HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-19-1980 Planning PacketS. -
t*
!
agenda
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, FFBRUAE'i 19, 1980
COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 7:30 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
1. Call to Order/Roll
ACTION ITEMS
2. Recommendation - Stubbs Bay Rezoning (B-2 to .
Review of Telephone I'Poll taken of each P. C. member
3, Recommendation - Proposed Amendments to Accessory Structure Ordinance
WORK SESSION
4. #538 Carol Moore, 4701 West Branch Road - SUBDIVISION
5. Planning Commission to list questions concerning legal implications
of Land use Applications for City Attorney’s Outline
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
6. Meeting of January 28, 1980
INFORMATION ITEMS
-Council's recommendation for the Navarre Lane Vacation
-Meeting Schedule Calendar for 1980
-Review of Joint Council/Planning Commission Meeting on
February 4, 1980
mmJC'
M
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Council #
Alan P. Olson, Village Planner
February 7, 1980
SUBJECT: Propose! Rezoning - James K. McCleary property
3445 Bayside Road
After discussions with the City Staff, McCleary on January 15,
has proposed rezoning of his property to facilitate future subdivision
and development of the land for three single family residences.
A public hearing is scheduled for 7:00 P.M. on Monday, February 11, 1980
to review this rezoning prop>osal. There has been mailed notice to all
owners of property shown on the attached map and published notice in the
Sun on January 30, 1980 and February 6, 1980. Attached are two letters
received from neighbors in support of the rezoning.
The Planning Commission was scheduled to review the proposal at their
regular meeting of February 4, 1980, but this meeting was cancelled.
Consequently, the staff reviewed the proposal with the individual
Planning Commission members and by noil has received the Planning
Commission's unanimous recommendation for approval of the rezoning.
The attached map shows a suggested subdivision arrangement which has
been reviewed by staff for conformance with zoning, flood plain and
septic system regulations. This is not an actual subdivision application
and may not be the final arrangement, but based upon this proposal,
three residential dwellings could be built on the property provided a
mound-type septic system was used for grey-water disposal and holding
tanks were used for all toilet wastes.
Assuming comments at the public hearing are favorable, staff and the
Planning Commission recommend the following action:
1.Adoption of the attached ordinance rezoning the property from
B-2 to LR-IA.
2.Approval of an agreement with James McCleary whereby he will
apply for subdivision of the property including all necessary
variances and wherein the City would authorize commercial dock
use of the property during 1980 while the subdivision review is
in process.
COUNCIL MEETING - FEBRUARY 11, 1980
Council held public hearing, adopted rezoning ordinance No. 228,
and approved agreement with Jim McCleary as drafted by staff and
McCleary except with clarification of Item #7.
limiiilltillliiiirillii J
L
I i
t .
I r
>, . ■ .-v«. I, • •
i.
FEB o 0BO
CITY 0^ ORONO
25406 Lakt Road
Bay Vlllaga, Ohio 44140
February 2, 1980
Nr. Alan P. 01non
City of Orono
P.O. Box 66
Cryatal Bay, Hinnaaota
Dear Nr. Olaont
55323
Ua will not ba able to attend the public hearing
February 11, but we would Ilka to axpraaa our aupport
for the raxonlng of the Stubba Bay.Narlna property to
alngla faiaily raaldancaa.
Sincerely,
or. 6 Nra. Vincent H. Laraon
V-
ii
EMORY SMITH
9400 BAVSIOeMOAO
ij
11l(glEllWE
FEB 3 I960 .
CITY OF ORONO
/ V / / / ■ 9/(a-i^yy‘/f^/-^
A.-^ 0^^ ^yy
llr'U ^
4
7
7
February 6, 1980
Dear Council Members:
In reference to your letter regarding a public meeting on the
Stubbs Bay property belonging to James McCleary.
How can you even consider letting him build three houses on that
property* One house would be great* It would clean up the awful
mess that we have had to live with because you vK>uld not let him
rebuild a public marina (which we would have preferred)*
In the first place, he does not have six acres, which would be
required for three houses according to Orono rules and regulations
for new houses* Granted, it has already been plotted, but only
for a marina ~ not houses*
In the second place, how can he be allowed to put in three septic
tanks and three drainfieids when you would not allow others on
higher land in the same area to put them into existing houses or
into new ones* If you would like names and addresses I will give
them to you*
If a house burns down, would you let anyone else put up two instead
of one - if they have the room - but not four acres? Consider
it, because whatis good for one should be good for everyone*
I really think, if you let him build houses it should only be
one*
Sincerely
Mr* i Mr:^* James K. Fulkerson
230 Tonka Ave*
Long Lake, MN* 55356
\I
\
.'>S:
N •"
J
1/ ^
* >.\
<2»>V\
A <v «-
\
1 / -5^ A'\ 4.
JtS^ . «* ^ •' A - f'
s” .■■;At. ^‘.• .'^ .'■■<i>‘^ V Vx
C.
• ^
/
I*
V
inn
■5»
^(i
>-
iMbv
1
-
1
rL
ORDINANCE NO. 220
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF ORONO BY REZONING
CERTAIN PROPERTIES IN THE CITY FROM B-2 LAKESHORE BUSINESS
DISTRICT TO LR-lA ONE FAMILY LAKESHORE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
The City Council of the City of Orono ordains:
Section 1. The municipal code of the City of Orono is
amended by amending the Official Zoning Map and Zoning Use District
Boundaries for certain parcels of land legally described as follows:
Block 7 of Bayside Addition and Lots 21, 22, and 25
of Auditor's Subdivision No. 203, Hennepin County,
Minnesota;
which parcels are hereby rezoned from B-2 Lakeshore Business District
to LR-lA One Family Lakeshore Residential District.
