Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-25-1978 Planning Packeti i AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 1978 COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER 1. Call to Order £> Roll PUBLIC HEARING 2. 7:30 P.M. #421 Rezoning -A. J. Tourangeau 1960 Shoreline Drive ACTION ITEMS 3. #414 - A. J. Tourangeau, 1960 Shoreline Drive SUBDIVISION 4. #419 - Michael Farrell, 2815 Casco Point Road VARIANCE 5. #420 - Theodore Anderson, 1940 Shadjrwood Road VARIANCE 6. #423 - Calvin R. Welsh, Jr., 650 North Arm Drive • VARIANCE 7. #426 - James P. Neve, Jr., 4060 Dahl Road VARIANCE 8. Schedule first meeting in October SKETCH PLAN REVIEW 9. #422 - D.W. Jiramerson, 505 Willow Drive South SUBDIVISION WORK SESSION 10. #424 - David Dunlap, 1595 Bohns Point Road CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT i w S !»»«■ AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 1978 COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER 1. Call to Order & Roll PUBLIC HEARING 2. 7:30 P.M. #421 Rezoning -A. J. Tourangeau 1960 Shoreline Drive ACTION ITEMS 3. #414 - A. J. Tourangeau, 1960 Shoreline Drive SUBDIVISION 4. #419 -Michael Farrell, 2815 Casco Point Road VARIANCE 5. #420 - Theodore Anderson, 1940 Shadywood Road VARIANCE 6. #423 - Calvin R. Welsh, Jr., 650 North Arm Drive • VARIANCE 7. #426 - James P. Neve, Jr., 4060 Dahl Road VARIANCE 8. Schedule first meeting in October SKETCH PLAN REVIEW 9. #422 - D.W. Jimmerson, 505 Willow Drive South SUBDIVISION WORK SESSION 10. #424 - David Dunlap, 1595 Bohns Point Road CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT J i • • sgfr. zsr /TfS' VELLMJE OF OEONO 99^ t.MS wlliaw t mlcs •Kl «w <»«««(• ■' r '! i- TO:Planning Commission • FROM:Alan P. Olson, City Planner DATE:June 8, 1978 SUBJECT:Subdivision - A. J.Tourangeau 1960 Central Avenue #414 SKETCH PLAN REVIEW This is a very rough sketch plan provided for your initial review and comraent, Ihe proposal is to divide the existing lots used by the Texaco Station and a rental house along Central Avenue for purposes of sale. The attached plat map shows property ownership: Tourangeau, Lots 7-14, 20, 24-26 (1-3/4 acre) plus 5300 on the lakeside, all separate parcels, Fahlln, Lots 1-3, 6 (3/4 acre), 22-23 (1/4 acre) plus 5100 on the lakeside, all separate parcels. Halgren, Lot 15 only (6000 s.f.), Stinson, Lots 16-19 combined (1/2 acre). Stowe, Lots 4-5, 21, separate parcels. Zoning: All RR-lB 2-acre residential except the easterly 70 ft, of Lots 24 and 25 which are B-1 commercial. The proposed division would Include variances co lot size and possible rezoning to make the station property all commercial. STAFF NOTE - AUGUST 3, 1978 Ihe attached survey and application for subdivision (lot line rearrangement) and variances have been received and a Public Meeting is scheduled for 7:30 P.M., August 14, 1978. The subdivision proposal involves a combination of four (4) platted lots and a newly located division line resulting in two parcels. The proposed Lot 1 contains an existing house. The proposed Lot 2 contains an existing service station. Not shown are the remaining Tourangeau lots (7-13 & 20) which contain the existing Tourangeau house on-47,300 s.f. (1.09 acre). ■jm ,-JV^ i.»-r, I m A. J. Tourangeau 1960 Central Avenue Subdivision Page 2 14 STAFF NOTE - AUGUST 3, 1978 (Cont.) The existing B-1 zoning description includes a portion of both proposed lots, being described as the easterly 70 ft. of Lots 24 & 25. The division as proposed does not follow the zoning district boundary. Ify recommendation is that the Planning Commission review till '! zoning discrepancy and that a rezoning application be required prior to final plat approval. I recommend that all of proposed Lt cs 1 and 2 be zoned RR-IB with the station becoming legal-nonconforming or, if the B-1 district is to remain, that all of proposed Lot 2 be zoned B-1. Variances required: Lot 1, if all zoned RR-lB: 34.842 Lot area required: proposed: variance: 87.120 s.f. 16.000 s.f. 71.120 s.f.827, Lot width required: proposed: variance: 200 ft. 104 ft. 96 ft. - 487. Front setback required; existing: variance: 50.0 ft. 40.7 ft. 9.3 ft. - m Side setback required: proposed: 30.0 ft. 15.3 ft. variance:14.7 ft. - 497. Lot 2, if all zoned B-1: 35.040 Lot area required: proposed: variance: 20,000 s.f. 10.875 s.f. 9,125 s.f.467. Lot width required: proposed: variance: 100.00 ft. 139.85 ft. None / i? - I $ A.J. Tourangeau 1960 Central Avenue Subdivision Page 3 ^414 STAFF NOTE - AUGUST 3, 1978 (Cont.) Lot 2, if all zoned B-1 (Cont.)t Rear setback required: 35.0 ft. proposed: 5.4 ft. variance: 29.6 ft. “ 85% Required vs Existing Landscaping: Front yard 20 ft. required - North side 15 ft. required - Street side 10 ft. required- Rear yard 30 ft. required - 0 ft. existing. 2-5 ft. existing with screening 0 ft. existing. 5.4 ft. proposed. Most of the variances arc large percentage-wise but it that this is an existing situation and is a lot line rearrangement me to Improve the existing situation of having two structures and mixed storeroom is bricked shut. Hardships include lack of additional available land and existing structure location. Hennepin County has been asked to review the plat and the * - accesLs on County Road 15. Existing septic systems will be Inspected by the City with reports included at the public meeting. Recap of staff reconmendations: 3. 4. 1. f^Plat proposal appears reasonable given existing situation. 2. Septic systems must be functional. Hennepin County may request and/or require certain access Snninr^^lssio" should review landscaping and yard requirements for the service station. Variances must be justified by finding of hardships. Staff recommends a required rezoning concurrent with this platting. The remaining Tourangeau residential lots should be combined into Rear’^statloriindow must be bricked shut per State Building Code. 5. 6. 