-WIRE ONLY ^26.00 040103 $416.00" flex spending PaidChki 075696 4/14/2003 DEPT OF ADM • INTERTECH GROUP E 101-42110-321 Telephone $41.19 W03020598 E 101-41900-321 Telephone $96.10 W03020596 Total OEP1 OF AOM - INTERTECH GROUP $i?7^9 long distance tong distance Paid Chk# 075697 4/14/2003 DEPT OF PUBUC SAFETY E 101-42110-311 Data Processing Communication Total DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY $510 00 MN02715003I CJON Charges 1st Qlr 2003 $510.00' PaidChk* 075698 4/14/2003 DEPUTY REGISTRAR E 101-42110-441 Licenses & Taxes Total DEPUTY REGISTRAR $1^50 4/9/03 $12.50 Registration • Chiefs Car Paid Chk* 075699 4/14/2003 DOBO'S E 101-41300-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges Total DOBO'S $7J_98 4933 $71.98 Bagels.Fruit - B Silus Paid Chk* 075700 4/14/2003 DODGE, RACHEL E 101-41900-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories Total DODGE, RACHEL $167 86 033103 $167.86 Storage shelves Paid Chk* 075701 4/14/2003 E-Z RECYCLING E 101-43270-316 Contract Recycling Pickup Total E-Z RECYCLING $6.409 20 4978 $6,409 20 curbside f/aprii Paid Chk* 075702 4/14/2003 EGAN-MCKAY ELECTRICAL CONTRCTR E 101-43000-408 Contracted Street Main! $217.50 JC3009757 Total EGAN-MCKAY ELECTRICAL CONTRCTR $217 50 HWY 12/Cty 6 Signal Paid Chk* 075703 4/14/2003 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS, IN E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $67.72 409610 Total EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS, IN $67 72 PaidChk* 075704 4/14/2003 ESS BROTHERS A SONS ' E 602-49450-227 Utility System Maint Supplies Total ESS BROTHERS S SONS flexwrap $13313 EE6064 $13313 MH *28 - Slope Adj Rings PaidChk* 075705 4/14/2003 FORTIS BENEFITS 0 101-21712 Other Deductions Total FORTIS BENEFITS $880J7 4019825-1 $8M27 LTD Insurance -4/2003 CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 04/11/03 10:38 AM Page 4 E 601-49400-226 E 101-43000-221 E 613-49630-226 E 602-49450-226 E 101-43000-404 E 101-43000-221 E 101-43000-226 E 602-49450-226 E 601-49400-226 E 101-43000-226 E 613-49830-226 E 601-49400-226 E 101-43000-404 E 101-42110-404 E 101-41900-404 E 101-41900-404 E 101-43000-226 Clothing & personal equipment Equipment Parts & Accessories Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Equipment Parts & Accessories Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Clothing & personal equipment Total G8iK SERVICES APRIL 2003 CheckAmt Invoice_^Comment $8.68 $52.66 $16.14 $27.47 $9285 $53.10 $6761 $28.96 $1656 $64.07 $4.79 $11 34 $94 98 $131.95 $5279 $5279 $9S34 $912 99' 438437 Mat Serv 515666 M 515666 unforms 515666 515668 uniforms 522570 uniforms 522571 uniforms 522572 !• 522573 • 522574 mats 522575 mats 522576 mats 529569 uniforms Paid Chk« 075707 4/14/2003 GENUINE PARTS CO. E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $14.45 734885 shop supplies E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $50 17 735240 oil filters E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $6 38 736034 grease E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $24 14 736450 bulbs E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $851 736462 wip blades E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $12 40 736625 shop supplies E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $26 50 737090 adapter E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $1081 737463 battery E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment & Parts $99 58 737464 shop parts Tout GENUINE PARTS CO.$252.94' Paid Chk# 075708 4/14/2003 GERRING'S CAR WASH E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $25 00 031503 car wash Total GERRING'S CAR WASH $25 00 PaidChki 075709 4/14/2003 GRAFIX SHOPPE E 101-42110-550 Automotive Equipment $936.00 29202 squads stripe #196.197&198 E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $18L50 29203 squad 190/insurance Total GRAFIX SHOPPE $1,117 50 ' PaidChki 075710 4/14/2003 GRAND VIEW LODGE E 101-43000-437 Training & Development $300 00 0507.0903 MPWA conf/GG Total GRAND LODGE $30000' Paid Chk# 075711 4/14/2003 HENN CO TREASURER E 425-46945-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $117.50 040103 labeis/MCWD board mtg ToUl HENN CO TREASURER $117 50 Paid Chk# 075712 4/14/2003 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH DPT E 101-42110-414 EDP/Communications Equip Rent $1.307 62 23038016 Radio Lease ToUl HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH DPT $1,307.62 Paid Chk# 075713 4/14/2003 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF E 101-41600-309 Jail Charges $251 21 031803 booking Me Total HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF $25121 CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register© 04/11/03 1038 AM Page 5 APRIL 2003 Check Amt Invoice Comment # 075714 4/14/2003 E 101-41600-309 Jail Charges Total HENNEPW COUNTY TREASURER-JAIL HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-JAIL SI.335.50 964 $1,335 50 Room & Board • 2/2003 Paid Chk« 075715 4/14/2003 HUMANE SOCIETY OF WRIGHT CO E 101-42110-317 Animal Care $42.50 4/1/03 Total HUMANE SOCIETY OF WRIGHT CO $42 50 ' 1st Otr Impound Service PaidChk# 075716 4/14/2003 INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $255.60 01JK1165 printing supplies Total INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS $25560 Paid Chk« 075717 4/14/2003 E 101-42400-433 Memberships & Subscriptions Total INTL CONF. OF BLDG OFFICIALS INTL CONF. OF BLOG OFFICIALS $16661 032603 IBC handbooks $16661 Paid Chki 075718 4/14/2003 INTERSTATE BATTERIES E 101 -43000-222 Vehicle Equipment & Parts Total INTERSTATE BATTERIES $63 90 10011805 $63.90 Batteries F^aidChk# 075719 4/14/2003 KMH ERECTORS. INC E 101-430(XM08 Contracted Street Maint $7.100 00 032103 Femdale Bridge Repair Total KMH ERECTORS. INC $7.100 00 Paldbiik* 075720 4/14/2003 KOEHNEN'S AMOCO E 101-42110-212 Motor Fuels S Lubricants $1 33 030703 oil E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $33 97 C30803 wiper blades Tout KOEHNEN'S AMOCO $35.30 Paid Chki 075721 4/14/2003 LABOR RELATIONS ASSOC E 101-42110-319 Other Professional Services $462 00 2/1/2003 LELS Mediation E 101-42110-319 