Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
10-27-2003 Council Packet
COUNCIL MEETING OCf 2 7 2003 AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, OCTORERJJ^J J:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, IVllW<ESOTA (*) 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 OATH OF OFFICE Council Member Lili McMillan CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve/Amend APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 2. Regular Council Meeting of October 13,2003 PUBLIC HEARING - 7:00 P.M. 3. Certification of Delinquent Utilities and General Scr\ icc Fees - Resolution PRESENTATION 4. Sally Koenecke, Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission - 2004 Proposed Budget 4a. Fire Service Report PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Irene Silber, Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - J. Marc Fritzler, Representative LMCD REPORT - Lili McMillan PUBLIC COIVIMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT ^02-2858 Scott Standa, 2659 Casco Point Road - Variance (After-the-Fact) - Resolution ^<02-2873 City of Orono - 2000-2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment #1 - Old Long Lake Road MUSA - Resolution #03-2929 Jeff Martineau, 2565 North Shore Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution #03-2934 Jason Bliss, 3445 Crystal Bay Road - Variance - Resolution #03-2941 Paul Cady, 465 Tumham Road - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 10. #03-2943 Robert and Janet Labalt, 3202 North Shore Drive - Variance 11. #03-2952 Greg Tripp, 3229C Casco Circle - Variance - Resolution 12. #03-2954 Howard R. and Lisa Alton, III, 1635 Concordia Street - Variance 13. #03-2955 Michael Palm, 710 Big Island - Variance - Resolution 14. #03-2956 Hossnpat Construction, 849 Brown Road North - Variance - Resolution 15. #03-2957 Joseph Thies, 1180 Willow Drive North - Variance - Resolution 5.#02-2858 6.#02-2873 7.#03-2929 8.#03-2934 ♦9.#03-2941 10.#03-2943 ♦11.#03-2952 12.#03-2954 13.#03-2955 14.#03-2956 15.#03-2957 i: MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT r AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, OCTOBER 27,2003,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA 16. Housing Week - Proclamation PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 17. 2530 Fox Street Driveway - Appeal of Administrative Decision 18. Adopt Assessment Roll for Heritage Drive Sewer - Resolution CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 19. Request for Payment - Navarre Fire Station 20. Renewal of the Police Service Agreement with Long Lake 21 . Purchase of Replacement Rescue Vehicle for the Long Lake Fire Department 22. Purchase of Replacement Pumper for the Long Lake Fire Department 23. PERA Resolution, Part-Time Police Officer - Resolution 24. Creation of Fire Administrative Officer for the Long Lake Fire Department 25. Appointment of Authorized City Representative for 2003 HRA Revenue Bond Construction Project CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT * 26. LICENSES Kennel License • 27. BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 2003 10/27 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m, 10/30 - Council Work Session, 5:30 p.m. 11/01 11/03 11/05 11/08 11/10 11/11 11/13 11/17 11/24 11/27 11/28 Leaf and Grass Disposal, Saturday, 8:00 a.ro. - Noon Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. Planning Commission Work Session, 5:30 p.m. Leaf and Grass Disposal, Saturday, 8:00 a.m. - Noon Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. HOLIDAY, Observance of Veterans Day Council Work Session, 5:30 p.m. Planning Commission Meeting, 6:00 p.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. HOLIDAY, Observance of Thanksgiving Day HOLIDAY, Observance of Thanksgiving Day i ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 13,2003 COUNCI!. MFPTIWG OCT 2 7 2003 CITY OF Omui^iO ROLL The Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members |n«sent: Mayor Barbara Peterson, Council Members Bob Sansevere, Jim Murphy, and Jim White. Representing staff were Planning Director Mike Gaffron, City Attorney Tom Barrett, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, and Recorder Alissa Wintemheimer. Public Services Director Greg Gappa was absent. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA I. Approvc/Amend Items 5,6,7,8,9,10,1 1,12,13, and 14 were added to the Consent Agenda. Item 4 was removed ftom the Consent Agenda. Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve the consent agenda as amend^. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *2. Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of September 22,2003 Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of September 22,2003. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS—RICK RICE, REPRESENTATIVE Rice arrived late in tlie meeting. See comments after the Mayor/Council report. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS-^EANNE MABUSTH, REPRESENTATIVE Mabusth was absent. r ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 13,2003 FIRE SERVICE REPORT None. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT *3. #03-2936 Bruce Meese & Maureen Murphy, 3135 Casco Circle—Varianc Resolution No. 5058 Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5058 granting a hardcover variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-282 and 78-1288(B) to allow an existing lakeside deck to remain in the 0 -75’ setback zone. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 4. #03-2948 WJ.\I Properties, LLC, 2605 West Wayzata Boulevard—Conditional Use Permit Extension —Resolution No. 5059 Gaffron stated the item was removed from Consent Agenda to clarify wording in the resolution. He stated that the applicants were asking for a 16-month extension of the CUP because they had issues to work through with the Watershed District. Until all matters with the Watershed District are finalized, they cannot proceed with the required conditions of Resolution No. 4845, which include a screening fence, berms, and trees at the north end of the parking lot. The applicant expects resolution w ith the MCWD by the end of 2004. Gaflron stated that the applicant's attorney, Peter Johnson, wanted to be sure that the required temporary screening described in items 3 and 4 of Findings in the Resolution only apply to the IS parking stalls on the northeast end of the parking lot. Murphy suggested that since the building would not progress for the next 16 months, the City could ask the applicant to put a coat of paint on the face of the building. Mayor Petereon, White, and Sansevere agreed that would be appropriate. Mayor Peterson stated they should request the applicant paint the front of the building in good faith. Mayor Peterson moved, and White seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5059 approving a 16-month extension of the effective period of Resolutions No. 4585 and No. 4993 to December 31,2004, due to delays as noted in the applicant’s letter of request which Is part of the public record of Application #03-2948 and hereby approves an amendment to the Industrial Site Plan Approval granted via Resolution ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 13,2003 4, M3-2948 WJM Properties, LLC, 2605 West Wayzato Boulevard—ConMional Use Permit Extension —Resolution No. 5059 —Continued No. 4845 to allow the interim use of a semi-opaque fence, five feet in height along the length of the northeast edge of the IS visible parking spaces, and a distance of 30-feet south from the northeast comer of said lot, instead of the previously approved landscape bernu and plantings in the same designated area. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT *5. Crime Prevention Month—Proclamation Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to adopt the City Proclamation for October as Crime Prevention Month. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Murphy stated that he, Ron Moorse, and Mayor Schaeffer of Long Lake, and other representatives of Orono and Long Lake had met with Senator Johnson to discuss the Highway 12 project. He stated that Senator Johnson was ahead of them with all of their concerns. They will meet with Mn/DOT, Ames Construction, and the senator next week. They hope to develop a plan in common, and to find a responsible contact with authority to make decisions in Mn/DOT. Murphy stated they were pleased with how responsive Senator Johnson was. White stated that Orono High School currently has IS German exchange students in town for a few weeks, and that next spring Orono students would be going to Germany. Mayor Peterson thanked Sansevere for his w ork on the Police Department fundraiser, and also acknowledged Tim Gilbertson for his help. Moorse stated that work sessions would be held on Thursday, October SO"*, and November 13*’’ at 5:30 p.m. Moorse mentioned the development proposal for the comer of Willow and Highway 12 would be on the agenda of the October 30'^ w ork session. Gaffron stated that the building seems closer to the street than it is because while it sits 31’ from the street, the trail running through there is only 9 ’ from the building. Moorse handed out information from the City‘s Comprehensive Plan related to the development. i ‘ i ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 13,2003 MA YOR/COUNCIL REPORT—Continued San.«evere asked if a bank and drug store would be objectionable as anchors. Moorse stated they would not serve the purpose of anchors at this location because the City does not want to draw retail to this area. Murphy stated they don ’t want to compete with Long Lake’s downtown businesses. He questioned how many Long Lake businesses will survive the closing of Highway 12 when the new road is complete. He suggested not moving ahead with retail uses on the property in question until they see what happens with the highway. Moorse stated Landform was pushing to develop the property because of the carrying costs on the land. Sansevere asked what would be acceptable there. Moorse replied office use and retail as accessory to office would be allowed by the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that it would be difficult to get an office in there in the current market. Murphy stated that he heard Cliff Otten bought the Shaunessy property. White asked if Long Lake was keeping Orono informed of its projects. Moorse stated they are, but they don ’t have any developments in the works currently. Orono, Long Lake, and Otten would all need to meet to determine the best use of the Shaunessy property. They want to view Orono and Long Lake as though it's all one area regarding developments. Mayor Peterson stated she sees no problem with competition. Sansevere stated that while they would consider Long Lake’s interest, they had to put Orono ’s interest first. White stated that if a project came their way that they felt enthusiastic about, they would pursue it. Moorse stated that what the Comprehensive Plan would currently allow was not 30,000 s.f. of retail. If the developer presented a use that met the Comprehensive Plan, they could not refuse it. Sansevere stated that retail would make sense in the location because it could provide services to the residential, such as coffee, restaurant, and a drug store. Murphy stated they had previously agreed to locally owned businesses and that he would not want a Subway and Caribou in there. Moorse stated he would schedule a meeting with the developer. Ii ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 13,2003 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS —RICK RICE, RESPRESENTATI VE Rice arrived and apologized for being held up by work. Rice stated that Pat Wolfe had followed up on White's suggestion for finding alternative funding for playing fields. They contacted the Wild regarding a hockey rink. The Wild do not have any funding in place for such projects, but would help with fund raising by sending a team member and some merchandise to fund raising events. The Twins do have a matching grant program in place, but the City would have to have their portion of the funds in place before iq>plying for the Twins grant. He stated that on November lO"* they would present the Friends of the Paric award to Barb Wulf for her work at the Seven Nations Park. Sansevere asked Rice if he could help them understand w hat the Park Commission wants from the Council. Rice stated that they want to be on par with Wayzata regarding hockey rinks, parks, etc. Rice stated that the Commission was concerned that the fire department got over 50% of the property in Navarre that was purchased partially with Park Funds, and the park area will be difficult to develop, and it is currently being used as a construction dumping ground. Murphy stated that in the current Commission minutes, it seemed there is a philosophical contest going on between the Park Conunission and the Council. He asked how they could get on the same page. Rice stated that the Park Commission is made up of talented people who want to be making a difference in the community. He felt they were frustrated because of an inability to act due to a lack of funds, which then created the current conflict. Murphy stated that parks were not the highest priority in the City; that safety came first. He felt the Park Commission didn’t want to work until they received money, while the Council wouldn’t grant funds until they saw a worthy plan of action. Rice stated there is an unwillingness to raise taxes to support the parks, which upsets the Commission. Sansevere asked if the Commission felt Orono’s parks were inadequate. Rice stated they did not, but that they would like to develop a well-used trail system. Sansevere stated that they could not force people to use the City's trails, no matter how good they might be. Muorse stated there is a work session scheduled for November 13 '*' that could be a joint work session with the Park Conunission. I ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 13,2003 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS—RICK RICE, RESPRESENTATIVE — Continued White suggested they look into YWCA progranis. The YWCA runs programs at no cost to cities in paries all over the metro. It draws the community into the parks and all the cities have to do is approve the YWCA’s use of the park. He suggested the Park Commission review what other cities, besides Wayzata, do in their paries. Sansevere stated that the Council and Commission needed to agree on a philosophy so they could work together. Mayor Peterson stated she liked the idea of having Kevin Garnett fund a half-court and put his name on it, which had been reported in the Park Commission minutes as a suggestion made during the meeting. She stated that Wayzata has much more commercial area than Orono, and Orono has more rural property, so there is a disparity in the amount the cities can raise in taxes for things like parks. She stated that the Park Commission has a fhistrating negativity toward the Council. Murphy stated that the Park Commission should forget about money for a while and develop a five-year plan, without regard to cost, then seek approval based on feasibility. Mayor Peterson stated that the Park Commission had done a spending plan, but now should do a plan to decide which projects should go where and when. Rice stated that one factor in Orono is that people use the lake as their major source of recreation, have big yards, and/or leave town to vacation. Orono doesn’t necessarily need a world-class park system. Moorse stated there are lots of resources in Orono. He suggested the Commission look at what is already here, whether it is City owned or not, then try to fill gaps. White stated that kids aged ten to twelve are ripe for gang recruitment and after-school programming for that age group could be a focus of the Park Commission. Murphy stated that the Park Commission has a victim mentality regarding the Council and that he resents it. He stated they should fight harder to accomplish the projects they believe in, and actively pursue other sources of funding. Rice raised the matter of public beach use. Mayor Peterson stated that small beaches are primarily for neighborhood use because they are too small to support public use. Larger beaches, like Summit Park, are more appropriate for public use. Rice stated that fencing of)'public beaches so there ’s no motor vehicle access seems I i 3 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 13,2003 PARK COMMISSIONCOMMKMS--RICKRiCE, RESPRESENTATIVE — Continued snobbish, and Orono looks standoflish. Muqihy stated that the Park Commission should explore whether Orono beaches should be for neighborhood or public use. Mayor Peterson stated she has heard both sides of the areument. R-BLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT *6. Receive Feasibility Report and Schedule Public Hearing for Homestead Road Sewer Project—Resolution No. 5060 Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5060 receiving report and calling hearing on Homestead Road Sewer Project. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *7. Spring Road Pavement Project Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve a budget adjustment for the 2003 PIR Fund in the amount of $123,100 for the Spring Hill Road Project. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT *8. Citizen Commendation Regarding House Fire—Resolution No. 5061 Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5061 to commend Mark Gangelhoff for his efforts in relation to a fire in the City of Orono. V'ote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *9. Request for Payment and Application and Certificate for Payment #12 —Long Lake Fire Station Sansevere moved, and White seconded, to approve the requests for payment to Kirk Program Management, Inc. in the amount of $4,895.00; and Rochon Corporation in the amount of $60478.53, to be funded from the Joint Fire Account V'ote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. iBBiudih I’ J ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 13,2003 *10. AppIkaUon and CertMcala for Payneat IM-Navarra Fire Slalfoa for'lfovi^i^i!'.!! ®“****” •“ «PPn>ve tke ApplicaUoa aad CerlMkate«ai:??r.'.;:traV.r ■' •• F.r. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *11. Reqaest for Payment—Navarre Fire Station Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. *12. Purchase of Fire Pumper for Navarre Fire Statlou Site "" ss-■« Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *13.Police Department Acceptance of Metropolitan Radio Board C rant *14.PoUce Department Purchase of Digital Recordiug Equipment Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to purchase 20 Olvmons Svitom* iKS-tnoo digital recorders, 2 Olympus AS-3000 Transcription Software packaacs with hMd«»» Vote^^A* ***4™*’ **’•*“*■* *** “P P«ck*ge for $6,709.50. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT None. *15. LICENSES None. 1 8 .-r ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 13,2003 *16. BILLS MHrphy moved, and Sanicverc Mconded, to approve paymeat of the All Foods Accouot. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT The DicetiDg was adjourned at 8:16 p.oL ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor I ir iilRaifM * ^ ' ( \ ^ d COUNCIL MEFTiNr; REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION OCf 2 7 2003 DATE: 9iibTo*ytrW2t)63 ITEM NO: Department Approval: yr / Name Tom Kuehn Adminbtrator Reviewed: Title Finance Director Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Public Hearing Regarding the Certification of Delinquent Utilities and General Service Fees Attachments: (A) Resolution providing for the collection of delinquent sewer, water. recycling program fees, septic inspection fees, /\nd general service fees. (B) Assessment roll. Each year the city certifies to the count)', all unpaid annual ser\ ice charges for the septic inspection program, the unpaid recycling program fees, all delinquent sewer and water accounts of $50.00 or more, and the delinquent general services for false alarm fees and developers improvement fees, to be collected with the following year’s ta,xes. In addition to the outstanding amounts deliiiquent, eight percent (8%) interest is added to all accounts and an administrative fee is added to the septic accounts. At this time the total to be assessed is $75,408.67 including administrative fees. This amount will be decreased by any payments received up to the final payment date of Nov ember 26,2003. A copy of the assessment roll is attached for your review. State statutes require the City hold a public hearing regarding the assessment of these fees prior to certify ing the assessment roll to the County. Notices of the public hearing have been sent to all delinquent properties, llie hearing is an opportunity for property owners to ask questions and provide comments regarding the proposed assessment. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adoption of resolution providing for the collection of delinquent charges for the 2004 sewer and water utility services, the septic inspection program, the recycling program, the false alarms, dev elopers improvement fees, and other general service fees. Word FwlbCTM«BCHC4MwTAciKMrJ00l<'ER 1200)13 wyd J niiTiiii A RESOLUTION FOR THE COLLECTION OF DELINQUENT 2003 WATER AND SEWER UTILITY SERVICE CHARGES, RECYCLING PROGRAM FEES, ON-SITE SEWAGE TREATMENT (SEPTIC) INSPECTION PROGRAM, STORM WATER CHARGES AND GENERAL SERVICE FLES Whcrca», the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota has enacted certain ordinances under Minnesota Statues, therefore pursuant to Chapter 14, Chapter 42 and Chapter 58 Orono City Code pertaining to payment and collection of water, sewer and storm water charges and annual service charges for recycling, and the on-site sewage treatment (septic) inspection program, and false alarm fees, and developers improvement fees; and and Whereas, the charges identified in the attached list of properties are delinquent in nature; Whereas, ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was gi ven, and the hearing was held thereon the 27*** day of October 2003, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono as follows; That the Hennepin County Special Assessment Division is hereby authorized to place the delinquent water, sewer and storm water charges and annual service charges for recycling, and the onsite sewage treatment (septic) inspection program, ar.d false alarm fees, and developers improvement fees, on the 2004 property tax rolls, payable in 2004. at eight percent (8%) per annum, against the specified properties as set forth in the following Exhibits. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Orono. Minnesota, this 27* day of October, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor miuautt If PIN 0211723210009 0211723210019 0211723240003 0211723310011 021172331Q019 0211723310037 02117^10039 0211723320003 0211723430026 0311723210001 0311723320020 0311723340001 031172334001S 0411723110011 0411723120016 0411723220003 0411723220020 0411723310004 0411723430002 0511723110002 0911723130012 0511723130026 0511723130032 0511723140002 0511723140031 0511723210023 0511723230004 0511723230013 0511723230014 0511723230040 0611723210006 0611723220017 0611723220019 0611723230004 0611723230017 0611723240001 0611723330001 0611723410021 0711723140016 0711723140060 0711723140063 0711723220016 0711723230002 0711723230032 0711723240023 0711723320003 0711723320025 0711723320027 0711723320054 0711723320066 0711723330005 Samount 119.06 119 06 51987 360^9 497.99 211.27 520.68 119.06 541.81 119.08 119.08 129.06 119.08 119.08 11908 541 81 541 81 109.08 119.08 119.08 540.62 124.76 541.80 508.93 479.25 67.81 111.91 541.80 497.99 541.80 119.08 109.08 119.08 119.08 118.16 119.08 109.08 232.77 541.81 508.93 232.77 119.06 541.81 111.91 111.91 541.81 111.91 541.81 531.26 232.77 497.99 0711723410014 0711723410030 0711723420013 0711723440004 0711723440005 0711723440020 0711723440021 0711723440026 0811723210017 0811723230011 OBI1723230024 0811723320026 0811723330027 0611723330065 0811723330066 0811723330075 0811723340020 0811723340050 0811723410007 0911723^70005 1011723240005 1011723240008 1011723310006 1011723310017 1011723310028 1011723310033 1011723310050 1011723310072 1011723420016 1111723320010 1511723210004 1711723220003 1011723220011 1011723320014 1011723320014 1711723220025 1711723220026 1711723220029 1711723220034 1711723230016 1711723230017 1711723230019 1711723240023 1711723310030 1711723310034 1711723310050 1711723330006 1711723340033 1711723340034 1711723340071 1711723340079 1711723410003 143.76 84.13 111.91 295 27 111.91 541.61 541.61 541.81 360.29 111.91 541.81 232.77 541.81 247.99 111.91 541.81 111.91 27007 247.96 119.08 342.20 51.20 541.81 520.68 531.26 360.29 541.81 541.81 119.08 497.99 119.08 328.09 55 00 400 00 1100.00 910.08 674.82 674.93 292.55 440.55 184.04 674 93 640.60 368.73 156.95 680.17 55.00 706.97 1032.46 161.59 154.63 130.37 711723410019 711723410019 711723410023 711723410027 711723420006 711723430005 711723430016 711723430044 711723430047 711723430051 711723430056 711723430058 711723430064 711723430076 711723430087 711723430095 711723430098 711723430122 711723430124 711723430129 711723430132 711723440018 711723440025 711723440059 711723440066 711723440084 711723440090 711723440091 503.23 144.41 719.01 728.48 140.70 711.31 383.92 768.06 836.66 92.55 85604 749.09 140.70 175.53 680.22 913.63 1815.14 344.29 6239 66893 800.17 473.63 299.67 653.84 234.30 163 92 542.73 350 50 1711723440096 996 33 1711723440100 621.32 1711723440100 331.67 1711723440102 89.92 1711723440105 55.00 1711723440107 183.29 1S11723310001 96 00 2011723120014 868.12 2011723120021 818.31 2011723120023 307.83 2011723120024 715.05 2011723210024 883.00 2011723220002 804.36 2011723220005 90.04 2011723240013 1023.70 2011723240017 749.84 2011723240030 427.39 2011723310010 696.97 2011723310036 130.00 2011723310064 226.61 2011723320015 666.64 2011723320018 726.36 2011723340011 20293 2011723430022 766.40 2011723430054 2011723430054 2011723430054 211173322000S 2111723220012 2111723230001 2111723240065 2211723240006 2211723310032 2311723210001 2311723220000 2311723220018 2611623410000 2011823410006 2011623410005 2011623430011 3011823310003 3011823430004 3111823120011 3111823120016 3111623210003 3111823220008 3111823410005 3111823420000 3211823130001 3211823130004 3311823130014 3211823210005 3211823220003 3211823230010 3211823320001 730.37 68.11 361.20 638.86 217.80 650.60 106047 06.00 06.00 240.00 96.00 06.00 2311723230031 96.00 2311723320002 98.00 2311723320003 86 00 2311723320027 96 00 2311723320063 72.00 2811623310007 119.08 2611823330010 495 63 2811023330024 317.78 2611023330030 497.99 2711823320010 119 08 2711023330007 119 08 2711823330014 119 08 2711823420004 119.08 2711823420015 119.08 2711023430014 119.08 2811023310002 692.1S 2811823320007 11908 2811623330014 11908 2811823330015 238.16 140 42 110.08 119.08 110.08 11906 139 08 110.08 119.08 11906 110.06 119.08 119.06 07.13 110.08 110.00 11908 119 08 119.08 119.08 3311823240007 3311823310007 3311823310011 3311823330006 3311823330007 3311823410007 3311823410016 3311823420005 3311823440010 3311823440023 3411823210010 3411823210018 3511823340011 3511823430023 3511823430028 3611823440006 96.00 321.24 119.08 119.08 110.08 119.08 110.08 119.08 245.90 541.81 94.00 55.00 119.08 119.08 119.08 332.21 75408.67 3211823440000 119.08 ! 3311823240001 299.18 •I ! L- • ! COUNCIL MEETING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION OCF 2 7 2003 DATE: ITEM NO: *j- Department Approval: Nanc Ron Moorse THk City Administrator Administrator Rc%iewed:Agenda Section: City Administratof's Rq)Of1 Item Description: LMCC 2004 Budget Attached are materials related to the 2004 Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission Budget. Sally Koenecke, the Cable Administrator, will attend the Council meeting to provide an overview of the budget and an update regarding Conunission activities. Thejoint powers agreement calls for member Cities to review and approve the annual budget each year. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the 2004 LMCC budget. A. iAMCC I LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 4071 SUNSET DRIVE • RO. BOX 385 • SPRING PARK. VN 55384 0385 • 952. 471-7125 • FAX 952. 47I-9I5I GRfiNWOOO INDEPENDENCE LONG LAKE LORETTO MEDINA MINNETONKA BEACH MINNETRI5TA ORONO ST. BONIFACIUS SHOREWOOO SPRING PARK TONKA BAT VICTORIA WOODLAND September 8,2003 Mayor and City Council Members City of Orono POBox66 DEEPHAVEN Crystal Bay, MN ExcELsiofl Dear Mayor and Council Members: The Luke Minnetonka Communications Commission (LMCC) passed the enclosed budget for 2004, at a Special Executive Conunittee meeting on August 28,2003. It was reviewed by the Full Conunission at the quarterly Full Conunission on August 19. This budget is not funded with tax dollars, but rather a cable company franchise fee paid annually to the LMCC. We are also receiving a PEG (public, educational, governmental) access fee for conununity use of the production studio. I am subnutting the budget to all city members of the LMCC for review and approval according to the joint Powers Agreement. This year the LMCC is asking all 16 cities to bring the LMCC Budget before your City Councils for approval and notify the LMCC of your action with a copy of your council minutes. Please notify the LMCC of your action within 30 days of the receipt of the budget according to the LMCC Joint Powers Agreement. In past years I have attended council meetings to present the budget but due to very full agendas some cities have requested the budget be mailed with no presentation. Therefore, I am requesting this year that any city who wishes to ^ve me present the budget make a request for a presentation. Please let me know your wishes as I would be happy to attend your council meeting and answer any questions. Sincerely, LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Sally Koenecke Administrator • i Lake Minnetonka CommunicaHons Coffintission Year 2004 Budget The Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission budget format includes three separate funds: Franchise Administration, Studio/Access Production, and Capital Improvements Fund. The Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission is not ftmded by tax dollars and its operating budget is derived from cable franchise fees and PEG fees to cable sub^ribers. The Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission maintains a fund balance as a reserve to maintain operation if unforeseeable funding losses should occur. These could mclude lowered franchise revenue, legislation resulting in reduced funding, or the like. The LMCC has some financial obligations, such as a building rental contract, that would have to be paid even if the legislature eliminated franchise funding. The LMCC has decided to deduct operating revenue from the fund balance this year. The LMCC studio and offices are stili located at 4071 Sunset Drive in Spring Park. The following is a summary of the categories of the budget: Franchise Administration Fund This fund is supported entirely by franchise fees and interest on investments. Activities acco. nted for in this fund are related to the oversight responsibility of the Commission representing the member cities' interest in the cable operators compliance with the franchise agreement. The LMCC also represents its member cities by monitoring and participating in the legislative activities at the state and federal levels. Studio/Access Plroduction Fund This fund is to account for all public access activities. Expenses cover staff time and all operating costs of assisting residents and institutions in producing video presentations to be played back over the local public access channels 8, 19, 20 and 21. Revenues for this fund are derived from interest on investments, PEG fees from our cable subscribers, a portion of the franchise fees, and additional charges to entities outside of our franchise area (Mound) who have a need to access the public access channels. The Wayzata Schools axe providing the programming function for Channel 19 and have included all the school districts in the LMCC service area in their programming. Capita] Improvement Fund The Capita] Improvement Fund supports the acquisition of new equipment as well as to recognize the depreciation and need for replacement of equipment and lease-hold improvements presently existing. A listing of a proposed equipment list is included. The equipment list is projected as pricing may have changed prior to the time of purchase. Purchases are subject to approval by the commission and may change if technology dictates better options. Submitted by: Sally Koenecke/ LMCC Adminbtrator Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission 2004 Budget Summaiy Projected Revenues:$ 395.122 Projected Expenses:$ 444,508 Reduction In Fund Balance:i mm} 2004 Beginning Fund Balance:$ 383.ns 2004 Ending Fund Balance: Lake Minnetoaka CommunicatioBS CoBiBiisaloB 2004 Badget Proposal Randiise Studio Capital TotB Adniinistntion Pioduclion Impioeement AIFlSKlS Franchise Fees 135.950 135,870 14330 286.150 PEC Fees 35.796 2L544 67.340 Mound Usage Fees Studio Renld Dub Fees 36.280 5,276 7.548 43.828 6.276 Interest L138 1,130 252 2528 137.088 214.360 43.674 396.122 Rro|agted Tnmt P«pgnM audit axpaoM total 127.624 inonn 2S4984 52.000 444.608 Piojected 2004 Btgtoniiig FUnd Ba 383.775 Piojected 2004 Rtfenues 395.122 Piojected 2004 Expeatet 77a897 444.608 Projected 2005 Beginning Ftind Ba 334.289 aiiina^'r neri'i Ld^eMi I nka CoMiunicdiom Couiisioii 2004 Budget Proposil 2004 2002 2003 •2003 2003 49144 Aduii Adopted 6 Month Actual PrniicIcO PmpaanI Ptnomi Scivicci 101 SdarMFiiU-ltec S29.700 8 J2p48i $16,050 $32400 $32400 103 Salmd Pait-lioic $12,709 S 19,380 $5460 8 15400 $16400 121 Pen Cent S2>«9 8 2453 1418 S 2453 $2401 122 HCAC4»l $3^59 8 3464 1408 8 3464 $3,733 131 Hcthh losunoot 19.030 8 7400 $4434 8 9470 $10400 151 Woeken Comp Ins.1230 L.JSO 1251 L.JSI L 360 $57.297 L-62J67 SSiU i.634JS L 68494 Simlia 200 Office Supplies $1,034 s MSO $568 s 1,1S0 $1450 210 Special Evema, Meetings S399 s 500 $186 8 500 $sso 220 Repsir A Maioi Supplies im JL 87$Ifi 1,200 L 200 Total Supplici L._____L222 IZ2i 1-___un L___LSff FtofcMiooilSavicci 301 Audit Fees $1,721 s 2480 $1,869 S 3400 $3400 304 Legal Fees $5,667 s 5400 $2,416 s 4400 $5400 314 FayroU Services $498 $500 $461 8 900 $990 318 isoitorial Services $1,974 8 2400 $613 8 1400 $1400 319 Security Soviet $579 S 1400 $320 S 900 $800 CompaScr/CoMutag Ifi it Ifi i.•L___im Total Profeasioiial Services $10,439 JL 11^K.MI JL 11400 L 12,750 ptfief Services md (:||||g^ 321 TckpboBe/ConiBunicalioas $2,499 s 2400 $1,463 $2450 $2400 322 Post^$1,017 S 1.150 $737 $1450 s 1400 331 Travel School A Conference $8,237 $6,700 $543 S 6,700 $9400 332 Mileage $819 $1400 $1,178 S 2400 $2400 350 Printiog and Puhliaiuiig $2,187 $2408 $1,284 S 2400 $2400 360 Ittsuranoe $2,017 s 3400 $3,240 8 3400 $3,700 380 Utilities $2,403 s 3,180 $1,720 S 3,100 $3400 384 Refuse A Recycling CoOectioQ $266 s 250 $61 S 250 $JOO Contracted Building Repair $1,584 $600 $302 $600 $1400 404 MatnL Repair E4|uip.$1,669 $2400 $0 $1400 $1400 412 $9,589 s 9,710 $4,890 $9,780 $9400 413 $1,473 s IpMO $1,096 $1400 $im 433 $3,789 $3400 $616 $3400 $3400 438 Property Taxes $1,868 s 1400 $1,016 8 2400 $2400 439 Contingency iQ f 300 KM L.700 JL 2^ ToUl Other Charges $39,417 L.41 j800 111.121 1.4K7J0 L CtpitiJ Oulliv 599 Leasehold Improvemcots Ifi JL JOO ts L-JOO JOO Total Capital Outlay $0 $300 $0 $300 $300 49855 Franchise Compliance Enforcement 301 Cable Operator Audit $11,300 $7400 9,650 S 9450 $10400 303 Legal Fees 8 6400 •$•11Sil.MQ UdM $9.630 L.iASO t.IftMt TeafAdBUHnin $120,801 SiMyiT]164.427 8I2IUIMI fU7A84 i J Lake Mionctonka Communications Commission 2004 FVopcsed Budget Aee.tsa XtudiO Pfodll hxpenes 2002 Actual lat Scnricei Tout Piofessionil Services 2106L00 Other Services and Ch«|ea 321 Telephone/Coauiunicatiom 322 Postage TravdS331 Travd School & Conference 332 Mleage 350 Printing md Piiblidiii« 360 Insurance 380 Utaities 384 Refute & Recyding Cdlection 401 Contracted BuidingRq>air 404 Maint Repair Equip. 410 Van Operation 412 Budding Rent 413 Equipaient Rental 433 Dues & Subscriptions 438 Property Taies 439 Coiitimtency 1.757.00 1.017.00 3.115.00 179.00 4.711.00 1.959.00 4.807.00 266.00 1.584.00 2.915.00 2.054.00 28,615.00 2.243.00 632.00 6.036.00 OJO Total Other Charges Total Eipenditures 61890 00 203,372.00 2003 Adopted 2004 2003 2003 Ceniiiittcc 6 Mo. Act. Projected Proposal 101 Sdaried Fuil*tiiBe 78,885.00 83,134 103 Salaried PaiHime 13,918.00 14,700 121 Pen Cont 4,486.00 5,215 122 PICA Cont 6,982.00 7,484 131 Hedlh IiBurance 7,968.00 7,480 151 Workers Comp. Insurance 400 Total Personal Services 112.563.00 __U8.413 Supplim 200 Office SupfHies 901.00 650 210 Special Evetds/Meetings 931.00 m 220 Repair & Maint Supplies 412.00 750 225 Studio Expendibles 2.61400 2.000 Total Supplies imfio 3.400 301 Auditing Fees 1,676.00 2,300 302 Access Coniracton 16,893.00 16,800 304 Legal Fees 893.00 4,700 318 PrqroU Services 498.00 550 318 Janitorial Services 1,864.00 2,300 319 Security Services 413.00 800 325 Cofutihing coiiipiiter L82AQQ 350 27,000 1,650 1,050 2,500 300 5,770 5,010 4,725 175 1,250 6.! 2,1 29,200 1,600 575 6,234 3S0 69J89 219,002 42,174 $ 7^70 $ 2,899 $ 3,230 S 4,001 S 437 S 84348 I 14.700 5379 7397 8300 457 I $ I I 8 91,778 27,641 6,365 9,136 9,000 500 60.131 S I20J8I 8 144.420 114 S 435 S • S 2.516 $ 250 I 600 I 300 $ 4,00e 8 300 1,000 300 5,000 3.065 S 5.150 5 6.600 1,820 10,775 1,116 461 581 228 $ S Ss ss 1.188 S 3300 I 21350 I 2350 I 930 I UOO I 500 8 2J00 l_ 3,650 22,000 2.300 930 1.300 tjoo 16.169 $ 32330 I 3L980 $ $ s s $ 1,160 757 1,274 285 3,476 3,064 S 3.441 $ 61 302 802 139 14,593 1370 103 3382 S S s s s $ 2350 UOO 2300 590 6,770 3364 6382 S140 S650 3300 1,000 29300 2300 575 6360 $ S S I 8 $ I I S I I Is I I 758 S 80S 1 2,500 1.250 3.000 600 6.0 3.3 6.3 250 750 3,600 2.000 29,784 2.250 650 6,850 __2.500 34.867 S 68.141 8 7L984 114332 S 225,902 $ 294,984 n : r. jv* m 2004 Production Equipment Projected List j _6_ 2 6 _2 2 V Itascrip^jK Tri Pods Equipment Room Needs: Panson ic 45 6 Series Charging Tabs Pans onlic 456 Power Suppli(M Gym Style Bags for Ca rrying Gear Sure 6 Channel Audio Mixer Portable Carts for Carrying City Council Gear Description: Channel 8 Improvement Needs: Equipment for Audio Improvement Q1^: 1 T 2 1 __Studio and Edit Bay Needs: Description: Studio Monitor Mfg: Bogan Panasonic Panasonic Sure Part#: 3063 VJA0180 AG-B6H Rubbermaid Mfa: Qty: 2 1 1 1 New Medi£l(M Non-^^^ System 2 Channel Audio Gole/Compressor Rack Moutitablu Wavu Form/Voctor Scopo Description: Production Van Needs: M^: jvc Mac/Media 100 GBX Leader Headset Mies tor Van Sports Productions S Output S\Mtcher for Van OV/Mini DV Deck for Van Additional Snake for Van mi Telex M367 H-1055 Part#: Cost Each: _j36.q0 8.00 Total wrTax: 2147.04----- 177.00 10.00 575.00 80.00 Sub Total: Part #: TM-H1750CGU See Attached ‘266LB 5872A Cost Each: Sub Total: Cost Each: 795.00 51.12 354.00 63.90 1224.75 170.40 4011^1 Total wrTax: 12000.00 12000.00 Total w/Tax: 21400.00 279.00 3935.00 -T 846.68 Sub total: Panasonic 1 Panasonic Tour Supply Part#: TELbW AW-SyV3iM AG^V200b 2V/4A-150 Cost Each: 80 00 22791.00 594.27 4190.78 28422.73 Total w/Tax; 3188.00 2^.00 170.40 i395:22 2449.50 602.50 Sub Total: 641.66 6656.78 51060.72 ____ ^h» iw#V w 1 bmO / _|r i 1 Date Application Received: 12-1<MI2 Date Application Considered as Complete: 8-26m3 60-Day Review Period Espires: 10-26-03 f;OI MFFTING OCT 2 7 2003 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ClIY ur onui>.vj Date: October 24,2003 Item No.: ^ Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron Title: Planning Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item DescriptioD: #02-2858 Scott Standa, 2659 Casco Point Road - Variance (AOer-the-Fact) - Resolution List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Notice of PC Action 10/24/03 C - PC DraR Minutes 10/20/03 D - Memo and Exhibits of 10/17/03 Application Summary: Applicant requests after-the-fact hardcover and setback variances to allow the reconstruction of a deck located at the shoreline attached to an existing accessory building. Variances required include: 1 . Structure within 0-75' setback zone, extending out over the shoreline (cantilevered 2-3* past the OHWL). 2. Structure encroaching within 1 foot of side lot line. 3. Hardcover in 0-75' zone of 16.24% (no changes proposed). 4. Encroachment of a\ erage lakeshore setback. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends partial approval per the Planning Commission recommendation. Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IC Single Family Lakeshoic Residential, 1 /2-acre min. 0.29 acre (12,815 s.f.) Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission review'ed this item at their October 20 meeting and on a vote of 4-1 recommended partial approval as follows; 1.Deck as reconstructed is not approved. Applicant to remove the 8'xl2' deck, but will be allowed to replace it with a 4'x7' walkway with 3' wide stairway to grade. ««2-2tSI 2659 Cmco Potnt Road October 24,2002 Pagc2 2.Applicant to remove the following items of hardcover: Concrete sidewalk at north side of house (132 s.f. ±) Concrete slab adjacent to accessory building (208 s.f.) Fabric and plastic liner from all landscape areas (235 s.f) 3.Applicant is placed on notice that the deck and accessory building are nonconforming structures and subject to the pertinent ordinances limiting the degree of structural repair allowable for such structures. Applicant is advised that replacement of the stairways providing access to the lake is allowed but will require building permits at the time such activity is commenced. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends partial iq)proval per the Planning Commission recommendation. Applicant paid the after-the-fact fee for the zoning application, and must obtain a standard-fee building permit for the 4'x7* walkway to replace the deck. Staff is recommending that deck and hardcover removals be required to be completed by June iS, 2004; a permit for the 4x7' walkway would have to be obtained no later than October 27,2004. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached resolution. A RESOLUTION DENYING AN AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE AND GRANTING CERTAIN VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-281(A) & (B); 78-282;78-1279; AND 78-1288 FILE NO. 02-2858 WHEREAS, Scott S. Standa and Irene S. Standa, husband and wife (hereinafter "the applicants"), are the owners of the property located at 2659 Casco Point Road within the City of cirono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 137, Spring Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota; (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the CityofOrono for after-the- fact variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-28 1(A) & (B); 78-282; 78-1279; and 78-1288 to allow the construction of a 8'xl2' deck and stairw ay located within 75* of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka where no structures or hardcover are normally allowed, and located lakeward of the average setback line and within 1 foot of the side lot line where such structures are not normally allowed. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1 . This application was reviewed as Zoning File #02-2858. 2.The property is located in the LR-IC Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, which requires minimum lot area of 0.5 acres and minimum lot width of 100'. The lot has a defined width of 60* and is 0.29 acre in area. 3.The Planning Commission initially reviewed this application at a public hearing held on October 20, 2003 and on a vote of 4-1 recommended partial approval of the after-the-fact variances per the following findings: Page 1 of 6 I! : ! i j 4. 5. A deck in deteriorated condition existed at the lake side of the accessory boathouse building prior to applicant's construction of a new 8'xl2’ replacement deck in April 200 1 . Based on a picmre provided by the 2^>plicant, the old deck was apparently somewhat smaller than the new deck. The new 8'x 12' deck was constructed within one foot of the side lot line and at the shoreline, a portion of said deck e.v.ending lakeward of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. The structure is also lake\\ ard of the average setback line and constitutes hardcover in the 0-75* zone. The new deck would likely not have been approved had the tqjplicant attempted to obtain the required permit and variances prior to construction of the new deck. However, the boathouse does contain an existing doorway which should be provided with a minim’I walkway to grade for safety and functionality reasons. In addition to the boathouse and new deck, existing hardcover in the 0-75* zone includes retaining v. alls, stairways and landings which are necessary to maintain the steep slopes and provide access to the lake. The 0-75* zone also contains a 208 s.f concrete slab which ser\ es no specific purpose and which the applicant has agreed to remo\ e to reduce the excessive hardcover on the property. The applicant has also agreed to removal of a sidewalk and all fabric/plastic landscape bed liners in the "5-250* zone. The average lakeshore setback encroachment by a replacement 4'x7* walkway will have no impact on views of the lake enjoyed by the adjacent property owners. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Plarming Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the public, and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect tralTic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properr.; would not merely serve as a Page 2 of6 I convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council her''by denies the after-the-fact variances to retain an 8'.xl2' deck adjacent to the boathouse, but grants variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-281 (A) & (B); 78-282; 78-1279; and 78-1288 to allow the construction of a 4'x7' walkway and 3' wide stairway to grade, located within 75* of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka where no structures or hardcover are normally allowed, and located lakeward of the average setback line and within 2 feet of the side lot line where such structures are not normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1.Council approval is based on the survey/site plan submitted by the applicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any changes from the approved site plan which are not in conformity with this approval or City requirements will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2.The following hardcover removals are required: (0-75 zone) Concrete slab adjacent to accessory building (208 s.f.) (75-250* zone) Concrete sidewalk at north side of house (132 s.f. +) (75-250* zone) Fabric and plastic liner from all landscape areas (235 s.f.) The above hardcover removals shall be completed no later than June 15,2004. 3.Hardcover on the property shall not henceforth exceed the limits as noted in this resolution and as noted on Exhibit A. Applicant is advised that any future proposals for additional hardcover on the property will likely not be approved, but might be approved only in conjunction with concurrent hardcover removals to result in no net hardcover increase on the property. 4.Applicant is placed on notice that the 4*x7 walkway and accessory boathouse building are nonconforming structures and subject to the pertinent ordinances limiting the degree of future structural repair allowable for such structures. Page 3 of 6 f rmm 5.^plicant is advised that replacement of the existing stairways in the 0-75* zone providing access to the lake is allowed but will require building permits at the time such activity is commenced. 6.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (October 27,2004). 7.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 8.The undersigned applicants has read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 27th day of October, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 4 of 6 ___J '.'TT i Hi STATE OF NfiNNESOTA 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 of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of ,2003 by Lind<> S. \'ee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 vtkoMMiiaia rii i^in 1 ii iirtfift * *5 ii ^ i i { : , . ^ 1 ■si STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this____day of by Scott S. Standa, husband of Irene S. Standa. ,2003 Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this____day of. by Irene S. Standa, wife of Scott S. Standa. .,2003 Notary Public Page 6 of 6 M V> \> X fZJ » MINU X X i_l X ^ x-i OF LOT 137. SPRING PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA cs^qc ^ . «* frfc?PS TP A^APi/6r^ 0XHie\r |2:eit>«AT76«v> ______________ TO ^ Z08^€. / COMU /aCAftS tiC BY ai //43 UidvV-TP Be ITONKA /3a •«^- * «J».: £• EXISTMC BU.OMG r in ^STOC JMU 79*00 { BAY 929.4 CONTOUR Lt€ STEP ^ . ^ / / STOW o <^/sToc ^ ruV rLAGKU 9)*-.%o if 75* 1 SETBACK-.// LINE If '00'' / •••.PUL TC.J.. r- .OOSC-CAD. STOICS fv s'.® • roved Hardcover: IsaoL iKMise ning Walls (Walk ; Sl Wood Borders walkway and steps plus 3x4) 30i SURVE LINE /5 LAO •.......... .......... 137 EXISTING I Ui A. IDETK STOIC fCTAMNC mtikJL 9< HOUSE #2659 I 267 s.f. 87 s.f. 71 s.f. 27 s.f. 40s.f 492 s.t/4580*= 10.7% ^^•00 00" 3 784. 3 pao^ PUL TC BOBOOI stone WAas. ! EX6TMG GARAGE \ \ « stones ched garage ktop Crete apron le walk (backyard) cTbrkkmcl. stoop kAsteps bes 1524 s.f. 74 s.f. 6 s.f. 40s.f. 453 s.f. 277 s.f. 39 s.f. 85 s.f. 363 s.f. 425 s.f 48 s.f. 3334 a.f. / 8235 * 40.5% TO ef 25S '-£• I ihown are boscd upon on asstmed dotum. Irtiiti itixtfi V CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box M Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING ntE #02-2858 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: October 24, 2003 TO: Scott Standa 2659 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING: October 20, 2003 Planniog Commission recommended as follows: Partial approval per the following conditions: 1.Deck as reconstructed is not approved. Applicant to remove the 8'xI2' deck, but will be allowed to replace it with a 4 ’x7* walkway with 3' wide stairway to grade. 2.Applicant to remove the foil awing items of hardcover: Concrete side .x alk at north side of house. Concrete stab .^td/rcent to accessor>' building Fabric aivl' pV;u<>iic liner from all landscape areas. 3.Applicant is placed on notice that the deck and acccs«<‘.''' building are nonconforming structures and subject to the pertinent ordinances limiting i:hc degtcc cf si'-uctural repair allowable for such structures. 4.Applicant is advised that replacement of the stairways providing access to the lake is allowed but will require building permits at the time such activity is commenced. VOTE: 4 FOR J AGAINST Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, October 27, 2003; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. Review Period Extension. State law provides that Cities shall make decisions on zoning requests within 60 days from the date of submittal of a complete application, and that this review penod may be e.xtendcd by notification to the applicant. Your application was considered as complete on August 26, 2003 and the 60-day review period would end on October 26, 2003. However, because the earliest potential date of final Council action falls after the 60-day period ends, the 60-day review period is hereby extended an additional 60 days to December 24, 2003. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call Plaiming Director Mike Gaf&on at 952-249-4600. S MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. 3. Approval of the hardcover variance. 4. RemVal of all plastic and fabric landscape liner in planting beds. Hawn believed the entire project c .istituted a rebuild, pointing out that there is an abundance of hardraver on the site. She urged the Commission and staff to fine further reductions in hardcovd While the applicant has voRmteered to remove portions of the driva«y, Foth stated that further removals from the driyeway would leave the home9Wners with little usable driveway space. Rahn asked if changes to ceiling heightsVould be niace to the first or second floors. Mr. Tripp stated there were no changes to those levels and further volunteered to remove some wooden steps on the site. ^ Foth stated that the removal onhe steps would constitutes^ additional 128 s.f. While she wished for further reductions, Hawn acknowledged|hc applicant had done his best to find the cui^nt removals and she could accept these. Hawn moved, Rahn seconded, to recommend approval of Applicatioi\#03-2953,Greg Tripp, 3229C Casco Circle, granting the average lakeshore setback, Wdcover, and lake setback variances in order to change the roof line and pitch of ton roof, add dormers, and aesthetically improve the design, subject to the removal of all lah^cape plastic and liners, as well as, removal of the side wc walkway. \'OTE: Ayes 5, n^vs 0. (#5) #02-2858 SCOTT STANDA, 2659 CASCO POLNT ROAD, VARIANCE, 6:13 6:43 P.M. Page 3 of41 I »• f J MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o ’clock p.m.T)' Scott Standa, the Applicant, was present. Gaffron explained that the applicant was requesting after-the-fact hardcover and setback variances to allow the reconstruction of a rotten deck located at the shoreline attached to an existing accessory building. 'Variances required include: 1. Structure within 0-75' setoack zone, extending out over the shoreline (cantilevered 2-3’ past the OHWL). 2. Structure encroaching within 1 foot of side lot line. 3. Hardcover in 0-75' zone of 16.24% (no changes proposed). 4. Encroachment of average lakeshore setback Gaffton noted that the deck that was replaced was attached to a 12‘x22* accessory building located 5’ from the shoreline and nearly abutting the side lot line. The accessory building has been there for many years and has apparently been maintained in relatively good condition. GafTron asked the Planning Commission to consider 5 key issues: 1. Would the Planning Commission have recommended approval for the replacement of this deck had the application been made before the fact? 2. Does Planning Commission a^ee with staff that the 1992 photo provided by applicant casts doubt as to whether this deck was 8' deep prior to its replacement? 3. The property has excessive hardcover in both the 0-75’ and 75-250' zones. Is there any hardcover on the site that should be considered for removal if the application is approved? The surveyor identified 235 s.f of landscape areas lined with plastic or fabric that are not included in the hardcover calculations and would be subject to removal if the application is approved... Page 4 of 41 J MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. 4. Applicant paid the after-the-fact fee for the variance application. If the variance is approved, should an after-the-fact building permit fee be paid? Applicant claims he was unaware that he needed a permit to replace an existing deck on the property... 5. Does Planning Commission have any other issues or concerns with this application? Gaffron indicated that staff recommends denial of the application. In staffs opinion, if this reconstruction had been applied for before-the-fact, the encroachment over the shoreline and within 1 foot of the side lot line would have been questioned and likely not approved. He noted that the apparent expansion of the deck from a depth of 6' to 8' would certainly not have been approved. Gaffron maintained that, while the fact that the approval process has cost the property owner more than the project itself is unfortunate, but should not be a factor in determining whether the approval is granted after-the-fact. Maintenance and/or replacement of existing decks and lakeshore accessory structures is an ongoing issue along Orono’s 40 miles of Lake Minnetonka shoreline. Gaffron stated that the Plaruiing Commission may wish to consider whether the current policies and codes are appropriate, or whether they need to be relaxed or strengthened. If approval is granted. Planning Commission should address the excessive hardcover on the property and make a recommendation as to removals. An after the fact permit should be applied for so the building inspector can confirm the construction meets pertinent building codes. Chair Smith asked if staff had recommended to the applicant that he consider a lockbox. Page 5 of4 1 rr L MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o'clock pjn. r Gaffron indicated that the discussion had not purrjed that far, since it was the applicant's intent to keep what he had. Mr. Standa voluntrzred to make additional recovals of hardcover on the propert.', including the concrete slab behind the accessory srjcture, sidewalk along side of the horn ; to the accessory building, and repair or removal of *iie crumbling lake access steps. Mabusth recommended the lake access steps be replaced for safety sake, since the lot is a steep lake lot. Mr. Standa pointed out that the retaining walls wculd also be in need of repair in the near future. Hawn questioned the necessity of the fire pit and f.agpole. Mr. Standa indicated that he would prefer to keep both his flagpole and fire pit; however, if it was mandated he could remove the fire pit. Mabusth questioned whether the LMCD would have an issue with the structure protruding over the water. Gaffron stated that the LMCD may want to Ioc'jc at it if the posts are at or below the OHWL. If this application had come before the Commission before the fact, Mabusth asked the Commission what they would have allowed. She noted that she would have asked for the removal of the slab. Hawn questioned whether they would have approved a deck on an accessory structure, and an even bigger deck than previously attached to this nonconforming structure. She asked whether it was the Commission's intent to do away with these structures altogether. Hawn Page 6 of 41 f MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNOSSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. asked what record the City has of the previous deck size. While he felt that he probably would not have allowed it, Rahn stated that it was not out of character of what is currently in the neighboihood. Mr. Standa stated that the deck has alwavs been on the structure. Gaffron agreed that, to everyone’s knowledge, the deck had always been there. He noted that research could be done to find the original paperwork. Rahn maintained that the cantilevered portion was new, and asked the applicant consider a straight replacement, without the cantilever, and tninimum landing. Mr. Standa stated that he would like a deck to allow for safe exit from the sliding doors that have always been there as well. There was no public comment. Fritzler suggested the applicant remove the sliding doors and replace them with a solid window. Mabusth stated that she believed the applicant should be allowed some kind of access platform out of the doors, for safety sake, adding that a second exit is beneficial. Rahn noted that two accesses are not mandatory. In light of the removals, Mabusth stated that she felt a 4* platform was a fair compromise. Hawn questioned whether the deck and or structure could be moved further than 1 ’ from the property line. Page7of4l 1 r- minutes of the ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. y. She r«n.nd.d U.. appl.ca„, o.,, ci^ does no. approve of .najor s.r„cn,ral repairs to nonconfonning structures such as this. ^ Mr. S|a.^a asked how .he s.o,n. of .993, which da,naged several boa,houses in .he area. While ca,asbophic evems are exempt. Gatfron rei.era.ed .ha, Ae code limits repair. He indicated ,ha, painting, new siding, and roofing are allowable repairs. structural Mabustt. Slated dial she fel, a 4' landing was reasonable. Gaffron asked for fiirther clarification, whefiier die deck access steps.was to be 4 ’X4 ’ with 3’ wide Aeslhelically. Rahn indicated that die deck should run dte entire lengd. of dte patio doors. which are approximately 6’. He suggesied die Commissi access stairs 3’ wide to the ground.•on approve a 7’X4 ’ deck and Mabusth and Chair Smith concurred. Frittler disagreed, suting dia, one exit should be sufficient and dm doors replaced by a window.should be Pages of 4 1 lili&iitBhiAiii n i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o ’clock p.m. Gaffron reviewed the recommendation, which included the removal of the concrete slab fabric, and sidewalk along the side of the home, reconstruction of the lake path and retaining walls to be permitted for at a later date, and the fire pit and flagpole allowed remaining. Chair Smith asked if this was acceptable to the applicant. Mr. Standa agreed. Mabusth moved, Rabn seconded, recommending approval of Application #03-2858, Scott Standa, 2659 Casco Point Road, granting after-the-fact variance approval for the reconstruction of a 4’X7* deck and 3* wide access stairs to the accessory structure, subject to the removal of the concrete slab, sidewalk along the side of the residence, and all landscape plastic prior to the final inspection; Duly noting that the structure is considered a nonconforming structure and limited structural repair is allowed. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays I, Fritzler dissenting. Fritzler stated that he neither supported the work being proposed to the nonconfonning structure nor could support the after-the-fact request. (#6) #03-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607 SHORELINMRIVE, VARLANCE, 6:43 - \ 7:40 P.M. Stevan Wagner, the Applicant, and NortotvWhinj^ the Architect, were present. Foth reported that the applicant has submitted an appljcation for a building expansion and remodel in the B-1 Zoning Districy^s per City Code 78-642 any application for a commercial building permit pjjdmpts a site review by the Planmhg^Commission and City Council. The applicant has requested the following: I) Commercial site plan review in order to obtain a building permit to remodel and Page9of4l Date Application Received: 12>10-02 Dale Application Considered as Complete: 8-26-03 60-Day Review Period Eipires: 10-26-03 To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Smith and Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator Mike Gafiron, Planning Director October 17,2003 ^02-2858 Scott Standa, 2659 Casco Point Road - Variance (After-the-Fact) - Public Hearing Zoning Dbtrict: Lot Area: LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1/2-acre min. 0.29 acre (12,815 s.f.) Application Summary: Applicant requests after-the-fact hardcover and setback variances to allow the reconstruction of a deck located at the shoreline attached to an existing accessory building. Variances required include: 1. Structure within 0-75* setback zone, extending out over the shoreline (cantilevered 2-3* past the OhWL). 2. Structure encroaching within 1 foot of side lot line. 3. Hardcover in 0-75* zone of 16.24% (no changes proposed). 4. Encroachment of average lakeshore setback. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial. If this reconstruction had been applied for before-the-fact, the encroachment over the shoreline and within 1 foot of the side lot line would likely not have been approved, in staffs opinion. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Letter of Request 11/4/02 C - Existing & Proposed Survey/Site Plan D - Submitted Deck Plans £ - Submitted Hardcover Calculations Background F - Correspondence 2001-2003 G - Photos H - Property Owners List I - Nei^bor Acknowledgement Form J - Plat map In June 2001 Building Inspector Marc Davis found that the deck adjacent to the lakeshore accessory building had been replaced, and he advised the owner that a permit was needed for such work. In July 2001 the owner applied for a building permit and was advised that because the work was within 75* of the shoreline a permit could not be issued and it would have to be removed or a variance application would have to be filed to see if Council would allow it to remain. On August 14, 2001 the owner filed an incomplete variance application, lacking most of the necessary information to process it. This matter remained as an open violation file and the next communication between applicant and City was in October 2002, which resulted in a new variance application being filed in December 2002, but still lacking an up-to-date survey. After a flurry of discussion between City and applicant in May/June 2003, a survey was submitted and the application considered as complete in late August 2003. #02>28S8 - 2659 Casco Point Road October 17,2003 Page! LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Lot Area/Width: LR-IC Lot Area Lot Width Required 21,780 s.f. (0.5 acre)100 ‘ Actual 12,815 s.f. (0.29 acre)60 ’ Deck Setbacks: LR-lC Required Existing Proposed Lakeshore 75'O'O' Rear (Street)NA NA NA North Side 10'<r <r Right Side 10'48'48' Average Lakeshore (No Encroachment Allowed)approx. 75'approx. 75' Structural Coverage ; Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 12,815 s.f. (0.29 ac.)Allowed: 1,922 s.f (15? i) Exisling/Proposed: 2,743 s.f (21.4?'o)* •Deck in question does not constitute lot coverage as ♦ is not 6* above grade. Hardcover Calculations! Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75'4,580 s.f 0s.f 744 s.f 744 s.f (0 %)(16.24%)(16.24%) . 75-250'8,235 s.f 2,056 s.f 3,466 s.f •3,466 s.f* (25 %)(42.1 %)(42.1 ?») i #02-28SS - 2659 Casco Point Road October 17,2003 Page 3 Deck Nonconformities The deck that was replaced is attached to a 12'x22' accessory building located 5' from the shoreline and nearly abutting the side lot line. The accessory building has been there for many years and has apparently been maintained in relatively good condition. The deck extending from the end of the building towards the shore was replaced by the applicant in April 2001, per applicant’s statement, because the old deck was rotting away. The City has no record of the pre-existing deck, either on old sur\ cys or in the assessors records. The January 1992 photo submitted by the applicant shows a deck at this location, although the deck in that picture appears to be not as deep as the new deck, and is perhaps 6’ x 12’ rather than 8' x 12'. The old deck had posts at the perimeter, the new deck is cantilevered 2* past the posts, and extends over the water. The deck is located less than one foot from the side lot line. City code would generally not allow an accessory deck with a railing to be less than 1 O' from a side lot line. The neighbors have indicated they are aware of the construction. The deck as it exists today comprises approximately 100 s.f of hardcover including the steps to it. Part of this hardcover is over the lake. Cit>- code allows no hardcover or strucuires within 75* of the shoreline, except for one 4' wide stairway; a lift; landings of no greater than 32 s.f.; and lock boxes. Total existing hardcover in the applicants 0-75' zone is 16.24?^o, consisting of: Accessory Building 22.1' x 12.1' Concrete slab adjacent to building (Approx 12x18) Retaining Walls Stone walkway and landing Deck at shore incl steps (portion over land) Stone & wood borders 267 s.f. 208 s.f. 87 s.f. 71 s.f. 84 s.f. 27 s.f. 749 s.f.. 4580 = 16.24% Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a hardship statement in his letter of request (Exhibit B), and should be asked for his additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In considering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in th e surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for wianees from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code In Instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship beemuse ofcircumstanees unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when It Is demonstrated that such aettons wOl be In keeping with Ae spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. #02-2858 - 2659 Casco Poiot Road October 17,2003 Paged Staff would make the following recommendations in regards to the criteria for "undue hardship" pertinent to this application: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. ‘The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the ofllcial controls.” The property can be used reasonably if the variances are denied. “The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created bv the landowner.” r r , j The only unique circumstance is that a nonconforming deck was replaced without the proper prior approvals. ^ “The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.” The variance will have little impact on the character of the locality, but will not be in keeping with City goals for lakeshore properties. “Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter.” While economics have not been cited by applicant as a hardship, applicant has e.xpressed to staff his frustration with the approval process costing more than the project itself “Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter.” Not applicable. “The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that IS not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person’s land is located.” Not applicable. “The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelline as a tw'o-family dwelling.” ® Not Applicable “The special conditions appl^ng to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.** The zoning code limiting the use of lakeshore property applies to neighboring properties. ‘ The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located.” The zoning code limitations apply to all properties within the Shoreland Overlay District. “The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial proper!}' right of the applicant.’* The property owner does not have an inherent right to replace in kind a nonconforming structure when it has reached the end of its useful life. W2-2858 - 2659 Casco Point Road October 17,2003 Pages 11 . "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code.” Granting of the variances would be in conflict with the intent of the Zoning Code, the intent of which is that no new structures be allowed within 73'ofthe shoreline, and that existing non-conforming structures eventually are removed by attrition.. 12. ‘The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty.” It is staffs opinion that granting of the afler-the-fcct variances would merely serve as a convenience to the applicant. Issues for Consideration 1.Would the Planning Commission have recommended approval for the replacement of this deck had the application been made before the fact? 2.Does Planning Commission agree with staff that the 1992 photo provided by applicant casts doubt as to whether this deck was 8' deep prior to its replacement? 3.The property has e.xcessive hardcover in both the 0-75’ and 75-250' zones. Is there any hardcover on the site that should be considered for removal if the application is approved? The surveyor has identified 235 s.f. of landscape areas lined with plastic or fabric that are not included in the hardcover calculations on p. 2 and would be subject to removal if the application is approved... 4.Applicant paid the after-the-fact fee for the variance application. If the variance is approved, should an after-the-fact building permit fee be paid? Applicant claims he was unaware that he needed a permit to replace an existing deck on the property ... 5. Does Planning Commission have any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the application. If this reconstruction had been applied for before-the- fact, the encroachment over the shoreline and within 1 foot of the side lot line would have been questioned and likely not approved, in staffs opinion. The apparent expansion of the deck from a depth of 6' to 8* would certainly not have been approved. The fact that the approval process has cost the property owner more than the project is unfortunate, but should not be a factor in determining whether the approval is granted after-the-fact. Maintenance and/or replacement of existing decks and lakeshore accessory structures is an ongoing issue along Orono’s 40 miles of Lake Minnetonka shoreline. The Planning Commission may wish to consi der whether the current policies and codes are appropriate, or w hether they need to be relaxed or strengthened. I f approval is granted. Planning Commission should address the excessive hardcover o.*' 'he property* and make a recommendation as to removals. An after the fact permit should be applied for so the building inspector can confirm the construction meets pertinent building codes. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial A^pUcaUon Fee S2S0.00 ($50.00 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 # 0^3- Date Received la -lO-OJ Amount PaldltqPO. oc^ PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address___^(.£3 __Casc O Pt. gj 111 pw-), / Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ?n - //’>» ?.?«- 7i '002?___________ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Propertjt^cquired----------^ \ ____________l_(month/year) I (do) ^o noQjhlso own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of prope^: \>**^idential ___mother (specift ) Zoning District: ______________ “ APPLICANT Name Address: 26J~y r.t.,.., ft. Phone (home) ____ Phone (woik)_?T^_;jV2ti^^^ City: U/i>yi4>ro ______Zip: J'JVf/ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Address:City:. Phone (home). Phone (work)„ _ Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost S C6 Describe request m defaU: *^/Q~6^/ Ct-JVe iJ~Aer £.rj ‘J ' ^ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED ___Lot Area ___Lot Width ___ Hardcover ___Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Other (specify) / __ Average Lakeshore f/ftA. o/* frt t*t <>f ^ HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Cede requirements: ^ ^ ^ ' /r o/JV ^ fc/zvf. t:---- (attach additional sheets if necessary) 4^0)0 O Xv • • REQUIRED SUB\nTTALS AH of the following information must be submitted bv the applicarion deadling dat* in order for your application to be coinidertd complgtg; Completed Application Form _ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A 603, Govt Center, 348-5910). __ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed sur\eyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'/i" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (e.xisting and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/i" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'/i" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. £ I/" J/ The Applicant and Propert>- Ovs-ner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information ha.< not been Included. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incuned in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature ^Date /O/Xn/dt OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date /dhi /i Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Plaiming Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 7 .-7 % i.» .• ♦ ..V »••••. : • o' I • % % , O Y L 'B 3oot Sf)»cia(iats andSaratona, 4.fftactauaia ana ^utgtona, S. SCOTT STANDA. D P M.. r.A.C.F S MICHAEL D. O'BORSKY, D.P.M.. F.A.C.P.S. ae? MARSCHALL RO.. SUITE 106 8HAKOPCE. MN SS379 TCLCPHONC (9921 449-9390 Fax (9921 449-9394 E MAILi STANDAOPM@AOL.COM 290 NORTH CENTRAL AVE., SUITE 314 WATZATA, MN 99391 TfLCPHONC 19921479-1378 Fax 19921 479-7494 E-MAIL STANDAOPM@AOL COM November 4,2002 Lyte Oman, Building Official City of Orono Municipal Offices 270 Kelly Pkwy Orono. MN 55356 Dear Mr. Oman: This letter is just a follow up of our conversation of the 21*' of October and it also is in response to your letter of October 17,2002. This letter is more to give you my understanding of the chronology of this so that we are in agreement on this. My boathouse deck was replaced in April of2001. I did the work myself. Cost and materials was approximately S900. I replaced the deck because it was rotting and I believed it to be a danger. The dimensions to the deck were not changed when I replaced it. The deck does have a railing that meets code. I failed to get a permit to replace the existing decK because quite frankly I did not think I needed to get a permit to replace an existing structure that did not change the dimensions. However, because of an inspection by someone in Orono they decided that I needed a permit to do this. In fact I did place an application for a retroactive permit in July of 2001 . With this I sent a check, which was ^\■ice the cost because it was a retroactive permit. 1 also provided documents, sketches and photograph of the pre-existing deck. I did not hear anything about this until your letter of October 1 7,2002. So, in summary, approximately 15 months went betw een my application for a retroactive permit with check included and this letter that I received from you on October 17. I know you are very busy with all the construction going on and that you are overworked with all the issues under your jurisdiction. I do not have to walk very far from my house to look at houses that are blotimg out the sun that have been recently remodeled, so, my question would be. what happened? Again, my position in this matter is that I replaced a pre-existing deck with dimen;.ions ai the pre-existing dimensions and the deck was replaced because it was structurally unsound. I did the work myself and the cost of material was $900. This has row taken 15 months to resolve for actually no change in my property. I would like this resolved at the soonest possible time. Sincerely, S. Scott Standa, DP.M SSS/soap/sb Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal, MN. 55323 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR SCOTT S.and IRENE S. STANDA OF LOT 137. SPRING PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA LAKE •V 4ji MINNETONKA oostnc 717 euu)NC SPRING PARK BAY 929.4 CONTOUR UE- !0: coMoye .8. .^/ J .«> / /V .SURVE ' LINE ® ^S'OO-OO" f :9ff 'S%«;MU * I OCCK 79*00* oo„ ^ EM5TMGCARACe V LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES Lot 137. SPRING PARK 0 : denotes iron marker BeorinQS shown ore based upon on osscmed dotifn This survey intends to show the boundories of the above described property, the locotion of three existing buildings, ond the location of oil visible ''hordcover*' thereon. It does not purport to show ony other inprovements or encrooctments. c-/ GRONBERG fc ASSOCIATES. INC. CONSmtMO DKKERS. LAND SWVtYOAS. STC PLMWEKS 44S NORTH UTILOW OWVE. LONG LAKE, IH 5535$ 952-473-4141 I »cwr ccnrr that tns piam . y»corcAncK m imi«r WAS pwapo tT ic oe iMxe uy orccr surawsoM a»o mxT I AM A lULt ucono peortsaoNAi. ocpcex a»o iam> SINDW IMO VC V M SUfC GT UNCSOTA* OATC Mi uccNSC MA«e yi.7rr V OATC 7-17-03 joe MO 03-302 4 W-JQ2 OF LOT 137, SPRING PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA C-2- I / .concR ..•-OXARS Ltc X *Y 0.1 MINNETONKA ING PARK BAY 43: 1 roccK EXISTMG BULOMG CONCRC: WOOD STEF STOIC WALL STOIC 79®oo O STOIC rLACI>OlC 8ASC 929.4 CONTOUR UNE P;|^...0.40 30 LEGAL description OF PREMISES Lot 137, SPRING PARK a,V SETBACK. ^ y Ltc "^...SURVEYi STOIC '00" 75 loosc-lao. RA TC LOOSE- „LAO X •• STOICS - aP-- A/C/^ <0 : denotes iron marker Beorings shown ore based upon on ossuffied dotim. LINE fSTOIC ICTAMC WAU 137 STOIC fCTAMlC WAa DECK 79*00 EXISTING HOUSE #2659 33. *1^ n.___o laoOn pt '00" ^ V '' 78 fUt TC [3 EXISTING ■"GARAGE^f&tfKf >.W....■•7^.'^ ....... STOIC .... 1 EXISTMC GARAGE V ^ too/ 4 ‘ i- vH, 65 m9 - \ •! •i » .1 ^/0T ^ T 1 C ^ C* I ^ P i Scott ^ Sr/sr-o/t 7-ZS-03 (-or 137 ^ SPRlHtSt- Pa(?I<- MAiinrnvER ca LCULATIO n woWv SUEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House 22.1 X X X B. C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Piiic/Deck X X F. LandKape Underlain By Plastic 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 Lcnfih X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E Patic/Decl: F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X 0. Other TOTAL K^RDCO cRINZ'^^Jc total PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A B 75-251)’250-500* iij. soo-iooo' -7/-7 ccUlL------S F - Sf -COriC SF ^ SF 206 97 SF.- WALLS ni fi4- 9- k'27 X ICO \L2^ w.cy* X 100 k SF SF SF-5TON£ w-AtR incl. Mv^Oin^ S F-OE6Ke9^o^iF SF. ^TePS SF SF. SF. STtfve f 0 SF. - SF A SF. B % S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. SF. SF. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. SF. SF SF. y. A 3 .fI / SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HAJtDrnviTR i\ 7n|vt; A. Flouse calculatiqn \vorksheet 7-ZS-oS 0-75 X 25-250!250-500* L©t 1 3T7 ^"2 SpRlNgr Rnft,c 500-1003' Length _|Z.I ZSL X X X W;(J:h A^l•z.*r B. Garage C. Driveway ZZ.^Z0.3 X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain B) Plastic Or Fabric X X X _JSZ4-S.F. - S.F.-SHfD A S F. -A/C•q-n S.F.-LO^C.UirO 455 S F. -AARA<S£ 277 S F. - ^LACV-yoP 57 S.F. -03«MC.AtVJ.O - 425 5TOH£ U//4U4 S.F. -{'3AC»i<YAfl(5} S.F.-£^H^7eR)ac iHO- srocp S.F. - DECK fSTc'Jf i8o G. Other WT|fi5r4^o' 6<cg.'4 : *2. TO! AL HARDCOVER IN ZONE total property area in zone ^ -------------------- - B 37^1 propose d HAUnrnvER in /r\\v A. Hoiue X 100 Length WiJ::- X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X 8Z ^5"' ~44k.94 G. Other total hardco ver in zone total property area in zone ^ B X ICO -.S.F. - S.F - of^ . S.F. • 0€OC -S.F. 4S S F -i^feidK S.F. A SF. B /O S.F. SF. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. A S.F. B r F-l \ ■ CITYOFORONO INSPECTION NOTICE PERMIT NO_______ DATE TIME CALLED IN SCHEDULED COMPLETED ~71 ADDRESS OWNER _CONTR. TELEPHONE NO. IS i •kJ I DESCRIPTION 01 footing 02 FRAMING 03 INSULATION 04 WALL BO 05 F inal or 0€MO - SITE cr OFMO - FINAL 09 PLUMBING Rl 11 VECHANiCALRI 13 MECHA.S:CAL FINAL 2-:.‘:5 WOCO BURNER/FiREPLACE 12 //ATER HOOK-UP 14 SFAER KX3K-UP 27 SEPTIC MAINT. 15 SEPTIC INSTALL. 23 SEPTIC F 'sAL 1 § 2 10 PLUMBING FINAL OWNER/CONTRACTOR TO MEET YOU;__YES___NO 18 EXCAV/GRAOING/FILUNQ 19 LAKESHOREAVETLANDS 34 TREE REMOVAL 17 SITE INSPECTION 06 PROGRESS 21 COMPLAINT 22 FOLLOW UP 35 HARO COVER REMOVAL 38 FOUNDATION/PEMOVAL Sts j O ?)A’/ i S 0: 0 u. Ui tt 12 1 ^ g &rh :5 0 Uj Ui 1 □ WORK SATISFACTORY: PROCEED □ CORRECT WORK 8 PROCEED r BEi RRECT WORK. CALL FOR REINSPECHON BEFORE COVERING C CORRECT UNSAFE CON04TICN WITHIN INSPECTOR V^LL RETURN □ PROJECT complete □ ISSUE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY TEM PORARY _________PERMANENT HOURS □ STOP ORDER POSTED CALL INSPECTOR G INSPECTION REQUIRED. CALL TO AR.'iANGE ACCESS. □ PHOTO TAKEN □ CITATION ISSUED Call for the next inspection 24 hours in advance. (952) 249*4600 Owner/Contractor on site:______________________________________ Inspector. J WMM CopyflMpwldt'l Fit*C«n«fy Copy/Sit. Nelica DATE TIME /t r % .‘V <fA July 11,2001 GITYoT ORONO Municipal Offices Smstldirast: 2750 ibIlQ Parlmay Oram. MN SS3S6 Mailiag Mdrass: P.O. 8oi 66 Crystal Bay, Ml 55323 0066 ta EXCA7/CRA0ING/FILUNQ 19 LAKESHOnE/WETLANOS 34 TREE REMOVAL 17 SITE INSPECTION 06 PROGRESS 21 COMPLAINT 22 FOLLOW UP 35 HARO COVER REMOVAL 36 FOUNDAHON.REMOVAL 4 Scott & Irene Standa 2659 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Re: Boathouse Deck at 2659 Casco Point Road Dear Mr. & Mrs. Standa: This letter is in regards to the boathouse deck that was replaced without proper authority from the City of Orono. Please contact the Zoning Department at 952-249-4600 or remove the deck by August 1,2001. If you fail to do so, legal action will be taken. Sincerely, Marc Davis Building Inspector PROJECT COMPLETE ISSUE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY ________TEfcsPORARY ________PERMA.NENT PHOTO taken Citation issued Kranc. (952) 249-4600 CaiiAry N oMcm lUcphoM (952) 24M600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 www.cLoromMBa.us p'^ ClTYor ORONO Mualdpd OUkM StmtMdfftt! 2750 IWtQ hfkway OroM, HI 55356 Mifllng AdOrus: P.O. Bn 66 CfysUI Bay. IIN 553230066 July 18.2001 Scott & Irene Standa 2659 Casco Point Road Wayzata,MN 55391 Re: Boathouse Deck at 2659 Casco Point Road Dear Mr. & Mrs. Standa: The City has received your after the fact application for a Deck replacement oti ycur property. Unfortunately the Deck is within 75 feet of the lake where no structures are allow ed. Therefore the City must require removal of the Deck or submission of a variance application to see if the City Council will allow it to remain. Please review the enclosed variance application and contact the Zoning Department to discuss submittals. If the deck is not removed or if a complete variance application is not received by 08/18/01, legal action will be started. If you have any questions feel free to contact me at my office. Sincerely, r 1 LyK Oman Building Official ■ ‘ i • ? >V lia ' Enc. Variance Application LO/mj Telephone (9S2) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 «rwtr.d.ofOB<UBB.iis j L M AppUcation # Date Recched Araount Paid /.ua t 4 2001 CITY OF ORO.\'0 Site Addres s <3 d CL«jt.i /r. ^ J. Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) applicatmnj^not i.-:.-did on required survey. 'i ^ T^. T'J'Ji/J ^ ' t ' ~ Date Pr I (do) cquired. __ also OUT! the adjacent parcels c:‘ land. Present use of property-: ✓'residential (specify) Zoning District:._________ » .(month/year) APPLICANT Name .ST! )7„n. Address: 24r? r^jc '/^r. ^ iO Phone (ho.T.e ) 9/*V7/- g V77 ------ Phone (work ) - /3lL ______Zip: ST^i/ OW'NTR (if different than applicant) Name_____________________ Add.'ess:C .... Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Zip:. DESCRIPTIO.N OF REQUEST .. Es:Lr.::=i Co.-.s_.^c,ion Colt S 060. D«cnbo r;qu«l ,n detatl: cA,7 Qc<kI I--------------------C-------------------------/ yTi^ (attach additional shee ^ if necessary)r* b fTf -o /»liT* VARIANCES REQUIRED ___Lot Area Lot Width Setback:Front Side Other (specify) L. , I C J ) • RARDSHIP/DESCRIPTIO.N OF l^USU.AL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difncul**. *• u- ‘s-'ii np«'-.—j-.*. -.u 7 ' r- j ^ L.._s.,ai propcrty conditions preventingcom£lia..ce with Zoning Code requirements: •• ^ j ^ ^ gx . ■—,e Hardcover . Rear —rVccb Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore __f/ r.c./k. j c. j. /^tn U)Ay />/ #2 (attach additio.nal sheets if necessary) J j ' m U ^ ^ t ^AfL t H .otir-• •r — ■- 6 i A 0/ ^ /ft, /»**• >yAt0r J7c n •T I J ?•• <# ty•• «.i Tf ••J'#• '%« I € .JT «:i I 11 iMiThifiiai HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' 250-500'500-11 EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ________’ X Lcngtli Vildth X X X B. Oarage C. Driveway jQ//) X D. Sidewalk /Qfy Y oh /y)y E. Patio/Deck X>^£> F. Landscape Underlain C I' -'5"^ •/t-^ce-p r ~Tkt,9 X X G. Other s 2 A A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ______________ + B ___ __________+ B X «00 - X IOC - PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONF A. House X Length Width X X X D. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ______________♦ B X 100 #2Bo S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _____S.F. a//>'S.F. S.F. S.F. SJ. S.F. % % SJ. S.E. S.F. SJ. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SJ. A B S.F. A SJ^. fi % H’ E'6 mmfi A S ■ FU1 A* JliI I • • • 'i ^ ■«: A,..,- ‘I * ^ F-'i CITY of ORONO Municipal Oflicci Street AMmt: 2750 IWItir Putmray Orono. MN 55356 IMtaiMiren: P.O. Ba 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323^66 Scott & Irene Standa 2659 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 RE: Boathouse Deck at 2659 Casco Point Road Dear Mr. Sc Mrs. Standa: On 7/18/02 this office reviewed your after the fact permit application for replacement of a deck on your property. You were notified at that time that the deck replacement was in violation of the City Ordinances. The City required removal of the deck or submission of a variance application to seek City Council approval. As of this date the issue remains unresolved. Therefore the City must again require you to remove the deck or to submit t -cc application. A deadline of 11/01/02 has been esublished. If this deadline is not met the City will initiate legal action. A court appearance will be required. If you have any questions feel free to contact me at my office. Sincerely, Lyle Oman Building Official Rd Enclosure IMcpboMltSlllIMfOB • Pai(»52)i^li ufwuMLonaojnnjH F-IO GlTYoT CMIONO f’!* lA' Municipal Oflk«a mnsy arwtMiwu. 27S0 Ktllty PMkwty Oram. MN 55356 MtOtagMims: P.0.6« 66 Cnrstil lay. Ml S»66 November 15,2002 S. Scott Standa 2659 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 RE: Boathouse Deck Dear Mr. Standa This is in response to your letter of November 4*'', 2002. A Review of your street file shows the following chronology: o 6-25-2001 Inq>ector Marc Davis leaves inspection notice stating a permit is required for deck rqilacement. ^ ° ^artaCTt requesting removal of the deck or contact Building o 7-12-2001 City received permit application - no check attached (Permit Fee is required when permit when permit is issued). ^ o 7-18-2001 Letter fiom me informing you that no structures are aUowed within 75* of 10 S•P' I^uires Building Permits for constructions of decks per Orono Municipal Code Section **™‘=***'«s 75’ of the lake per Orono Municipal Code Section 10 56 subd. C. Once a structure is removed; replacement structures are required to meet current zoning code The City has received your variance application. If you have questions about the variance oroccs- Ifyo«h.v.,„«ionsform.pl«« ' Sincerely, Lyle Oman Building OfRcial LO/dml Enclosures ra«phMC(9S2)MMMI • Fai (tS2) 24MCM J F'll -4 V f •GITYoT ORONO Municipal Strait Mdrass: 2750 Kill« Pnkway Orono, MN SS3SS Mailing Iddritt: P.O. Boi 66 CiystalSay. MN 5532^0066 REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION December 19,2002 Mr. Scott Standa 2659 Casco Point Road Wayzata,MNSS391 SUBJECT: Zoning Application #02-2858 The City of Orono is required to notify you within ten (10) business days as to the status of >*our application for an after the fact variance for property located at 2659 Casco Point Road. Below is a list of items the City of Orono is requesting to complete our review: o 2 original surveys, (certificate of survey, signed by licensed surveyor) of an updated survey indicating the location of the lakeside deck on the property. o All existing and proposed hardcover shall be calculated on the hardccrver woricshcets that are enclosed. The hardcover calculations must be completed by your surveyor. A certified property owners list, mailing labels, and plat map of all property owners within 150* of your property. You can request these items from the Hennepin County Department of Finance at 612*348-5910. Application #02-2858 is incomplete. If you wish to proceed with your application please submit the items requested above by Tuesday January 8, 2003 to remain on the January 22, 2003 Planning Commission agenda. Please call me at (952) 249-4600 should you have any questions. Sincerely, iU-Udc^- .cOc la Wendy Bottenberg Zoning Administrator/Planner Tdtphoiic(9S2)24M<M • Fas<M2)24M616 L GITYofORONO Mitaidpal Offica StrMtMdrhs:' 2750 IWtiy PMmay Orano, MN SS3S0 MaOtaf Mimfc P.O.Boi« CiystalBay, H 55323-0066 May 2,2003 Scott & Irene Standa 2659 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 RE: Boathouse Deck at 2659 Casco Point Road Dear Mr. and Mrs. Standa: On 7/18/02 this office reviewed your after the fact permit application for replacement of a deck on your property. You were notified at that time that the deck replacement was in violation of the City Ordinances. The City required removal of the deck or submission of a variance appUcation to seek city Council approval. As of this date the issue remams unresolved Therefore the City must again require you to remove the deck or to submit a variance application. A deadUoe of 5/21/03 has been established. If this deadline is not met the city will initiate legal action. A court appearance Nvill be required. If you have any questions feel free to contact me at my office. Michael P. Gafnron Planning Director Tritpheac (952) 24M600 • Fax (952) 249^15 www.cLoroiiojiiii.as i .. VI: •F'li CITYof ORONO Municipal Oflkcs Strtat Addrtsfc 2750 Kelley Partway Orono, MN 5:356 Hailing Addn u: P.O. Ba 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 Sq>tember 26,2003 Scott Standa 26S9 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 5S391 SUBJECT: Zoning Application #02-2858 Dear Mr. Standa: This letter is to notify you as to the status of your application for an after-the-fact variance for deck replacement on your property located at 2659 Casco Point Road. Our preliminary review indicates that your application is considered complete now that the survey and hardcover calculations have been submitted. Your application is scheduled to appear before the Planning Commission on Monday, October 20, 2003. The meeting begins at 6:00 p.m. Please make sure that you or your representative is available to attend the meeting. You will be mailed a staff report regarding your application prior to the meeting date. Please call me or one of the City Plarmers at (952) 249-4600 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Michael P. Gaffton Planning Director cc: Melanie Foth, City Planner Janice Waataja, City Planner V TfMioaf (953) 24M600 • Fai (953) 349^16 wwwxLoronomajB i —....... -1 1 f• % ^ % 1 k k “ »»% 1 •■j • » % \ • 1 ; -• s? ir ' t I'r t r/ Mt - # h! I&t.!- 9 ur^*/?^ ^ - -r- • if Mil**' vv m Mm I ^^io. \*\^Z, f^«>TK> i:t»e»^<nTW^ ^‘r A^fic4CMrr «* » . ‘.u ;.• . V • Hr*> I 5.^ ♦ 1* *, ^•w * i ■I&3 •ft.. vv r iUN BATC 12/23/12 BATCN 5*1 HENNEPIN COUNTV P20PENTV INFORHATION SVSTEN PROPERTY ONNERS LIST REPORT NO. PACE PMBS4R1 1 PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAVER NANE/ADOR SO 20*117-2S 2S •••! •2MS CASCO POINT RO 0 J ERICKSON ASF ERICKSON OERALD J A SANORA F ERICKSON PO BOX SOO MAVZATA NN SSSOl SO 20-117-2S 2S OMO •2077 CASCO POINT RD A 0 KLUIS t S V KLUIS A D KLUIS • S V KLUIS 20r/ CASCO POINT RO MAVZATA NN S53V1 SO 20-117-2S 2S OOZl •200B CASCO POINT RO C R SHUTTS OHO SNUTTS CARL R 0 NARILVN 0 SNUTTS ZOOS CASCO POINT RO MAVZATA NN SSSOl PROP AOOR OMNER NAME TAXPAVER NANE/ADOR SO 20-117-23 25 0022 020SV CASCO POINT RD S S STANOA SIS STANOA S S STANOA SIS STANOA 20S0 CASCO POINT RO MAVZATA NN SSS91 SO 20-117-23 20 •••2 •200* CASCO POINT RD F L HAIR IDE HAIR CO-TRST FLOVO L NAIR • OIANE E HAIR 2000 CASCO POINT RO ‘ MAVZATA NN SSSVl SO 20-117-25 20 •••S •2000 CASCO POINT RO 0 L RUNKLE • L F RUNKLE DAVID L RUNKLE 2004 CASCO POINT RO MAVZATA NN SSSOl PROP AOOR OMNER NANE TAXPAVER NANE/ADOR SO 20-117-2S 20 ••20 •2049 CASCO POINT RO JULIANNE N SCNEr/TN . JULIANNE N SCNERVEN 2049 CASCO POINT RD MAVZATA NN SSS91 SO 20-117-2S 20 OOSO •2045 CASCO POINT RD N J OREENE OAK GREENE NORNA OREENE t ALAN OREENE 204S CASCO POINT ROAD MAVZATA NN 5SS91 SO 20-117-2S 24 ••SI •20S5 CASCO POINT RO NARILVN 0 TtnRNE NARILVN 0 THORNE 20SS CASCO POINT RD MAVZATA NN SSS91 Am ) fr) PROP AOOR OMNER NANE TAXPAVER NANE/AOOR SO 20-117-23 24 OOSO •2040 CASCO POINT RO J M 0 0 J ESSEN JEFFREY 0 OAROARA ESSEN 2040 CASCO PT RO MAVZATA NN SBS91 TOTAL OATCN 5S1 •••!•CO 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUB ^ I!!!!*!”? ????•!?. or rtorcorv tajutiqno to tni ocstOF NV KNONLEDOE AND RELIEF. DATE • L Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) Pg>.,/ ___________of y-CV9 Pr. [print name(s)][prim address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at r..,..PrJ?J also referred to as Land Use Application No.________ I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor ’s project or use requires Council approval. \0' Date Date ************************************************** I (we) Co^//y} /y^ S, Lurfs [print name(s)] of J(^J. [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at 2dLT9 . Fr. K'J also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. I (wc) understand that in executing this acknowledgement. I (we) am (are) not asked to declare app*'oval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council thSi I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or ivie requires Council approval. (/o - -o Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. o o o T ^ w‘ ^ O 8 T Taxpayer Services Department V •• •• Parcel Information ^ ,v>Parcel ID 101172: ' Homs# Naaibar lOM Straal Naaie CASCO POINT no 7M$l§nefl$gaKymootd$dmap. «/epfvsaittacanaiMtanoriiftvmiebn antf iMa «om CNy. OoufNy. antf SMte fMtf Mtfwrae* ane otfwr MvrcM. COIJNCII MPPTiMr; REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION OCT 2 7 2003 CITY Oh Or»oi,o Date: October 22,2003 Item No.: (_p Dtpartmeat Approval:Admiaittrator Approval: Name: Michael P. GafTron Tide: Planning Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #02*2873 City of Orono - 2000*2020 CMP Amendment #1 * Old Long Lake Road MUSA * Final Approval • Resolution List of Exhibits A - Resolution B * Letter from Met Council 9*19*03 Earlier this year Council conditionally approved the Old Long Lake Road MUSA Amendment subject to Metropolitan Council review and comment. On September 19 the City received confirmation of Met Council approval for the amendment. The final step in the CMP at lendment process is for the Council to adopt the attached resolution formally adopting the Amendment. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the following motion: Moved by__, seconded by__, to adopt Resolution No.Approving Amendment No. 1 of the 2000*2020 City of Orono Community Management Plan, adding certain properties along Old Long Lake Road to the defined Metropolitan Urban Service Area. Simmmm J i d A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT OF THE 2000*2020 CITY OF ORONO COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation located within Hennepin County and within the planning jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Council; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1976 and its amendments, and with Minnesota Statutes Chapters 462 and 473, the City of Orono in November 2001 adopted a comprehensive municipal plan known as the 2000-2020 City of Orono Community Management Plan (also referred to as the 2000-2020 CMP) to provide for the orderly development of the City. An integral element of the 2000-2020 CMP is the Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan, which identifies certain areas of the City as being within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) in which connections to the metropolitan sanitary sewer system are allowed; and WHEREAS, the City received a request from a property owner on Old Long Lake Road to provide municipal sewer to an existing property that is not buildable without municipal sewer. Subsequent review by the City indicated the potential need to construct municipal sewer to serv'e an existing neighborhood of eight developed lots in the RR-1B Zoning District, five of which are substandard in area based on the 2-acre minimum lot size requirement of the RR-1B District and WHEREAS, on January' 13, 2003 the City Council voted 5-0 to direct that a Comprehensive Plan Amendment process be initiated to amend the MUS.A as adopted in the 2000- 2020 CMP to incorporate certain Old Long Lake Road properties into the MUSA; and WHEREAS, pursuant to published and mailed legal notice to the affected property owners, on February 19, 2003 the Planning Commission held a public hearing and subsequently recommended approval of the proposed CMP amendment: and WHEREAS, on February 24, 2003 the City Council voted 5-0 to conditionally approve 2000-2020 CMP Amendment /H adding certain properties along Old Long Lake Road to the defined Metropolitan Urban Serv ice Area subject to review and comment by the Metropolitan Council; and Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, the amendment consists of a revised and updated inter-community Sanitary Sewer Agreement between the cities of Orono and Wayzata, and a revision of the MUSA description to incorporate MUSA Part XXXXIII - Old Long Lake Road, into the 2000-2020 CMP. MUSA Part XXXXIU - Old Long Lake Road consists of the following parcels: PINS#Address Status Lot Area 36-118-23 31 0007 (Not assigned)Mostly wetland, not buildable; remnant outlot from Wakefield Farms Addition, owiKd by owner of 375 Wakefield Road 0.87 ac. 36-118-23 310010 220 Wakefield Road Conforming lot with conforming septic systems, abuts Old Long Lake Road 2.34 ac. 36-118-23 32 0002 250 RuAnn Road Substandard lot, existing residence, is being rebuilt, plans to build a new conforming septic system this year 1.51 ac. 36-118-23 32 0003 625 Old Long Lake Rd.Substandard lot with existing residence, septic system is non-compliant and must be a*placed by 2010 1.05 ac. 36-118-23 32'4 645 Old Long Lake Rd.Substandard lot, existing residence was demolished by owner in 2001 1.02 ac. 36-118-23 32 6 705 Old Long Lake Rd.Existing residence on slightly substandard lot, septic system is conforming mound 1.96 ac. 36-118-23 32 i7 685 Old Long Lake Rd.Existing residence, slightly substandard lot, conforming mound septic system 1.87 ac. 36-118-23 32 9 360 RuAnn Road Existing residence, confomung lot, $q)tic system is conforming 3.6 ac (2+ ac dry) 36-118-23 32 0010 350 RuAnn Road Existing residence, conforming lot, septic sy'stem is conforming 4.0 ac (2+ ac dry) 18.2 Ac WHEREAS, on March 20,2003 documentation for 2000-2020 CMP Amendment #1 was submitted to the Metropolitan Council for approval and written notice was sent to the City of Wayzata as the only affected neighboring local unit of government, requesting written comment; and Page 2 of 3 A WHEREAS, no negative comments were received from the City of Wayzata, and the cities of Wayzata and Orono have executed a new Sanitary Sewer Agreement for the affected areas; and WHEREAS, on September 19,2003 the Metropolitan Council indicated to the City via letter that the 2000-2020 CMP Amendment #1 - Old Long Lake Road MUSA is in conformance with metropolitan system plans, consistent with the Regional Blueprint, and has no impact on the plans of other units of local government. The letter indicated that Metropolitan Council waives further review and the City may place the amendment into effect. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby amends the 2000-2020 City of Orono Community Management Plan Part 4C, Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan by incorporating into the plan MUSA Part XXXXm - Old Long Lake Road as well as the revised Sanitary Sewer Agreement between Orono and Wayzata dated August 25,2003, finding that: 1.The amendment meets the intent of the basic goals, objectives and policies set forth in the 2000-2020 CMP. 2.The amendment is consistent with die goals, objectives, needs and desires of Orono residents. 3.The amendment is consistent with the planning goals and objectives of Orono ’s municipal neighbors. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota this 27th day of October, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 3 of 3 i Metropolitan Council Building communities that work September 19,2003 Michael GaiTron Planning Director City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 RECEIVEO SEP 2 2 2005 cmroFOflowo RE:City of Orono, Comprehensive Plan Amendment Old Long Lake Rd. MUSA - Waiver Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 18392-3 Metropolitan Council District 3, Mary Hill Smith (952-475-1388) Dear Mr. Gaffron: The Metropolitan Council received the Old Long Lake Road comprehensive plan amendment on March 24 2003 and found it incomplete on April 2,2003 because it lacked r^n intercommunity agreement with the City of Wayzata. On September 15, 2003 the Council i iceived a signed copy of the intercommunity agreement and found the amendment complete for review. The amendment proposes to extend the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) to serve eight developed single-family lots in an 1 8-acre area. Of the eight lots, five do not have alternative septic sites and one is currently non-conforming which requires removal. The amendment would allow for the removal of existing septic systems by providing wastewater services to the properties, when needed. At its May 24, 2000 regular meeting, the governing body of the Council identified certain types of local comprehensive plan amendments that may be reviewed by Council staff without fuither formal review by the governing body of the Council. Council staff applied the plan review waiver criteria established by the Council ’s governing body and finds that the amendment is in conformance with riKtropolitan sv'stem plans, consistent w ith the Regional Blueprint, and has no impact on the plans of other units of local government. Therefore, the CoutKil will waive further review and the City may place this amendment into effect. The amendment, explanato«y materials supplied and the information submission form w ill be appended to the City's Plan in the Council ’s files. If you have any questions about this review, please contact Roh.;, Caufman, Principal Reviewer, at 651-602-1457. PhylhyHanson, Manager Planihng and Technical Assistance cc:Mary Hill Smith. Metropolitan Council District 3 Robin Caufman, AlCP, Sector Rep/Principal Reviewer Brigid Gombold. MN DOT Metropolitan Division Cheryl Olsen, Referrals Coordinator Vf, 4<i-V (I \itsi Ml nfww.mrUoi^urx il.oTf{Mrfro Info line 602* 1888 230 £<i»l Fifth Sircct • St. Paul. 9bt;r.nrooU 5510 M626 • (6511602 1000 • Fax 602 1550 • TTY291 0904 An equal OfiporPituty enqmjytr I Dale Application Received: 7-22-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 7>22«03 60*Day Review Period Eipires: 9-2(MI3 Review Period Eitended on 8*25-03 to: 11-19-03 cm INCH MFETING OCT 2 7 2003 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF Omuivu Date: Item No.7 Department Approval:Administrator Approv al: Name: Michael P. Ganion Title: Planning Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: tt03-2929 Jeff Martineau, 2i65 North Shore Drive • CUP -Resolution List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Notice of PC Action 9-18-03 C-PC Minutes 9-15-03 D - Memo and Exhibits of 9-11-03 Application Summary: Applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit for plumbing in an accessory structure, to allow installation of a half bath (toilet, sink and shower) in a proposed detached garage with upper level exercise and sitting room. The applicant has agreed to concurrent hardcover removals so that the property will remain in hardcover compliance after construction of the new accessory building. Applicant has also agreed to eliminate the initially proposed kitchenette so that this will not have the potential to function as a guest house. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the CUP for plumbing in an accessory structure, subject to elimination of the kitchenette from the proposal, and subject to the standard code restrictions on use of the structure; - carmot be used for a home occupation unless allowed by home occupation ordinances - cannot be used as a dwelling unit unless Guest house CUP is obtained • cannot be rented, leased, or otherwise provided for use as dwelling. Staff recommends that concurrent removals of excess hardcover be required as proposed, to result in a final hardcover not exceeding the site’s hardcover allotment of 7530 s.f. for the area between 0-250'. Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-1A Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acre min. Gross: 64,250 s.f. (1.47 acres) Wetland: 33,000 s.f. ± Net Dry Buildable: 3 1,250 s.f. ± #03-2929 October 23,2003 Page 2 Background The proposed plans included a kitchenette with range, sink and refrigerator, which could easily allow this building to function as a small guest house as designed. However, the property does not contain adequate acreage for a guest house CUP (w ould need 4 acres in this 2-acre zone). At the Planning Commission meeting applicant agreed to remove the kitchenette from the proposal. The proposed structure and its associated driveway are all within the 75-250* zone. This building will replace a smaller existing storage building located northeast of the house. Significant portions of the existing residence are within the 0-75* zone. The new accessory building and driveway would increase hardcover beyond the hardcover allotment for the property absent any removals. Applicant submitted a hardcover removal plan that would result in the overall hardcover limit on the property being met, so that no hardcover variance is required. The structure will meet all pertinent setbacks. Planning Commission had no problem recommending approval despite the fact that the property is slightly less than the two acre requirement for the accessory building plumbing CUP. Planoing Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission reviewed this item on September 15 and on a vote of 7-0 recommended iq>proval of a CUP for plumbing in the accessory structure, subject to the following conditions: 1. a. b. The property owner must agree to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that: the accessory building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by City or if allowed by City code; the accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained (site is not large enough to qualify); the accessory building will not be rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances; the accessory building shall not be fitted with a kitchenette (kitchen sink, range or refrigerator); and installation of such fixtures in the future shall be considered a violation of this covenant w hich the city may enforce. c. d. 2.Applicant shall remove the excess driveway hardcover prior to the footing inspection for the proposed accessory building. Please review the Planning Commission minutes of 9-15-03 in regards to comments by the adjoining property owner, Ed Callahan. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached resolution. < A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PLUMBING IN AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE PER MUNICIRAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-303. SUBDIVISION (17) HLE #03-2929 WHEREAS* JcfTrey L. Martineau and Melissa L. Ottinger, husband and wife, (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 256S North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as: Attached “Exhibit A” (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-303, Subdivision (17) to allow plumbing including a toilet, sink and shower to be installed in a proposed accessory structure; 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 September IS, 2003, at which times 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, nXDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #03-2929. The property is located in the LR-1A Zoning District, where 2 acres is the minimum lot area. The property is approximately 1.47 acres in gross area including wetlands. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 15,2003 and on a vote of 7-0 recommended approval of a CUP for plumbing in the accessory structure, based on the following findings: Page 1 of 6 L 4. 5. a. b. c. d. e. f. The proposed use of the accessory strccnire with plumbing will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. The plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory structure. The property size and building location are sufficient to allow the conditional use permit to be granted. The CUP should be subject to the standard "Plumbing in Accessory Structure* conditions. The installation of a kitchenette in the str:rture would not be appropriate as that would make the building easily functi :nal as a guest house for which the the property does not qualify. The property can remain in compliance \\i± the hardcover requirements if the concurrent removals of driveway are completed as proposed. The City Council has considered this applic^on including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, rjpons by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed coriitional use permit on the heal th, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that granting a condition^ use permit to allow plumbing in the accessory structure will not be detrimental to ue health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will its usj depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the pr:peny will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Cc-prehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of6 i ittii J CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-303, Subdivision (17) to allow plumbing including a toilet, sink and shower to be installed in a proposed accessory structure, per the site and building plans attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B and as annotated by City staff, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant by executing this resolution agrees and covenants that the property will be bound by the following conditions: A) the accessory building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by City or if allowed by City code; B) the accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained (site is not large enough to qualify); C) the accessory building will not be rented, leased or otherw ise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances; and D) the accessory building shall not be fitted with a kitchenette (kitchen sink, range or refrigerator); and installation of such fixtures in the future shall be considered a violation of this approval. 2 The applicants shall remove excess driveway hardcover per the site plan attached as Exhibit B so that the property remains in hardcover compliance. 3. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that dale (October 27,2004). 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shali 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. Page 3 of 6 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 27th day of October, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) t * Page4of6 .bk- STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 27th day of October, 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 ' of ,2003 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota munic:. corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page S of6 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this__day of _.. 20. personally appeared before me, ____ who is personall) known to me ____ whose identity I proved on the basis of whose identity I proved on the oath/aflirmation 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 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPLN 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 6 of 6 EXHIBIT A RESOLlTnON NO. LEGAL DESCRIPTION IN GOVERNMENT LOTS 4 tc 5, SECTION 9-117-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA : DESCRIPTION or PREMISES The Northwesterly 50 £eot» front end rear, cf that part of Government Lot S, Section 9# Township 117, North Rengc 23« West of the Fifth Principal Meridian^ described as follows: Commencing at a point In the center line of County Road No. 5l, which point Is 437.4 feet V/est of a point In the East line of Government Lot S. distant 1,262 feet South of the East 1/4 corner of said Section; thence Northwesterly along the center line of said road a distance of 534. 6 feet to the true point of beginning of thci property being described; thence continuing Northwesterly along the ce«*ite7« line of said road to a point 265.25 feet Southeasterly measured along thr centerline of said road from Its intersection with the West line of Cover.nment Lot 5; thane. SouthweiUrly with an Interior an^le o{ $0* 41'. a tllitanca ol 435.7 feet, more or less, to a polnt'ln the West line of said Government Lot m 5, said point being 507 feet South of the Internection of said V/est lire with the centerline'of said County Road, said point also being ca the shore of I Crystal Bay, Lake Minnetonka; thence Southeasterly along said shoi eline to Its intersection with a line drawn through th>.* point of beginning and forming an interior angle of 84* 29* with the centerline of said road; thence Nor;h« f - OaTSterly along last deserlbod line a distance of 435 feet, more or less, to « the true point of beginning. Fagelof J Thai p4ft of Covornmort Lot 5, Soet&on 9# Townthip I IT, .North flange 23, West of the Fifth PrlneipAl Meridian, described at foUowii Deginning at a poln< In the eenterilne of Count/ Road No. Si running aeroti said Government Lot S, which point Is 200 feet Southeaster!/ measured along the centerline of said road from its intersection with the West line cf said Government Lot S, said point of beginning being the Northeasterly corner of that certain tract of land deeded to Anna H. Schuler by Anna and Titus Mareck by Oood in Book SSI of Oooda, page ?4S of Hennapin County, S£inn« ttola; thaneo Southoaatarly along tho ceiiterUne of said road, 6S.2S feet; thenco Southwesterly making an angle of 90* 41' to the right from said centorlino, a distance of 43S.7 feet, mere or less, to a point in the Wes*, line of said Government Lot 5, said point being SC7 feet South of the intersection of said West line with the centerline of said County Road and which point Is also the most Southerly corner of the above msutloned deed to Anna K. Schuler by Anna and Titus Mareck; thence Northeasterly along the Easterly line of said Schuler tract, 440.11 feet to the point of beginning. Tracj^IJlL Thai part oi Lots 4 and 5, Section 4, Townihlp 11?, Ncrth Range 23, V/ast of Iho Fifth Principal Meridian, described as foUe^ss Beginning al a point on the centerline of tho main County Road; turning Easterly end Westerly through said Lot 4, 300 feet Easterly from the point where said cciitorlliic Intcrsocts the centerline of a side road runr.isg Southerly from said main road to the shore uf Lake Minnetonka, §zid point of beginning being tho Northeasterly corner ef a tract of land conve/sd by Anna H. Schuler and husband to Mattie M. Ortdgcman by Deed in £suk S79 of Deeds, page 423; thence running Southv/estorly along the Easterlv line of tho tract of land so deeded which line Is parallel to and 300 foet disrint from tho centerline of said road to lo-.v water mark on the shore of said like; from thence Easterly along the line of low water mark about 300 feet to the North and South Covornment lino between the aforcttaicl Lots 4 and S, and from thence about at right angles Northeasterly through said Lot S, and a*.eng thn Easterly lino of the tract of land conveyed by Anna and Titus Marerk to y»nna K« Schuler by deed In Book SSI of Deeds, page 34S. to a point in ths centerline of .said main road, 300 feet Easterly of the point of beginning and fr:.-n thence Westerly along said centerline to said point ef beginning. EXCEPT l^rd described as follows: Commencing at a point on the shore of Lake Minnetonka, •aid point being 300 foot Westerly along said ihorc from Southwesterly corner of Lot 5, Section 9, Tov/nshlp 117, Range 23, said point also being Scutheast* erly corner of land now owned by Dr. W. A. Patten; thcncc Northeasterly along line of said Patton land, 370 feet, mori or less, to center of Coa^ty Road, said point being 100 feet, more or lest,. Northwesterly from l^te:? je>:tlon of said centerline of said road, with line bctv.ccn Lots 4 and S, eaid Section; thence Southeasterly along said centerline to Intersection with center ef a private driveway extended and thence Southwesterly along said centsrline ef said driveway to shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence Northwesterly alcr.g said shore to beginning. Fagt 3 0f3 i i! i wmm CITYOFORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE #03-2929 NOTICE OF PL.kNNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: September 18, 2003 TO:JefT Martineau 2565 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: CUP DATE OF MEETING: September 15, 2003 Plaaolag Commission recommended as follows: Approval of CUP for plumbing in accessory structure, subject to the following conditions: 1. The property owner must agree to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that: a.the accessory building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by City or if allowed by City code. b.the accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained. c. the accessory building will not be rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. d.the accessory building shall not be fitted with a kitchenette (kitchen sink, range or refngerator); and installation of such fixtures in the future shall be considered a violation of this covenant which the city may enforce. 2.Applicant shall remove the excess driveway hardcover prior to the footing inspection for the proposed accessory building. yOTE: 7 FOR 0 AGAISST Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, October 27, 2003; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the officii. < Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call Planning Director Mike GafTron at 952-249-4600. 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, September 15,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. e (#6) #03-2929 JEFF MARTINEAU, 2565 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, 6:40 - 7.24 P.M. Jeff Martineau, the Applicant, was present. Gaffron explained that the applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit for plumbing in an accessory structure, to allow installation of a half bath (toilet, sink and shower) in a proposed detached garage with upper level exercise and sitting room. The proposed plans include a kitchenette with range, sink and refngerator, and could easily function as a small guest house as designed. However, the property does not contain adequate acreage for a guest house CUP (would need 4 acres in this 2-acre zone). The proposed structure and its associated driveway are all within the 75-250' zone. This building will replace a smaller existing storage building located northeast of the house. Significant portions of the existing residence are within the 0-75' zone. The new accessory building and driveway would increase hardcover beyond the hardcover allotment for the property absent any removals. Applicant has submitted a hardcover removal plan that would result in the overall hardcover limit on the property being met, so that no hardcover variance is required. The structure will meet all pertinent setbacks. Gaffron indicated that the applicant proposes to construct a detached 844 s.f. 2-stall garage with adjacent shop area, and a second level with a sitting room, exercise room, screen poich plus half-bath and kitchenette (range, sink and refrigerator). As depicted in the plans, the proposed structure contains all the features that would make it functional as a guest house. However, the property is in a 2-acre zone and is only 1.5 acres in area, so it does not qualify for a Guest House CUP which requires double the zoning district acreage, or 4 acres. Gaffron noted that the applicant has indicated he is willing to remove elements of the kitchenette necessary to disqualify this as a guest house. The criteria or conditions for a CUP for accessory structure plumbing include: 1 . The Council must find that the proposed use of the accessory structure with plumbing will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. 2. The Council must find that the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. 3. The property must be 2.0 acres in area or larger. 4. The accessory building must be conforming in location, size and height. 5. The property owner must agree to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that: a. the accessory building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by City or if allowed by City code, the accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained. the accessory building will not be rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. b. c. PAGE 5 of 25 A MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, Sq>tember 15,2003 6:00 o'clock p.m. («6 #03-2929 JEFF MARTINEAU, Continued) While Gaflfron acknowledged that Conditions 4 and 5 were met, he indicated that Condition 3 was not met. He recommended that the Planning Commission review Conditions 1 and 2 with the applicant to determine w hethcr they were also met. In addition, Gaffron believed it should be noted that the Council has granted a number of Plumbing in Accessory Structure CUPs for properties less than 2 acres in recent years, and as recently as last week. Gaf&on explained that staff recommends approval of the CUP for plumbing in an accessory structure, subject to the code restrictions on use of that structure: - cannot be used for a home occupation unless allowed by home occupation ordinances - cannot be used as a dwelling unit unless Guest house CUP is obtained • cannot be rented, leased, or otherwise provided for use as dwelling. In addition, staff recommends that concurrent removals of excess hardcover be required as proposed, to result in a final hardcover not exceeding the site’s hardcover allotment of 7530 s.f for the area between 0-250'. Note that the unused hardcover allowance in the 250-500' zone cannot be transferred to zones closer to the lake. Rahn questioned whether the proposed bathroom constituted a Vi or V* bath. Gaffron felt the code defined it as a half bath configuration. Chair Smith asked the applicant to explain the purpose of the building. A self proclaimed ‘career remodeler’, Martineau stated that his family arrangements had recently changed and required him to create more livable space in his home. He noted that the lower level living area has ceiling heights of merely 6 ’ and that the 2 bedroom home does not offer adequate room for a family. He stated that the proposed addition workout room would be for his use to free up the small bedroom in the home. He indicated that, unfortunately, he was misinformed by what constitutes an accessory space versus a guest house and would be more than willing to omit the kitchenette from the design. As if trying to piece together a puzzle, Martineau admitted that he has undergone numerous construction projects over the years in an effort to improve his property. He stated that he would remove the circle driveway in order to meet hardcover restrictions, which would not be necessary as part of the new design and driveway setup anyway. Chair Smith reiterated that limitations exist to prohibit the addition from becoming an ' apartment for his children in the future. She felt this would not be inconsistent to what has been allowed in the past. PAGE 6 of 25 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, September 15,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. (#6 <103-2929 JEFF MARTINEAU, Continued) In an cfTort to establish grounds for the Planning Commission recommendation, Zugschwert questioned whether the code defined a dwelling or guest house as containing a fhdge, microwave/range, and half bath. GafTron admitted that the terms were not well defined within the existing code, citing the fact that, while the addition of lower level wet bars are allowed uses in homes, accessory buildings are quite another matter. He agreed that the code should be modified to reduce the number of allowable fixtures in a guest house, which in turn, limits use. After meeting with staff, Martineau believed that it was the term ‘tub’ which defined the guest house use from accessory structure use. He indicated that based on discussion this evening, he understands there are further limitations. Chair Smith indicated that the Commission, too, during discussions has found it difficult to determine the difference between a dwelling and accessory structure; however, she felt limitations such as kitchens etc. helped to define those differences. Rahn stated that whether written in the code or not, the Commission could place conditions on the CUP. Hawn stated that, while it was clear to her from this discussion what restrictions the Commission wished to place upon the applicant, she felt a future owner might decide to turn the structure into a guest house. Chair Smith indicated that it was her hope that eliminating the kitchenette would deter this action. Ed Callahan, the southeast neighbor residing at 2545 North Shore Drive, made light of the fact that Mr. Martineau’s home has been under continual construction since he moved in. Although Orono is very restrictive, Callahan acknowledged that the applicant is also well versed in City codes and continues to make changes to changes already made. He stated that, while it would presumptuous of him to object to the application, he wished staff w ould put a note on his own property, as well as the Woodhouse property on the other side of Mr. Martineau, to advise future owners of the ongoing construction chaos. As he pointed out that the Woodhouse property was now on the market and alluded to the fact that he would be doing the same by spring, he urged the city to mandate the applicant not proceed with his work until June of 2004 in order to allow them time to move on. He asked that the applicant be forbid to remove the hardcover until June 2004 to avoid the continutll noise of construction as the two neighbors market their homes. Although he felt the applicant had always been very attentive to his property and what is allowed, once again, Callahan asked that no further activity, no prep, no removals, no commotion, be allowed until 6/04. PAGE 7 of 25 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, Sq)teinber 15,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. (#6 #03-2929 JEFF MARTINEAU, Continued) Chair Smith asked the applicant to try to comment upon the neighbors requests. Martineau admitted that he was a motivated, hyper, and creative homeowner who was always trying to improve his property. While he has continued to renovate his home over the years, Martineau indicated that he was sorry to have had such a negative impact upon Mr. Callahan. With regard to the other neighbor, Martineau stated that he had just listed Mrs. Woodhouse’s home for sale. He indicated that the nature of the Ordinances is to allow someone to renovate their home to meet their needs, which he maintained he had been attempting to do with his substandard property all along. While he wished to be good neighbor and cooperate with the request to wait until June 2004, Martineau indicated that he would have to make some adjustments and speak to his contractors. He added that, he too, would love to avoid removing the hardcover; however, believed the Commission would have a different view of that request. Chair Smith thanked the applicant for his cooperation and flexibility in handling the situation with the neighbor. She suggested Callahan add any notation he chooses to his own address file for future owners to view. Since the applicant agreed to potentially postpone additional construction until June, she asked if the applicant had any active permits on record to fulfill. While he had no permits that he was currently working on, Martineau maintained that he has always strived to take care of his property. Chair Smith reiterated that the garage accessory structure limitations would include a half bath, no kitchenette, and removal of driveway hardcover to ensure it not be turned into a guest house. Rahn stated that he had no issues with the application and complimented the applicant on the design, as it will look like a garage with attic space. He felt that it would not be a good idea for the Commission to place limitations on the application restricting him of when he could actually begin his work. While he could decide, on his goodwiU, to delay work until June 2004, Rahn felt the City should not mandate that timeline to the applicant. Bremer, Zugschwert, Mabusth, and Fritzler agreed that it was not in the City’s authority to mandate the dates for construction. Hawn asked the neighbor if he had had issues with the hours of construction the neighboi had been working under. Callahan acknowledged that the applicant had always been very considerate of his requests and not begun constiuction work until after 8:00 - 8:30 AJ^. PAGE 8 of 25 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, Sq>tember IS, 2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. (#6 #03-2929 JEFF \URTINEAU, Continued) Bremer moved, Rahn seconded, to recommend Approval of Application #03-2929, Jeff Martineau, 2565 North Shore Drive, granting a Conditional Use Permit for plumbing in an accessory structure for a % bath, including showcr/stool/sink, (excluding a kitchenette) subject to concurrent removals of excess hardcover to result in a final hardcover not exceeding the site’s hardcover allotment of 7530 s.f. for the area between 0-250* and code restrictions on use of that structure including that It: - cannot be used for a home occupation unless allowed by home occupation ordinances - cannot be used as a dwelling unit unless Guest bouse CUP Is obtained - cannot be rented, leased, or otherwise provided for use as dwelling. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0 NEW BUSINESS (#7) #03-2938 SANDRA S. LARSON, 540 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD SOUTH. VARIANCES, 7:24 - 7:44 P.M. Kelly Perry, daughter and representative for the Applicants, was present. Foth explained that the applicants request side yard and street setback variances in order to construct a 10’ x 28’ addition to the north side of the existing home. The proposed addition would not encroach further into the street setback than that of the existing home, however, would make a conforming side yard setback non-conforming. The proposed addition would encroach 10’ into the currently conforming side yard setback, while there is ample area on the west side of the home to add 282 s.f. of additional living space. Since the property is split down the middle by a public alley right of way, this results in the necessity for a rear yard setback in the center of the property. A fence exists on the alley right-of-way approximately 20’ north of the property line between 540 and 550 (property to the south). The alley has historically served only the 540 and 500 Orono Orchard Road properties; how ever, a recent home addition and garage reorientation at the 500 address has changed the use of the alley. In summary the alley now serv es 540 Orono Orchard Road exclusively. While the Planning Department Staff recommends the following: 1. Approval of the street setback variance, since staff finds that a hardship exists to allow the decreased setback to the rear yard due to planed right of way which splits the property in half 2. Denial of the side yard setback variance, since staff does not find a hardship to support the side yard encroachment thus making a currently conforming setback non-conforming PAGE 9 of 25 I Date Applicatioa Received: 7*22*03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 7-22-03 dO-Day Review Period Eipires: 9>20-03 Review Period Eitended on 8>25-03 to: 11*19^3 fj,. To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Smith and Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator Mike Gaflron, Planning Director^ September 11,2003 #03-2929 JefTMartineau, 2565 North Shore Drive - CUP - Variance • Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IA Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acre min. Gross: 64,250 s.f. (1.47 acres) Wetland: 33,000 s.f. + Net Dry Buildable: 31,250 s.f + Application Summary: Applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit for plumbing in an accessory structure, to allow installation of a half bath (toilet, sink and shower) in a proposed detached garage with upper level exercise and sitting room. The proposed plans include a kitchenette with range, sink and refrigerator, and could easily frmetion as a small guest house as designed. However, the property does not contain adequate acreage for a guest house CUP (would need 4 acres in this 2-acre zone). The proposed structure and its associated driveway are all within the 75-250' zone. This building will replace a smaller existing storage building located northeast of the house. Significant portions of the existing residence are within the 0-75' zone. The new accessory building and driveway would increase hardcover beyond the hardcover allotment for the propel^ absent any removals. Applicant has submitted a hardcover removal plan that would result in the overall hardcover limit on the property being met, so that no hardcover variance is required. The structure will meet all pertinent setbacks. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the CUP for plumbing in an accessory structure, subject to the code restrictions on use of that structure: - carmot be used for a home occupation unless allowed by home occupation ordinances - cannot be used as a dwelling unit unless Guest house CUP is obtained - caruiot be rented, leased, or otherwise provided for use as dwelling. Staff recommends that concuaent removals of excess hardcover be required as proposed, to result in a final hardcover not exceeding the site’s hardcover allotment of 7530 s.f for the area between 0-250'. Note that the unused hardcover allowance in the 250-500' zone cannot be transferred to zones closer to the lake. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Existing & Proposed Survey/Site Plan C • Proposed Plans & Elevations D - Submitted Hardcover Calculations E - Property Owners List F - Plat map G - Photos H - Code Sections 10.20 Subd. 3G and 3Q M3-2929 September 11,2003 Page 2 Pertinent Code Sections 1. 2. Sections 10.22, Subd. 2, lO.SS Subd. 8 & 10.56 Subd. 16(L): Hnrdcovert a) 0% Hardcover allowed in 0-75’ zone, proposed is 2,608 s.f or 21.6% (same as existing). b) 25% Hardcover limit in 75-250* zone, proposed is increase of 191 s.f. from 4 731 s f (15.7%) to 4,922 s.f. (16.3%). The property is currently just under its allotted hardcover allowance of 7,530 s.f. (25% ^^"250 zone) by 191 s. f. Applicant proposes removal of existing driveway hardcover to result in total site hardcover not exceeding the 7,530 s.f allotment. Section 10.20 Subd. 3G (CUP for Guest Houses and Non-Rental Guest Apartments) Section 10.20 Subd. 3Q (Plumbing in Accessory Building) Plumbing in Accessory Structure CUP Applicant proposes to construct a detached 844 s.f 2-stall garage with adjacent shop area, and a swond level with a sitting room, exercise room, screen porch plus half-bath and kitchenette (range, sink and refrigerator). As depicted in the plans, the proposed structure contains all the features that would make it functional as a guest house. However, the property is in a 2-acre zone and is only 1.5 acres in area, so it does not qualify for a Guest House CUP which requires double the zoning district acreage, or 4 acres. Applicant has indicated he is willing to remove elements of the kitchenette necessary to disqualify this as a guest house. If this solution is satisfactory to the Planning Commission, the requirement that no such fixtures could be installed at a later date would be estoblished in the resolution approving the Plumbing in Accessory Structure CUP. The criteria or conditions for a CUP for accessory structure plumbing include; The Council must find that the proposed use of the accessory structure with plumbing will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. The Council must find that the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. The property must be 2.0 acres in area or larger. The accessory building must be conforming in location, size and height. The property owner must agree to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. a. the accessory building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by City or if allowed by City code. W3-2929 ScpUmbcr 11,2003 Page 3 b.the accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained. c.the accessory building will not be rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. Conditions 4 and S are met. Condition 3 is not met. Planning Commission should review Conditions 1 and 2 with the applicant to determine whether they are met. It should be noted that the Council has granted a number of Plumbing in Accessory Structure CUPs for properties less than 2 acres in recent years, and as recently as last week. Hardcover Hardcover Increases. Portions of the existing house and sidewalks, the deck, and most of the retaining walls are within the 0-75' zone. The hardcover allotment for the property is 25% of the 75- 250* zone or 7,530 s.f. Total existing hardcover is 7,339 s.f., and proposed is exactly 7,530 s.f. Therefore, although hardcover exists in the 0-75* zone, Staff would conclude that no hardcover variance is required for this project. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Lot Area/Width: LR-IA Lot Area Lot Width Required 87,120 s.f. (2.0 acre)200' Actual 64.250 s.f. (1.47 acres) Gross 31.250 s.f. (0.72 acres) Dry 157'-163' Setbacks tProposed Structure): LR-IA Required Existing Storage Building Proposed Building Front (Lakeshore)75'130'119 ’ Rear (Street)30'227'227’ Left (W) Side 10'130 ’125' Right (E) Side 15'19'15 ’ Average Lakeshore (^io Encroachmeot)(No Encroachment)(No Encroachment) Structure to Structure 10'35’20’ HI03-2929 September II, 2003 Page 4 Structural Coverage: -*tA Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 64,250 s.f (1.47 ac.)Allowed: Existing; Proposed: 9,638 s.f 2,856 s.f 3,434 s.f (15.0%) (4.4 %) (5.3 %) rz~~r ^.----------------■Hardcover Calculationa! Hardcover Zooe 0-75* 75-250 ’ Total 0-250 ’ 250-500 ’ Total Area in Zone 12.070 s.f. 30,120 s.f. 22,060 s.f. Allowed Hardcover Os.f (0 %) 7,530 s.f (25 %) 7,530 $.f. 6,618 s.f (30 %) Existing Hardcover 2,608 s.f (21.6%) 4.731 s.f (15.7%) 7.339 s.f 550 s.f (2.5 %) Proposed Hardcover 2.608 s.f (21.6%) 4,922 s.f (16.3%) 7,530 s.f. 550 s.f (2.5 %) Issues for Consideration 1 • What fixtures should be eliminated/prohibited to ensure this accessory building with plumbing does not become a guest house or dwelling unit? Range? Sink? Refriizerator‘>All three? 2. 3. Docs the fact that the lot is less than 2 acres in area have any bearing on whether the CUP for accessory structure plumbing should be granted? In addition to the standard conditions noted above and the prohibition on certain fixtures are there any other conditions that should be added or addressed based on the intended use of this structure? 4. Does Planning Commission have any questions about the hardcover situation on this property? 5.Does Plarming Commission have any additional concerns about this proposal? (M3.2929 Snitcnbcr 11,2003 PaftS Stair RccommcBdation If the Planning Commission finds that the criteria for ^>provaI of the Plumbing in Accessoiy Structure CUP are substantially met, then a recommendation for approval would be appropriate subject to the following conditions; 1 . The property owner must agree to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that: 2. the accessoiy building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by City or if allowed by City code. the accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained. c.the accessory building will not be rented, leased or otherwise provided fiar use as a dwelling under any circumstances. d.the accessory building shall not be fitted with the following fixtures: (kitchen sink) (range) (refrigerator); and installation of such fixtures in the future shall be considered a violation of this covenant which the city may enforce. Applicant shall remove the excess driveway hardcover prior to the footing inspection for the proposed accessory building. ’tlRV -j ' i /4 AppUcation # Date Received •7~'2 j2-03 Amouot Paid -i CITY OF OROiNO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Z-KCj^ AJ» Type of Application to be Filed Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ^ j APPLICANT Phone (home)aS2^jOirlfe^ Name,_________ Phone (woric)^ST. Z-ID Address,.?.r<psr. ^^-SArrttr 7>giv^, City Zip OWNER (if different than applicant) Name_______ Address City Phone (borne). . Phone (work). Zip. Date Property Acquired I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - 2S 75.00 For each variance request v.iih CUP application $250.00 Residential Accessory Use $250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $250.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments ___$250.00 Duple.x Credit/Bldg ___$325.00 Commercial/Industrial Use ___$250.00 L«nd Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 50i cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of lakeshore rM PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no char.ge from original application) After-the-Faci Fee - Double Ciment Application Fee 3^- 00 OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$275.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$250.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$375.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ____ $100.00 Appeals _____Other - see Fee Schedule I. r # 9 Q; 9 / / V-' r 1 required submittals —— Completed Applicatic; Form v/ Describe request in dsail. - A-603, Government Center, 34t327^1) ** Department of Finance. * '“"“0 - refer ,. hendou. foe survey dl on re,ui«d survey. changes in elevation (pades), contours) if land alterations involve ~y’ property. *" FOR ^row Sctto /documents or copy fuSr “• pL":T ^71 appIiesdouisnoUraiireTffei-ivrtafoSo^^^^^ Certification by Clerical Departmez; tha^ Land IT«<» s* Initials of Clerical Staff- ‘ ^ ^ Application is cc=plete. ■---------------------------------------------Date 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. APPLICANT'S SIGNATLTIE Administrator, agrees" to^pay add^on^*fe« ^afTf "quired cr requested by the Zoning and/or unusual expenses bcLerb review ofS,T T P«y “«nt) supplied is true and correct to the best of hi^/iefl^vledge°"’ that the information Applicant’s signature Dare OWNER'S SIG.NATlTRkJUl^ V_) , members for "»< Council Chvner ’s signature Date Applicant must have all TUBbifnMs^ into\ie City ofllcM 3S /i v * I Planning Commission Meetings are held caSfce-third Mondav nf*i? k ”^*t.**^* Planning Commission Meeting, icheduled review meetings of the Placiij Cctcmission and Cot^rii “”?<?** ^ presem at all ’ aH m* V •'.> / r* .J 1 ••-V r • - / ,• *•** • s' y U€Or I 4^. «VT tOT ac .1,1 OOTT U* 1 ae. »-n7*u / \ a •\ IA V*\ X X A V'X \ 4 X 'C 'C is. s X N CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR JEFF MARTINEAU IN GOVERNMENT LOTS 4 & 5. SECTION 9-117-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA •* *-*• ^ il r, %•««« •••f i»***«^ H «••••» •* *m*9f»* •» AMl. 3«^ l» >«*■. ^ga «xs. rMM« l«iii>»<»«4»»f n*** *• *••••»»» *»“ ^ M VM1 ^ 1*^ M 4«*<*4 •<•*«» li* t» *m4 ua tttm «• ..lar l*t .4 M.4 f^4 • :-r- .~*4 4k*»« ■« ***4 U4t; tAiMttf 1m% »»• Um «l -WM m»tk aW.! »• #••• »• •*« Mi SmiX C4»»J Lf |-~ *••••■» •4**4»**< •• at attfu a>g!a« Ha>aMrttflf ttraa*^ •«»4 •• laau/.T .JI4 .4 ua« 4l ai»-n«« ^ **•#•«» ••A.- M. »» 4#a4 -»••%••; a^. r*-« *• « aa-4 »•••. >•« »••• &••»>? •• •* '^‘** •* **•*" •'*•••• VMitfif •*•4 m m>4 »' wcrrr u»4 4aa4^>a4 a. f4il —. *k«** - U*- ^ ^ M-i, SSt faa« W*i»4r> mU-g «*4 .Mr, ffwn »a«^ti«rlf t«r«a* *. ttauM f. »» ••*4 4»»»* 4l« katag SM*aaai> „ • (ir>«r V. !%«<•«!» ^ at •*'• :««4. r~t -a*^ <*ar. «» .•«!. ?a taaitr af C«»‘iT aa-4 y I— aa ag :43 laa*. wara at ,aa . Matfiwaaiatlv Itmm oitaf <a*<a%M ak4 aaatMltM •( aa>4 taai. « i» uaa »a.« aaa ;,a«a 4 a«i I. aa«4 faat.aM; liMat SMiftaaaiarlf ataag a«,4 aaiuarttBa «a aaatattnaM wtti taaiar a< a fr.aata 4ai«a«ar aaiaaiai aai tmamm Sa»ta«a«urif a«aag aal4 aaaiatll*a af ^gie»!>r:?< of Fntwiiti XJUJ.LI »a«*-aaiaa f M *aa«. Iraaa aai taar. •al faat - Ca..ramaaa U. •. laatl-a f. Ta-afc.» H». Ha.A taaga IJ. W* •< *• ruii ^Ma..gai Matliiaa. M%U a. faU-a. Caaa#aaa.«« ai a gmma Ufia4aMaMUaa<C-a*r»..4?»a. «• i— ay«-ia.Mta..U-a-C*ar —U.I. 4..«-1.14* Saaa 1/4 aaaaa# a4 aati faauaa. liaaaa Haaia-aaiatlf aJaag cm #»*ar Uaa ^ aal4 taai a «aiaaaa tt IH.4 faaa la *a waa yaM al tarayag ^ *a itayrtr MUg iaataiMt Ay«a aaaa-M-ag M»ia^acat»r •*• Uaa al aaai aaai u a gala. M*.ll fai» ia-k-Maalr -aaayai aUa« *a aaaMrtiM 1^4 f»a» ^ MatMaaiaa •>* iM »aai U m Qyafiafiay ty » 4yaaa ia-Maaiarlf - A y •«..*- - ••• ^ 4Jf.tlaaa. yaaa w taaa. y a »a«a u Wa waai Uaa a< aa.4 CyaraiMai U« t. •*i4>ya4aacat»ttfaaafa.*iliMlyaa.aaiyay y^ Vay Uaayifc 4la a»iarilaa y Mti Caaaar tyl. y*4 y»« alaa iatag m *a a%aaa ai 'CfraMl tar. Ufca MlaaMiaato. ayaa laatkyMarty atyg y-4 ya.Uya m AV.ia«*r»ayJaB*>wt<a-ifaa afaM--*.»aagi>4 ‘ »»•••• c*.*vr** *? yc' »'**’*t* M iatarta* ygU al la* Xr a,* Aa ayMrl.»a ti y.4 tyl. y ai;7.i^ - 4MM.J - • *------- ••• *•••- •• ••• - y« »taa y*y «l •••••«••• ■f,,., II. m.,...-e^.~— t-»• *••”-*• "’• «...• •>■ •••• - - ’■>* »—•" *“'•* ** ••gtaatag at a y-a u «fca cytcflyaal Cay*r »yl >•• »i ••»••• •a.4 Cy«r«jayt Ua I. I— *a »«» f*«y a^M^T -^-44 ai«| tta aayyUaa y>4 fy4 ItaM .« yyaaatay .a*U Ua w«a« ’*••• ••‘4 Cyaramaal kaa $. y»4 gyy al Ury *| fca*»l ManMaiiy’.? a«y4 al *«i tMuy ttic* al la*4 4aya4 * My M. faWy »» M»a aai T.sy Mataah if Oaai ut iaafc Ml al 3y4a. Ml* ata«: Mtaaaa |y*yiiatir alvf IM aaaaailAa y aa.4 ryA M. XI laat; yyaa laarttyiMtlr ayaoig y ygU al 44* 4f %m lia r.g»i J»ay aa.i aaMMtya. a itaiyaa ai MUt Caai. a»a#a y Uaa. y a gaya y *a Wy*! lya af yi4 eyaaayy |. aaU gaya iay| «» laai SaaU al *• ycataaauy • af aaci Waal U m y* *a ayui^Aa al y 4 Cayag »aai a*4 •*.!* «• aly dy aMat SaadMtir y»ya ^ >44 *^a yaaliyai 4—4 y Aay M. faWaa 4f aam aai Tum aayaaa; *yaa JiyiMaaiatlg a^ag Aa Saciaaif Uaa al y»4 tataya uaaa. 4M. U faai y ^ ga»ai af Mgya.ag yraal ttli TUi girt al Wia • aai I. laiay 4. ?a»*y^ ll». »«»i4 Kaaga tJ. Waaa af 4m f4A ^rtaaigal Mani y. itacrtMi aa faSa»a. •4fM*atM a ga-M y 4y aaatarlAa al i4a aia«a Cayty »aa4. ryayg Caaurlg aai Vaaiarlg 4uaag4 y i Lai 4. Hi fay Saaiylg fta* *a gyy I fyrgfcf C4fti», !• « iTit •Pd corrget sf • ViM »f IM 4M4rl»d pnprt, tM Itc«t4li» «f m Mi, tfyr«r. H pioort U «nr •wrtagfWMU «r «ncrMmi«nia. Far ^ tM tfi, miriitry in^«« v« i»o«i aitiiif wMa«rtr.«n •cs.oct^n tfigrt «r« •#i4»t •••'flyiti** •• ***• *••• M 4 y>«r«af y aMva 4l Lay aXaaa sa aagiaayg. tiaaka. Mya ^caiOyaatarlg alyg aali \ )—> tn<< Og “'* O>*o co“2 CO o“- <^5-1<=;Z dSST _^ SK —nn z: —c 0“Z2 CfcS^-^H C3G?^ i852\ ia5S\ iMi 'sli 4 mm • •* m»/11/«* top «totiM LF^FT ELEVATION i/i* • I* f* MOP VCNfS f i/«* P« # RI6HT F(^'^ATTD*N ftioM ititn inn #«P«OC«4P !/•• • •*••• lK^»/«tM. l««P ° (WWMMt CIO. 40MIMN •HTM* MCCB— 9k MOTtMatk •.SS.3»gft^ 'wwsi imm9 5 ► r« 1>3-1 b D 1r i_r j 1 *miwe AUFMftf aooRMrait •^l«9/ruilCMiMLtm uTienviflc NOTCP FIRST FLOOR PI AM o l«ttH V. t ’ ‘Vr . » I,*. J .'/.X. --' I «.!«.»«» *«.ik»Ml tt4pi^ Tm«commifiom mt¥wm *««cm •. Mon m Au. nMm • mL9nmm§ •«.« mfSSkMO. '•Sft!ifnsM *L AMtan WC MMM . >*-8* ■_________^ y-0* ^414 001414 PROVCe 9 1/ *1(9 PAM dOL. MIMC TOi ICA^ (TIP)• movBc 9/r npe W MTP IP TO Nme ON POMON 9SC or OMMON mu ^CNrr «AT Neitinr naikm numm LoaTMi •AMVWMWi • • OO NT M1M96 OnCMMi N01CP Ail tATtMIOfl ML» 9 fIHM# i KOMO mO¥m ft l/f*K9f*ATTI0 A0«9i Pi (M Jl. :r. HARDCOVER CALCULATION WUKKSHlLbT SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) wS 75-250’ 250-500’ i/n/03 500-1000’ f////#7 *• t, EVISTINn HARDCONTR IN ZONE A. House /72S" Length Wijth X X X B. Carafe C.‘ Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X 4^^ E. P«Uo/Oeck X X 25Z 123 F. »fc>a<mpi ttinlutoiu '2.5 L.P. By PImfe _____________ OrFtbnc X X /•2 a: n li. JO X C. Other X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A- 2^09 i- B fZOJo 26,09 IZOJCL X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length X X X X B. Gerage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Paiio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plasiic Or Fabric X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ___________ ♦ B .X 100 " !4 S.F. S.F. S.F. • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ■ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. "PAr^i, S.F. S.F. S.F^ S.F. S.F. S.F. ?. A B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F; . S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B I i I J . „ • HARDCOVER CALCULAUUat \\ORKSHfchT ' SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ 250.500*500.(000' l/lf/63 C//V»3 EXTSnXC HARDCOXTR IN ZQNT A. House • % .Ltnfih \yidih X X X • • B. Cara|e * C. * Driveway X X 0. Sidewalk J*^^€tA/A cjg E. Pitio/Oeck X X X X F. tiSiSS A/r Hudodaia ____________ BrWaattc OTPMnc ^ X X X C. Other /.4.S o * z total hardcover in zone TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ B S£)/2o X ICO PROPOSED HARDCOVTER fV 7CtKF A. House LcAfth X X X Be Garage c. te;; €tt/Srj^c AfM0U9 tirtfr/due D. Sidewalk * i- 4 E. Patio/Deck X X % • F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X O. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE *1^1 TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ B - ________X .:o 0 «# • a « S.F. •S.F. • S.?- _____s’.F. ' S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. "<0 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _S.F, /A S.F. -^73/ • S.F. 30/-zo S.F. _ /S. 7/r. S.F. • ••• S.F. S.F. S.F. S78 S.F. S8o S.F. S.F. •S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. •S.F; . . •S.F. t • !• S.F. itJ2ZS.F. • A S.F. 3 % A B 14 • « A UIDCOVEK CV setback ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75 ’ EXISTiXC HARDCQ\TR IN ZONE HARDCOVER CALCLLA'llUtN WUKAfitHJbJia 75-250’ '/pyo3 M0.I000' I A. House ■X ■S.F. •. Ltnfth X Widih• m S.F.1Xm(S.F. •<X m S.F. • • B. Oarage - • X m ••• a* S.F. C.' Driveway X m S.F. 1 X m • •S.F.! D. Sidewalk X m S.F.1 X ■i .S.F.! « E. Patio/Deck X m • S.F.r X m S.F.•• F. Landscape X ■1 S.F. Underlain m S.F. By Plastic • X m S.F.• • % Or Fabric • C. Other •• $ X S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE • • ■ S.F. • A TOTAL PROPEMY AREA IN ZONE m S.F.B A> 9^^+ B X 100 XI f.1 PROPOSED HARDCOV’ER IN ZONE 1 A. House X a.S.F.1 UA|tfl X Width • • • S.F.1 •X m S.F.9 • X m , S.F.9 B. ‘ Carate X .S.F.% 1 C. Driveway X S.F. X m S.F. D. Sidewalk X •S.F.Bb X m S.F.l: E. Patio/Deck X S.F. : •X S.F. * • F. Landscape X • .S.F.• Underlain X m B S.F; ••• By Plastic X m J L V • •T'S.F. Or Fabric •» i>• 0. Other X S.F. • TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE ••$.F. *A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE •S.F.B A >•- B a 100 m % k K kUNUA1E:7/21/.HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPER .FORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNE ks LIST M 091172)140007 lOPAOOR II JO OLD CRYSTAL BAY RDS WNER NAME THOMAS O * PIIYUlS O COLWELL AXPAYER THOMAS O A PHYLLIS D COLWELL AMF7ADOR C/0 COLWELL INDUSTRIES INC 12) JRDSTN MPLSMN SS40I 31 0911723410002 PROP ADDR 2SIS NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME MARY DALE JESTER TRUSTEE TAXPAYER MARY DALE JESTER NAME/ADOR 2.<I5 NORTH SHORE DR WAY/ATAMN SJJ'H )8 091172)41000) PROP ADDR 2)43 NORTH SHORE OR OWNER NAME CAROL G CALLAHAN TAXPAYER CAROL 0 CALLAHAN NAMiyADDR IlOX 72 CRYSTAL HAY MN JJJ2J 31 0911723410004 top ADDR 2)6) NORTH SHORE DR WNER NAME J L MARHNEAY AML OTTINGER AXPAYER JEFFREY L MARTtNEAU AME/ADDR MELISSA L OTTINGER 2)6) NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN ))39l 38 091172)410009 PROP ADDR )8 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME CHARLES & OIRGITTA SCHOEN TAXPAYER CHARLES A niRGIITA SCHOEN NAME/ADOR 2430 NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATAMN JJJ9I )8 091172)420002 PROP ADDR 260) NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME JDJEROMEASK JEROME TAXPAYER JOHN D A SANDRA K JEROME NAMF7AOOR 260) NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATAMN )))9I 38 0911723420003 lOPADOR 262) NORTH SHORE DR WNER NAME ANGELA E WOODHOUSE AXPAYER AMIVADDR ANGELA E WOODHOUSE 262)NORIIISIIORni)H WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0911723440001 PROP ADDR 248) NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME S B A B J LINDAHL JR TAXPAYER BURTON JOHN LINDAHL JR NAMIMDDK P 0110X26 CRYSTAL HAY MN )))2J I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESEFTTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUER PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARSTHIS DATE ONTHE RECORDS OFTHE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTWEN<)lX)THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. ^ - L y date by yfU'/Til- // PAGE: I k 0 >6 ' f ■#' ( < DISTRICT . »<v I . '.V ■\f f'i:; fflSfi vjif V ~:i'n». ^i«B i>V7 4;'^ :>4j: S39I pj?issjsiiBjaHBit kn-^ ww ..'*■• A*<‘*iaWIBi8iW» *■ >'Cs^’V - ^wSBBfflSiS ■V‘r^{<; »c tsir- c -tJ j: »»i ii p£ if RraisSs?. ■■ VI |.f; ■fjjwyjtsT^Kiwa \\v ;/SSMwaisaty^gt^git >U..li«C!9Hx?SBI.. •*>’,•• >“* v2r**« ^X I* ■. '• . . •V'' -'^*-y'Vi’sv-^"lV vrfV - ^Tr . . . * * ... - f».. ^ 1 \ •' ft • * > > '. ^ 'A ^ / ; . , ' X''';t.' A'■ ■ • -' V '’V ••; \ ♦.. • ^ • ' Vi\ ‘ *-'.•<: ■, *> ., ! Vr>VvvA - • •.••:■■•• .*’ iV \•■•’v.v'-V-Y' • 1 o'*- * -U f ’ * • -o. I LV.^ A > Ifew i ir:v?A • / * >r<>• i.' r . ( I'r •*..•'*•■'mm;\,iv’ ^lai.: mP1-:... ;.v. * 7 'r*mA % . t I *'i ■ •* '■ ^ ■ .*' ■'* >• V pr» -• ,v';‘. j *. ; - V . -*^... '•./ -r V--’ ,•»■■*. • !:,7 : n-;S; ‘ t * ‘ i-- > L" * > >>?/« • '*/‘iw?i^^'«'r- !• I* # # —^^'•-.'N. v^v; .'JJ. ■^'■ ^>/:i ^?Vk-.-u*^.* »»■ .. -: t .:»f^ • • 4 • » y * ^' iv'/ - > ‘ I * . • ,*r7r*.^?;iv T.^'* . * \ / r'AY"rr*^ • A^f Aflf '^#ilri/^1 **<* '\'^ J ^ V' ^ 'd ^L-rw,r»;;v-^ •-. >~^ .‘,y •, ,i^ 14 To: From: Date: Subject: Building & Zoning Staff Mike GafTron July 21,2003 Refresher Course on Guest Apartments, Guest Houses, and Plumbine in Accessory Buildings !• Guest Apartments are attached to the principal residence structure, and standards are established in 10.20, Subd. 3(GK2). 10.20, Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "R-IA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: G. Guest Houses & Non-rental Guest Apartments. 2) Non-rental Guest Apartments. An apartment within the principal residence structure on a lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal residence, including their domestic employees or non-paying guests. Th.*re shall be at least one access door to the apartment from within the principal structure, and such door shall be the primary access to the apartment. Application for such a guest apartment shall address the concerns of parking, sewage treatment, entiyway and interior access method. Such apartments shall not have utilities metered separately from the principal residence utilities and shall not have a separate street address. Source: Ordinance 29,2nd Series Adopted: 2-23-87 2. Guest Houses are free-standing accessor>- structures, and standards are established in 10.20, Subd. 3(G)(1): 10.20, Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "R-IA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: G. Guest Houses & Non-rental Guest Apartments. 1) Guest Houses. A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal buildings, including their domestic employees or their non-paying guests. All regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house.* Source: Ordinance 29, 2nd Series Adopted: 2-23-87 *Ed. Note. All regular lot requireinents” means thstr 1. Property must have double the dry buildable acreage required for a principle structure; and 2. Guest house must be located so that it could be subdivided off from main house and bo»h main house and guest house would have conforming setbacks from lot lines, etc. 3. AggWgpry PyjJdinKs wjth Plurpbing are those accessory structures which are neither intended nor used for overnight occupancy. Overnight use would presumably make them dwelling units, which triggers the Guest House status and need for a CUP. Accessory Buildings with Plumbing are divided into two categories: a) Those that do not contain any of these fixtures: bathtub, toilet, or show er. These are subject to an administrative permit and covenant and Those that jJa contain one or more of any of these fixtures: baihmb, a toilet, or a shower (or a combination of these fixtures). These require a Plumbing ir -Vecessorv Ruildiny r) rp Accessory Buildings with Plumbing are governed by Section 10.03, Subd. 9(F): 10.03, Subd. 9. Accessory Buildings. F. Plumbing. Because the provision of plumbing fixtures and wastewater plumbing in accessory buildings has the potential to allow such buildings to be used as dwelling units, and because it is the policy of the City to limit residential development density to the allowed densities within the respective zoning districts, plumbing in accessorybuiidingssball bcregulated as folio ws: 1. The provision of outside sillcocks and indoor wf ter supply shall be allowed in any accessory building that is conformLig in location, size and height. 2.Installation of any combination of fixtures requiring was'iewater plumbing that docs Qoi include a toiler shower or bathtub shall be allowed in any accessory building that is conforming in location, size and height, subject to provision of ir.u.nicipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from such fixtures, and rubjcct to the property owner executing a covenant providing that: a. b. c. Accessory building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approvedbyCityorifallowed byCity code. Accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained. Accessory building will not be rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling imder any circumstances. \ i •i 3.Installation of any combination of fixtures requiring wastewater plumbing that includes a toilet, shower or bathtub shall be allowed only in an accessory building that is conforming in location, size and height, which meets one of the following criteria: a.The accessory building has been approved for a 'Guest House' conditional use permit; or b. The accessory building has been approved for a Tlumbing in Accessory Building' conditional use permit. Source: Ordinance No. 179,2nd Series Adopted: 10-12-98 Accessory Buildings with Plumbing that includes a toilet, tub, or shower cr a combination of these fixture, but not intended to be used as a Guest House, are governed by the “Plumbing In Accessory Building" CUP standards of Section 10.03, Subd. 3(Q): 10.20, Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "R-IA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: Q. Plumbing in Acccsso^ Building. The provision ofa toilet, bathtub or shower accessory building. Approval shall be conditioned on provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from the building plumbing. Approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met: 1.The Council finds that the proposed use of the accessory structure with plumbing will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighboihood. 2.The Council finds that the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. 3. 4. The property is 2.0 acres in area or larger. The accessory building is conforming in location, size and height. 5. b. The property owner agrees to the filing ofacovenant in the title of the property providing that: a. the accessory building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by City or if allowed by City code. the accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained, the accessory building will not be rented, leased or oth'.'iwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. Sourcs: OrdiaMcc 179,2nd StrlM Adopted: 10•1^9t C.i i Date Application Received: 7*23-03 Date Application Coniidcred at Complete: 9-16-03 60-Day Review Period Eipires: 11-1^3 COI iMCIL MEETING OCT 2 7 2003 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY UH Ohuivu Date: October 23,2003 CONSENT AGENDA ITEM Item No.: / Department Approval:Administrator Appro'-al: Name: Michael P. GafTron Title: Planning Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #03-2934 Jason Bliss, 3445 Crystal Bay Road - Variances - Resolution List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - Notice of PC Action 10-23-03 C - Revised sur\ ey submitted at PC meeting D - Memo and Exhibits of 10-16-03 Application Sumuary: Applicant requests a number of variances to construct a new residence on the property. The variances include: 1 . Lot area and width. 2. Side street setback (required I S' proposed = 11'-12.S'). 3. 75-250' Hardcover (existing = 1,985 s.f. = 30.6%; allowed = 1,623 s.f. =* 25%; proposed per 10/20/03 revision = 1,868 s.f. = 28.77%) Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends: a) Approval of lot area and width variances. b) Approval of side street setback variance per PC recommendation. c) Approval of 75-250' hardcover at 1,838 s.f. (28.3®i) per PC recommendation. Zoning District: Lot Area/Width: LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Required = 0.50 acre (21,780 s.f) min. area, 100' min. width Existing = 0.15 acre (6,494 s.f) / 50' width Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission reviewed this item at their October 20 meeting and recommended as follows: 1. 2. Approval of lot area and width variances. Approval of side street setback variances for house and attached portico as requested. t #03-2934 3445 Crystal Bay Road October 23,2003 Paic2 3.Approval of hardcover as follows; House footprint Stoop/portico Sidewalk to driveway Driveway Air conditioner pad Deck on lake side of house 1385 s.f. 36 s.f. 41 s.f. 247 s.f. 9s.f. 120 s.f. 1838 s.f./6494 s.f.28.3% 120 s.f deck may be configured as applicant chooses but r.ust meet froni'side/side street principal structure setbacks. Deck approval is for a Is; floor level open deck, with railing if required; no upper floor decks are approved. Planning Commission noted that the minimal actual encroachment of side street setback by house and portico, and narrow width of lot, plus the substantial separation between the proposed house and traveled portion of side street, act as hardships to support ihe sidet street setback variance, and the small lot size is a hardship supporting the hardcover variance. Staff Recommeadatioa Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission rcommcrdation COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached resolution. lalbMiiaMliAiiife I . I 11 ■■ ■■ • I A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-350(B); 78-282; AND 78-1288 - RLE NO. 03-2934 WHEREAS, Jason Bliss, a single person, (hereinafter "the applicant") has an interest in the property located at 3445 Crystal Bay Road and owned by Chicago Title Insurance Co., such property located within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: That part of Lot 4, Block 1, Wiley’s Park; Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying northerly of a line drawn from a point on the westerly line of said Lot 4 distant 1 13.5 feet northerly of the Southw est corner of said Lot 4, through a point on the easterly line of said Lot 4 distant 83 feet northerly of the Southeast comer of said Lot 4, and lying southerly of the southerly right-of-way line of Old Road as shown on the plat of Wiley’s Park, Lake Minnetonka (hereinafter the "properly"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-350(B); 78-282; and 78-1288 to allow construction of a residence on a lot of 0.15 acres in area and 50* width where 0.5 acres in area and 100' width is required; to allow a building encroachment of the side street yard, and to allow hardcover in excess of the 25% hardcover normally allowed in the 75-250’ lakeshore hardcover zone. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, HNDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #03-2934. 2.The property is located in the LR-IC Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, which requires minimum lot area of 0.5 acres (21,780 s.f.) and minimum lot width of 100*. The lot area is 0.15 acres (6,494 s.f.) and defined lot width is 50'. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on October 20,2003 and on a vote of 5-0 recommended approval based on the following findings and recommended conditions: a.A house has existed on the property for many years, and the property is served by municipal sewer and water. Page 1 of 6 iin I Millrfll iBeucM 4. 5. L ..A b. c. d. The lot area and width are sufficient to allow development of a single family residence meeting or nearly meeting all standards of the LR-IC zoning district. The minimal actual encroachment of side street setback by house (2. S' encroachment) and portico (<2* encroachment), and the narrow widtli of the lot, plus the substantial separation between the proposed house and the traveled portion of the side street, act as hardships to support the side street setback variance. The proposed house will be sized smaller than 1500 s.f. lot coverage allotment for lots less than 10,000 s.f. in area, and the configuration ofthe lot and garage location will minimize hardcover while still allowing for off-street vehicle parking in front ofthe garage. The revised proposal accounts for the necessary hardcover amenities to functionally serve the house (AC pad, front sidewalk). A small first-floor level deck of no greater than 120 s.f. should be allowed on the lake side of the house meeting all principal structure setbacks. The small lot size is a hardship supporting a hardcover variance to allow 1,838 s.f. hardcover (28.3%) in the 75-250' zone, which Planning Commission finds is the amount of hardcover necessary to reasonably support the construction of a new residence on this property. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect trafiic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the ^plicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 6 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above flndings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-350(B), 78-282, and 78-1288 to allow construction of a residence on a lot of 0.1 S acres in area and 50* width where O.S acres in area and 100' width is required; to allow a building encroachment of the side street yard of 2.5' and a similar portico entrance encroachment of 2'; and to allow hardcover of 1,838 s.f. or 28.3% in the 75-250' zone where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1 . Council approval is based on the revised site plan submitted by the applicants dated 10-20-03 and as annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as E.xhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Conunission and City Council review. 2. Hardcover removals as noted on Exhibit A (shed) shall be completed prior to the footing inspection for the new residence. Hardcover in the 75-250' zone shall not henceforth exceed 1,838 s.f. as indicated on Exhibit A. Applicants arc advised that any future proposals for additional hardcover on the property will likely not be approved, but might oc approved only in conjunction with concurrent hardcover removals to result in no net hardcover increase on the property. 3. The deck on the lakeside of the house shall not be enclosed and shall not extend above the first floor level, except that a standard railing may be constructed for said deck. The deck shall not exceed 120 s.f. in footprint area but may be configured in a shape of applicant ’s choosing as long as it meets all required principal structure setbacks of the LR-IC district. 4. The applicant is advised that the property does not abut the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka and is not considered as riparian by the City of Orono. 5. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the app. ':ants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction w ithin one year cf the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (October 27,2004). 6. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 3 of 6 7. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants* heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 27th day of October, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s)For Chicago Title Insurance Co. Page 4 of 6 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this__dayof ,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 ,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 This instrument was acknowledged before me this by Jason Bliss, a single person. dayof ,2003 Notary Public Page S of 6 STATE OF COUNTY OF This instrument was acknowledged before me this day of .,2003 for Chicago Title Insurance Co. by its Notary Public Page 6 of 6 L $ ***•*••< EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO, S PARK /\ APPROVED SITE PLAN to /Sf / /r * / / A- •53-.DECK \ :: I f* / ^7• # # ^ / DECK / i j utv;K f o $* / EXISTING HOUSE 'vC PAO / PROPOSED / ^0//o^ / driveway/ ~ '^•^c // e / 0 />I / ^ ^ t / 0 / / / 0^ / ^ Ar // i / •«?? nSTMCggOAOfW-r.»*./ W LY L»<E OF LOT 4. BLOCK 1. WLEY* S PARK E* LY LINE OF LOT 4, BLOCK I,-- WLEY'SPARK Approval of hardcover as follows: House footprint Stoop/portico Sidewalk to driveway Driveway Air conditioner pad peck on lake side of bouse 1385 s.f. 36 s.f. 41 s.f. 247 s.f. 9s.f. 12Q s.f. 1838 s.f./6494s.£28.5% Ai# i E CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING HLE #03-2934 NOTICE OF PLANNING COi^IMlSSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: October 23. 2003 TO: Jason Bliss 3349 Crystal Bay Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: Paul Larson Coldwell Banker 201 East Lake Street Wayzata, MN 55391 Chicago Title Insurance Co. Ann. Asset Management 4050 Calle Real #120 Santa Barbara, CA 93110 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variances DATE OF MEETING: October 20, 2003 Planning Commission recommended as follows: I. Approval of lot area and width variances. Approval of side street setback variances for house and attached portico as requested.2. 3.Approval of hardcover as follows: House footprint Stoop/portico Sidewalk to driveway Driveway Air conditioner pad Deck on lake side of house 1385 s.f 36 s.f. 41 s.f. 247 s.f. 9 s.f 120 s.f 1838 s.f. / 6494 s.f. = 28.3% 4.120 s.f deck may be configured as applicar.t chooses but must meet front/side/side street principal structure setbacks. Deck approval is for a 1st floor level open deck, with railing if required; no upper floor decks are approved. VOTE: 5 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, October 27, 2003; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Plarjiing Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and appro\ al by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call Planning Director Mike Gaffron at 952-249-4600. LCGAL PCSCRiPTlQN OF PREMISf.^* Thot porl of Lol ®!2gj^,y*o7'o^l(ine^drown'’from “■'""•M"on‘the'w«trr 5 ne of soid Lot 4 dislont o point on ,he Southwest corner of 13 •- q-'i"! noMh^Jl^o? M Southwest corner Ofll^iS feel northeriy o *hp easterly line *?’*’ '^rfVot rd^sTont eS'feet northerly of the of sold Lot 4 disioni oj lying south- O : denotes iron morker («083): demotes eKistinq spot elevolion. ' moon seo level dotun denotes proposed spot elevation, mean seo level dotifn Beorings shown ore bosed upon on ossurvid dotun This survey intends »° i?oJo«d the obove '*’®^-SIi°hLsr thereon. It does iorJi?po?l to'^show ony other inprovemonts or encroocNnents. proposed elevations : 1) Goroge - 2) Top of foundolion 3) Bosernont - filTlMNOO^^ I-—ROADWAf ^ /SURVEY.. / UNI /OLD ROAD AS , I SHOWN ON THE\ , PLAT OF j __WILEY* S PARK / <•f. i $ \ \ / •/ / *» / \ KCK Uo>, I/O'•crowo A/C ^40 existing house 5) /PROPOSCOi ^ / ORfVCWAYi WOOSf 03-31# \ I » 5> WIY Lie or —LOT 4. OLOCK 1, Wttr S PARK E LY l»€ or lot 4. BLOCK 1.- Wl Ct* S PARK !s / % Sw COR ^ lot 4. a OCX 1. wu:r s PAW sc ccR or lov 4. ac<x t.. m.Cr S PAim '•s,^ / 1/ /V . / • /R h» GRONBERG k ASSOCIATES, INC. .C06UUIC t«Mf«. two WiVtTOlS. 9lt 445 N WILOW CM. I.CNi: LAKE. UN, 95J-473-4I4I ,H«t I AU A 0IA» i«N;to . ei/rrisf***!. i»»o ‘iHW'fW u«t* II* * "* ''*’L ^ ^ ------------------- OAlt “X LA/tS-.C OAWI-----/.LIXX- 1'4’f ~ > ♦! fe • 03-516 im'v * U. A* 7 r Date Application Received: 7*23*03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 9-16^3 60>Day Review Period Eipires: ll>15-03 To:Chair Smith and Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Mike Oaffron, Platming Director^^^^''^^ October 16,2003 #03-2934 Jason Bliss, 3445 Crystal Bay Road - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot AreaAVidth: LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Required = 0.50 acre (21,780 s.f.) min. area, 100’ min. width Existing = 0.15 acre (6,494 s.f.) / 50' width Application Summary: Applicant requests a number of variances to construct a new residence on the property. The variances include: 1. Lot area and width. 2. Side street setback (required 15’ proposed = 11'-12.5'). 3. 75-250' Hardcover (existing = 1,985 s.f = 30.6%; allowed = 1,623 s.f = 25%; proposed = 1,668 s.f = 25.7%; adding AC pad, minimal sidewalk and probable future 8x12 deck yields 1824 s.f=28.1%). Other items of note: - Lot coverage by structures proposed at 1420 s.f including entry portico (1500 s.f allowed). • AH existing structures to be removed. - Garage will have doors 14’ from right-of-way, 37’ from traveled roadway. - This property does Qot have lakeshore, and average setback is not applicable. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends: a) Approval of lot area and width variances. b) Denial of side street setback variance. c) Approval of the degree of hardcover variance necessary to accommodate a house (and its essential amenities) th^it is conforming in terms of setbacks and lot coverage. List of Exhibits A - Application & Hardship Statement B - Proposed Survey/Site Plan C - Existing Conditions Survey D - Proposed Plans & Elevations E - Hardcover Calculations F - Photos G - Property Owners List H - Plat map 1 - Background re: Lake Access Issue Pertinent Code Sections 1. 78-350: Area, height, lot width and yard requirements for the LR-1C District 78-282 & 78-1288: Hardcover limitations for LR districts and Shoreland District J #03-2934 October 16,2003 P«fc2 Background This extremely small property has contained a small home and single-stall detached garage for many years. I he existing residence and garage are in poor condition and are in nonconforming locations. The applicant recently purchased the property with the intent of removing the existing structures and constructing a new 2-1/2 story residence with tuck-under garage. The property is served wiili municipal sewer and water. Note that this is not a lakeshore lot; the City was deeded the separate tax parcel abutting the shoreline north of the “Old County Road” in the 1930’s. Average lakeshore setback is technically not a factor in this application. & Width Variance. The lot size is a factor not controllable by the applicant, and no additional land is available for acquisition. The exclusion horn the lot area of the 60' dedicated right-of-way for the “Old County Road” is consistent with City code and policy, although the paved travel^ roadway is distant 36' to as much as 63' from the north lot line. Tlie potential may exist for a partial vacation of that roadway, but such an application is not before the City ai; llus time, and would necessarily involve the three additional affected properties to the east. LqI CQvgfffgg. The lot size and relation to surrounding roadways yields a somewhat rectangular buildable envelope 25'-30* in width and 58'-66* in length, or about 1650 s.f. The site would be allowed 1500 s.f. of structural lot coverage as it is a lot of less than 10,000 s.f. tctal area. Applicant proposes a house with portico entrance that totals 1420 s.f structural co\ crage. Sglba<?kyyjance. Regarding the requested side street setback variance, note that the proposed house location is further from the lake than the existing residence structure, but closer to the side street. The buildable envelope tapers to the front; at the front of the proposed house the lot width is 50’, which would allow a conforming house width of 25'; at the rear the lot is 55’ wide, allowing a conforming house width of 30 ’. Applicant is requesting a house width of27.67 ’-28’, which requires encroachment of the side street setback. A house could be designed within the buildable envelope without the need for setback variances. Applicant also proposes a covered portico entrance 11’ from the side street lot line, requiring a 4* variance. Again, the house could be designed to not require such a variance. Hard^QVer Variance. The applicant’s hardcover proposal is for 25.7% where only 25% is allowd. The proposal does not account for the following potential hardcover needs: 1) sidewalk from driveway to main entrance, 50 s.f needed; 2) probable air conditioner pad, 10 s.f needed; and 3) potential future deck on lake side of home (nominal 8’x 12’ for discussion purposes). Staff considers items 1 and 2 as essential; item 3 is merely an amenity that is likely to be requested in the future and should be addressed now. Proposed hardcover including the three items noted above would be: (1668 + 50 + 10 + 96) = 1824 s.f / 6494 s.f » 28.1 % 1 «03-2934 October lit 2003 Page 3 From staff s perspective, there is no hardship to support approval of anything more than the degree of hardcover variance necessary to accommodate a house (and its essential amenities) that is conforming in terms of setbacks and lot coverage. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Lot Area/Width ; LR-IC Lot Area Defined Lot Width Required 21,780 s.f. (0.5 acre)100 ’ Actual 6,494 s.f. (0.15 acre)50' Setbacks; LR-IC Required Existing Proposed Front (North)30 ’(to be removed)38.9 ’ Rear (South)30*(to be removed)30 ’ Side Street (West)15 ’(to be removed)12.5 ’ (house) ir (portico) Right Side (East)10 ’(to be removed)10 ’ Lakeshore NA NA NA Average Lakeshore NA NA NA Structural Coverage; Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 6,494 s.f. (0.15 ac.)Allowed: 1500 s.f. (23%) Proposed: 1420 s.f. (22%) Hardcover Calculations; Hardcover Zone Total Area In Zone Allowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover • • 75-250 ’6,494 s.f.1,624 s.f. (25 %) NA 1,668 s.f. (25.7%) 1,824 s.f. (with 3 added items) (28.1%) ■ r -a I* «03-2934 October 16,2003 Page 4 Hardship Statemeot Applicant has provided a hardship statement, and should also be asked for his testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis tm consideriHg applicatioms for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, rish to the public safety, and the effea on values ofproperty in the surrounding area. The nannlng Commission shall consider recommending approval for xariances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in beeping wUh the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code Staff would make the followmg recommendations in regards to the criteria for "undue hardship" pertinent to this application; 1.“The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls.” The area and width variances are necessary to allow continued use ofthe sitefor residential purposes. 2.“The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner.” ^ The lot sice and relationship to surrounding roadways arefactors nc: under the applicant control. 3.“The variance, if granted, will not alter tlie essential character of the locality.” Granting of lot area and width variances to allow a replacement house will not alter the character of the neighborhood: but variances to allow an excessive size house too close to lot lines would have negative neighborhood impacts. 4.“Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter.” Applicant has not suggested that economics are a factor. 5.Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy ’ systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter.” Not applicable. 6.“The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.” Not applicable. m1 IH)3>2934 October 16,2003 Pages 7 . “The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling." Not Applicable 8.“The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.” The lot size and location is unique in the neighborhood. 9.“The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located.” The lot size is unusually small for the LR-IC District. 10.“The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.” Granting of area and width variances is necessary to allow continued use for residential purposes. Hardcover and setback variances are not strictly necessary, however, since a residence meeting the hardcover and setback requirements could be developed on the property. 11.“The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code.” Granting of the area and width variances to allow a new house on the site will not be contrary to the intent of the Code; but variances to allow an excessive size house too close to lot lines would have negative neighborhood impacts in terms of maintaining open space in neighborhoods. 12. “The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty.” Granting of the lot area and width variances is supported by hardship, but variances to allow an e.xcessive size house or to allow it to be located too close to lot lines would be merely a convenience to the applicant. Issues for Consideration 1.Does Pl^ng Commission concur with staff that the lot is buildable, given its history of residential use and connections to municipal utilities? 2.What hardship if any has been presented that supports the request for side street setback variances for the house and portico? 3.Since a slightly smaller house could be constructed meeting the 25% hardcover limit,' what if any hardships have been presented that support the hardcover variance for a rebuild on the lot? Does the size of the lot itself constitute a hardship in this case? 4.Should the proposed house be redesigned to reduce or eliminate the degree of hardcover and setback variances? 1 #03-2934 October 16,2003 Pago6 S. Does Planning Commission have any problem with the fact that the garage as proposed will have only a 14 ’ depth of parking area within the property? Would Planning Commission allow extra hardcover to allow for a garage that does not face the street? 6. Does Planmng Commission have any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff RecommcndatioD Staff recommends as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. Approval of lot area and width variances. Denial of side street setback variances, and require that the house and portico be redesigned to eliminate the proposed encroachments. Approval of the degree of hardcover variance necessary to accommodate a house (and its essential amenities) that is conforming in terms of setbacks and lot coverage; i.e., allow only the amount of hardcover necessary to functionally accommodate the house, driveway, necessary sidewalks, AC pad, and perhaps a limited front deck (because the tendency is that one may eventually appear anjdiow if not addressed now). An option is to address the deck issue by formally directing that under the approved plan, no deck shall be allowed. (Applicants have indicated they will be presenting a slightly revised plan showing sidewalk, AC pad and deck for Monday ’s meeting) The resolution should include language regarding the fact that this property does not abut the lake and does not currently have the right to a dock, as a warning to future buyers. A' CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S2S0.00 (SSO.OO per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee SI50.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-confonning structures S2S0.00 Afrer-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application # Date Received *7-yR3~03 Amount Paid PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address / £a c/ Pei, Property Identification Number (P.LD.) in U’7'2 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired 'TAH_________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property; X residential ___pother (specify) Zoning District; L.K - ! __________ .(month/year) APPLICANT^ Name _,c»scr> g>)i<>.s Phone (home) qr52.-W7/-/>3«/& -------------------------------------------------- Phone (work) ;> 7» ^ z 7*? Address; /ioy /2f^ City; _ Zip; SS 3*7 / 0\MSER (if different than ^plicant) phone (home) go«=;. C^(7Q__I __________ Phone (work) Address;,^g 5O—-y ^p^City; 7K Zip; ?2>ll O DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail; __ Estimated Construction Cost $ l^ooK (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED V Lot Area Lot Width Setback: __Front Side Hardcover Lot Coverage Rear Average Lakeshore ■J=L HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNTJSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:,___ (attach additional sheets if necessary) rf* litj,> A .... •*» REQUIRED SUBi\nTTALS VOUr^ppHcaHon* ^PPlP>»lti9B tfea^jjln^ ^ztt In orrt>.. _/ Completed Application Form ^ Pf0P««y0^-ners List of owners within isrt' i,k-i ^ . obtain this list, labels and map from Hermeni^r Govt Center, 343-5910). County Department of Finance, A-603, rq>rodaclion. P™"**' »“ 0) copy gy," x II" for are’’pSposed. In id^tiOT?pr “,dde'Te”o)*J^^^^ ■" cxislins grade properly. This would include namefsl or .nnr r I “ “<c«st in the As an addendum to this applicau^^nieLe “"""<*)• you wish notified of this application.’’ * separate hst of any other persons Additional items as may be requested by City staS The Applicant and Property Owner must s'en this «ir.r»r »»adg.ee application i, eon,p„„ am APPLICA-NT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all infnrTT,>f;«« . • c Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not k 5*5 ““**** Zoning consultant expenses incurred in review of this aonlir J ^ supplied is true and correct to^e best of his/her lSJ)wledge *e information 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. r., . Applicant’s Signature OWTS'ER'S SIGNATU^ Owner’s Signature ^ . # ^ ------------------------ Date 7^^ _________ Applicant must have all submittals into the Citv nfftr-»c -jc j Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings ie held ^*fff®** ****™^S Commission Applicants must be present at all scheduled review r*^ Monday of each month. Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled*m!*-?^****i***““‘"® *««* have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advi«gI"tK*‘o®'arrangements to change prior to the meeting. ^ ^ Building & Zoning Office of this =r* .v ’ •• ■ 7: • # •i* ’‘a 1. /4'2_ r'l'FA/ r\f? r\iyr\\ir\ •» »■* « • ( j3Son Bliss application 3445 Cr>‘stai bay Road Orono, MN 53391 Re* Documented hardship for variances. To Whom it m^ concern. I The house at the above address has reached the end of its useful life, without extensive remodeling. 2. The road is platted much wider in the direct area than it will ever he ased. 3. The propertv' is on a comer. 4. The property is in a neighborhood of substandard lots. 5. The new house will be more conforming to the setbacks than the existing house. 6. Replacement of the existing house will be a much needed improvement to the west end of Ciystai bay Road. 7. The proposed house will be smaller than recently built homes in the direct neighborhood on visually smaller lots. 8. outers have been granted variances recently in the direct neighborhood for similar reasons. Sincerely, Jason Bliss V • d. M JL 4 ; . .taw. ail CERTIFICATE OF SURVEYJ^OR JASON BLISS IN LOT 4, BLOCK 1. WILEY'S PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA LAKE MINNETONKA CRYSTAL BAY I rr.Ai descriptiw thoi po.. «| «■' '• Minnclonko. 7 ,'iu^ilnt; ot soid Lot 4 distonl0 point on the wcs c-My '"%°'.h°est corner o( 113.5 teel northerly ol the Sou hwesr co^ ^ sold Lot 4. a3 ?eet northerly of theof soid Lot 4 ^ 4 and lying south- denotes iron norker (9083): denotes existing spot elevotion. rraon seo level dotun denotes proposed spot elevotion. mean seo level doiim ^ - Beorlngs shown ore bosed upon on ossirned dotin. This survey intends “’•nHS^JoJosId or cncroochmenls. proposed elevations 1) Goroge » 2) Top of foundolion 3) Bosemenl » [0CSIU«J>||CVISI0N M i nn« a po 113.: soid of s Sout cr ly os s |UCSIU4.U ICV5I0N 1 OAAWN 1 ECO loCCKCO1 uso DO • 'OLD ROAD AS SHOWN ON THE, PLAT OF -Wll£Y' S PARK ! KCK S A CXBTM HOUSE A / / / iitr iMAi n«s SKcrokiKiK c" ;o BT X M UMXM MV OMCT «KmnON MS outv uxHSco nnntaBMM. nacca m« u»» 1 nc IMS V M tun cr MMiai*. SCM.C 11 MIC 1 •-14-OSl JOB Ha l 09-314 1tzfjL. m uBom Htma dXTrjL -------- sriy of the lying south- line of Old Rood \ k. BITUMNOUS. ...ROADWAY h, n,68 /OLD ROAD ’ SHOWN ON PLAT OF WILEY’S AS THE</ t PARK s / sumed datum # / •v•v ndaries of [he proposed It does ements \ # DECK ....... ”id6 existng ^Opi HOUSE PROPOSED, DRIVEWAY, ^0(ys£* K A # / ^■^KT4 6e / ^4»32> EW51M0 ^ CNOKMOVO* SKO W* LY LWE OF •LOT 4. BLOCK 1. VWLEY’S PARK SZ94.y I 1 E'LY LWE OF1 A lot 4, BLOCK I,*"** Sil ^ * i?i 1 WILEY* S PARK i 1 I I sc COR OF lot 4. aOCK WI.EY* S PARK / / SW COR OF .. lot 4. BLOCK 1. ■ HEY'S PARK \ / ndories of [he proposed It does ements L. 6e ^ GRON Oh SUKVLY hUK < PALM LAKt Minnetonk/ # •• •• I • • « «»«»« ••• *«■••• ' ^ u‘.1 Q t*'• * js, . a iiii •• 4. 1 1J. V j ■ 1 2V • i 1 Li U «,•« 9 • 0^ • .« • ••* ••••••• . • • • • • • ‘ - •■ '• •-•♦•■ ■■■• • ^ nrir ■m-r E Bl H • • S.••• - •• *r 0“ o F' tat ‘ •« • • 1. ^ CA d O ' •' ywfcvr <Vcaa.» VV«t**«^4 \1^ r\m«>i>v MW,iffctAiT-fc«^<f.-»j I »i>rf«ui-Ai gi. i » -r*—ftP^M 'n—fa item n.i._A.,t ih. • r^«i ■ a 11 liand wtvtairtwrT “Ti'—in* Ti^iwr^lfi ii^ >ritnf ftiih ■ i -n tirit ^ .-v^. ^., i,t. .. ■ _. . , .av '■ ■M 14 - jo rK sM1 *■ 1 t ll *•fl * mm■ « •M 1 •f >2kfl&]1 >1 ]o jiJ 1 1 ^1 Vtii** «•• V ^ C^ OS T# ono k; n- r-ii*fcfi (NA !' Ia iL_ E MtMa I I ^r ^i» f l^H. *.«««• lM« 4ty»« n»^7 («.m) IbMt. U*i9 y*»* \ V*%isi» I. m*a Sr**«V<».4 '«* Sr*i%Ui|« eiT Sm»4 s <••1 V«.i^>4«»Ci. • M V4«f% d^«|» ig) k* iVv* M%«» ft*Ml I %4 u*^*j4iw% r ?iMU^»ra>L Ic %* Mt %%«» iizn W «M«« VCMC M*. •* J^:z:y.\/*j>vr vis.V.^i-.'pH*:*; ?••». * fvA O _ . a . , _ ^ > Mai I Am >mL_. •\ . '•"N ■ >I m J. ;-i t. A .r. 9 4 • *> . ’./ 4t mi B m iv iL-r ? f s; ^ » . •>< /n T i^^Si ii^K I m ■■ pri .■■ -I' sip'.' V''^'7 fATs^. ■•' '.I •j'. '',jC'» • **'*;■;‘1- ’’V . YA' . ' ' • , \ ' • • ,>_ . x' '' ; :*»■>* Sfea;:-'. t mm m-imw-mMm p::.c;/ ':v i -.v • :h: -: S^’r,' ’ V/^J CL' ’ ■ ' I-'S^' - - t. - r A L . . r fd ;/.‘L4 Tcrni' rr‘'" ^ 'J'ft ®fc \:r*^ V — / ^"-f^ ili K-v < ' w RUNbAfi.:?/' ^3 31 l?l1723340052 PROP ADDR 31 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME HENNEPIN CO REGIONAL RR AUT1I TAXPAYER HENNEPIN CO REGIONAL RR AUTII NAME/ADDR 417 5T1I ST N «320 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55401 38 1711723430117 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME TOWNOFORONO TAXPAYER CmrOFORONO NAME/ADDR PO110X66 CRYSTAL DAY MN 55323 38 1711723430120 PROP ADDR 3435 CRYSTAL IIAY RD OWNERNAME SCOTTAIIROWN TAXPAYER SCOTT AIIROWN NAME/ADDR 3435 CRYSTAL IIAY RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 1711723430123 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNERNAME TOWNOFORONO TAXPAYER crnr of ORONO NAMiyADDR PO 110X66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 1711723430146 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRIiSS UNASSK jNED OWNERNAME HENNEPIN CO REGIONAL RR AU11I TAXPAYER HENNEPIN CO REGIONAL RR AUTH NAME/ADDR 417 5TH ST N #320 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55401 hennlun county prof PROPER lYO ' INI OKM/O iON bYSl EM tS LIST 38 1711723430115 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNERNAME TOWNOFORONO TAXPAYER CITY OF ORONO NAME/ADDR PODOX66 CRYSTAL DAY MN 55323 38 1711723430116 PROP ADI>R 3407 CRYSTAL IIAY RD OWNERNAME RS A EC NICHOLS TAXPAYER ROBERT S A EUNICE C NICHOI^ NAME/ADDR 3407 CRYSTAL BAY RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 1711723430118 PROP ADDR 341 5 CRYSTAL DAY RD OWNER NAME K J ELSHAZLY A YI ELSHAZLY TAXPAYliR K i ELSHAZLY A Y I El^l lA/LY NAME/ADDR 341 5 CRYSTAL BAY RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 1711723430119 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSK jNED OWNERNAME TOWNOFORONO TAXPAYER CITY Of ORONO NAME/ADDR PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 1711723430121 PROP ADDR 3445 CRYSTAL DAY RD OWNER NAME Cl IICAGO TITLE INSURANCE CO TAXPAYER Cl IICAGO TITLE INSURANCE CO NAME/ADDR ATTN ASSET MANAGEMENT 4050CALLE REAL 8120 SANTA BARBARA CA 93110 38 1711723430122 PROP ADDR 3447 CRYSTAL DAY RD OWNERNAME TODDCMARTIN TAXPAYER TODD C MARTIN NAME/ADDR 3447 CRYSTAL DAY RD WAYZATAMN 55391 38 1711723430124 PROP ADDR 2264 SHADYWOOD RD OWNERNAME EVELYNSTRUTNAUTRUSTEE TAXPAYER liVELYN S TRUINAU NAMIMDDR 1561 MOLEHU DR HONOLULU HA 96818 38 1711723430125 PROP ADDR 2256 SHADYWOOD RD OWNERNAME WHMEYjR4kJRMEY TAXPAYER WILUAM IIMEY JR NAMI7ADDR 2256 SHADYWOOD RD WAYZATAMN 55391 I CERTIFY THATTHE FACTS REPRESEP/TED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARSTHIS DATEONTHE RECORDS OFTHE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BEUEF. — ^ ( > YDATE>/7 03 A.. A n • PAUL; I r * (. /T'' ■ I f :• r / {■.) V? ■ ICS w i Hennepin Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department COUNTY SURVEYOR PLAT FILE. (VACBKl16h Parcel Information Parcel ID 1711723430121 House Number 3445 Street Name CRYSTAL BAY RD 77)iS H/tor a fegaiy reowdMffljp. ff/sprtMnts a oonyidMton o^Myrrutfon •nd data trom CAy, County.andStatanadauthjtribaddddadiaraouidi^ r.