7. I1 8. I1 I T k ! H A»J. Tourangeau I960 Central Avenue Subdivision Page 4 vnMT'TTMP - AlirUST 14 1978 (Public Information Meeting) PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - ,PLANNiWO — Touranseau and Mr. Hobart ' were present for discussion. Jhe PI ® proposed listing situation °™cal Identities Planning lot line rearrangement to ere , ? „£ the City staff and the Coiinlsslon reviewed the ‘ „ „ag noted that service stations Hennepin County Highway Oapa«Mnt^ taen are conditional uses I" *eJ-l that there va, never any ro^i"cond?tlCri'- per.lt or application on file. parking was <*J==“®®^/’pai«Mn*noted Sat th^statlon ”Srklng Soblems" ®hrMHnr(Paul's Snding)'’SS’'not have wUvends. He stated that the ins IP p„^lng. any authorization from him to use cnis p p . ___nutfl and driveway ®8r« 1 P ^ code requirements to bricK ci.wsic« w..- — tj «./o^ Hiscussed the existing zoning Planning Comlsslon and ^SSSg^oindary change Is deslreable. with all parties asreelng th^^ station’s fuel tanks are located ^drSr“e%Lldentlally eoned comer lot.under Lot 26 the resiaenux**^^ Planning Com.lsslon "to^ends preliminary plat approval with the following conditions. 1. A fo^l application be made for ^^oond ^eS?^S^SVurriSt«l landscaping, curb cut. parking, etc. conditions per 38.500. 2.A formal application be ^de "-"e'^ftSSr^SpS^d roSSivfsSriu nsir ^ SdSelrtng: SSSSeSlfecrironS upon recording of an approved final plat. I \ A.J. Tourangeau 1960 Central Avenue Subdivision Page 5 #414 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - AUGUST 14, 1978 (ConClnued) approximately 120 ft. north of Central Avenue. 4. Applicant to provide a landscaping plan and schedule of completion for review with the conditional use permit prior to final plat approval. 5. Combination for tax purposes of the remaining Tourangeau residential lots (7-14 & 20). 6. Closing of the rear station window per State Building Code requirements. 7 Aonroval of all variances necessary to accomplish the above finSlnrhardships of no additional land available and exxating Structure loc'^tions • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - AUGUST 28, 1978 Planning Commission reviewed at work session Item 418, a condition 1 use permit application for the station expansion of the existing use. Due to this new Planning Commission voted to reconsider their 14, 9 and then voted to table the subdivision application complete and concurre.it review of the conditional use application (# ). COUNCIL MEETING - AUGUST 29, 1978 After brief introduction. Council was advised of application and of the Planning Co^ission ^^persons reconsidering and tabling this subdivision application #414. Perso present for discussion included Art Toura'^eau, Robert Reutiman his attorney, Robert Kornick and George Rovegno (2010 Shoreline Drive). due speed. He wished the station use to be a separate issue. Reutiman was asked and did promise to revise the survey to show the traveled portions of Central Avenue and County Road 15, the existing ® and the pump island location. Hornick was concerned that he be able to assume operation on schedule and did offer to retain the ^uto repair service if this was necessary to satisfy the City. He would still want to sell the groceries. i i • t ► i A.J. Tourangeau 1960 Central Avenue Subdivision Page 6 #414 Council was very concerned with traffic problems and pedestrian safety. Council was concerned that this area was to have been zoned LR-IA in 1974 except for Tourangeau's promise that the station would be operated in its same manner indefinitely. They were disturbed that the proposed use was a change from the previous commitments and a change not warranted by the existing problems and hazards. Council would not object to continuing the same type of station use as has historically existed. Tourangeau was asked if he would consider having the station rezoned to LR-IA with a conditional use permit to operate the station as presently operated. Tourangeau said "yes" he would agree to such a rezoning if the subdivision could proceed. Council indicated that this would resolve their concerns. The City attorney requested a copy of the lease and option to buy from Tourangeau. Council moved to refer Item 414 back to the Planning Commission for consideration with the Conditional Use Permit 418. STAFF NOTE - AUGUST 30, 1978 Art Tourangeau and Robert Reutiman were in my office today and they completed an application for rezoning of the station to LR-IA. Reutiman was to supply a letter requesting amendment to the conditional use application #418 to continue operating the station in its present form. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 11, 1978 Planning Commission discussed this item with Tourangeau, Reutiman, Homick and several concerned neighbors. Homick had just withdrawn his conditional use application. A petition from some of the neighbors was delivered to the commissioners. Mr. Tourangeau stated that he wants to expedite the subdivision so he can sell the house. He has been "paying taxes on the property for 100 years" and it is "common knowledge that he does not operate the station". He feels the issues should be separated. J 11 i A.J. Tourangeau 1960 Central Avenue Subdivision Page 7 1 4 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - SEPTEMBER 11, 1978 (Continued) Planning Commission noted to all present that a rezoning application (#421) bad been made and that a hearing would be held as scheduled on September 25, 1978 at 7:30 P.M, Planning Commission tabled the subdivision (#414) until after the hearing on the rezoning. After much consideration of all the facts and new information, I recommend the following: 1. That the rezoning hearing be held first. 2. That the current B-1 zoning be amended to LR-IA consistent with all the surrounding property. 3.That the subdivision request be granted per the same conditions required August 14, 1978; i.e. : a) Formal issuance of a conditional use permit for the gas station, pursuant to the requirements of 31.100, 32.480, and 38.500, for continuation of the existing character and extent of use of the property as a legal non-conforming use of land. b) Installation of required curbing and landscaping as recommended by the County highway department and the City engineer, not to include any additional right of way. (See revised map showing suggested landscaping areas.) Landscaping time table required. c) Combination of remaining Tourangeau lots for tax purposes (Lots 7-14 & 20). d) Closing of one rear station window for building code purposes. e) Approval of variances necessary to accomplish the above. p ■k ^ • • • j * September 2, 1978 Mr. Alsm P. Olsmn Village Planner City »f Oren* P.O, Bex 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Sflf 8 !