Other Professional Services $1,155 00 3/1/2003 LELS Mediation Total LABOR RELATIONS ASSOC $1.617 00 PaidChk# 075722 4/14/2003 LAKESHORE WEEKLY NEWS E 613-49830-340 General Advertising $75 00 100710 Print Advertisment Tout LAKESHORE WEEKLY NEWS $75 00 Paid Chki 075723 4/14/2003 LANO EQUIPMENT E 227-45500-580 Other Equipment $37.733 81 4798 S250C- bobcat E 101-43000-208 Books & Periodicals $17.56 86457 Switch Tout LANO EQUIPMENT $37,751 37 Paid Chk# 075724 4/14/2003 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES E 101-41110-101 Full-Time Employees Regular $40 00 89480 Los Control Workshop ToUl LEAGUE OF MN CITIES $40 00 Paid Chk# 075725 4/14/2003 LOGIS E 101 -41900-329 Other Communications $159 00 internet 3/03 E 101-41900-311 Data Processing Communication $3000 Henn Cty connection E 101-42110-401 Repairs/Maint-OfRoe Equip $4250 ■ E 101-42110-329 Other Commuricationi $159 00 intemet3/03 E 101-41900-311 Data Processing Communicatjon $30 00 22793 Henn County oonne^n E 101-42110-310 LOGIS-Applications $1,64300 22793 police records 2A)3 E 101-41900-329 Other Communications $159 00 22793 internet 2/03 E 101-42110-329 Other Communications $159 00 22793 internet 2/03 E 101-42110-310 LOGIS-AppUcMions $1.64300 22895 polioe records 3/03 r CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register® 04/11/03 10:36 AM Page 6 APRIL 2003 Check Amt Invoice Comment E 101-4190CM01 Repairs/MaintDffice Equip Tout LOGIS $42 50 22932 Innoculane updates $4,067.00 Paid Chk# 075726 4/14/2003 MACA E 10M2110-433 Memberships 6 Subscriptions Tout MACA $6500 $65 00 9/30A)2 2002 Pan Workshop Paid Chk# 075727 4/14/2003 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $142 72 2032541 E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $10.28 2032542 E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories 2032575 Total MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT $189 75 Gauge - Sweeper Plate Diode - Sweeper Paid Chk# 075728 4/14/2003 MAGIC CLEANERS E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories Total MAGIC CLEANERS 0210C2 $27.66 blankets cleaned Paid Chk# 075729 4/14/2003 MCLEOD USA • PHONE BILLS E 101-41900-321 Telephone P 101-42110-321 Telephone E 602-49450-321 Telephone E 602-49450-321 Telephone E 601-49400-321 Telephone E 601-49400-321 Telephone Total MCLEOD USA • PHONE BILLS $476 80 8433626 phones $204 34 8433626 phones $52 98 8433626 phones $4741 8433626 phones $39.45 8433626 phones $2Z70 8433626 phones $843.68* PaidChk# 075730 4/14/2003 MCNICHOLS, DAVID E 101-42110-437 Training & Development ToUl MCNICHOLS. DAVID $5 07 4/4/03 $507 Meals - Training Paid Chk# 075731 4/14/2003 M6CSA E 613-49830-437 Training & Development ToUl MGCSA $100.00 03-04dues $100 00 03-04 MGCSA dues Paid Chk# 075732 4/14/2003 MIDWEST FUELS G 101-14101 Gasoline Inventory E 101-43000-212 Motor Fuels & Lubricants Total MIDWEST FUELS $2,073.59 12612 $731J9 12612 $2,804.78 1437 Gals Unleaded 654.6 Gals Diesel Paid Chk# 075733 4/14/2003 MINN COMM E 101-42110-321 Telephone E 602-49450-321 Telephone E 601-49400-321 Telephone Total MINN COMM $45 95 20261004038 Police Pagers $3361 48300504031 pagers $33 61 48300504031 pagers $ilil7 Paid Chk# 075734 4/14/2003 MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPARTMENT E 101-42110-311 Data Processing Communication $552 00 40650001272 APS set up charges ToUl MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPARTMENT $552 00 PaidChk# 075735 4/14/2003 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY E 101-42110-403 E 101-42110-403 E 101-42110-221 E 101-43000-221 E 101-42110-221 Repairs/Maint-Misc Equip Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip Equipment Parts & Accessories Equipment Parts & Accessories Equipment Parts & Accessories ToUl MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY $652.70 BH744293 $239 68 BH744370 $52.45 JA744987 $31.69 RI03030884 JM«^RI03030885 $992 37 manifold labor & parts oxygen/PD Acetylene, Oxygen oxygenPD CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 04/11/03 10 38 AM Page 7 APRIL 2003 Chock Amt Invoice Comment Paid Chk# 075736 4/14/2003 MINNETONKA BEACH. CITY OF E 602>49450-387 intergovernmental Services $96 00 032603 2090 Shoreline Drive/swr ToUl MINNETONKA BEACH. CITY OF $96 00 Paid Chk# 075737 4/14/2003 MN CHIEFS OF POLICE E 101 -42110-311 Data Processing Communication Total MN CHIEFS OF POLICE $500 00 1430 $500 00 2003 MJNO Paid Chk# 075736 4/14/2003 MN COMMERCE DEPARTMENT E 101^41300-433 Memberships & Subscriptions $4000 Situs Notary Application • Situs Total MN COMMERCE DEPARTMENT $40 00 Paid Chk# 075739 4/14/2003 MN HIGHWAY SAFETY CENTER 110M2110*437 Training & Development $271.00 030903 trainfng/Erickson Tout MN HIGHWAY SAFETY CENTER $271 00 Paid Chk# 075740 4/14/2003 MN STATE TREASURER G 101-20802 Due to govts-State R 101 -39610 Miscellaneous Revenue ToUl MN STATE TREASURER $4.048 88 1st Qtr 2003 ($16L96) 1st Qtr 2003 $3,886 92 Surcharge 3/2003 Surcharge 3/2003 Paid Chk# 075741 4/14/20C3 MOBILE RADIO ENGINEERING INC. E 101-43000-403 Repairs/Maint-Misc Equip $113 33 112652 Total MOBILE RADIO ENGINEERING INC. $1 li33 repair bas @PW Paid Chk# 075742 4/14/2003 MOUND. CITY OF E 101-42260-318 Fire Services Total MOUND. CITY OF $32.402 00 920 $32.40200 Paid Chk# 075743 4/14/2003 MPLS DEPT OF HEALTH & FAMILY E 101-42110-319 Other Professional Services $:^00 3/31/03 Total MPLS DEPT OF HEALTH & FAMILY $73 00 Cont Substance Analysis 03-033 Paid Chk# 075744 4/14/2003 MTI DIST CO. E 101-43000-2? < Equipment Parts & Accessories 'otal MTI DIST CO. $101 05 344939-00 Bearing $1oTo5 ’ Paid Chk# 075745 4/14/2003 MUNICIPAL CODE CORPORATION G 101-20200 Accounts Payable $9.139 35 53062 Total MUNICIPAL CODE CORPORATION $9,139 35 Pmal Copy - Code Paid Chk# 075746 4/14/2003 NAVARRE HARDWARE E 101-42110-221Equipment Parts & Accessories $275 tape E 101-43000-221Equipment Parts & Accessories $2814 batteries, bushings E 101-41900-223Bkjg/Grounds Maint Supplies ($936)GFI cover returned E 101-42110-221Equipment Parts & Accessories $169 key E 101-42110-221Equipment Parts & Accessories $244 adhesive E 101-43000-224Street Maint. Materiats/Supply $23.41 nails. washerA