Section 2. This ordinance shall be published in the Lake
Minnetonka Sun and shall be effective upon publication.
Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular
4>Ko 1 1 ^ X980*meeting held on the 11 day of February
William B. Van Nest, Mayor f
ATTEST:
Walter R.^i^sonV^City AdliTT^wistrator
Published in the Lake Minnetonka Sun on the 20 day of February » 1980.
N.
liilte i frifr ^ - ■ *
Telephone 473-7357
CITYof ORONO
Post OfTice Bos 66*CryaUl Bay, Minnesota 55323*Municipal Oflioaa
On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka
February 12, 1980
Mr. James McCleary
4240 Reiland Lane
Shoreview,
Minnesota 55112
■M
s'.!**-
Re: Stubbs Bay Rezoning & Agreement
Dear Mr. McCleary:
As Mr. Oberhauser is aware, the rezoning public hearing was held on
February 11, 1980 after wh.tch the City Council approved the rezoning
ordinance No. 228 attached and the rezoning agreement as negotiated
between yourself and the City.
The Council did want to clarify Item #7 on Page 3. I understand that
Mr. Oberhauser and Mr. Malkerson will meet to decide final wording
and to have the draft retyped for signature. For everyone's information,
my understanding of the clarification would have #7 rewritten as follows:
7.The area shown on Exhibit B as Outlot B is intended to be
platted as an outlot for purposes of sale to the owner of
Lot 23 immediately north of the outlot across County Road 84,
or to another nearby property, owner, for placement of one
single family dock. Outlot B shall be owned in common with
Lot 1 of this subdivision and shall not be used for any
purpose until such sale is completed. Outlot B shall be
subject to an open space easement, in a form acceptable to
the City, to ensure that it can only be used for the aforesaid
single family dock.
i
I have enclosed a reduced copy of Mr. Coffin's January 21, 1980 preliminary
plat to be used as Exhibit B to the agreement.
The City will sign the agreement as soon as the final draft is typed and
signed by Mr. and Mrs. McCleary.
The next step is for you to complete the forms and apply for the 1980
marina license and the subdivision. I do need the completed applications
but the fees will be waived per the agreement.
Sin
in Olson
llage Planner
APO:kh
cc:Mr. Louis Oberhauser
Mr. Bruce Malkerson
- --- --
■ liim
■ X
^ ■ ^#*(*
(*■
REZONING AGREEMENT FOR PROPERTY
KNOWN AS THE STUBB'S BAY MARINA PROPERTY
* ' .
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 15th day of
January, 1980, by and between James K. McCleary and Carolynne M.
McCleary, their heirs, successors and assigns who are the
owners of the property legally described on Exhibit A attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference, hereinafter
referred to as "Owners” and the City of Orono, a municipal
corporation, hereinafter referred to as the "City."
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Owners have requested the City ic change
the zoning of the above described property from B-2: Lakeshore
Business District to an LR*-1A: One Family Lakeshore Residential
District to allow for the development of the above described
property consisting of approximately two acres and 240
lineal feet of shoreline on Lake Minnetonka, into three
separate single family lots with homes thereon, and
WHEREAS, the City has found that the proposed rezoning
of said property pursuant to this rezoning agreement would
be in the public interest and would promote the health,
safety and welfare of the public, and
WHEREAS, in order to induce the City to change the
zoning of the above described property and to grant the
variances related thereto as provided for herein, the
Owners agree to lay out, develop, maintain and restrict
the development of the above described property as herein
after set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed that for and in consider
ation of the City's adopting an ordinance rezoning the
above described property from B-2: Lakeshore Business
District to LR-IA: One Family Lakeshore Residential District
with variances granted as set forth hereinafter, the Owners
agree to restrict the development of the above described
property as set forth hereinafter:
1. The development of the property shall take place
generally in accordance with the concept plan, a copy of
which is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
2. A preliminary and final plat in conformance with
Exhibit B shall be submitted to the City for its approval
as soon as possible by the Owners.
I*-
3. That prior to final plat approval, the Owners will
comply with all the applicable rules, regulations, ordinances
and la«rs of the City and will submit all information necessary
as usual for the review and approval of a preliminary and final
plat.
4. That the above described property will be restricted
to the development of that property into no more than three
single family homes each of which will be built on its individual
lot.
5. Any homes built on the above described property
shall comply with the following:
A. The homes shall be built at least one foot above
the floodplain which floodplain has an elevation of 931.5 and
at least one foot above the sheet flow which has an elevation
of
B. The homes shall be built at least 75 feet from
the lakeshore of Lake Minnetonka.
C. The homes must meet the State Building Code.
D. The homes must comply with the applicable rules,
regulations, ordinances and laws of the City constructed with
the variances granted herein.
E. Each home shall be constructed in such a way so
that the gray water from each home will be treated in a gray
water on-site disposal system, subject to approval by the City,
which system will be located as shown on Exhibit B. That area
shall be sufficient in size to allow for the primary treatment
site and an alternative treatment site.
F. Each home shall be built so that the toilet
wastes shall be collected in a holding tank, subject to
approval by the City, which holding tank shall be pumped
as necessary by the owner of the home.