•'* ClTt Of °’*°**° D€tBt Mr# ^ T¥mm # 414-SubdlYlslon-Teurangeau a»4 This letter pertains ^ Hernlck. and is directed Item # 418-Cendltlenal Use ciuJcll.te the Planning Cemmlsslen and the City Ceuncii. W«, residents ef the area surreundlng preperty at I960 Sherellne Drive, feel »» fellewss '.‘.e u.e Plan, th. S««r- ;-It ?. u.c..tn.pi^ ebjectlenable future uses ef this preperty. The rights ef the ewner *«ct nalner Itcerner part ef this preperty 1* the exact manner xs eLrated in the past sheuld net be abridged. But, t Mr Teuranqcau's prepesed subdlvisien Is appreprlate«i IriSw’bJ .pp?«e. If 1 2 •« nTPFEKENT USE s The existing facility is a lew relume, •’nelghberheed • itltlel: ThJy are epen enl^ fire and erne half pSferm repairs fdr lecal residents and the City. B. Mr. Hernlck's prepesal is fer a leTen^days cenvenlence feed, beer sales per week fer lengthy heurs thenumbers ef passersby rather than te serve the neighberheed. SAFETY A. This type ef business raises seme serleus public i ♦ ■ I : 414 - >..... UU 9 ViTi Mr. Alan P. Olsaw Village Planner City ef Ore*. C\Tt OF. ORO^° P.O. Bex 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mr. Olsen: ^ 4«- 4.- « 4i4-Sub<iYlslon-Teurangeau an4This letter pertains te Item ff Aie iucei directed rt. Pi.^ln, c.»»ls.t.» >ni the city Cu.ell. We, reeUents ef the ere. surreunilh, pr.perty et 1960 Sbereline Drive, feel as fellews: 1 Tbe entire preperty sheuH be rezene^ fJel this iB cSnsiltent with t>*e use Pl»n. the result ?. u.c..te.pl.te4. ebjectlenable future uses ef tbls preperty. The '‘S'***/'‘i; «:4”.«.r'‘its:r:p.?*.u/!. ti: ^nriiJui; ». .brie,... But, specific. c..41tl.«.l US. pe«lt. ; • • 5 Mr Teurangeau’s prepese4 subdlvlslen Is apprepriate ’• «i rt«?5’b"spp«re* If 1 «4 2 •« s**Pt*-- Re,.r4ih, the sppfppi-^'r*:,:!."*" * “®’'"f0ll«wing cencerns and ebjectiens. nTPFEBENT USE A Tke existing facility is a law valune, "nelgliberbae* * service atatlenl' They are epen enly five and ana hal per fir ll.lte. heurs. ^^hey prl.srll, pSfern repairs f*r lecal residents and the City. B. Mr. H.rnicf. pr.p.sal cenvenlence feed, beer sales . Sraw greatper week far lengthy heurs ^fflgned te draw great nunbers ef passersby rather than te serve t neighberheed. • SAFETY A. This type ef business raises sene serieus public J Mr. Alan P. Olsan Page 2 safety questiens. 1. Pedestrian traffic Tkis weuld be a new preblea te tkls area. It weuld •nly be natural far flshernati custeners ef Paul's Landing te cress Ceunty 15 te purckase beer and feed fren tkls establlsknent. Most ef tkls traffic weuld be en weekends and kelldays wken tke existing business Is clesed. There Is ne cresswalk er ether traffic centre! derlce te protect tke pedestrians. 2. Increased vehicular traffic If this proposed business Is successful, we weuld experience narked Increase In entry-exit frea tke property, narked Increase In tke traffic using Central Avenue as a "short cut", and conceivably an Increase In tke total amount ef traffic en Ceunty 15, using It Instead ef tke ring route because ef lew gas prices and "convenience." SURROUNDING PROPESTY OVWERS'RIGHTS A. The natureef tke proposed business leads te an Increase In tke potential for littering, already a preblea. B. Tke nature ef the proposed business would encourage trespass en tke part of boaters using both ^rlvat'e'llcc-' docks and Paul's Landings' docks te tie up tkelr beats in order te purchase gasoline, feed and beer. This could create a police preblea, and weuld add te tke pedestrian preblea. C. Tke substandard size ef tke let coupled with tke high veluae Mr. Hernlck projects (three times tke current traffic) could aggravate an already serious l.lldgal parking preblea. One exaaple weuld be tke question ef where cars tewing beat trailers weuld park la suck Halted space. Pei; the above reasons, we ask tke Planning Commission and City Council te act as fellows: 1. Rezene tke entire parcel as Residential; 2. Allow Mr, Teurangeau's subdivision; and 3. Issue a Conditional Use Permit for operation ef^a , business Identical te that which currently exists as a legal, non-cenferalng use. Tkls permit shall be subject te reconsi ’’^ratien by tke City at any tlae and must be reapplied for annually. Further, tke following conditions must be set forth In tke permit: 1 ' Mr. Alan P. Olson Page 3 USE; Nelgliborhood service station prloarlly performing repairs but also selling petroleum products. Not selling convenience foods or beer. b, HOURS OF OPERATION: Monday-Frlday- 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. or shorter Saturday 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 Noon or shorter Sunday and Holidays Closed c. TRAFFIC VOLUME: Net to exceed existing volume; operator will provide dally counts on a monthly basis to the City. d. OTHER: The station will provide curbing, etc. required by the County and City traffic engineers. The station will aid the city In preventing Illegal parking, littering, trespass, etc. The station will not enter any activity which encourages pedestrian traffic. Thank you for your consideration In this matter. A ^ k A . * > 1» M Andenlik & ^iSociatei, 9*tc, ^335 W. '‘1>u***U tJil^hwatf 36 SL Ptutif MlttMtltUa 551 f 3 Phtmt 636-4600 September 5, 1978 Mr. A1 Olson City Planner City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Mn. 55323 Re; Texaco Station, Co. Rd. 15 and Central Ave. #414, 418, 421 Our File No. 139-414, Plats Ono tS. Bonittr00, PM, Rohm W. Roitmt, PJE. Jctfpk C Andirtik PM. Bradford A Lemberg, PM. Robert D. Frigaord* PM. Richard £. Turmgr, PM. Jamet C, Olsoa, PM, Lawrence P. Feldslem. PM. Glenn R. Cook. PM. Keith A. Cordon. PM. Thomat E. Soyet. PM. RUhard W. Foster, PM. Robert C. Sehunkht, PM. Marvin L. Sarvals, PM. Donald C. Burgardt, PM. Kenneth R. Meisier, PM. CPtarlet A. Erickson Leo M. Pawetxky Harlan M. Olson Dear Al, We have reviewed the proposed lot line rearrangement for the Arthur Tournangeau at Co. Rd. 15 and Central Avenue. We concur with Hennepin County’s reconroendations as follows; 1. ) Dedication of additional 7' of right-of-way for Co. Rd. 15. 