screws E 602-49450-227Utility System Maint. Supplies $5.31 twine E 601-49400-223Bldg/Grounds Maint Supplies $1317 eid cords. A tape E 601-49400-221Equipment Parts & Accessories $7 44 batteries f/locator E 101-42110-221Equipment Parts & Accessories $2447 broom, surge strip E 101-42110-223Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies $24 64 bike hook E 101-43000-224Street Maint. Materials/Supply $19.16 wire E 101-42110-223Bldg/Orounds Maint Supplies $16.70 studs, hooks A bolts E 101-42110-221Equipment Parts A Accessories $15.95 kitchen bags A can opener CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register® 04/11/03 10:38 AM Pages APRIL 2003 Checfc Aiwt Invoice Comment E 101-42110-221 E 101-42110-221 E 101-42110-223 E 101-41900-223 E 101-43000-222 E 101-43000-222 E 101-43000-221 E 101-42110-221 E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories Equipment Parts & Accessories Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies Vehicle Equipment & Parts Vehicle Equipment & Parts Equipment Parts & Accessories Equipment Parts & Accessories Equipment Parts & Accessories Total NAVARRE HARDWARE $14.31 $1260 $7.65 $37 03 $3933 $56 26 $10.07 $383 J957 $366 56 114990 115003 115086 115097 115136 hooks, acrylic sheet brush, sandpaper 4x8 stud flexiguard cover SEALANT MISC HARDWARE Putty knife & foam nut &botts 100* chalk line 1-1 Paid Chk# 075747 4/14/2003 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS E 101-42110-321 Telephone *68172 506573311-01 Police CeH Phones Total NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS $68172 Paid Chk# 075748 4/14/2003 OFFICE DEPOT E 101-41900>201 Office supplies $9091 supplies E 101-41900-201Office supplies $1976 196551792 supplies E 101-42110-201Office supplies $1617 196551792 supplies E 101-42110-201Office supplies $64 56 197184248 supplies E 101-42110-221Equipment Parts & Accessories $12510 197184248 shelving E 101-41900-201Office supplies ($44 79) 199609769 return E 101-42110-201Office supplies ($3666) 199609769 return C 101-42110-201Office supplies $74 38 199611100 supplies E 101-41900-201Office supplies $7869 2^8295359 supplies Total OFFICE DEPOT $38832 Paid Chk# 075749 4/14/2003 OMAN, LYLE E 101-42400-331Travel Expenses $6537 011403 mileage E 101-42400-331Travel Expenses $40 88 013103 mileage E 101-42400-331Travel Expenses $29 57 032403 mileage E 101-42400-331Travel Expenses $2592032503 mileage G 101-20200 Accounts Payable $2001 1/23A)3 Mileage G 101-20200 Accounts Payable $35 53 11/27/02 Mileage Total OMAN, LYLE $217^ Paid Chk« 075750 4/14/2003 OMEGA INDUSTRIES E 101-43000-4CJRepairs/Maint-Misc. Equip $264 67 5747 Repairs • Truck Wash E 602-49450-403Repairs/Maint-Misc Equip $132.33 5747 Repairs - Truck Wash E 601-49400-403Repairs/Maint-Misc Equip $44 11 5747 Repairs-Truck Wash Total OMEGA INDUSTRIES $441 11 G 101-21710 Life Insurance Tout PERA LIFE INSURANCE $288 00 6732403 PERA Life - 4/2003 $288 00 Paid Chk# 075752 4/14/2003 PETTIT, SANDRA K. E 101-41500-437 Training & Development E 101-41500-331 Travel Expenses Total PETTIT. SANDRA K. $126 21 032503 $21.77 032503 $147 98 MCFOAConf mileage Paid Chk# 075763 4/14/2003 PIRTEK E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts S Accessories $97 49 PL18748 truck msh parts E 651-49910-227 Utility System Maint. Supplies $7819 PL18941 culvert cleaning Total PIRTEK $175.68 CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register© 04/11/03 10:38 AM Page 10 APRIL 2003 Check Amt Invoice Comment E 101-42400*437 Training & Development E 101-42400-437 Training & Development Total STATE TREASURER $35 00 03Bldgcode bldg code semlnar/BV $70 00 03MNFIRE Fire code seminar/lO $105 00 PaidChk# 075766 4/14/2003 STREICHERS G 101-20200 Accounts Payable E 101-42110-226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories E 101-42110-226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42110-226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42110-226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42110-226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories Total STREICHERS $830 70 334564 1 $130 95 344772 1 $127,75 348305.1 $106 29 349366.1 ($120.00) 350727.1 $89 95 351847.1 $139 95 353107 1 $219 85 .35344 1 $56.98 353674 1 $53J4 355837.1 $1.635 56 Handguns quilted garment speaker ass battery returned garment outershelt garment outershell garment pants A jacket traffic wand battery Paid Chk« 075767 4/14/2003 STS CONSULTANTS LTD. E 101-42110-404Repairs/Maint'Bldgs/Grounds $250 97 241760 air quality check E 101-41900-404Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $306 73 241760 air quality check Total STS CONSULTANTS LTD.$557 70 Paid Chk# 075768 4/14/2003 THE HOME DEPOT E 101-43000-222Vehicle Equipment & Parts $24 92 695/2112078truck insulation E 601-49400-223Bldg/Grounds Maint Supplies $16.95 700^130130blinds E 101-41110-221Equipment Paris & Accessories $44 08 705/1021301 wood for armory room E 101-43000-224Street Maint Materials/Supply $55 20 730/7011438tumber/Fe ndale Bridge E 101-43000-224Street Maint Materials/Supply $207 50 867/2014642 lumber Total THE HOME DEPOT $348 65 PaidChk# 075769 4/14/2003 TKDA E 402-48032-304Engineering-Consulting $796 64 061172 state bid proiect/OCBATH12 ToUl TKDA $796 64 Paid Chk# 075770 4/14/2003 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO. E 101-43000-404Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $267 19 163072 lubricate A adjust 5 doors E 101-41900-404Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $1438 164489 PVV Garage Door Tout TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO.$281 57 PaidChk# 075771 4/14/2003 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED E 101-42110-226Clothing & personal equipment $152 4 5 168374 Uniforms - Tomczyk E 101-42110-226Clothing & personal equipment $97 00 160067 Uniforms • Lee E 101-42110-221Equipment Parts A Accessories $5527 160469 Sitinger Battery E 101-42110-226Clothing & personal equipment $80 75 162421 Uniforms - Serna E 101-42110-226Clothing & personal equipment $221 52 163338 Badge Shield Seal E 101-42110-226Clothing & personal equipment $364 23 163342 Badge Hat Seal E 101-42110-226Clothing & personal equipment $364 23 163357 Badge Hat Seal E 101-42110-226Clothing & personal equipment $85 94 164154 Badge Panels - CSO E 101-42110-221Equipment Parts & Accessories $163 70 165100 Drug Test Supplies E 101-42110-226Clothing & personal equipment $62 84 165610 Handcuff Case - Herman E 101-42110-226Clothing & personal equipment $15 95 168575 RefInish Badge - #540 E 101-42110-226Clothing A personal equipment $146 65 168976 Flashlight. Glove;»-Famiok Tout UNIFORMS UNLIMITED $1.81053 paid Chk# 075772 4/14/2003 UNITED ELECTRIC E 101-43000-437Training A Development $11600640241 Work Zone Traffic Control f T I I CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register® 04/11/03 10:38 AT4 Page 11 Tout UNITED ELECTRIC APRIL 2003 Check Amt Invoice Comment $116 00 ; k I j' Paid Chki 075773 4/14/2003 IINIV CF MINNESOTA F 101-43000-437 Training & Development $150.00 MPWAconf MPWA spring conf/GG rout UNIV OF MINNESOTA $150-00 Paid Ciildl 075774 4/14/2003 VERIZON WIRELESS E 101-41900-321 Telephone $528.76 032003 cell phones E 602-49450-321 Telephone $39.99 1003-4585141Utility Cell Phone E 601-40400-321 Telephone $3998 1003-4585141Uti’ity Cell Phone Tout VERIZON WIRELESS $608 73 PaidChk# 075775 4/14/2003 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER E 101-43000-226 Clothing 8 personal equipment $795 78 118654 Booto. Glasses E 101-43000-226 Clothing & personal equipment $157.20 119033 Boots. Glasses Total VIKINO INDUSTRIAL CENTER '$952.98 ’ Paid Chk« 075776 4/14/2003 VOGT HEATING « AIK E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Maint-Bidgs/Grounds $47400 8134 check fumaceiS E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $259_C0 8295 Programable T-Stat Tout VOGT HEATINGS AIR i722 00 PaidChka 075777 4/14/2003 W.W. GRAINGER INC. E 602-49450-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $3862 495-4973S0-1 misc parts Total W.W. GRAINGER INC.$38.62 PaidChk# 075778 4/14/2003 WAYZATA. CITY OF E 601-49400-387 Intergovernmental Serv»ces $1,651.09 1st Qtr 2003 Purch Water - 1st Qtr 2003 Total WAYZATA. CITY OF $1,651 09 i^akJ Chk# 075779 4/14/2003 WEST PHOTO E 101 -42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $37.40 28756 Photo Card Reader Total WEST PHOTO $37.40 Paid Chki 075780 4/14/2003 WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT E 101-43000-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip $32 00 510444 Tire Repair ToUl WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT $32 00 Paid Chki 075781 4/14/2003 WILDER FOUNDATION E 101-42400-437 Training & Development $60 00 03affordhouse affordable houstng/MG.WB Total WILDER FOUNDATION $60.00 Paid Chki 075782 4/14/2003 WITTKE, TONY E 101-42110-437 Training & Development $248 00 3/28rt)3 Meals. Transportation - NCMEC ToUl WITTKE. TONY $248.00 Paid Chk» 075783 4/14/2003 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC E 101-43000-381 Gas & Electnc $27 45 3113009200 Electncal Service E 602-49450-381 Gas & Electric $^15 3113009200 Electrical Service ToUl WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC $57 60 PaKi Chki 075784 4/14/2003 XCEL ENERGY E 101-41900-381 Gas & Electnc $1.254 4? Allocation Electncal Service E 101-42110-381 Gas & Electric $517.50 Allocation Electrical Service E 101-43000-381 Gat & Electric $246 26 Allocation Electrical Service E 101-45200-381 Oat & Electric $22 76 Allocation Electrical Service E 601-49400-381 Gat & Electric $2,993.83 AflOCatiOfl Electrical Servioe 9 I CITY OF ORONO 04/11/03 10:38 AM Page 12 *Check Detail Register® APRIL 2003 Chacfc Amt Invoica Commant E101-42110-381 Gat ft Electric E 602-49450-381 Oat ft Electric E 613-49030-381 Oat ft Electric E 101-43000-361 Oat ft Electric E 101-43000-386 Street Lighting Total XCEL ENERGY S9.42 Allocation $1,34571 Allocation $172 72 Allocation $116.33 Hwy12 $1.288.58 Sir Light $7,967.53 Electrical Service Electrical Service Electrical Service Hwy 12/WillowLighU Street Lighting - 3/2003 PaMChW 075785 4/14/2003 ZARNOTH BRUSH VVORKS E101-43000-221 Equipment Parts ft Accettoriet _ Total ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS $462.21 033103 brootn/JO tractor $46221 10100 Primary Cash $160,226.49 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 227IMPR/EOUIP CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND 402 MUNICIPAL ST AID ST CONSTUCT 425 NAVARRE FIRE STATION PROJ FUND 601 WATER OPERATING FUND 602 SEWER OPERATING FUND 613 GOLF COURSE 651 STORM WATER UTILITY OP FUND 10100 Primary Cash $108,364.40 $37.73381 $79664 $117.50 $8,753.91 $3,291.92 $741.24 $407.07 $160,226.49 r* »I d :i 9 i . ✓ 9 \ CITY OF ORONO check register 04A)1/03 10 46 AM Page 1 r Check Number Employee Name 052607 052606 052609 052610 052611 052612 052613 052614 052615 052616 052617 052618 052619 052620 052621 052622 052623 052624 052625 052626 052627 052628 052629 052630 052631 052632 052633 052634 052635 052636 052637 052638 052639 052640 052606 052641 052642 052643 052644 052645 052646 052647 052646 052649 052650 052651 052652 052653 052654 052655 052656 052657 DODGE. RACHEL M. LESKINEN. DENISE M. MOORSE. RONALD J VEE. LINDAS. KUEHN. THOMAS M. OLSON. RONALD J. PETTIT. SANDRA K. ANDERSON. BRUCE L. ARNESON. JOSHUA A. BOBZIEN. SUE A. BORIS. SCOTT W. BUDIO. STACIE M. CARLSON. MICHAEL B. CORNICK. JAMES L DEMBOUSKI. JAYC. ERICKSON. KURT R FARNIOK. CORREY L FISCHENICH. DAN T. FISCHER. CHRISTOPHER K, GOOD. STEPHANY R. HENDRICKS. RONALD J. JOHNSON. JEFFREY MADSON. ADRIENNE M MCNICHOLS. DAVID L. MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES PERSELL. WILLIAM R. SCHOENHOFF. JOHN B TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. TOMCZYK.MARKW. WITTKE. ANTHONY A HERMAN. JOHN R. LEE. JOSEPH P. BOLTERMAN. MATTHEW A. VOID BOTTENBERG. WENDY C. CHAPUT. JENNIFER L. GAFFRON. MICHAEL P. GAPPA. GREGORY A. KANGAS. JAMES K. MEYER. WILLIAM C OMAN. LYLE E 7ANG. BRUCE L. Bl NKHAUS. JOHNF. DEBAERE. DONALD L GREGORY. JAMES D. HANSEN. STEVEN OBERAIGNER. SCOTT G. OBRIEN. RANDY L PALMER. GREGORY A RATHBUN. BARRY J SKREEN. DALE S STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD Pay Period 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Check Amount $1,020.13 $851.24 $12.18 $1,229.96 $1.01446 $126 $534.67 $77409 $622.94 $76981 $1,437.53 $69691 $271.39 $1,52543 $1,495.34 $1,528.42 $1,620.49 $1,474.78 $14373 $1,877.33 $1.276 79 $1,495.07 $52807 $619.89 $1,601.67 $654.33 $1,521.21 $92593 $1.456 61 $1,557.35 $845 58 $27406 $1,084.79 $0.00 $1,363.41 $1.23970 $1,398.84 $1.706 74 $659.74 $682 05 $197.74 $64916 $1,372.67 $1.185 03 $827.22 $1,213.81 $731.79 $969.10 $750 85 $1,458.16 $1,397.89 $1,362.54 $52,034.74 Check Date Check Status 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4^/03 Void 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding 4/3/03 Outstanding CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register© 04/02A)3 7:27 AM Page 1 APRIL 2003 Check Amt Invoice Comment 10100 Prtmefy Cash Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 10100 Primary Cash $51.283 39 $51.283 39 Paid Chki 07S661 G 101-21711 4/2A)3 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Credit Union $10,665.00 ToUl CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION $10,685.00 SAVINGS W/H & TRANSFERRED Paid Chk« 075662 4/2A)3 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES G 101-21701 Federal Withholdirrg $9,986.40 FEDERAL W/H G 101-21703 FICA Tax Withholding $4,487.73 FICA & MEDICARE W/H G 101-21703 FICA Tax Withholding $4,487.73 FICA & MEDCR CITY SHARE Total FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES $18,961 86 Paid Chkf 07S664 4/2A)3 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST • 457 G 101-21705 Other Retirement $300 00 DEFERRED COMP Totol ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 $300 00 Paid Chki 07S66S 4/2A)3 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE G 101-21707 Union Dues $000 UNION DUES Tout LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE $0 00 Paid Chk# 075666 4/2A)3 MN DEPT OF REVENUE G 101-21702 State Withholding KOI 3.32 STATE TAX W/H Total MN DEPT OF REVENUE $4,013.32 Paid Chki 075667 40/02 ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEBCUST G 101-21705 Other Retirement $2.789 68 MN STATE RETIREMENT Total ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST $2,789 68 Paid Chki 075668 4/2102 PEBSCO/OBRA G 101-21705 Other Retirement $0 00 OBRA DEFERRED COMP Total PEBSCO/OBRA $0 00 Paid Chki 075669 4/2/03 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS G 101-21705 Other Retirement $2.289 00 USCM-ENTITY 2339 ToUl PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS $2.28900 Paid Chki 075670 4/2/03 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT G 101-21704 PERA $6.743 80 PERA CITY SHARE G 101-21704 PERA $5,251.11 PERA EMPLOYEE W/H ToUl PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT $11.994 91 Paid Chk# 075671 4/2/03 UNITED WAY G 101-21708 United Way $65 00 CHARITY DONATIONS Total UNITED WAY $65 00 Paid Chki 075672 4/2A)3 WISCONSIN SCTF G 101-21712 Other Deductions $184 62 JOHNSON i 0002756898 Total WISCONSIN SCTF $184.62 10100 Primary Cash $51.28339 F CITY OF ORONO check register 04/00/03 7:47 AM Pago 1 Qhfck Pay Chack Chtck Numbtr EmployM Namt Ptrlod Amount Date Chock Status 052658 PETERSON. BARBARA 4 $323.22 4/14/03 Outstanding 052659 MOORSE. RONALD J.4 $346 31 4/14/03 Outstanding 052660 SANSEVERE, ROBERT K.4 $269.36 4/14/03 Outstanding 052661 MURPHY, JAMES L.4 $269 36 4/14/03 Outstanding 052662 NYOARD.JAY 4 $269.36 4/14/03 Outstanding 052663 WHITE. JAMES M 4 $26936 $1.746 97 4/14/03 Outstanding ^ 4 200S City o^ 'Mft ^ • P^O/yq . » •INFOBMATION ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING ir _____________ APR 1 4 200} CItYurOHONU OF * » Si .i f % APPLICATION FOR CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMISSION --------- ^J.i" > 4 2005 CITYof OROm o«c^ Municipal Offlces mcis street Address: 2750 Keltey Partway Orono, MN 55356 Mainnj Address: P.O. Box 66 Costal Bay, MN SS323 0066 Commission Applying For: ^ Parks Commission □ Planning Commission □ Community Task Force (Name)_________________________ Name Address 'i-y'ytfAAJ i Post Office&ZipCod e \/\/~A'*r v7)/\/ .^20*^________ Telephone (H) «&o (W) Resident of Orono years Work Experience: fxx^^^frA crrut'c-* //2^J(/»rrA y'xKT ■A J ‘ t Education: <Piyj£ - *y«jx/r'7f •! rinf^ " jli Civic and Volunteer Activities (past and present): Telephone ($12) 47}>73S7 • FAX47»)510 n Please state your reasons for wanting to serve on this Commission. {Phase be as specific as possibie. Use additional sheet if necessary.) ___________/,T ___ 4 ^>/i z^y/jed: c^Pe-Ai —A/f7ryi2i jgrjirt ^------------ What Is your view of the role of the Commission?,rtj(^^/^/^ -k . C7J J^/7y(i>yl___ ^ ^ (~7T3 j6>/yc-je^/ka^ 7g>go yf^£.— Other Comments: {Use this space to lr ?iude any further information you would tike the City Council to consider, or that you feel is relevant to the appointment you are seeking. You may also attach other materials you would like the Council to consider.) ^ ^puSr^TC^^ 's/ / AJ\yd^v'^(P i r/__— /vag:-----------^---- I understand this appointment may be discussed at a public meeting 03 1 Signaturt Data ••NOTE:Volunteer commission member's name, address and phone number will become public Information. oaoiNJ ■ V j ----------------------or; Bruce DeWitt 2145 6»hAve.N Long Lake, MN 55356 APR I 4 2003 CilYUt OHOivu Mr. Ron Moorse, Orono City Administrator 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 3/27/03 Dear Mr. Moorse, Please find attached my application for membership on the Parks Commission. I’m looking forward to having the opportunity to discuss with you and others more about why I’d like to be a member. Please let me know when we could meet. Thank you In advance for your time. Sincerely, ^ Bruce DeWitt PleasestateyourreasonsforvvBntinolDseiveonthisCommission. (Phasebeas sp^mc as posslbla. Usa additional shaat if nacassary.) —S t-^ ly .-Atn iyd/lm \y ' V / jfij O^^J’ /)Pc/f S/n6e.S ^ / /jyif S St i(\ft (^A/yl 'rki /OM'iM'Hy./hyp/'^id f 1 yjCHf\Cr -^h,-iCo (^./i\e.