‘* - *• • n;..,rv 7/ AA .• /__A ___mjA Background: City-Owned Lakeshore Lots on Ciystal Bay Road 10/16/03 Update Summaiy of Issues: The City has owned 4 lakeshore tax parcels on Crystal Bay Road since they were quit-claim deeded to Orono Township and accepted by the Town Board on December 1,1934. These parcels are on the lakeshore side of Crystal Bay Road. In total they include approximately 180 lineal feet of shoreline. The distance from the edge of the traveled road to the shore (929.4 contour) ranges from just a few feet to as much as 20 feet. For many years, apparently, the 4 property owners across Crystal Bay Road from these parcels have erected seasonal docks extending from the City parcels. Current staff has been aware of this since the mid-1990's. Due to a complexity of factors that will be described below, until recently staff had nut taken formal action to have the docks eliminated. However, two circumstances in the spring of 2002 prompted staff to order removal of the dock and boat at the most westerly of the parcels, across from 3445 Crystal Bay Road. These circumstances were 1) submittal of a variance application survey by the then owner of 3445 (Palm) that incorrectly included the City parcel across from it; and 2) complaints by neighboring property ow ners about rental of slips at the ‘illegal ’ dock recently erected across from 3445. The issues presented to the City Council for consideration at a July 30,2002 work session included: 1) whether Council supports staff taking appropriate action, including litigation if necessary, to have the offending uses and docks removed from the City parcels; and 2) deteimina*'on of the City ’s ultimate intent for these 4 parcels. Historical Background 1907 - Wileys Park platted. The City parcels are parts of 4 lots originally created by the plat of Wiley ’s Park in 1907. That plat dedicated a 66' wide right-of-way for the old County Road that follow ed the route of w hat is today Cry stal Bay Road. Those 4 lots were bisected by the 66' right-of- way, leaving a small s*rip along the shoreline side of the right-of-way (See Attachment A). 1911 deed-created “bathing and boating rights ”. In 1911, a number of lots in the neighboring plat of Navarre were transferred from one owner to the next, via a deed that also granted to those Navarre lots “a perpetual right to use for bathing and boating purposes” the portions of Lots 1-4, Block 1, Wiley ’s Park lying bem een the north line of the County Road and the shoreline. This right of use was also reserved for other lots w ithin the plats of Wiley ’s Park, Navarre Heights, Navarre, and Block lOofLangdonPark. Under current ownership patterns, this could mean that as many as 100- 150 properties in the Navarre area might have “bathing and boating” rights over what eventually became the City parcels. 1 Crystal Bay Road Lots J0/16/0J Update Page 2 City ownership came about in 1933-34 via two quit-claim deeds in favor of Orono Township, which were officially accepted by the Township Board of Supervisors on December 1, 1934. We have found no records which indicate why the parcels were deeded to the City. However, we must assume the Township Board knew of the potential “bathing and boating ” rights which affected the parcels. Perhaps the Township was viewed as the logical overseer of property that could potentially be used by many members of the public. Maps and Surveys. The earliest survey we have showing the relationship of the traveled road and the platted right-of-w ay dates to 1945. Other surveys and County plat maps since then have not been consistent in recogmzing the traveled road or the platted right-of way. However, County plat maps for at least the last 40 years have shown the City parcels as separately owned from the inland portions of the 4 original lots. Interpreting ••bathing and boating rights^. During the 1970’s, 80 ’s and into the early 90’s a number of properties in the Navarre area were sold with the right for “bathing and boating ” on the City parcels appearing in the deeds. As lake access became dearer, the City more and more often was queried by new Navarre area owners as to ‘Vhere can I put my dock, my deed says 1 have bathing and boating rights...” By the mid 1990’s the City had firmly established via ordinance tested in the courts that only properties with principal structures could have docks. Our standard response to inquiries became “ you can swim or fish or launch a canoe at the City parcels but you can’t have a dock ”. 1995 Research. In 1995 the City Attorney was asked to review whether or to what extent the off- lake owners in the Navarre area actually have rights to use the 4 City parcels. It was determined that in general, the dozens of inland properties that might claim the easement right are subject to the Marketable Title Act which would generally bar any claims by the inland lot owners for private bathing and boating rights, unless a claim on behalf of an inland property attempting to preserve the easement rights had been filed within 40 years of the original 1911 deed. This likely reduces the actual number of legitimate easement holders, and we are so far unaware of any such notice having been filed. However, the City has not fully researched the titles to all the properties involved to determine whether such claims have been filed in the past. The second question asked was whether the 4 adjacent landowners on Crystal Bay Road would have the ability to establish a prescriptive easement over the City parcels by virtue of their continued use of the parcels. It was concluded that in general, land owned by the City cannot be acquired by an occupant inerely by reason of occupation per Minnesota Statutes, Sec. 541.01. The only exception might be if the City has taken an affirmative action to abandon its interests in the property. However, we are unaware of any such affirmative action, and the fact that the City prior to 2002 has not attempted to have the seasonal docks removed would not constitute an abandonment action. In a 1996 followup letter from the City Attorney’s office, it was noted substantial title review of the 4 City parcels as well as all the potentially benefitted lots would be needed in order to determine to what extent easement rights are in effect. Even if title work concluded that rights have been terminated, it would likely require a quiet title or registration action to adjudicate same. This could prove to be an expensive process. It should be noted that 3415 Crystal Bay Road, one of the 4 lots across from the dock lots, was sold in 1999 with the “bathing and boating” right appearing on the deed Crystal Loit 19/16/93 Vp4»tt Pages Recent Status of City Parcek As of July 1,2002 each of the 4 City parcels had a private seasonal dock, presumably erected by the owners of the properties directly across the road. Two of the four docks had one or more boats that were known to be not titled to property owners in the general area, and were considered as illegal slip rental situations. The property at 3445, purchased in 2001 or 2002 by Larry Palm, was the subject of a spring 2002 variance request for construction of a new residence to replace the existing cabin. Upon receipt of that application, staff determined that the sur\ ey was incorrect because it did not show the dedicated County Road or the City parcel as separate from the homestead parcel. After receiving two neighborhood complaints about rental use of the dock at 3445, staff met with Mr. Palm and advised him to remove the boats and the docks, which he did later that summer Palm also was adamant that if his parcel is subject to this action, that the 3 adjoining owners also be made to remove their docks, and that the property owner at 2264 Shadywood be required to remove his trailer from the City right of way adjacent to the 4 lots. As of summer 2003, the dock at 3445 had been removed, but docks were again installed for the 2003 boating season by the homeowners opposite the other three parcels. Tax Valuation History A question that arises finm the use of the City’s dock lots by the propeity owners across the street is that since those owners appear to be receiving a special benefit not available to other owners of non-lakeshore lots, is whether they somehow are paying for that benefit. The answer is y£§, in terms o. property valuation for tax purposes. The January 2, 2001 land valuation for tax purposes for taxes payable 2002 for the four adjacent residential lots (3407,3415,3535 and 3445) is equivalent to that for similarly sized lots on Crystal Bay Road which have legitimate lakeshore rights (See Attachments C & D). In order to determine whether this has been the case for some time, staff compared the tax valuation history back to 1980 for the land portion of these 4 lots vs. 4 similar sized lots on Crystal Bay Road (3369,3375,3385 and 3393). It becomes clear that since 1980 or earlier, the 4 residential lots have been valued as lakeshore lots. There is no significant difference between the valuations of these 4 residential lots and other legitimate lakeshore lots, and the owners of Lots 1 -4 have been paying full lakeshore taxes. It is unknown whether this has an impact on any prescriptive easement claim that might arise from the 4 owners. Issues for Future Consideration Slip Rental. Although it appears two of the four existing docks are being rented out by the off-lake property owners, staff views that as a separate issue from the docks being on City property-. The ordinances that in combination act to prohibit dock slip rental have a few loopholes that should be closed if Council concludes that the City should be more pro-uctive in pursuing slip rental complaints. Crystai Bmy Romi LMs imi/03 Vpdau Page 4 Eassjbic Options for Future Use of Four City a variety of possible options should be considered for ultimate disposition or public use of the four tax parcels. Location factors that make these lots unique and add to the potential for possible enhanced public uses include: > adjacency to the shoreline adjacency to a 66' City road right-of-way that extends to the lake adjacency to a City-owned 20' right-of-way that connects to the Dakota Rail future regional trail corridor location in the Navarre area with many non-lakeshore homes within walking distance only 3 blocks to the Navarre Park Other unique aspects of these parcels include: three of the 4 properties across the road are underutilized in terms of residential use, with building values of $2S,000 or less; the primary value of those lots has been in their proximity to the lake, and without lakeshore rights, their market values may be significantly reduced; the extent of such reduction is difficult to determine, but the land value might be reduced by perhaps 1/3 according to the City Assessor. a culvert under the Dakota rail line had long been causing a neighborhood drainage problem for these lots, as it outletted in their back yards and did not have a specified channel to the lake. This drainage situation was improved via a City project within the last year. The fact that there may be a number of off-lake parties with “bathing and boating rights” over the City parcels might tend to make some use options more complicated. Options for possible long-t use that could be explored might include the following:erm I. Do nothing, let the four lot owners across the road continue to put docks on City property Deal with rental slip situations as a separate issue. 2. Require removal of the docks from the 4 City parcels. This has potential to result in a costly legal battle since the property values will decrease significantly as soon as lake access is denied. 3.Sell each parcel to its opposite off-lake landowner (Question for City Attorney: Can the City selUhis property) owner deal with the consequences of the potential multiple 4. 5. Lease the individual lots to the respective four owners for unlimited lakeshnw access. Lease the individual lots to the respective four owners for limited lakeshore access, perttaps limiting the number and ownership of boats stored on the site. 6.Lease the lots as a group to an association of the four, to have one joint use dock on the property subject to an annual joint use dock license with limits on the number and ownership of boats stored. Such a dock might be located to allow access for the possible off-lake holders of “bathing and boating ” easement rights. wrrarracflm Crystal R0€d Lets IO^i/03 Update Pag* 5 7.Require that the docks be removed, develop the site for rental City dock space, to be allotted on a lottery basis. Would require that paricing area be developed, which probably means acquisition of one or more of the 4 off-lake lots. 8. Acquire all 4 off-lake homestead parcels plus the back lot (3447 Crystal Bay Road), re-route Crystal Bay Road to the south, develop a stormwater pond and a neighborhood park or beach area at the site. 9. Other, or some combination of the above. Council Action To Date The City Council was presented wiui the above information at a work session on July 30,2002, and suggested the following: 1. Get title work for the 4 City lots and the 4 residential lets across the road to determine what how the City lots are encumbered and whether the residential lots have any specific easements over the City lots. 2. Get airphotos for pre-1975 to determine whether there is the potential for any of the 4 residential owners to claim a grandfathering. (W’e have since researched old airphotos and have concluded that docks extended from the City lots in many years prior to 1975.) 3. Inform the residential owners we will not allow docks to return in 2003. Because the basic research of items 1 and 2 was not completed before the 2003 boating season, the City did not force the issue of dock removal for 2003. The issue of how to proceed remains for Council consideration. 1 • i mm L COIIMr;i| MFFTIMQ Date Application Received: 8-19-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 8-19-03 60-Day Review Period Expires: 10-19-03 and extended to 12-19-03 OCT 2 7 2003 C!TV OH REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: October 27,2003 Item No.; Department Approval: Name: Janice Waataja]^ Title; City Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: ^03-294), Paul Cady, 465 Tumham Road Conditional Use Permit - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: RR - 1 A, One Family Rural Residential District (5 acre minimum) 5.948 acres (259,111 b.f.) 424.18 feet List of Exhibits A - Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendation B - PC Action Notice 10-22-03 C - PC Memo and Exhibits of 10-16-03 Application Summary: Applicant requests a conditional use permit to construct a bam on a “through" lot. Sta/f Recommendation: Staff recommendations: 1 . Approval subject to the bam location indicated on the submitted plans. Planning Commission Recommendation Approval consistent with staff s recommendation. Staff Recommep dation Approval per Uic attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting a conditional use permit for 465 Tumham Road for the construction of a bam. * J A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1431 FILE NO. 03-2941 WHEREAS, Paul David Cady and Judith Lynn Rauch%varter-Cady, husband and wife (hereinafter “the applicants”) are the owners of the property located at 465 Tumham Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City”) and legally described as follows; Lot 1, Block 3, Tumham Toll Addition. Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "propert> “): ar.d WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a conditional use permit per Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1431 to allow construction of a bam on a through lot. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File =03-2941. The property is located in the RR - lA. One Family Rural Residential District which requires a minimum lot area of 5 acres where the applicants' property is 5.948 acres. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on October 20. 200) and recommended approval of the conditional use permit based on the following findings: a. The bam if constructed in the location indicated on the submitted plans will meet the required 75' setback from all propert> boundaries. Page 1 of S 4.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed conditional use permit on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5.The City Council finds that the conditions e.xisting on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to od:..r i, roperty in this zoning district; that granting the conditional use permit would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensiv e Plan of the City. CONCLUSIO.NS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the abov e findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a conditional use permit to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1431 to allow construction of a bam on a through IcL subject to the follow ing conditions: 1.Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council rev iew. The applicant is adv ised that the bam in considered oversized and is subject to the standard oversized accessory structiire covenants. 3.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction wi'Jiin one year of the date of Council approval, or the conditional use permit will expire on that date (October 27,2004). 4.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Pace 2 of 5 4 4 4 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants’ heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 27*** day of October, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owneifs) Page 3 of 5 bam STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowriedged 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 of the City. Notary 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 of the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrum.ent was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of S State of Minnesota ) )ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this by Paul David Cady, husband of Judith Lynn Cady. day of .2003 Notary Public State of Minnesota ) )ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this by Judith Lynn Cady, wife of Paul David Cady. day of .2003 Notary Public Page S of 5 L .1. r V Cadv Proncm-: Site Plan l”=20 ’ sT5»-«Tsr;'^ l\ m m- '^W^ j »s«5lil#3g V/HWi^/i »< \C7n\r . /:.'• Ojl.i- \ \ .», f/' f')^. ■» V iV» “ -v.-., , .' . / '• >rr: I / V __ VJ 5lNMfK»h IMpCHM I' • 1. ..»*»****^ CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box M Crystal Bay, MN SS323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE: 03-2941 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; October 22,2003 TO; Paul Cady COPIES: 465 Tumham Road Orono, MN 55364 TYPE OF APPLICATION:Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETINo: October 20.2003 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approval of the conditional use permit to allow a bam to be constructed on the ""through lot" subject to it meeting a 75" setback as required by the Zoning Ordinance. VOTE:FOR AGAINST Applicant ’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, October 27,2(N)3; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Waataja at 952-249-4623. P . 7? V“- < 1 lii limn flirt <n M H jr #03-2941 October 20,2003 PofelofJ Date Applkatloa Received: 8-19^)3 Date Application CoraMcred as Complete: S>1943 60*Day Review Period Expires: 10-19-03 To:Chair Smith and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Janice Waataja, Cit>- Planner^ October 16,2003 Subject:03-2941, Paul Cady, 465 Tumham Road - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: RR - 1 A, One Family Rural Residential District (5-acre minimum) 5.948 acres (259,111 s.f.) 424.18 feet Application Summary: Applicant requests a conditional use permit to construct a bam on a “through” lot. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommendations: I. Approval subject to the bam location indicated on the submitted plans. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Section 10.03, Subdivision 10: Conditional Use Permit Required. All accessory buildings on through lots located in *'R” Districts shall require a conditional use permit. List of Exhibits Exhibit A: Application Exhibit B: E.xhibit C: Exhibit D: Exhibit E: Exhibit F: Exhibit G: Existing Survey Proposed Survey/Site Plan Floor Plan Elevations Property Owners List Plat Map Background The applicant submitted plans sho\%ing a bam to be located on his property which is considered a “through lot". At this time planning department staff informed the applicant that the plans submitted for the bam do not meet the 75 foot setback required by Zoning Ordinance. At that time the applicant stated that he will be submitting plans at a later date showing a revised location for the bam. A pool was approved at the September 22, 2003 Planning Conunission meeting. I 11 ■■pin I INI u #03-2941 October 20.2M3 Pagc2 4r3 Since the September 22,2003 Planning Commission meeting the applicant has revised his plans by removing the stalls on the outside of the bam and rev ising the floor plan of the bam to only show three stalls, w hich is the number of horses allowed on this property. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot Area/Width: ;rr -ia Lot Area Lot Width i Required 217.800 s.f. (5 acres)300’ .Actual 259,111 s.f. (5.948 acres)424.18- Setbacks: The setbacks indicated below for the bam are appro.ximates, except for the setback to the adjacent neighbor to the south (75*). The lot is almost six acres and all other setbacks are easily iVitt. RR-IA Required Existing Proposed House / Bam Front 100’100’100'/228’ Rear 100’552 ’552 ’/520’ Left Side 50’98.25’98.25’/75’ ; Right Side 100’227’227’ / 200’ Structural Coverage: This property is not subject to structural coverage requirements because it is in excess of 1.99 acres. Hardcover Calculations: This property is not subject to hardcover requirements because it is not within 1000’ feet of any water body. Conditional Use Permit Analysis The Zoning Ordinance states that any accessory structure placed on a ‘Through” lot must obtain a conditional use permit. The intent of this ordinance is to confirm that the accessory structure conforms to the principal building setback requirements and to allow for review of strucnire placement in relation to neighboring uses. The bant is considered an accessory structure and is therefore subject to these requirements. All bams are 1 \ ^ I i M3-2941 OctabtrM.2W) r«i*3*r3 required to maintain a 75* setback, wliich the plans have depicted. The bam will be located SS’ from the home and be visible from McCuIley Road. Renderings have been included in the exhibits to illustrate how the bam will appear. This proposal meets all conditional use permit standards. luucs for Consideration 1. Will the ham negatively impact the adjacent neighbor? 2. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Approval of*the conditional use permit to allow a bam to be constructed on a through lot subject to it meeting a 75’ setback. AppUcation # H I Date Received S'- Amount Paid - QT> CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address_____ Type of Application to be Filed Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) *31- H€> —''-H CC>|-X APPLICANT Phone (home) _______ Nam e __________ Phone (work) Address TZAf2itO\;;;VT^^ City Zip___________ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _______________ Phone (home). Phone (work). Address City Zip. Date Property Acquired_____________________ I (do) ^o noy also own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____S 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application S250.00 Residential Accessory Use _____S250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____S250.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____S250.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _____$325.00 Commercial/Industiial Use _____$250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and Ailing - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75* of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$275.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$250.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$375.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule Q4-1 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. required submittals _ Completed Application Fonn. _ Describe request in detail. u w • - roust obtain this'*iist?E md information. ^ ^ * licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey : •" -l-«* -rvay. changes in eievation (glades). P'®Poscd contours) if land alterations involve property. Thif •" «>«sr-xsT. persons you wish notified of aSs application ®"’'r for w”shI^LER^“ OOCUMENTS OR COPV fuSl“- - -« «-ings*'o?i|irurotl': pl^^'T^he application is not comptoelf •^bovrLfomaiot'L^ y®“^ * .MS Sf Clel?sram ^FP'->i®" « complete. -—-_________Date APPLIC^'T ’S signature Administrator, agrees^ t^p^y “ddition'al'fera (sta™time" n« *' Z®ning and/or unusual e.xpenses incurred in review of fh!« „ T by original fee payment) supplied is true and coirect to the best of his^e?imowlcdge°"’ information Appliesnt’s signature Date n OVTVEk’S SIGNATURE entry omo ^a^reny fi-«hcr authorized reasonable members for puntoses ot Ouzteris signature 9 7^0^ Applicant must have all submittali in#/, ,\./r> s^'pL=3,?»t:^:s.“Ss j *“ «J>an«e prior to the meeting ^ ***"‘ *“*“* “ *“<* *<Wse the P -w 4 ll *tn :> V ;■.• •; - ;''® Vj - r 7v t 1^•* ■ io ' ■ U',‘ .' ' 'i ' -t '*‘V * ¥ .... ,:''-^ V'. ■ ) , ' * r. •l- • • Cady Property: Site Survey 1*^* ■..) 15.79 S 4r32 ’12" E J Ai 01 lO N* CM --^---------b-------- tM« • . '-'-j fit a:*1 ' ■•' mm <r :m^w Caciv i'roncrt\": Site Plan 1”=20’ j7i\i : ;• *■ .2-^A. *. • m mmmm \-I* \ !^ ,' ^ Mv • \* M * **•* ■*“*' * *J--.W % / •• *^f# •T-r;''t r-' TlfcAfcr ri’g^r^nalbH'iiii i O #if' ; '.^ V-:^V' • 'Jt \v1?V lofliliBlil' £ Cady Property: Bara Plan Hy ' - . V-'■■ ■•■ ■ »*irifitiaiiiiini«iiifiJiiiii tiiiiriri El:nlWl*iriMmiTiir ■<'..ili«.^..w^.>-..*.i^i-..--.,^-,-»-»rrt«'B?^ <Mvt*.^ra».nnin. rrt I III III ^ ^p- £ mmti 'Wnr^h^'Tl yLpl ^.!^i-^5lilftiSfeSb iRi aTnid ' Mih^ if “ “ '-ui;j rvv.:s/;,<- :4jf B?BI3 ffl ^D<u| la^tpl:'3(#!t’f » I I ••» EHffl 7-c« - >* jjmu rfj • i- ii.l.( p :i. ‘ 'w Cady Property: Barn Elevation . ^ % ^ ■"ii I 1 mT Tl lOlfcMl ■ iii^Ti iimm iiiiJ^riiJVillh ii fialMOti Iii~ ■' 11 ii f I ~i I ri i> A Cady Property: Drivcway/Approacb iw . tj • \ >04ae ir —Ti 4*^ »aA ip kUNL>Alli:l> 31 3IIIS23I30002 PKOPADOR 420 TUKNIIAM RO OWNERNAME L E DERG A K M DERO TAXPAYER LEONARD A KATIILEEN M DERG NAME/ADOR 420 TURNHAM RD MAPLE PLAIN MN SS3S9 38 3111123240003 PROPAOOR 423 TURNHAM RO OWNERNAME T W OTTEN A A M OTTEN TAXPAYER TIMOTHY W A ANNA M OTTEN NAME/ADDR 423 TURNHAM RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 33339 38 3111823240012 PROPAOOR 323 MCCULLEY RD OWNERNAME STEPHAN HOMECONSTRUTION INC TAXPAYER STEPHAN HOME CONSTRUTION INC NAME/AODR 3773 CORD 92 MAPLE Pl^INMN 33339 .18 .1||l82.l.timNMi PROPADDR 383 lURNIIAM RD OWNERNAME C E PHELPS A J C PHELPS TAXPAYER CHARI JK lyjnNNIlHiR C PHELPS NAME/ADDR 383 TURNHAM RD ORONOMN 33339 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROP PROPERTY O. ' INi'ORMAT ION SYSTEM jIS list 38 31 11823130003 PROP ADDR 4343 WA11-RTOWN RD OWNER NAME DONALD K PEARSON A WIPE TAXPAYER DONALD K PEARSON NAME/AODR 4343 WATERTOWN ROAD MAPLE PLAIN MN 33339 38 3III823I300I3 PROP ADDR 4300 WAT1:R30WN RO OWNERNAME i.\MES MY JOHNSON A WIFE TAXPAYER JAMES JAY JOHNSON NAME/ADDR 4300 WATERTOWN RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 33339 38 3111823240004 PROP ADDR 4343 WATERTOWN RD OWNERNAME J LA MR DROLL TAXPAYER JEFF DROLL NAME/ADOR 4343 WATERTOWN RD ORONOMN 33339 38 3111823240007 PROPADDR 413 DEOORAIIDR OWNER NAME T A HALLQUIST/W A HALLQUIST TAXPAYER TOM A HALLQUIST NAME/ADOR 413 DEDORAH DR MAPLE PUINMN 33339 38 3IIIH232400I3 PROPADDR 463 TURNHAM RO OWNERNAME PAUL CADY TAXPAYER PAULCADY NAMI-yADDR 2900 THOMAS AVE S *2412 MPLSMN 33416 38 3111823310003 PROPADDR 4330 WOLVERTONPL OWNERNAME J LHARSTADA J RHARSTAD TAXPAYER JAMES LIIARSTAD NAME/ADDR 4330 WOI.VER ION PL ORONOMN 33339 .18 .1MIN?ll7(NMm PROP ADDR 38U 11IRNI lAM RD OWNERNAME OEAOFMERZ TAXPAYliR IXXXII AS E A DIANR V MIIK/ NAM IVADDR 380 TURNI lAM RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 33339 I CERTIFY TIIATTHE FACFS REPRESEF/rOD ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF IWORMATION AS IT APPEARSTHIS DATEONTIIE RECORDS OFTHE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. , DATE OY . ------L-_ fAQE: 1 S' i. V I 1 '» If •! C'V ■ * V V V *• . 't ^ • ■J I L ■■ i; Dale Application Received: 8-I9-03 Dale Application Considered as Complete: 9-5-03 60-Day Review Period Expires: 11-4-03 COIIMOIf MFFTIMn ocr 2 7 2003 CiTy Oh REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: October 27,2003 Item No.: / 0 Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Janice Waataja Title: City Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #03-2943, Robert & Janet Lubalt, 3202 North Shore Dr. - Variance Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - IB. One Family Lakcshorc Residential District (I acre minimum) 0.223 acres (9,715 s.f.) 62.37 feel List of Exhibits A - Council Action Notice 9-23-03 B - PC Action Notice 9-16-03 C - PC Memo and Exhibits of 9-12-03 Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variance to construct an addition, approximately 525 s.f, to the existing home. 1. Hardcover variance for the 75-250’ zone to allow 37.6% hardcover when 25% is normally allowed and 50.5% currently exists. 2. Hardcover variance for the 250-500’ zone to allow 42.7% hardcover when 30% is normally allowed and 55% currently exists. 3. Side yard setback variance i • allow a setback of 2.8 feet when 10’ is required and 2.8’ currently exists. 4. Structural coverage variance to allow 1 9.4% (1,883 s.f.) when 1 5% (1 ,500 s.f.) is required____________________________________________________________ Staff Recommendation: Staff recommendations: 1 . Denial of the proposal due to the increases in structural coverage beyond what is allowed by Ordinance. No unique hardship has been presented which would justif}' expanding the current home ’s footprint, given alternatives for an addition exist. Background This application was originally scheduled to be heard at the September 22,2003 City Council meeting. The applicant requested that the application be tabled to allow time to meet with staff to discuss other options. The applicant met with staff on October 21,2003 and has decided to move forward with the original plan, attached, which the Planning Commission denied. - -~ j 8 ■T iri ~i r__Ifett Planning Commission Recommendation Denial of the request consistent with staffs recommendation, on a unanimous vote of 7-0. Staff Recommendation Deny the request consistent with Planning Commission's recommendation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Direct staff to draft a denial resolution for adoption at the October 13,2003 City Council meeting. nMmi CITY OF ORONO 2750 KcUcy Parkway P.O. Box 66 Ciystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE: #03-2943 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; September 23,2003 TO: Robert & Janet Labalt 3202 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION;Variances DATE OF MEETING: September 22,2003 VOTE: 3 FOR 0 AGAINST Motion: Table. TTie applicant requested that his application be tabled to the next City Council meeting to allow him further time to explore his options, meet with staff, and redesign if necessary. The next City Council meeting will be held on Monday, October 13,2003. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. Mlltf* P If ---- CITY OF ORONO ZONING FILE; 03-2943 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 DATE OF NOTICE: September 16,2003 TO: Robert & Janet Labalt COPIES: 3202 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Hardcover Variances, Side Yard Setback, Structumi ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ DATE OF MEETING: September 15,2003 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Denial of all requests consistent with staff recommendation. VOTE;FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, September 22,2003; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they are available from ^e City Recor;:r after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Waataja at 952-249-4623. ^ -JfcUU M3-2943 September IS, 2003 Page 1 ofO Date Application Received: S-194)3 Date Application Considered as Complete: 60-Day Review Period Expires: iO 19 03 -11 - 3 To:Chair Smith and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Dale: Subject: Janice Waataja, City Planner^ September 12,2003 03-2943, Robert & Janet Labalt, 3202 North Shore Drive - Setback, Hardcover, and Structural Coverage Variances • Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1-acre min.) 0.223 acres (9,715 s.f.) 62.37 feet Application Summary: Applicant requests the follouirg variance to construct an addition, approximately SIS s.f. to the existing home. 1. Hardcover variance for the 75-250' zone to allow 3“.6® e hardcover when 25% is normally allowed and 50.5% currently exists. 2. Hardcover variance ior the 250-500' zone to allow -2.7? o hardcover when 30% is normallv allowed and 55% currentlv exists. 0 0 3. Side yard setback variance to allow a setback of 2.S reel when 10' is required and 2.8’ currently exists. 4. Structural coverage variance to allow 19.4% when 15% is required. Sta/f Recommendation: Staff recommendations: 1. Denial of the proposal due to the increases in strucr.in)l coverage beyond what is allowed by Ordinance. No unique hardship has been presented which would justify expanding the current home’s footprint, given altemati .es for an addition exist. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Section 10.22, Subdivision 2: Lakeshore Hardcovei and Land Alteration Regulations. Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(L): Hardcover Limitaiiens. Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B): Lot Standards Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C): Lot Coverage List of Exhibits A - Application B - Survey C - Revised Survey Showing Removals D - Hardcover Calculations (revised by staff) E - Building Plans & Elevations W3-2943 September IS, 2003 Page 2 of6 F - Alternative Plan (Staff Concept) G - Photographs H - Property Owner’s List I - Plat Map Background The applicant is proposing to build an addition to the existing home over existing driveway hardcover and to add a two-siory deck adjoining the proposed addition to the existing home. An existing deck, 9x19, will be removed. The majority of the 525 square foot living addition and a portion of the deck are being placed over existing dri veway. The applicant is proposing an additional 15 square feet of hardcover for the living addition and an additional 81 square feet for the deck with significant driveway removals. The nature of this lot requires a shared driveway for the lakeshore lot to the north. Currently, the applicant is not using the shared driveway and is accessing the property from the adjacent marina. This lot is currently substandard with respect to hardcover and side yard setback. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET LotArea/Width: LR-IB Lot Area Lot Width Required 43,560 s.f (1 acre)140’ Actual 9,715 s.f. (0.223 acres)62.37’ Setbacks: LR-IB Required Existing Proposed Front 35’30.5’30.5’ Rear 30’13.9’13.9’ (detached garage) Left Side 10’2.8 ’2.8 ’ (new deck) 10* (addition) Right Side 10’21.9’24’ Lakeshore n/a n/a n/a Average Lakeshore n/a n/a n/a i L Structural Covera£c: ^K)3-2943 September 15, 2003 Page 3 of 6 Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 9,715 s.f (0.223 acres)Allowed: Proposed: 1,457 s.f (15%) 1,883 s.f (19.4%) Hardcover Calculations: When calculating hardcover percentages for the 75-250’ zone the area within the shared driveway easement (490 s.f.) was taken out of the lot area so as not to either help or hinder the hardcover percentages. This is because this portion of the shared drive does not benefit the applicant. When calculating hardcover percentages for the 250-500’ zone the area within the shared dri\eway easement was kept added into the lot area due to the fact that the applicant benefits from this portion of the shared driveway. Hardcover Zone 75 - 250 250 - 500 Total Area in Zone 3,200 s.f. 6,025 s.f. Allowed Hardcover 800 s.f. (25%) 1,807.5 s.f. (30%) Existing Hardcover 1,618 s.f* (50.5 %) 3,324 s.f* (55 %) Proposed Hardcover 1,205 s.f (37.6 %) 2,570 s.f (42.7 %) After e.xclusion of fabric or plastic-lincd landscape beds Hardcover Variance The applicant is proposing to add the addition over e.\isting hardcover with the e.xception of 15 square feet. The dramatic decreases in hardco\er amounts for the proposal are the results of the applicant eliminating the drive access through the marina and utilizing the existing shared drive. This includes a net decrease of approximately 413 square feet of hardcover or 13% in the 75-250’ zone. In the 250-500’ zone there would be a decrease of approximately 754 square feet or 12%. Although Planning Department staff is encouraged by the proposed decreases hardcover and the existing drive through the marina being eliminated, the overall proposal doesn't fit within requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Structural Coverage Variance The applicant is proposing a living space addition of approximately 525 square feet and a deck of approximately 81 square feet. This results in an increase of structural coverage of 606 square feet bringing the current structural coverage percentage (14.9%) over the allowable amounts to 19.4%. Side Setback Variance The applicant is proposing a second story deck, approximately 81 square feet in size connecting the existing house to the proposed addition. This deck would be located on M03-2943 September IS, 2003 Page 4 of6 the western sid. -; the home facing the manna. The current side yard setback in this location is 2.8*. The applicant isn ’t proposing to get closer to the property line. The deck would extend diagonally from the 2.8 ’ setback to an 11’ setback where it attaches to the proposed addition. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit A. and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis in considering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall con ider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property In the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code In Instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions win be in keeping with the spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds that there are hardships which may justify hardcover amounts beyond what is allowed by Zoning Ordinance. Those hardships consist of the man-made lagoon at the marina bringing the property closer to the lake and the shared driveway arrangement for the lot to the north. Staff is also very agreeable to eliminating the drive access through the marina in an attempt to eliminate hardcover. From a zoning perspective, gaining access from the marina is inappropriate. However, staff does not find i hardship which would allow the applicant to increase their structural coverage from a percentage which meets Zoning Ordinance to a percentage which would become non-conforming, 14.9 to 19.4 percent. Allowing this increase in structural coverage would also not fall within what has consistently been approved by the Planning Commission as structural coverage requirements are strictly followed. The applicant also has alternatives for adding living additions to the house without adding to structural coverage. This would consist of having an attached garage instead of a detached which would allow living space above and tuning the existing deck (which is 6’ or higher above grade and therefore counting towards structural coverage) into Jiving space. Therefore, staff cannot support the proposal in its entirety. Staff would make the following recommendations in regards to the criteria for “undue hardship ” pertinent to this application: 1.“The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls." The property could exist in its current manner. 2."The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." 1 e iJ L 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. M3-2943 September IS, 200J PageSofS The applicant has seems to have outgrown a small house. There is no unique circumstance to the property that would justify an increase in structural coverage because there are alternatives to adding li\ :r.g space. “The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the localit> ." The character of this lot and a few lots to the east are smaller lot. smaller house situations. Allowing a dramatic increase in structural coverage would change the character of this. Most of the other lots and house in the area meet the requirements of their zoning district. “Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable ust for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter.' The applicant has not indicated that economics are an issue. “Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy sy items. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes. Section 1 16J.06. Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter." Not applicable “The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located." The uses proposed are allowed in the LR- IB zoning district. “The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwellmg." Not applicable “The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.” The shared driveway arrangement may be a condition which is peculiar to the property' and wouldjustijy hardcover variances. However, there are no special conditions applying to the structure or land '.^ hich would allow increases in structural coverage. “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or s,ructures in the district in which said land is located.” .Most of the properties immediately surrounding the applU int’s property, except the marina, fall within allowable structural amounts. “The granting of the application is necessar> for the preserv ation and enjoyment. of a substantial property right of the applicant." There are alternatives for adding a living space addition therefore not hindering fhe applicant ‘s right to enjoy their property . M3-2943 ScpUmlwr IS, 2003 PaftOofO II.“The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to tlie intent of the Zoning ^ould a structural coverage variance be granted it would be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. 12.“The granting of such variance will not tvierely ser\ e as a convenience to the applicant, but is neccssm^ to allevidce demonstrable hardship or difficulty.” Granting a hardcover variance may alleviate demonstrable hardships however granting of a structural coverage variance may serve as a convenience to the applicant for not requiring a redesign. Issues for Consideration 1. Should the applicants be limited to the 15% structural coverage requirement? 2. Are the applicant s headed in the right direction towards reducing hardcover? 3- Are the hardships which would justify granting a structural coverage variance? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Denial of hardcover variances for the 75-250* and 250-500 ‘ zones, denial of the structural coverage variance, and denial of the side setback variance to allow a 525 square foot living space addition and subsequent 80 square foot deck. The applicants should be directed to redesign whereby not increasing structural coverage on the property. The applicants should also be ouected that the proposed decreases in hardcover are reasonable. i i % 4 • • EXHIBIT A Application #6 Date Received Amount Paid 7^^ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPUCATION Initial Application Fee S2S0.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee SI50.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures S250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address K) . ._______________________ Property Identification Nuuiber (P.1.D.1 \ A.nach legal description to application if not included on required surv*ey. Date Property Accuired NoVoVg______________________________^(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: y residentid ___other (specify). Zoning District:. C rwxnr'i ecA) APPLI Name Address:3202 [pAIST . . V Phone (home) le V \\ __________ Phone (work) ress: '■^'ZO'2^ City:VOxv>j^^iS^ Zip:_2Sr OW7VER (if different than applicant) Name ___________ Address:City:. Phone (home). Phone (work). Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost S Describe request in detail: vJ!^fvgvGw>c\rr. V vtx -A (? (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARLANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback: Lot Width t'mmmrnmmmm Front Side y Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specif>) 4 cc HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: g^\o<^s.Or\vY /^r\ V^U/ia A tNTTLO cv<fi9rQrf; fyv^Vi>\tT (attach additional sheets if necessary) O C (attach additional sheets if necessary) Vo<,Vo»>. msmt I REQUIRED SUBi\nTTALS 1. 2. ^ y Completed Application Fonn Certified Property Owners List of owners within I j . must obtain this list, labels and map from Hetiffni n Pl^t map (you Finance. A-603, Govt Center, 348-59 10).^auiA^ Department of Certificate of Survev u„ - i- . ’ . ^3. 4. 5. 6. ^ of si:.y (S - ■ - r*-Sketches or plans of floor & elevatinn ^'Production. — List of the legal names (mclude marital stani«^ «r «ii______ . x 11 ). 7. 8. List of th. legal names (include marital su4) the property. This would include namei's'J of «n«r .f ^ interest in As an addendum to this application ni J if not current owner(s). perso^ you wish notified of this application. ® ® separate list of any other Additional items as may be requested by City staff. t The Applicant and Property Owner'must sign this anolication du .ppllegiion Is not eomplelr If .h^ave APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE Ad'mSS. a^e^ tTp'“ ^ and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this a ^ ongma. fee payment) information supplied is ^and corree, ,o t^best of hisriif SeduT Applicant’s Signatiu-e /'. * -■ (' i v; r- ^ * . Date OWIVER’S SIGNATURE members for purposes^vestigatio^d verif.Utlon of *U deques" ) f, ^ •• Owner’s Signature / Date •; ' V < I V /• N • *. •? - • '•I Applicant must have all submittals into the Citv offic^c a. ^ c Commssion Meeting, Planning Commission Meetings are held on tod Mo d' month. Applicants must be present at all schedulp.rf r.J- “U^d Monday of each Commission and CuneU. If"an a^plilul jjlble ,o f *'“■ make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in vour ot meetmg, please & Zoning Office of to change prioTto K«tSg. ” >«<i «. «ivise flte BuUding > S • . EXHIBIT B o QO cro EAST 57.30 ' ^t» ! CNCIIOAOM CffAVtL•. ouTscc or * • 2 CAXKNT A«A TO K RCMOVCO s«* tmVNG GARAGE 10* OMVtWAY CASCkCNT P£R OOC NO. Z774792 GRAVEL %tr 10 SCT8A(y LACOCM ..1 PROPOSED f? ^ aooiton g • L' sti • EXISTWG ee HCXiSE ^ #3202 SiJ iX f".-, >• \ CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR BOB LABATT N GOV’T LOT 1, SEC. 8-117-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA I CAsrcPLY LiC or GOV* T LOT 1. ....... SEC. 8-117-23 oo iri ID i-115 05 3 Ocn ’^COu> - LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : Thot port of the West 57.3 feet of the Eost 115.05 feet of Government Lot 1, Section 8, Township 117 North, Ronge 23 West the 5th Principol Merldion, lying North of County Rood No. 5l ond lyi* southerly of o line running West ot ri^ht ongles from o point in tf soid 57.3 feet distont o: denotes iron morker set denotes iron morker found Bearings shown ore based upon on ossimed dottm East line of 65 feet north of the North l.ne of soid rood. This survey intenrln to show the boundaries of the nhovr desrrihed property, the locotion of un existing house and goroge, the locution of oil visible "hardcover’* ond the proposed locotion of o proposed addition thereon. It does not purport to show ony other inrprovements or encroochments. GROKBEKG k ASSOGATESl INC CDBII6 om M SiCiaet K ¥iikmmm ukiachissii 1 Mf c*fb M Ms mtf Ml priced wdtr mf Wed sfw- M 1 «i • Alp rqktwfd M eid {tC wWr ttc bn tf tfw Mt df Mmola fj bwWMiO IkMM birfcf l?755IM 1 Gr scale r-KT joe NO 03-249A CO ;• J ' y 03-749A EXHIBIT C CASTERLY Lf€ or COV T LOT 1, .. see. 0-117-23 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR BOB LABATT IN GOV'T LOT 1, SEC. 8-117-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA I LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES Thot port of the West 57.3 feet of the Eost 115.05 feet of Governrr^nt Lot 1. Section 8. Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the 5tn Principol Meridion, lying North of County Rood No. 5l ond lying southerly of a line running West at right angles from o point in the East line of soid 57.3 feet distant i65 feel north of the North line of said .oad. o; denotes iron morker set • : denotes iron marker found Bearings shown are based upon on assumed datum. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the obove described property, the location of on existing house ond garage, the location of all visible **hordcover*' ond the proposed location of o proposed addition thereon. It does not purport to show any other improvennents or encroochments. GSONBERG Jt ASSOCUTESl INC mimmm locuniiiaBi l5H7Mt4t 03-749A 1 cwHjf M nil tfwy m pi^eid hr x « aee-SCALE r-20* ; ! ed ill 1 «i • Ain rifdeti Od and land Sirwyor wdv te tan of Iht Stalt of Mtamola DATE i i itot S. Ctottar, MmimIo Licmt lOim WH • ;• EXHIBIT D HAEDCOVER CMX^ULATIQliWORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-7S* (tsJsO^ 250-500'500-1000' EXISTINO HARDCOVER INTONE UlMt taSttYXtnji -tCUCfn OUi Cf 0.11 . A. House- . • •_______ X « S.F^ tU/te^SA. House-^ •X • Ltnith X wm X X B. Garage ViM X C. Driveway X X D. Sidewdk « X • X E, Patio/Deck X X as F. Landscape X , Underlain X By Plastic X Or Fabric X % S.F. S.F. SJ-. 5t/b 5b SJ". S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE - TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - “ A Ibis______ + B xJOO - UlS S.F. A ^ S.F. B55T5 % A. House X S.F. Length VuSth X m ST. X m S.F. X B S.F. B. Garage X 5%-^h S.F. ^.,s C, Driveway X -----------^ ' Z-lJ *X SB D. Sidewalk X OLtd/C S.F. X B S.F. E. Patio/Deck X S.F. X B ST. F. Landscape X .ST. Underlain X B ST. By Plastic X ST. Or Fabric G. Other X • ST. • TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE -ir. A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^Z-(^ ST. B A \ZOH.^+ B *?32,00 xlOO » i 4 ■ni • :• A. House LtHi^ 6« z^M *4b B. Can^e C. DHvewc^ D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dedc F. Landsctpe Vnderleun By Plastic Or Fabric X X X 500-1000 'I'bO S.F. X X X X X X X X X 3^0 1^>I€> m » IS _s.F. iscnfi^. _S.F. pr'ivc S.r. -SrPt^COllUkdt S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. C. Other total HARDCOVER IN 7X)NE - TOTAL FROPg^^^tREA IN ZONE S.F. + B lcOZ<b xIOO PROPOSED hardcover IN TfiNV^ A, House _____________ Length ____S.F. A _ bOZ<b S.F. B ___ S655 wm B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. PoAofDeck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric C. Other X X X I'bO __y\ S-z.^ S.F. S.F. S.F. ^ \'^]h S.F.. B ~ X X X X X X X X 12A lot! ^ S.F.~7b S.F. CP - 5toO'/U«5/ . “•*• ftLiHr S.F. ir'tt- ffi/'t SF. S.F.--------------- S.F. S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE - TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONEA 'Vtno + B _ iiOZ^ xioo VblO J.F. A - VgOL6 5.F.rMz.y ~% • • •j-. B w s w k • » » wEsr euEVA-noN 5CMZt l/a**-^ 1 V'■r g * ■ »i ■ ...■■■• .i fcs^tA. M.A V..,s ?r Lj )1 I < * NC?Rn (WE5r EUeVATlON I. 4 V V- a**< I/9* nAft HTtCHT l^lg^ n^OCKPL/^ $CJt9» 1/^m9o.n. EXHIBIT F "ASTtRLY LNC Of COV T LOT 1. see a-117-23 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR BOB LABATT IN GOV'T LOT 1. SEC. 8-117-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA I TerAutisiio ShArU DV iv C VrWCMAriYIA- AHlT^VtfiVit WdtW«r\ licf ihih^decic. ^iUUt Sf»rl5 -(§)- legal description Of PREMISES That port of the West 57.3 feet of the East 115.05 feet of Covernrent Lot 1. Section 8. ToAinship 117 North, Ranee 23 V/esl of the 5th Pr^rcipol Meridian, lying North of County Road No. ol and lying southerly o^ a I ine running West ol r ight angles from a point in the r.n«;t I ine of said 57.3 feet distant 165 feet north of the North line of said rccd. o: denotes ironmarVer set # : denotes iron marker found Bearings shown ore based upon on ossemed dotim. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the obove described property, the location of on existing house and garage, the locotion of all visible **hor dt ovt»r ** and Um* pfOf.o^iirci locotion of o proposed riiMitinn Ihcrcsn. It does not purport to show ony other improvaments or encrooclmcnts. GRONBERG ft ASSOCIATES, INC. oHiic oom u« siara^ K riMS ¥nmmm locuniiissi l5^47Mm 03-249A I lsr«6| celiff IM His sntf ni peporH me« edir died «ce- MtfL aid ftoM an i Aif rc^id Cwi Crgnca aid lad Sf vt|a ada tfM lo«t ol Iht Slolt of UinrtMta. Mat 1 Cfotaj ICrrciolo L<ris« I2W SCALC r-20 ’ DATE 03-249A m WMH 4 • ^ % mm pi n-.. y ff. ^ V ;u? ; ♦ r1. jr . ^^'‘l •s ' '» * «- ^ ii’ ■- -w^il mm %.Wl 'V ^ I i2 X la hr-'- > S.v -■.. Ni-t - . • y -v<? •i?r iv-‘i&m i^ •* • • • -^.iv '• • -A , _ * * 1 ■. * * ^ / ” :5r<i£ivV, . •• -\r V'^-. • • '-rSc,'- *. ^v- ’ ' *■ • 7:^*' /•*/ •i;v. ■- ... . -.«s» ^'••^'tt! i - ' tHi' . ' ’ .‘V> 'A^5V,,f^-* I ^ f'j •'’ -i^'. "■■:■■.. Tc.' --. -k^ ^ ^ ;•> . ^ h^J:. :-i . V^v : t:h..'r:Ai'^M v\r>. ii • '.V‘V • >^ f ti f • • I ^ • • < ■•■ ■' \ • -'V ar .. . >• /AizM , • i ■•■•r vi/i- * I .aii s. .: ■ ■ V / A . ) ' A m mmiSKNir^ wir^/: '•^ y -T Si.V>- 1^ --->li _ 'w Kiiiiiriim» ■fy*‘i:.w.. < J.. *; W-.MW irucBuif^^^,v%,Jrv ^fc^ yp ■ rwjms^ «*krMiwbnmrimt^’^iiri ^ois:, na gsaKa-i .r^jal K • y t Ei^5i / • >C- }£ft.\ *•’***• **•■»' •**. *"■ .. *ii.;.,cr■*'*• • v:..V- , >•••*. *, *• ».**• •♦• 1^ . #. *, . , ,. • * *-• * ♦ ^ •'• . ••»**• '*'. •» 4 . •• , , f *4 • •• . , » • . • . ' • .•:*:• •• i.‘ • '• • • •• ■ • •».••' •* ; ' ‘* 1 • * . *• '••• ,. . ••» . i . . . . • • . - ^ • • • • r-.- • • • ••• ^ • *,• , I • . • • • *• ».■. -^ . . ‘-Vvl V>A •• ♦. r •• I i-yik*.ilMH RUNDATE:a/IW2a>J 3$ 08II7234I000I PROP ADOK 3200 NORTH SIIOKIl l)K i>WNI.K NAMli SIIIMUiY J IlhNIlKICKSON 1:1 AL TAXPAYER SHIRLEY JIIENORJCKSON NAME/ADDR RICK A WINDENDURO 3200 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0811723410004 PROP AOOR 3224 NORTH SHORE OR OWNERNAME NORTH SHORE MARINA INC TAXPAYER NORTH SHORE MARINA INC NAME/ADDR 3222 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0911723320010 PROPADOR 3186 NORTH SHORE DR ownername resort ventures company LLC i&TAXPAYER RESORT VENTURES COMPANY LLC ^AMIVADDR P O IlOX 97 S tiXCElilK)RMN 55331 38 0911723330015 PROPADOR 1406 BOHNS POINT RD OWNERNAME CWAEPCHAPMAN TAXPAYER CHRISTOPHER A EMILY CHAPMAN NAME/ADDR 1406 BOHNS POINT RD WAYZATAMN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE: I 38 0811723410002 PROP ADDR 3210 NORTH SHOKi: DR OWNER NAMI: MARK I INNl.Y TAXPAYER MARKHNNEY NAME/ADDR 3210 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 0811723410003 PROPADDU 3202 NOR M I SHOKI 1 DR OWNER NAME KOlIl:R I O A JANE I L LAUAVI TAXPAYER ROBERT A JANET 1AUATT NAME/ADDR 3202 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0811723410005 PROP ADDR 3240 NORTH SHORE DR OWNERNAME NORTH SIK3REMARINA INC TAXPAYER NORTH SIK3RE MARINA INC NAME/ADDR 3222 NORTH SI K3RE DK WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0811723440006 PROP ADDR 3220 BOHNS POINT LA OWNER NAME A C TRAPANESE/C A TRAPANESE TAXPAYER AUIERT C/CHERYL A TRAPANESE NAME/ADDR 3220 BOI INS POINT U WAYZATAMN 55391 0 •* • • •» 38 0911723320011 PROPADOR 3188 NORTH SHORE DR OWNERNAME JAADLROSATl TAXPAYER iAMES A A DEBRA L ROSATI NAMI^ADDR 3188 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0911723320012 PROP ADDR 3190 NORTH SHORE DR OWNERNAME C A A A C TRAPANESE TAXPAYER Cl lERYL A ALBERT TRAPANESE NAMIZADDR 3165 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 55391 CO '■ r ‘•t. t; V I ( i -•/ .-t GQ I CERTIFY THATTHE FACTS REPRESEFTTEO ARE AN ACCURATE AND mUE REPRESENTATlCmOF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARSTHIS DATEONTIIE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND OEUEF.________________________^DATE^-y^-^ BY •'V >. « EXHIBIT I '• % ^ ^ ' •• *** \ ■■ - Honnei^in •. •' •'V •’ ’■••.• lopl II County paye^ervices Depaiitm^njt,^ rv \ . i.Vi r t:. • • • » ParcWnformation NORTH SHORE DR. legally ncoriadmap. H nfirasanis a canpIMton efkOomMion and! 4i^lJlnmCify.Counfy, i^Stat9 road mj^Killiaa and clharaotJiias. ■ Cr>nMrii *<pcTiNG Date Applicatton Received: 09*I7>03 Date ApplicatioB Cooiidered as Complete: 09-29-03 iO-Day Review Period Eipircs: 11*29-03 ocr 2 7 2003 CITY OH OHUvu REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: October 22,2003 llcm No / ^ Departnent Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Melanie Foth Title: City Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: 03-2952 - Greg Tripp, 3229-C Casco Circle- Variances - Resolution Zoning District: LR>1C, Single Family Lakeshore Residential (1/2 acre Lot Area: 20,186 s.f. (0.46 acre) Lot Width: 100 ft List of Exhibits: A - Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendation B - PC Action Notice 10-22-03 C - PC Memo & Exhibits as of 10-20-03 Application Summary: The applicant is requesting variances from Average Lakeshore Setback, Hardcover, and Lake Setback in order to change the roof line and pitch of the roof, add dormers, and improve the overall design aesthetically. Planning Commission Recommendation On Monday, October 20, 2003, Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the variances from Average Lakeshore Setback, Hardcover, and Lake Setback with the additional stipulation that the applicant remove the 128 s.f. wooden stair on the south side of the home and any plastic/fabric landscape liner from planting/rock beds. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached resolution. daaai .. .— A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-281, SUBDIVISION B, 78-350, SUBDIVISION B, 78-1279, SUBDIVISION B AND 78-1288 FILE NO. 03-2952 WHEREAS, Gregory Robert Tripp, a single person, (hereinafter “the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 3229-C Casco Circle within the City of Orono (hereinafter the ‘ City ”) and legally described as follows: Tract C, Registered Land Survey No 1333, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the ••property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-281 Subdivision (b), 78-3S0 Subdivision (b), 78-1279 Subdivision (b) and 78-1288 to allow reorientation, change in pitch and addition of dormers to the roof of the existing home existing completely within the average lakeshore setback, and panially within 75* of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File ?=03-2952. The property is located in the LR-IB Zoning District, which requires a minimum lot size of 1 acre and a required lake yard setback of 7S’. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on Monday, October 20, 2003 and recommended approval of variances based on the following findings: a. The existing home is situated on the property entirely within the average lakeshore setback. Page 1 of 5 b. A very small portion of the existing home is situated within 75’ of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. The revisions to the roof lines will have no impact on lake views enjoyed by neighboring property owners. d. Although the proposed construction docs not add hardcover to the property, the site already contains hardcover in the 75’-250’ zone in excess of the allowed 25% and the applicant has agreed to remove certain hardcover items to result in a reduction from 58.6% to 53.2%. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping wuh the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-281 Subdivision (b), 78- 350 Subdivision (b), 78-1279 Subdivision (b) and 78-1288 to allow reorientation, change in pitch and addition of dormers to the roof of the existing home which is completely within the average lakeshore setback, and partially within 75’ of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka, subject to the following conditions: I. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. Page 2 of 5 2.Hardcover in the 0-75’ zone shall not increase above the 55 sf. or 0.6%. Hardcover in the 75-250’ zone shall be limited to 5505 s.f. or 53.2% per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit A. Applicant is advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. 3. Applicant shall remove all plastic or fabric liner material from the decorative landscape beds on the property to ensure their permeability as non-hardcover surfaces. 4. Required removals of structure and hardcover shall be completed by the first framing inspection. 5.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (October 27,2004). 6. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 7. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicant and the applicant’s heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 27“* day of October, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 3 of 5 « j MOM Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNl Y 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 of the City. Notaiy 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 of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument w as executed on behalf of the City. Page 4 of 5 riRWii *. '•/ ..A' , f, STV' W'- jjI - -i. . ■, V ' “ ./ .. Ik uiiiAV iuriw/ii imir, om.ii ADVANCE SVEVBYING A ENGINEERING CO. )mt Hay N*l Ml MiwioM*,MNJ5M} nMK(«»)4M-T«M FH(fID4H«i7 ununi GREG TRIER *‘"**"'“*^ i^wtii.mi MAfnifc i^nwM.«,iw> TM<Cli||MwnarhwMW> HH,airrfW4|aifc. llwMii Cm». ■d: mrMtmyibi. *>iw4niliyii>i<ilmiiMtf>w<iqFiiff<Mi>mkpl«lwcrtp^ Vmmmf DimitmitmRimmlmRtR»RmmaRED%wRmfmwmm,wRRAkAk9immm. Hm» NK—jlf ':;p- 4. Hi Mi « ito IMIIMi if i« iMi «• Ml AmM iKMHi iHf titrlM iriil in IMMlIi IwfiiiMi^iiitii mifRitinimmwR amRmmmm^i tgg gsigait ”™”*«Ml piMlIi HM Miit Xm UcMM NwmMi f 2IS, til, M4t« yjfiflrrti Mfi^pMiikfMior IPm M m ^"-r Mr XlMl «|^iMWM Mi MI Ml • IMMM ITNiMMil Bit MMMy iMMiM Mi» *■ IMM if Ifti SMi ofriMlMy tMMTMjM *i ll ^i^utai«r.&*pj.fCf2is fl^ CDMM fMUIAMOM. HomM Ccncfds WMiSiMt I IImM * HM«i {i wMlacailhf ?,l7n Sq. fl. tMf Si. rt JM Si. rt i7i Si. rt i.mj Si ^t lilM Ul Mm: % N«ri Cmm I 7.ue Si. rt KLIM Si. rt •• ,a\! COM or MHO Vf. S. SOU t^gHcNB Co^CJ^iei^ (^igeoO t flprw Tf-I « ^%-r I I Qunac 9Ciu (•ion 7 M O K Si IM H X •4 hh • CITY OF ORONO 2750 KcUcy Parkway POB0X66 Crystal Bay» MN 55323 952J49.4600 ZONING FILE 03-2952 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: October 22,2003 TO: Greg Tripp 3229-C Casco Circle Orono, MN 55391 COPIES:Kathy Alexander Alexander Designs 401 East Lake St Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF REQUEST: Variances — Average Lakeshore Setback, Hardcover and Lake Setback DATE OF MEETING: Monday, October 20,2003 Planning Commission recr>mmended as follows: 1. Approval of the Average Lakeshore Setback Variance as requested. 2. Approval of the Lake Setback Variance as requested. 3. Approval of the Hardcover Variance with the stipulation that the applicant remove all the fabric or plastic liner in all landscaping beds, and also remove the 128 s.f. wooden staircase on the south side of the home. VOTE:5 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, October 27,2003; Meeting starts at 7:00 pm___________ If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call City Planner, Melanie Foth at 952.249.4627. I'lr-rrfiX- iL FILEM3-2992 October 10.2003 Page 1 oTS Date ApplicatioB Received: 09-17-03 Date Appileatloo Coasldered as Complete: 09-29-03 60-Day Review Period Eipires: 11-2^03 To:Chair Smith and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. Cit>- Administrator From: Date: Subject: Melanie Foth, City Planner October 10,2003 03-2952, Greg Tripp, 3229-C Casco Circle, - Variance - public hearing Zoning Dbtrict: LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential ('/: acre min) Lot Area; 0.46 acre (20,186 s.f.) Application Summary: Applicant requests the following; 1. An average lakeshore setback variance in order to change the roof line and pilch of the roof, improve the design aesthetically, and add dormers. 