G. The area to be utilized for the gray water
disposal on-site system shall be described in an easement
for the benefit of the three lots or shall be a separate
outlet, the ownership of which shall be by a homeowiers*
association, or some other legal arrangement to insure that
the o%mers of the three lots share equally in the cost of
the ownership of that lot or easement, the maintenance,
repair or replacement of the gray water on-site disposal
-2-
a .
i
i4
I i
-ii
i. .
3. That prior to final plat approval, the Owners will
conply with all the applicable rules, regulations, ordinances
and la«rs of the City and will submit all information necessary
as usual for the review and approval of a preliminary and final
plat.
4. That the above described property will be restricted
to the development of that property into no more than three
single family homes each of which will be built on its individual
lot.
5. Any homes built on the above described property
shall comply with the following:
A. The homes shall be built at least one foot above
the floodplain which floodplain has an elevation of 931.5 and
at least one foot above the sheet flow which has an elevation
of
B. The homes shall be built at least 75 feet from
the lakeshore of Lake Minnetonka.
C. The homes must meet the State Building Code.
D. The homes must comply with the applicable rules,
regulations, ordinances and laws of the City constructed with
the variances granted herein.
E. Each home shall be constructed in such a way so
that the gray water from each hoiM will be treated in a gray
water on->site disposal system, subject to approval by the City,
which system will be located as shown on Exhibit B. That area
shall be sufficient in sise to allow for the primary treatment
site and an alternative treatment site.
F. Each home shall be built so that the toilet
wastes shall be collected in a holding tank, subject to
approval by the City, which holding tank shall be pumped
as necessary by the owner of the home.
G. The area to be utilized for the gray water
disposal on-site system shall be described in an easement
for the benefit of the three lots or shall be a separate
outlet, the ownership of which shall be by a homeowners*
association, or some other legal arrangement to insure that
the owners of the three lots share equally in the cost of
the ownership of that lot or easement, the maintenance,
repair or replacement of the gray water on-site disposal
I
-2-
j
f1 'I
system; the agreements therefor shall be subject to the
approval of the City Attorney.
6. Variances are hereby granted for each of the
proposed lots as shown on Exhibit B as follows and shall
be valid for ten years:
A. Lot Area: The average minimum lot area shall
be 21,780 square feet including its share of the outlot for
on-site sewer system.
7S feet.
B. Lot Width: The minimum lot width shall be
C. Minimum setback from Private or Public Roads:
20 feet.
D. Minimum setback from Side Lot Lines: 10 feet.
E. Minimum Distance Between Houses: 20 feet.
7. The area on Exhibit B with approximately 100 in
width at the road at the northwest corner of the property
may be subdivided off in such a way so that that property
can be sold to the owier of the property immediately north
of County Road 64. That parcel of property to be sold
shall be subject to an open space easement, in a form accept
able to City, to insure that it can only be used for the
placement of one single family dock.
8. During the calendar year 1980, the Owners may apply
for a permit to allow for the use of the property and the
existing docks in front thereof as a limited commercial
marina, and the City shall grant a permit for 1980 for the
marina which coranercial mariiui shall be limited as follows:
A. No iBore than a total of 55 boats may be stored
on the premises or at slips attached to the dock or sioored
in front of the property during 1980.
property
B.
C. No structure shall be constructed, erected or
placed above or upon the property, including without limita
tion, docks, piers, signs, billboards, hardcover or roads of
any nature whatsoever, accessory buildings, or any other struc
ture or iiiprovement which is not presently existing on the
There may be no winter storage of boats on the
' -u
-3-
f
property, which is limited to one storage shed
present docks, except that portable toilets as necessary
and a garbage dumpster may be erected.
D. The present docks may be reconstructed in the
same position that they are presently and
to make them safe for the 1980 boating season subject to
plans to be first approved by the City.
I
9. During any time period in 1980, when the property
is used in any way for commercial marina pur^ses,
1.
tii 3ctivitl.. stall tav. be.n fro»
the property
11. In addition to any other remedy the City may
the covenants and restrictions contained herein may be enforc d
by injunction.
12 Any violation by the 0%mers of the restrictiOTS
covenants'herein shall constitute a dJv**of^able by up to $500 penalty and 90 days in jail for each y
offense end violation#
13. All the provisions hereof shall run with the
oroperty and shall bind the heirs, successors, representatives,
" ...isn. Of th. 0»»r. .nd tta
thia aoreewent or a short fonn thereof at the Ci y
tion. may be filed in the chain of title for the property and
<ihe Owners agree to execute whatever documents are necessarytSrSllS, of this «9t.e»ent or . short for. tb««.f.
14. The above described property is hereby rezoned
from B-2 to LR-IA.
for herein, the denial of the 1979 marina
property, and the negotiation for and execution of this
agreement.
'1
16. The variance* granted herein and the
the final plat for the property shall be rescinded and be
null and void if the Owners breach the
and the owners fail to cure the breach Jv.
notice thereof. In such event, ®ithproperty shall be limited to one single family lot %.itn
one house thereon.
17. In the event Owner, submit a tinal *"
1980, in compliance with this agreement and the City has
not approved the final plat within 90 days thereof, a*
provided herein, then this agreement shall be null and
void.
18. This offer by Owners shall remain open for
acceptance and shall be binding upon the Owners if signed
by the City by February 15, 1980.
19. City releases Owner for having operating a Marina
in 1979 without a permit and waives any rezoning fees and
licensing fees due under the terms of this agreement.