\ r^y f bur /jf"'* fh\f.S !oCs/ ^ d ,jSc/^^/ //.V r O p.y {/•CC / ■ ■ ' , r- c{/ iyuf'yiu^. Whpt is your view of the role of the Commission? / y -/ cs CD^'? r/hy/e /o> a —- V-/ / l//.)'o^ hiy /J\ dn //f ^ ^Vf.tu /J6d f / /ti /'c^r^c/y^____________________ Other Comments: (Usa thisspaca toindudaany furtharinformation you would iika tha City Council to considar, or that you faai is raiavant to tha appointmant you ara saaking. You may also attach othar matariais you would iika tha Council to considar.) j . if^ r>/'' \yj / /Vu,/ /V / ^'U1 r'. 0 cx-T Sf /r}>o ■'' ^ . t C> 1 /..'/’//■'} / m/' .ii/\ c) out L '',//hJ ytj/J/y}(\ / C'o-^ ^t >JUJix/lh/h /<^^///^ O ! ' )f ^ A//C/ t *^^// I understand this appointment may be discussed at a public meeting. ' ■ ' / Signature 1. .?'/ oj Dat« NOTE: Voiuntaar commission mambeYs nama. address and phone number will become public Information. • • MAR.21*2003 14:34 952 B31 0161 NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL LIFE 14517 P.002/005 ■•^10 APR J 4 20Q7 APPLICATION FOR CITIZEN ADVISORY CQMQ/^j^glON CITY of ORONO »tnet Uinta: 2lU KdlQT Ml 553S6 .Maffioi Mdnut P.f. 8o4 6§ . CiystitB^y. MN 553234)0(6 CofiuNssion Applying For: ^J0>oTks Commission □ Planning Commission □ Community Taskforce IWame)_______ Name ^ uj wQmmuniiy iasxrw ce ^ J- Address J? "lOd Ks/^ y4 C Post Office AZip Code ^)(Ce/s/bA_______S^?3/__________________ Telephone (Wl ^6"" ^^3^ Resident of Orono 3^years. Work Experience: January 1980 October 19B2 Radiason Hotel Corporation position of Sales Manager In Saginaw Michigan. Chicago III. Louiavilla Kv. November 1** 1982 to graaent Financial Mutual Life and Northweal em Financial Ne x V j entative for Northwesi(ill Education: Education: Colleoe of St Thomas. BA In Buaineas Manaoemi Civic and Volunteer Activities (past and present}: ATTAKlah 'P/i (6U)475.7357 • TAXm^m 'kAR.21'2003 14:35 952 831 0161 NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL LIFE #4517 P.004/005 Please state vour reasons for wanting to serve on this Commission. Being bom into this community I have been blessed and fortunate from day one to be an Orono resident. Now it is my time to give back to Orono in the form of community service. I have learned from my Adopt A Highway experience that maintaining a dean and beau^ul city breeds pride in its dtizens. Sometimes this pride is overt, mostly it goes unspoken but is felt every time an Orono resident answers the question, "Where do you live?” It is Important that Orono residents feel good about the city they live in. As Mayor Gulianni’s implementation of the "no broken windows" policy in New York City greatly contributed to the resurrection of that dty, I believe that subtle dvic pride is rendered by vtrise attention to detail. That takes community leadership and activism. In this case on the Parks Commission. As you can see from my list of volunteer activities I don’t sit still for very long. I have been off of the OLL Parish Council for over a year now and I getting antsy. Need a new challenge. What is you view of the role of the Commission? To be an advisory group to the City Council where appropriate and carry out the requests of the City Council pertaining to Parks, open space and trails. These requests represent the wishes of the community via the electoral process. To analyze park system issues, considering all relevant and known factors, hearing dtizen concerns and presenting as precisely and condseiy recommendations to the City Council for final action. ' MAR.21'2003 14:35 952 831 Old NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL LIFE #4517 P.005/005 •J(/ My practical experience in career and multiple volunteer organizations has provided me with many opportunities to be wrong and right, foolish and wise, Ineffective and effective. Learning where to pursue and where to let it go* I believe has helped me be effective and relatively successful in many of my endeavors. Effective communication in any meeting setting is crucial. I find well timed/appropriate humor an effective style that works in many settings. Because of my residence in Navarre anu active community involvement in Mound I may be of help In issues that overlap. Public Service is a noble calling I look forward to doing my part. APR 1 4 2003 STATE OF MINNESOTA FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT Uli r ur UMU KEVIN S BURKE CHIEF JUDGE HENNEPIN COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 55A«7 OA2J lei£ • 3A8 4 309 FAX <ei£» 340 5374 kcrfin bur^cGco hcnncpm.mn.us March 17,2003 Mr. Ronald Moorse POBox66 Crystal Bay MN 55323-0066 Dear Mr. Moorse: The Hennepin County justice system faces a very real crisis. 1 write to you to ask that you join the effort to solve this community’s crisis injustice. All of us know that the State of Minnesota, like many other states, has a significant budget problem. Nearly every commentator on state finance describes the situation as the worst since World War U. Article 1, Section 8 of the Minnesota Constitution provides. ‘'Every person is entitled to a remedy in the laws for all injuries or wrongs he may receive to person, property or character, and to obtain justice freely and without purchase, completely and without denial, promptly and without delay, comfortable to the laws.” The right of access to justice, as guaranteed by the Minnesota Constitution, is as threatened as the state's economy is fragile. The justice system cannot e.xpect to be exempt from the changes that will be required out of fiscal necessity. 