2. ) Elimination of access along Co. Rd. 15 except at northerly edge of property. In addition, we recommend that access be controlled along Central Avenue with curb or other appropriate devices and that a controlled access be located as far westerly as possible, away from Co. Rd. 15. We recomnend that no other use, except motor fuel station, be allowed that would have the effect of increasing traffic movemente in the area. A site plan indicating traffic control areas, landscaping and drainage should be provided for review and approval. On-site soil absorption systems should also be checked for compliance with City code. #414 #418 1 5,! . . • } :! . V !ly HENNEPIN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 320 Washington Av. South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 -'fin 935-3381 August 8, 1978 miwi AU3 11 JS7, X VILUGB Ofi ORONO Mr. Alan P. Olson, Planner City of Orono P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mr. Olson: RE:Proposed Plat - "Tourangeau Addition” CSAH 15 - Northwest quadrant CSAH 15 and Central Avenue Section 10, Township 117, Range 23 Hennepin County Plat No. 683 Review and Recommendations Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County TGview of proposed p1dts dbutting County rodds. We reviewed the above referenced plat and find it acceptable with consideration of the following conditions: 1.The developer should dedicate an additional 7 feet of right of way for a total of 40 feet from and along the centerline of CSAH 15. 2.Direct access from proposed Lot 2 to CSAH 15 must limited to existing Central Avenue and to one comnercial driveway entrance located approximately 120 feet north­ easterly of Central Avenue. The remainripr of the frontage along CSAH 15 must be closed so there is separatiiin CSAH 1? traffic and gas station traffic isee attachment). 3.Access construction and/or revision requires an approv^ entrance permit. Entrance permit forms are available from our Traffic Division. HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employCf At rjMM 1 t'i. Tourangeau Addition Page 2 #414 4.All other proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved utility permit prior to begin­ ning construction. This includes, but is not limitM to, drainage construction, utility construction, trail dev­ elopment, and landscaping. Utility permit forms are available from our Maintenance Division. 5. The developer must restore any area within County right of way that is disturbed during construction. Please direct any response or questions to Douglas Mattson at this office. Sincerely,0.//;. '<3^es M. Wold, P.E. Chief, Planning and Programming JMW/DBM:bg Attachment cc; Schoell & Madson, Inc. 1 i \ fI •- J TO: FROM: Planning Conmiission and Council Alan P. Olson, Village Planner #419 DATE;September 5, 1978 SUBJECT: #419 Variance Michael Farrell, 2815 Casco Point Road Mr. Farrell is proposing to add a wood deck on top of the lower terrace of three existing on his shoreline embankment. The upper two levels will be planted. The existing stairway will be used. The lower concrete wall is to be faced with wood. Proposed deck area is 165 sq. ft. The terraces were installed following a major washout of the hillside after the heavy rain this July. The Council approved an emergency conditional use permit for this work on July 11, 1978. Variance required: 34.201 setback and 34.202 hardcover Lakeshore setback required: 75 ft. proposed: 15 ft. variance: 60 ft.807. Hardships: existing terrace location and steepness of the embankment. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - SEPTEMBER 11, 1978 Discussed events behind construction of retaining walls and intention of placing deck on lower level. Jim Olson, city engineer, stated that if a spaced wood deck were constructed over a gravel subbase, that runoff water filtration would be adequate if not better than the existing runoff. Item tabled to allow site inspection by members and to allow staff to notify neighbors. To be acted on by Planning Commission on 9-25-78 and be 6n the Council agenda on 9-26-78. 11 7 i C ‘ TO: FROM: DATE: Planning Commission and Council Alan P. Olson, Village Planner September 1, 1978 #420 SUBJECT: #420 Variance Theodore Anderson, 1940 Shadywood Road Mr, Anderson proposes to remodel and add onto his existing house at this address. He proposes to remove the existing breezeway and single car garage and replace same with a new two car garap, dining area and expanded kitchen. He will also remodel the main floor expanding the Uvingroom into an existing bedroom area and replacing the bedroom with an expansion area above the new garage. The entire existing house and all of the proposed addition are within the 75 ft. lakeshore setback. The new addition more than 75 ft. from the Crystal Bay shoreline 48 ft. of the channel. The existing side setback of 6.3 ft. would be maintained. Variances required: Section 34.201 Lakeshore setback Required:75 ft. Proposed House:42 ft. Variance:33 ft. = 44% Proposed Deck:30 ft. Variance:45 ft, = 60% Section 34.202 Lakeshore hardcover Within 75 ft.:None permitted Existing:1160 sq. ft. - 11. Increase:494 sq. ft. Proposed Total:1654 sq. ft. “ 16. Hardship: Stated as shoreline (channel) being unique to this property with existing house location being as remote from shore as possible. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - SEPTEMBER 11, 1978 Tabled for applicant to provide revised plan showing actual deck proposal and for staff to notify neighbors. To be acted on by Planning Commission on 9-25-78 and be on the Council agenda 9-26-78. J . » I r 5 4 S- r h * ► I TO:Planning Comnlsslon and Council FROM: DATE: Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Zoning Administrator September 19, 1978 SUBJECT: H23 Variance Calvin R. Welsh, Jr. - 650 North Arm Drive Lot 1 of Auditor's Subdivision #362 Is sewered and has approximately .8 acres of dry bulldable land. The lot qualifies for " a single family dwelling purpose" per Zoning Ordinance Section 31.202. The proposed house will require p front yard setback variance due to severe hardship of the shallow depth of the lot,even at Its widest (dry bulldable) point Is only 126' (Review Exhibit C) , and the lakeshore rear yard setback of 75' makes It Impossible to meet the zoning demands. The driveway entrance as stated on the lot Is acceptable. In Mr. Welsh's letter, he makes mention of a proposed dock to be located 25' from the neighbor's property line at the southeast comer of his lot. The dock appears to meet all requirements as long as It doesn't Involve any dredging, shoreline alteration, decks or retaining walls on steep bank. Variance required: Zoning District LR-IB, Section 34.450 Front yard setback required; 35' proposed: 27’ variance: 8'23X V ^I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Land Use Application • LOCATION OF PROPOSAL (or property) Address ArmT)rn;g^ — -9arcg| IOIQ_ APPLICANT Wamft %*l7S~^?S£*-^:^!B^ertzrz7S^ , Address Tir'ipe LarcP (PJY^-- OWNER Name . ^ ^#.V?5AA2^ Mailing , ^ -,. / * < UEST $150+$5Aot Conditional Use $50 Variance $50 _ Rezoning $250 ___ Riprap $15 ($65) /y7 J>J> t Present Zoning J'RlB ________________ Present Use Uk # Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request - - - - - - - -- specify ordinance Requirements ‘/^^.VrO SirfW.rfl fee 'Sc^ ./_ _ ___1- - ^ By y- - -- - - - . n^ad _YS^ Explain your request and reasons for same I VAHJA^ «quired - ex^ Side Width ____ Other, explain Rear Specify hardships to property Jl—J« ESOTA on • fUEST $150+$5/tot Conditional Use $50 )[ Variance $50 _ Rezoning $250 _ _ Riprap $15 ($65) FEE Date Rec*d By /_ _ _ _ _ _ __ Use L/>4- 'ee, AT^rt^L^iJ «' side Rear CxW-a ^.\\6>cl Sf^pcn/: » • \ ■ * ’ Land Use Application • ■U)CATI0N OP PROPOSAL (or property) h!nr-/j /4rmT)r:.,p _ _ Legal Description iQiQ UEST $150+$5Aot Conditional Use $50 applicant Name LO^ /s^ ^ Mailing 7)r'nx> Z/7nr. rt)/\) df/u/n (jJt^AA sJr- ^ SS3S^rtATi^n (h/utf\ 7^€K oJe/sA Jr OWNER Name a a ).-, /c l . / Mailing ' X ■ Variance $50 _ Rezoning $250 _ Riprap $15 ($65) Present Zoning JJ^ JS Tel #V7«r^fJ PEE Pate~Rec'd ' ®y / - Present Use \ ^4. Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ specify Ordinance Requirements SaP ■SS'.nna4 ^ H^plain your request and reasons for same See. c.U„„^ VARIANCE required - extent of nonconformity Area _^ Setback Pront / Side _ _ _ Other, explainWidth Rear Specify hardships to property -------aW^f,if)rl SAt}/r/ SUBDIVISION application Residential Other, explain No. of Lots CONDITIOKM, USE AND OTHER - explain proposed use of property in detail MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY POR COMPLETE APPLICATTnn («.st he submitted 10 days prior to PlanninfSmil^Is^m^in,) 1. Application completed 2. » Plat map section 3. Certificate of survey of property sketch location and setbacks of proposal 4. Construction plana, if applicable. 5. DATE ^ 3 / - 7 ^ date O ^ Certified Property Owner*s list of owners within upfi) ClISOQ- from Hennepin Oo. Dept, of Pinance A-603 Government Center Stamped, legal sized envelopes(#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the edx>ve list- ^ Applicant's Signatur<^^ i(//(^I, 0'*^er*s Signature 0^/i)f rsqulrad os' riquested by and Council neces^.^C ^ Engineer, City Attorney, Planning CoramisstM .11 fee. as “"bns'Jerbnrdr'an^:? agrees to pay s 5/78 Ei» % # ^ ^ 7/,;^ /£ an apflica.iicn -for a. t/ar^ane<^ ^Cui^ resp^c^ -4-0 Me 3s' s^ree.1^ ' S^hucA and dLoe drea^. dje. pro^£&- huJdinf, a. s,n^h- h!>me£d^ad cmifAjS \,q c>^an ac-re dod', Thert^ U)oa/J \ i,.e. ,nd!ca.^ffr\ dno.^ VWe planners^ dfi/3 cS <d hu,'IdaUe. lod S/nce. fAet^ i£ SicOer sduU^J -k-'fhe^ ds d fde. secdv<idij u)e. art^ prlpc£-^‘A ^ ud.//ke. dde. parz'af h:^ ^rL-hr /S I l> , 8 Of /7-ee^/^ rn<^ _ ^tSacA oeau ’.remeild- ^ propose pMd/)^ ■:tAe housJ dkcTk 'drc^ ct/iJ J^enf.fe/'e. -^S/pdend/n-^ di, from dl\e. She^d. 2ecaujr<r i2x,£d,n<^ mdhe n^.fUrh^ ■ipkldx dJLSO ha,^ 'Mk •^e.e-1-Wi.'s )s giddied- OJc, oJJso ^eeZ S',nt£- 33ni£. •re<^uest Was a~ppfoutd U6i7r^ ^‘A^> ^ ^ : - '/ ' - '-^r-r)f^r Ai £fimC-/Zppfi>dixyL fS dP L? rede I . Pi me u;<?”' Cvfe \f pecm\S£,,t>r^ 4o ^tac^-x a dc>cd( atOprcxirm.-k/Y -^S i«d Sru<npe saccdlea^d d-orner af- !o&. t>cXi'd'n<>/! \t\eCca/l Lmcl) C^q.Uire£^en'/si t'W ■-Ti lli^ - ■J !#k-23 ’ 1 ^r...y jA 5 b! / / I I - ; i ( < » ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JANUARY 26, 1976 On review of the renewal proposal, I find the variance would also have to include hardcover setback (34.303) and lakeshore grading (Ord. No. 125 and No. 167). The site plan sub­ mitted shows extensive grading and hardcover between the house and lakeShore. All of this work would be done within the 75* setback area. Another factor worth considering would be moving the location of the structure 5* closeer to the road. This would require a 5* variance from the 35* street setback requirement and only 10* variance from the lakeshore. Nine of the 10* extending into the required 75* lakeshore setback would consist of the attached open deck. The applicant should also be reminded 'of the restrictions on grading and changing of existing lakeshore conditions. Page 4 Planning Commission Action - October 21, 1975 The Planning Commission tabled the Russell Wenkstern application for a time when the owner would be present. Zoning Administrator's memo - December 19, 1975 t-lr. Wenkstern called Mike Scheller while I was ill and said he would be present at this Planning Commission meeting to explain his proposal. He would, therefore, be made aware of any conditions stipulated regarding filling, grading and hardcover. Zoning Administrator's memo - January 12, 1976 ^Ir. Wenkstern has assured me he would attend the Planning Commission meeting of January 19, 1976. Planning Commission Meeting - January 19, 1976 The Commission recommended approval of a variance on lot area and street setback requirement. They also approved a variance not to exceed 8* from / the required 35' street setback. The variance V from the 75* lakeshore setback requirement was not approved. Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to approve as per the Planning Commission Minutes of January 19, 1976, subject to no grading nor tree removal. Motion, Ayes (3) - Nays (0), VARIANCE 650 North Arm Drive (Continued) 1 MC55I ■■"P/i DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE A-603 GOVERNMENT CENTER MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55487 #42? /^o jpt.PROPERTY OWNERS LIST NAME e^n=cd GOL-P ADDRESS DESCRIPTION f^[5CT/r)N ^ -//7-Z3 __ LP.