Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
04-06-1981 Planning Packet
il I AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, APRIL |r, 1981 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:30 P.M. Call to Order 1. Call to order/Roll Action Items 2. #568 Daryle Uphoff 2497-99, 2501-03 Kelly Ave. Preliminary Subdivision 3. #597 Verne Hubbell 3340 Watertown Rd. Conditional Use Permit 4. #592 John F. Allenberg 1920 Sixth Ave. North Preliminary Subdivision 5. #599 John L. Laurent 625 North Ferndale Rd. Preliminary Subdivision 6. #607 Robert G. Bredeson 1410 Rest Point Rd. Variance 7. #608 Mike Mehner 3398 North Shore Dr. Conditional Use Permit Work Session 8. #609 Ruxton R. Strong 420 South Brown Rd. Subdivision Approval of the Minutes 9. Approval of the minutes of March 16, 1981 Information Items 1. Marina Committee Meeting Wednesday, April 8, 1981 4:00 PM 2. Joint Council and Planning Commission Meeting Wednesday, April 15, 1981 7:30 PM 3. Cancel regular meeting of Planning Commission for April 20, 1981 rie F I! O Pi V AGE OF OEONO «r \>•.•«• WHIIAII 1 Mtif fl I •i! ' * Af TO: FROM: DATE: Planning Cononission Jeanne A. Mabustb March 30» 1981 SUBJECT: #568 Daryle Uphoff, 2497-99, 2501-03 Kelly Avenue Subdivision I have enclosed State Statute 515A-1-106 for your review. If the Planning Commission intends to deny this subdivision, please support your recommendation with findings that relate to specific ordinances. In review of the State Statute, note that reference is made to low and moderate income rentals, Kelly Avenue Duplexes are clearly not considered low or moderate income units. . i H ,f ’I i ' 5ISA.1-1M UNIFOWI CONDOMINIUM ACT (,„ -Uni." mn«» .solelv or Dartially wiUun a building, dcsignatea lor Srta.Sd2rt.rofwhich «. described P»nu«...»sec..on ^jT-Uni. o.i.er" me«.s . *I«X m owneiship of a espites simoltaneoosly »ilh any lease the Sri'n or«™ta.S ol'^^ich will remove .he uni, from me ~;^m.mun., but does not include a holder of an interest as ssecurity for an obligation. History: 1980 c 582 art I s 5I5.hl03 5ISA 1-104 VARIATION BY AGREEMENT. ci< a i.ioi to 515A.4- Except as expressly may not be varied by 117. provisions o'to 515A.4-117 may not ir m VaSf r o"rt4iie°of se«i 5.5A.M0. .0 515A.4-117 or the declaration. History: 1980 c 582 art 1 s 515.1-104 real estate taxes becomes P*y*'’**’^® J°,u unj.f interest and penalties which »t£^:;sfacS;"cX‘"“ SISn m accrue un.il a. Icas, 30 day, a„.r .he exemptions or classifications shall apply. History: 1980 r 582 art 1 s 515.1-105nisiorj* i --------- 5,5A.I.l«d APPLICABILITY OF LOCAL ORDINANCES. RECIXATIONS. and building codes . . tu\ and rel a zoning, subdivision. (a) Except as f carter provision, or reg- building code, in*^,ectlv oroh’ibit the condominium form of owner-Illation may not directly or indire y p . • uDon the creation or dis- ship or impose any “nv Ja^if the’ condominium conversion position of a condominium or upo ^ ^. :„.iy eimilar development under process which it v^juld . q provision of sections 515A.M01 toa different form of ownership^therwi . p zoning, subdivisioo, r;a.”e,tru«T..'’,'=n^'. cba'^cr prl-uou, or re,- ulation. “7b) Submerion (a) riiall no, -Pl^y I” ,er piwi.ioo or conuac, pro»J^fc;""|“ fi'nance pKf or aer., la. b, a sure « iwal agency or local unit of government. -------- ......•««“» O' 'O'" "0" O' ci.y purman. ,o an ordinance or cbariiJV-S“Tablhrnr«anda,m^^^^^ y for^y for housing *!** ‘ the authority granted in U Any ordinance or i ihall not apply to *"y^° ^um for which a ^n- ^f>d by a lender and is charter provision or for ’ ooQvert prescribed by tenancy, has been pv possession poor to the ua (d) For purposes of tion showing that the co, that any conditions requ be prima facie evidence thereof. (e) A violation of i the provisions of subwcti ntini^. This i a city to enforce the pri, pursuant to subsections U Any ordinance or c tive for a period exceedin Hletory: 1980 c 582 515A.1-10^ EMINENT (a) If a unit is acqu by eminent domain leavii Soiy or lawfully be use awvd shall compensate i an obligation in the unit appear, whether or not a tSi. unless ihe * interest, votes in the a^ reallocated to the rema votes, and liabilities of t promptly prepare, exeim uig the reallocations. A taken under this subsecti (b) Except as pro' eminent domain, the aw an interest as ^cu"jy, reduction in value of tl tion, unless the apportw equality. (1) that unit s common expense haWi of the unit, and (2) tne expense liability divesti located to that unit anc esu. votes, and liabili' acquired unit participa ests, votes, and liabiliti rum. whether or not ^ (1 for separate ownerdiig,! I'ton 515A.2-110. a unit, a person to wl or in a leasehold coodiK ineously with any lease tl^ lit from the condominium^ for an obligation. I. Ir i .ns 5I5A.1-101 to 515A.4- 17 may not be varied li^ 01 to 515A.4-117 may ooi attorney, or use any other f sections 515A.1-101 tc HOMESTEAD, interest constitutes for aU V s before any installment of thority shall split the taxes itcrest and penalties which •1 at least 30 days after the r with not more than two element interests shall be 'lining whether homestead ANCES. REGULATIONS, (c). a zoning, subdivision, charter provision, or reg- ndominium form of (wnw- .1, upon the creation or dis- !• condominium conversion similar development under >n of sections Sl.^A. 1-101 to )f any zoning, subdivision. :. charter provision, or reg- nee. rule, regulation, char- .incing of housing construe- >ugh a housing finance pro- • federal law by a state or irsuant to an ordinance of d uniformly within its juris- ,.ns upon the conversion of ilv if there exists within the *221 INIFORM CONDOMIMl AfT 5I5A.I-I07 ya^inu^m^^ Mk,nmvidine direct or indirect ,1,^1 not apply to 3*'^^ loi a consideration has been 0iinium for which 3 ^ the date of adoption of the ordin**' .-c or ^o^” m notice of condominium conversion or intent to charter provision, or cicA4.ii(Xai containing n termination of tion showing that the ' o ‘La,rce h^ been complied with shallrdoss-iit n». ceJa m v,„uuo„ '*""1. A ,iol,Hon o, Sf”7conr the provisos he construed to in anv way limit the power of '“T;"r,raV,'U.on -aced haroundc, sdaU no. d. aHcc tivc for a period exceeding IK months. History: 1980 c 582 art I s 515.1-106 "“WU a ™! i?”u“Tcn..ncn. domain, o, il par. of a by eminen. domai^eaving the uni. j®by'*.hc dTclaralion. Ihe ^ il**tL^unit p'wncr^d holders of an'intercst as security for award shall compensate the unit ,.i«m^nt interest as their interests may “d^il£a'o?’S (bl Except as provided in subsection (a), if part of a eminent domain, the a « their interests mav appear for the ttmalitv that unit s common element intcrcsi, ^ tVi.* ci-?#* ilLnse liability arc reduced in proportion to the reduction in the size acquired unit participating in the reallocation on the basis of its reducca inter Cilt, votes, and liabilities. 