CITY OF ORONO
And Walter R. Benson,
Clerk/Administrator
James McCleary
Carolynne M. Mccieary
f
>i
I. ' i
irJOUfmEh'
-5-
1:i
william B. Van west, Mayo:
;■ I- i>5i*•
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) S8.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
this
The foregoing instrument was ac)cnowledged before roe
day of •_ _ _ , 1980, by James McCleary
and Carolynne M. McCleary, husband and wife.
• «-4
■P'wm
V a;:.
■
iik.
} .
Notary Public
\ i)**
9^'
r>-..
; » . y!.. .! ■
ttlr-.y-'-
, v; •‘../
'm 1
WKM
i!
9
5
fli
%
K ^ O ^ ^
3 "{^
1 ^ i2 =s 5
’v ‘
L • ■
! m
\:
Planning Commission and Council #538
Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator
February 14, 1980
SUBJECT: #538 Carol Moore, 4701 West Branch Road - SUBDIVISION
WORK SESSION
Zoning District RR-IB
Subdivision - 2 lot plat, total acreage 11.153 Acres
Staff has recommended a platting for the two lot division proposed by
the Williaun B. Moores. They were advised of the additional expenses
involved in a metes and bounds division with lengthy legal descriptions
for wetlands and lot configurations such as the one proposed. The
Moores want the newly created lot to abut the public road. The City
has no problem with lot alignments of this kind in fact it is preferred.
Access - access for both lots will be off West Branch Road. Lot 2 will
grant a driveway and utilities easement in favor of Lot 1. Applicant
should be advised that the City has granted preliminary approval to the
Valek plat just to the south of the subject property. A public road
coming from the south could provide access to Lot 2. We would recommend
increasing the access corridor from 25* to at least 30*.
Wetlands - there is approximately 1 to 1% acres of wetlands. We will
require a flowage and conservation easement. The wetlands will involve
both lots - plan shows only lot I's involvement.
Lot Specifications - each lot meets the standards of the RR-IB zoning
district. The animal barn is located 150* from the lot line.
Septic Testing - Septic testing will be required for the 4.236 acre lot.
The existing system on Lot 1 will be inspected by the On-Site Systems
Manager and additional area for septic expansion will be reviewed.
Dedications required on the plat:
1. Dedication of right of way for West Branch Road (Cty. Rd. 15).
2. Dedication of right of way for Highview Lane.
3. Dedication of drainage and utility easements.
• ;.:v
#538
ad - SUBDIVISION
Bires
division proposed by
additional expenses
rthy legal descriptions
me proposed. The
lie road. The City
** ^act it is preferred.
anch Road. Lot 2 will
of Lot 1. Applicant
minary approval to the
A public road
would recommend
f wetlands. He will
wetlands will involve
of the RR-lB zoning
•e lot line.
i:236 acre lot.
the On-sxte Systems
111 be reviewed.
* (Cty. Rd. 15).
r • 'IX)CATlCii op PROPOSAI* (or* property)
X«9al Description __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
iw OP ORONO, MIMMESOTA
Land Use Application • *
J TYPE OP REQUEST
V^dfsubdivision $1504$io OOlLoi
Conditional Use $50
fWXXUl^ ——
jCq.^ .'to.sra^./
«"“* VmLrC.g.,,^ ^ir.7 / t,¥V'3)e7
Address
Present Zoning lift. - I ^
^SShing^SO
Riprap $15 ($65)
PEE
Present Use
Date Rec' d P «- /C, ~
By -V-^. hx._ _ _ _ _ _
Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request St d»e
Ordinance Requiggjuents
Eiqplain your request and reasons for same T)iVi<%*c4\ ^ . ^
l£k pev aifi^L^e\ Ver creciikt^^
a® 1 \ou I 1•« <. </ liO .
VARIANCE re^n^red - extent of nonconformity
- - lot Xbea _ _Setback Front
Width ^‘'**%*^ Other*Rear
Specif hardships
SUBDIVISION application Residential Other* explain
_ No. of lots
COHDITK ^LTOE AND OTHER - explain proposed use of property in detail
~“ssjrs^“^'s.ss’s^:ssrs,«
Application completed
section
[cate of survey of property
sketch location and setbacks of
proposal
rnssassiHoff
DATE
Certified Property Owner's list
owners witiiin f300»> (M^)- f
Hennepin Oo. Dept, of Finance
A-603 Governswnt Center
Stamped* legal sised envelopes (#li
pre-addr eased to each of the
on the above list.
DATE
Applicant's Signature
(bfner's Signature i a ^
^ P«>vi<le all informatiOT^^ir^ or requested by
and ^unc?l
all feee as established by ordinance. w pay
- - 5/78
I
#53
> I
w »,
V •’^ f ■
:i- :»h • •» «
ww
I'i ■■■ ■ ^.
■ Jbrtm
mu%--
-vl
5JBaB6g^:>^;:'b
i^is
«t*
|-JrirTWIl5lF^^^«
f-I
• •
vi;•
--------rif*-------^
K t
• ^ '
* ".1 •
* . • • 1i
|r.:
1 ■K ------j
> f , 1
h/ • •• 1I , fc^________ •
I *
I
I
*
m <•
•
- \•m 19a”
^ I
r
MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 28, 1980
The Planning Commission met on the above date. Present
were the following members: Chairman Wilson, Adams,
Hammerel and Jabbour. Mabusth represented the City staff
Mabusth advised the Planning Commission that their
recommendation was sought concerning the realignment
of the south property line for the Scherber subdivision.