^T^HI36G4 ...- f\UDiTn^i^ suBd.m.^cz Fttui-F, /5og/g.T$i SLS. UlA y^mr l 5 5.^6 Uo(tr^^0^ iS^ /?L°i un. is'^ LMsirw NO. ’iC,‘4 LOT BLK. Z^QO_ PARCEL -mf/aza ■5 3JP- ^A/d DESCRIPTION LOT BLK.PARCEL -2^ 4 4 Z^OO ^O.^C2.— / ---------------------------— 7^ A . .... i Joo<5\ L .. ■■'Pi DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE A-603 GOVERNMENT CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55487 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST #42? —/ ^ C/—^-V-^ X 1 ------------------------- DESCRIPTION NAME ADDRESS LOT BLK.PARCEL ^pcT/nt,/ /;;; -//7-Z^ e.(PLf¥T P| ^^C, )------------ _ ~s^ -*----------«—f f ^ ^ / iMe^iisco (SUCf- Ai.'«f w n ^/r 4 4 Z^OO f\UDlT0£^? SUBD.h/^3. .^^! It z X__"f---------------------1 -------- (pLfYT----------------------------------/-y—1 -—.---------------^ f?./ ^ 7 -«/d/(T fA lx/A>?l. y T)./ZZ/) Q J.llLJLX-^a----K-I----- : —------------------------- m (PLAT^P>67PX __ • ------------------- -------------------------------^ -9-■*- • fh/jLF Fy:>^^,T5i 5"$?/^ Nf^ftTA A/2/ L i-D£^OOP) ' f7Ul§>^ ' i ' • 1 1 •/?|J^NO. ....... (PLAr ^3/ 2.7 1 ------------------------------------\r“^^ A \ i?.L.//WNK‘^efy7 fiiPnMO-^S34yp 6doo ‘ • • 1 * i----------— ...................... i • • certify the fecu reD-e.««,- . i ^tW.certia..Mecree„.c-.M. ««Prcar,tN,rt ,„ on in. -.fword. ot the Hem,. Co. Jo the be« oi my koowteo*. •« belef. ~^.x: r-i., \ / ’ 9 -----^ ^***VgCM . ., .-■______________________________________________________________________________________ I-• U .:i r ^ \ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: .^426Planning Commission and Council Jeanne Mabueth. Asslatant Zoning Administrator September 19, 1978 ^426 Variance James P. Neve, Jr. - 4060 Dahl Road The applicant requests a 5' side va»-H * exf^M proposed family room (revi^^Exhibit^^? soi^heastexisting greenhouse will be rem««ori' exhibit A), The of the neighbor's house to the east'uDM^^fh location applicant has supplied photoerenho u inspection. The City office for which are available at the Variance Required: Zoning District LRlB - Section 34.450 Side yard required: proposed: variance: 10' 5' 5'507. ■v- -- --.1 _l ^42 6 Administrator ce at the southeast •chibit A). The note the location - inspection. The available at the LOCATI Address */ofeo D a KI RJ CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Use Application • y) fV\aaioA . SS3t^4 Legal Description PiftaTes C>ooe. ^e&. )C> Bik*. I APPLICANT Nam eJA«vtes P. Mevie. Jc. Tel #V7a45/<> Mailing O'X. fJeoe.* Address UoUo Tiakt XV_____Mu. OWNER Name Mailing Address 8a mg. 4S Tel # TYPE OP REQUEST Subdivision $150+$5/Cot Conditional Use $50 V^iance $50 Rezoning $250 Riprap $15 ($65) . cro ■ ) (trS-oST RecM •0- /r Present Zoning I ^Present Use Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request J Specify Ordinance Requirements fO jg*i _____________ Explain yovir request and reasons for same Rg/yugsT fl S' v/ariamce. Te A ) I Cl ^ ~tg fl <4^ rs »J *%■ ■Pa mi ly Roe cn uj t r It' X ^4' . U have A T«»>o ST©Ay hemg UL*it*h Tbe. bedo©o»ns ®x> The.. Top -^Voec The, maitj Aro om The. level ,______ poo hooxe. *»& -Cflft. Ph©<v\ The nJeloVApoo or. The, a.'dei. of The. • “ P|l©pose.d Rddi'ti’e«J — Seg ^ HoToS VARIANCE required - extent of nonconformity _____ lot Area Setback Front ___ Side tA Rear ____ ____ Width ____ Other, explain ______________________________________ Specify hardships to property The, ^trev/.'ous ^iAJije.r boJlT TUe, ex:«ri<kJ3 hi A parr o'P ovjko \©T Th) o rder* *to g,uT The. U%sT hluoiteec of' TAees. "to fldA onj To fthjy oTVter p^rT -fKe hooSe- uoT \>\e4A wItW exisTihij SraueTuy SUBDIVISION application Residential Other, explain No. of Lots CONDITICmAL USE AND OTHER - explain proposed use of property in detail 1 MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE APPLICATION (Must be submitted 10 days prior to Planning Commission meeting) 1. Application completed 2. » Plat map section 3. Certificate of survey of property sketch location and setbacks of proposal 4. Construction plans, if applicable 5. Certified Property Owner’s list of owners within (300') (150')- from Hennepin Co. Dept, of Finance A-603 Government Center « 6. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10)i pre-addressed to each of the neunes on the above list. DATE Applicant's Signatur ll it o DATE f//^/78 Owner's Signature Applicant hereby agrees to provide all infornjation required or requested bv the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commissi^ I t I !■ I ' ^ i 1 ) '■ • iJ $ i f ,*e“^ I ^■ : «N. ^ V. j ^ t %1 f ■ L’ f. Pl»t of ftirx’er for P, Kfve of Lot !£•, Block 1, Pirates Cove rerjiepir Co:irtT, VJ.rx#osrtt (yTCtfi ^ Certificate of Survey: I horety certify tlat thit is a true end . correct roprtsontttlcn of a evun-ey of the . boundaries of Lot 1£, Block 1, Pirater. Cove, and the location of all existing huilclrgs therecr.. It coos not purport to show ether Japroveaents or €ncrp*»ckr»Tite. ^rern h. Coffin Rrvt ^'o. tO60i.4 Alvin H. P^hder Peg* No.13295 Siu-eeyore and Civil Englr-eerB' long Lake, Klmvsota r ffoed a Scale: I«ate : o : If = 50* 0-7-7S Iron mrksr I . ^ ef * ir TTe3 . .r -. • ., ^ ■•■ .Vm ■ »•• HOWARD ^F^CRKINS n e ^ T . i m% . f ..■ i ^Aao<z.i*.o Mcoc- £ £ S' n> 3. i i STRoeTuf^ * j « • I X t —c«1 r « h 0 t: I 'i #426 ?C “ 5r i.'X <4 5 ^ t OKi • I Jb < i eNC. •S*l»ot' » - % - HCSS4 department of finance A-603 GOVERNMENT CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55487 #426 K/f -ft property owners list ^ Of^O N 0 description LOT 33 BLK. parcel -----mgro^L. , L(rMc VAtU-^ d2od_ 7^00 i.t tarn HiF r 1; .i I I ‘L I (T .4 TO: FROM: Planning Comnlssion Jeanne Mabuath, Assistant Zoning Administrator ► f DATE:September 19, 1978 SUBJECT: Rescheduling of Planning Commission Meeting for second week of October The Cltv Attorney has advised the staff that we will be to schedule the Planning Comnlssion Meeting for October because of the national holiday, Columbus Day. The Council plan* to meet on Tue.day, October 10, 1978. Therefore, the Planning Commlealon will have to meet on one of the remaining nights of that week. f 0\ fini­ s'* • ^ -»lr .