1 I i I TO:Planning Commission PROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth DATE:March 30, 1981 SUBJECT: 1597 Verne Hubbell, 3340 Watertown Road Conditional Use Permit The City Engineer’s letter is enclosed for your review. Based on the Planning Commission's discussion of the »PPii“ cation on March 16, 1981, the following recommendation is submitted for your review: To approve the conditional use permit of Verne Hubbell Such approval is subject to the following conditions. 1.All fill to be moved out of the wetlands to a distance of 26'. At completion the entire fill area must be 26' from defined wetland. 2. All concrete chunks and rock buried to allow adequate maintenance. 3.The remaining fill area to be graded such that no slop exceeds 4:1. 4. 5. Entire disturbed area to be reseeded. Hay bales placed and staked along edge of wetlands - to remain in place until ground cover has taken hold City Inspector to make final inspection. IT 4 I i ' ? . ■ • ■ ^ i } * I i ‘ 1 ^ ^iioeSa tu, Q»rnimUim 2S3S hf. 7*i>4 f M St. P*^ am #l/itf U. Bum»irot>. tS. Mifbtft Bfiicne. f.f. imefh t. AndtfUk, ? K. Htmdlotd 4. Lembfrg B t. Bnhmtd L. Imfntf. f > immrt C. Ot^en. B.F. fiimm. 6f 2-636 4600 March 17, 1981 2Qi(k-/9w;> nni verssryy^ (tlrmn it. CoifB, f.f. ke$lk A. f.f- rhomtu t. S0}e». f.F. Bnhstd W. fotar, f.t B0beri a. Sikmttkh htsnin L. Sonsls. FS. Oomsid C. Bmttvdl. F.F Jrtry A. Bomrdom. B.C. Ifark A. hBni0n B.t Charlei A. Ffhktnm ieo W. fawetiky tUrUn M Ohom t>mtid V Olt0" city of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Mn. 55323 Attn: Jeanne Mabusth Re: File No. 139-597 Verne Hubbell 3340 Watertown Road Dear Jeanne, U. »ould reco-end th.t the fill pieced on the Hubbell Property rcl«rerc< of the uetlonds eree, seeded euch thet no elope exceed. 4:1 end reseeded. Z, cJnrretrchunck. end’rock .hould be buried to ellov »eentenence of the area if necessary# The toe of the slope along the north edge should be surrounded »>y*'ay bales Staked to the ground to minimize silting of the wetlands area. The enclosed drating providL a detail of the recommended erosion control procedure. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. As. Glenn R. Cook GRC:li End. 3244a i 2 r2 Wood ttoke 2 por boM Ltootb Stt PlON Vorioblo •poc. 1 Bolts pioctd on tdQt. ’Butttd tipbt. PLAN Grodtd Qiodt WP~^Pt. A to bf hiQhtf thon Pt. B 1/2 Totol Length _ Pt. A PROFILE , I ; i Eorth fill flow OPTION I j 2*« 2" Wood stokt 2 ptf bolt. Jolts plOC£<i on td^ Grodtd prodt flow I 1 ' 11 1 « X i '1 i! - 1 ’ 1 1 1 Bontstroo, Bpstrtt, Andtrlii a Assoc., me ConswHing Enginttis St. Pool, lAnntsoto (O’min. 1 OPTION 2 SECTIONvA-A SPECIAL DETAILS Revisions EROSION CONTROL No^^Scolt Plote No SP-64 4\ I TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Conndaaion Jaanna A. Mabuath April 1, 1981 #592 John F. Allenbarg» 1920 Sixth Ave. North, Sxibdivision Zoning District - RR-IB Subdivision “ metes and bounds Area - approximately 3.5 acres Staff wishes to readvise the Planning Commission that not dealing with a plat but a metes and bounds division of lot line rearrangement. The subdivision does not create a new lot but merely serves to accomodate the 1 Block 1, Wolsfeld addition with a more suitable building location. The surveyor reassured me that there were no un ique problems with legal des :riptions of the I volved and that since there were rio dedications involved, simple metes and bounds division is adequate. The access to the site has been confirmed and DNR road tc the east. The legal documentoht o'f wav will be a lease entered into by Allenberq with the DNR. Tllte tlity will have no obligation under their arrangement. Your recommendation for approving the lot line and metes and bounds division of John Allenberg should con tain the following findings: 1) Subdivision does not create a new lot 2) The residential lot. Parcel A, contains 2 dry buildable lemd and satisfies the area and width re quirements for RR-IB Zoning District 3) The existing house on Parcel A has a conforming septic systiBin And AdccjuAto ar©ft for ©xp©nsion Such approval would be subject to the following conditions: 1) Parcel A recognized as a single family residential lot garage apartment may not be used as a dwelling unit. Subject structure may only be used as on accessory struc tures to the principle structure. ^ 2) Before a building permit is issued to Allen^rg, he must submit proof of combination of Parcel B with lot 1, Block 1 wolsfeld Woods Addition and copy of lease that confirms access to site. Vi *i««l M# in* •» ^ %r« ^««« i» ftH«a« !• t mu • • I m^tin «i»t «u« it • mm mid 9W91 tmtmmnm\h$9. mt • tMTtif •:* «*it cfi ^ ;^t ftii •• tr*f<iM»*. fiATWr «Mrur •r itt%i9ik s*?! lii •Mt% >.lf» 91 «tt» tf 1M Hk MeM»l Mr;t!ir, tttmU: tt i«lltMi It,; «% t ^ pMl^t tft %.it .Urn if 9 IJ .« ■iMMt <i«ir%9r If t« Atilt.* M% AtittM *.«| rt«* ^ ^ iMt fUr* 19* mnrnmm mmmr t.f m%$ »iH»irttt tisrtir mf IM ir • £m t»:i litt t «:«• ____«f 9m fwti ^ to*u ftr«;>i um 0-*t }if t •! • itM ler*Jt^wt t»« > • 9«rt /trtirtt imt IlMCM t«ti t?%» ». i t^tt U»* • t: .9' f*.i| ^ ti«M ttfftfMtrttrif * r t.riA(i><‘s _ m tot wf «f M 9trt*9Mtt iMtrur H# f |i«ri»f ti .ttfl^r rt, Ttwtthlp •. Ilf lfem« IfetM ri t«tl #r m^^ »•-. •• t9kU*%t Cwrtttm •% • fPtot w. »i*^ tft :• c«irt«r ilaiitt Tf) Mi« ffin ? # rnttm me l^’HKcrl t th; fm t^tui :«rt99i • t.f. %:if Urn totfi •Ud me M*!. «9f9i.Mift ^.fi«r tf n« i.Hi*ttttt \jm%^ t f)§i i*^ ftlt* *t me %rj» .•*•< *.«r#rUtf<| lttrx« ’•#9% «>tif t«lt ;itt • fStUttt *% m M f^ii Ifttri# 9-nt ptilltl ttli W.ti llf« r«9titrl* rlf%l»-f*iwf IlMt ef 'mmaUm CmmU fltU rt. f. tut ft •• tiiiti<*H li. i«y. ; ar fVt., I, »• tu itli itnitif;# ri.9t-wf*w# lU* U !*t .l*t t lira >10% rf U^tfii. *. 9«4M titttitit.tt l%tmi -r-** • V- m !• 1 «f li.lii.Jf. l l*jr« It Utt Cl9|Mt t illi't > ’. i f t /It fJl.A Mtf IM UfUtftr tf fit^f. prut rt U^tfli. *. f«tUt £ Ut I* It ft dmm ut p0 cft l: ddm |9i«rt» IMM.U »l»9*t.« 9 II kr« •bf%# t« tti fUMt ^t#t Uti «!«•*.« it I TO;Planning Conunission FROM:Jeanne Mabusth DATE:April 2, 1981 SUBJECT:#599 John L. Laurent, 625 North Ferndale Preliminary Subidvision Laurent has submitted the corrected preliminary plans as required by the Planning Commission* The 15 foot wide road outlot has been designated, the wetlzmds of 7,500 square feet located and the areas of each lot exclusive of wetlands and road outlot. Gaffron staked the wetlands with the applicant's surveyor. Please review his enclosed memo for his comments. The on site septic contractor reports that he found frost in ground and was unable to complete the required septic tests. Gaffron sees no problem with locating a suitable on site septic system for each lot. Staff sees no problem with the Planning Commission acting on the subdivision approval subject to requiring all septic testing and review be completed before being presented to Council. In any event, if results of the septic test require lot line changes, the plat would be returned to the Planning Commission for additional review. The only other change noted in the revised plat is the original 50 foot corridor has been changed to 46 feet. Staff sees no problem with a 46 foot wide road corridor serving two lots since the majority of private driveway easements are between 20 feet to 30 feet. If approved, your recommendation for the lot plat of John L. Laurent should contain the following conditions; 1. Lots i emd 2 share common access via 46' corridor. 