2. Lake setback variance in order to change the roof line and add a dormer to the portion of the home within 75 ’ of the lake. 3. Hardcover variance in order to reduce the amount of hardcover w ithin the 75 ’- 250 ’ zone. _____________________________________________ Staff Recommendation: Planning department staff recommends ihe following 1. Approval of the average lakeshore setback variance. 2. Approval of the lake setback variance as lequested. 3. Approval of the hardcover variance. 4. Removal of all plastic and fabric landscape liner in planting beds. Hardship: This home and most of the property is located entirely within the average lakeshore setback. The existing home is located approximately 1 foot within 73' of the OWHL ____________________________________________ Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-281. Setback regulations (b) No principal or accessory structure shall be located within 75 feet of the lakeshore nor closer to the lakeshore th^ the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots (refer to Orono Manual of Design Standards and Specifications), except that this does not apply to structures allowed in subsection (a) of this section. Lot Area (acre) UtWidkh(feet)Front Yard (feet)Side Yard (feet)Rear Yard (fcei)Side Yard Adjacent to Street (feet) 0.5 too 30 10 30 15 FlLEi03-2952 Octobtr 10.2003 Pag«2of5 78-1279(6) Average takeshoresetback. No principal or accessory structure shall be located closer to the lakeshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots; except that this does not apply to st^tirways, lifts, landings and lockboxes. Further, the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (a) No hard cover or impervious surface shall be placed, located or constructed within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of any lake or tributary, except for stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in this Code. (b) Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OHWL, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. List of Exhibits A. Application B. Existing & Proposed Survey/Site Plan C. Proposed Plans and Elevations E. Property Owners List F. Aerial photo illustrating the average lakeshore setback G. Plat Map H. Photo D. Submitted Hardcover Calculations Background The home was constructed so that currently it is siniated entirely within the average lakeshore setback. Therefore any additions or alterations to the existing building require a variance. The applicant is proposing, by their design, to reduce the bulk and mass of their home. The pitch of the roof will be lowered and the peak will remain at the existing height. The change in the roof line will improve the visual crowding from the lake. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot ArcaAVidth: LR-IC Lot Area Lot Width Required 21.780s.f. (0.5acre't 100 ’ Actual 20.186 s.f. (0.46 acre)110’ Setbacks; LR-IC Required Existing • Proposed Lake 75 ’75 ’75 ’ / FILEi03-2952 October 10. 2003 Page 3 of 5 Rear (street)30’12’12’ North Side 10’10’10’ South Side 10’5’5’ Average Lakeshore The entire home is currently located within tl setback. le average lakeshore Structural Coverage; Total Lot Area 20,186 s.f. (0.46 acre) Total Structural Coverage Allowed: 3027 s.f. (15%) Proposed: 2728 s.f. (13.5%) Hardcover Calculations; Hardcover Zone 0-75 75-250 Total Area in Zone 9,856 s.f. 10,330 s.f. Allowed Hardcover 0 s.f (0%) 2582.5 s.f. (25%) Existing Hardcover 55 s.f.* (0.6% %) 6059 s.f.* (58.6 %) Proposed Hardcover 55 s.f. (0.6 %) 5633 s.f. (54.5 %) After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Lake Yard Setback Variance One square foot of the home exists within the 75’ required setback from the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. In order to change the roof line in this area and lake yard setback variance is required. The variance requested will lessen the bulk and mass of the home as the roof peak will remain the same and the pitch will increase, thus losing bulk. Hardcover Setback Variance Hardcover levels on this property are above that which is allowed by Code. W ithin the 0- 75’ zone 0.6% hardcover exists which accounts for 55 s.f, including a portion of the home, a portion of the deck and paved patio. The 75’-250’ zone currently has 6059 s f of hard surface, the applicant has proposed a 426 s.f. reduction in the driveway area to lessen the hardcover. The hardcover for the 75’-250’ zone will be reduced from 58.65% to 54.5% not including landscape beds with plastic or fabric. Average Lakeshore Setback Variance The entire structure of the home is within the average lakeshore setback. Due to the nature of the property and its relationship between the properties on the point the entire property is essentially within the average lakeshore setback. No neighboring views of the lake will be impacted by the changes. i FILEM3-29S2 October 10.2003 Page4ofS Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit A, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In consUering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and weffare of the community, existing and anticipaud tt^fic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, rbk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property In the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code In instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property^ under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when It Is demonstrated that such actions will be In keeping with the spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff would make the following recommendations in regards to the criteria for “undue hardship” pertinent to this application: 1. “The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls.” Over % of the property is located ahead of the average lakeshore setback. In the opinion ofstaff this criterion is met. 2. “The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner.” In the opinion of staff this criterion is met. 3. “The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.” The proposed changes will lessen the bulk and mass of the home, thus will improve the character of the locality. In the opinion ofstaff this criterion is met. 4. “Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter.' The applicant has not indicated economic consideration for this project. In the opinion ofstaff this criterion is met. 5. “Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter.” Not applicable. 6. “The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.* Not applicable. 1. “The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a 1 i FHEi(»-2952 OdOttr 10,2003 PaO*SofS one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling.” Not applicable. 8. "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or inunediately adjoining property.” In the opinion of staff this criterion is met. 9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located.” In the opinion ofstaff this criterion is met. 10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjo>inent of a substantial property right of the applicant." In the opinion of staff this criterion is met. 11 . "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code." In the opinion of staff this criterion is met. 12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty." In the opinion of staff this criterion is met. Issues for Consideration Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Planning Department Staff recommends the following: 1. Approval of the average lakeshore setback variance. 2. Approval of the lake setback variance as requested. 3. Approval of the hardcover variance. 4. Removal of all plastic and fabric landscape liner in planting beds. EXHIBIT A CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S2SO.OO (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application # 03-3^52. Date Received Q - I Amount Paid if (TO PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P.l.D.) U- 111- - bOPtA Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date PrqpfiitSL Acquired, I (do) Idon^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Presenr'Dsc'tif property: V residential ___^other (specify). Zoning District: |(C_____^ (month/year) APPLICANT Name Address: City;, Phone (home) 4-~M" WAl Phone (work) LsK'L'" _____Zip:_________ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ______________ Address: Phone (home). Phone (work) City-Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUESF Estimated Construction Cost $, Describe request m detail: yi^^AtOdg: k)e»goTe> •y=pg. t?r>3C= eryytyr. i*a uar^ to la/ ' onal sheeb i(attach additional sheeb if necessar^ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback: ^ Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: ^■^vUg./>4jr lw rC i iV^ -p-, t»L:r..a=-g /* (attach additional sheets if necessary) 6 if GO t jymeor and COCC OF WATER SEPT. Z 2003 rouM) 1/2* as WSTOr COMTIl FO»noN n* s/. I I Orn§.N».$Um t. ^ -\lAXXl y - V III L mh 1^ 1 ^itJ iiiiiMMl viliM itarii//ii iNiri*. uiuu ADVANCE SURVEYING A ENGINEERING CO. SI0li.H»7 Hi Ml Mi«t«Hli,MN55J4) llMiiCf51)4H-7fM lM(fSi)474ll«l iMnifiNi GREG TRIPP 4, Ml■MBkHlMI MAnm: UBAUnOUBfiTMCMiMdnrariwi»N»IWO»«fWiyii^ll»OC4i Kjgtvr.ygfK; I. rfMrtwwInHiwmUlia Itoinfl rf—wwliB liwiMlwlM4—WinMl|w»WM*liH>tli|il —IT. ItaM ■MiMMiiarMM. »'”Ha ’iA i ;# c ; 1 I. UUmwm 4. Hi4iMi«i4HlMliiiMftfMkwi«i«lMnMk lip4Mpii«taMi*4 •rteW|^4f*t4iMa fmiKRkmd%m99$ ims H (^iLiftjftA.PJ. AM Ite ms iptdfimiM^ npHl «r liiMiMiaVMMitf Mi«r nis.Mi.i- pMpscrf ky Nomm CiiKrili Jf2f »Oicliv WittlC»«M<[lMil£||^§ 2.730 Sq. ri. I04f Sf. ft Mf Sa. rt. tTf sa. rt H rt T«m: j 7J20 H rt Ul Atm: 8 IMri CiMB ^ SUM 9a. rt 30.18 ws cocc or «Miui spf. z mi t3eH«7ve c:ckk:^eie '^•1: I OtAPiOC SCALB ▼D A • lA/^W I u Hs XX •ai mfr tr-' ■.> 1 .5 \ I»% V ** •m ” / 1___________M % I L > ^^ t ^ EABDCOVER CALCULi^ SETBACK Z<K«E: (CIRCLE ONE| 0-75’ ^ tVORKSHEET 250-500* EXHIBIT D 500-1000’ nT^RDCQVERlN ZONE Home „SI L bs |^Widdl X X X * I B. Oanje ' • • C. Drlvwiy •*.X • • • •*• ••• •• ' •• • • • • • X X D. Sldewdk X X E. Ptdo/Dedc X X F. Luidscq)e Uadedain By PUatIc Or Fibdc X X X \J / o. Olh« \}i» ,|.\0 i; TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROP^W AREA IN ZONE A • no^o + B t X100 Uzi± X X X B. Oarage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F; Landscape Undedaln By Plutic Or FAric X X X ^ r LrO. other TOTAL HARDCOVER IK ZONE * TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE^ A IJt/0^ * B 1^32.XlOO S.F. S.F. • * •S.F. •!•• S.F. IMI S.F. • • •S.F. •S.F. S.F., . S.F. Oil _SJF. S.F. • S.F. S.F. no^o S.F. S.F. f. • S.F. S.P. S.F. -------------------S.F. • 'Z'LH S.F. S.F. 1 u 'S.F. •■ S.F. • ••S.F. • *•• • S.F. S.F. • S.F. .S.F. ---------------- S.F. • ___^S.F. • lyU0‘^S.F- S*F« ft I HARDCOVER CALCULATION Wj SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARl A. House SR IN ZONE Lcn|iti B. Gmfe C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Palio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other MEET 75-250*25»-S00*500-K X X X X X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ^ B X X X K X X X X X X X X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A 69 7 B Width xlOO - Width xIOO - 42- 150 t-n % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SJF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _______S.F. A S.F. B / O •/• S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. A S.F. B V* / RUNDAICiVIMaU 31 2011723430002 PROOAINM 3229 CASCOaK OWNERNAMB DPPARUPSKYAJACARLSON TAXTAYBR DAPARUTSKYRJ ACARLSON NAME/AOOR 3220CASCOCW WAYMTAMN 35301 31 2011723430005 PROPAOOR 31 AOimtiiSUNASSiONBO OWNCRNAMB MARY SUSAN SWANSON TAXPAYER MARY SUSAN SWANSON N AMr/ADOR 32» » CAStX) CIR WAV/ATAMN 553')! 3S 2011723430016 PROPAOOR 3231 CASCOCIR OWNBRNAMB JUDITliBCOOPER TAXPAYliR i I! CIXNliK A J I! nX)PI!M NAMIMIMNt 323ICA.SC-OOR WAV/ATAMN .Wll (d HS HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROI'ERTY OWNERS LIST 3> 2011723430003 PROPAOOR 3229 CASCOCIR OWNER NAME MARY SUSAN SWANSON TAXPAYER MARY SUSAN SWANSON NAME/AOOR 3229 0 CASCO CIR WAY/ATAMN 55391 38 2011723430004 PROP ADUK 3229 CASCO CIR OWNER NAME GREGORY ROBERT TRIPP TAXPAYER GREGORY ROBERT TRIPP NAME/ADOR 3229 CASCO CIR WAY/ATAMN 35391 3S 2011723430014 PROPAOOR 3235 CASCOCIR OWNERNAMB SDSILUSRECSILUS TAXPAYER STEPHEN SUJUS* ELAINE SILUS NAMWAnOR 3235 CASCO CIR WAV/ATAMN 55VM 31 2011723430015 PROPAOOR 3233 CASCOCIR OWNERNAME OMSPILSETH4PDSPILSETH TAXPAYER DAVID M SPILSETH NAMI-/AODR 3233 CASCO CIRCLE WAY/AIAMN 55391 3S 2011723430017 PROPAOOR 31 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNERNAME PAMELA L PI AIN TAXPAYI'R I'AMlilAl.PIAIN NAMI/ADDR 3227 CAMX) CIR WAY/AIAMN '5391 30 20II7234300IS PROPAOOR 3227 CASCOCIR OWNERNAME PAMEIALPLAIN TAXPAYI'R PAMlilALPIAIN NAMI/ADOR 3227 CAM () CIR WAY/7VIAMN 55«9I I CERTIFY TIIATTIX3 FACTS REPRESCNTEO ARC AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPKESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARSTHIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OFTHE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT, TO 11 li: IlCST OF MY KNOWLEDGE ANDDEUEF. « ^ ^ DATE /-/ft*^3 BY PAGE: I V. I ( . V* •••C ••• .V =1*. Sap 17 03 10t32a Kathtf Rlaxandar 952-473-8222 P«2 Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form' I (we) m^erstand t^l in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project requires Council approval.or use Date Date I (we) [print name(s)][print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at —------------------------- also referred to as Land Use Application No._______ 1 (we) understand tW in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare Wroval or duapproval of the property or use but merely to confinn for the City Cotmed that I Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any inbnnation that may aaaitt the Gty in the review of this Lend Use •»'>» Building * ZmOj, O0to « leaat 10 day, prior 322J- Cdsco Circle Average Lakeshore Setback File 03-2952 A »-'t:KiBggai l!m F?i % * Li;5i TO-'i; \ ' -^r,''-- -.rj «>-.^ •( -S', i “ ’"‘>t»^ '-!lL-2i Mi .r •.yv-1. >5 '.,. ..: ^;;: •" 'V > ■ r. * r* , '. m 0.03 0.03 0.06 Miles Ht'nru'pin Pf.-m.:.^ Hennephi Taxpayer Service rX’-^vi^W Parc«l ID 201172343(0 Housa Numbar 3220 ‘ ';.•. Ai:i^r: Straat Nama CASCO ^0!'$ 77ito <s nor a lapa^r feowPitf map. ir fapnmnti a coiiviMbe er MbnnikiM \* »v H Md .‘■»t •i ^ * r^ exhibit h mmm\f>-v.. • f •f •V '.V « ^ ^ I = :--\ ^ > ‘0 t 5 i?S» i-fe 8748^00 * rmfjffl? 7.%- '■ » ::-4 V. ; .. ^ ^ --..4 . V* ;• ^ ' I - ' *1'. .-M: Date Application Received: 9-17-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 9-17-03 60-Day Review Period Espires: 11-16-03 COUNCIL MEETING OCT 2 7 2003 CITY OF OHONU REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: October 27,2003 Item No.: /cX Department Approval: Name: Janice Waataja Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Title: City Planner Item Description: #03-2954, Howard R. & Lisa Alton, 1635 Concordia Street - Variance Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: LR - 1C, One Family Lakeshore Residential District ('/j acre minimum) 3.943 acres (171,772 s.f.) 249 feet List of Exhibits A - PC Action Notice 10-22-03 B - PC Memo and Exhibits of 10-16-03 Ap/^icotion Summary: Applicant requests the following variance to construct a patio on the lake side of the home: 1. Hardcover variance to allow 26.9% hardcover in the 75-250’ zone when 25% is allowed and 24.5% currently exists. Planning Commission Recommendation Denial of the request with a unanimous 5-0 vote. The basis for the denial was that no viable hardship was presented. Staff Recommendation Deny consistent with Planning Commission ’s recommendation COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Deny the request and direct staff to draff a denial resolution for adoption at the next City Council meeting. I 4 CITY OF ORONO 2750 KcUcy Parkway P.O. Box M Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE: 03-2954 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: October 22,2003 TO: Howard R. & Lisa Alton COPIES: 1635 Concordia Street Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION:Hardcover Variance DATE OF MEETING: October 20.2003 Planaing Commission recommended as follows: Denial of the request stating that there was no demonstrable hardship which justified granting a hardcover variance. VOTE:FOR AGAINST Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, October 27,2003; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Waataja at 952-249-4623. Mil I II IIT <1 H rfb October 20.2003 PaielofS Dale Applicalioo Received: 9-17-03 Dale Application Considered as Complete: 9-17-03 60-Day Review Period Eipircs: 11-16-03 To:Chair Smith and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Janice Waataja, City Plannerjjl^^ October 16,2003 03-2954, Howard R. & Lisa Alton, 1635 Concordia Street - Hardcover Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR- 1C, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (Yi acre min.) 3.943 acres (171,772 s.f.) Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variance to construct a patio on the lake side of the home: 1. Hardcover variance to allow 26.9% hardcover in the 75-250’ zone when 25% is required and 24.5% currently exists. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommendations: 1. Denial of the request due to a lack of a viable hardship. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections List of Exhibits Exhibit A: Application Exhibit B: Exhibit C: Exhibit D: Exhibit E: Exhibit F: Exhibit G: Exhibit H: Exhibit 1: Exhibit J: Hardship Statement Adjacent Property Owners’ Acknowledgement Forms Existing and Proposed Sur\ ey Hardcover Calculations 2002 Building Permit Conunents 2002 Building Permit Hardcover Calculations Photographs Property Owners List Plat Map Background The applicant received a building permit to construct a large addition to his home in November of2002. This building permit consisted of a number of removals to meet hardcover requirements. These hardcover calculations are attached as Exhibit F. These W03-29S4 0ctobtr20.2003 Pagt2«rS calculations show that in conjunction with the addition the applicant was required to remove 476 square feet of patio in addition to removals of driveway and sidewalk together totaling 866 square feet. With the 2,940 square foot addition these removals were required for the property to maintain a hardcover of 24.9% when 25% is required. The applicant is now requesting a variance to allow 1,000 square feet of new patio resulting in a hardcover variance to allow 26.9% when 25% is required. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot Area/Width: LR-IC Lot Area Lot Width Required 21,780s.f. (’/lacre)100’ Actual 171,772 s.f. (3.943 acres)249 ’ Setbacks: LR-IC Required Exbting Proposed Front n/a n/a n/a Rear 30 ’340 ’340 ’ Lea Side 10 ’40.5 ’40.5 Right Side 10 ’10 ’10 ’ Lakeshore 75’73’(house) 87’ (existing patio) 73’(house) 76’ (proposed patio) Average Lakeshore 65’ (at closest comer) 73’(house) 87’ (existing patio) 73’(house) 76’ (proposed patio) Structural Coverage: This property is not subject to structural coverage requirements as it is greater than 1.99 acres, in accordance with Section 78-1403. Hardcover Calculations: Hardcover Total Area in Allowed Existing Proposed Zone Zone Hardcover Hardcover Hardcover 0-75 18,556 s.f.0s.f (0%) 0 s.f.* (0%) Os.f. (0%) 1 -------^ ^ .fllfelili «K)3-2954 October 20« 2003 Page 3 ofS 75 - 250 250 - 500 41,920 s.f. 111,199 s.f. 10,480 s.f 125%) 33,359 s.f (30%) 10,309 s.f* (24.5%) 4,381 s.f* (3.9%) 11,309 s.f (26.9%) 4,381 s.f (3.9%) After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Hardcover Variance The applicant is proposing to construct approximately 1,000 square feet of patio on the lake side of the home. The survey for the addition depicted 168 square feet of patio. However, currently only 8 square feet of patio exists. The proposed patio would be located in the 75-250 ’ zone where the hardcover percentage is currently at 2A.5%. The Zoning Ordinance allows 25% hardcover in the 75-250 ’ zone however with the proposed 1,000 square foot patio the hardcover would rise to 26.9%, resulting in the need for a hardcover variance. The property is conforming with respect to hardcover in the 0-75 ’ and 250-500* zones. Upon a site inspection, stalTdi :overed that landscape fabric is currently being installed. The building permit for the aduttion indicates that all landscape fabric must be removed. The applicant has not disclosed this fabric, nor included it in the hardcover calculations as it isn’t allowed regardless. The Planning Commission should question the applicant on this matter and make a determination on whether the fabric is acceptable or not. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit B. and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In considering applications for variance, the Planning Conmisslon shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, end the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commbslon shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the Individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it Is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff does not find a viable hardship to grant approval of the hardcover variance request. The applicant removed patio hardcover in 2002 in order to construct an addition to the home. The applicant at that time could have adjusted hardcover amounts to allow* for the proposed patio but chose to accept a 168 foot patio as indicated in Exhibit D (with .1% hardcover to spare). Should the applicant wish to construct additional patio, .5% could be constructed amounting to a total patio increase of 171 square feet for a total patio area of 179 square feet (including the 8 s.f. which already exists). This would put the property at 25% hardcover and not require a variance. Staff would make the following recommendations in regards to the criteria for “undue hardship ” pertinent to this application: if ■■■niMlai iWiri I , . - - -------- 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8 MU-MS4 October 20. M03 Page 4 of5 "The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls.” The property can continue to be used in its current manner which consists of an 8 square foot patio. The applicants have the means to construct an additional 1 71 square feet without a variance. Constructing a patio which constitutes excess hardcover is not reasonable. “The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner.” The circumstance which limits the amount of additional patio to 1 71 square feet instead of1,000 square feet is a situation the landowner created when the 2,940 square foot addition was constructed in 2002, not a circumstance unique to the property. The properly is 3.94 acres in a '/: zone. “The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." The applicants ’ lot is substantially larger than the other lots located on Concordia Street. Because of this, it is very easy for the applicant to meet hardcover requirements. Should a variance be granted for hardcover on this lot the character of the neighborhood could be altered. “Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter.' Not applicable “Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes. Section” 116J.06. Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter.” Not applicable “The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person’s land is located." The proposed use is permitted in the LR - 1C zoning district. "The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary* use of a one-family dwelling as a nvo-family dwelling.” Not applicable “The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.” Staff does not find any special conditions applying to the structure or land in question that wouldjustify variance approval. 'The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in j M3-29S4 0ctobtr20.2003 Pages of 5 which said land is located.” Staff does not find any unique conditions with this lot or structure to recommend variance approval 10. ”lhe granting of the application is necessar> for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.” The applicant still has to ability to construct 171 square feet of patio. 11.”The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code." Granting of this variance would be contrary to the iraent of the Zoning Code. 12."The granting of such variance will not merely serv e as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty." The granting of this variance would serve as a convenience to the applicant since no demonstrable hardship or difficulty has been shown. The applicant has the ability to construct 171 square feet of additional patio. Issues for Consideration 1. Should the applicant be held to the hardcover calculations which allowed the addition in 2002? 2. Is there a hardship that constitutes granting a variance to allow 1,000 square feet patio when the applicant has the ability to construct 171 square feet without a variance? 3. Should the applicant be required to removed all fabric that has since be installed? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Denial of the hardcover variance to allow 1,000 square feet of patio in the 75-250' zone resulting in a hardcover percentage of 26.9% when 25% is required. *1 1 innsiiuiriiiii EXHIBIT A 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) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application # Date Received Amount Paid 2-So. PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address ^^35 Concordia Street Property Identification Number (P.l.D.) 17.117-23-22 nnan Attach legal description to application if not included on ^uired survey. Date Property Acquired__ I (do) (dmoDOt) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: x residential ___mother (specify) Zoning District:_____________________________ .(month/year) APPLICANT Name Hnwarrt R- TTT_____________ Address: 1635 Concordia Street City: 670 1080 (952) 431-8080 Phone (work) r6i2t 340 0606 Wayzata_______Zip: 55391 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name j LisV f m^^rneA') Address:___________________________City: Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $10>000.00_______ Describe request in detail: Construct! an attached stamped and eolnred ernneret patxo in front of the house. (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback:Front Side X Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage 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:. attached (attach additional sheets if necessary) #29 54 1 [ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the followiny informati_pmimKi for VOur application to be copaldered compV^y; 1. 2. 3. Completed Application Form Aif pjat map (you must Govt ctteois 591^ Department of Finance. A-603. 4. Govt Center, 348-5910). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover ^r^“rn “ *" C> “Py X II" for ^ 'I'^oloos) if any changes in existing grade «• fi proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8/," x 11" for reproduction.A* ^* Slcctchcs or ol^ns oF floAr jJr _✓___• •< *. e Cl, » u -----. one uj copy 8/j" x 11" for reproduction 5. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) co^ 8'/," x 11") ' ®*‘*" P*”®"* “ m^erest in the name(s) of appUcant(s) if not current owner(s) ■ “ y^u”:;i:Jt;ir '■« p— ---- Additional items as may be requested by City staff.8. The Applicant and Property Owner must sim this annIicafiV,n u 3arl«0y^ 4PPlk4ll9B h PQt complely If the above infnrma^tdh.T has nnr ^ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all infonnalion required or reouesied bv the 7„n,e» supplied is true and co^ect to the best of hisiher taowf^ge, ‘ "" Applicant's Signature Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE JtJ'Z "’P““«0" “I >“«ho-ia.s reasonable ntetnbets for putposes^of investfgation »reSioToTiifr“ ““ Owner’s Signature ~ Date to' 03 Wkel'inr Tfililling cJH^shn hto^' ''Z°M on“'uie ^hiri'lU' Coi^ission ch:;;grp“ sr' “ ““* # 2 Q K; ,d• I j£ EXHIBIT B Howard R. Alton, III 1635 Concordia Socct Wayzau, MN 55391 September 16,2003 Planning Commission and City Council Members Re: Variance Application for Patio 1635 Concordia Street, Wayzata Howard Alton Ladies and Gentlemen: I am requesting a variance to replace a patio that was removed in construction of roy house addition. The new patio will be shaped differently and slightly larger than the previous patio. The variance is for the 75 ’ - 250 ’ setback zone. The present hardcover in this zone equals 24.5%. With the proposed patio the hardcover would be 26.9%. The hardcover on the entire property would be less than 10%, which is one of the lowest hardcover totals on all of Lake Minnetonka. I suffer two hardships in that I was forced to give up property that my neighbor built over, so that I could get clear title to my property. That additional property would allow for more hardcover in the 75 ’ to 250 ’ setback. Furthermore, I have allowed the City and others to use my property for a cul-de-sac and even allowed paving of it, which increases my total hardcover. The ordinance which limits hardcover near the lake was written to ensure rainfall absorption into the ground rather than run-off into the lake. The topic property is very level, sandy soil, it is veiy unlikely that any additional rainwater would run off into the lake due to the addition of the proposed patio. Furthermore, the current ordinance would allow for the construction of a 30,000 square foot patio or thirtv' times larger outside the 250 ’ setback, which I state only to illustrate there is ample green space for rainwater absorption on this property in keeping with the spirit of the City ordinance. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Howard R. Alton, III #29 54 EXHIBIT C Adjacent Property Oivners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) i/6hn4/4l^i) 6rArmc of rnrint namefs)1 [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at ^onctyt/iit T* also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Date Property Owner Date I (wci^^gi^A/___________of /CB a Jie4M^.A [pri’print name(s)][print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at /^3S CcncorU>\ S».also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. \ I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the propert>- or use but merely to confirm for Lhe City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor’s project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date f/VA5 Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. *. if {/ y-r^j r*. \ • » • .*• •. •%_* •• • 4-^ # 1 Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) ______ [print name(s)][print address] the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at /fc3S also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement. I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I r^uir^C^cirappr^val^^ improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use Property Owner Property Owner Date ^ (^«)^^,»0|Kn-?ft\ w(f/ of K(/o [print name(s)] [print address] I (we) understand that in execuung this acknowledgement. I (we) am (are) not asked to declare V property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project requires Council approval.or use Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any infomalion lhat may assist the City in the levieur of this Land Use ®.TT" w 1 Ai: I 1 j • M ^ . .r h t Xrjse ApSoI “'“■' '»P*^ •«««d « I (we) understand that K :r u-)»(«> »o..... a«,„. Date Property Owner Date *************************** I (we) **********,***^*^^ Iprint name(s)j -K*^.uv«i or aisapproval of the property or uJ h. * 7 ’ ^ "" ("«) not asked to declare (we) am (are) aware of die iinproverarol olans ^ con/inn for the City Council that I requires Council approval. “<* «>« proposed neighbor-; proj^t or^si Property Owner Date Property Owner Date Application, please aubmiT^rco^'X to^L’n'^M''” Land Use to Che scheduled meeting d«e. * Zoning Office « least lo d^^ p nor j..{ 4 • <'e • • t Till Jfc I ■ ■ ' ■ HARDCOVER OHW -75* SETBACK (18556 SF)* *''' WJAO — -tr-.: r HARDC SETBACK ZONE: (CmCLE ON EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZOt A. House _____________ e ^ibit e CULATION WORKSHEET 75-250* 250-500* Lenfth Width C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Fatio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN’ ZONE _ _ _ _ _ + B X 100 500-1000* O S.F. X OB S.F. X S.F. X S.F. B. Garage X o S.F. C. Driveway X o S.F. X S.F. D. Sidewalk X o S.F. X SJf. E. Patio/Deck X m o S.F. X m SJ. F. Landscape X n SE. Underlain X S.F. By Plastic X Sf. G. Other X S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE •c SE. TO! AL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE •SF. A B X 100 % A B / ^ 5 & c?X 100 O PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE • A. House X «S.F. Length width X SE. X SE. X «SE. B. Garage X a.SE. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SJ. SF. S.F. SJ. SJ. SJ. A B SI. A S.F. B % #29 54 T I i ' i HARDCOVER CALCU SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length -ILL X X X WORKSHEET 250-500' B. Cange C. Driveway 2V7 X X JiPS D. Sidewalk S»e rs / 7 X X E Patio/Deck X X F. Laodscape Underlain By Plastic X X X O. Other A A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _ _ _ _ _ _ _^ B _ _ _ _ _ _ B X 100 - ^ i 1 20 X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length Width X X X B. Gange C. Driveway ^ D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck _____7 0> F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE // 309 + B V/ H ZO X 100 * Si •• •»* d 1 500-1000' 7.HL1 SJ. ROO 1 SJ. SJ. SJ. /ooo SJ. SJ. SJ. /-I 7 SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. JO rto'l SJ. ________S J. _______________% 2^/5 % A B SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. SJ. /noo SJ. ^ SJ. S.F. SJ. SJ. SJ. SF. SF. A B 2 6,.<i 5# i • • *v 1 ■*1 HARDCOVER CALCULATION W SETBACK ZONE: (CmCLE ONE) 0-75* 75-250’ FXISTINC HARDCOVER IN ZOtiE A. House _____________ » ------------------ N WPKKSHEET n ^ 250-500’ Length Width X X X B. Gaiage C. Driveway I^IL X X D. Sidewalk X X E Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other A A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _ B _ t- B X 100 - /// / ?‘) X 100 - PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A House _____________ * Length Width X X X B. Gaiage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk £. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ B X ICO - » « • • • Lt w j0 500-1000’ C) ^si. 3.*? SI. S.F. SI. S.F. S.F. S.F. SJ. SJ. S.F. SJ. SJ. S.F. SJ. 2 663 SI. ____S.F. 11 i I 7 9 S.F. % S.F. SI. S.F. S.F. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. A B S.F. S.F. A B •/. liC CITY OF ORONO 0^ SITG PLAN__GflADiNO PLAN B'Ai'pr:o''Tr) - a0o\tv»^o 1.1 AFpr,0V *0 WITH iLTV!Si'.?r!S V DiSAv'P;-;:;'.' i»0 LW___ DAVE__ _ ^0 ^P.AC»\N(> ALJUaw '<9 W C'*^5’' /V 89^59'24 266.0 m :> ' ■■.'■:■-/ L^ s’ V. s s:,® ri:iv *■■ ,^vrr<“-k\ • • »v: • '■ .1 ■ ::s ‘ r •. y, '' i^/ .icr'anM r j^> - - " • • t • • • • • ••••• • ••• • W I HARDCOVER 01IW /;>' SLIUACK (mbljOSI) 75 SETBACK - 250 SETBACK 41920 SF (X 25% = 10480 SF ALLOW. HC) EXISTING HOUSE = 4534 SF PATIOS = 644 SF DRIVE = 3000 SF WALK = 80 SF STEPS - 128 TOTAL = 8386 SF (20% OF 75-250 SB AREA) PROPOSED HOUSE = 7474 SF EHOUSE 45.54 PHOUSE 2910 PATIO = 16t! Sr DRIVE = 2640 SF WALK » 50 SF STEPS = 13/ TOTAL = 10469 SF (24.9% OF 75-250 SBARBA) 250' SETBACK + 104220 SF ( X 30%= 31266 SF ALLOW. HC) EXISTING DRIVE = 1690 SF GATEPOSTS = 8 SF TOTAL =1698 SF (1.6 % 2504-ARE A) W/ CUL-DE-SAC PROPOSED SAME TOTAL 4381 SF / 4.2% 2683 SF ► '■ m- rl iili iJWI iiM>h Hill 4i=iiiiim I TIM ss H Ci • ^ ♦fT . . '\>^A . ' <' V/ »> r ^-V-iWc A • > j • • *. * • 1%. • f :^s \*' '- • V'*‘-'.«t- :r*- " • * .'- V?.: •-V'^ .-f.; .g .•., ^V-; ■ \ . -'f- ' I . •WJiCvr^, Uu >' - *^* I. pflITte 1,-i^"^ . t Li -r. > jng^ *^1 ,«.• 9 • v4 ‘.• . .i.Tk ^ ^ A • r-'""• ,*r>. •n«c:%^* •- ;• "A- . ■^■■■pPppPP|p|p|H^|^^ * v*^.*• •• • * . .. - * f;w f * ^ • •“ V. I It ^ • fT ' *: •-* **'>*•. ' *• * *i». z'• •• rV'.. -:>'• /' ■*'. .■ ^:^^. . • . f: • ■ . • * ' ^ \ --jSSi / /'• rfe^B i&M' S?5^l sf^ . •’ & . :. fcMtw-> ; 1,^; l: OTfT'' fe., pvv* to- f* ;«B. ’ ’•.fW a- l*«r\/^i».a r:^ PIW!SS5"xw^^ •''" '■'» ^ • -^fc. <••>».♦ • - "“.;v> :•■ <.w • • • , ‘ • \ ’. I • . »\ . H . . • ' '-.‘^iv . ^.'■V„c-J. ^K-Whr 4' : M'l ■> - -^r. ' A;. m *ixjili - ' .>’■ •• :r iV ■ ,. f _ m I, • >.;/;“^ 1^** i ^ **" ^ . *w^ ’ " •' 1 • ' . * » * • , . <.n,,--V .. Y?‘-v's^ V • •'t " ^ **^"^*? ■• ‘vm^• 'Vr-^ V. !fi"-.3~I >f36^ 'A ■ ' . i .. -^ ■■'■ '''-r iis& t^y.i ^:.ri 11 m Eim milmu W^- m5?1^ mm m . ,->*! ^ •■ /i ' -r V' ..cf; -'' a ,T .V ■ , J '’;. '. y •v jkai I / f y • 'A'r “j ■-{'' HBffv ass* ' • . V -iV - t. :y ■ > • •vn/' ‘ ^ X, v1 •>T' ■ m. RUNi)ATi;:9L n 071172)440003 PROP AODR 400S NORTH SIIORI: DR OWNER NAME CHRISTINE L WOOD TAXPAYER CHIUSTINELWOOD NAMF7ADOR 400) NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN SS364 38 171172)220006 PROP AODR 38 ADDRESS UNASSK jNEU OWNER NAME LYNN A FAITH CHRISTINE TAXPAYER I YNN A FAITH CHRISTINI: NAME/AOOR 3»25 NORTH SI K3RE DR MOUND MN S3364 38 171172)220012 PROPADDR 1635 SHADYWOODRD OWNER NAME RAIJ>H E MILLER ETAL TAXPAYER RALPH E MILLER NAME/AOOR 1635 SHADYWOODRD WAY/ATAMN 55391 38 171172)220023 PROP ADDR 1695 CONCORDIA ST OWNER NAME OIA D R IIELAWSKl TAXPAYER DONALD JOHN OELAWSKI NAME/ADDR 38 19 COLORADO AYE N CRYSTAL MN 55422 38 1711723220032 PROPADOR 1680 CONCORDIA ST OWNER NAME RIIWILUAMS/J A FF^ENMAIER TAXPAYER BRIAN II WILLIAMS NAME/ADDR JUDY A FESENMAIER 1680 CONCORDIA ST WAY/ATAMN 55391 38 1711723220040 PROP AODR 1635 CONCORDIA ST OWNER NAME HOWARD R ALTON III TAXPAYER HOWARD R ALTON III NAME/ADDR 1635 CONCORDIA ST ORONOMN S539I I IF.NNEPIN COUNTY PROPJ INFORM ATTON SYbT LM PROPER l YOW. „RSLIST PACE: I 38 1711723220002 PROP ADDR 3865 NORTII SHORE DR OWNER Name MAAMADOBRATZ TAXPAYER MARKAAMARYADOIIRATZ NAMI7ADDR 3865 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 38 1711723220007 PROPADDR 3925 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME LAFCHRLSTINE TAXPAYER LYNN R CHRISTINE NAME/ADDR 3925 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55)64 38 1711723220013 PROPADDR 1645 SHADYWOODRD OWNER NAME RALPH HARVEY ETAL TAXPAYER RAIJTI HARVEY NAME/ADDR 1645 SHADYWOOD RD WAY/ATAMN 55)91 38 1711723220024 PROPADDR 1687 CONCORDIA ST OWNER NAME 3 N GEHRING/K REINKE GEHRING TAXPAYER JOHN A KRISTIN GEHRING NAMF/AODR 1687 CONCORDIA ST WAY/ATAMN 55391 38 17117232200)4 PROPADDR 1735 FAGERNESS POINT RD OWNER NAME TONEY J WILLIAMS TAXPAYER TONEY J WILLIAMS NAME/ADDR 3719 GEKLER LA APT 44 DOISID 83706 38 1711723220043 PROPADDR 1675 CONCORDIA ST OWNER NAME HELEN K TRAINOR TAXPAYER NEIL J A BARBARA L TRAINOR NAME/ADDR 1675 CONCORDIA ST WAY/ATAMN 55391 PROP ADDR 38 1711723220003 3895 NORHI SHORE DR OWNER NAME PATRICK OTIANAOAN TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PATRICK OTLANAGAN 389) NORHI SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 38 1711723220009 PROP ADDR 3993 NORHI SHORE DR OWNER NAME ROBERT D PIEPER TAXPAYER ROBERT I) PII.PER NAMI7ADDR I847SHOREWOODI-A MOUND MN 55)64 %■ • ?• ■ 1 38 1711723220022 PROP ADDR 1685 CONCORDIA ST OWNER NAME T L PALM A M A PAIM 1AXPAYER HIOMAS L PAIM NAME/ADDR 1685 CONCORDIA ST Wa V/ATAMN 55391 I • / 38 1711723220031 PROPADDR 1690 CONCORDIA ST OWNER NAME RICHARD FA KRISTIN L PALM TAXPAYER RICHARD F A KRISTIN L PALM NAME/ADDR 1690 CONCORDIA ST WAY/ATAMN 55391 OB H !' II.'-' ^ J, ■-'^i 38 1711723220039 PROP ADDR 3905 NORHI SHORE DR OWNER NAME HOWARD R ALTON IB TAXPAYER HOWARD R ALTON III NAME/ADDR 1635 CON^kDIA ST ORONOMN 55391 38 0711723440002 PROPADDR 38 ADDRi-SSUNASSIGNEO OWNER NAME TOWNOFORONO TAXPAYER TOWNOFORONO NAME/ADDR POBOX66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 IHUU^LOJUM-Oatw -TrMWihMi »i ir*".V,' V --J f.'^j ;»»: *1^ RUNDA11:Wiy2a»J HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST I CERTIFY THAT THE FAHS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATTON OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON Tl IE RECORDS OFTIE lENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT. TO THE DOST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. -----> DATE BY X. PAGE: 2 Xi ^ ^ rj f Avy c/ CQ vr jr iJilM --- Hennepin EXHIBIT J Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department ^ • *. • *1 ,^^(73) »i g (7J''' «!o jvr 1 • n1 i*’• r C9> ! a 39B t .30 S| '3 ’■ • '31}»i' .6 e .« 0“ {32} 9 »• .1 !33)»i ! 3 •• 3J) —1 »i la ’• *j .. iJ5» t*1 f/fOCjiV/NO i», Is # A I*' 1 K' 92 hi . i»i 1 46 99 99 TTi (94) p e 9CC 99 b 1 • M 1 __li s »* s,'• 1 •- 1 1; >»l iJS. isoi1 1 (95) at ’8 94 1 (54)(55) ml (561 rl f#S ! ; u K* a? V* M 99 99 99 If ,r“99 99 90 ‘99 1 (7) mt rt4 ‘iiefir (9) •5 tP^ (39J P; \ r » -rtA^SO)^---------NBRJj RLS nucr4 NO 1628 3$4 V tT s mj3crc (43) -\ 779 7^ **\ hr 8! 29 P2) 234 (V (P) (13) i ^2:(2n K / Cl 292 9 • (42 c f := ^29'2 ^ 5 r/\»r Iyj• 9 1 ' Uj • • fi' 29*9 C; -i-----Li— I*rr 2939 c: z-------- 220 n (34) i Z 8 0-. ,'2C 8 MAPLBGA Tt 4 P7) 2 (35) 399 29 i S {35 m 399:2 HEX tZ9) Orf Q 5C 2* RLS NO 1216 M Parcel Information ^»• ^ * r. V ‘^" few cel ID 1711723220040 Hous« Number 1635 Street Name CONCORDIA ST This is not a hgatty ncofdtd m»p. It npnsants a compilation of IntomMlon and data from City. County, and Stata road authoritias and othar sowcas. COIINCIL MFETING Date Application Rccched: 9-17-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 9-17-03 60-Day ^vicw Period Eipircs: 11-16-03 OCf 2 7 2003 CITY Or OMONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: October 27,2003 Item No.: /5 Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Janice Waataja ^ Title: City Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: ?03-2955, Michael Palm, 710 Big Island - Variance - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: RS, Seasonal Recreation (5 acre minimum) 2.889 acres (125,845 s.f.) List of Exhibits A - Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendation B - PC Action Notice 10-22-03 C - PC Memo and E.\hibits of 10-13-03 Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variances to construct a 3-season cabin: 1. Average lakeshore setback variance to construct a home on a property which sits entirely in front of the average lakeshore setback line. 2. Lot area variance to allow a cabin to be constructed on a lot on Big Island where the lot is only 2.889 acres in size and 5 acres is normally required. Planning Commission Recommendation Approval ol the average lakeshore setback and lot area variances with an unanimous vote of 5-0. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting average lakeshore setback and lot area variances for 710 Big Island. -Mi* A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-1279 AND 78-568 FILE NO. 03-2955 WHEREAS, Michael Palm and Shannon Palm, husband and wife (hereinafter “the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 710 Big Island within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City”) and legally described as follows: That part of Government Lot 6. Section 22, Township 117 North, Range 23 West, described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the east line Recreation Point (now vacated) with the shore of Lake Minnetonka; thence westerly and southerly along the shore line of said lake to its intersection with the southerly line of Lot “H”, said addition vacated; thence southeasterly along the southerly line of said Lot “H” to the southeast comer thereof; thence southeaste.ly in a straight line to the southw esterly comer of Lot “T" of said addition \ acated; thence easterly along the southerly line of said Lot “T” to the southeast comer thereof; thence north along the east line of said addition vacated, to the point of beginning, including any accretions. (hereinafter the “property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-1279 and 78-568 to allow construction of a new cabin with a footprint w hich replicates that of the footprint shown on the survey dated September 9,1935. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED jy the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #03-2955. 2. The property is located in the RS Seasonal Recreation District, which requires a minimum lot area of five (5) acres. The applicant's property is 2.889 acres in size. Page 1 of 6 i 3. 4. 5. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on October 20, 2003 ar.d recommended approval of the average lakcshore setback and lot area \ ariances based on the following findings: u. The lot is situated on a point which causes the entire lot to sit in front of the average lakeshore seirack. b. The lot is a legal lot of reccrJ and was granted legal buildable status in 1983 as Record Lot No. 13. The lot is 2.9 acres in size located in a 5 acre zoning district. c. A structure has existed on the lot in the past. d. A structure could not be constructed on the lot without an average lakcshore setback and lot area variance. e. A structure can be built on the lot meeting all other pertinent code requirements. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by Citv staff, comments by the applicants arc the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the healUt. safety ar.d w elfare 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 varance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other d.mger to neighboring property; would not merely sen e as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonsrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial propertv right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 ef 6 1 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-1279 and 78-568 to allow construction of a new cabin w ith a footprint w hich replicates that of the footprint shown on the survey dated September 9, 1935, subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 5 Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. The structure which is constructed on the lot shall generally be in accordance w ith the footprint shown on the survey dated September 9. 1935 but in no event shall such structure be located nearer than 75’ to the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka nor shall hardcover exceed the allowable limits. A current survey and proposed hardcover calculations be submitted with the building permit application for the new structure. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (October 27,2004). 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 misdemeanoi. The undersigned applicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants' heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of6 I I i Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 27*** day of October, 2003. JTm _ ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 4 of 6 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of 2003 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota ______ y ^ ^ ^ 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 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 a.v- Page S of 6 I r State of Minnesota ) )ss. Covnty of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this __day of___ by _____________husband of______________, husband and wife. Notary Public State of Minnesota ) )ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this __day of _ by ______________, wife of_____________, husband and wife. Notary Public Page 6 of 6 ,2003 ,2003 ^ • • ••V M ' ■•^t;77rVV.v ! ^ * " i *^1' V . .......... . --- •^1 ^ II »:;s • »*^ U-4-• • —I Cw i \ \\ ■ J • /Jf • . ‘ - f V*r \ ! , , !f=6»t^^'' /A)-i* w ■ I ■■• \ \\/ %.C , . 5^1 ^ C /-. ___ f t ; —---C ______— -L • .. i* . • • ■*. t/>f/^OjLFNMlV ';•>. L CITY OF ORO.NO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box M Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4000 ZONING FILE; 03-2955 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: October 22,2003 TO: Michael Palm COPIES: 5034 Bruce Place Edina, MN 55424 TYPE OF APPLICATION;Average Lakeshore Setback and Lot Area Variances DATE OF MEETING:October 20.2003 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approval of the average lakoshore setback and lot area variance consistent with the following staff recommendation: 1. The struefire shall be constructed in accordance with the footprint shown on the survey dated September 9,1935. 2. A current siurey and proposed hardcover calculations be submitted with the building permit application. 3. No other setback or hardcover variances be required. VOTE:FOR AGAINST Applicant's next schedulcvi meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, October 27,2003; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the ofTuial Planning Commission or Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Plaiming Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Waataja at 952-249-4623. Ik... '■1 jy m-295S October 20,2003 Page 1 of S Date Application Received: 9-17-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 9-17-03 60-Day Review Period Eipires: 11-16-03 To:Chair Smith and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Janice Waataja, City Planner^ October 13,2003 03-2955, Michael Palm, 710 Big Island - Average Lakeshore Setback Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: RS, Seasonal Recreation 2.889 acres (125,845 s.f.) Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variances to construct a 3- season cabin: 1. Average lakeshore setback variance to construct a home on a property which sits entirely in front of the average lakeshore setback line. 2. Lot area variance to allow a cabin to be constructed on a lot on Big Island where the lot is only 2.8S9 acres in size and 5 acres is normally required. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommendations: 1. Appro\ al of the averag.. lakeshore setback variance to allow a 3-season cabin to be constructed on a property which sits entirely in front of the average lakeshore setback line. 2. Approval of the lot area variance as the property is a legal lot a record and no structure could be built on the property without a lot area variance. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Section 78-1279: Placement of structures on lots. Average lakeshore setback. No principal or accessory structure shall be located closer to the lakeshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots; except that this does not apply to stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes. Further, the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. Section 78-56S: Lot area requirements. Within any RS seasonal recreational district, no new lot or parcel shall be created less than 5.0 acres in dry-buildable lot area exclusive of designated wetlands... 11 jkiii miMti N03-2955 October 20.2003 Page 2 ofS Lbt of Eihibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit b Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Application Survey/Site Plan Topography Map Elevation of Proposed Structure Aerial Photograph Photographs Plat Map Property Owners List LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET All setbacks are approximates. A current survey will be required in conjunction with the building permit application and all required setbacks must be met. The applicant is pioposing to mirror the structure that existed in 1935, which is the structure shown on the submitted survey. The setbacks and lot information l^low was taken from the submitted survey, dated September 9, 1935, and are subject to change slightly but in no circumstance will variances be granted to these requirements. The applicant has proposed a cabin of the same footprint indicated on the submitted survey (appro.ximately 1,880 s.f.). Lot ArcaAVidth: RS Lot Area Lot Width Required 217,800 s.f. (5 acres)50' Actual 2.889 s.f. (125,849 acres)539’ Setbacks: RS Required Exbting Proposed Front n/a n/a n/a Rear n/a n/a n/a Left Side 50 ’n/a -100 ’ Right Side 50 ’n/a -250’ Lakeshore 75’n/a -75’ Average Lakeshore 385 ’n/a -90’ f M)3*295S October 20,2003 PageJofS Structural Coverage; The property is not subject to structural coverage requirements as it is over 1.99 acres, in accordance with Section 78-1403. Hardcover Calculations: No hardcover currently exists on the property other than the old foundation from the previous cabin. The applicant has indicated that he will build around this foundation but follow the same footprint as the old cabin indicated on the submitted survey from 1935. From the submitted survey it appears that the cabin is located exclusively in the 75-250 ’ zone and no structure or hardcover exists in the 0-75 ’ zone. The building footprint on the submined survey meets all hardcover requirements for the 75-250 ’ zone. The second residence located on the southern property boundary and the ice house (shown on the 1935 survey) no longer exists on the property and the applicant has indicated that he will only be constructing the cabin. Under no circumstances will hardcover variances be permitted and the applicant must submit hardcover calculations with the building permit application. Average Lakeshore Setback Variance The property is located on a point on the north western side of Big Island. The configuration of the propert> and location of the homes to the east and west of the subject property put the subject's property entirely within the average lakeshore setback as shown in Exhibit C. The applicant would not be allowed to construct any structure on the property if an average lakeshore setback variance w asn’t granted. The proposed structure would encroach approximately 150 feet into the average lakeshore setback. Lot Area Variance Currently, no structures exist on site. Because the applicant is proposing to build a cabin and the property is under the 5.0 acre minimum a variance is required to build. The lot is a legal lot of record and therefore buildable. Further, it w as granted buildable status as part of the creation of the RS District in 1983 (Section 78-568 (b). Record Lot No. 13). Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit A, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In considering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety o»d welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under cottslderation, and shall recommend approval only when b is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. L_i uimataM mm r M3-29SS October 20,2003 Page 4 of5 Staff finds that a hardship exists merely in the configuration of the applicant ’s property and the property to the east. The applicant ’s property is located on a point putting the entire property in the average lakeshore setback. Also, the property to the cast is very large (17.5 acres) with the home having over a 500 ’ setback. Staff also finds that a hurdship exists for approval of the lot area variarjce. This Variance is routine when properties are rebuilt, fhis approval would be subject to the proposed structure meeting all other setback and hardcover regulations. Staff would make the following recommendations in regards to the criteria for “undue hardship ’’ pertinent to this application: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. iUi&■'i “The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official conU-ols.“ A structure could not be built on this property without the requested variances. The lot is a legal lot of record and therefore the applicant should be able to build on the lot. Also, a structure could not be built anywhere on the lot without approval of an average lakeshore setback. "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner.” The configuration of the property and the surrounding properties, and that the property is located on a point creates unique hardship not created by the landowner. “The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." A variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The applicant is proposing a 3-season cabin for summer use only which is the usual use on Big Island. Also, the applicant is proposing the mirror the cabin that existed in the 1930 s falling within the character of Big Island "Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter.' Not applicable “Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06. Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter." Not applicable “The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for projjerty in the zone where the affected person's land is located." A residential structure/cabin is permitted in the RS Zoning District. 7. 8 9. 10. 11. M13-29SS October 20.2003 Page 5ofS “The Board or Council may pennit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling.” Not applicable “The special conditions appl>irg to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.” A special condition applying to the land is that the property exists on a point and the configurations of the property to the east cause a very restrictive average lakeshore setback The special condition applying to the lot area variance is that a structure currently doesn t exist on the lot but has in the past. “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located.” This proposal does not apply generally to other land or structures on Big Island but is common with properties that exist on points. “The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." The granting of the average lakeshore setback and lot area variances are required for the applicant to use his property in an allowed manner. “The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code." The granting of the proposed variances will not in any way be detrimental to the public or intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 12. “The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty.” The granting of the variance is necessary for the applicant to build on his property and alleviate demonsrable hardships. Issues for Consideration 1 . Is the unique aspect of this property being located on a point enough to justify variance approval? 2. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Approval of the average lakeshore setback v ariance and the lot area \ ariances subject to the following: 1 . The structure shall be constructed in accordance with the footprint shown on the survey dated September 9,2003. 2. A current survey and proposed hardcover calculations be submitted with the building permit application. 3 . No other setback or hardcover variances be required. OuniCfl.EXHIBIT A TLICATION Application # ^3*^ ^^.£513 Date Received Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - V. Initial Application Fe^ S250.00 (S50.00 per each ackiitional vapafice) Renewal Variance Fee S (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures S2S0.00 Afrer-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Z.2.—U7 ZA d)r>CP^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. 'ropgjjy > no^ (month/year) Present use of property: __ Zoning District:____ APPLICANT Name Address: t^Xtuc€. pLfitCJC.City:, OW’NER (if different than applicant) Name ___ Address:City:, Phone (homd^J^zN^ ZC-44-fi'^ Phone ^vork) - 0'7oc^^ Phone (home)_________________ ^ Phone (work)_________________ ft ---------- ivw. -lyZip:, DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST^ Describe request in detail: '700 ^ ^ • _ J _ .11 . Estimated Construction Cost S ioOiOOO *T?s/a4^( (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area C<1 X Setback: ___Lot Width Front Side Lot CoverageHardcover _ _ Rear Average Lakeshoreffe Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTiON OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: Cxincr ’ I riT* l*i -D ^ with Zoning Code requirements: ^ Mzyv>c~ ' pCcCCcrV A - U>w 'j5L>OC?ffTX>r*4 “Dtwjo 1‘^Ao. ‘ ^xrc., pjg rue LAvigMg: required submittals i^ygur^pplicatlo^^ ^PPlly^ti9n <jeadline dan, 1. 2. 4. Completed Application Form obtain this iSfl^ds'^d^ii'ap from''^^^^ *"^P "’“^t ^ Govt Center, 348-5910). ^ ^*P**^cnt of Finance, A-603, reproduction. P™''"’* ®“ <•) "PX 8X,“ x 11" for V •" P^de3e*0)*copy^^ property. This would include namefs) of annf ® “ interest in the As an addendum to this aoplication*^ni#i!ic current owner(s). you wish notified of this application.^ * * * separate list of any other persons Additional items as may be requested by City staff. 7. 8. The Applicant and Property Owner must eJon ♦»,;* t* • ppp.l.q00n H not ron mktUUll^^y J^ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE Administrator, agreesV^ndditiinirfees^L?/^^^^ H t Zoning JMQOaaApplicant's Signature Date 07i OWNER'S SIGNATURE entry onto the propeny°by'c1^ stafC^omuhaSll' authorires reasonable members for putposes of investiaation ’and verif.cat’iofoTius°r2^l«r" Owner's Signature Date lll4 Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings ve hdd A ** Planning Coi^ssion Applicants must be present at all scheduled review Monday of each month. Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled mSr ^ **»e Planning Commission and have an authorized agent attend in your nlace and »a .d ^ ”!!**«*’ ** arrangements to change prior to the meeting. ^ & Zoning Office of this #SQ^55 V • . « A • • * % •. • ^ • •. • .. . «* •- .• *. . « • Oafed AfS-----.cfi^o/—----- •.•..•• <•. . .S'-V • '■•. ■•■. • . • ‘t --'. • V* ••;. ;•.■.•• * . ■ •. T -f* ._ ■ •.- :r-, -■ -■: ';5- • 'V . • .X • » • - ^ ^— . V •l • t . • • * /'%/o^/c/i i* •. \ ^yrlT. A/a/fO^i ••* .■ :\-V ; ,f f.• •• il. ’\ 7 N."v’/r V ®=- \V r I > * > <♦ .*• J \ % /II, : v’^ : i i''x-■■: ■ • • ' V -/\•. I I •. •t. • . f J/- v: 7:'v. ♦.. « • * «i • .. V lidof X V • N.^4 .• I "v / h\ *; ■X•1: X * % / • . •• *•*; *. I Jbdiddf • t « rx • ^ • % •V ■ ' ‘'f S -C- w4-4.r- i ^ lv:f TMCfC^f . .j ^ofx/sFns/^• • •♦ — • • ««• • • ♦ ■.. ..’(.'• .^vri V • • lx ■Judf'e/a^ j —4___„ §J^,P(rKF/7W/r . S •• : ♦ *. •' ' ■ — —A U jiA-I'OK^ \tOMN ElOUH^Ht^> '— ■ A SttoW'LiW^ XPTpwlrvv>i6 M)£4.^‘evv Df M«w; p/ii4<ndo pnqo Sctit !• Ft«i 0 100 Ccatsvr |•l•r••l 2' sH n NWl/4 SEC. 22 TlI7N.R23W HENNEPIN COUNTY Orona* Minnesota H-IO-93 m HORIZONS. INC. *E*|A|. (UAPIM Monssioans •••.« Cilf. M O^Wti ltl«l • ttlJifll'tMt MORtZONS* FILE 3-F209 i Ml ^mumk nw¥’'io!.; k w / . ^ » «k r^r^ * / ■ • • •m • ••« .r y^OT^' /\^vViTOUL>CAt— ^2f=soQOz-v-A^ OF TTfCL ‘^^cPCbcxxnt^ 1^00 l-fevvitc ^oLor Oi X46A--\'C> ^ T2oCA4fCO i-u> 1140. tM ^Tl v_ tZ4^^nrXjr-i TD ^7?^ us^ ViP«_c«£_^ o >0 £. % ij f \ 'j cJ Q<1 "f i. u ^llt ‘ * IT** V '5' V, > -V^ »: i..' , •*; \-*V .'t <. .r.- • *♦ V ’ • ^ V. '*. .'.V•r -i : V y.. f f..--;V 1 r- ■4:.-: i.cVA».::m kM .vV •• -■'1' • .. i . V'■ ; ^r' i ' . ' -v»' • ■:*ss i- A .•» Kfc ■ V^j :¥-’ !w-4f Ki.- i-.: i'^ ‘‘V^, iT'i:-' . . -. ‘iT- ^ • 1?’j|3 . ,.• ^ •.*> • •' *^1 ftr&M "'•'LD''* ■ ‘ ** . • * y: ✓. <# k; - /■ ^ - • jk ••-f.i^' '"-A •1 w . V #* • ✓ * .. 0 ■■ '■■ >. ■■ ' '' / #• < #*^, «• /' - •' .• 4.- .^'* • # ♦ / "•• • , • * .•’ ^j' . - '. ^'«v V '.'A ' ■■•/t^ '-*i»--If ^ V> r / .• . .y' /V' . V ' ■ ■^O y: ; '.;<>• * ‘ ■•■ij .•: vH*t7 • A‘fl-'<S t:-}pii. M-aM ^■:,rr . -;i rg"."- .~;7i i-^r* it!.rei : .!* •!- 4 nil ■ ,/XtJ ' • . -V. *• -■?• j .^v f**'*?- '■: . ,J# ** - * *• ^^MTi2lk * 1*-J ^- j^* -' -i ' ^y*.ic. - i •• I . ■ .N *. U"'''.-."i <^.4 ■ ■ ‘ “ I .; i» ;•n f ■ ! .1' rrjr> *• 4:■ If % o^ ^rir^<‘ 'X^\ass*£,«asii 42r.-*v: *. :^:“L. • li^ 'W^^. i-l- matr* 'V. MA^ /'’*■ VS •.=’•.'^■K'Z:.- vSea5i3 c' •?^ I.: '• •-*: N <Vw*'.,■* ■ ■ i'i-iu*T; '•'^Wi i.t' m m 'M m km^ ^1 • *‘ < • . •»/LtA 15* h5fW piS-fe'* *V|:Cr l^f m' I’-v*".iV :v;av::5 m*- • - 'r.//. :*-• ‘.M ^Vyin’lA Ir' :■■■..: ■. J'0 .1 \ •', v‘ '• i^VoTV; •: li'r-vfi■ J»4v> •'• •. . ;,.’h '.•. }. i.,// . I i:: ;iVt r. \! Ifi TTrJ piipi ■'; v j fr'i'■'» ''''f‘^^ . li! ■■■-*: . i.i i.r. .r’ i- ^'W- 1^^ w.^%' EXhikit ii Hennepin Hennepin County V ' Taxpayer Services Department ■ !f (T% / 0.^ i tTvsK/ Information ID 2211723240009 '*4 m‘6um Number 710 Stmt Nam« BIO ISLAND 7Nsl$not»l$gti9ynconMinap. hnpns»nt»aeompilalxnelMonna6on widdatBfromOly. County,§ndStat0foaamjlhoffH9S9ndctm9oufe9s. m j ^v ■ < ■' ^:j - ...f " f/\ ‘ -•’■ • ^-A ■ RUNrMTF.:r lICNNCIMN COUffTV PROP* PRCH^LRIYOX • INFORMATION SYli HIM <S LIST PAGR: I 3f 2211723240001 PtIOfADOII 720 UK] ISLAND OWNERNAME GERALD A ERICKSON JR ET AL TAXPAYER HOLIDAY COMPANIES NAME/AOOR 4507I0THSTW MPLSMN 55417 31 2211723240006 PROPADDR 3S ADDRESS UNASSIGNI-D OWNER NAME RECREATION POINT LLC TAXPAYER RECREATION POINT LLC NAME/AOOR 3721 KACHINA DR E PHOENIX AZ 85044 38 2211723240008 PROP ADOR 700 DIG ISLAND OWNER NAME RECREATION POINT LLC TAXPAYER RECREATION POINT LLC NAME/ADOR 3721 KAOIINA DR E PHOENIX AZ 85044 38 2211723240009 PROPADDR 7I0DIOISLAND OWNER NAME MICHAEL J WEINER TAXPAYER MICHAEL J WEINER NAME/ADDR I03I23RDST CODYWY 82414 I CERTIFY THATTHE FACTS REPRESEhTTEO ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS TIIS DATE ON TIC RECORDS OFTHE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT, TOINE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND DEUEF. DATE T-/7'd3 BY Ud % Date Applicatioa Received: 9>l7-09 Date AppUcatioa Considered as Conplete: 9* 17-03 60-Day Review Period Expires: 11-16-03 COUNCI! MFFTING OCT 2 7 2003 CITY OF ORC.\u REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: October 27,2003 Item No.; I Department Approval: Name: Janice Waataja]^ Title: City Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: /^03-29S6, Hossnpat Construction, 849 Bro\%ii Road North - Variance - Resolution Zoning Dbtrict: Lot Area: RR - IB, One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre minimum) 4.37 acres (190,364 s.f.) List of Exhibits A - Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendation B - PC Action Notice 10-22-03 C - PC Memo and Exhibits of 10-16-03 Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variance to allow the construction of a new home: 1. 