The State Building Code requires a minimal 3* setback
from the property line before structural modifications
are required. The Orono Zoning Code requires a 10*
setback for accessory structures. Mabusth noted that
the proposed plan did show a setback for the garage of
10* and the shed and fence were setback 3* from the
property line. Dave Carlson, representing the applicant,
reviewed Mr. Scherber's position. Mabusth noted for the
record Mr. Solomonson's letter in which he states that
he would abide with any decision the Council deems
necessary.
Frahm arrived.
Adams moved to recommend approval of the proposed lot
line realignment as a reasonable solution in consideration
of the other alternatives; to approve the creation of
Outlot A allowing a 3* setback from the encroaching shed,
under the express cc.idltion that Scherber will transfer
'^utlot A to Mr. Solomonson. Outlot A must be legally
combined with Mr. Solomonson's residential lot. It
should be noted that the setback created by this sub
division is unique to that shed. Motion seconded by
Hammerel. Vote: Ayes (5), Nays (0). Motion passed
unanimously.
Wilson noted for the record that the existing condition
was not a result of Scherbe‘:*s doing and that the
maximum required of Scherber by the Planning Commission
was a 3* setback but that the Council has the option
to leave the lot line as is and require the removal
of the shed.
Mr. Haefele and Mr. Martin were present. Mabusth
reviewed for the applicants the responses from Hennepin
County Highway Department and the Public Works Director.
The Planning Commission was to determine if the area of
Navarre Lane to be vacated although no longer used as a
public roadway still involved any public Interest.
ATTENDANCE
7:30 P.M.
PAUL SCHERBER
1420 Bohns Pt.
SUBDIVISION
(#508)
7:40 P.M.
R. HAEFELE,
E. MARTIN & R.
HASSEL
Navarre Ln
VACATION
(#528)
L
MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 28, 1980
PAGE 2
Hennepin Covinty requested an additional 33* of right-
of-way at the west end of Navarre Lane at the inter
section of Shadywood. The Public Works Director stated
that easements for the four utilities would be necessary
and access for maintenance of the two fire hydrants on
the south side of Navarre Lane. Mr. Haefele questioned
the City's concern in vacating just a roadway easement
not a dedicated road. He added that all abutting property
owners would grant the necessary easements for the four
utilities and that the area would be maintained to allow
access to the fire hydrants. Staff was asked to send
pertinent sections of the application file to enable
Mr. Haefele to submit a written response for Council
Meeting of February 11, 1980.
R. HAEFELE,
E. MARTIN, t
R. HASSEL
Navarre Lane
VACATION
(#528) Cont.
Wilson made the following motion:
The proposal as we understand involves the vacation of
Navarre Lane from the intersection of County Road 19
to the Olive Avenue Intersection with the possible
exception of a 33* strip of additional right-of-way
requested by the County and that adjacent property
owners be required to grant underlying easements for
all four utilities including access to the fire
hydrants resulting in the following advantages
benefiting the public interest:
1. abutting property owners plan to clean up and
landscape the entire area.
2. title difficulties for church resolved.
3. property placed back on tax roles, and
4. eliminate need of City to maintain street area.
The difficulties of the Planning Commission to come to
grips with the proposal is the issue of safety involving
both fire hydrants located in street right-of-way which
remain important for public safety requiring the City
to maintain the access to hydrants offsetting benefit
of vacation. In the absence of any direction as to
possible use of the hydrant, we are recommending that
just so much of Navarre Lane be vacated to uncloud the
Church's real estate title* Ad2uns seconded the motion
with an additional comment. He advised that before a
vacation of the whole street can be considered, an
adequate review and study must be made of the exact
location of all four utilities and the proposed land
scape plan for the area. Vote: Ayes (5), Nays (0).
Motion passed unanimously.
MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 28, 1980
PAGE 3
Nr. and Mrs. Butler were present. They presented
photographs taken of the existing driveway from
County Road 19 and the severity of the slope. They
again stated their concern with the safety of such
a situation. Mabusth noted for the record some of
the points that would be reviewed by staff:
1. Possible elimination of one of the
off County Road 19.
2. Location of additional parking area to..' four
cars along County Road 19.
3. Egress from site allowed only through Rest
Point Road driveway.
Chairman Wilson stated this item would be tabled
pending receipt of reports from members of the City
staff.
Frahm moved to approve the Minutes of J2uiuary 14, 1980
as submitted. Motion seconded by Hammerel.
Vote: Ayes (5), Nays (0). Motion passed \inanimously.
Planning Commission set Wednesday, February 6, 1980
as a suggested date for the joint Council/Planning
Commission meeting. The purpose of the meeting was
to discuss Planning Commission's proposed amendments
to the fourth draft of the Fence Ordinance.
Meeting adjourned.
DAVID J. BUTLER
4685 No. Shore Dx
CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT (#537)
APPROVAL OF
MINUTES
January 14, 1980
JOINT MEETING
DATE
9:40 P.M.
j jf: • •
K
0-'
j
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY, JANUARY 28, 1980
COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 7:30 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
1. Call to Order/Roll
ACTION ITEMS
2. #508 Paul Scherber, 1420 Bohns Point Road - Reconunendation
for south lot line.