2.Lot 2 grant an access and utilities easement in favor of Lot 1. 3.Septic test information must be submitted and reviewed prior to Council acting on preliminary plat. If such results involve chemges in lot lines, the plat will be brought back to the Planning Commission for review. 4. Flowage and Conservation easement over the designated wetlands. 5. Underlying road and utilities easement acquired by City over Outlot A. 6. Park dedication fee in the amount of $400.00, $200.00 for each lot. I i TO:Jeanne A. Mabuath PROM:Michael P. Gaffron, Septic Systems Inspector DATE:March 24, 1981 SUBJECT: Wetlands classification, #599 Subdivision, John L. Laurent, 625 N. Ferndale Rd. On March 17, 1981,1 met with Mr. Laurent, his surveyor, and his realtor on the above property to discuss delineate the wetland existing on the south end of the property. The wetland in question was at this time dry enough to walk on without getting wet, except for a small portion maybe 30 feet in diameter which showed evidence of cattail growth. The wetland appears to exist as an overflow for a small pond located just to the east; ditched drai)ing acts as an outlet to the west; no water was flowing at the time. The wetland appears to be wet only during wet periods of the year and/or if the pond above overflows. While it appears that a small wetlands conservation easement would be appropriately for the site, it also is true that the rest of the lot is quite open and relatively flat, hence sub stantial potential area exists for use as drainfield. I do not feel the taking of a wetlands conservation easement over the marginal wetland should cause denial of the subdivision even if it means a "dry, buildanle" area somewhat less than 2 acres. It is noteworthy, however, that portions of both lots 1 and 2 contain a Dundas silt loam soil (according to Hennepin County Soil Survey) which has' a seasonably high water table and may require the use of mouiid drainfield systems. ;i * 4 i LAND USE PLANNING ZONING VARIANCE APPLICATION CITY OF ORONO F.O. Boh 6b» Crystal Bay, Minnesota S532) 473-7357 EXHIBIT 1 NSTBUCTIOKS; riaast first read tha attached InforMtioii Sheet. Cooplata Itates I • IJ P** Frint). If needed, attach letter or other Information to better deacrlbe your request. Incomplete applications vlll not be accepted. 1. PROPERTY ADDRESS > I 'I^ K - f /| /’ V \ L ^ Legal deaerlption shall bo ohotm on attached Survey, Eahibit 3 APPLICANT lUne 1 v ^ ^ N fhone V*'- ^ C Mailing Address / ^' d. ^ /\t> /*/< f If Applicant is not owner, explain 3 • OWNER N bm /?<■ fl r (1^^ PiKt. i>c Phone ^ • V .! C ? Mallln, Addr... / *> L, Sr. /-I i./?<»/>’:• /Yt >V.//^v'- \ V Date Property^Acquired /Vv > (ttonth/Year) I (do) also own other adjacent parcels of land fhooe 6. PRESENT ZONING USE DISTRICT LA-l3 (Oth.r) _________________ LIST OF EXHIBITS £ Peacriotiog Initial Application must include: 1 Application Form 2 \/^ Property (hmers Lis 3 Certificate of Surv Fee Beceipt # (C^ Date Beccived ^ ^ By ^7 . Ill Staff Information 4 ___ Plat Map 5 Inventory 6 ___ Staff ConaentO Other Information r' Ci:V 1 . r 7. PRESENT USE Basid«.tui Vacant Lend_ _ _ Vacant Building(s)Occupied Building(|) DESCRIBE REQUEST ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $ ________ — ..t.feU.b n*. ua. __craelnu. or Mp.nd ai.tln, u*. ^butM .w __add m ___rwdat ___rapUc. Describe request in detail: P,. n ivt ■ •, %/<■ n r. m. > ■ <<> Pk’l- r». r____________ ty C lYI kr" C. .~r/7cc >1 V ^ if J f f"* >\ tr 9^ V t. ^ R. C < ^ r> /t Q «: «v V) if ^ C ^ / fT c' 1? L C 7~ Lot Area9« ^AfARIANCE(S) REQUIRED to do the requested Voxb: _ _ _Setback (_ _ _Front _ _ _ Side _ _Beer) Other Lot Width Nerdcover lOo Describe UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS preventing compUence with Zoning Code requirements: Lct /> //V/ r/^L- c /3 /^iT/.vr /?/i/^ / •> ^ 31/% Describe UNDUE HARDSHIP or PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY r..uuu,g fro. .trie* «,forc<.«.t of .onm. reguletions L~ . t >\ r f, 4 C L i M . c f / •* V /V ia V. 7^.. A •• ^ • 12. Describe EFFECT OF PROPOSED WORK on nalthbortn, preparclaa a.d o. Uia nelthberttood la gamaral: //’ f /» r./ fj of thie epplieetion, end certifies thst ths informstion wUssion members, •.P^Uad 1. t«.a «.d erract *. th. ba.t .f hU hao-Iad,.: . / .jy .?/> ^ /j'l W.> 4</ ~yi. ■;/. K- / DateApplicant's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date APPLICATION DEADLINE TEN (10) DAYS BEFORE PTANNTNG COMMISSION MEETING ■?Pbb — 7 FEE OWNER TAX PAYER/ MAILIN6 ADDRESS PROPERTY ADDRESS ID /y7 - //'7 - J/fA'e- A> Q niem £s^/^^ 5>./4/£> /krr* /^ ^ -f^OO , r4 (yJti i /^6i> mA^^. *i^3C ^ V'OtK/^^ *’)ltf^ -^- — /jf^f MoL / * “O^Z>c ^^dTD Jt . - ^ M^y C/CTU^ '* J.j^r/C/A<r^. _CfC)t> t R,^/tk^wf-r /Cl i^- ^ a^AA ^ «5 l0^ y 0 ^_________________________ e:ftit^^\ i^l/. Hti(M -----------l4o^'/?e^r/^Wr'^.^ _________/>zy / C PACTS REPACSCHTCO ON THIS SeCUNATt AND TRUt MARE- •ATIOH AS IT ARREARS THIS IS OP THE NEMRERIR COUNTY 0 THE REST OP MV RHOMLEOCE CE OlViSiON K)PERTY ADDRESS ID /?■ >0'-ooo, •»>R/!RSr _______________________ ar>»t cnx>^^ - ^ f.- f*e>o/o n n i- r«i • ** \ Nofirn \ \ \ o \ \ o \ \ \Vii- An-. s\ \ y' \ 'v /\ \ / f. Lor t \ 7i»#c \ \ 23c 00 03 »■- t \ f > Af7' * i Via<icrr #607 iM27eei rcFfTcK \ \ \ \ V.\ fc:. miMimm*^ > 'll miii iiii—I 0* .V/k' ti-' I PlitnMi t k t!: 1 i il i If ^ ^ \'t n ' Ni dmm§0^ ^ tw MMIIMI MR W* ^ v1 V -sv*i— 1 \ - M yf-s A 52 r* « ic4i< ?* *" . —. ^ir^t V ---------* —A-i. ; -s.' //: i *>Ot/« ?i ( S'lmm •£ •• *5*K. »• ’*TY of orono i^^^^lANCgS REQUiRpn density I • "i!Uffl»!L!!iasU4a ACTJJAI V2£iw»crC-- — ___ r Birring mSTrw. VA^ IVJCX r ropc^srcT^Of 75 rt. 75 Ft. ^ardcqvfp U)T AH£j| ®- a»rt.o% ftok. 0 -w rt.ox ;U». 73 _aso pt.7SX ISO -soo rt.30X ^o soo -1000 rt.5SX WAADCOVEH OtlSTlKC **AADC0VI3|^AOPOSOJ ^^AADcqvth 5UX*. TOTAL VXAIAWCZ Lli,S-^ ^ ^OOC^CTI 5i.«n 54.702 54.201 SECTTOig aaiylit ‘•Ckljty OO..I *•->01 X.JOJ y**rAHrr ----------------------------- 8gfr»a, land ♦ Joiyparcl. p,, , v.c.„t •PPllc.tlon ____^_r-.,„„. „----- --------— lot •PP»<c.tlo«, •»••• ------ »•>'•* sround 'PP^o U ob 0T,„,x«r7*r. locuon ------ P,opo..d ~ city w.t^T' **••“‘•tin, eon/on,l„- ------•v.ll.bl, ***'“"* "*"-«>»»on,ip. Iand usf ••*J«ct lot i» iSTRlfCTURBs fBMriag aoiiADig. '••flOloMCj.,, ' PMMtM. rm< "0"-eonlonii^ «.. do fiot p.rfo«.„,. —-«•».0^/*’"" 11 r —.....(IS A As^KssMtari'H _ - - PI* |i 1^1 ^ W|* Shm «o »*®®P _ «ta . hv^.4, #«. ««» Itt4« h«| ■' * «— &(U« JLiJju Hennepin Cty. DOT Hinn. Stete DOT Minn. OMR MCWD LMCD tn I \ i ■ Page 2 UND USE PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS & RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED FINDINGS 1.^ T>.