68’ encroachment on the average lakeshore setback. Planning Commission Recommendation Approval of the average lakeshore setback variance with an unanimous vote of S-0. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting an average lakeshore setback variance for 849 Brou-n Road North. .1. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1279 FILE NO. 03-2956 WHEREAS, Hossnpat Construction, (hereinafter “the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 849 Brown Road North, within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City") and legally described as follows: The South 248 feet of that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 27, Towioship 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5*** principal Meridian, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the East line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter distant 354,75 feet North of the Southeast comer of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter: thence North along said East line a distance of 635.25 feet; thence West parallel w ith the South line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter a distance of990 feet; thence South parallel with said East line a distance of 635.25 feet; thence East to the point of beginning, which lies south and southw esterly of the follow ing described line: Beginning at a point on the East line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter distance 384.76 feet North of the Southeast comer of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence west parallel with the South line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter a distance of 1 78.00 feet; thence Northwestc, ’.y deflecting right 54 degrees 25 minutes 38 seconds to the north line of the above described property and said line there ending. (hereinafter the “property”); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow construction of a new' residence encroaching past the average lakeshore setback on a property abutting Dickey’s Lake. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1 . This application was reviewed as Zoning File #03-2956. Page 1 of 5 2. 3. 4. 5. The property is located in the RR - IB zoning district, which requires a minimum lot area of 2 acres. The applicant's property is 4.37 acres in area. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on October 20, 2003 and recommended approval of the average lakeshore setback variance based on the following findings: a. A residence meeting all required building setbacks could not be constructed on the lot without an average lakeshore setback variance due to the configuration of the property boundaries. b. Lake views for neighboring propei . >". will not be obstructed due to the topography of the lots to the north and south. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Plarming Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City, CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78*1279 to allow construction of a residence encroaching past the average lakeshore setback on a property abutting Dickey's Lake, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of S i i i « 1.Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2. 3. No other variances shall be required for construction of the proposed home. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (October 27,2004). 4.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicant and the applicant's heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 27 “* day of October, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 5 •! id STATE 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 of the City. Notary 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 of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public '* y '»■ HiUliii Page 4 of 5 ■iA State of Minnesota ) )ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this__day of Notary Public . > -..r-r.-t ; . f • ,2003 Page S of S 'i JiAhlMLdaii^aaui^ m A ■'a 1 r *• I I I I • wtr ir* V ctRircATt or suRvrr for WILSON MANAGEMENT. LTD. I ! w lie sc 1/4 or lie sw 1/4 or see. 27-118-23 l€N»CPM COUNIY. IM€SOTA i t artr ir c DICKEY LAKE ^ • * . * * g _______* M y;a3Jag a.'STtgga^a.vja.yaa'isajgy: IIOUSK DETAIL r »m ••«»« SIil :riii |ji §1! M I? >m JJ.<' ^Ty- O' o o yMbiit r CITY OF ORONd 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay* MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING nLE; 03-2956 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; October 22.2003 TO: Hossnpat Construction COPIES: 18105 31 “ Avenue N Plymouth, MN 55447 TYPE OF APPLICATION:Average Lakeshore Setback Variance i; J i DATE OF MEETING: October 20,2003 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approval of the average lakeshore setback variance consistent with the staff recommendation. VOTE:FOR AGAINST Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, October 27,2003; meeting starts at 7:00 p.nL If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Waataja at 952-249-4623. M3>2956 October 20.2002 Page I ofS Date Application Received: 9^l7-®3 Date Application Considered as Complete: 9-17-03 60-Day Review Period Expires: 11-16-03 To;Chair Smith and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, Citv Administrator From:Janice Waatajju City Planner Date:October 16,2003 Subject:03-2956, Hossnpat Construction, P.I.D. 27-118-23-34-0003 - Average Lakeshore Setback Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: RR - IB. One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre minimum) 4.37 acres (190,364 s.f.) Application Sunmary: Applicant requests the folloNsing variance to allow the construction of a new home: 1. 68’ encroachment on the average lakeshore setback. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommendations: 1. Approval subject to the home being placed in the location shotwt on the submitted plans. A hardship exists in that there is no other suitable location for a home on the property where all required setbacks could be met. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Section 78-1279: Placement of structures on lots. Average lakeshore setback. No principal or accessory structure shall be located closer to the lakeshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots; except that this does not apply to stairwa> s. lifts, landings and lockboxes. Further, the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. List of Exhibits Exhibit A: Application w/Hardship Statement Adjacent Property Owners’ Acknowledgement Form Existing and Proposed Survey Exhibit B: Exhibit C: Exhibit D: Exhibit E: Exhibit F: Exhibit G: Exhibit H: Aerial Photograph Proposed Elevations Proposed Floor Plans Property Owners List Plat Map Ll 1 M3-2956 October 20,2003 P«|tc2ofS Background This property is a iot which was created from a suMivision of 849 Brown Road North and a lot re-arrangement in October of 2000. The lot re-arrangement established a less than two acre lot as a legal lot of record when two acres is required and a conforming lot back lot, being the applicant ’s property. An address was never assigned to the applicant ’s property l^cause it has remained vacant for some time. The applicant. Hossnpat Construction, applied for a building permit to construct a home on the lot. The configuration of the back lot in relation to the adjacent lakeshore lots creates a situation w here an averag * lakeshore setback variance is required for placement of the home LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET LotArea/Widlh: RR-IB Lot Area Lot Width Required 87,120 s.f. (2 acres)200 ’ Actual 190,364 s.f. (4.37 acres)335 ’ Setbacks: RR-IB Required Existing Proposed Front 50’n/a n/a Rear 50’n/a 52 ’ Lefr Side 30 ’n/a 31 ’ Right Side 30 ’n/a 97’ Lakeshore 150’ (Natural Environment Lake)n/a 275 ’ Average Lakeshore 340 ’n/a 272 ’ Structural Coverage: This lot is not subject to structural coverage requirements as it is over 1.99 acres in accordance with Section 78-1403. Hardcover Calculations: The applicant did not submit hardcover calculations however, it appears that the proposal meets the City’s requirements. The footprint of the home falls partially within the 75- 250 zone and the 250-500 ’ zone. The house is approximately 3,400 square feet. The j «^03-2956 October 20« 2003 Page 3 ofS applicant will be required to submit hardcover calculations with the building permit application and approval of the average lakeshore setback variance would stipulate that no other variances be required, including hardcover. Average Lakeshore Setback Variance The applicants have proposed an approximate 3,400 s.f. house to be constructed in the location shown on Exhibit C. The subject property is a back lot which doesn ’t allow the applicants to move the house to meet the average lakeshore setback while still meeting the lot setback requirements. Also, the topography of the applicant's lot and the adjacent neighbor’s lot creates a layout where views of the lake are not obstructed. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit A, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In considering applications for variance, the Planning Conmission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds that due to the configuration of the lot, its status as a back lot, the location of the existing adjacent houses, and the topography of the immediate area, a house could not be constructed without an average lakeshore setback variance. These circumstances create an undue hardship unique to the property. Staff would make the follow ing recommendations in regards to the criteria for “undue hardship” pertinent to this application: 1.“The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls." A reasonably sized home could not be constructed on the lot meeting the average lakeshore setback in addition to the lot setback requirements. 2."The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." The lot being a back lot and the topography of the adjacent area not affecting views are circumstances unique to the property and not created by the landowner. 3.“The variance, if granted, w ill not alter the essential character of the locality." The essential character of the locality will not change. Dickey Lake is a Natural Environment lake which requires a 150 ' setback. The proposed house meets this requirement. t ► 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. II. 12. W3-2956 October 20,2003 Pagc4orS “Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter.' Not applicable Undue hardship also includes, but .s not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 1 16J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter.” Not applicable “The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located." The proposed use is an allowed use within the RR - IB Zoning District. "The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling." Not applicable “The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.'’ The circumstances of the back lot designation and the topography not affecting adjacent homes ’ views are special conditions applying to the land. “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district which said land is located." These conditions are unique to this property and do not apply generally to land located in the RR - IB Zoning District. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." The granting of this application is necessary for the applicant's right to be able to bmlda home on this lot. Without an average lakeshore setback variance a house could not be constructed meeting the lot setbock requirements. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any w'ay impair health, safety, Co*de respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning The granting of this application will not in anyway be detrimental to the public or intent of the Zoning Ordinance. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty." The panting of the application will alleviate demonstrable hardships which exist should a house be constructed on the lot. 1 FT' M3-29S6 October 20.2003 Pigtsors Issues for Consideration 1. Does the fact that the lot was created without consideration of the average lakeshore setback constitute means for i^)proving the variance? 2. Does the back lot designation and the topography which doesn ’t obstruct others ’ view of the lake provide enough valid hardship for approving the variance. 3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Rcco jimendation Approval of the average lakeshore setback variance to allow the proposed house to encroach approximately 68 ’ into the required setback. EXHIBIT A CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 (550.00 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 U Date Received Amount Paid D YD.cnj PROPERTY INFORAUTION Site Address_^'i^ O wU. Property Identification Number (P.LD.X^ji -li^-^2> * 3yLiQ002> Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. D^Property Acquired Apg.t\ 300 _________________________(montfi/year) I (do not) also own the adjacent parcel^of land. Present use of property: >/ residential ____pother (specify)_____________________ Zoning District: ^___________________________ APPLICANT Name _ Address ^ Phone (home’) Q-* HpFgirvpCLA: CfYVSyk'tJCAiOrs Phone (>^ (^\OS 31^*" Q>A;C»UjLiLL> City: PieynnQ Zip:_S£!SLl _________________________O______Phone (work) ______ Address: \ 9A OR fl m li <l. D City: ‘Plt^ifvyv ______Zip: ll.'CiiV DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Constructiou Cost S Describe request in detail: ft tV j- svt- (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear ^ Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical dif&culty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: T>w it^4e4 AvH.te.'T’t tS— Cf^ -rWu ■.>«.**• tf*.) ,"TK«V Qn <c U. ..-r .-.a. -<1^- >0 C pv ^4 . CS^ -CV^ji a (K a z f REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All Pf following Information must bg iittt Y9»ir application to he considered ^tl nation deadline date in I 2, 5 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form “ xwTot?a - - 'hd"g« in „isu„g s.de ^ Sketches or plans of floor I elevation vi^v's^rorl one (n C st x I I". - yourshtfird':fts “S:^^^^ p'-- __ Additional items as may be requested by City staff. ^complete.,f th^ abovf information hf.« been inrlurfpH ----- APPLICANT S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide a'l infor-iaf.n-s —a, • j Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff tfme no'^ covS-d bv°"sar.r5^.,ygrjai.^ Applicant’s Signature Date f 7 - o OWNER’S SIGNATURE Jnt ” th?X“^;ra" “af;*;r4aha'nu mentbers for purposes of invesysalion'and verincanon oTthis°i^«r" Owner’s Signature Date gf-f •>- O Applicant must have all submittals into the Citv o Pcm^^^h .c k r u »>t Meetins- Planning Commission Meetiras are Md on ^th, xJ' Applicants must be present at all sched^n ."'■'‘i Monday of each month.Applicants must be present at all scheduled r#vb.tv ° Monday of each month. Council. If an applicant is unable to atterd a sched”erm«f Commission and have an authorized agent attend in vour nb,.. ,n,^ -.4..?. .! s-Tangements tohave an authorized agent attend in your oh- and a-Tangements to change prior to the meeting ^ & Zoning Office of thi: 1 1 i Wat Ink Advertising 612-47>1799 nc 9/16/03 012:37 PM 22/2 EXHIBIT B Adjactat Property Omicra' AekaowlMlganaBt Form I (w«) !S»»4 of 'XA 4>/ jii (print addresa][print nama(a)] wDiSSS* proposed use of the property located at alao reftned lo *s Land Use Applicadoo No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement. 1 (we) am (ate) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of die propetty or use but merely to confirm for die City Council that 1 (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor’s project or use requires Council qqnovaL Proper^Ownre y Date Date '♦♦******************»*#***a*******************^ I (we) *feyVI of ^(*9* B>fdlAlil RiL « I (print namc(^ (print addresa] have reviewed the plans fbr the proposed improvement or proposed nse of the property located at Art?' idfetred to aa Land Use Application No.________ I (we) understand that in executing thia acknowledgement, I (we) iun (are) not asked to declare approval or disi^ptoval of the property or use but merely to confirm Ibr the City Council diet I (we) am (are) aware of die nnprovement plans and that the prc^iosed zieighboi*s project or use requires Council approval. Date Provikty Owner IL^ Date If you have any infbrmstton that may asrist the Qty in die review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to die Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to die scheduled meeting date. 8 ^ - — •* • * •7 ^----•• -• * V» *•' • •••»•. I tv- !»' II r * >1 I I M »r*rifV*** ■ "“ ------------------------ ccRircATC or survey tor WILSON MANAGEMENT. LTD. N lie SE 1/4 OF lie sm 1/4 or see. 27-118-23 ICMCPM COUNI Y. UNNCSOTA i ; _____________ * '»• 4 .....................................:v — / . DICKEY LAKE -\r‘” -/- - {'>/--V-;- - V* ,-y //// y. j./j * / / / y *‘------------------' ,•«•••••• ••••••■f // /r^>......../ yJ^.; V '3=; ' 7* tp —V- i ' -s. ■ • I '/ X o: * o:rf • QV? ;f i I I;:' I ‘ I I I . I # r^r lil JS. KlWiVKfl !Bj. •t 4r«r IV ■ HOUS£ DETAIL r«v ^ c|w!%^irr^jSTi!?? stsi^Crioh tw*** #« m •>«*»•« ^4^ •# «m«4« t«. ** -nr.r.iu'aiS'irp r'*♦.iMlMl s;^j5jri'22.'rr3i;“iu'jii • - • #M. - - • I •M MM«M. I tmtumrnmti ■MttM. OMB BBB tBBBl M • mb. B« ftBM) •t !«•« •«Mbb* WMf «■«■* f* Mbb m. trnmtm •» mb Mbm i •* • »»MMB« taMB itoBB. ll Mbb bb4 MBBMI to BBBB ■■ ••• *>nB.. BtoB* Bn I BtoilB M aBBti C»1 g » Hn m U»w\% • • th <\ ;; f ••' r^U ^ 'W I- ;4 ,v ? * ‘TT 111 ■mlNiill —f MilIII I ■■itllh'iri-ii rr .. . .. toBHi^AgtTWm.. .ir:l..LlAli^--irvjA ; < 1 F.XIIIBIT I) (Vx)p^K'-fy BcvrMv)) ’ Y .. '♦ > • I w ■■ ■ ss.-'-"" y p,ypYO%irraiV ;..' :^J-K ■'.../ .V. ;a» * >'J'N-. i>-.,i af' l2 f ** -lY •■ r/ HDI/56 UC^+f‘C?)^ *. ■ :^'.•‘'rw.•-' M- jH; •.!41^ V Property Boundary Doesn't Reflect Lot Line Re-Arrangement ^ ■ of 2000 * •« ’.* r* •^-Tt -- ,4 ^ f Ik ^ * • •vj^. ^ * *^* *- * ^ VA ' c: - ^'J5k ■ I®, ,^I .. ■^- ■m fir ^ *»• StMUmUOiw>* r*r imacYAiiOH g^/AgYATWN § '*•..*’ ’1 I-.« . K *••“• Xl.Vr?* •^::>:5;v * I t; #. 'rS-lTT*!’;- • '\ ;■ -• * •; I N...' «rs:»r >.. 3<v:." riwtiicuvMflti esnwtf-* I • 4^1 PMNftCltYAliai rfr # V / V ■: .■'■ nv ■ > ' 'i ' - ,/i^X^ y '% iai»«w»s«r"- s i^*«w »» •-•■ o "n D ;•' W y# \ Slk’,->^\\ A<\ '* X\ g ^0 t1m ID»—• 9 ... ■v’-'m N.3f:--»^.:,v.S »v a:__ «!••- t- •‘••IN^> M* «•. ^ iF*S*S iiicia■r.A'; ':d;b 55a.~* I ■««•••.«««i \y ^ . X x%V. r' 0 ,.u :, > i; i I WMrlr^;- f I U* I* ^ * _ '•• I ||tl(>^*•' J*^Ir ~<rK|> iX wtifVsr 4^N \ - ,/y £SW»“^iySL. IP a >■ /* #c:t; f‘ (• ; /fo p 'v( a i 5 iiitniiiiidi jmt M»IM* Mf&rxsvrx&nu***" xmm tmu^^CiiiSwi w.» ^TWv* •«W«* MW* gggy fLOflwg^^ o -n •0 p® 5«• ?5 I § ►A ik M If M ->l u a i •-••• ;» u »/ •' ; / . ; • • .*.r*. .-. • * * . •* ^ w*' i:/'"is 3; F RUN DATE :9‘ TOJ IR 27IIR2JJJOOM ntORADOR 736 DICKEY LAKE OR OWNER NAME MARIAN M HOYT TAXPAYER MARIAN M IKIYI NAMI7ADOR 7)6 UK'KiiY LAKE DR lONO IAKE MN ))))& )• 271112)340003 PROPAOOR 31 ADDRESS UNASSKiNED OWNER NAME IIOSSNPAT CONSTRUCTION INC TAXPAYER IIOSSNPAT CONSTRUCTION INC NAME/AODR I8I0S 3IST AVE N PLYMOiniIMN SS447 PROPADDR 31 27IU23340006 •09 IIKOWN KD N '4 OWNER NAME LESLIE N HARRY ^ . TAXPAYER LESLIE N HAHN NAME/ADDR ■09 DROWN RI> N LONG LAKE MN SS3S6 31 27IIR2343002) PROP ADOR 900 DROWN Kl> N OWNER NAME M A M ROIIIIINS TAXPAYER MARK W A MARIA ROIIIIINS NAME/ADDR W) DROWN RD N LONG LAKE MN S3JM f-' ilENNi.l'h4C«)llNi t I'UOP i*roi'i;ri VO Y INI ORMAI ION SYSTEM J<S LIST PAGE. I 3K 27IIH2333WI2I PROPADDR aSO WILLOW DR N OWNER NAME T D CARLSON A J A CARLSON TAXPAYER 7IIOMAS I) A JANE. A CARLSON NAMEyADDR «50 WILLOW DR N LONGIAKEMN SS3S6 3K 27IIH2.IJ4U(N)2 PROP ADDR 913 DROWN RD N OWNER NAME THOMAS W UNE A WIFE TAXPAYER THOMAS WIANE; NAMOADDR 913IIRUWN RDNO LONGIAKEMN 33336 31 2711823)40004 PROP ADDR S79 DROWN RD N OWNER NAME IIOSSNPAT CONSTRUCTION INC TAXPAYER IIOSSNPAT CONSTRUCTION INC NAMI7ADDR m03 3IST AVE N PLYMOUTH MN 33447 38 271182)340003 ROPADDR 819 DROWN RON fWNER NAME F A JEVNE. IV A K N JEVNE TAXPAYER FRANZ A JEVNIt IV NAMli/ADDR 819 DROWN RDN LONGI.AKEMN 33336 38 2711823430013 PROP ADDR 1993 WIJIT FARM RD OWNER NAME R I. PARRISH A C J PARRISH TAXPAYER RKTIARDL PARRISH NAMF7ADDR 1993 WEST FARM RD LONGIAKEMN 33336 38 271182)430022 PROP ADOR 1990 WEST FARM RD OWNER NAME A A M DRACHMAN TAXPAYER ARMANI) E A MARY A DRACHMAN NAME/ADDR 1990 WEST FARM RD lONGLAKEMN 33)36 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAMI7ADDK 38 2711823430024 38 ADDRESS UNASSKINED THE I ARM AT LONG IAKE nil EARM AT LONG I AKE PINSHP C/U1IMOIHY ADAMS 1810 WEST FARM ROAD lONGIAKI MN 3.^336 38 3411823220004 PROP ADDR 730 DICKEY LAKE OR OWNER NAME J D RICK « JII RICK TAXPAYER K)NATHAN D RICK NAMIMDDR 730 DICKEY lAKE DR LONGLAKEMN 33336 ICURTIFY THATTMI: FACES REPRESENTED ARE AN ACXTJRATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OFTHE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE by TMENT.TO •niE BEST . y Ir \ CnilMCII ^^P^rTING Date Application Received: 9*17-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 9-I7-03 60>Day Review Period Eipires: 11-1^03 OCF 2 7 2003 CITY OF OHONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: October 27,2003 Item No.: / \ Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Janice Waataja-^K^ Title: City Planner Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #03-2957, Joseph Thies, 1180 Willow Drive North - Variance - Resolution Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: RR- IB. One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre minimum) .839 acres (36.552 s.f.) 196 feet List of Exhibits A - Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendation B - PC Action Notice 10-22-03 C - PC Memo and Exhibits of 10-16-03 Application Summary: Applicant requests the following variances to construct an addition to the home and a detached garage: 1 . Rear yard setback variance to allow an attached garage and house addition to be setback 32 feet when 50 feet is required. 2. Rear yard setback variance to allow a deck to be setback 24 feet from the rear property line when 50 feet is required. 3. Rear yard setback variance to allow a detached garage to be setback 5 feet from the rear property line when 10 feet is required. Planning Commission Recommendation Approval on a vote of 4-1 consistent with staff s recommendation which consisted of: 1.Approval of the rear yard setback variance to allow an attached garage and house addition to be setback 32 feet when 50 feet is required due to limited alternate locations available for expansions, that the lot is substandard in size, and that the variance will not negatively impact the adjacent neighbors. 2.Denial of the rear yard setback variance to allow a deck to be setback 24 feet from the rear property line when 50 feet is required due to it not being a necessary component of the addition and it could be relocated. 3.Denial of the rear yard setback variance to allow a detached garage to be setback S feet from the rear property line when 10 feet is required because the garage can be shifted to meet the setback. The dissenting commissioner felt no hardships existed to allow the applicant to ftirther increase the non-conforming rear yard setback. Staff Rekommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached Resolution granting a rear yard setback variance for 1 1 80 Willow Drive North. ifcnoin r A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-420 (B) FILE NO. 03-2957 WHEREAS, Joseph Thies. a single person, (hereinafter “the applicant ”) is the owner of the property located at 1180 Willow Drive North within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City”) and legally described as follows: The North one hundred and ninety-six feet (196 ’) of the West two hundred and twenty feet (220’) of the Southwest quarter (SW!4) of SEC. 27, TWP. 118, RGE. 23, subject to road easement over the Westerly thirty-three feet (33 ’) thereof, according to the map or plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the register of deeds in and for said county and state. Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the “property ”); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a rear yard setback variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-420 (B) to allow construction of an addition to the home which consists of an attached garage and living space. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 9 This application was reviewed as Zoning File #03-2957. The property is located in the RR - IB zoning district, which requires a minimum lot area of 2 acres. The applicant ’s property is .839 acres in size. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on October 20, 2003 and recommended approval of the rear yard setback variance based on the following flndings: Page 1 of S il U 4. 5. a. The home, as it currently exists, has a non-conforniing rear yard setback. b. The locations of the septic system and well and the existing footprint of the home constrain alternative locations for additions. c. The additions will have minimal or not impact on the visual density of the surrounding neighborhood. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the public, and tlie effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-420 (b) to allow construction of an addition to the home which consists of an attached garage and living space to be located 32.5 feet from the rear lot line where a 50 foot setback is normally required, subject to the following conditions: I.Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. Pt^e 2 of 5 i 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. The proposed detached garage shall be constructed to meet all required setbacks consisting of 10' from all property boundaries and 10' from the principal structure. This structure shall also not be in access of 1,000 s.f. The proposed deck off the east side of the addition shall be moved to the north side of the addition and shall be located so that the deck meets a rear yard setback no less than the approved 32.5 feet. No other encroachments shall be allowed in the rear yard so as to decrease the setback less than the approved 32.S feet. This includes any accesses such as stairN\ays, etc. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (October 27, 2004). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, undeisiood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicant and the applicant's heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 27'*^ day of October, 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 5 STATE 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 of the City. f Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HEN*NEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of , 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 Page 4 of 5 State of Minnesota ) )ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this ___________, a single person. day of ,2003 Notary Public Page 5 of S A SCMf MffCf I I I c ^ B •- 0 R 0 l»€ MOKIN IMC or INC SOUIMMSf l/« see. Ih w- itiL KCC. n ==SETBACKS rnONT VAMO SrittACH • IV toe VMIO SCTMCK • MEM VMIO MIMPC • IT LEGEND OfpvP^^* ^ ^11 (m*P 9M\ toc |MiV<A W n«U 4M OEMOIEi SEFTC CtlMOUT OCMOffSrOUNOMON OCMOTES SC? MON A Tme OPMON WAS NOr RJNMSICO TO nC SUNViYOM NON WAS A SreOf C TIME SfMCN rON M« EjnSfUCt OM NGWEJUSf f NCf or Nf CONOtO ON UNNCCONOCO EASCMENf S CONOUettO tV ll€ SURViYON AS fMT OT ITNSSUN^V. IhercbrccfWif MtiitlsalnioandoofriCi ftpfostnUsoN ol a umy of Vtt boundarttt ol THE NORTH ONE HUNOHEO AND NiNETY.SlX FEET (196) or THE V^ST TWO HUNDRED AND TWENTY FEET (72V) OF THE SOUTHV^STQUARTER (SWIM) or SEC 27. TWR lti.RG£ 23 SUUJTCT TO nOAO EASCMENT OVER TIC WTSTEIILV TIRRIY TIIMEE FEET (33) TICREOT. ACCOROINO lOTIC IMAP OR PIAT TICREOT ON rHE OR OF RECOROM TIC OTFICr. OF 11C REQSI Ell or UCEUS IN AND FOR SARI COUNTY ANU SIAIC. ICNNEf»IN COUNTY. IRNNESOTA\7ftUhAn4 ■wr.taMOMMUiMA Mt I in d^r «l NnM*w. 20U. -fwv\ nc M. j si OfO ■if sg j inzo B U o I4Jino lo t It oma. (• CNCCICfO GNO DATE flN4« scAir An &IHMNN JIHINII •Nff not •r> t I. I 'r-i-*n>n4^WftlUkN CITY OF ORONO ZONING FILE: 03-2957 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952)249-4600 DATE OF NOTICE; October 22,2003 TO: Joseph Thies COPIES: 1180 Willow Drive N Orono, MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION________________ DATE OF MEETING; October 20,2003 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approval consistent with staffs recommendation, which is as follows: 1. Approval of the rear yard setback variance to allow an attached garage and house addition to be setback 32 feet when 50 feet is required due to limited alternate locations available for expansions, that the lot is substandard in size, and that the variance will not negatively impact the adjacent neighbors. 2. Denial of the rear yard setback variance to allow a deck to be setback 24 feet from the rear property line when 50 feet is required due to it not being a necessaiy component of the addition and it could be relocated. 3. Denial of the rear yard setback variance to allow a detached garage to be setback 5 feet from the rear property line when 10 feet is required because the garage can be shifted to meet the setback. VOTE: 4 fJOR 1 AGAINST Applicant ’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as; City Council - Monday, October 27,2003; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they are available from Ae City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Waataja at 952-249-4623. myim October 20.2003 Page 1 of6 Date Application Received: Date Application Considered as Complete: 60-Day Review Period Expires: To:Chair Smith and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Janice Waataja, City Planner October 16,2003 Subject:03-2957, Joseph Thies, 1180 Willow Drive North - Rear Yard Setback Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: RR- IB, One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre minimum) 0.839 acres (36,552 s.f.) 196.16 feet Application Summary: Applicant requests the follow ing variances to construct an addition to the home and a detached garage: 1. Rear yard setback variance to allow an attached garage and house addition to be setback 32 feet when 50 feet is required. 2. Rear yard setback variance to allow a deck to be setback 24 feet from the rear property line when 50 feet is required. 3. Rear yard setback variance to allow a detached garage to be setback 5 feet from the rear property line when 10 feet is required. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommendations: 1. Approval of the rear yard setback variance to allow an attached garage and house addition to be setback 32 feet when 50 feet is required due to limited alternate locations available for expansions, that the lot is substandard in size, and that the variance will not negatively impact the adjacent neighbors. 2. Denial of the rear yard setback variance to allow a deck to be setb;. k 24 feet trom the rear property line when 50 feet is required due to it not being a necessary component of the addition and it could be relocated. 3. Denial of the rear yard setback variance to allow a detached garage to be setback 5 feet from the rear property line when 10 feet is required because the garage can be shifted to meet the setback. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Section 78-420 (b). Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be obser\ed: Rear Yard (feet) 50 II Lbt of Exhibits Exhibit A: Application w/ Hardship Statement Existing Survey Proposed Survey Existing and Proposed Site Plan Alternative Location Map Septic & Well Diagrams Elevation of Proposed Detached Garage Cross Section/Elevatioos of Addition Floor Plans Aerial Photograph of Surrounding Area Plat Map Property Owners List M3-29S7 October 20,2003 Page 2 of 6 Exhibit B: Exhibit C: Exhibit D: Exhibit E: Exhibit F: Exhibit G: Exhibit H: Exhibit I: Exhibit J: Exhibit K: Exhibit L: Background The applicant ’s property is located north of County Road 6 on the cast side of Willow Drive. The property is less than an acre in a two acre zone. The house is located in the south eastern portion of the lot. The property is also on its second septic system. The applicant ’s property is surrounded on the south and east by a 2.6 acre residential parcel where Willow Drive is to the west and the City of Medina is to the north. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot ArcaAVidth! RR-IB Lot Area Lot Width Required 87,120 s.f (2 acres)200’ Actual 36,552 s.f. (0.839 acres)^196’ Setbacks: RR-IB Required Existing Proposed Front 50’ f 88.9 ’88.9’ Rear 50’43.5’32.47’ (house) 23.75’(deck) Left Side 30’103 ’105 ’ Right Side 30’40 ’ 40 ’(house) 12’ (detached garage) J 1 «03-2957 October 20,2003 Page 3 of 6 Structural Coverage; Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 36.552 s.f. (0.839 acres)Allowed: 5,483 s.f (15%) Proposed: 2.677 s.f (7%) Hardcover Calculations; This property is not subject to hardcover requirements as it is located more than 1000’ feet from any body of water. Rear Yard Setback Variance The applicants are proposing to tear down the existing attached garage and build a new garage with liv ing space above and an 11 x 24 foot addition which connects the new garage and living space to the main house. The applicants are also proposing a detached garage to be located in the southeast comer of the property. Currently, the existing attached garage maintains a 43.5 foot setback to the rear property boundary when 50 feet is required. With the additions, the applicants are proposing a rear yard setback of 32.5 feet when 50 feet is required (11 feet closer than existing). Additionally, the applicants are proposing a second story deck setback approximately 24 feet from the property boundary. Also, the applicants are proposing a 528 square foot detached garage in the southeast comer of the property. Any detached garage under 750 square feet must be located behind the house and 10 feet from the side and rear property lines. The applicants are proposing a setback of 5 feet from the rear property line and 12 feet from the side property line. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit A, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. H-.rdshlp Analysis In considering applications for variance, the Planning Conunlsslon shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of/Ire, risk to the public safely, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code In Instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and Intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds there are several hardships which would constitute a rear yard setback variance for the proposed attached garage and living space addition. The property is on its second septic system which precludes any additions from expanding northwest as the mound and septic tanks may be disturbed. Also, the applicant’s well is located directly M3-2957 Oct^btr 20,2003 PiSe4of6 north of the most eastern line of the house precluding any additions from goins north as the well may be disturbed. The only o'her alternative would be for the addition to be constructed off the southwestern side of the e.visting house, however, the layout of the house would not be sensitive to that as the garage would be accessed throu^ the living area rather than the kitchen. The existing setbacks and layout of the home would not support any addition to the south. Therefore, the only alternative is to expand to the east where an existing non-conforming setback is already occurring. The non-conforming setback would be increased by 11 feet, however, the adjacent neighbors would not be affected as shown on Exhibit G. The new ’ rear yard setback would be 32.5 feet on a property which is under an acre in size. If the property were located in a one acre zone this 32.5 foot setback would meet the 30 foot required rear yard setback. Additionally, the applicants are proposing a rear yard setback variance to allow a deck to be setback 24 feet when 50 is required. Staff does not find any hardship w hich would constitute this variance approval. The deck is not required, is for aesthetic purposes, could be relocated to the north side, and is accessible from only the master bedroom. Further, such a deck would not be permir.ed in even the '/; acre’ or one acre zones, since the minimum rear setback for those less restrictive zoning districts is 30*. Lastly, the applicants are proposing a deuiched garage to be located 5 feet from the rear property boundary. Staff does not find any hardship which would constitute this variance approval. The required setback is 10 feet and there is adequate room for the garage to be shifted west to meet the setback and not interfere w ith the house. To do this, the applicants may be required to construct a 22 x 22 foot garage rather than a 22 x 24 foot garage to maintain a 10 foot separation from the house, and'staff belie' es this can be achieved without any variances. Staff would make the following recomme.ndations in regards to the criteria for “undue hardship” pertinent to this application: 1.The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls." Any garage additions to the home would require variances. There are limited areas to expand on the lot. 2.“The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his proewrty not created by the landowner." The unique circumstances are the locations of the septic and well, and well as the location of the home and its footprint in relation to the property boundesries. 3.“The va .ance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." The neighbor s property that would be most affected surrounds the south and east property boundaries of the applicants. However, this neighbor's home and livability of it would not be altered should the rear yard setback variances be in etifc 11 ■ aiitti Mitl ifcr d 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. MJ-29S7 October 20,2003 Page S of 6 granted. “Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter.' Not applicable “Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 1 16J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter." Not applicable “The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person’s land is located.” The uses proposed are permitted in the RR — IB Zoning District. “The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling." Not applicable “The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.” The special conditions of the locations of the septic system and well are peculiar to this specific property. “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located.” The hardships described do not apply generally to other land or structures, and are a unique circumstance to this specific property. “The granting of the application is necessary for the preserv ation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." The granting of this application is necessary if the applicants desire to do any additions to the home presently or in the future. “The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code.” The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way be detrimental to the public or the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. “The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstiable hardship or difficulty.” The granting of this variance will not sen'e as a convenience, as the applicant has demonstrated hardships relating to the location of the septic system arid well MU-2957 October 20.2003 PogoOofO which preclmU locations for additions. Issues for Considcnition 1 . Do the hardships presented create a unique circumstance which would constitute variance approval? 2. Should the detached garage be required to meet the 10 ’ setbacks? 3. Is the deck necessary? Is it located appropriately? Could it be relocated? 4. Will the neighbors be negatively impacted? 5. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the following: 1. 2. Approval of the rear yard setback variance to allow an attached garage and house addition to be setback 32 feet when 50 feet is required due to limited alternate locations available for expansions, that the lot is subsUmdard in size, and that the variance will not negatively impact the adjacent neighbors. Denial of the rear yard setback variance to allow a deck to be setback 24 feet from the rear property line when 50 feet is required due to it not being a necessary component of the addition and that it could be relocated. 3. Denial of the rear yard setback variance to allow a detached garage to be setback 5 feet from the rear property line when 10 feet is required because the garage can be shifted to meet the setback. •It ,. ‘Ui .i.-v Vn'tf. p. S ,s . . *' ■ Ij^ C- EXHIBIT A CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S2S0.00 (S50.00 per each additior.al variance) Renewal Variance Fee SliO.OO (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures S250.00 Afrer-thc-Fact Fees (Double application fee) ApplicatioD #__ Date Received 1~7-o3 Amount Paid ^ 2. SO. PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address V\*£6 Property Identification Number (T.I.D.) V \ g OOO!^ Attach legal description to appliMtion if not included or. required survey, Date Propert^couired ______________ • r.ionth/vear’i I (do) no^also own the ^jacent fmcels of land. Present use of property: , v^resl Zoning District:________ _residential g2.-/g other (specify). APPLICAI^ . I ^ Name v‘Vv<.<r oK ^"TV\ Vr±> Address: \ k( Phone (home)^S4 47S ____ Phone (work)*^L«'3> 4-T? City:^rcrvo Zip: OWTS’ER (if different than applicant).^ Name Address: Phone (home) Phone (work)_ City:... Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUE^ Estimated Consruction Cost S _______ ^escribe request in detail: ^ rvva>a<, ITL* (attach additional sheets if necessarft ® ^ VARIANCES REQUIRED ____Lot Area ___ Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front .Ave.-c-i Lakeshore Other (sperSfy) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY' CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical diffic^ty or unusual property ccud:t:o.':s nreventi compliance with Zoning Code requirements:nW^ j 5 \ A \A Corfvtr er^ j t.iV^ oft. A -e t additional sheets if necessary) _ ^ ofV #Zu:S7 * iJi \JcJ,o.r. 4- REQUIRED submittals Mgf thy foltowtllg ............................ IfiLYQur appliraf j^uoLMsid^T;;^^ ^Pplt>iHnn deadline 1. 2. 3- 4 obtain this Ito, IrtcU^nTnip P'« ""V (you must Gom Center. 348-5910). Department of Finance. A-603 Certificate of Survi^v /■c-^ j t. ’ - / X «y changes in existing grade 7 / P^'operty. This would include namer-'i nf ^ y ^ an interest in the 7- 4^ As an addendum to this apefcaZ w L? »'™«(c). you w,sh notified of this atolicatioi,’" “ °f “y other persons - he -requested :y City staff. 4. 5. 7. 8. -» APPLICiNT’c cif-s,.,___ EP.inctudetLapplicant s signature Adntijfishator! cpctV^y «<l“ircd or requested by the Zoning sunolier ««cw'of this appited IS tme and cotiect to the best of hiXr-.-avv-^eo '"fo™ation ny.4fxJ^ 'Applicant's Signature OWNER’S SIGNATUM Date _C\-(n vrtTiiiLtv^ ^lOiNATURE SbeTfo'V™'’'%^^'^^^ c"c(f!'^Su\Ut ase-?"co,l^- ”■'*“"«* "«onable members for puqioses of investigation a.-.d ‘erificaitn ofOiis Council c*Owner’s Signature Date------------------------------— i-'dlC Meeting. TlanUfng Co!!^Z‘on Me°et'ir«“« ^ “r Commission Applicants must be present at all ,chedmtL?,‘’"' '= "■» Wrd Monday of each^r„tb c^annc... ,f an apphcant is unZTZl a sS" C.mU...7.Td e an authorized agent attend in your pla-e and tr’a*° “'cting. please make arrangements to change poor to the meeting. «» Building & Zoning Offic™ f flu“ Q O f J Hss S ;r) » •» THC HOflTM INC or fHC SOUTHKSf 1/4 see 27. w. lit. nee 23 scAic M/tcr SETBACKS MM rRONTYAROSrTtACK*S9 MM. SOC YAM) SCYNICK • XT MM tOMIVMIOSCTNCK*S9 LEGEND (S) OCMOICSUPfCCtlAMOUT 9 OiNOTfSrOUNONONMONUMCIff O OCNOrCSSfTMONMONUMCMT A rmc OTMION MAS NOT rURMSICO TO Tie SURVrYOt NOR WAS A SPCOP C YlYlf SCARCN rOR THi OnSTUCC OR NONCJltSirNCf or RCCOROCOOR UNRCCOROCO CASCMCNfS CONOUCICO BY THE SUR^YOR AS AART OT TT«S SURVEY I fwrety ccfUjf tfial tfvt is ■ tnio and oorrtet is pitsan Uipn ol a surwy of Iht boundanat ol THE NORTH ONE HUNDRED AND NINClY-SiX FEET (1901 OF THE WST TWO HUNDRED AND TWENTY FEET (22QT) OF THE SOUTHVW ST QUARTER iSWU4) OF SEC 27 TW> 110. RGE 23 SUOJECT TU ROAD EASEMENT OVER Tl€ WESTERLY THIRTY THREE FIET (33) THEREOF. ACCORDINO TO THE MAP OR PLAT THLRCOr ON FU E OR OF RCCORO IN THE Of flCr. OF 1IIC HLQSII It or UirUS IN AND rOfi SAIUCOUNIY ANU MAIL HEFRiEPtN COUNTY. MMNESOfA AfM iit locaioR of al byidlnoic tf any. Mm vid tf vl^ ORqoRChRiiRla,< any. Earn Of OR said land. Aaiiavoyadby mo BUS 1191 day of NoMmbor. 2002. Oaiy R CVwmnnd 11 I .iml *i44iw««t««. Mm I It H* 24/04 MSVISAMS Zo ozou s§ o l4itooaorr It IS UHAiRN RS CHECKED GRO DATE 1t04AX2 SCAIF AS MHAAM MXtNd ••I t (■ // ? v-:r-j 3 fl 0 S- C I i. R ‘"‘ nc NQwtN iMC or nc souiM«csr 1/4 see 27, twF. lit. nee IJ SCALCMrtU LEGEND Q ocNontscpicaoMoin 0 OCNOIKtrOUMOMONMONUMCNr O OCMOTTSSn WONMOMUIdrr A Tin E Of>MON WAS NOT rVRMSMCO TO nc SUMTOn MOM WAS A 8ICCCC Tim SOWICM rCM THE CXOTMCi OR P«OH EXISTENCE or AEOOROCO OR UMVCOAOCO EASEMENTS C0N0UC110 SY THE SIXmTOR AS RMir or nis SURVEY I hotstqr coitf^ ttul Mils It a InioiiniJ culf eit icpiatanlalloR ol a uray ol »w boundanet of HIT NOfiTiiONr MUNunriiANONiNriY r.ixrrrr(inrr)or 1IH! wLsr IW011UNUHLUANU i^NivfLLru20)Of iim: SOUTHWEST OUAHTCR(SWf/4) OF see TW 110.RGE 23 SUOJECr TO ROAD EASLMCNT OVER THE I^STERLY THIRTY-THREE FEET (3J) THEREOF. ACCOROMO TO TIC MAP on PtAT TICREOF ON FM E OR OF RTCORO IN TIC OFFICE OF THE REGISTER OF DEEDS IN AND FOR SAID COUNTY AND STATE. ICNNEPIN COUNTY. IRNNESOTA Ani tw locallOR of al Mdbigf. E any. twffOR. ORd ol iMMi •nmcfiRitfilA i iRf. Hri Of OR Mi nw Ills llii day of Novombor. 2002. oonrR. UooROOdLondSowtyor.Mbm Uc No 24704 12Z.J t vn*53 «• ! cob >• (r 3in 0 III 1 • •Iu ►- n: lUo ?a o S aO DRAWN RS OCCKiO QRO DATE lUIAOl scAie AS SHOWN JOONO 0907 001 exhibit e ALTEMAf)V/E PuAM f— ^ V V-N '' ^ \/ 0 s R r^ V-/ f z .'•V* ■<. ; ‘4 ■ '} ■ ■•! —i-v.----------------f «• i| • o -------------- •/ •^roVOyrt-^ -IWV-fW^ViT \ u i; 4? ] > tOl.t 7 p”'6-o o MLu-iaf« »• 9e aO. JiVv?T;t*U -TRriC _u ‘ / -^ ^ W^\\Q^V .£^%ST»»<ta q\ , Hou^e. 1^ \ \f PGWMima APPRiy.cO A : SUDMITT£D PROVED V\}th ajRRfcnONS AS NOTED-tmmm MIOI.O w g22H - *»J 9Rercolol eSoil 8o( ® Bench IncilKtmH . •<£h^ this Pm ^ ^ ^ -------— -------------- /t?0 ?»*/?>!»» V <Vf C0V <Pv»i"t(FiU/<U7wA Note: TNs Ihe N Cha( ChecI: ^^^yLgjjgli^rVr; } I2D Ullou AJ. A /,7HH-W Z/mi33'^HU 'j0 61'H I ,1.Jii^iut I Ccjistrcac Dedicated to Quality for Over 52 Years ___f\(VrN(^VL- 23^ 15>‘c - ^ • ■ *4 O ■.• 'Jr-. .1x</ y. QESQ C2Li!a ^mcdt ESEQ Q.^. m *»iiwm CEQ ■ - -Y ** * Esiise-rTrvi*- 5rri .v:'.- \i:s' ;)iii'-'l^.v:;It# •,•••••• j • I 'MV \ - 4% . . *» • •- ^ • ‘ • ' • • r*"^7 •;•: • V-’.,. \:r ' • wMliHl iiBlBfililMlia N* ««•• A • •• • • JMiM 4.^\ ■• v.'.r: -.'•'■■ ■ ~ •■•■‘Tr’qrv.T*;^ :; A. • • • ‘ ■■__________ ■ -^1 —j ^ T>‘ •-------------'* 1 ; • 1 ; • ] <4 •i- J *r- . _ f ^ • •• ^ rr-----T- L* * 1.•-■*' :y\zx:lj^^ X 5 1 .■■rj) •h^ EXHIBIT H ^ m..jy Z^to ^jot0^ TTrt^. !^%C fUL.jCi^rS,W#rVi^ W/ Z* Kdr-D C; \ ' •x r J,. ■ > * '^1^ Secryqfj rtin-j -(oerJiMsr ^Vb* 1 fIMK WliJO®*i-> tv . A SC(M*\ E''v«h’<rk MisM mm •: ' . ' Ti; * 1 -.^'1 ^ «>!r‘ ■ * •' . ■'•".a ■ 7*'" •♦ c, ~ .' ij&rJ 'V'"- »tt9rW6> itoote Mo*4n t A ■ f I • 4 ■ 1. *■• ^ *'• ' If * ,^ JL: J r' Aif -0 • ..'wmFm ii • I. I' '• ■ jspi'V^ /< V /W * I ..*-♦-< • ••' » I ', ‘ »- »t 'U' **' *-«'7 - ’tv/4f--i;:)-,v,^”j.f" ■ ■ ^ > 'Tp'^ fc "T • --------- - - 5 •* ‘ . fy> . ' sL’£>i^'!f.jgBWMWOttP^di iPITA\ • ‘ t . t • • jjs. # / • i ^ j Vl ^ ^ Le,-s I «. • >{'v ^/ y vr • J.'FcX’;> >.i^. i:- •» •« i t;>- i :* s s • «'• n' . ■ K^ > —" *^ .. *■/T' ‘. .k-i^ . '• ■ 'V. ^ >, t, ^ ‘ ^ % ;• •.■-•^1^0 • .■> -V y .W*. ^• . . •' ••• - ^ - .•• ' •' ■ .:^*? ‘ «• • •V^‘ f . V. ». • I . «... •* *> f'M . , V •‘‘•^*>V«»i,V..’<-^>'jt ,!'• ' , * ^ • ^ •■’a^ .■ i 4 * t - .. ' i V*/ ^ ^mm ‘L'' ik:. > A ^ I .♦.Jix ’5»? .r ^ >’:' -4 0^ mm s>-^ki-*'i5K t • - *^1. n / * V .■f>V •T X s ' - ‘^.; r- i.i»‘•r..ymm 'mmm0 '^■'4^i3 V .V* » •',\»x f-‘T-tti.'v .it mi *‘<. .'.'V ' • I i '^I , . u... . U.. .^.-r,# - • • «* - <^'••• V “• • •#* •• r ; * ***** * • • * 1P^ ■ %•- •'•*^*. “V **V. 4* » V. .** 0 t ‘o'-- EXHIBIT K Hennepin • f Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department V- ft\ /?»! • •tJSy • C MM ^ ^vj i I—iiL-Iy *Zj ‘ <<■< *•121 ^ 7-3 :lsrrt-T5|(f ^ i (39}I B *M ii®. -^*0^ a O' •. vv •0 etj* FARM RUN,i 4t2f7 mrirtrw Z _&._PiAr_a. yTjsnrasnnf^B ------------- tOtM ^4JJ- \ ■ 1* 11 uts !5 e f (W 3 l ,1«fi ? Parcel Information • *• * •• •• > ••• * Parcel ID 2711823320003 '"House Number 1180 Otreet Name WILLOW DR N This is not a kgsBy nconJta map. it raprasants a eompiaSen otMotmatton and data from Oty. County, and Ss:a road authoriUas and off»ar aourcaa. RUN DATB: 9/12/20)3 80 2711823230009 rROPADOR 2395 COX TR OWNER NAME DAVID TOLCIItNER TAXPAYER DAVID MTOtiCHINER NAME/ADDR 2195 COX TR LONCUAKi: MN 55350 18 27I1H23320004 PROPAODR 1100 WUijOWDRN OWNER NAME CLIFFORD ALFRED HILLSTROM TAXPAYER CLIFFORD A lULLSTROM NAMI7ADDR 1 100 WIU.OW OR N LONOUKI-MN 55356 . • ♦ • ... HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 2711823320002 PROP ADDR 2300 SIXTH AVE N OWNERNAME UAROROURKE TAXPAYER BARRY A ROBIN O'ROURKE NAME/ADDR 2300 OTII AVE N LONGU^KEMN 55350 38 2711823320003 PROP ADDR 1 180 WILLOW DR N OWNERNAME JOSEPHCTIIIES TAXPAYER JOSEPH CTIIIES NAME/ADDR 1 180 WILLOW DR N LONG LAKE MN 55350 so 2811823140002 PROP ADDR 1 255 WILLOW DR OWNER NAME FREDRICK J KELLER JR ETAL TAXPAYER ANNE M KELLER NAMI7ADDR 1255 WILLOW DR IX)NG IAKi: MN 55356 38 2811823410002 PROP ADDR 1125 WILLOW DR N OWNER NAME W L LESKINEN ADM LESKINEN TAXPAYER W LA DM LESKINEN NAM17ADDR 1 125 WIILOW DR N lONGIAKF.MN 55350 I CERTIFY THATTHE FAHS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON T) IE RECORDS OFTHE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND HEUEF. ^ ^ ^ ^ z' DATETi HY \ -ft—-I—*At r»Aii iflf- 1^1 PAGE: I i “7N I f • . ■ -N .■. J CM m* I f-rfia 1 rJiMaArtttfMll CniiMcii r^PETING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION OCT 2 7 2003 cityoforo.no DATE: October 23,2003 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name RonMoone Title City Administrator Adminbtrator Reviewed: Item Description: Proclamation-Housing Week Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report Attached is a letter from LaDonna Hoy, Executive Director of Interfaith Outreach and Community Partners, rc;garding efforts to increase awareness about affordable housing issues. Also attached is a proclamation setting the week of November 15-22,2003 as Housing Week in Orono. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached proclamation setting the week of November 15-22,2003 as Housing Week in Orono. iMin mil I—nfnli Aanfcl ViiiMiA ^ I ^ I CITY PROCLAMATION OF HOUSING WEEK TO BE NOVEMBER 15 - 22,2003 IN THE CITY OF ORONO WHEREAS, an adequate supply of safe, well-kept, affordable housing is an important component of a strong, stable, economically vibrant community; and WHEREAS, wages at lower levels have not kept pace with rising housing costs, and the wage-housing cost gap has led to rising homelessness; and WHEREAS, the shortage of affordable housing contributes to homelessness; and on a given day, 8,600 Minnesotans are homeless and an additional 13,740 are at imminent risk of losing their housing; and W'HEREAS, 157,372 Minnesota households spend more than 50% of their income on housing; and WHEREAS, children make up 43% of Minnesota's homeless population; and WHEREAS, homeless children are much more likely to experience physical, behavioral, and emotional health problems, be held back in school, and suffer from learning disabilities than non homeless children; and WHEREAS, National Hunger and Homelessness Awareness Week is November 15-22, 2003; and WHEREAS, Interfaith Outreach & Community Partners (lOCP) provided 1246 emergency housing assists to 508 households in FY2003 to prevent homelessness; and WHEREAS, public, private, non-profit partnerships play w essential role in the development and preservation of affordable housing; and WHEREAS, the City is a participant in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act; and the City Comprehensive Plan supports a balanced housing supply, with housing available for people at all income levels; and WHEREAS, “Housing Week" is a community initiative to raise awareness about local housing issues, to raise money to address housing needs, and to promote community involvement and volunteerism. Page 1 of 2 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Orono City Council does hereby proclaim November 15-22,2003 to be: HOUSING WEEK in the City of Orono, and does also encourage all citizens to participate in the activities associated with Housing Week. Adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on October 27,2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 2 of 2 L October 2. 2003 The Honorable Barbara Peterson City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 1 Dear Mayor Peterson: Attached is our annual request for the City of Orono to issue a Housing Week proclamation in an effort to increase awareness around the issue of affordable housing We so very much appreciate your active participation in the kick-off event on Lake Street in Wayzata together with the other four mayors of our area. Thanks again for your personal involvement as well as the city's great support of that effort! The purpose of this letter is to invite the City to again participate in our community initiative to raise awareness about local hotjsing issues by proclaiming the week of November 15-22, 2002, “Housing Week" in the City of Orono. (see enclosed draft proclamation). Background Interfaith Outreach and Community Partners serves low and moderate income households in Plymouth, Wayzata. Long Lake. Orono. Medina, Minnetonka Beach. Medicine Lake, and Hamel. lOCP actively advocates for the preservation and development of affordable housing in Medina. One of lOCP’s housing goals is to raise community awareness and support for increased housing opportunities for low-income families throughout the community. To this end. lOCP, along with several local congregations, will be observing the week of November 15-22 as “Housing Week". Calendar Housing week will be initiated on night of November 14 as the Home Base kids from several area schools sleep out for one night at two school locations in Plymouth. On Saturday. November lb*”- Bob Fisher will begin his eighth annual Sleep-Out. Bob will be sleeping outside to raise funds to address and prevent homelessness in the community. This year our Housing Week financial goal is to raise $1,000,000 in an effort to meet the skyrocketing housing needs of the families we serve! A community-wide kick-off will take place at 6:00 pm, in front of the Wayzata Depot in downtown Wayzata. The kick-off will include a hot dog supper, entertainment, educational “learning" stations, and a short program We expect significant media coverage including television news, radio news and interviews, and newspaper coverage once again this year. On November le*". several leaders of the faith community will deliver messages from the pulpit about the affordable housing issue. Many of these congregations will be taking a special offering to raise funds that will seed some exciting new housing 110 Grand Avenue South. Wayzata. Minnesota 55391-1872 952/473-2436 Fa^ 952/473--:337 i r Initiatives In the community. In preparation for Housing Week. lOCP will be working within our member congregations to provide education about affordable housing issues. Several youth groups from churches in Wayzata, Plymouth and Long Lake will also be sleeping out the night of November IS*”, each in their respective churchyards. Several scout groups will also be hosting sleep-outs, as well as some of Wayzata ’s businesses. A number of CEO’s in the community will be sleeping out with Bob Fisher that first night at Heritage Park in Wayzata. You should have received a letter from Plymouth’s mayor. Judy Johnson, inviting mayors and/or city council members from each city to sleep out as a part of her “Mayor ’s Challenge" that night. The multiple sleep-outs on November IS'” are a sign of solidarity and support for those who are homeless. An Invitation Cities are key partners in the effort to meet the housing needs of low and moderate income residents and employees. We hope that the City of Orono will consider participation in Housing Week in the following ways: 1. Join with the mayors of the cities of Plymouth, Long Lake. Medina, and Wayzata in issuing a proclamation of Housing Week, (proposed text included) 2. Participate in the November 15, 6:00 kick-off event and program on Lake Street in Wayzata. 3. Encourage city staff and council members to participate in the November 15th kick-off event and subsequent sleep-out. 4. Distribute a short information piece (see enclosed brown card) at your front desks and other places in your office that have high interaction with the public. 5. Print an article about Housing Week (see enclosed) in your city newsletter prior to November 15th. Enclosed Is a short report on homelessness in our area, based on FY2003 data from lOCP. Please call Jill Kohler, lOCP Development Director, at 952 473-2436 if you have questions or would like additional information. Thank you for your consider ation of our requests and your continued support for addressing this critical issue. Re^pecuuUy, LaDonna Hoy, Executive Director End (4) Cc; RonMoorse Jl PLEASE COME AND BRINS THE WHOLE FAMILY! "KICK OFF EVENT" AeeP-Oot -0i 7: If SATURDAY. NOVEMBER 15™ - 6:00 P.M. LAKE STREET WAVZATA (In front of the Woyzota Depot) You and your family can make a difference in our community by supporting Interfaith Outreach A Community Partners as they work to prevent homelessness omong fomilies in our communityl **Teach your children welt Inspiration-Music -Snocks- Activities ttmvBOBSSLeEPOurcoAf Kick-Off Sponsor>^or^i I i—miii—>y T ■Hi HOUSING WEEK 2003 November 15-22 Housing Week is a community initiative to raise awareness atx.wi ’.ocal housing issues, to raise money to address housing needs, and to promote community involvement and volun- teerism. Housing Week originally began through the efforts of local shoe-repairman Bob Fisher, who began his annual winter sleep-out in 1996 to raise the awareness of people in his community around the issues of affordable housing and homelessness. Bob donates funds he raises to the housing work of Interfaith Outreach & Community Partners (lOCP). In 1999 Bob worked with lOCP to expand the Housing Week effort to the entire community, joining with local churches, the cities of Wayzata, Plymouth, Orono, Long Lake and Medina, youth groups, civic organizations, and schools to raise awareness about local housing is sues. to raise money to address housing needs, and to promote community involvement. In this year's Housing Week campaign (aka Bob's Sleep-Out) lOCP and Bob have set a stretch goal of $1,000,000 ($833,000 was raised in Housing Week 2002). While this may seem an overwhelming goal, it reflects the dramatic increase in need for housing assistance by families in our area. The faltering economy means more and more people out of work and with out the money to meet their daily needs, including shelter for their families. In 2000 lOCP was provid ing approximately 30 emergency housing assists each month to low-income families in our area. In 2003 lOCP is averaging 120 assists/month and is running out of funds budgeted for housing assistance by the middle of each month. lOCP will use funds raised through Housing Week to help low-income families and individu als find, secure and keep affordable hou'.»i.ng. Please join Bob in becoming personally in volved in building a community in which every family has a warm place to call home. Here are ways you can help: / Financial contribution to the Housing Week campaign. Land, houses, buildings The availability and cost of land is a huge barrier to affordable housing efforts. Call lOCP if you are interested in a tax-deductible donation or partial do nation of property. v' Volunteer. Volunteers can be a part of lOCP s housing efforts through: o Rehabilitating homes o Working with lOCP client families in apartment complexes in Plymouth through IOCI‘’s CONECT project. Education. Become an infomicd voice in the community. Attend community forums and iiicel- ings on this issue. Call lOCP for information about housing needs in the western suburbs. See www.bobssleepout com for more infonnation v' Advocacy Join lOCP's advocacy efforts lOCP works with members of 30 west metro congregations in the West Metro Faith Communities in Action (WMFCA), the Metropolitan Interfaith Council on Affordable Housing (MICAH), and participates in the HousingMinne- sota collaborative to raise awareness and encourage cross-sector participation in finding solutions. See www wmfaca orq for more information on upcoming efforts and events P/ease catUOCP at (952) 473-2436or see n-.iw./ocp ora for more information. - Homeless in Our Community* Inter^itb Outi'e^ch & Community Partners CIOCP) FY2003 Report*’ a glimpse of homelessness... ...a single faiher experienced the death of his 2 year old child and lost his job. He and his daughter are staying with relatives... ...a family of three moved irom Texas, found full-time work but not housing. They sleep in a tent... ...a single working mother of three has been homeless for 5 months after leaving an abusive situation. They have nowhere to sleep but their car... ...a couple with four children live in a motel and cannot secure housing because of a past bankruptcy ... ...a single woman, who has been homeless for several years, battles with chemi cal dependency issues. She works part time but remains without housing... the numbers lOCP served 87 homeless households in FY2003; Half are children More than half (60%) are families with children; 40 percent are individuals 64 percent of homeless households are from the community. Those outside of the commu nity are referred by lOCP member churches, schools, other service agencies, cities, or em ployed in the community. 66 percent of homeless households were working when they e.xpcrienced homelessness. clefiniti ons This report includes information provided by individuals who experienced homelessness In this community in FY2003, and sought assistance from lOCP. It does not provide an actual count of homeless people in the community. A household is considered ‘^homeless’* if it lacks pemiancnt shelter. The homeless people served by lOCP live in cars, tents, parks, shelters, hotels, doubled up with friends or family, churches, streets, campsites, or, in most cases, a combination of these. A household is considered **near-homeless** if it must vacate its place of residence and faces one or more barriers to finding replacement housing. Barriers include a low-income, an immediate notice to vacate, a poor credit or rental history, a large family, and using a Section 8 voucher. *IOCP serves eight west Hennepin County cities: Hamel. Long Lake. Medicine Lake. Medina. Minnetonka Beach. Plymouth (west of 1-494), Orono, Wayzata ••FY 2003 is April I, 2002-March 3l'. 2003 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CO'lMrti MPf^TING ocr 2 7 200J CITY OF OI^O/VO DATE: October 27.2003 ITEM NO.: 1 1 Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Adminbtrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services Director's Report Item Description: 2530 Fox Street Drivewo^- Appeal of Administration Decision Construction of a new home on a previously vacant lot on Fox Street is nearing completion. The issue of the driveway location for this new house was considered by the Council at the October 14. 