• (< • 1 I 1 ».r|s ,i 1 y r i.» ’ .• ' ■ I . ■ h: 1 TO: FROM: Planning Commission and Council Alan P. Olson, Village Planner DATE:September 5, 1978 SUBJECT: #422 Subdivision D.W, Jimmerson, 505 Willow Drive South SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Mr. Jimmerson is proposing to divide his property into four residential lots. A new home has been started on the PJ’OPJ®®® Lot 3 under Building Permit No. 3824, issued August 4, 1978. The permit was issued using the entire 12 acre parcel as building site. A conventional septic system design was provided and approved on the proposed Lot 3. Proposed Lots 1 & 2 each contain two acres of dry land plus some existing farm sheds. The existing buildings are over t e proposed dividing line and/or within the required setbacks. They are in poor condition. I recommend that these buildings be removed prior to final plat approval. 1 39 acre of dry land. An additional .41 acre of dry land la In the northwest comer of this lot, but is completely separated by wetlands from the building site. 1 expanded approximately 70' south so that the building site contains at least 2.0 acres of dry land. in an area of poor o’ght distances. Access to Lot 1 is particularly bad. It may be desireable to provide access to both lots from Willow Drive. Lot 3 has an existing driveway which should be . located on the survey. Lot 4 fronts on Willow where a hill could reduce visibility. i Sketch plan review should address the size of Lot 4, the access to all lots, the existing buildings and the septic system suitability. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - SEPTEMBER 11, 1978 Tabled as the applicant was not present it TO: FROM: Planning Commission and Council I Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Zoning Administrator DATE: SUBJECT; September 18, 1978 #424 Conditional Use Permit David Dunlap, 1595 Bohns Point Road ■ !»*■ Ordinance Reference: 31.700 The applicant requests a conditional use permit for the purpose of drudging accumulated sand and rock at the inlet to a lagoon, creating a channel for his boat at the northwest cornet' of his property. The dredging operation will cover a 26' X 28' area, removing 18" of sand to a 3' depth, approximately 200 cubic feet of material to be removed. (Review Diagram "C") Mr. Dunlap has furnished a sketch designating the location of the proposed dock to be constructed at a future date and subject to staff and LMCD review. (Review Comments and Diagram "D") To be submitted to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for review. DNR permit will be required. .Vi _ __ _ _.11 ip^ ^snmzTSi I !J !L%03ififr^€HVt L*>«TirM«TSl [•m^WrnT^ m ■ Mil A A Fir *’« 9 Ck“tch fcr It. Itevld J. la-lep of Lot 1, I<Tl»-rc's ihr'K H'*r,rT Ir. Ccx V', Mlr-'.^sota £/Ci5r/*iG #424 ' ' 1-1 . . 'V ir-t L jT^ r r V nT *4n JTS9‘•9 I I S£J‘ t • 1 j^• •k- -^ ' • ■ r ■ ‘:-i i/' .•,■ .^:Ja , ■ .V pll'. J n % Seal** 1" » IOC Ifita : i-23-69 Core on R, Coffin , Iftnc iJurv n'or anc Flanner - • lDn£ Lake, Minnesota ^ ■;? r. . '?■ ?“* e-t-» : 4 . ' < K,'* i 'U' * Y '?%v’ i£»v:ifii t 4> r' OF /AiLSr iftfiTH PfoPoj^o hoCK o^€ 5<s<//4<ec “ /o' IaK£ ______ t£ct; f PROpe/fTV A/A/^ ii00S€ h ^ Uj My current aock has deteriorated beyond repair and this coming year I will be purchasing a new dock. I will also be getting a 19' boat requiring a boat lift and canopy cover. Due to a chronic back problem I should not be engaged in the physical labor involved with putting in and taking out a dock each year. I propose to avoid this hardship by putting a dock in the inlet where it would be protedted from shifting ice and could be left in year around. This location would also afford more protection for my boat during rough weather and from theft as it Is closer and more vlsable from the house. Removing 18" of superficial sand from the entrance to the inlet would not break or enter the mud bottom of the lake and would only remove sand which has filtered in during the last few years. I would be happy to use a steel pipe dock in the inlet instead of a piling dock to spare the lake any possible damage from driving piles into the bottom 2uid to spare me the expense of the saime. n l[ ' ^ f I'/ rIt U, L i L’n ! : L. SEP CITY Or ORO.NO Doc/c t IPRopofty coming year I will boat requiring a em I chould not be ind taking out a .ting a dock in the could be left in action for my boat more visable from e inlet would not remove sand which nstcad of a piling pi?es into the a n 1^ V* ^ r r it vU L { C li1 [j L 1 y LJSEPu HCSJ4 f\ DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE A-603 GOVERNMENT CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55487 §8 3oo I PROPERTY OWNERS LIST t #424 NAME .S'^55>‘=»» 5pV^S Log.v^_ V nr.myr\^4T ^V-'V N\a>^s \\ U n p\ o^tt ei DESCRIPTION ADDRESS -------K ^ \ S *a>oVsxSs o>\ A*t 2)3 us AAA L o-t b 1 1 \ v^Vxvxis, . SS&9V 3>Aa,t. LOT BLK. PARCEL 02.00 0^00 I 5050 4 l Sub K-Cl\ W5<Tx X?JS-Sf^ ) UOC^ ’^ v y\X feSAO'iS \Ut>'& ^5>C>\\<vS ' ~T \ ' ^ -V\a 'T\ L CLv\. 43 A-t &S5»*=»\ \UfiS ■^OV\'r\^9fc)\«N'i^ ^30 rWx*''«=w^i n O nc> x5»S3fT t feQsj.'TV - ^boVv\5i . \ a,A Subtle n.CaAtv- \aJc<L ^ '‘*'1 5 4S t^at U.ti rfP'*xeniao •ntMicartKi *'.' •" •*<^ and tnit f»p av«H•’ -.0 o« infotma. MIO Mo 41 <; 0500 \ooo 4000 5500 hhQO 30 t,Ooo _ 3000 4000 30oq_ kooo 7000 8000 5000 TO:Planning Commission FROM:Alan P. Olson, Village Planner DATE:September 19, 1978 SUBJECT: Mrs. Wyatt Moe, 1220 Loma Linda Proposed Culvert John Gerhardson and I have been discussing this proposal with Mrs. Moe for some time. In essence, she would like to extend an existing culvert to the lake. This involves engineering review by the City and the Watershed; hence our request for an engineering design submittal. The proposal would also involve construction and filling within the lakeshore setback area; hence this informal request for your opinion. Before engineering costs are invested, Mrs. Moe would like to know whether or not you would consider this application. I stress that staff cannot review or issue any recommendations until engineering data is submitted. This is conceptual review only. cc: John Gerhardson 1 1220 LoT.a Linda Mound, Ktiinesota 