« .pecUl eondlUon. .pplyin* to .truetuf. in th* di.trlct iMMdUtnly .urroundln9 property nnd do not -pply x In Which onid Innd i. locotwJj OP _ _ _«*• condition. J^*^*‘;“'‘to\ppll%nn«"*»»^^ U^’tf“.tructur.. in th. di.trlct in imeeaieialy •urroundin9 property out oo pf j v aeid lend le located. .X' , nec.eeery for the pre.erv.tlon end enjoy^nt o . ^ ^........ ~.... .. - - ........................... mrele or ^enerel welferei OR _ ........ .< «. “ 9enerei welfare. 4o So ^Z’dltin, o* th, propo^d v.ri.nc. -ill not h. contr.ry to th. Int.nt ci th. Coopr.h.n.lv. _ r,irn,^ -Toi»l v.ri.nc. would h. contr.ry to th. int.nt oi th. Coopr.h.n.i.. .nd «.. run or th. tonin. Cod.. ^ .nc. to th. .ppUc.nt. but 1. n.c....ry dlfficultl... OP to .n.*i.t. d«o aifficuity .nd th.r.for. th. ,r.ntin, of .«ch ^ciiiisirc;:r.^.nc. to ..ch .ppnc«,t. ______ ✓ do ^ g. SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL t - ^ So . 1 M T3f*^ *■* it [S'- •I iThii .irfffii ■»: . I. TO:Planning C<Mani88ion FROM:Jeanne Mabuath DATE:March 31, 1981 SUBJECT:#608 Mike Mehner, 3398 North Shore Drive Conditional Use Permit Application - Conditional Use Permit Zoning District - B-2 Applicable Ordinances 31.100 31.105 32.480 Non Conforming Uses Discontinued Use for over a year Conditional Use Permits required for non conforming uses The applicants plan to operate a full service station and a marine fueling and towing service. The proposed use will be at the same level of operation as of the previous owner. A conditional use permit is reoulred because a service station is considered a non conforming use in the B-2 zoning district. As the planner's letter of September 10, 1980, states the original conditional use permit for the non donforming use expires if the use was vacated for over a year. The Union Oil Company representative had asked for special consideration noting several reasons in his responding letter of October 7, 1980. The Marina Committee will review the applicant's marina lisence application at their meeting of April 8, 1981. The files have no record of a formal conditional use permit being issued to the previous owner for the service station operation. There is no record of complaints from neighboring property owners. In fact, we've had residents coming in to complain that the City roust be making it impossible for a service station operation. We assured all that we are con tinually dealing with interested parties but that the economy has been more of a hinderance than the requirements for a conditional use permit review. The Mehners own and operate a full service station in Bloom ington. They plan to buy not lease the operation from Union Oil, The Mehners have been dealy with the Union Oil Company and our staff for the past 6 months. They are fully aware of the limitations of the site in regard to expansion of the service station and the marina operation. They propose no physical changes on the site. 1 #608 Mike Mehner, 3398 North Shore Drive - Conditional Use Peradt March 31, 1981 page 2 The hours of operation will be 7t00 a.n. • 9:00 p.m. Sunday through Saturday. There will be 2 full time eiqployees. The same sign frame%iork will be used by the new owners. Staff has scheduled this application as an action item because the /^ril 6th meeting is the only regular meeting scheduled for this month. Planning Commission should advise staff if additional information is required before the meeting night. 9*00 p.ni. Sunday a employees, new owners. action item because eeting scheduled 1 advise staff if he meeting night. ✓ I^iCATIGII 0^ PROPOSAL (or property) ^ ^ A^CtC/ /"f S//£ 1%/t'{ Z f A.Address Legal Description M APPLICANT NameM\kC MChtAiO/ Tel ClcX^.AiWt.-Vori Address \o9UO k?ci /»»AA^ni\LC bloo ^ OMNBR Name L^W/d/u C/L ca C,)i,C Tel #. Mailing Address i^9o l/t/f//^c Present Zoning /?-AL Present Use _ _ Sketch Plan Review $50 _ _ Subdivision $150 + $i0/Lot _ _ Conditional Use Permit ___ $30.00 ___ Rezoning $250 ___ \^cation $100 (Minimum) PEE /6C>2^ Date ,Rec*d By ____________ Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request ? A JA 7J^, ^Sr? Specify Ordinance Requiremen^|^. l'/'i/.'A i£/”*■ i-Z l .v/*> ( j_Explain your request and reasons for same ^ U T O ut'ifl i /7 /v*<> < f ^ e ^ • «« -«sas«ere - VARIANC ' ^[equired ea _ _Width^ Specify hards] extent of nonconformity ____ Setback F; t'’*S3cplain . I Rear SUBDIVISlI Residential Other, explain No. of Lots CONDITIONAL USB AND OTHER - explain proposed use of property in detail \/ fuLL S/'yj/'/c.v z' - - - - - - - - - - - - - MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE APPLICATION (ttist be submitted 10 days prior to Planning Commission meeting) ^plication completed Plat map section Certificate of survey of property sketch location and setbacks of proposal Construction plans, if applicable 5./ Certified Prope^^jt„Owner* s list o owners within <(30oj) from Hennepin Co. Dept, of Finance A-603 Government Center Stamped, legal sized envelopes(#1 pre**addressed to each of the name on the above list. DATE 90 \Applicant's Signature ^W\ DATE CX»?ner's Signature J:\\ f\ii ^ d or requested by il! Applicant hereby agrees to provide all information requi the Zoning Administrator, city Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commfssion and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay ®11 fees as established by ordinance. 5/78 TYPE OF APPLICATION Sketch Plan Review $50 Subdivision $150 + $iO/Lot Conditional Use Permit $30.00 Rezoning $250 \^cation $100 (Minimum) I Jtec»d 7 t-,. •*>/*>/'j. ♦ i C ^ ^ * '*■ • iN I VJ'A I ' !-?3! Rear explain NO. of lots roperty in detail 4. '/.'/«»/ 1 ^ ’6; • PLICATION ision meeting) Prope5^jt,^Xmer • s list o :hin <(30oJ) from 30. Dept, of Finance trnment Center Legal sized envelopes (#1 ised to each of the name 3ve list. V KquirWd or requested by ey. Planning Commission 3 further agrees to pay 1 WFMlTMKliT OF FINANCt A-tOS AOVtmiMtNT CCNTCA MINlieAFOLia^ MN SS4S7 MiT SItl I CCRTIPY THAT THf PACTS HCPNCSCNTCO OM THIS eCHTIPICATt AHC AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRE SENTATION OP INPORMATIOH AS IT APPEARS TNIS BATE ON THE RECORDS OP THE HENNEPIN COUNTY PINANCE OIVISION. TO THE REST OP MY RNOHLEOSC ANO REUEP. NENNEPIN CO. PINANCE DIVISION DATE E (NVNER JL TAX PAYER/ MAI.IWC ADDRESS S-g T-/I7 E-Z3 ieiug.y F _____S3Sb- NftglH shoPk t>g 3342 ' /VQgTM SMflgg^.C. \V4A.- /V0g.W sHacG r>p %A\il /!V 4i^i Hfit COZ» •! I I PROPERTY ADDRESS 3^4/ /vM RS. MABJiiAt rtiffP cast dOLF Itl> sa^HjyypiAcC, III, sor ABotft!: ^ALE i 4 .TUTA/AAI XAUKA uia IZD DOAI^O f. Ha^osn t.J.? Su&AM L, /Vi£Vggs 3^- stvsen: t:>i? riAMlFLL P t; ALICg J UlUDS 34-z^ - /ygfzm f^rz Nozm ^Mogg" r>g- /v/yl fd/- su Rjeor PB»feK.T/ M' 1 iii.‘ i '*V ' I ■ ' MAR 2 7 1931 /7 5/78 12jdnO • •S',’ Tt mMttCNTIO ON TNtS IRATI AND TNUt RCNRt- ON At IT ANPf AM TNIt P TNI NIHNCPIN eOUNTT It MtT OP MY KNOWLfOOt 473-7367 ITY itDRONO. CITYof ORONO P«» om» bm On iht North Shore of Lake Minnetonkm S«ptenber 10# 1980 \ \ r' r\ // Union Oil Company Property Department , 1650 East Golf Road Schaumburg Illinois 60196 Re* North Shore Union 76 3398 North Shore B-2 Lakeshore Comroercxal Zone Gentlemen; least The above ®®cYtv^has*received n^erous*calls from rufcSLis -Sr-aiy your realtor or property staf*. The existing service station °??''