2002 meeting. There are two options for the driveway location. The driveway access could either be located directly on Fox Street or on an existing shared private drive located adjacent to the house. The October 14.2002 staff recommendation was for the new house driveway access to be from the shared private drive, and the property owner is requesting driveway access directly from Fox Street. No decision was reached by the Council at this meeting, and the issue was tabled. Attached is a second request from the property owiier for the appeal of an administrative decision on the driveway location. Also, attached are the Council Minutes and the Request for Council Action information from the October 24.2002 meeting. The property owner is requesting direct driveway access to Fox Street instead of using the shared private driveway for access to Fox Street. The proposed driveway onto Fox Street is shown as Option 3 on the plans submitted by the property owner. These plans also show two access points onto the shared driveway. Option I which will not require the removal of any substantial trees has a 23% grade which is too steep for a driveway. Option 2 has only a 2% grade, but would require the removal of several substantial trees. Another potential possibility could be to construct a driveway between Options I and 2. Moving the driveway further north will increase the steepness of the driveway, and most likely require removal of the 32" diameter White Pine tree. There are several issues to be addressed regarding the driveway location. The first issue con:ems the general City policy in the Comprehensive Plan that driveway access should be minimized on City streets for new developments. This policy has generally been consistently adhered to for new larger subdivisions, with all of the driveways located on the new private road. The adheience to this policy has been somew hat inconsistent for the smaller land divisions. The applicant has noted a year 200 1 front /back lot split on Fox Street in which two separate driveways were allowed instead of one combined driveway. The second issue is tree preservation. Orono historically has advocated for the preserv ation of trees in order to preserve the rural character of the City when properties are developed. The property owners request for a driveway access directly onto Fox Street is based on preserving several large Page 1 of 2 --- trees that would need to be removed for the construction of a driveway access onto the adjacent shared private driveway. The third issue is safety. The general City policy of limiting the number of driveways is based on the assumption that limiting the number of driveway access points onto streets increases safety. Although the shared driveway access onto Fox Street has a flat slope, the disadvantage of this access is restricted visibility because of a large Oak tree located close to the edge of Fox Street directly adjacent to the left side of the driveway when approaching Fox. This results in having to have the front of the vehicle up to the edge of the pavement to see past the large tree. The driveway option directly onto Fox Street has better visibility, but the disadvantage of this option is the steeper driveway slope. Based on the advantages and disadvantages of the two driveway access points the difference in safety between these driveways appears to be negligible. In sununary, from a general City policy viewpoint, the driveway for the new residence at 2530 Fox Street should be onto the private shared driveway. Staff is recommending that the Council review and discuss the issue of the general City policy on driveway locations in relationship to the issues of tree perseveration and driveway safety as requested by the property owner. In order to bring closure to this issue, a Council recommendation on the most appropriate driveway location for this property should be made. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Discuss/Approve a recommendation on the most appropriate driveway access location for the property at 2530 Fox Street. Page 2 of 2 — ii.i Lim ^.wiui I m >■: '•>• i-stl'.jj,’ ' ,.ii \ \ \ \ \M ® *■—•-----»------130 <5moH(0 (feo<mff‘) 2>3% ................- ^'>T- NfiiO f^p^tso % V Pecryt^TEO.’^ooT' 2^'46' V' t ^R4De^ !)SCfCeB®T; (9_eriett (ijWjgi^ .^iJLdh ‘i* ' • ‘ TO: FROM: DATE: Orono City Council Boyer Building Corporation October 1,2003 SUBJECT: Appeal of Administrative Decision - 2530 Fox Street Driveway At the October 14,2002 City Council meeting our request for access directly onto Fox Street for a single family residence to be built on the property was tabled. Construction of the residence has commenced per City Council approval. We would like the council to readdress this access issue and allow a driveway to be constructed onto Fox Street. The access for the residence at 2530 Fox Street should be directly off Fox Street for the following reasons: 1. Precedent: City staff referred to the policy adopted in 1996. The intent of the resolution was to limit the number of curb cuts and access points onto Fox Street. Since(l996 ^^perties along Fox Street have added access points: • The property directly across, 2555 Fox Street, was giwted a sofond access point fortheproperty onto Fox Street.U^^^ 1 € MPr'1 Tfrj(v»» Jcyjrt • Bill Kelley’s Land 3”* Division subdivision, 2240 Fox Street, was approved with an outlet to be the shared access for both lots. Shortly after, another access point was approved directly onto Fox Street negating the shared access via the outlet. v SabJ\Ui5\r^ awprov’M Frors.K ^X\rA\n*j 2. Arterial Street:lvaS-3 tC'V\V ^ ^now/ ^0^ •fV\t {cc\ct Fox Street is not designated or termed an artenal street. Tne intent of the Comprehensive ^ r t ^ td fv^ev’f The percent grade from Fo'' Street to the garage is less than the grade when access is ^ from the shared driveway. The approach directly fi-om Fox Street starts out flat and then wtH* rises gradually versus an immediate sharp rise in grade from the shared driveway. Because of the immediate change in grade off the shared driveway, fill would need to be removed. Retaining walls would be required for drainage and erosion control. Plan is to limit the number of curb cuts and access points on arterial streets. 3. Grade/Elevation: 4. Trees: Access directly onto Fox Street would minimize tree removal. Several oaks and a stately white pine (approximately 100 years old) would be saved. Access from the shared VM driveway would necessitate the removal of 7-10 mature trees, including the oldest tree on the lot. 5. Meetings with staff: Julie Ann Johnson-owner, John Boyer-builder. James McNeil-architect met with Mike Gaffiron at city hall and uith Greg Gappa at the site in September 2003. The plan indicating access directly onto Fox Street was presented and discussed. After reviewing the plans and dismissing other options, . Mr. G^ipa agreed that the shared driveway access point was dangerous and the proposed access point onto Fox Street was a better location from a safty consideration. 6. Safer Access: Access onto Fox Street would be a safer point of ingress and egress because the entrance at the shared access point is screened. Access to the site would be greatly improved due to a flat area immediately onto Fox Street with good sight lines and visibility. Access off the shared driveway is steep and would have a sharper turn into the property. The shared driveway is not very wide. In the winter with snow piled on both sides would make the turn into the property even more difficult. With direct access onto Fox Street a circle driveway would be constructed and the property owner would be able to drive directly out onto Fox Street rather than backing out onto the shared driveway and then onto Fox Street. This circle driveway would also allow parking for guests. Because Fox Street and the shared driveway are both narrow additional paricing for guests becomes a problem. 7. Architecture: Access onto Fox Street would architecturally and esthetically be better for the site and the home. The residence looks towards Fox Street With the dri\ eway in front of the house one would enter the property viewing the front entry and landscaping rather than the garage doors. 8. Subdivision Standards; The property has been part of two subdivisions: Plat of Beau Marais and Plat of Beau Marais 2"^ Addition. The first was approved in 1986 and resulted in 2 lots. The second subdivision was approved in 1996 for a total of 3 lots. Orono subdivision ordinances state private driveways can service only 2 homes. The shared driveway presently services 2 homes. Adding this residence would put it over the ordinance standards. This site should access directly to Fox Street to conform to ordinance. iinitnhr 'r • i 9. Conforming: The property and residence are conforming and consistent with other properties that access directly onto Fox Street. Along this portion of Fox Street all the residences which have direct access onto Fox Street face Fox Street. 10. Access Requirement: The requirement to access the property via the shared driveway only or exclusively was never documented in the ‘‘private access drive documatts" which were iq>proved by the City when the subdivision went forward. II. Neighbors: The neighbors to the north and west have been contacted. They do not have any issues with access directly onto Fox Street. The neighbors to the north agree the sight lines and visibility onto Fox Street from the shared driveway are difficult and not safe. Thank you very much for considering this request. / JuHe Ann Johnson Property Owner 1 ■j j i CITY of ORONO Munkipal Oflfcs tatOflktBoi66 CnnUl MhuMoU 5SI2M0M Tony Eiden Eiden Construction 4100 Berkshire Lane Plymouth, Minnesota 55446 Dear Tony: During the week of December 14, 1992, I met with you at 2555 Fox Street to discuss a curb cut for that property. This letter will serve as authorization to allow two curb cuts to the property as designated on the site. The curb cut shall not exceed 12 feet in width at either location. This authorization is given to minimize tree removal and provide off-street parking. If there are any questions, please call me at 473-7357. Sincerely, / John R. Gerhardson Public Works Director JRG/lsv cc: Address File, iSSS’*fo5tJSYfeft/ TCtcriiOf«-4T»-TM7 • nx>4^uni .1,, ,.r—- 1 fllli II 1 III t J I IM • • ■' \1'<- >ti>- ^ ”' 'Sa^P , • l^’ ■ ^ ^T ^ ^ . m *i .«» « A WBBBh t *ir^ *' 'r'~ -r/S ^. /*ssilir-rf£iSi- ’Z;s^ ■ ' ' 'lC ^ . - v ^ ^ *^v*^ V;; SMwBoum-:';: .*. • S'^.^Ss^mmm A ■ A. ' '. 'v** :h •"'s 8 tf.T /«T » • S ^ 4. .2:' /V >^e<44sL: » \- \ '* ^ ' ., V^3fc . • '• •><«._ -•- i, V*; -.'i. a:*5.J»i: ■ A / — . • '-A :.- ■ ■ .'T!>^cs^ n; - \ .1 t <iP9 -> * •Y' ■^* /» > 4^1 . *.••*•-4 “=^.iAC^ ^ V4 “ . ifli '•f-ih r' r « . . • r w. -Li?*" . • ■ ^ zz » ■ 9 .'•i > • * I * ^ ‘ ' < . , t 4 i'v •'' •* ■ ;•>' ? ■ .. tJ... ■ I iC. ► • • * tj^^,**** '/■■sV“* »V:\' A ■"••-'•■:-.vv;;.: r'- .r..■m ^ * •7 (,<i ^ t km- • • . A , •'/•'A • >•• . '. I**• • * f * • *•-NJL’. • • . ) •• t "•>-rfVv'' >• ■ A.* s(r;:sfsiwf; Hj>r» *V iw ES • t • *v. •- # i* 1__ .>;■ **■■ i '•V - o* J M: 4 : - y} A‘V. Tm3. ^*1<*»r '<r-» ^ - • . v-^ ^v' ‘ f- mm "nair kk. . m.» . 4- Wt' m iL'i ^f!ur K. - ;»,• ?^-■ ' > •-V Hi lie I • • 0 f I I • • M . • ^ . IA >• •» j • *« > ► %«« f «I ,f ' • ^ , N-;, .,/• t' • •k i •• f A* • ^ni ■%''*« ... ir ». >••'»>. J •.. -*^4 *'•r ••r'-^Vv I*' . v:V^O'i-; ■' • ' V'.-' 5(p::;$Tsiw^. ' Uf>ri\5amj|BMM^Mhi^iM—-^B^g ^’t^i>‘&r;'5^-':r. 'OCT Af '• • •": s;;^j ^r.ss&jsS^feNf. > «* ,•» .... • "^v*” -■*'7* ' *.' jx»'*»' • - •, • '* .Vrv^^' v:4 • y '•ii "^^. v* 0 ’ ^ f/.. .' - • Xi.s • M . TV \i % ‘ V / . ’*?> ^ 4'’.W »' ' ^ - '• ■ ^ • • / 4> ^ ^ •:•v:^^V v':'' ■'■ - 'P/^-Z ■•. V. - V .•. •■'A'a !• >.\^ * A _ m ' • »»1 I % ( / ^ -I" •>•VA t V • • • ^ • O''.■ If ^ ^\1 f mmr: t e; « * ^ M y-* - • ■ • 1 i«' •' ' A I »(•I ^ - . t • ■■ ^ • 4 : ;■ I i? ? ^ J % 'J T tH’ \s .. L :<r.1i IM' vsr?. x\»LA A‘S •< ti^.t:.- - . - • < »<—^ V'.'^H • * ■* • *JL . W'> • ^V'pF*' lf«1i *.5 ' «-• T-)< I..-‘4 . t ' 4» .•r.:.. -4- "• 1^^ ?■ If i'V •*‘4 iv Sv;c-.-.^1 ^ .'P ♦: ^y .#t; *-%-;■ Pl»l .■'• •■ • .H'J wJ *%. 4"% y k m iHW aJ f Pfe-?►-i ® ' •*' I* * S'*U'. 4iii » •>cN^ •• p?5 wm •V i*^ * .i% *• I ;ryii r«iT:'2‘w m » A ^C5Js ■ r-: y^w " >- J;^ -• # >• fj^am « % * / •i- '•'i 'lV.Airi . * — ^ A. • ^ ./» ^2^du\ . f ^ J . • ‘* '^.. I A r"* *i!' i^»t« .<*'• -.’j - • ** * io,».. '• ' • f * V ' • • |v y ' , ^ y- • a. ■"•« Si*.'2S ■: ,?5sl W-/5j ? f; iC*'♦ - ^ y- ^^ ^ - • • . f •*''^X-.'> V vT / \ ^ • -r > ' <1^/ ^•-V VI rtT-5 » -I- .»• '• I )l -1 i ^:- -4»r: .7} '- ' -^.r :v^-.--^r V * *r <^ * 4 ^ *5?! I • * ' \ •* /. •* »■ •^1 ^A. L •• •'-■*“»♦'« iv '■'■1mji fv -. ir.r--V^. . . •• * A. VWi»^ •;l ' '*j ’S^i>f^ ;-v>/ •■ iV HV.* i^-'^ ..V ► ^ ^ ^ •/ ' /► • 4*^ ^ t I t Jv■- j%*w - ~ : ■. t \ *'»r . /. r »V-' •• "»■ «• .. . Lc'* •»'' '• ' }< *. * I i' i r .."■■■■ 'V I ■■ */•; r y. • I »; f. V ’ Iy \ <*'• if. ;•)' •►5 ‘ ' » .1- • !l ' • V ' I M . V’* * l“r »1K V* •(. '■‘,7 I K*V.1W*V.'.■•'"Ml • (V'lm Lf-*.,!* •■ ->-V 'ft 3^ ^ «l4^ ?■ i mi P ■*1 ' •:< i. 3^« rsiv •. r m U f ■»I '. 9? 75 Il/fTiir f * feiPSV • I. $rr- ’ ru'St' * /,'rv- 'jr' ' -^'h' ^ '\ V . k #*r • hk PIr:J j V ..f' V h. ; •>»*.• . • t PLEASE DISREGARD • / ■LAST DOCUMENT h_________^ -M-- \yA^ V^.'—' i.V ■*' * ^ L* >' ‘Tt' -‘ V • ' ». .fT^•r , • V ■ ',. .n. >Sr1 '••" ' f ** i.' ... X vJ^\v • . V . -.1 r X . • ' y^ . V . . ' 1 t ■ •• * A r^- ^■H k Sbs I*i?fe^ ■’ '**■ A \ -W ^ ^ ^ * * -** *'!' ^ ^ ^ I ^ ^ ^ m • wkjm jsssr*-' .? ' ♦ MPiKa jaS^feL*:^ ^ •?!: mBSIgf^ T >w - -V- .’- ^BrrWyJ™ *. m^4 A ^ 5SBit>’.-. - •- ^ • ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 14,2002 6, »02-2822 DanM 4872—Continued \dy, 3422 Livingston Avenue—yaHaueef—Resolution No. coodilional use permit per SectionJjOcOS'SithttMsion 10 to allow an accessory building to be constructedjMrifie^bject propei1><l^r to the street than the principal stnictiuEe.«nir^a through lot; with the new^thngimge in Item 41 included In thej:es«lilfIoii. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. 10. Appeal of Administrative Decision—Fox Street Driveway Weinberger stated that the applicant was appealing the denial of a request for driveway access permit for property located at 2530 Fox Street. At the time the lot was created, in 1996, it was planned to use a shared driveway that also serves two lots to the north. The 2530 lot was required to enter into a driveway maintenance agreement with the lots to the north. The applicant was requesting direct access to Fox Street. The staff recommended denial in order to limit the number of direct driveway access points to Fox Street, according to the Comprehensive Plan stating that the number of curb cuts and access points be limited. While Fox Street is not termed arterial, it is one of only a few through streets that do receive additional east-west traffic. The letter requesting appeal stated that the driveway would have a steep incline for access. Staff found that the direct access from Fox Street would have an average elevation change of 10% to the turnaround site, where the access from the shared driveway would have an average elevation change of 5% to the turnaround, therefore the driveway from the shared access would have less elevation change than the direct street access. Staff concluded that the shared driveway would be the appropriate access to the property. Troy Prosa of Formation Architects stated that the percent grade from Fox to the turnaround is greater than the grade from the shared drive, but they were measuring from the street to the garage, where the residents will be parking. He stated that the grade from street to garage is less than the grade from the shared access to the garage. He stated that the driveway approach approved by the City would result in the loss of 7-10 mature trees, including the oldest tree on the lot. With the approach from Fox, they would minimize tree removal. Murphy asked what their major concern was. Prosa stated that their two major concerns were preserving the trees and the grade of approach. Sansevere asked if maintenance of the shared drive was a concern. Julie Johnson stated it was not. If they were grandfathered in to the maintenance agreement it would be fine with I ■! iii'TTrT'r -* 'in I ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 14,2002 to. Appeal of Administrative Decision—Fox Street Driveway—Continued her. She mostly wanted to protect the trees on the property. Prosa stated with their proposed driveway they would only need to cut 2-3 trees. Murphy asked if they could move the drive to the north in order to keep the trees. Prosa stated they would then lose the circular drive. White suggested rotating the house to give the garage a different orientation. Prosa stated they designed the house for the view and want to keep the back windows in the current onentation. Sansevere asked if they were concerned with the looks of the house as people approach the property from the street. Prosa stated they were naturally concerned w ith the aesthetics of the house itself. Murphy suggested they could find a solution to minimize the loss of trees, such as curving the driveway to the north or south. He stated he was not in favor of adding a driveway to Fox Street. Weinberger stated the lot could accommodate a driveway nearly anywhere, but because of the location they chose for the house, the options were narrow ed. Sansevere suggested tabling the item so that the applicant could consider other options. John Boyer, the builder, stated that they were going to move the driveway further north, as Murphy suggested, but found it would not work because of the inclines and necessary turns in the drive to reach the garage. Because of the old white pine on the lot, the drive would only work where they had it located. He also stated that an entrance off Fox Street would be the best option aesthetically. Weinberger stated that the assumption was that the building location would be further to the north when the plan for the shared driveway was originally made. Mayor Peterson asked if the applicant would consider turning or moving the house. Johnson replied it was a walk-out design and they considered many factors w hen choosing the site for the house. Sansevere asked Weinberger how strongly staff opposed access from Fox Street. Weinberger replied they did not strongly oppose access from Fox Street, but that the issue concerned the intent of the resolution from 1996. Nygard stated that Fox Street is arterial, based on the amount of traffic it receives. Weinberger stated there is a gravel drive on the other side of the property, but it is privately owmed and the owners will not allow access to it. % L ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 14,2002 10. Appeal of Administrative Decision —Fox Street Driveway—Continued Moorse stated they needed a grading plan to see how the trees would actually be afTected by the driveway installation. Boyer stated they were an.\ious to begin construction on the house. Barrett stated that the Council could table the application and the applicant would have to revise the plat. They could still begin construction, but not on the driveway. Nygard suggested they change the house’s design to accommodate the grade, put a drive off the shared access, and save the trees. Johnson stated that they had received verbal approval for the plan. Prosa stated the plans were approved until they went for the building pennit. Nygard stated they might not be able to save the trees anyway. Weinberger and Gaffron stated they had a grading plan, but it was insufficient and they needed more detail. White stated construction on the house could be started, but the curb cut was tabled. Murphy stated that construction access would be allowed through the shared access drive only. Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to table Item 10, Appeal of Administrative Decision—Fox Street Driveway. Vole: Aves 5, Nays 0. ______ 4. #02-2764 Commercial Planned Unit Development Weinberger stated th^KjK City considered a CPLTD district imlowing a request for a proposed office developmoqt on a vacant propeny in Navafre. The multi-unit office complex would create indiviobaloffice buildings, eadsmeld in private ownership. Such a development is currently not possible in the B-4 district based on the minimum lot size and w idth standards. The CPUD wouklcreate a^district for the proposed development, and would create a district that would allbw other development options in the commercial areas of the City where strict compliance underlying zoning ordinance is not practical. Weinberger stated that the CPUD/Would not afiecrHie B-2 district, as B-2 is lakefront ‘ property that has been reserve^dor marina use. The benefits of the CPUD are that it would allow approval of e^n site plan with individual pehformance standards written into the final development ^ument. If the project were not completed, then the property HMi r-.mum REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: October 9,2002 ITEM NO.: /O Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: List of Exhibits: James E. McNeal, Formation Architects Driveway Access Request Appeal of Administrative Decision A B C D E F G H 1 J Letter of Request (James E. McNeal) Letter to Troy Prosa, Formation Architects Survey of Beau Marais Resolution No. 3739 - Approving Plat of Beau Marais 2“* Addition Resolution No. 3577 - Approving Preliminary Fiat of Beau Marais 2“^ Addition Copy of Driveway Easement Agreement Plan Option I - Driveway Access to Fox Street Plan Option 2 - Driveway Access to Private Dn\eway Comprehensive Plan - Roadway Functional Classification Comprehensive Plan - Access Manazement Policy The City has been asked to reconsider a denied request tor d.nveway access permit for property located at 2530 Fox Street. The lot was created in 1995 as part of the Plat of Beau Marais 2“* Addition. At that time it was implied that the access for this lot would be to the private drive that also serves two additional lots to the north. The 2530 lot also was required to enter into a driveway maintenance agreement with the nvo lots that also share access. The request is to allow direct access to Fox Street rather than have access to a shared driveway. The staffs rationale behind requiring the access to the private drive was related to limiting the number direct driveway access points to Fox Street. The Comprehensive Plan addresses the issue stating that the number of curb cuts and access points be limited. The Comp Plan only discusses limiting access for individual residences for sueets designated as arterials. This section of Fox Street is not defined as an arterial but is cne of on!% a few through streets that do receive additional east-west a^affic. Fox Street west of Old Crystal Bay Road is defined as “B” minor arterial, and east of Old Crystal Bay is expected to have all additional traffic in the future, especially if/when improvements to the County Road 15/Orcno Orchard Road intersection are made. Staff has concluded (from information that is available from the time the lot was created) the city ’s intent was that access for 2530 would be from the existing private access drive. The developer also went so far as to attribute a portion of Lhe maintenance costs for the private drive to the subject lot. Additionally, the private driveway was required to be upgraded to accommodate additional traffic for a third lot. Allowing direct access to Fox Street would not be consistent with the past policies and approvals, and would conflict with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. James E. McNeal, Formation Architects Driveway Access Request Page 2 of 2 ______[_____________ In the Jetter requesting an appeal of staff ’s administrative decision, the property owners representative has stated the driveway would have a steep incline for access. When reviewing the elevations provided on the survey the direct access Fox Street actually has an average elevation change of 10% to the turnaround site, where the access from the shared driveway has an average elevation change of S% to the turnaround. According to the elevation information the shared driveway provides less elevation change than the direct street access. Building Permit Status The original request for access to Fox Street was denied. Since the plans were amended to show a driveway access from the private drive that has been accepted and a building permit is ready to be issued under that scenario. The property owners would amend their grading plan if Council approves a separate driveway access to the property. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to either accept the staffs position to require access to the shared driveway or to allow the property owners direct driveway access to Fox Street. CouDcU Exhibit A CityofOrono 275 Kelley Paricway POB0X66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Ron Morse City Administrator Property: Plat of Beau Marais 2*^ Addition Lot 2, Hennepin County. Minnesota Dear. Mr. Morse The following is a letter of appeal to an administrative decision to allow direct access from Fox Street to Lot 2 of Beau Marais for review on October 14 Orono city council meeting. Referencing city of Orono : resolution of the city council number 3577 line item number 7 stating: (lot 2 of the original Beau Marais plat would continue to gain access via the existing easement drive) and under city of Orono transportation plan: access management: (direct individual property access to arterials is regulated in the Orono municipal code by limiting the number of curb cuts per residence; by prohibiting direct access to principal arterials, and by a number of the other regulations involving the location type and number of access points to the arterials roadway system. Allowing access to Lot 2 only from the existing easement drive forces an approach to the property that would be to steep of an incline based on grade conditions. Fu^ermore. access of the property to avoid the steep incline would promote the loss of approximately 7-10 mature trees. This in essence goes against resolution of the city council number 3577 item 6 trying to salvage existing trees. Moreover, it is the city ’s policy under access management to (minimize the number of new direct access to principal and minor arterials). However per city of Orono. Fox Street in not a principal or minor arterial. Because of the mature planting and the steep grade change of the property at point of access, an unusual hardship to the property would result and have a negative impact upon the aesthetics and sensitive environment. We believe the intent of resolution of city 3577 i.e. tree conservation and overall aesthetics would be better suited by allowing access from Fox Street than die easement driveway. Sincerely, l^es E McN< Formation Architects i Council Exhibit 8 CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices Stntt Address: 2750 Kelley Parliway Orono. MN SS356 Mallini Address: P.O. Boi 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 September 30,2002 Mr. Troy Prosa Formation Architects, Inc. 275 Market Street Minneapolis, MN 5S40S RE: DRIVEWAY PERxMlT FOR 2530 FOX STREET Dear Mr. Prosa: The Cit>* of Orono has review id Ac driveway access for the property at 2530 Fo.x Street and has concluded the best access for the'drlveway is to the existing shared driveway rather than a direct access to Fox Street. The property was part of the Beau Marais 2*^ Addition in 1995. At that time it was implied that the access for this lot would be to the private drive that also serves two additional lots to the north. The 2530 lot also was required to enter into a driveway maintenance agreement with the two lots that also share access. Part of the City ’s rational behind requiring the access to the private drive was related to the limiting of direct access to Fox Street. The Comprehensive Plan addresses the issue stating that the number of curb cuts and access points be limited. The Comp Plan only discusses limiting access for individual residences for street designated as an arterial. This section of Fox Street is not defined as an arterial but is one of only a few through streets that do receive additional east- . west traffic. The Cit>‘ of Orono has concluded from the information that is available from the time the lot was created the “intent” was made that access for 2530 would be from the existing private access drive. The developer also went so far to assume a portion of the maintenance costs for the private drive include the subject lot. Additionally, the private driveway was required to be upgraded to accommodate additional traff-c. Allowing direct access to Fox Street would not be consistent with the past policies and approvals, and would conflict with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions. I can be reached at 952-249- 4600. Sincerely, Paul Weinberger Zoning Administrator Telephone (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 www.dx>roooJniLus #2.. Council Exhibit IAT4'* k1 te-. :■^:r-=! > ■J noi> '5r*-x.«-sK:«iX1>SSr'1i -:lfl i' Z530 6viU«n«s;+e © a,T9 J ^riVCuiioAi ^ropoieJ i>/c**»«^«-i AdttSS • • Council Exhibit D ps CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCI L NO. 8y 8 9 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF BEAU MARAIS 2ND ADDITION FILE NO. 2029 WHEREAS, the City of Orooo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted *suodivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the Cit%-; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a Class II subdivision of a plat by William F. *’^th (hereinafter "the subdivider"); and WHEREAS, the subdivision has been found to meet all standards of the RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District finding that Lots 1 and 2 are of a size and configuration that would allow either its new or continued use as a single family residence to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including: Completion of all the requirements of Resolution No. 3577. » Dedication on the plat of drainage and utility easements. The subdivider has created non-exclusive ingress, egress, easements over a privute easement driveway in favor of all abutting and/or benefitting lots including a declaration of certain maintenance covenants known as First Amendment to Easement Agreement wherein each of the abutting and/or benefitting lot owners covenants and agrees to permanently maintain and pay the cost of roamtenance for said private driveway. Page 1 of 3 I i ’ ' . uu /I C .-/H CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 7 39 The su^Wder has completed the instaUation of certain driveway improvements as a condition of subdivision approval. The City Engineer, Shawn D. Gustafson, in his report of June 3, 1996 has confirmed the driveway meets the requirements of the City and has been found the improvement to be acceptable fi-om an engineering standpoint. Applicant has completed brush clearing adjacent to access at Fox Street as a’so recommended by the City Engineer in that same report. 5. 6. 7. Pa3rment to the City of a park dedication fee in the amount of $6,400.00. Payment to the City of a final plat application fee in the amount of $175,00. Payment to the City for the I^al review and filing of the plat, easements and covenants in the amount of $200.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of Beau Marais 2nd AddiUon, Hennepin County, Minnesota, subject to the following conditions: 1.Prior to the City issuing a building permit for a new residence for. Lot 1, Block 1, Beau Marais 2nd Addition, subdivider shall have installed appropriate identification/address signage identi^g location of three residences served by driveway at intersection of private drive and Fox Street. Residences shall continue to be addressed at Fox Street. 2. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono wth either the Hennepin County Recorder's OfiSce or Registrar of Titles OflBce on or before January 8,1997 together with a certified ori^nal copy of this resolution and executed copies of easements and covenants as noted above. Page 2 of 3 If Ji ; cmrof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 7 8 9 The approval granted by this resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated this 8th day of July, 1996. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, Deputy Cleric Edward X STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of July, 1996 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and Deputy Clerk of the City of Orono, a Nfinnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public I , CMOLEA.KASEMAN \ N0MmBUC4INNES0n1 HBMCPM COUNTY My Comintniaii 6^ an. 31.2X00 Page 3 of 3 yd I • CouDcU Exhibit C y CITTof ORONO E3H9. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. y R7y A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR A PLAT OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2580 FOX STREET (LOT 1, BEAU ^L\RAIS) - APPLICATION NO. 2029 WHEREAS, William F. Smith, on May 25, 1995, filed a fonn^ subdivision application with the City for approval of a two lot residential plat of property legally described as: Lot 1, Beau Marais, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and W'HEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono’s 2!oning and Planing Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 19,1995, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on July 10. 1995, the Orono City Council considered this subdivision application and variance to Section 11.31, Subdivision 5 noting the following facts and findings: 1. The property is located within the RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 2 acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. The property contains a total of approximately 10.23 acres with 3.07 acres of wetland. The proposed plat contains ftvo lots each exceeding the 2 acres dry contiguous minimum lot area requirement as follows: Lot 1 = 6.07 total acres, 3.5 acres dry, 2.57 acres wet. Lot 2 = 4.16 total acres, 3.66 acres dry, .5 acres wet. A J.Each lot has been tested by a licensed on-site evaluator and found to have suitable soils for both a principal and alternate on-site sewage disposal system. Page 1 of 5 1 fm CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 5 7 7 4. 5. 6. 7, 8. 9. 10. The existing easement driveway that intersects proposed Lot 2 will not violate Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (B) as there is 2.15 dry contiguous acres to the west of the easement driveway. In the granting of approval of the Beau Marais plat in 1986 the City also gnmted variances that allowed the fUling of designated wetlands for the installation of the driveway to serve the most northern lot or Lot 1 of the Beau Marais plat. If a private road with cul-de-sac was installed along the east side of proper^ to serve all three lots, a half acre of designated wetlands would be filled. This improvement would also result in the loss of several mamre evergreen trees along the east side of the property. All three access drives leading from road would also encroach upon the designated wetland areas. The current subdivision is defined as back loi/front lot subdivision requiring shared access via a 30’ driveway outlet. The driveway outlet along the east would be limited to only two users. Lot 2 of the original Beau Marais plat would continue to gain access via the e.xisting easement drive. Construction of a drive w'ould result in the loss of some of the mature evergreen trees planted along the east property line. There would be an encroachment of the required 26* setback from the wetland. There would be additional encroachments of the H<»$ignafM w etland for the future drive to serve both Lots 1 and 2 of the current subdivision. The Planning Commission found the creation of two driveways within this property would have a negative impact upon the aesthetics and sensitive environment of this unique property. The current owner of Lot 2, Beau Marais, has agreed to maintain the current looped driveway within their property to serve as a turnaround for emergency vehicles. There is no record of problems reported by the former owners of Lots 1 and 2, Beau Marais or the current owners of Lot 2 in the use of the current driveway nor has the City any record of an accident resulting at the intersection of the private driveway and Fox Street. Page 2 of 5 • ? err i i • • ill GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ s 5 7 y 11.The granting of the variance to the subdivision regulations will not be detrimenti! to the public safety, health or welfare or injurious to other property. 12.The conditions upon which the request for a variance is based are uidque to tts property for which this variance is sought and are not applicable generally t? other property in the City. 13.Because of the location of extensive designated wetlands that surround the d.^ buildable areas of this property and mature plantings on the property, an unusual hardship to the land would result, if the letter of the code were to be foUowed as distinguished from an inconvenience or hardship to the subdivider. 14.It has been found that the strict enforcement of this chapter would result in an environmentally unsound development of land. 15 The variance will not in any manner vary from the provisions of tht Comprehensive Municipal Plan which would approve three residential units bein: served by a driveway. 16. No variances are sought to the minimum lot requirements of the RR-IB Zonieg District. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or mors of the above findings, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the prelin^y KS.T M.'. rSS'KSatZS.'S.-S; conditions: 1 The existing driveway shall be upgraded from a 10’ gravel road to a 12 gravel road The entrance portion of the drive shall be upgraded to an 18 widA e; road'to a point just beyond new curb cut to serve residence on proposed Lot Subdivider shall be responsible for installing appropriate identification si^gs identifying location of three residences served by driveway at intersection of dn\ s with Fox Street. Residence shall continue to be addressed at Fox Street. Page 3 of 5 ta ^ ><■ mi. '- I L ^ ctAOtz? crv*^dtXx. 6d!^:^Y CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. JRsyy - 2./—Subdivkler shall create^ outlogwithin Lot 2 defining the driveway at a 14* and 18* width as described uTTondition 1 above. 3.Subdivider shall be responsible for developing covenants for the maintenance and upkeep of driveway. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Admiidstrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month: 1. Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200’. Drawing to include: A.Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Mark Gronberg of Coffm and Gronberg, Inc. dated 2-10-9S, most revised date 5-25-95. B.Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 5’ each side of new internal property lines. 2. C. Naming of plat. Legal documents required: A.Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. B.The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. C.Execution of a Developer’s Agreement and posting of a letter of credit to be written to an amount equal to 150% of the costs of required improvements. This includes the required upgrading of the gravel driveway as set forth in Condition 1 above. 3. Fees to be paid: Total due: S375* Page 4 of 5 J GITYofORONO A. B. C. Final plat fee = $175.00 Legal review and filing fee = $200.00 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 57 7 ’ ^ /<i, </y PcJjilej' *Park Dedication Fee Upon approval of preliminary plat, the subdivision shall be referred to the City Assessor to determine the fair market value of the property in its undeveloped state. You will be advised as soon as a fee has been determined. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 10th day of July, 1995. an, Jr., Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of July, 1995, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Mirmesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. LINDA S.VEE NouRYnieuc4aNNESon NENNtrai COUNTY My Cofflinbiiea Eieini JM. 31.3000 gzeg Notary Public Page 5 of 5 1. . • J Council Exhibit F ITRST AMENDMENT TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the Smith Parcel and the Casotti Parcel are subject to an Easement Agrwment dated June 24,1987, and filed for record June 29, 1987, as Document No. 5290219 (the Easement Agreement"), providing for driveway access to both Parcels; and WHEREAS, Smith has submitted an application to the City Council of the City of Orono for yprovd of a plat of the Smith Parcel into two separate residential lots, one of which will be idcnufied as Lot 1 of the n; w plat ("North Smith Parcel"), and the other of which wiU be.. . T o ir Y .....^ /, culu ulc oiner or wnicn win oe Identified as Lot 2 of the new plat ("South Smith Parcel"). The owners of the North Smith Parcel, the South Smith Parcel, and the Casotti Parcel shall be collectively known as "Lot Owners"; and *1. « Casotti desire to amend the Easement Agreement to provide for the allocation of maintenance payments and other e-xpenses upon the platting of the Smith Parcel; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideradon of the sum of One Dollar (S1.00) and other good Md v^uable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as 1. Smith shall be solely responsible for aU expenses, and fees payable as a m . „. Owner shall have one vole, and all decisions regarding the driveway shall be made by a majority vote of the Lot Owners. If, however, one person, family, or entity shall own more ^an one lot or if any two lots are owned by persons related to one another, persons engaged in business with one another, or if there is any other arrangement which would give or appear to give one lot owner control over the deeWoos of another lot owner, then such ^t Owners shall collectively have only one vote, irrespcctiw of the number of lots owned by them. 'A 3. «d “» of Ne^ proposed Lot 1 (North Smith Pared): Ousting Lot 2, Block 1, Beau Marais (Casotti Aued)* New proposed Lot 2 (Soudi Smith Pared); 33% 30% 13% ^ttaclor «>th Ihe loweit bid. unless ottierwise decided by unidlus votelf^L^ *■-. ^ Ctodenuiitor") shsli indenuiify and hold the other Lot Owners e^^iSudin* a^eKirs»=?5£,isr?«Ks» and are®heieby^*fi^ Easement Agreement shaU rentain the same written above.IN WJINESSMEREOF, this Amendment is sioitd/u of the day and year first ; r.- . William F. Smith - 2 - - : : •••. fi I 1*011 ■■iisTyiaaftss^ i STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF j)*s. The wife. MMNLIinH MmrMUMoosson NENNEPM COUNTY KjrCicBhdnfivim Jia. 3t, 9COo: Notary Public 'I « STATE’OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF IL ■mi PATRICIA A MACK N otary Putuc-MuNBOTA, HENNEPIN COUNTY Wy%.«n!Ufcr|oiMJr.JMC30 ^ This instrument drafted by: 30 East Seventh Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-4999 LtH34>7J2aBi - 3 - AHii iT»^< ml Mi. 1 O I.Lt7 LrtS\. - CIJi- r ► IF u m Slubb iBay ^ c HUawfN lUy^ ^(fy I » • • • O >te N •“•rrrT-4—T- 3* J 9M K •#• M ■ IM t ^ I ■ IP——<i/dHTFr' U1 “. ~"*>,§prjL nr*'^Krjhsxn i-'i T-^ Wj *, City of ~ LongLako i=W^rljTTrr !r Wa«t A«m .7). imoooao »' / > /' J2^ 1 jJ “Urqi«i*i Djy—\ IftMliai "v (nKhSfy A Lake Minno onka "'r / % i- • Roadway Functional Classification City of Orono • • Minnesota + Prindpal Artorial "A* Minor Arterial -O* Minor Arterial CuQoctor ^ ^ ^ ^ oconic Parkway Designation Local Public Streets & Private Roads Future Highway 12 Re-Route MAP4A-4 • t 0|£Pjtaj24i^|[rau2ortatiooP^ Council Exhibit Where identified ri£ht«of-way needs nre * subdivision, the City wUI obtain needed right-of-way by gift, purcha« or condemnation as circumstances may waixanL The City will establish and maintain an ofiBcial map and records of all existmg nght-of-ways and easements for permanent reference. Access Management Management of access to principal and minor arterials is necessary to ensure a safe and efficient arterial system. Direct individual property oxess to arterials is regulated in the Orono Municipal Code by reqiUring development of local streets or private roads to serve new residential developments of 3 or more units; by limiting the number of curb cuts per residence; by prohibiting direct access to principal arterials; and by a number of other regulations mvolving the location, type and miQibfr of access points to the arterial roadway system. It IS the City’s policy that new direct access to arterials is to be to the greatest extent possible. However, many of southern Orono ’s arterials near the Lake Minnetonka shoreline have historically served a dual function as bo* arterials and as local/collector sirtets, due to geographic and topographic limitations. Minimization or consolidation of existing driveway and local street access points along these unique roadways isa complex matter which will often require the cooperation of multiple property owners. The City will encourage the use of shared driveways along existing developed arterials wherever feasible. Further, the City will continue to investigate the feasibility of closing existing direct local street access points to principal and minor arterials where suitable alternative access points may be established. City ofOroBO Comm unity Maugemcal Plan Page4A-9t 4k REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COIIMril f/fPFfii^Q ocr 2 7 2003 CiTVOFOHONo DATE: October 23,2003 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services Director's Report Item Description: Adopt Assessment Roll Heritage Drive Sewer Extension- Resolution Two separate assessments for this project were previously adopted because the twro property owners connected to the sewer system at different times. A new assessment is proposed for adoption Utat will include both properties on one assessment roll. This will allow one levy numbers for this project instead of two separate levy numbers. The staff recommendation is for approval of the resolution to assess the $14,400 sewer connection fee for the properties at 1955 and 1980 Heritage Drive at a 6.25% interest rate for a fifteen-year time period. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the resolution adopting the assessment roll for the Heritage Drive Sanitary Sewer Extension project, ; V- :,V'. ■ Iai Ci-.!/--.-------- mmmm ■V ■■■ m - II II in R A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE HERITAGE DRIVE SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION ASSESSMENT ROLL WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law. the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for Heritage Drive Sanitary Sewer Extension improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: 3. Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benelltted by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 15 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in Januar>' 2004 and shall bear interest at the rate of 6.25% per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2003. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within thirty (30) days from the adoption of this resolution; and he may, at anytime thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. Partial prepayment may be allowed in accordance with ordinances which are existing or which the City may choose to adopt in the future. Page 1 of 2 4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted by the City Council of Orono this 27th day of October 2003. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 2 of 2 —-----------—■ 1< #*’r Assessment Roll for Heritage Drive Sanitary Sewer Extension Date: 27-Oclobcr-2003 MHnkiinlity: ORONO Levy Number: Total Project Assessment: $28,800.00 Muakipal Code: 38 Levy OeKription: Heritage Drive Sanitary Sewer Eitcnskn Interest Rate: 6.2S%Number of Years Payabk: 15 PIDM Addition Total Code Principal Lot Block Owner's Name Street Property Address Mailing Street Address Mailing City Address IO-II7-23-I3-OOI4 $14,400.00 001 004 Todd Gorr I9SS Heritage Drive I9SS Heritage Drive Wayzata MN 55391 10-117-23-42-0006 $14,400.00 001004 Leonard & Belh 1980 Heritage Drive 1980 Heritage Drive Dayton Wayzata MN 55391 Total $28,800.00 til mmiMfiitufra'i iirimi ► •I COl INCH MEETING OCT 2 7 2003REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO DATE: October 24,2003 ITEM NO: Departraent Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: ifn Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Payment Request Ni&nber 9- Navarre Fire Station The City has received an invoice from Constructive Ideas, for project management services for the month of September, 2003, in the amount of $3,240.00. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the request for payment in the amount of $3,240.00 to Constructive Ideas, to be funded from the Navarre Fire Station Construction Fund. >v : . ■( '< Invoice Date:October 1,2003 No: 4305 To:City of Orono Date Due: 1I/I/03 P. 0. Box 66 CUJobNo: 03-016 Orono. MN SS323 Account No: 342 Date Sept. 2003 Description Navarre Fire Station Construction Phase • September Billing Hrs. 1 I.S. Total amount this invoice: Amount 3.240.00 $3,240.00 If rniihir'ii ^/tFFTING ocr 2 7 2003 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF OHO nu DATE: October 24,2003 ITEM NO: ZO Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: ] Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Renewal of the Police Service Agreement with Long Lake (2004/2005/2006) The Long Lake City Council has approved the renewal of the Agreement and Contract for Police Services for the years 2004,2005, and 2006. The agreement is now being presented for the City Council’s approval. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the 2004/2005/2006 Agreement and Contract for Police Services with the City of Long Lake. 'I f 4 agreement and CONTR.ACT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT THIS AGREEMENT AND CONTR-ACT made and entered into this ^ / dayof tbi*'’ , 20^£. by and bcmccy ihe CITY OF ORONO, Minnesota and the CITY OF LONG LAKE, Minnesota, is made under ant? by virtue of Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59. iilTNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City of Long Lake is desirous of contracting with the City of Orono for the performanc*; of law enforcement ser\ ices within the City of Long Lake, and WHERF^/^VS, the City of Orono is agreeable to render law enforcement senices on the terms and conditions <hcreinal\cr set forth, and WHEREAS, a contract such as this is authorized under and by vinue of the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section. 471.59, NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Orono agrees that it will provide law enforcement services for the City of Long Lake on the following terms and conditions and the City of Long Lake agrees as follows: 1.Definition of tcmis. For the purpose of this Agreement, the terms in this Agreement shall have the meanings given to them in this section. A."Contract year" means a 12 mon*Ji period during which law enforcement ser\ ices are to be rendered or were rendered to the Contract Cities by the City of Orono. The contract year shall commence on January 1 and terminate on the next December 31. B "Contracting Cities" means any city which is a party to this contract or a similar contract which by its terms is interrelated with this contract for the purposes of allocating the total cost fc: law enforcement ser\ices. The contracting cities are Orono. Long Lake, Minnetonka Beach, and Spring Park. C."City of Orono Police Budget" shall include all preliminary estimated and actual costs of operating the Police Department of the City of Orono for a given contract year, including bui not limited to: 1. All insurance costs including PERA, OASI, Workers Compensation Liability. 2. All salaries, fringe benefits, overtime. 3. All costs of equipment and apparatus acquisition and maintenance. 4. All non-prosecution consulting fees. Page 1 ML l! I S 3. 5. Holiday and severance pay. 6. UncmpIo>'ment benefits paid. 7.Utilities. 8. Telephone Ser\icc. 9. Gasoline and oil for police cars. 10. Books and periodicals. 11. Wearing apparel. 12. Officer equipment. 13. All other e.xpcnscs normally and reasonably incidental to the operation of a ten officer. Chief included, police department. 14. Administrative overhead charge of 10% of all the above costs. Public Imaee. The designation "Orono-Long Lake-Minnetonka Beach-Spring Park Police Department" shall be afli.xcd to all police cars used by the Orono Police Department under the terms of this agreement and the City of Orono shall cause the listing for the Police Department for each Contract City to be inserted in the appropriate telephone directories as may be distributed in the contracting cities. If another city contracts with the City of Orono for service, its name may also be added to the above. Level of Scr\ices. The quality and level of services rendered to the Contract Cities shall be the same as the serv ices rendered to the City of Orono. except as hereinafter stated. It is tlic desire of the City of Long Lake to purchase from the City of Orono police serv ice beyond the basic service; such service to be delivered in a method that provides service equivalent to that which would be received had Long Lake hired two individual oftlcers to serve it exclusively. The equivalent of two full-time officers is agreed to be a total of 3640 in-serv ice hours per year (35 hours per officer per week for 52 weeks) because provision is made for vacations, sick days, training, etc. This two officer equivalent will be provided in the form of staff hours serv'ed within the boundaries of the City of Long Lake. The exact number of hours during any given month may vary by mutually agreed upon scheduling, but the aggregate av erage over the year will be 70 hours per week with variations of plus or minus 10 hours in any given week being considered aceeptable delivery of the contracted Page 2 ► i extra service. During the period in which such additional serv ice hours are provided, the stafTmember(s) assigned to provide such service will be physically within the city limits of Long Lake at all times e.xcept for the following: A.Responding to Necessary Calls which are defined as calls created by immediate necessity for police service, such as responding to a medical emergency, a crime in progress, an officer requiring immediate assistance, etc. Such calls will always be a part of the communications log of the Orono Police Department and the officer responding w ill have been directed by official communication to respond to the Necessary Cali. B.Scheduled travel to the Orono Police Department Offices at the beginning or end of shifis, or for break periods as called for by Union Contract. C.Looping througli Orono as a part of regular patrol patterns through the City of Long Lake. The loops that are permitted will have been agreed upon in advance by the Long Lake representatives to the Police Commission. D.Transporting prisoners to the Orono Police Department, Hennepin County Jail, Juvenile Detention Center, Detox Center, or other location.*, as necessary. There shall be the equivalent of four additional officers, w ho w hen on duty shall be stationed within the City of Spring Park. During the period in which supplemental police service hours are provided, the staff member(s) assigned to provide such .«;ervice will be physically w ithin the city limits of Spring Park at all times save for the following: A.Responding to Necessary' Calls which are defined as calls created by immediate necessity for police service, such as responding to a medical emergency, a crime in progress, an officer requiring immediate assistance, etc. Such calls will always be a part of the communications log of the Orono police department and the officer responding will have been directed by official communication to respond to the Necessary Call. B.Scheduled travel to and from the Orono Police Department Offices at the beginning and end of shiAs, or for break periods as called for by union contract. C.Looping through Orono as a part of regular patrol patterns through the City of Spring Park. The loops that are permitted will have been agreed upon in advance by Spring Park. D.Transporting prisoners to the Orono Police Department, Hennepin County Jail or Juvenile Detention Center, Detox Center or other locations as necessary. Page 3 1 1 i ( 4. 5. 6. Administrative Responsibility. The law enforcement services rendered to the Contract Cities shall be under the sole direction of the City of Orono. The degree of services rendered, the standards of performance, the hiring and discipline of the oflicers assigned, and other matters relating to regulations and policies, shall remain in the control of the City of Orono. Any disputes between the parties to this agreement as to the extent of functions and duties to be rendered hereunder, or the level or manner of performance of such service, shall be resolved by the City Administrator of the City of Orono. If a Contract City disagrees with the resolution, the Contract City may appeal within thirtv- days of receipt of written notice of the resolution, by giving written notice to the City of Orono asking for arbitration, as provided in paragraph 17 TheCityAdministratoroftheCityofOrono,throughtheChiefofPolice,shall submit to the Contract Cities a monthly report of serv ices rendered to the Contract Cities, as well as suggestions regarding any changes that may be helpful, and a quarterly budget update. These reports will include copie.s of Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Criminal Justice Information summaries for law enforcement ser\ ices rendered within the Contract Cities. Joint Advisory Committee. Each Contracting City may appoint two volunteer members to a joint advisory committee and the name of such appointees shall be furnished to the City of Orono Administration. The Joint Advisory Committee shall meet periodically to discuss and make recommendations regarding concerns or problems identified regarding the provision of police service and to periodicalh review budget updates. The Joint Advisory Committee shall have the specific task of reviewing the Police Department's budget proposal for the next calendar year and arriving at a consensus Budget Package consisting of an Aruiual Operating Budget, a Year Two Budget amount and Year Three Budget amount by August 15 of each calendar year. Officers. Employees of the Citv of Orono. Officers assigned to duty- in the Contract Cities shall be police officers of the City- of Orono. The City of Orono shall assume all obligations with regard to workers compensation, PERA, withholding tax, insurance, etc. arising from the employment of such officers. The Contract Cities shall not be required to furnish any fringe benefits or assume any other liability of employment to any officer assigned to duty within the Contract Cities unless a Contract City employs officers directly, independent of this agreement, to provide special law enforcement services in the Contract City. In such event, all obligations and liabilities with respect to employment of special law enforcement officers shall be the complete responsibility of the Contract City. No such direct employment shall be entered into by the Contract City without first obtaining wrinen approval of the City Administrator of the City of Orono which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Paged j r. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Enforcement Policies. Enforcement policies within the City of Orono shall prevail as the enforcement policies within the Contract Cities. The enforcement policies of the City of Orono shall be provided in writing to the Contract Cities. Enforcement of Ordinances of the Contract Cities. The City of Orono officers assigned to duty within the Contract Cities shall enforce the Ordinances of the Contract Cities. All Officers to be Officers of the Contract Cities. The officers assigned duty within the Contract Cities shall be provided authority to enforce the several laws of the Cities by proper action to be taken by the governing councils of the Contract Cities. The Chief of Police of the City of Orono shall furnish the names of all Orono police officers to the Clerks of the Contract Cities. Offenses. All offenses shall be charged in accordance with the ordinances cf the Contracting City in which the offense occurred in each case possible, otherwise, the charge shall be made in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota or the laws of the Federal Government. Communications. Equipment and Supplies. The City ofOrono shall furnish communication equipment necessary to perform the services which are to be rendered. The City of Orono shall provide the necessary equipment and vehicles and the Contract Cities shall provide any necessary supplies which must be specifically printed for the Conuact Cities. Cooperation and Assistance from the Contract Cities. The City of Orono and the Contract Cities shall have foil cooperation and assistance from each others officers, agents, and employees. Headquarters. Headquarters for the services rendered to the Contract Cities under the agreement shall be located at offices owned or leased by the City of Orono, and the citizens of the Contract Cities shall notify headquarters, or radio dispatch for services requested either in person or by some other means of communication. Services shall be tendered to the Contract Cities on a 24 hour basis. 14. Cost to the Contract Cities. A.Cost Sharing Formula for the Total Base Cost. For and in consideration of provisior of Law Enforcement services under this agreement, the Contract Cities shall pay total base costs determined by the formula, as illustrated in Appendix A, for each contract year. The factors of the formula which shall be weighed equally, shall be defined as follows: Pages L --'-m B. C. Population of Each Contractine City: The population of each Contracting Ci»7 computed as of April 1, prior to each contract year from the then most recent Metropolitan Council estimate, except in a census year when there is a new census figure available by August 1st, then that figure shall be used. Market Valuation of Each Contracting Citv: The market valuation of each Contracting City is based on taxes due and payable for the year immediately preceding the contract year. The source of the assessed valuation data shall be the official figures of the Hennepin County A.’ssessor ’s Department. Cost to Long Lake - Additional Manpower. The cost of additional manpower above the base cost contract to the City of Long Lake, shall be determined as follows: The actual salary of officers assigned to the City of Long Lake shall be computed. To this salary figure will be added an overtime cost calculated as the total overtime budget for all officers divided by the number of all officers times the number of supplemental officers, 88 hours of holiday pay at the hourly rate, wearing ^parel, hospitalization, life insurance, memberships, workers compensation and pensions calculated at the salary figures above. This total (net of to\NTi aid) is then added to the base contract cost to determine the cost of ser\ ice for Long Lake for the new budget year. This procedure is illustrated in Appendix A. This cost will be an actual cost. It is understood that the City of Long Lake may, due to budget consideraiicn in any contract year at the beginiting of the contract year, adjust the number of additional officers in which event they shall pay all those extraordinary costs as outlmed in the third paragraph of Section 23.5 of this agreement. Cos t to Spring Park - Additional Manpower. The cost ofadditional manpower above the base contract cost to the City of Spring Park, shall be determined as follows: The actual salaries of officers assigned to the City of Spring Park shall be computed. To this salary figure will be added that percentage of the total overtime budget for all officers calculated by dividing the number of officers assigned to the City of Spring Park by the number of all officers, 88 hours holiday pay at the hourly rate, wearing apparel, hospitalization, life insurance, memberships, workers compensation and pensions calculated at the salary figure above. This total is then added to ih total cost per Contracting ^ity (total plus support service charge, net of town aidl for Spring Park to determine cost of service for Spring Park for the new contract vear. This procedure is illust'-ated in Appendix A. This cost will be an acnial cost. It is understood that the City of Spring Park may, due to budget considerations in any contract year, at the beginning of the contract year adjust the number ofadditional officers, in which event the City of Spring Park shall pay all extraordinarx* costs as Paged outlined in the third para^ph of Section 23.5 of this agreement. 15. Budget Package 15.1 Definitions A.The Annual Operating Budget refers to the calendar year budget of the Orono Poli<'e Department during the first year of any three year period covered by this agreement. This budget will become the official Annual Operating Budget upon ratification by the Contracting Cities. The Aimua) Budget incorporates all costs of operations. B The Year Two Budget refers to a single number, not to be exceeded, dollar amount which will be used as the budget limit for the next calendar year in the event the Annual Budget Package is not ratified by all Contracting Cities by October I of the first year of any three year period covered by this agreement. C.The Year Three Budget refers to a single number not to be exceeded dollar amount which will be used as the budget limit for the next calendar year in the event the Annual Budget Package has not been ratified by all Contracting Cities by October 1 of the second year of any three year period covered by this agreement. D.The Annual Budget Package refers to the grouping of the Annual Operating Budget, the ^ear Two Budget and the Year Three Budget which is submitted as a unit by the City of Orono for ratification by the Contracting Cities. The Annual Budget Package must be ratified by all Contracting Cities prior to October 1 in the year submitted to become the valid budgets for the following three years. The Annual Budget Package must be accepted or rejected in its entirety. 