55364 Septercber 18, 1978 Orono planning Coaraission Crystal Eay» Minnesota 55323 Dear planning Comniisslon Members: Ten years ago we had an erosion problem that was undermining the foundation of our cabin# The water seems to cone down a natural drairage line to Lake Minnetonka. At that tine. Bill Mills, the village engineer, researched the area and gave our contractor directions for the work to be done, we installed 120 feet of 30 inch freeway grade culvert and filled over it, \Ve did not continue the culvert to the lake because we did not own the adjacent property. There remained, after the culvert was installed, a 50 foot open ditch and a 30 foot lenth of 10 inch pipe under the lawn opening into the lake. Although the 30 inch culvert has never been used to its capacity, the 10 inch pipe is inadequate for most needs. The open ditch is a safety problem for our family and the neighborhood children, Kow we own both properties and we want to correct the erosion problem and the hazard of the open ditch by extending the existing culvert an additional 80 feet. There would be no significant bends or changes of angles to accomplish this - it appears to be a simple matter, Mr, Olson is requesting a new engineer’s study that has been estimated -it ^200-300 before I can begin the work, I an asking you to advise me on the feasibility of the culvert extension before I start apendir»g large sxims of money. Sincerely yours, MrsV W. Wyatt Moe I Telephone -I73-7357 CITY of ORONO Post Office Bo* 66* Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 • Municipal Office* On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka July 21, 1978 Mr. and Mrs. Wyatt Moe 1220 Loma Linda Avenue Mound, Minnesota 55364 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Moe: Pursuant to your questions concerning the drainage ditch on your property, the Public Works Supervisor, Mr. John Gerhardson, and myself have inspected the site. It Is our opinion that extending the existing culvert will involve more work than maybe apparent on first glance. The existing culvert is quite long, the downstream outlet is undersized and a bend in the alignment requires special considerations such as catch basins and cleanouts. Also, extending the large culvert will require replacement of the existing downstream pipe which work is immediately adjacent to the lakeshore. Consequently, any work will require reviews and permits from the City, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Because of the involved nature of the proposal, the above agencies will require that a qualified engineer design the work and provide adequate plans for review. As this is a private drainage ditch, you would be responsible for providing this engineering as well as for Installation and maintenance of the work. Sincerely, an P. Olson Village Planner cc: Mr. John Gerhardson A I-’* • • . ^ -..r- .1' s u A 1 in'- . y J ■I -■4 ^__ 4 J •’C n : .ec c B s ^id r :qi ■on en? p£C O t ?d I eve ling d t< eeki :5ue oidi iricti €cis Uirr mf ne je f Jt i cSiC IctO'r lied >rr.p Ered redif cami rs i; so h iny * nte: cce: € CC ss ri • ^ Cuilt^<^rt BAirftn^lcn b.a^ fOai ^ ftop 1/ iC-uJ /C fcci-f pi-r A' fV\oe.! A • - ■! • i 1 . J t ■ I f • I i I 1 - ...^ IV. WuM /i?cc^ Lo.’iiZi I 4 4 oun J ■^S3L4 I ‘ ifi—tMiirm iith f T A. / . 7^s irrrpc r:*nce of thtse judlcia! detcrmlrxtions is * ♦•jst the Court h»$ recognszed th»t quz*i*judic««l - prcctcdlrsi of t^e city council are ir.fcrrr.e: a'.d 5 sophisticated .courtroom pioctJure oc« not have 5 - to be followed. Rather, the council v/il. only heve r * ' 10 insure that a party "1$ given reasonable nonce and * xsssonable opportunity to'Be heard.- 8 * The Court theVcarefufly exarninied the legal tte^ f ' • dardsithat 'ean^ .used.to deny aj$p«^^^ usepeanit L IfTifI . ha legally suffieiMt unatng, vnesi • I . sider whether the prQjM^.'usa Js i ^ ' •/ . its tsrid use plenjo preserve^ the h ^ • £ ■ . - Seednd. the CoOri held that a Rndl •• r r- ...• i. * excavation appears to. increase the = . • ■ • I. * dards.that can t^.usep.tp ceny a ipwiw u»c >1 .. > . * I : • epplicatidn.///»f,. thep>i^.eoneludedthatar,r^ ■z . " Jng'that S use h contrary to, a epmprehenshe plan f : • h. M i^oatlv suftldeht findine, ante a city may con- Iccent Law Cases onir.g - Spacia' Use Permits ipw vflr mM • ^ ^ * V • ^ h a legally sufficient finding, since a aty may corn -?-»— ...L.Mi,— proposed.usa is consistent iVttn • _ the’land's charecter. W..W..W, ...»_____________findirsg that further excavation appears' to. increase the danger of irre­ parable environrnental dernage Is. also a legally ■ sufficient finding. Sufficient rvider.ee was found on the record to support .this firtding. * * he ?/.inr.*sota Supreme Court recently decided on - 1 irr.portan: special use permit case, in v.t.ich the eague partic'pated as an a.m1cus curiae. . ^ .. -. • * X . V-; ThVrd,' the Court held that the finding that an ep- ^ .“ plicantY failure to prove that a proposed use will . riot affect health, safety,rnpralsand vvel.are of the dccupahtt* of the'^surrournling'land. IS legally suffi ­ cient. This is'p^icufar^^ the ljurdeh of proof bh the. applicant. Pir.ally, the Court'held! that a findirigithaj the end use would .'dwisibh biebiusi loci* governmerjt is better able to^ iciou» ffMinn.'Sup..CL, Apnl J4,.1978 v-';^ . I cision was appealed to the Supreme Court, which . .• limately reversed the'decision and disinissed thei_* •I'*. mpany'scomplaint... . . ' : ZbriTiiaAdult'Bookstores ■ le Court first discussed, the issue of procedural le process. Since the issuarice of a special use.per{ i ^ it is a quasi-judicial function of the council, the. ^4. sic rights of reasonable riotice of e hearing and e^*.,.‘ • Bspnsbia opportunity to be heard must be conh - ied with. The Court concluded, however.' that j . ZOTThg^AduftB^ •: •*r A'ciity ebuneij pes^*eYesblofion.directir>9 the V ' local, biiindinjg 'official tt! withhold tf»e'issuance of . V an occupancy pefrhil for in adult bookstore because VI * tKe'Visuef efisplays in dw.«ndpws .offend^ nearby residents'arid reridered we'location urmiitable for: thii'^^.Tof fesinesi the' resolution was invalidat- !tslde the record. .ri -u • f * ‘ * - i*ji.^,'S*tead‘••• 'V • •’ * •• • •• \