?^J’expires°by'ordinanc^ one pursuSI to% conditional ^ ‘ «Lof U“eo^ned as a service rtrtioJ“?t:r"SctSS? i! IlSfand it cannot “e“rt?« ?rsit Irgiven to potential buyers. If.the service station *""=‘j°"^3j°t‘’|o“the^Mlnn4sltI Statute Fire for permits. SinceMljr# ;aw P.^Olson Ullage Planner APO:kh je“ne'’ji^b4stl^^oning Administrator Mr. Thomas Jacobs, Building Inspec or SZ%) (^7) ; I ; ! I i I Union 76 Division: Eastern Region Union Oil Company of California Pentagon Office Park 4940 Viking Drive. Minneapolis. Minnesota 55435 unien October 7, 1980 City of Orono Attention: Alan P. Olson Village Planner P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay# Minnesota 55323 Re:North Shore Union 76 3398 North Shore Drive Oronc, Minnesota Dear Mr. Clson: In accordance with our meeting on October 6th regarding the Union 76 station on North Shore Drive, I respectfully request that the existing service station use be permitted. We have several prospects for this location and expect to sell it as a service station. We have a substantial investment and a fairly new building at this location and the sale prospects have been rather limited due to the high interest rates, however, we feel confident that we will be able to make a sale in the near future. We feel that there is a need fot a service station in the area as the nearest location would be in Navarre, which would mean driving out of the way for most of the local resi dents. I have also talked with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District regarding the building on the dock and it would be our intention to remodel the building in conformance with the new regulations at such time as the sale is consummated. In the event the station is sold for other use, we are aware that the dock and the underground storage tanks would have to be removed. Again, I reiterate, it is our intention to sell the location as a continued use as a service station and we will continue to maintain the building and grounds until such time it is open and operating again. I appreciate the courtesies extended to me and will put every effort forward to get this location back on stream. Yours truly, • .... G£H:wd cc: Mr. Frank .Mixa, LMCD G. E. Hubbard Division Fcal Estate Representative r:-r--- ■'y * •> y \ K \ \ \^•k \ \ \ \ir^ : ^ -w \ \ \ S'CMit ~ I "z.zto k' •-— ' , ■ y ">.^V,>v?'.,--. . .. ■ !"••.!. Of Oi r. -. . •>. 'V • - r , - -i; t0^ TOt PROMt DATE! SUBJECT: Planning CobmIsalon Jeanne A. Mabusth March 31, 1981 #609 Ruxton R. Strong, 420 Brown Road South Subdivision Work Session ■L^.- , Subdivision - 3 lot plat Zoning District - RR-IB 8 :>i Mr. Strong proposes a division of his 10 acre homestead. The subdivision will be a plat of three lots served by a private road# The road will be designated as a 50 wide outlet. The topography along the south pr^erty line requires a curving of the road and creates an additional outlet. The ownership of that lot should be clarified. i i ^ i4 K, vAV< i V; Septic testing has been submitted for staff review. Staff*s report will be included in the packets for the public hearing on May 4, 1981., ’ V hr f I' p ^,:3 I > - <•V ■ ’^ l. • ' . :" .1*. • .mM -»i «ft • ftM Lid. * ■» • r. 5 > f t -A'i |i t y - 'W>1l’*'•* h1. A f 4 •Alts -1-‘ ■ . 1. . > *. 5 rtj, kd South - D acre honestead. ■erved by a a 50* wide rty line requires al outlet. taff review, s for the public •# * ■ ■ ■: ■ vV-i ■ -.1 •. f-s!• . /a: •; r i i i i ' i CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Land Use Application • # LOCATION OF PROPOSAL (or property) Address 430 M/a Legal Description APPLICANT Name'piJS.ToiJ Tel K>i<4v>o«n 5h-<»u/4li i^D, Uy^'VgXl'TYl—SS2SJ Tel #_ _ _ _CMNER Name Sn>»m£. Mailing Address _ _ _ _ _ ___ Present Zoning A. ft. "*—LB- TYPE of APPLICATION Sketch Plan Review $50 ^^Subdivision $150 + $10/Lot Conditional Use Permit _ _ $30.00 $50.00 Rezoning $250 Vacation $100 (Minimum) FEE ^ ^^^ * ** /S£a^/ Date Rec * d 3 * 7 ~ _ By . dt» <d<. ^- -- -— Present Use Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request Specify Ordinance Requirements ^ ^OV<=- VARIANCE reqjiired - extent of nonconformity Lot Width Setback Front Rear Other, explain Specify hardships to pr( SUBDIVISION application V<1, Residential Other, explain No. of Lots 3. COroiTIC*»L USE AND OTHER - explain proposed us. of prop«ty in detail : i\ h r minimum material NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE APPLICATION ^Mast. 130 subn\it.ted 10 days prior to Planning Coituniss on ineo oonxjpXotLea.e ' DATE Certificate of survey of property sketch location and setbacks of proposal ' Construction plans, if applicable Certified Property (Vner's list of owners within (300*) from Hennepin Co. Dept, of Finance A-603 Government Center Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#lt pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list. DATE Applicant's Signature t_‘-U —1 « - , -- --- - --— Ovner*s Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ the ell lnfom.ation required or requested by and Snncfl Engineer, city Attorney, Planning ,and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay , an fees as established bv ordinance. APPLICATION tmission meeting) 'roperty (X#ner*s list of in (300') f**)“ • . Dept, of Finance nment Center tgal sized envelopes l#i'- ed to each of the names e list. i or requested by j inning Commission 1 -_ to pay f 1 NOTICE OF JOINT MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION and CITY COUNCIL WEDNESDAY, APRIL 15, 1981 7:30 PM AGENDA 1. Comprehensive Plan Review - Status Report 2. Recodification ~ Status Report 3. Procedures for Ordinance Revisions 4. Performance Standard Reviews a) Fences b) Accessory Buildings c) Guest Houses & Duplexes d) Setback Standards e) Land Alteration Projects 5. Suggestions solicited for future topics NOTE:This meeting was scheduled by the City Council at their March 23, 1981 meeting. Papers on each of the above perfomance standard reviews will be mailed at least a week before the meeting. . J* t: « •v ' i ’ ♦ ^ TO:Walter R. Benson, Planning Coininission, Council FROM:Alan P. Olson DATE:March 23, 1981 SUBJECT: Ordinance Revisions Procedures I cun now fully involved in working on revisions to the zoning and subdivision ordinances again. Scheduling of joint Planning Conunission and Council meetings is in order. This time, with recodification in progress, we should work toward developing an entirely new, updated and reorganized code. Substantive changes can be discussed and decided one at a time, and then all integrated into a revised doc ument for public hearing. If adoption is done as part of adoption of the recodified code, substantial cost savings will result because in that case the text of the code need not be published. Only in exceptional circumstances should changes be formally adopted prior to recodification since this will duplicate effort and delay the recodifier. Consequently, I will prepare items for discussion on an abstract basis without getting into final, legal language. Items will be separated by category. First, I will briefly describe the existing regulation. Then I will list some of the issues or problems we have experienced. Finally, I will suggest some changes in content to solve the issue. Council and Planning Commission members should expect to make con tent decisions based on the purpose they want the ordinance to accomplish. These decisions will then be drafted into the final document for review prior to public hearing. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: A<tolnistrator Planning Commission 5Si5£i!la.RSaHlations Alan p. Olson, city yia„n„ March 25, igei Ordinance Revisions - Pences 31.43? rves - --'a-^a.cu. -- —ilne permits fences and wan. . "“1“ thoroughfare31-«4 permits fences and «>oroughfar any Side or%%,“\-Us not over 6 ft. ehove gtade i„gx^aae an • Sections 35.047 ?i; ooo residential prop!riyf^ ^ - -------- WUZZJ prS^IS?f”' ‘»t “aJn^-|f‘ «“arf^e"i*| aJd^re^lVnU i 4. a%e-i- -dT “ The ki-^4.^ r.. .... ^ Issues g —y. —aire "an addi ™a|!“%®;!41«n9 code section 301^-2 ,es " « «• »^» or°!!ss?" o 1. affect views! I^aff ^^^'eshore yards whirh yards, thereby,^akeshoreadversely not clearly written I height to 3!i/? ?! "front"y wratten an the ordinance *»«t this is ii ■ 2. 3. Solid Walls are permitted the scune as fences. There is no distinction between above ground walls and retaining walls. 4.Certain definitions are lacking, such as "wall”, where height is measured, "major thoroughfare", etc. 5.Screening should be primarily natural material with fences used as secondary screening, not vice-versa. 6.There is no provision for swimming pool or other security fencing. 7.There is no prohibition against hazardous fences like barbed wire or electric fences. 8.There is no differentiation between the needs of urban and rural neighborhoods. 9.Ordinances should protect against typical complaints (view blockage, spite fences) yet permit maximum flexibility to preserve privacy and to keep public involvement to a minimum 10.Ordinances should cover "grey areas" with necessary definitions, prohibitions, permissions, etc. 11. Ordinance should be as simple as possible. Ordinance Suggestions 1. Create a separate section to regulate fences, freestanding walls and retaining walls (take these items out of the non' encroachments" section). 2.Make natural planting the primary screening material with fences to be used only in particular circumstances, or in addition to natural materials; perhaps by conditional use permits. 3.Regulate permanent "walls" and obtrusive solid or opaque "fences" more stringently than open fences. 4. 5. Require swimming pool fencing. Prohibit hazardous fencing in urban areas, yet allow barbed wire or electric fencing where horses are permitted in the rural areas. 6.Establish a "fence permit" system to require staff review prior to construction. This may apply to all fences or, preferably, only to solid fences, walls, or fences over 3-1/2 ft. high. -2- i\ { if- * [4:/ Planner’s Detailed Suggestions Lakeshore Yards a) Prohibit solid fences or walls of any height b) Allow retaining walls by conditional use permit when necessary to control erosion, but limit height and require screening. (Allow staff to approve such walls without conditional use permit review in emergency situations where slippage is occurring or has occurred). c) Allow open design, max. 42" high fences if located 75 feet or more from the shoreline. d) Allow open design, maximum 42" high fences along side property lines, but not closer than 10 ft. from the highwater elevation, only if; 1) adjacent property owner agrees in writing; or 2) Council approves a conditional use permit OPTION: prohibit all fencing without a variance. Hardships would be difficult if not impossible to prove, hence variances unlikely. Prohibition may be overly restrictive if neighbors approve as in (d) above. Urban Front (Street) Yards a) Prohibit solid fencesjor walls over 24" high b) Allow open design, maximum 42" high fences c) Allow privacy fences by conditional use permit only on lakeshore lots fronting on county roads or designated City streets (such as Casco Point Road ). Limit depth along side property lines. OPTION; prohibit all fencing except by conditional use permit Urban Side or Rear Yards a) Allow open design, maximum 42" high fences b) Allow solid fences and/or fences up to 6 ft. high only if: 1) adjacent property owner agrees in writing; or 2) Council approves a conditional use permit -3- t when necessary re screening, ditional use Ippage is occurring ;ated 75 test } or Hardships would , hence variances strictivo if only on lakeshore y streets (such property lines. L use permit Rural Yards a) Allow open designr maximum 42" high fences b) Allow open design, maximum 6 Ft. high fences of wood, barbed wire, or single strand electric wire around pastures and paddocks actively used for agriculture or the keeping of horses in compliance with other zoning regulations. Minimum lot size is three acres. c) Allow solid fences and/or fences up to 6 Ft. high in side or rear yards only if: 1) adjacent property owner agrees in writing? or 2) Council approves a conditional use permit Other Fences & Walls a) Allow retaining walls by staff permit, except by conditional use permit if within 75 Ft. of lakeshore. Set maximum height for retaining walls in yard areas - suggest 42 inches. b) Allow solid fences, or fences higher than permitted above, by staff permit if located to meet reguired building setbacks. Excimple: tennis court fences must meet setbacks. c) Require at least 42" high securitv fences around swimming pools. d) Prohibit kennel fencing within setback areas regardless of height. Define kennel as a confined area for keeping 1 or more dogs. e) Set standards for non-residential fencing similar to above, with setbacks amd screening around storage area. Approvals Neighbor approval is not normally allowed by statute in zoning matters. I suggest that Council approve by conditional use peinnit with strict standards being established as the basic reauriement, with a provision waiving Council review if the written consent is provided. t. high only if: ing; nit -4- 4b ^ TO;Dick Benson, City Administrator FROM:Alan P. Olson, City Planner DATE;March 25, 1981 SUBJECT;Ordinance Revisions -* Accessory Buildings Existing Regulations 31.310; 31.320; 31.330; 31.340: 31.350; 31.360 31.370 31.380 31.435 38.201 34.031 no accessory structure allowed before a principle structure maximum height is same as principle building, except barns and stables allowed higher with Council approval maximum area 1,000 sq. ft. except barns, stables and green houses. This is also building code maximum area for residential accessory buildings and for buildings without frost footings. no accessory