15.2 Budget Process By August 15 of each year during which this agreement remains in effect, the City of Orono will provide an Annual Budget Package covering the cost of Police protection for the next three calendar years. The budgets presented to the Contracting Cities must have been presented to the Joint Advisory Committee prior to August 1 for discussion and review. Although it is expected that the Annual Budget Package which is provided to the Contracting Cities by the City of Orono will have the consensus support of the Joint Advisory Committee, that is not a requirement since each Contracting City has the opportunity for final ratification or rejection. 16. Contract Payments. The City budget Share (See Appendix A) of each Contracting City shall be paid by the Contracting City to the City of Orono in equal monthly installments by the last day of each month. Page? J 17. 18. Orono agrees to provide the Contract Cities with reasonably detailed information relating to its estimated expenditures and its actual expenditiues so as to adequately inform them of the basis for the calculation of billings made by Orono. Under the provisions of this contract, Orono agrees to moke its records available to the Contract Cities for inspection for the purpose of determining the basis for the calculations by Orono under the provisions of this section. Arbitration. If the Contracting City is aggrieved by the determination of the City of Orono as to the allocation of the actual costs of the prior year’s service, the Contracting City may appeal said determination within 30 days after receipt of the City of Orono's audit. Said appeal shall be in writing and shall be addressed to the City of Orono asking for arbiftation by a board of arbitration. The Board of Arbitration shall consist of three persons; one to be appointed by the City of Orono, one to be appointed by the appealing Contracting City, and the third to be appointed by the two so selected. The name of each arbitrator shall be submitted in writing to the other party. In the event that the two arbitrators so selected do not appoint the third arbitrator w'ithin 15 days after receipt of written notice of appointment of either of the first two arbitrators, the Chief Judge of the District Court of Hennepin County shall have jurisdiction to appoint, upon application of either the City of Orono or the appealing Contracting City, the third arbitrator to the Board. The third arbitrator selected shall not be a resident of either Contracting City, and shall be a city manager or administrator. The arbitrators’ expenses and fees, together with the other expenses, not including counsel fees, incurred in the conduct of the arbitration, shall be divided equally between the parties to the arbitration, .\r itration shall be conducted in accordance with the Uniform Arbitration Act, Chapter 572 of the Minnesota Statutes, and any decision shall be rendered within 60 days of appointment cf the third arbitrator. Said arbitration shall be binding on both parties. Annual Audit of .Actual Costs. The Contract Cities understand and agree that it is impossible to project with complete accuracy the actual costs for labor and equipment as well as the service to be required by each Contracting City for the forthcoming contract year, and there fore, agree to a yearly audit to adjust the prior year’s estimated police service cost as set forth above to the actual police serv ice cost based upon the actual costs for that contract year. On or before April 1 of each year, the City of Orono will tabulate the actual cost of providing law enforcement services for the prior contract year and will submit to the Contract Cities a summary of said costs. The actual costs set forth for the prior contract year may result in either a credit or a debit applied to the estimated police service costs charged to the Contract Cities. If a Contract City is still participating in this agreement, and if a credit, one-half of the credit shall be deducted in each of the third and fourth quarters from the estimated police service cost payments required of the Contract City for the current year of service; and if a debit, the Contract City shall pay the additional sum to the City of Orono together with the estimated contract charge for the current year by adding one half of the debit to both the third and fourth quarter payments. The allocation of the credit or debit shall be made pursuant to the same formula set forth above. If a Contract City is not still participating in this Pages 19. agreement at the time the credit or debit amount is determined as set forth above, the Contract City shall receive from (in the case of a credit) or shall make to (in the case of a debit) the City of Orono a cash payment in the amount of such credit or debit, one-half oo the date that the third quarter estimated police service cost payment would be due if this arreement was still in force and one-half on the date that the fourth quarter estimated police service cost payment would be due if this agreement was still in force. Hold Harmless and Indemnification. As part of the Police Budget for each cuniiacl year, the City of Orono shall purchase liability insurance to insure the City of Orono against liability incurred in the rendering of law enforcement services to the Contract Cities. The City of Orono shall maintain insurance covering its police services with limits of not less than $600,000 for general liability coverage and S2 million for excess liabilit> coverage. However, the amount and extent of insurance coverage may not be sufficient to insure the City of Orono and the Contract Cities completely and to pay all expenses incurred by the City of Orono, including attorneys' fees and judgements rendered against the City of Orono and/or the Contract Cities. Therefore, the City of Orono exposes itself to potentially ur.dennsured and noninsured liabilities. Notwithstanding any language to the contrary herein, the Contract Cities agree that the City of Orono is faced with such an exposure and therefore the Contract Cities agree to hold harmless and indemnify the City' of Orono, if^ employees and agents for any loss or damage of any kind whatsoever caused by the rendering of law enforcement services in the Contract Cities to the extent that the loss or damage and all expenses related thereto are not covered by the insurance policies of the City of Orono in effect during the contract year in which the act or alleged act giving rise to ^ly claim for loss or damages occurred. In no event shall this agreement be construed to fix upon City of Orono any responsibility or liability to the Contract Cities or to third parties which are greater or different in kind then the responsibilities and liabilities borne by the Contract Cities if they w ere providing law enforcement services through their owm police department. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the police chief of the City of Orono or his designee will have the sole discretion as to the officer and equipment that will answer police calls, and it shall not be a violation of this agreement nor shall the City of Orono be held responsible to the Contract Cities or to a third party for any loss which may result in the event that the City of Orono, in the exercise of reasonable judgment, is unable to respond promptly or to respond w ith only limited officers and equipment., or is delayed in responding to a call by reason of answ ering a previous call. The Contract Cities agree that they will hold harmless and indemnify the City of Orono for any judgement rendered against it or sums paid out by it in settlement, paxment or defense of any such claims, to the extent the City of Orono is uninsured or underinsured arising out of any calls for police services to be rendered in the Contract Cities under the policies of insurance the City of Orono is required to maintain as set forth above. Page 9 A 20. 21. 22. 23. Unforecasted Expenditures. Not wthstanding any of the above, the Contract Cities shall have the right to approve any proposed capital expenditures and/or increase in number of officers not otherwise included in the annual budget. Notice of such proposed and non-budgeted capital expenditiu-es and/or increase in the number of officers shall be given in writing to the contracting cities prior to actual expenditure for such items and the contracting cities shall thereafter have until the later of their next Council meeting or 30 days after receipt of said written notice in w hich to j^iprove and/or disapprove the same in writing or else it is agreed that such proposed expenditures may be made and the cost thereof shall be included in that year’s budget. In the event the Contracting Cities shall disapprove such non-budgeted capital expenditure and'or increase in the number of officers, it shall not be liable to the City of Orono for any costs incurred by the City of Orono should the non-budgeted capital expenditure and/or increase in number of offii.ers be made despite such disapproval. Furthermore, the cost of such disapproved capital expenditures and'or increase in number of officers shall not be computed in determining the "Base Cost" or "Contract Charge" herein above set forth for each contracting city for the years in which the disapproved expenditure(s) is/are made. Prior Contract. Notwithstanding any language herein to the contrary', or in pnor contracts benveen the parties, any credit or debit due to the Contract Cities or to the City of Orono on account of prior agreements and contracts for law enforcement between the panies shall be payable in 2004 as provided herein for credit or debit pavments payable in 2004 and thereafter. Police Contract Serv ice Explanation. The City of Orono w ill deliver 24 hour patrol and response throughout Minnetonka Beach, Spring Park and Long Lake will conduct routine patrol throughout the city as needed, and will conduct periodic security checks of businesses and will conduct such duties as requested by the Contract City's councils. The City of Orono will submit regular reports to the Contract City officials and appear at council meetings or any other special meetings as required by the council. This can be the Chief or any other member of the department as required by the council. Four officers were requested by Spring Park and will be assigned to Spring Park by mutual agreement between the City of Orono Police Department and the Spring Park City- Council. Two officers were requested by Long Lake and will be assigned to Long Lake by mutual agreement between the City of Orono Police Depanment and the Long Lake City Council. Term of this Agreement. This Agreement is for three contract years and covers the period January 1,2004 through December 31,2006. A contract year covers the period January 1 through December 31 of a calendar year. This Agreement will become effective upon ratification by the Contracting Cities of all its parts including Appendix A and Appendix B w hich contains tlie Annual Budget Package. The term of this agreement may be extended as described below. Page 10 23.1 On each occasion that the Annual Budget Package is ratified by October 1 by the Contracting Cities, this Agreement will be renewed for a total period of three contract years beginning with the contract year following the current contract year. The details of this process are covered in sections 23.2 through 23.3 following. 23.2 23.3 23.4 When during the first contract year of any three year period covered by the Agreement the Annual Budget Package is ratified by Contracting Cities by October 1, this Agreement shall be extended by one contract year. VVTien dunng the second contract year of any three year period covered by the Agreement the Annual Budget Package is ratified by Contracting Cities by October 1, this Agreement shall be extended by two contract years. When during the third contract year of any three year period covered by the Agreement the Annual Budget Package is ratified by Contracting Cities by October 1, this Agreement shall be extended by three contract years. The elements of the Anr.ual Budget Package so ratified will replace the elements of the previously ratified Annual Budget Package. When during the first contract year of any tL*ee year period covered by the Agreement the Annual Budget Package is not ratified by Contracting Cities by October 1, the amount previously ratified as the Year Two Budget shall become the Annual Operating Budget for the second contract year and the term of this .\greement shall not be extended. When during the second contract year of any three year period covered by the Agreement the Annual Budget Package is not ratified by Contracting Cities by October 1, the amount previously ratified as the Year Two Budget shall become the Annual Operr.tinv Budget for the third contract year and the term of this Agreement sh^l not be extended. 23.5 When during the third contract year of any tfiree year period covered by the Agreement the Annual Budget Package is not ratified by Contracting Cities by October 1, this Agreement will terminate at the end of that contract year. This Agreement may be terminated by either the method detailed in section 23, or by mutual agreement of all Contract Cities. If any one of the Contract Cities terminates this Agreement, the other Contract Cities may terminate or renegotiate the Agreement. In the event that a Contract City terminates this Agreement with or without cause, the Contract City agrees to pay to the City of Orono any of the extraordinary costs incurred by or within the Police Department of the City of Orono on account of such termination; said costs include but are not limited to unemployment benefits paid because of the need to lay off existing police department personnel and those costs occasioned by the need to reduce overhead because of the termination of this agreement. Extraordinary costs shall not include the costs of day to day operations of the police department of the City of Orono at level of performance and quality of it's choice. Page 11 iftHMMltliil PROVIDED* HOWEVER* that no such termination costs shall be imposed unless and until authorized representatives of the parties hereto have met and such terminati ng costs have been mutually agreed upon. In the event the parties are unable to reach agreement, the matter shall be submined to arbitration as provided in paragraph 17 of this agreement. Termination of this contract by either party shall not affect the obligation of either party to perform the contract prior to the time that such termination becomes effective. All Contract Cities signing this agreement agree to participate in a pro rata share of all the operating costs of the department’s total base cost based upon a ten officer department. It is understood that the formula for allocation and the distribution of costs will be calculated yearly as illustrated in Appendix A. 24.No Discrimination. The City of Orono agrees that during the period of this contract, it will not, within the State of Minnesota, discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, sex, national origin, or ancestry and will include a similar provision in all subcontracts entered into for the performance hereof. This paragraph is inserted in the contract to comply with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 181.59. CITY OF ORONO CONTRACTING CITY L City Administrator Clerk —VCity of Long Lake Mayor 4 Mayor The above agreement was reviewed and approved by the City Council of the City of J by Resolution No>2^^-/^-i^dated / , 20 The above agreement was reviewed and {^proved by the City Council of the City of _________________by Resolution No._________dated __________________, 20 »'fw.;, fim » rifc i tnnmini im !>■ Page 12 ii^s--------------— i APPENDIX A Page 13 ^ ______- PERCENT APPLIED BASE BUDGET TOWN AID CREDIT TOTAL ADMIN CHARGE (10%) TOTAL BASE ADDITIONAL OFFICERS TOWN AID TOTAL ADDL OFFICERS GRAND TOTAL ORONO POLICE SERVICE CONTR.\CT BASE BLDGET FORMULA FACTORS BLIX jET YEAR 2004 ORONO POLICE SERVICE CONTRACT DISTRIBUTION OF COSTS SERVICE YEAR 20C4 ORONO LONG LAKE MINNETONKA BLVCH SPRING P.ARK SUI6.877 (43.28!) 12.19%6.52%10.57% SI70,1I9 (7.460) S88.990 (3.990) S139.964 (6.469) 1,173.596 117.360 162.659 16.266 85.000 8.500 133.495 13.349 H 78.925 S93.500 SI46.844 SI47.530 (lOJIOO) S292470 (20.400) S137J30 11,290^»14255 $93J00 S418.814 APPENDIX A ORONO LONG LAKE MINNETONKA BEACH SPRING PARK TOTAL POPULATION 7^U2Q 11.779 % OF TOTAL 64.45%15.70%5.25%14.60%100.00% WEIGHT 50%32.23%7.85%2.62*/«7,30%50.00% ^URKET VALUE SI.427.900.500 SI60.819.900 SI44.359.I00 SI2I.(M9.S00 SI.854.129.000 % OF TOTAL 77.01%8.67%7.79%6.53%100.00% WEIGHT 50%38.51%4.34%3.89%3.27%50.00^'« TOTAL PERCENT 70.74%12.19^;652%10.57%lOO.OO^^. TOTAL I00 00«/ossssaB=s= S 1.615.950 (61.200) 1.554.750 155.475 Sl.710.225 S439.900 00.600) ■S-iOti APPENDIX A cmroFORONo POLICE SERVICE CONTRACT BUDGET YEAR 2004 Police Dcpiitnmt Expenses Salaries - FT. Ovenime Salaries • P.T. Offlccn/CSOs Salaries • P.T. Clericil/Alcohol Compliance Holiday Pay (LELS) Pen • Cicy Contribution F1CA\IDCR - City Contributloo Health, Life, Disability, Other Benefiu Worker Compensation Insurance Office Supplies Bocks A Periodicals Motor Fuels A Lubricants Equipment Parts A Accessories Bldg A Grounds Maint A Repair Supplies Clothing A Personal Equipment Training Supplies DARE Program Small Tool A .Minor Equipment Mair.i - OfHce Equipment Maint - Automotive Equipment Maint - Misc Equipment Main: - Bldgs A Grounds Jar.iicrial Services Data Processing Aninial Care Professional Services Insurance Agent of Record General Liabilit) insurance Property Insurances Um.breila Liability Insurance Telephone Postage Internet Tra\ eI-Mileage«Parklng Prinhng/Publishing/Advertising Utilities Radio Rental Office A Building Rental Memberships Training A Development Mcttmg Expenses Special Equip Replacement Charge Licer.ses A Taxes Other Charges Buildings A Structures OtTce Fum • Fixt • Equipment Automotive Equipment Other Equipment POST Training Reimbursement School Liaison Officer Reimbursement Federal Grant • COPS Federal Grant • Emergency Preparedness Sale of Used Squads/Other Equipment State Aid - Payroll PERA TOT.AL 2003 Budget 2004 Budget Adjustment to Long Lake Cost Base Long Lake Cost Base SU 14.250 Sl.l5Jt.780 (SI28.240)$1,027,540 40.000 50.000 50,000 40.170 47.110 47.110 24.240 24,100 24.100 37.220 38,190 (4.190)34.000 111.660 118,140 (11,230)106.910 20.360 21,590 (3.700)17.890 129.910 135,000 (18.000)117.0GO 34.830 43,780 (4.610)41.1T0 9,010 9,010 9,010 920 600 600 39.780 37,000 37,000 8.500 8,500 8.500 3.000 2.700 2.700 25.000 21.000 2 LOGO 4.020 4,020 4.o:o 2.270 0 0 4.000 4.000 4.C00 2,500 2,500 2.5C0 19J60 27.000 27.000 2 930 2.930 2,930 12,000 11.000 11.000 9.270 9.000 9.000 36.050 36.0^0 36.050 3,830 3,830 3.830 9.210 11,500 11.500 3.640 3.640 3.640 13.510 16.290 16.290 7.250 7.610 7.610 5.450 5.720 5.720 15,000 13.000 13.CC0 1,480 1.480 1.480 1,920 1,920 1.920 180 180 ISO 2.530 2,530 2,530 11.440 10.300 10.300 25.100 25.100 25.100 50.420 50,420 (50.420)0 2.330 1,600 1.600 20.000 17,000 17.000 U80 1,380 L3S0 940 940 940 1.060 1,060 1.060 2.100 2,100 2.1C0 0 0 0 14.000 27.000 27.CC0 83.000 83,000 83,000 5.000 0 0 (8.080)(8.100)(8,100) (18,000)(18.000)(18,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 (15.000)(12.000)(12.0C0) (6.000)(6.000)(6.000) -------JL977J40 S2.054J00 ■ (S220J90)Sl.834.110 k LONG LAKE ADDITIONAL MANPOWER 2004 SERVICE YEAR EXHIBIT 'C Projected Salaries, 2.0 Officers Overtime Holiday Pay P.E.R.A. • City Contribution FICA/MDCR - City Contribution Health • Lite Insurance Worker Compensation Insurance Clothing A Personal Equipment Total Deduct Town Aid Credit Total Additional Officers Total Base Cost Total Cost of Service S1I0.S80 3,700 4,680 11,060 S80 12,000 4,280 6S0 SI 47,530 (10,200) 137,330 178,925 S31 6.255 APPENDIX A Aaiki J 1 APPENDIX B 2004 - 2006 BUDGET PACKAGE Orono Long Lake Mtka Beach Spring Park Amount AlROHDl Anv9unt Amount $2,119,325 2004 City Cost Share Using 2004 Cost Allocation Numbers $1,290,956 $316,255 593,300 $418,814 Two Year Contract Cost $2,225,500 Two Year City Cost Share Using 2004 Cost Allocation Numben $1,355,504 $332,067 $98,175 :$439,756 Three Year Contract Cost $2,336,776 Three Year City Cost Share Using 2004 Cost Allocation Numbers $1,423,279 1 $348,671 1 $103,084 $461,742 r ikjipPTING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION OCT 2 7 2003 Cl I Y UH OHONO DATE: October 24,2003 ITEM NO: *2) Department Approval: N sbc Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Purchase of Replacement Rescue Vehicle for the Long Lake Fire Department. llie Long Lake Fire Department's multi-year equipment replacement plan includes the replacement of a rescue vehicle in 2003. The total cost of the vehicle is $223,928, less a $4,185 discount for prepaying 90% ofthe cost of the truck. Orono’s share of the total cost is $158,212.86. Thisyear’s HRA Navarre Fire Station and Equipment bond sale provided sufficient funding for the rescue vehicle. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the purchase of the rescue vehicle for the Long Lake Fire Department, at a total cost of $223,928, with Orono's share being $ 158,212.86, to be funded from the Navarre Fire Station and Equipment Bonds Construction Fund. f S' - . V* A ■ T* -» I I aiiii I CITY OF LONO LAKE 55, 2 j 2005 4S0 VIRGINIA AVENUE Invoice PO BOX 606 CITY OF LONG LAKE LONG LAKE MN 55356- 952-473-6961 Sold CITY OF ORONO To: P.O. BOX 66 Crystal Bay MN 55323 Ship CITY OF ORONO To: P.O. BOX 66 Crystal Bay MN 55323 Ottf. UnM ShIplAa Tenna Contract Upon Rocoipt Contact CustomtrP^ Dsocriplion Unit Pilea ’ Amount ILLVFD Chaste - Ofono Portion (76.39%)$43,098.48 $43,096.48 11 iLLVFD Truck 90% - Orono Portion (78.39%)$115,114.38 $115,114.38 Special Inatn DUE UPON RECEIPT SubTotal Tax Shipping I Total $158,212.86 $0.00 S1^.212~86 Please make checks payable to: CITY OF LONG LAKE If you have any questions concerning this invoice please call Tina at 952-473-6961 Thank you ■PPPliPPPPI ThankYou! Imaf /I A Fir* D«partm«nt • R mcu * PurchM* Purchase Price Discount Total Purchase Price $223,928.00 4 185 92 $219,742.08 1st Invoice • October 2003 Total Orono Long Lake Medina 100%76.39%15 62%7.99% Chasis >100% due now $56,419.00 $43.098 47 $8,812.65 $4,507.88 Truck - 90% due now $150,693.00 $115,114.38 $23,538.25 $12,040.37 Total $207,112.00 $158,212.86 $32,350.89 $16,548.25 2nd Invoke • December 2003 Estimate Total Orono Long Lake Medina 100%76.39%15.62%7.99% Truck -10% due - final $12.630 00 $9,648.06 $1,972.31 $1,009.14 ■M-'4 1 •Original Message — From: DJ Goman [mailto:dJ6590@mchsi.com] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 11:07 AM To: michelle morse Subject: discount Michelle, Good morning I just got off the phone the Paul with Amtech. Amtech is willing to offer a $4500.00 deduct if we issue a check up front for 90% of the puchase price or about $152,000.00. we would hold 10% until complection then take the $4500.00 off of the remaining 10% number. In addition Paul states will can hang onto the bid bond until complection. Paul will be sending me a E-Mail as follow up to our phone conversation from this A.M. Let me know if we want to proceed that way. and i'll let Paul know. Thank you.. DJ r.OllMCII MFftTING REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION OCT 2 7 2003 CITY OF ORONO DATE: October 24,2003 ITEM NO; 22- Department Approval: Nine Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Purchase of Replacement Pumper for the Long Lake Fire Department. The Long Lake Fire Department's multi-year equipment replacement plan includes the replacement of a pumper in 2004. The Cities of Long Lake and Orono, through the Long Lake Assistant Fire Chief, and the Excelsior Chief, have worked together on the purchase of tw o pumpers, one for the Navarre Fire Station, and one to replace the LLFD pumper. This has enabled very favorable pricing for both of the pumpers. If the replacement pumper for the LLFD is ordered now, rather than waiting until 2004, the 2004 price increase can be avoided. The total cost of the pumper is $220,500. Orono's share of the cost is $169,000. This year’s HRA bond sate provided sufficient funding for the LLFD replacement pumper. Although the pumper will be ordered now, it will not be delivered until the spring of 2004, which is also the time when the Cities will pay for the truck. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the purchase of the replacement pumper for the Long Lake Fire Department, at a total cost of $220,500, with Orono's share being $169,000. A ^ i A roiiMrii mpftin G OCT 2 7 2003 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ciTY OF ORONO DATE: !0‘Zi- 03 ITEM NO: ^23 Department Approval^ ^ Name Tom Title Finance Director Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: ^ ^ City Administrator's ^ Report Item Description: After the Fact Resolution to Appoint Paul Theisen as Part-Time Police Officer When the City appoints a part-time police officer state statutes require the adoption of a resolution declaring the position is that of a police officer, as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 353.64. If a resolution is not adopted the part-time police officer is deemed ineligible for membership in the Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Fund. When Officer Theisen was appointed the memo and accompanying information from the police department did not include the resolution. At this time ti,w* resolution is provided for adoption. COUNCIL ACTION REQi.lESTED: Adoption of the attached resolution declaring that the part-time position held by Paul A. Theisen was that of a police officer. T A RESOLUTION TO DECLARE THAT THE PART-TIME POSITION HELD BY PAUL A. THEISEN IS THAT OF A POLICE OFFICER WHEREAS, that Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Fund exc ludes part-time police officers unless a resolution is adopted by the governing body to establish eligibility for coverage in the Police and Fire Fund. WHEREAS, the City of Orono, on May 13, 2003, did appoint Paul A. Theisen to the position of part-time police officer, as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 353.64, but did not adopt a resolution at that time. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota that effective May 13, 2003, the position Paul A. Theisen was appointed to was that of a police officer as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 353.64, pursuant to which said employee did become a member of the Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Fund. Adopted by the City' Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held October 27,2003. ATTEST:Barbara Peterson, Mayor Linda S. Vee, City Clerk 1 I * MFPTlMG OCT 2 7 2003 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY Of ORONO DATE: October 24,2003 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Titk City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Creation of Fire Administrative Officer for the Long Lake Fire Department As the magnitude of administrative task> required for the operation of a volunteer fire department continues to grow, departments have seen the need for paid staff to ensure these tasks are adequately carried out. The Long Lake Fire Department has been very fortunate that its volunteer Assistant Fire Chief. Tony Roe, has taken on these tasks. However, the time required to handle the administrative workload is well beyond the level of compensation provided for the volunteer Assistant Chief position. Although determining the longer term solution to this problem for the LLFD will require more discussion and review, the Fire Advisory Commission has determined that, as an interim solution, a paid Fire Administrative Officer position should be created. The position description is attached. The pay rate is proposed to be $15.00 per hour. It is also recommended that Tony Roe be appointed to the position, and that he receive pay for his administrati’ e work retroactive to July 1 .2003, which is when he began spending substantial hours on administ«3tive tasks. The cost for this position in 2003 will be $13,650. Orono's share of these costs will >e approximately $I 1,000. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Orono's share of the costs of a Fire Administrative Officer for the Long Lake Fire Department, and to approve an adjustment to the 2003 General Fund budget to reflect the additional $11,000 expenditure. n 1 City of Long Lake Position Description November 2003 Position Title: Department: Accountable to: Fire Adminbtrative Officer (35 hrs/week* temporary) Fire City Administrator PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: The Fire Administrative Officer is responsible for the day-to-day administration and coordination of all Fire Department activities consistent with municipal ordinances, policies. State and Federal laws. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS: 1. Coordinates Fire Fighter Recruitment - Advertises and solicits interest from residents or employees within the Fire Ser% ice Area to become members of the Volunteer Fire Department. - Meets with interested applicants and answers questions. - Coordinates processing employment applications. Interv iews interested applicanis. administers the physical agility test, works with the Orono Police Department to complete a criminal background investigation and coordinates pre-emoloyment medical exams. - Presents hiring recommendations to the City Administrator for final approval by the City Council. - Maintains a current fire fighter roster. 2. Coordinates Fire Fighter Training - Works with surrounding fire departments to provide Fire Fighter I and II training or coordinates enrolling fire fighters in required training courses through Hennepin Technical College. - Coordinates on-going training for all department members and ensures that members maintain current certifications. - Maintains and distributes member training and participation data. - Works with the Orono Police Department and neighboring fire departments to plan for joint training. 3.Short and Long-Tcmi Kquipment and Facility Needs Planning - Maintains a current listing of major and minor vehicle and equipment replacement needs for future capital planning by the cities. - Works to ensure that the cities receive maximum benefit from all vehicle and equipment purchases. - Ensures that all equipment is properly maintained and OSHA certified. - Works to identify alternative funding sources for acquiring and replacing equipment. Identifies and resolves issues related to the operation of the Fire Station and plans for facility maintenance and improvements. City of Long Lake Position Description November 2003 4. Responsible for managing the Fire Department Operating Budget - Oversees all department expenditures to ensure that they are within the operating budget and comply with city purchasing policies. - Reviews and codes all invoices and works with the City Finance Officer to resolve any billing issues. 5. Records Management - Responsible for maintaining personnel files on all fire fighters including training records. - Responsible for maintaining call records and informing cities of false alarms. - Responsible for maintaining a log of bum permits and inspections. - Completes required State reports. 6. Maintains Positive Professional Working Relationships - Works to develop and maintain professional working relationships with City Staff, elected officials, and neighboring fire and police departments. - Works to improve relationships amongst volunteer fire fighters. - Works cooperatively w ith neighboring cities to offer joint training and other services. - Represents the Fire Department at the Hennepin County Police and Fire Chief Meetings. - Serves as Emergency Management Coordinator for the Fire Department and attends Hennepin County Emergency Management meetings. 7. Customer Ser\ ice and Community Outreach - Responds to daily inquiries for information on the Fire Department and its services. - Assists the Fire Department in coordinating community events at the Fire Station and providing youth education on fire prevention. 8. Performs other duties as required or assigned. QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS: To perform this job successfully, an individual must be able to perform each essential function satisfactorily. The requirements listed below are representative of the knowledge, skill, and/cr ability required. 1 . Education and Experience. - High school diploma or GED equivalent. - Must be at least 1 8 > ears of age. - Must possess a valid Minnesota Drivers License. - Shall ha\e completed Firefighter 1 and II training or the equivalent Fire Department, State and NFP.A training. - Basic computer skills and software knowledge. 2. Knowledge. Skills and Abilities. - Considerable know ledge of the rules and regulations of the Department, geography of the service contract area, and the location of roadways, principal buildings, and fire hydrants. - Considerable know ledge of the principles, practices, procedures, and equipment used in fire fighting and in the protection ot life and property* fiom fire. \ City of Long Lake Position Description November 2003 Considerable knowledge of the uses and limitations of the various types of apparatus and equipment used by the Department, and of their operational and maintenance requirements. Considerable ability to plan and implement programs of the Department operations and activities, personnel training and fire prevention. Considerable ability to prepare accurate and thorough reports. Considerable ability to communicate effectively both orally and in writing with City, State and County officials, and the general public. 3. Special Requirements. - No felony convictions PHYSICAL DEMANDS The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. While performing the duties of this job, the employee is frequently required to talk; hear; sit; stand; walk; use hands to finger, handle, or operate objects, tools, or controls; and reach with hands and arms. The employee is occasionally required to stoop, kneel, crouch, or crawl. The employee must occasionally lift and/or move up to 30 pounds. Specific vision abilities required by this job include close vision, distance vision, and peripheral vision. WORK ENVIRONMENT The work environment characteristics described here are representati\ e of those an employee encounters while performing the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. While performing the duties of this job the employee regularly works indoors in an office setting with moderate noise levels. EXAMPLES OF PERFORMANCE CRITERIA Establishes effective working relationships with others. Caries out assignments and duties under limited supervision. Prepares reports and assembles data as required in an accurate manner. Maintains due regard for the safety and welfare of self and other employees. Receives direction in a businesslike and professional manner. Communicates effectively in person and on the phone. SELECTION GUIDELINES Formal application and resume; review of education and experience: oral interv iew; background check, final selection. NOTE: Appointees will be subject to completion of a standard probationary period. City of Long Lake Position Description November 2003 The examples of duties are intended only as illustrations of the various types of work performed. The omission of specific statements of duties does not exclude them from the position if the work is similar, related or a logical assignment to the position. The job description does not constitute an employment agreement between the employer and the employee and is subject to change by the employer as the needs of the employer and requirements of the job change. Ik... ’\V h CITYoT u:^i NO MiinkiiMl Offices /'/ October 27,2003 Strast Mdrets: 27S0 Kelley Perlmay Orono, MN 55356 IMHrI Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323^ U.S.Bank 60 Livingston Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55107-2292 Attention: Jay Paulson, Third Floor DRAFT Dear Mr. Paulson; The Orono City Council, at a regular Council Meetirg held on Monday, October 27,2003, appointed Orono Finance Director, Thomas M. KueLn. as an Authorized City Representative, to act on behalf of the City and the HRA. The Authorized City' Representative will request and direct the Trustee in the investment of the moneys held in the Bond Fund, the Reserve Fund and the Construction Fund, as well as the disbursement c;' moneys in the Construction Fund to pay, or to reimburse the Authority or the City for paymen*.s made under Article IV, Section 4.02, Disbursements from the Construction Fund, as per the Lease Purchase Agreement dated July 1 , 2003. This letter will serve as the certificate of appointment Thank you. Sincerely, Barbara A. Peterson Mayor Thomas M. Kuehn Authorized City Representative THtpliMn 052) 24MdB> • Fas(952)14M61« i i I } mu nrM ^^pptiNG REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: OCT ? 7 2003 u IT ur OMuuu ITEM NO: J.S' Department Approval: _ Name Tom Title Finance Director Adminutrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Appointment of Authorized City Representative for 2003 HRA Revenue Bond Construction Project. Attachment: Certificate to appoint an Authorized City Representative The proceeds of the 2003 HRA Public Facility Lease Revenue Bonds for the Navarre fire hall and equipment were required to be deposited with a Trustee. An Authorized City Representative must submit written claims to the Trustee for the City to be reimbursed from the construction monies. The trust agreement defines an Authorized City Representative as the Mayor, City Administrator, City Clerk or such other person designated to act on behalf of the City by written certificate furnished by the Authorized HRA Representative, who is the HRA Chairperson, or Secretary. As the reimbursement claims will be generated through the Finance Department it is recommended that the Finance Director be designated as an "Authorized City Representative". COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to appoint City Finance Director, Tom Kuehn, as an Authorized City Representative for the submission of claims for payment, and for reimbursement of claims paid by the City with regard to the 2003 Orono HRA Fire Hall and Equipment construction project. Memo Coimol»ArtwCOO)\HltA Hifirmemmiva I2J —I f ~ l a REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION »*pptING OCT 2 7 2003 CM Y OF OHONO DATE; October 23,2003 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Nunc LinVee Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval Agenda Sect^n: Licenses RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE 1. Jim and Judy Hatchett 840 North Shore Drive COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the above listed licenses. ' 'J1 _______— i i. ^M r n Oh KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION Effective January 1,200__ to December 31,200__ II _________Z^irr\ <j- /Ia-'TC/i^’TT_________________ Property Address: J> SS6 Owner: Mailing Address (if different):, (include city and zip). Phone: (home) /yOO (work)____ residential Kennel License Fee: $25.00 (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time:______ (over 6 monihs of age) Principal Breed:_______n-r" 7^/ J^09 Purpose for more than 2 dogs: Dogs normally kept: inside /X kennel structure ^ COMMERCIAL Kennel License Fee: $150.00 (payment must accompany ai^lication) Name of Business:________________ Business Activities: (example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.) Normal Business Hours:_________________________________ After Hours Contact: (name) (phoneX Dog runs/exercise areas are: inside outside__^th ^'V(O-'N .4 >vA' The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and does not grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigned hereby grants the City permission to inspect the premises prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; acd the undersigned agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any special conditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel license approval. ^-^-5 J Date For dry Use Only Kennel inspected by Date Recftmmends: Appra/al \C Denial^ J I CITYOFORONO INSPECTION NOTICE PEI.4ITNO.______ DATE to-13- TIME ADDRESS OWNER _ CALLED IN SCHEDULED COMPLETED ----------- ■ — „ 8^ M ■ ShnrP W^^eoNTR. <noo TELEPHONE NO.______L/>9>~nQl ^ i DESCRIPTION l^nnc ( Jjl^pC Crf I CV\ At A A* mmt _____ . 5 t *i s 3 j: e 01 FooTmo 02 FRAMING 03 INSULATION 04 WALL BO. 05 FINAL 07 DEMO-SITE 07 DEMO-FINAL 09 PLUMBING Rl It MSCHANICALRI 13 MECHANICAL FINAL 24/25 WOOD BURNER/FIREPLACE 12 WATER HOOK-UP 14 SEWER HOOK-UP 27 SEPTIC MA'NT. 15 SEPTIC INSTALL. 23 SEPTIC FINAL 10 PLUMBING FINAL OWNEIVCONTIUCTOflTOHEETVOU:___YES IS EXCAV/QRAOINanxiNG 19 LAKESHOREAVETIANOS 34 TREE REMOVAL 17 SITE INSPECTION 06 PROGRESS 21 COMPLAINT 22 FOaOW-UP 35 HARO COVER RE1AOVAL 36 FOUNDATIONREMOVAL COMMENTS'roQ =* ^'5. ‘7i(f , <^n ^ \ cS<OC^2 1^ y -o? 5: D 41 !Q >) % I>41 % :oo >41 % >N Q 8 □ WORK SATISFACTORY. PROCEED □ CORRECT WORK 6 PROCEED □ CORRECT WORK, CAU FOR REINSPECnON BEFORE COVERING □ CORRECT UNSAFE CONDITION WITHIN INSPECTOR WILL RETURN □ PROJECT COMPLETE C ISSUE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY ________TEMPORARY ________PERMANENT □ STOP ORDER POSTED. CALL INSPECTOR O INSPECTION REQUIRED. CALL TO ARRANGE ACCcSS. □ PHOTO TAKEN □ CITATION ISSUED Call for tha naxt inspection 24 hours in advance. (952) 249*4600 . • CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Registers) 1CV24/03 12 45 PM Page 1 OCTOBER 2003 Check Amt Invoice Comment roiiMni ocr 2 7 2003 CUT 10100 Primary Cash Paid Chk» 076829 10/13/2C03 AMERICABLE E 402-48030-304 Engineering-Consulting Total AMERICABLE ($2,302 M) 22435 ($2.302 98) Void Check 76829 Paid cm! 076835 10/13/2003 BEAUCHENE MAILING E 101-41900-322 Postage ($619.34) Postage Void Ck 76835 Total BEAUCHENE MAILING ($619 34) PaMChkO 076905 10/13/2003 MTGF E 613-49630-437 Training & Development ($12000) 10/15.03 Void Check 76905 Tout MTGF ($120 00) Paid ChMI 076941 10/10/2003 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE E 101-41900-322 Postage $54071 Postage Postage - Fall Newsletter Total UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE $540 71 Paid ChkA 076953 10/16/2003 MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM G 101-21718 Post Employment Health $16.27321 30-Sep-03 HCSP-Srinkhaus severance Total MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM $16,273 21 Paid Chki 076954 10/27/2003 PRUDENTIAL UFE INSURANCE G 101-15998 Non-Employee Health Ins $28 85 9.7ZCZ Life Inso^nce 9/2003 G 101-21710 Life Insurance $89.70 9/2C03 Lfe InSsjrance 9/2003 G 101-21710 Life insurance $662.10 9/2C03 Life Irrsjrance 9/2003 Totel PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE $780 65 Paid Chki 076955 1/27/2003 ACCLAIM BENEFITS E 101-41900-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $93.50 338497 COBRA Admin-9C003 E 101 -41300-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $137 75 333438 FSA Acmin - 9'2003 Tout ACCLAIM BENEFITS $231.25 Paid Chk# 076956 1/27/2003 ACE TRAILER SALES E 101-43000-240 Small Tools and Minor Equip $500 55 553 Pcie S» Total ACE TRAILER SALES $500 55 Paid Chk# 076957 1/27/2003 AMERICAN ENGINEERING TEST, INC E 402-48030-304 Engineering-Consulting $2.302 98 2243$CRl9SewaIk ToUl AMERICAN ENGINEERING TEST. INC $2,302.98 PaidChk# 076958 1/27/2003 ANDERSON. KRISTI E 101-42400-319 Other Professional Services $260.00 10.2:03 Ptannlng Minutes 10/22 Tout ANDERSON. KRISTI $260 00 Paid Chk* 076959 1/27/2003 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $116 96 6013-348642 Ccffee - CH E 101-42110-201 Office supplies $116 96 6013-348643Coffee - PD E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $5'^.80 6013-348644 Coffee - PW • Total ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES $29. 72 Paid Chk# 076960 * 27/2003 AT A T WIRELESS SERVICES E 601-49400-321 Telephone $9 76 3419397 Cea Phones E 602-49450-321 Telephone $9 76 3415397 CeU Phenes E101-41900-321 Telephone $M 90 3419397 CeO Phones Total AT BT WIRELESS SERVICES $46 42 Paid Chk# 070S61 107^003 AUOIBS MOBILE CHEF I CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 10/24/03 12:45 PM Page 2 OCTOBER 2003 Check Amt Invoke Comment E 613-49900-093 Concessions For Resale-Txbl $38.74 23524 Hot Dogs. Cheeseburgers ToUl AUGIES MOBILE CHEI^$38.74 Paid Chk# 076962 1/27/2003 BIFFS INC. E 101-45200-415 Other Equipment Rentals $177.02 W204170 Solid Waste - Bederwood E 101-45200-415 Other Equipment Rentals $121 82 W204171 Solid Waste - Summit E 101-45200-415 Other Equipment Rentals $121 82 W204172 Solid Waste - Hackberry E 613-49830-415 Other Equipment Rentals $60 91 W204173 Solid Waste • GC E 101-45200-415 Other Equipment Rentals $60.91 W204174 Solid Waste - CB Plygrnd E 101-45200-415 Other Equipment Rentals $25691 W204175 Solid Waste - Navarre Plygrnd Tout BIFFS INC.$800 19 Paid Chk# 076963 1/27/2003 BUDGET PRINTING E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $104^^20571 Color Copies ToUl BUDGET PRINTING $104 96 Paid Chk# 076964 1^7/2003 CARGILL SALT E 601-49400-216 Chemicals and Chem Products ($2,231 20) 16674 Bulk Solar Salt E 601-49400-216 Chemicals and Chem Products $1.56869 16675 Bulk Solar Salt E 601-49400-216 Chemicals and Chem Products $1,851 17 837415 Bulk Solar Salt ToUl CARGILL SALT $1,188 66 Paid Chk# 076965 1/27/2C03 GEMSTONE E 601-4940C-227 Utility System Maint Supplies Total GEMSTONE $132 06 05678 $13206 Clear Coat Paid Chk« 076966 1/27/2C03 CENTER POINT ENERGY • GC E613-49830-361 Gas & Electnc $4^01 539004161700 Electricity Total CENTER POINT ENERGY • GC $45 01 Paid Chk# 076967 1/27/2C03 E 101-41900-404 Repairs^Ataint-Bldgs/Grounds Total CITYVIEW PLUMBING S HEATING CITYVIEW PLUMBING S HEATING $115 0iO 23590 $11580 PO Furnace Chedv Paid Chk# 076966 1/27/2C03 COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION E 402-48024-530 Other Improvements S43.200JDO 21300023587 TH12/Brown Road Signal Total COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION $43,200 00 Paid Chk# 076969 1/27/2003 CONSTRUCTIVE IDEAS E 425-48945-304 Engineering-Consulting ToUl CONSTRUCTIVE IDEAS $3.240 00 4305 $3.240 00 Constr Phase • Sept Billing Paid Chk# 076970 1/27/2C03 CROWN MARKING INC. E 101-41900-201 Office supciies ToUl CROWN MARKING INC. $13 85 113902 Nameplate - McMillan $13 85 Paid Chk# 076971 1/27/2003 OCA • WIRE ONLY G 101-21719 DCA/Spendirg Accounts Tout DCA-WIRE ONLY $1.574 28 10/21/03 $1.57428 FSA 10/21/03 Paid Chk# 076972 1/27/2003 DEEPHAVEN. CITY OF E 101-42110-319 Other Professional Services ToUl DEEPHAVEN. CITY OF $12284 10/7/03 Revise Reg Emg Op Plan $122 84 Paid Chk# 076973 1/27/2003 DELTA DENTAL O 10M5998 Non-Employee Health Ins G 101-21709 DenUi Insurance $129 65 37220072 $1.376 05 37220072 DenUl 11/2003 Dental 11/2003 • ! CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 10/24/03 1245 PM Page 3 OCTOBER 2003 Check Amt Invoice Comment ToUl DELTA DENTAL $1.505 70 Paid ChkO 076974 1/27/2003 DEMBOU8K1. JAY E 10M2110-437 Training & Devek)f>ment ToUl DEMBOUSKI. JAY $35.34 10/9/03 Refreshments-Itt Responder $35 34 1 /27/2003 DEX MEDIO EAST LLCPaid Chk# 076975 E 613-49630-340 General Ad . erasing ToUl DEX MEDIQ EAST LLC $263.10 17041776000 Directory Adv $263 10 Paid Chk« 076976 1/27/2003 E-Z RECYCLING E 101-43270-316 Contract Recycling Pickup ToUl E-Z RECYCLING ^.4MJ0 $6.409 20 5737 Recycling 10/2003 Paid Chk« 076977 1/27/2003 EARL F. ANDERSON A ASSOC. E 101-43000-224 Street Maint Materiils/Supply $185 84 E 101-43000-224 Street Maint Materials/Supply $211.21 E 101-43000-224 Street Maint Materials/Supply $1,066 00 ToUl EARL F. ANDERSON A ASSOC. $1,463.05 546543 56574 56644 Street Signs No Parking Signs Speed Limit Signs Paid Chk« 076978 1/27/2003 ELECTRIC PUMP E 602-49450-227 Utility System Maint Supplies ToUl ELECTRIC PUMP $473.93 24607 LS id repair $473.93 Paid Chk# 076979 1/27/2003 ENGINEERING REPRO SYSTEMS E 601-49400-201 Office supplies $15.34 E 602-49450-201 Office su plies ToUl ENQINEER.no REPRO SYSTEMS $125 57 57464 57464 Plan Copies Plan Copies Paid Chki 076980 1 /27/2003 OAK SERVICES E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds E 613-49830-226 Clothing & personal equipment E 601 -49400-226 Clothing A personal equipment E 101-43000-226 Clothing A personal equipment E 602-49450-226 Clothing A personal equipment E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds ToUl OAKSERVICES $94 26 $5.76 $12.55 $7536 $37.68 $106.11 006-711521 006-711521 006-711521 006-711521 006-711521 006-711522 Mat Service Uniforms Unifomis Uniforms Uniforms Mat Service - PD $331.73 Paid Chk# 076981 1/27/2003 6APPA. OREO E 101-42400-331 Travel Ejqiensat $107 67 5/28A)3 Mileage Reimburse E 101-41900-322 Postage $8 04 5/28A)3 Postage E 101-45200-331 Travel Expenses $12 05 5/28/03 Mileage Reimburse E 101-45200-439 Meeting expenses $11.66 5/28A)3 Pop - Park Tour ToUl GAPPA.GREG $139 42 E 101-42110-403 Repairs/Maint-Misc Equip Tout OERRINQ!S CAR WASH $9.^ 10/KV03 $900 Car Wash Paid Chki 076983 1/27/2003 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL E 601-49400-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $62 78 3090626 E 602-49450-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges___ ToUl GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL $125 55 $62 77 3090626 Locates • 9/2003 Locates - 9/2003 \ Paid (ihk# 076984 1/27/2003 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH OPT E 101-41900-329 Olhar Communicationa $66.87 23097188 Data Bata Aooatt 9/2003 J CITY OF ORONO 10/24A)3 12 45 PM Page 4 *Check Detail Register® OCTOBER 2003 Check Aint Invoice CommefB Total HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH DPT $86 87 Paid Chk« 076985 1/27/2003 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF E 101-41600>309 Jail Charges $753 63 E 101-42110-319 Other Professional Services ToUl HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF $779.41 M38-212 51980 Booking Fees 8/2003 MDT Antenna Replacement Paid Chk# 076986 1/27/2003 HUEDSCH RENTAL SERVICE E 613-49830-403 Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip $25 66 887756 Total HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE $25 66 Mat Service • GC Paid Chk# 076987 1/27/2003 HUFFMAN. JIM E 651-49910-319 Other Professional Services Total HUFFMAN* JIM $22500 $225 00 10/15/03 Beaver Removal - ELL Road Paiddhk# 076988 1/27/2003 HUMANE SOCIETY OF WRIGHT CO E 101-42110-317 Animal Care ToUl HUMANE SOCIETY OF WRIGHT CO $85 00 $85.00 3rd Qtr 03 Bearing Fees Paid Chk# 076989 1/27/2003 IT-DATA DIRECT E 613-49830-340 General Advertising Total rr-DATA DIRECT $4J7J5 $417.45 44759 Direcrcry Advertising Paid Chk# 076990 1/27/2003 JORSTAD S REUTHER COM E 101-41900-352 Printing S Publishing $800.00 Total JORSTADSREUTHERCOM $800 00 2066 Fall hieesletter Paid Chk# 076991 1/27/2003 LANO EQUIPMENT E V21-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories Total LANO EQUIPMENT $41.^ $41.77 98062 Switch, Fitter Paid Chk# 076992 1/27/2003 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $79 20 51280 Total LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT $79.20 Pole Saw Drive Shalt Paid Chk# 076993 1/27/2003 LONG LAKE, CITY OF O 601-16500 Fixed Asset-Const, in progress E 425-48945-550 Automotive Equipment ToUl LONG LAKE. CITY OF $1,789.79 $158,212^ $160.002 65 20030064 LL/Orono Interconnect 20030069 WiUcw Fire Station • Truck Paid Chk# 076994 1/27/2003 MADSON. ADRIENNE E 101-41900-201 Office supplies ToUl MADSON. ADRIENNE $1058 $10^58 “ 10/23A)3 Plant Supplies Paid Chk# 076995 1/27/2003 MEDIA COM E 613-49830-415 Other Equipment Rentals Tout MEDIA COM $1848 10/4/03 Oigitai Equipment (3 months) $1848 PaidChk# 076996 1/27/2003 MEDICA O 101-15998 Non-Employee Health Ins O 101-21706 Hospitatixrtion/Medical Ins O 101-15998 Non-Employee Health Ins O 101-21706 Hospitalization/Medical Ins O 101-15998 Non-Employee Health Ins 0101-21706 HospiUlIzation/Medical ins ToUl MEDICA $1.364 09 $10,267.03 $1.183 44 $2,191.74 $1,251.32 $8.392 78 103305102552 Medica High -11/2003 103305102552 Medica High -11/2003 103305122585 Medica Low -11/2003 1C3305122585 Medic# Low -11/2003 103305125488 Medica Elect • 11/2003 103305125488 Medica Elect • 11/2003 $24,650.40 Ire m r-aw»>W1MTK|l CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 10/24A)3 12:45 PM Pages 1 OCTOBER 2003 Check Amt Invoice Comment ___________ Paid Chk# 076997 1/27/2003 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS E 602-49450-383 MWCC Currcnt Charges $31.403 67 763387 Wastewater 11/2003 Total MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS $31.403 67 PaidChk# 076998 1/27/2003 MIDWEST AQUA CARE E 613-49330-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $658 00 10/6/03 2003 Pond Maint Total MIDWEST AQUA CARE $658.00 Paid Chk# 076999 1/27/2003 MIDWEST ASPHALT E 602-49450-227 Utility System Maint Supplies $143 58 71667MB Patch - Manholes Total MIDWEST ASPHALT $14358 PakJChk# 077000 1/27/2003 MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DIST E65M9910-437 Training & Deveicoment $17.50 Boltermann E 651-49910^37 Training & Development $17.50 Gappa Total MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DIST $35 00 Constr Site Erosion Control Constr Site Erosion Control PaidChk# 077001 1/27/2003 MINNESOTA CONWAY E 101-42110-101 Full-Time Employees Regular Total MINNESOTA CONWAY $337 38 326880 $337.38 Checfc/Recharge Ext Paid Chk# 077002 1/27/2003 MINNESOTA UC FUND E 101-42110-142 Unemployment Benefit Payments Total MINNESOTA UC FUND $5,502.00 7989288-000 Unemployemnt • Hendricks $5502 Ck) Paid Chk# 077003 1/27/2003 MN DEPT OF HEALTH - CON FEE G 601-20302 Due to govts-State 1270041 Total MN DEPT OF HEALTH-CON FEE Connection Fee 7/1-9/30/03 $1.15900 Paid Chk« 077004 1/27/2003 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $10.00 B42 i>51R0225 Reg-Comp Air Tank - PW Total MN DEPT OF LABOR A INDUSTRY $1000 PaidChk# 077005 1/27/2003 MN DEPT OF REVENUE G 613-20806 Due to Govts-State Sales Tax R 101-34650 Police Reports R 101-34210 General Taxable Sales/Servlce ToUl MN DEPT OF REVENUE $1,220.00 6033059 $13.00 6033059 $29 00 8033059 $1.262 00 Sales Tax -9/2003 Sales Tax-9/2003 Sales Tax-9/2003 Paid Chk# 077006 1/27/2003 NAVARRE HARDWARE E 613-49830-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $3575 124624 Ear Protect E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $691 124632 Switch E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $33 05 124763 Batteries. Traps E 601-49400-227Utility System Maint Supplies $9 34 124818 Brooms E 601-49400-227Utility System Maint Supplies $327 124843 Misc Hardware E 601-49400-227Utility System Supplies $12.75 124934 Enamel E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories $4 25 124965 Batteries E 613-49830-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories $71 91 124980 PadkKdis E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories $1011 125007 Strap E 602-49450-221Equipment Parts A Accessories $8 50 125047 Foam Tape E 602-49450-227Utility System Mamt. Supplies $18 07 125048 Marking Paint E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Maint-BidgSiGrounds $2501 125277 Screen Repair - PO E 602-49450-221Equipment Parts A Accessories $15.96 125330 Fire Ext -#712 E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories $5.06 125341 Ext Return. 100W Bulbs E 601-49400-227Utility System Maint. Supplies $1254 125349 Brushes E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories $8 50 125390 HD Staples W ’ CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 10/24A)3 12 45 PM Page 6 OCTOBER 2003 Check Amt Invoice Comment E 601-49400-227Utility System Maint. Supplies $637 125495 Brush E 651-49910-227Utility System Maint. Supplies $10.83 125509 Concrete Mix E 601-49400-227Utility System Maint. Supplies $340 125626 Muriatic Acid E 101-41900-223Bldg/Grounds Maint Supplies $7 20 125743 Mouse Traps E 101-43000-221Equipment Parts & Accessories $617 125777 1 x12 E 101-42110-201Office supplies $688 125789 Key. Marker E 101-43000-221Equipment Parts & Accessories $1 07 125801 screws E 613-49830-201Office supplies $1902 125831 Cleaning Supplies E 601-49400-221Equipment Parts & Accessories $21.26 125853 Brush E 601-49400-221Equipment Parts & Accessories $2 86 125866 Hinge E 101-42110-221Equipment Parts & Accessories $3 39 126014 Key Total NAVARRE HARDWARE $369 43 Paid Chk« 077007 1/27/2003 OFFICE DEPOT Ma E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $138 64 220515105-00 Office Supplies E 101-42110-201 Office supplies $138 64 220515105-00 Office Supplies E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $29 91 220515105-00 Office Supplies Total OFFICE DEPOT $307 19 Paid Chk« 077008 1/27/2003 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. E 613-49900-093 Concessions For Resale-Txbl $8 82 6001628 Chips for Resale Total OLD DUTCH FOODS INC.$8.82 Paid Chk« 077009 1/27/2003 ORONO ROTARY E 101-42110-433 Memberships & Subscriptions $119 00 47 Membership - Good 10-12/2003 ToUl ORONO ROTARY $119 00 PaidChk# 077010 1/27/2003 PETTIT. SANDRA K. E 101-41300-439 Meeting Expenses $39 49 10/22/03 Retirement - Bnnkhaus E 101-41500-331 Travel Expenses $4599 10/22/03 Mileage ToUl PETTIT. SANDRA K.$85 48 Paid Chk# 077011 1/27/2003 PLUNKETTS E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $103.84 S-74326 Pest Control Service E 10t-419(XM04 Repairs/Maint-BMgVGrounds $103 84_ S-74326 Pest Control Service Tout PLUNKETTS $207 68 Paid Chk# 077012 1/27/2003 PLYMOUTH. CITY OF E 101-42110-437 Training & Development $18 00 Bobzein PLEAA Fall Training E 101-42110-437 Training & Development $18 00 Budig PLEAA Fall Training E 101-42110-437 Training & Development $1^00 Madson PLEAA Fall Training ToUl PLYMOUTH. CITY OF $5400 Paid Chk# 077013 1/27/2003 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE G 101-15998 Non-Employee Health Ins $30 50 10/2003 Life Insurance -10/2003 G 101-21710 Life Insurance $8775 10/2003 Life Insurance -10/2003 G 101-21710 Life Insurance $662 10 10/2003 Life Insurance -10/2003 ToUl PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE $780.35 • Paid Chidl 077014 1/27/2003 RICKS SUPERVALUE E 101-41300-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $154 53 8/27/03 Dell. Bakery • Emp Picnic ToUl RICKS SUPERVALUE $154.53 PaidChk# 077015 1/27/2003 SAFETY SIGNS E 101-43000.415 Other Equipment Rentala $194 36 31944 Barricadet ToUl SAFETY SIGNS $194 36 CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register© 10/24A)3 12:45 PM Page 7 OCTOBER 2003 Check Amt Invoice Comment E 101-42110-321 Telephone $30 58 20261010035 Police Pagers Total SBC PAGING $30 58 PaidChki 077017 1/27/2003 STREICHERS E 101-42110-226 Clothing & personal equipment ToUl STREICHERS $1^06 $150 06 391192.1 Duty Holster I PaidChki 077018 1/27/2003 TOLL OAS A WELDING SUPPLY E 101-43000>221 Equipmant Part* & Acoeasorlet $5 85 429845 Cylinder Rental Total TOU GAS A WELDING SUPPLY $5.85 Paid Chk# 077019 1/27/2003 UNIFORMS UNUMITED E 101-42110-226 Clothing S personal equipment E 101-42110-226 Clothing A personal equipment Total UNIFORMS UNUMITED $2970 191042 $47 W 191042 $77E5 Sweater • Sue Shirt - Persell Paid Chk* 077020 1/27/2003 VE88COINC. E 601-49400-227 Utility System Maint Supplies $24 39 29826 Nozzle ToUl VESSCOINC.$2439 Paid Chk# 077021 1/27/2003 WAY2ATA BAY CAR WASH E 101-42110-403 Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip ToUl WAYZATA BAY CAR WASH $9 74 5042 $9 74 5057 $9.74 5068 ^9.^ 5074 $38 96 Car Wash Car Wash Car Wash Car Wash Paid Chk# 077022 1/27/2003 WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT E 613-49830-403 Repairs/Maint-Misc Equip 22197 ToUl WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT $199 65 Gas Pump Repair - GC Paid Chk# 077023 1/27/2003 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC E 101-43000-381 Gas & Electric $30 84 3113009200 E 602-49450-381 Gas & Electric $2512 3113009200 E 101-43000-381 Gas A Electric $21 37 5015782900 Tout WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC Electrical Service Electrical Service Electrical Service $77.33 i M27I2002 YELLOW BOOK USAPaid Chk# 077024 E 613-49830-340 General Advertising Tout YELLOW BOOK USA $63 00 P7236937 Directory Adv $63 00 10100 Primary Cash $310.326 56 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL 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 $65,596.21 $43.200 00 $161.452 86 $4,466.13 $32.30927 $3,031.26 $27083 $310,326.56 CITY OF OPONO check register 10/15«36:54AM Pagel Chock Numbtr Employoo Namo ! 053484 DODGE. RACHEL M. 053485 LESKINEN. DENISE M. 053486 SILUS. BARBARA G. 053487 ANDERSON. BRUCE L. 053488 ARNESON, JOSHUA A. 053489 BOBZIEN.SUEA. 053490 BORIS. SCOTT W. 053491 BUDIG. STACIE M. 053492 CARLSON. MICHAEL B. 053493 OEMBOUSKI. JAY C. 053494 ERICKSON. KURT R 053495 FARNIOK. CORREY L 053496 FISCHENICH. DANT 053497 MAOSON. ADRIENNE M 053498 MCNICHOLS. DAVID L. 053499 MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES 053500 PERSELL. WILLIAM R. 053501 RUSSETH. KYLE M 053502 TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. 053503 TOMCZYK.MARKW 053504 WITTKE. ANTHONY A. 053505 HERMAN. JOHN R. 053506 GAFFRON. MICHAEL P. 053507 MEYER. WILLIAM C. 053508 OMAN. LYLE E. 053509 VANG. BRUCE L. 053510 GREGORY. JAMES D. 053511 HANSEN. STEVEN 053512 OBRIEN. RANDY L. 053513 PALMER. GREGORY A. 053514 RATHBUN. BARRY J 053515 SKREEN. DALES 053516 ABRAHAMSON.FREDW. 053517 HAMBRO. MARSHALL J. 053518 JENSEN. ROONEY W 053519 MARSELLA. DAN G 053520 MCINTYRE. WILLIAM E. 053521 PEICKERT, GARY J. 053*22 POLLEY.MIKEA. 053423 ROSS. JOHN A 053524 SMYTH. KATHERINE R. 053525 STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD 053526 STORK. JOHN T 001140 MOORSE. RONALD J 001141 VEE. LINDAS 001142 KUEHN. THOMAS M 001143 OLSON. RONALD J. 001144 PETTIT. SANDRA K. 001145 ANDERSON. BRUCE L 001146 BOBZIEN.SUEA. 001147 BORIS. SCOTT W. 001148 BUDIG STACIE M 001149 CORNICK. JAMES L 001150 FISCHER. CHRISTOPHER K. 001151 GOOD. STEPHANY R. 001152 JOHNSON. JEFFREY 001153 MCNICHOLS. DAVID L. 001154 SCHOENHOFF. JOHN B. 001155 TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. Pay Chtck Check Ptriod Amount Data Chack Status 21 $1,031 08 10/15A)3 Outstanding 21 $864 60 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $464 96 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $539.01 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $897.53 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $77247 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $1.542 74 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $70475 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $241.61 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $1.556 61 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $1.623 33 10/15 03 Outstanding 21 $1.84956 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $1,521.47 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $619 25 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $644.07 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $1,697.80 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $51829 10/15A)3 Outstanding 21 $1.194 15 10/15A)3 OutsUnding 21 $39278 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $1,469 55 10/15/03 OutsUnding 21 $1.400 04 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $898.36 10/15/03 Outstand ng 21 $1,404 19 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $677 09 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $44 63 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $1,313.61 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $788 41 10/15/03 OutsUnding 21 $346 50 10/15/03 OuUUnding 21 $99216 10/15A)3 OuUUnding 21 $741 01 10/15/03 OuUUnd rg 21 $1.104 00 10/15/03 OutsUnding 21 $1.055 34 10/15A)3 OuUUnding 21 $7859 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $43 54 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $227 88 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $47.17 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $187.11 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $32513 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $70 23 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $109 54 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $16682 10/15/03 OutsUnding 21 $1.363 46 10/15/03 OutsUnding 21 $21330 10/15A)3 OuUUnding 21 $2.23592 10/15/03 OuUUnding 21 $1,243.61 10/15/03 OuUtand ng 21 $1.31326 10/15A)3 Outstanding 21 $1.163 82 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $1,083.57 10/15/03 Outstanding 21 $1,135.00 10M5/03 Outstanding 21 $110.00 10/15/03 OutsUnding 21 $20.00 10/15/03 OuUUnding 21 $4000 10/15/03 OuUUnding 21 $1,360.95 10/15/03 OuUUnding 21 $1.648 98 10/15/03 OuUUndtfig 21 $1,941 39 10/15/03 OutsUnding 21 $1.528 39 10/15/03 OuUUnding 21 $875.00 1 (VI S«3 Outstanding 21 $1,743.81 10/15/03 OutsUnding 21 $90000 10/15/03 OuUUnding CITY OF ORONO chock rogiotor 10/1SA)36:S4AM Page 2 Check Pay Number Employee Name Period 001156 LEE. JOSEPH P. 21 001157 BOLTERMAN. MATTHEW A. 21 001158 FOTH. MELANIE C. 21 001159 GAFFRON. MICHAEL P. 21 001160 GAPPA. GREGORY A. 21 001161 OMAN. LYLE E. 21 001162 WAATAJA. JANICE J 21 001163 DEBAERE DONALD L. 21 001164 HANSEN. STEVEN 21 001165 OBERAIGNER. SCOTT G. 21 001166 OBRIEN. RANDY L 21 001167 PALMER. GREGORY A. 21 001168 RATHBUN. BARRY J. 21 Check Amount 127465 $1,098.45 $1.16671 $125.00 $1.790 38 $1.400 00 $1,212.45 $1.15870 $775.00 $1,020.24 $500.00 $350.00 $200.00 $63,157.00 Check Date Check Statue 10/15/03 Outstanding 10/15A)3 Outstanding 10/15A)3 Outstanckng 10/15/03 Outstanding 10/15A)3 Outstandkig 10/15/03 Outstanding 10/15/03 Outstanding 10/15/03 Outstanding 10/1SA)3 Outstanding 10/15/03 Outstanding 10/15A)3 Outstanding 10/15/03 Outstanding 10/15/03 Outstanding