3. #528 R. J. Haefele, E. Martin, and R. Hassel, Navarre Lane
VACATION
4. Proposed Fence Ordinance
5. Proposed Accessory Structure Ordinance
WORK SESSION
6. #537 David J. Butler, 4685 North Shore Drive
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
7. Meeting of January 14, 1980
INFORMATION ITEMS
8. 1980 Approved Meeting Schedule
9. Reappointment of Planning Commission Members
i • • ••
O.P!1 C
City of Oiono^ Mmesota UnaST"^ A ST PS:
.1
•1
r-
I
TO;
PROM:
Planning Commission and Council #508
Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator
DATE:
SUBJECT:
January 21, 1980
#508 Paul Scherber, 1420 Bohns Point Road - SUBDIVISION
Determination of South Property Line
The Scherber application received preliminary approval from Council
at their October 30, 1979 meeting. One point was left unresolved
that the applicant and his neighbor, C. Bruce Soloroonson, agree
upon a transfer or sale of a piece of land to provide a minimal
setback for Solomonson's encroaching structure. Planning Commission
is asked to make a recommendation concerning what the minimal setback
should be. Mr. Solomonson is agreeable to any setback the City deems
necessary (see letter dated January 4, 1980). Mr. Scherber wants a
3' setback, the minimal setback required by the Building Code. Staff
has suggested a 10' setback, the minimal required by the Zoning Code.
Review of hardships cited for applicant (see David Carlson's letter
received in this office on January 15, 1980):
1.
2.
3.
4.
Hinder future expansion of main structure or on attached garage
Aesthetics of existing yard.
Negative financial effect - resale.
Unfair to expect Scherber to bear full responsibility for
encroaching structure.
* «
.UUM JiSSi£i
i(k/.!.•«.»
fW. •‘••V** A* •f't.i.J »A
• i* r* ** ••#508
1 v.«i t.!- •• -•
, Tael . i- r -f.i ^
•:
• « •*•
1 • r?*
.. T:vr..
b«.rrl^« -. .•*••.• » .*.. 1»- »* ! *1
of fc.i »; nr.-i* U i li - »• *
^uit .•r.iia
*f.;rv ’ flf ^ t ' i ' '!‘I* • ^ * III!
lu •'-In « • #»li ‘''Cf;
.*.t_ IT. :... 0.-1.:., • ">-■; ‘;* :‘.
iit.t l: . .11 * k ^ • •* * - '
•f>i ».ti **’ »*
•erv t • -*i» * •• ** • *'■ *’ • • *■t • o« r** I
I
• t.-: ''•* * •
! ill
•. j-rr f • le*
rl, *•
V * l.'.ii
!• j i »i Jir*. 11
.: •-• ; •- •
• r *.
:i7 .
! 1
^ .1
u t ! T • €*•'.*• ••• •*•*'
i. •
I*!, n ?
•V .•
1^%. cf tl.» • rl.? -r %^’A u^n rf Xhm
I c! I* -»i * Mrlwlio,
- .; vv.' ll''*. ' ^
l , ' 't • ditiaf**' 2XV fooij ift*oco
.•.rt '* IVv . Mfl rtln.
‘it !"• r K*.*.*-* oT 1.0 I.oiU* iU'» O «»•
i. . -Lf U-; tl^ r/*.* .*.t nlJ lorii
r* -• .. U t' cr d UWiOlOf.45i
; : 1» . ri 9 . • r.Mf/.lol; Ucero
• -II
.1 ' I:,:•• i • r ‘'»r4, ll .c«*t ®oi
•taI • I •!•’ •• • •• •
•#.*.? i v-r-^Y*
I Ir ft .r ru.tu.1 I j*** t• • :*vn/:>
•roo I •parJ4l2-wlv r,** .er s
*, ..r r. i*..* ^’>..0 .
.4ivir • . K **J#r K.V . l-t.liiVS
!,-.i.l :.i*-\** 0 » ftJ /Uw^r*
Plw.onolft
.wfti rt
Jt
;J
:*
r>^‘i
V - ■
k
.*2m-
t*i* '■'' 1 ■ ^ ■
'. I r
' V
‘ ♦
■ ''.it » - ■-r!
H, )^ r. ■'-..V.
' >
ri-
-«
C. Bruce Solomoneoii JAM 5» 1980
CITY OF ORONO
January 4« 1980 #508
■
Mr. Alan P. Olson
Village Planner
City of Orono
P.O. Box 86
Crystal Bay^ Minnesota
ii
55323 . K
if
Dear Mr. Olsons
In regard to Subdivision 508. Bohns Point Road, as far as I
an concerned, the rearreuigement of the property line as shown
on the enclosure or any other arrangements that are suitable
to the City of Orono would be acceptable to me.%
Sincerely,
C. Bruce Solomonaon
• .'h:
CBS/jp
"•(fV'
■t m
i .. 'i ’««
• gti ind 1st
■•kn
^ a.
M
v';*
V
£iM!t4(n*4 :t
•.i>: "• t V
i!- 9 \ h
M. • ^ '•:i ff
t*
........................................
fieiMs REAODRS
South Office
7412 Lyndale Ave. So.
Richfield, Mn. 55423
666-3025
West Office
3554 Shoreline Or.
P.O. Sox 6
Navarre, Mn. 55392
471-6575
Dear Council persons.