building permitted in front yards except on lakeshore lots conditional use permit required for all accessory buildings on through lots prohibits dwelling use of accessory buildings 10 ft. setbacks required to principle buildings garage doors facing street must be set back 30 ft. accessory buildings permitted in rear yards with 5’ setback garages permitted in side or rear yards with 10' setback barns and stables require 150 ft. setback Issues 1. There is no limit on the number of accessory buildings allowed on any lot 2. There is no correlation between lot size and setback or accessory building size 3. All urban and rural zones have the same standards despite different needs 4. Residential and commercial districts have the same standards 5. Docks are not specifically addressed imam r« r*ni r: f L* I •IiIiKT? r«) ^ p 9 fi* I o w rci« •14 4 111 ^•Til • »9ef*i r« »■ I r« 1 lew* • i 'i. r : '--t TO:Dick Benson« City Administrator City Council Planning Commission FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Alan P. Olson, City Planner March 26, 1981 Ordinance Revisions - Guest Houses and Duplexes Existing Regulations 34.027 - allows guest houses by conditional use permit and defines it as a separate dwelling on an undivided lot. All "regular lot requirements" must be met. 30.040 - includes the same definition of a guest nouse as 34.027 except here it is an accessory separate dwelling. 34.029 -allows duplexes by conditional use permit on any single lot within 200 ft. of any commercial district. Issues 1.There is no provision for attached guest houses, except if regulated as duplexes. In-law apartments are popular and should be includea. 2. The existing definitions are contradictory or vague. What are "regular" lot requirements? lot area? setback? 3.Duplexes are allowed anywhere adjacent to commercial districts. Is this beneficial or not? Should lot area be increased for duplexes? Parking and other standards must be addressed. 4.What is the policy on sewer and water assessments and/or service charges? 5.Separate guest houses often have been rented as apartments and/or have been divided off onto separate lots. New reviews should recognize this likelihood. 1 * Ordinance Suggestions 1. Improve definitions. Dwelling Unit; A single residential unit providing complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. (Exactly per State Building Code) Apartment; A separate dwelling unit in a building containing two or more attached dwelling units where access to each unit is gained from an interior corridor. Townhouse; A separate dwelling unit attached by party-wall to one or more other dwelling units where each unit has separate access direct from the exterior. Townhouse units may be located on one (;individed lot or on separate lots under individual owner ship. Duplex; A building located on one undivided lot containing two attached dwelling units each having separate access direct from the exterior. Dwelling, Detached; A single dwelling unit completely surrounded on the same lot by open yard space. Condominium; An arrangement wherein real estate is divided as to ownership, portions of which are designated for separate ownership and the remainder of which is designated for undivided common ownership solely by the owners of the individual portions. (see Minnesota Statutes 515 et. seq^ J In-Law Apartment; A portion of a single faunily dwelling having facilities that constitute a separate dwelling unit, but where primary access is gained solely from within the principle dwelling unit. Where such ar. apartment has separate exterior access, three or more bedrooms, or encompasses more than 600 sq. ft., it shall be defined and regulated os an attached guest house or as a duplex. Guest House, Attached; A separate dwelling unit attached to a single family dwelling on an undivided lot intended £( t the sole use of the occupants of the principle dwelling unit, tlic-ir domestic employees, or their non-paying guests. An attached guest house shall not be used as rental property unless the building and property also conforms to all zoning reouirements for duplexes. -2- 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Guest House, Detached; A separate detached dwelling unit located on nhe seune undivided lot as a single family dwelling intended for the sole * of the occupants of the principle dwelling univ., their domestic employees, or their non-paying guests. A detached guest house shall not be used as rental property unleus it shall first have been subdivided off onto . separate lot conforming to all zoning requirements for that district. Allow in-law apartments in any single fcunily residence. Allow attached guest houses by conditional use permit on any single family lot, conforming to all standard setbacks. Allow detached guest houses by conditional use permit in any zoning district, provided: a) b) The lot contains at least twice the minimum zoning area The guest house setbacks meet all principle building setback requirements c) The guest house location is such that it can, in the future, be subdivided onto a separate conforming lot Allow duplexes on any undivided lot within 200 ft. of a B or l District (as per current regulations), if the lot contains 150% of the minimum lot area required for single detached dwellings. Require at least four off-street parking spaces. Note: attached double residences on separate lots (Hussman) are not duplexes but instead are two-unit townhouses which should be reviewed under Planned Residential District regulations. On the other hand, duplexes may include condominium ownership where each unit (and perhaps a small amount of yard space) is separately owned but located within one undivided lot under common ownership. Assessment Policy. Duplexes are obviously two separate dwellings which contribute double flow. Guest houses are a problem in that, as non-rental units, the use and service requirements often are less. On the other hand, the detached guest houses are often occupied full-time and may be divided off onto separate lots. SAC would consider ?r.y quest house as a separate dwelling and would require a second charge. Therefore: Charge 1 assessment to:detached dwellings (including in-law apartment) each town house unit Charge 2 assessments to: duplexes (one per unit) house with attached guest house house with detached guest house Charge 80% per unit to: multi-family (3+) buildings .