1 ask you not just to join in lobbying for adequate funds for justice, but to help make the painful but necessary changes we must make. Governor Pawlenty has proposed a 10% cut to the court’s budget, a 15% cut to the public defender budget, and a 10% cut to Legal Aid funding. These are real cuts. There will be less money spent on justice and unless we offer our collective creativity, significantly less justice. The Governor had difficult choices to make. For reasons that 1 will explain, my hope is that the legislature will find a way to “soften the fiscal blow” to the justice system. However, for that to happen this community’s leaders must become engaged in the legislative process to a degree that they have not done in the past. Our courts are about people - the people who use them, and the people who run them. Our courts are about poor people who need lawyers and self-represented people who need assistance from Legal Aid and the Self Help Center. There are no faceless “programs” for lawmakers and the Governor to cut. The potential reductions will strain an already burdened judicial system. Although this is a state that can pride itself in having a progressive tradition when it comes to public services such as education and health, we have not done as well wh.rn it comes to the ensuring the constitutional right to access to justice. Consider these facts: The Legislative Auditor found that Minnesota Judges’ caseloads already arc 49% higher than Judges in comparable states. By national standards, Minnesota is not particularly litigious. The fact is Minnesota has fewer judges per capita than other states. til fM . . f »0C; That is in part why wc have the highest caseloads in the country. Our ability to deliver justice in light of these caseloads is due to our adequate and dedicated staff. After this legislative session, presumably we are going to have the same number of overworked judges. The question is whether we will have adequate staff support that will enable the court to serve our community’s needs. • Public defenders statewide endured a 24% caseload increase between fiscal 2001 and 2002. On average, a Minnesota public defender carries 944 cases per year. American Bar Association standards suggest an annual caseload of400 cases. A recent Legislative Auditor’s report on the court system found that 70% of judges believe there are too few public defenders - many of whom are not well prepared because they have too little time to spend on cases. A 15% cut to the public defenders budget will require this judicial district to radically and unacceptably alter the criminal justice system. • The Minneapolis Legal Aid office is down nine lawyers and two paralegals already, and is slated to lose five more staff members in the next year even without proposed budget cuts. Statewide, Legal Aid expects to turn away as many as 10,000 families that they could have helped two years ago. Volunteer lawyering has decreased 27%. Wc know we cannot provide a lawyer for every poor person who may need one. Moreover, the cost of legal services leads more and more people to elect to represent themselves. Our district has been proactive. Wc established a Self Help Center to make access to justice more understandable for people without lawyers. Frankly, for a judge it is far more difficult and time consuming to handle a case with an ill-prepared self-represented person. Approximately 25,000 people used the Self Help Center in Hennepin County last year. What happens to the Minnesota constitutional requirement of access to justice if there is no Self Help Center and Legal Aid must make further layoffs? • Filings of major cases have increased twice as fast as expenditures on the judiciarv during fiscal years 1996*2000. Court business tends to be counter-cyclical with certain aspects of the economy. Historically, court filings go up as economy goes down. If the economic predictions about our economy are true, then courts, public defenders and Legal Aid may have more business in the next year or so. o “A drop of 2 percentage points in unemployment would mean a 9% decline in burglary, 14% in rape and robbery and 30% in assault." (Centre for Economic Policy Research, Winter-Ebmer and Raphael, 2000) o "Had unemployment been one percentage point higher in 1992, there would have been nearly 500,000 more crimes in the United States. " (Centre for Economic Policy Research, Wmter-Ebmer and Raphael, 2000) Even before these proposed budget cuts, the Hennepin County court had been absorbing many costs and postponing new staff positions to meet state and federal mandates and to maintain core operations such as funding employees’ health care costs. Our ability to handle the 700,777 cases that were filed last year is due in large part to the excellent staff that wc have. It is inevitable that we will see that staff diminished in coming months. Currently we have a self-imposed hiring freeze. Just to illustrate w'hat this means, seven judges have no court reporter, many have no law clerks and the guardian ad litem program has one person supervising 291 volunteers. In life, timing is important. The timing of this budget crisis could not have come at a worse time. As of July 1,2003, all funding for Hennepin County District Court will come from the State of Minnesota. Our court has been operating in a transition mode for several months. Our goal has been to ensure a seamless transition while we as a state judiciary move toward greater consistency and effectiveness. A consultant once told me that 80% of business mergers fail to achieve the merger objectives. This state cannot afford this merger to fail to meet its objectives. The state’s 10 judicial districts traditionally have operated more like independent Baltic republics than a singular entity. State funding provides us with the opportunity to function as a true branch of government. One goal of this merger is to ensure greater consistency and effectiveness. The transformation affords us the chance to redesign ourselves, capitalizing on the best practices already in place and reforming those that have not served us well. It is not a goal of this merger to dismantle the Heimepin County District Court to shore up the budget shortfall or years of fiscal neglect of other districts throughout the state. Without united commitment from Hennepin County’s leaders, we could fail to meet the goal of ensuring consistency and effectiveness. Because we know that the transition to state funding would present ^^oth opportunity as well as risk, our district has embarked on the Baldrige Assessment, a rif*!