jAH 15 M0O ^
CITY. OF ORONO
North Office
13025 Central Ave. N.E.
Olaine, Mn. 55434
I aa contacting you on behalf of Mr. Paul Scherber, owner of the property
located at 1410 & 1420 Bohn's Ft. Rd. within the Village of Orono, which has rt.. ntly
been before you and obtained your prellalnary approval for subdivision, subject to
several conditions, referring to your notice,Control No. 508 on the meeting of
October 30, 1979.Mr. Scherber Is In agreement with all the conditions set forth,wlth
the exception of the planning Department's recomended solution to the last condition
IE; Sell or grant to the Solomonson Property that land which hlsshed& fence presently
occupy due to an encroachment, plus an additional 10 feet, to allow more proper
setbacks to be created for the benefit of said property. It la Mr. Scherber's
sincere opinion that although Ideallstlcly from the point of view of the Solomonson
property and the planning dept, this would be a very desirable solution, yet he finds
It would be highly detrimental to his property for several reasons. The fact that It
would hinder possible future plans for expansion of the hone and or the addition of
a ga;rage, which will have to be placed on that end of the hone due to setback require
ments, by sight and peace of mind being that a fence, hedge or other obstructions
might be placed there, which would awkwardly Jut into what Is now a smooth and free
flowing lawn,not to mention the obvious quantity of land just lost from the yard.There
are also certain financial effects to tate into consideration, due to the alteration
presently and In the future upon any resale.
Having need of council approval to complete this subdivision, which has been
totally within all the requirements of the village statues and regulations, Mr.
Scherber has felt that the village has-possibly applied undue pressure upon him to
accept total responsibility for this encroachment situation. Yet th'' problem exists
whether or not the subdivision Is completed, also examining the origination of the
problem, the responsibility would not lie with the party who had been trespassed
upon but with the trespassor and the governing body which was to enfor'*e the coning
and set back requirements at the time buil'^ing permits were issued and construction
was being completed. Mr. Scherber does not want to pinpoint blame, create a legal
entanglement with his neighbors,or draw on the patience of the Village Council too
heavily, realising that none of you reading this, were Involved with what happened
then. He would sincerely appreciate your acknowledging the merits of, and accepting,
his proposed solution. He Is %d.lllng to grant, without cost, to the Solomonson
property, that land contained In "out lot A" on the accompanlng survey, which will
allow the mlnlmun 3 ft. setback required by the State without all the possible
turmoil that can sometimes result out of boundary disputes and without It being
too detrimental to his own property and well being.
I believe Mr. Scherber has been very objective in his consideration of this
situation and also very generous with the proposed solution. It laay not be the
moot Ideal, viewed strictly by set back requirements, but I sincerely believe It
to be most fair to all parties concerned in obtaining an equitable solution.
Thank you.
Very Truly Tours
David E. Carlson
.a
TO;Planning Commission and Council
#528
FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator
DATE:January 21, 1980
SUBJECT: #528 Navarre Lane Vacation
At our meeting on November 26, 1979 staff was asked to report
on the responses from the following agencies, consultants and
department heads:
1. County Highway Department to determine the amount of right
of way they might require for a possible expansion of County
Road 15 and 19 intersection. In this report, the question of
retaining the access to Shadywood for the service station should
be resolved.
2. Public Works Department, Gas and Telephone Companies should
determine existing location of utilities within Navarre Lane.
3. City Attorney to answer the following:
must the City have to allow vacation?
What kind of finding
A. Comments from the Public Works Director
1. How costly would it be for the City, gas and telephone companies
to locate the four underlying utilities?
The cost for the location of all utilities should be borne
by the party requesting the vacation. We can assist by
making sewer euid water as builts available to them.
2, What type of access would be necessary if the.entire area
was grassed?
If the entire area is grassed, this does not create a problem
as long as there are no fences or barricades.
3. Would a 10* easement be sufficient for each of the utilities?
We would need a 20 ft. easement which is the normal utility
easement.
4.Does the Orono road department use Navarre Lane from the
intersection of Olive to the west? Do you see any future use?
The Orono street department maintains that part of Navarre
Lane to allow access to the church parking lot and fire'
hydrant accessibility
5.Input from the gas and telephone companies as to the feasibility
of the application.
N/A
L
January 21, 1980
#528 Navarre Lane Vacation
Page 2
#528
A. Comments from the Public Works Director (Cont.)
I only wish to suggest that we should determine what effect if any
this would have on our total miles in the City in regard to M.S.A.
monies. We should also be concerned that the fire hydrant at the
south end be accessible to the gas station on the corner, perhaps
the street cannot be vacated all the way to County Road 19.
B. Hennepin County Highvray Department’s Response
The Traffic Division and Preliminary Design Section revl^u-ed the
CSAH 19, CSAH 15 intersection revision along with your vacation of
Navarre Lane. To allow for channelization at the intersection, we
are requ«%sting an additional 33 ft. of right of way through the
Navarre Lane corridor, making the right of way 66 ft. from the center
of CSAH 19. I have attached a half section map showing the area
requested.
4
Although Mr. Weigelt's letter does not respond specifically to
Mr. Martin's request to maintain his access off Shadywood (Cty. Rd. 19),
he has assured me that there would be no problem. In fact the
additional right of way requested by the County would assure that
access.
C. City Attorney's Response
I have enclosed a copy of State Statute 412.851 - Vacation of Streets
for your information.
D. Staff Recommendation
I recommend a partial vacation of Navarre Lane, that portion encroached
by a corner of the church building, based on the following findings:
1. City maintains the eastern portion of Navarre Lane from the
intersection of Olive Avenue - serving church parking lot at rear.
2. If completely vacated, the City would be responsible for enforcing
all conditions - to maintain site.
3. Hennepin County Highway Department wants an additional 33' of
Navarre Lane at the western end to assist in their plans for expanding
County 19 6 15 intersection. The City has stated very clearly that
they are against such expansion plans.