-^per SAC^ -3- il 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Guest House, Detached; A separate detached dwelling unit located on the Scune undivided lot as a single family dwelling intended for the sole use of the occupants of the principle dwelling unit, their domestic employees, or their non-paying guests. A detached guest house shall not be used as rental property unless it shall first have been subdivided off onto a separate lot conforming to all zoning requirements for that district. Allow in-law apartments in any single family residence. Allow attached guest houses by conditional use permit on any single family lot, conforming to all standard setbacks. Allow detached guest houses by conditional use permit in any zoning district, provided; a) The lot contains at least twice the minimum zoning area b) The guest house setbacks meet all principle building setback requirements c) The guest house location is such that it can, in the future, be sxibdivided onto a separate conforming lot Allow duplexes on any undivided lot within 200 ft. of a B or I District (as per current regulations), if the lot contains 150% of the minimum lot area required for single detached dwellings. Require at least four off-street parking spaces. Note: attached double residences on separate lots (Hussroan) are not duplexes but instead are two-unit townhouses which should be reviewed under Planned Residential District regulations. On the other hand, duplexes may include condominium ownership where each unit (and perhaps a small cimount of yard space) is separately owned but located within one undivided lot under common ownership. Assessment Policy. Duplexes are obviously two separate dwellings which contribute double flow. Guest houses are a problem in that, as non-rental units, the use and service requirements often are less. On the other hand, the detached guest houses are often occupied full-time and may be divided off onto separate lots. SAC would consider any quest house as a separate dwelling and would require a second charge. Therefore: Charge 1 assessment to: detached dvrellings (including in-law apartment) each town house unit Charge 2 assessments to: duplexes (one per unit) house with attached guest house house with detached guest house Charge 80% per unit to: multi-family (3+) buildings .-^per SAC^ -3- r . OPTl^: Perhaps property with guest houses should only be assessed i-l/2 units, especially if only one stub serves the lot; however. service charges must remain whole units (1 or 2), a second SAC is still required, and in the case of detached units, additional assessments would be due if the property were ever divided. The extra booJc-work would be simplified if the suggested two units were originally assessed. ;i -4- ' f. . 1. 1 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT; Dick Benson, City Administrator Alan P. Olson, City Planner March 26, 1981 Ordinance Revisions - Setback Performance Standards Issues 1.Existing standards vary the setback requirements by zoning district, not actual lot size. Especially in the 2 and 5 acre zones, many variances have been reviewed because the basic standards are impossible to apply on the many substandard lots of record. If required setbacks were correlated to lot size, staff could issue permits with less delay and no adverse effect on existing situations. 2.Existing accessory building setbacks are confusing and some what contradictory. They are less- than the principle building setbacks, unrealistically so in the 2 and 5 acre zones. Making accessory and principle building setbacks the seune will simplify writing, understanding and enforcing the ordinance, and will provide realistic rural setbacks consistent with ordinance intent. Performance Standard Comparision Table Existing regulations shown with suggested changes in parenthesis: Lot Area 1/2 acre 1 acre 2 acre 5 acre Width 100 140 200 300 Front yard 30 35 50 100 Rear yard - Princ.30 30 50 (3 a)100 (3 abc) - Access.5 (10)5 (10)5 (30)5 (50) Side yard - Princ.10 10 30 (3 a)50 (3 abc) - Access.10 10 10 (30)10 (50) •f.T'-VS Suggested Changes 1. Make side setbacks the same for principle and accessory buildings 2. Make accessory building rear setback saune as side setback 3.In 2 & 5 acre zones, reduce required side and rear setbacks for undersized lots of record; (area or lot width variances would still be required for new construction, but existing houses could be expanded or accessory buildings added without having to apply unrealistic setback standards); a) b) c) lots less than 1-1/2 acres: use 1 acre side & rear standards lots 1-1/2 - 4 acres in size: use 2 acre side & reeu: standards lots over 4 acres (in 5 acre zone): use 5 acre side & rear standards TO;Walter R. Benson, Planning Commission & Council FROM;Alan P, Olson DATE;Marcli 3, 1981 SUBJECT; Ordinance Revisions Land Alteration Projects Existing Regulations Section 31.700 (Ord 167 in 1974) prohibits excavation, grading, filling or dredging of rock, sand, gravel, dirt or similar material within the City of Orono without a Conditional Use Permit issued by the City Council. Section 31.705 provides an exception for normal and customary grading in the area of an existing or newly constructed building, or for a driveway serving said building, provided the building inspector approves same at the time a permit is issued. Issues 1. 2. 3. 4. 31.700 may be overly restrictive in that it applies to all lands in the City and to any amount of work however minor. Lakeshore and wetlands still need special orotection. Controls are required to ensure no adverse effect on neigh boring properties. Those projects not affecting lakeshore, wetlands or neighbors could proceed with less hassel or delay if staff could approve the permits, or in the case of very minor work, if permits were not required. Suggested Ordinance Content 1. 2. 3. 4. Prohibit grading, excavation, filling or dredging on the bed of public waters or within designated wetlands. Any such work would first require a variance. (example; loss of navigability to an existing riparian lot may justify dredging). Exclude dredging by government agencies in designated lake channels. Allow by Conditional Use Pemit grading, excavation, filling, dredging, seawalls or retaining walls within 75 feet of any lakeshore or within 26 feet of any designated wetlands; or any grading, excavation or filling which in the interpretation of the City Engineer may affect drainage from or onto neigh boring properties. Exclude rip ranoing from Conditional Use Permit requirements. Allow by Permit approvable by staff;grading, excavation or filling elsewhere in the City, including normal rip rapping and building construction grading. Allow by Blanket Permit (no application required) minor grading or landscaping done by hand anywherejor if by machine, if less than (20) cubic yards and not within 75 feet of the shoreline or 26 feet of anv wetland. ir t <»l , j ! \ - t ■«»■ '*ir •.’/V V j - -- ..........................................................................................................................................................—' ■ '^r y I ' . 1 *■•rr'\ L f ,(■• #■ ’ ^' '— '' ■■ /i, ■ //A I I' i / [' \\:!//‘i/^y^^'''.... (s; M -' ......-’/*' ' ’ ; / • r' ■' ,//■ / I •■,;- \ \ \ • ^ '■ M:' . _' ■\ \ ■■'71' /V Ln ' \ ■-• * — —,. ,• .......................................................................... N ■■ . * 1 / • * '. •* • *• » •*• • » * » i , *••»!••• 0m»y ^ # -V IH '' 4ik .4^^^ ^ iri /l(i;|-^ ]if ij I' - ifTTi '"y ^ M, ^ #-«'. 4ik. It ^ n' (ff^-fm^^i ^___ ^ M j-fH* 'X< i! ■\\' k ft i# a i? S^ a ■■V \