**. is process designed originally for the private sector to evaluate quality improvement efforts and to improve results. We are the first court in the country to pursue an assessment of this kind. By surveying our own court users and reviewing data from other courts around the country, we have developed seven categories for improvement: leadership, strategic planning, customer knowledge, information and analysis, human resources, process management and results. Understanding that organizations tend to measure the things they care about and care about the things they measure, we have identified a number of areas for continued assessment. More importantly, our bench is committed to the proposition that fairness is one of our key areas of measurement. Fairness is one of the results for which courts should be held accountable. The Hennepin County courts will be judged by court users in the following areas: 1. Is the court perceived as fair to litigants and other constituents? 2. Is the court perceived as accessible by litigants and other constituents? 3. Do litigants perceive they are being listened to? 4. Do litigants understand the orders given by the court? 5. Do litigants perceive that cases are resolved in a timely manner? The public has a nght to have answers to these questions. We cannot allow the current fiscal situation to undermine that effort. We intend to report the results regularly and to be held accountable for our performance. Initiatives like this can easily be sidetracked by the mistaken belief that we can’t afford it. In my mind, that type of commentary translates into the belief that we can’t afford fairness. You may have read the recent story about the alternative of closing a suburban courthouse. It is an option I hope we do not face. Courts in Oregon are open only four days a week as a result of budget cuts. In Manon County, Oregon, all but the most serious cnminal cases, including felonies, have been continued until next July due to lack of public defender funding. Hinng freezes forjudges and critical court staff arc in place in 62 percent of state courts. To generate more revenue, 30 percent of state courts are collecting fines and fees more aggressively and 43 percent hav** 'mposed new court fees on litigants. Ninety-eight percent of the nation's cases are heard in s «. courts. The work of courts has a significant impact on the health of children, families, communities and even the economy. Across the country, too many courts, public defenders and Legal Aid offices are on financial life support. With your help we can avoid the calamity that has occurred elsewhere. We recognize that the sute faces an incredible deficit. Frankly, I think that increasing revenue throu^ court fees must be considered. Second, we need to establish priorities about where we will cut because w must recognize that there is a real fiscal problem. After the disposition of serious felony crimes, I suggest that juvenile and family courts are the highest priority. Realistically, we need to be open about alternatives to how we handle just about everything else. We are the largest judicial district in the state, widi 61 judges, 17 referees and more than 600 employees. To take a step backward in fimding or a step toward the drastic budget-cutting tactics of otfrer states will have a negative impact on court users. We will do everything in our power to avoid that result, but we will have a greater chance of success with the combined forces of the bench and community leaders such as yourself. Calls or letters to your legislators siqrporting court funding would be timely and enormously helpful. Personal meetings are even better. With the significant turnover in both legislative chambers this year, we are working to educate new lawmakers about the important role the courts fulfill for their constituents. The implications of the transition to state funding make it important that all legislators, not just the few on court fimding committees, understand the implications of what rruiy happen to justice in the district. Sincerely, Kclin S. Burke Chief Judge ____________ STAT. or MINNESOTA ^ 20“3 fourth judicial district CO*€RlrUr-OHONO o' HIL i KEVIN S OURKE CHILF judge: MCNNEPIN COUNTY GOVCNNWENT CENTCW MINNCAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55AB7 O^Zf le I e t 34B 4 389 TAX lel^• 3 48 8374 kcvin.burl c®co hf'nnrpin mn.u% March 21,2003 Mayor Barbara Peterson City of Orono P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Dear Mayor Peterson, I have received your resolution and agree with almost all the clauses about the negative consequences of closing one or more suburban courthouses. 1 suspect that the finances ol our court arc very much like those of many municipalities that arc struggling to deal with the state of the State of Minnesota’s economy. We face a serious crisis on funding the judiciary. Governor Pawlcnty has recommended a 10% cut to the trial court budget. In addition, the court must cover escalating health care costs. The Governor’s proposed cut, therefore, is much greater than it might seem. While I disagree with the Governor’s recommendation, all of us must recognize there is a very real fiscal crisis in this state. To be prudent stewards of the public’s dollars, we must explore alternatives to the way we do business. As part of that process, our court leadership has looked at several options. One option is to close a suburban location. In my mind, the potential savings of $350,000 docs not justify going any further than simply looking at closing a facility and concluding that closing a facility is an undesirable option. So that is the good news. The bad news is that closing a suburban facility could happen. The Governor has recommended a 15% cut to the public defender budget. It the legislature follows the Governor’s recommendation, the cut will have a dramatic and serious effect on ‘he ability of this judicial district to provide constitutionally mandated legal services to indigent people. The Hennepin County Board is talking about reducing .k!......u.,. i.mnlovces. That decision inevitably will have a senous impact on legal services to inoigcni pcopic. i iw ncimtpiii v v/un^ ............»------- - - the number of county employees. That decision inevitably will have a senous impact on the corrections department. The Governor has recommended a 10% cut to Legal Aid. If that occurs, there will be further pressure on the court s Self Help Center. The combination of public defender cuts, court cuts, sheriffs department cuts, corrections ' 'C . i