4. Gas, telephone, water and sewer lines are located throughout the
Navarre Lane right of way. City would be liable if fire hydrant on
south side is not accessible in case of emergency.
5. Partial vacation will give clear title to the church and alleviate
their financial burdens.
#528
• ll**
s Director (Cont.)
ould determine what effect if any
s in the City in regard to M.S.A.
ned that the fire hydrant at the
s station on the corner» perhaps
the way to County Road 19.
troent's Response
ary Design Section revi- red the
ision along with your vacation of
eliza^ion at the intersection, we
t. of right of way through the
right of way 66 ft. from the center
If section map showing the area
s not respond specifically to
his access off Shadywood (Cty. Rd. 19),
d be no problem. In fact the
by the County would assure that
^131 a.II
tatute 412.851 - Vacation of Streets
Navarre Lane, that portion encroached
g, based on the following findings:
rtion of Navarre Lane from the
rving church parking lot at rear.
ty would be responsible for enforcing
tment wants an additional 33* of
o assist in their plans for expanding
City has stated very clearly that
l^ms.
er lines are located throughout the
would be liable if fire hydrant on
ase of emergency.
ear title to the church and alleviate
J'l
L*'ttt 'T
CTT. irmrrjir-i ic;
T. •TiTiB ■*
•Tt rViMi*
A**
¥528 ■v^
1
I ‘ '
2^
■S,;:
5a
•/•
A
• •
\
\
\
ME tNKET •oL,r: m
k
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
320 Washington Av. South
Hopkins, Minnesota 66343
935-3381 OED'14 1914
December 12, 1979
CITC OR ORONO
Jeanne A. Kabusth
Zoning Administrator
City of Orono
Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
Dear Ms. Habusth;
The Traffic Division and Preliminary Design Section reviewed the
CSAH 19, CSAH 15 Intersection revision along with your vacation of
Navarre Lane. To allow for channelization at the Intersection, we
are requesting an additional 33 ft. of right of way through the
Navarre Lane corridor, making the right of way 66 ft. from the center
of CSAH 19. I've attached a half section map showing the area re
quested.
Thank you for considering our Input before proceeding with this vacation.
Sincerely,
/
Les Weigelt
Administrative Assistant
Planning & Programming
LDW/de
Attachment
■
File Orono general
cc Dennis Hansen - Traffic
Dave Schmidt - Preliminary Design
HENNEPIN COUNTY
on equal opportunity employer
1.«
> ^1. • •
..
I ?0 21^ 22
5 *
5 24 2b 2e 2T 28
<< <r«t
a' 24 2b • 28 2>J^®
S'
r.-t
Co. Rd No 15^
III It ^ ________.*•,. *’^
PoM of 'IBIO
c:rr Of
K O QUtO
pwr
■•4
TO:
FROM:
Council and Planning Commission
Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator
DATE:
SUBJECT:
January 22, 1980
#537 David J. Butler, 4685 North Shore Drive
Conditional Use Permit - Work Session
Mr. Butler requests permission to construct a driveway, 10* width,
within an unimproved road easement of 20* that abuts the east lot
line of his property. The steep slope that runs from County Road 19
to the lakeshore prevents egress in wet, snowy or icy conditions.
They have constructed an additional access further east that they
hoped %M>uld facilitate egress but there are days when 4-wheel drive
vehicles cannot make it up the Incline. The applicant proposes
construction of a driveway at the southeast corner of his lot
continuing southwest within the 20* easement to the intersection of
Rest Point Road (see diagram enclosed).
The City recognizes its responsibility in providing a safe and
usable access for emergency vehicles to all house sites. Mr. Butler
has reviewed the hardships and the question of safety in his letter
of January 15, 1980.
The following consultants and staff members will be asked to review
the proposal before action is taken by the Planning Commission.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Public Works Director
City Engineer
City Attorney
Building Inspector
I
t
tSOTA
►n •
TYPE OF REQUEST
___Subdivision $150+$l0.00/
Lot
j/_ Conditional Use $50
Use
#.£37
___ Riprap $15 ($65)
PEE .<b.oo
Date Rec'd 1^ Po
By fW,
ide Rear
■ th
•• •; fr> 0% t'iii
i .<»4.e«stv 4<
" *«aa) .
. iw ' •
cm OP OROMO, MIIWESOTA
. Land Use Application •
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL (or property)
Address 'c 8> //>■>/.»
Mouk.'o. y
Legal Description
APPLICMIT
Mailing
Address
OWNER Name SOnn
Mailing
Address
Tel #.
type op REQUEST
Subdivision $150+$10.00/
• Lot
y Conditional^^ 5*®,
~ Tl
Riprap $15 ($65)
FEE ,4V) »0O
Date —
By /I * - - - - - - -
Present Zoning Present Use
zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request
Specify Ordinance Requirements
Explain your request and reasons for same
VARIANCE required
ea
Width"
extent of nonconformity
Setback Front_Side Rear
Other,, explain
Specify hardships to pro^
SUBDIVISK ion Residential Other, explain
No. of lots
CONDITIORM. SSE AND OT«ER - explain proposed use of property in detail
r ,-ir-r-fr^r ^
f ^ y—^ ^ - - /I
Application completed
Plat map section
Certificate of survey of property
^etch location and setbacks of
proposal
Construction plans, if applicable
6.
DATE.
Certified Property (Xraer's list ol
owners within (300*) (1N®^)“ fromi
Hennepin Co, Dept, of Finance
A-603 Government Center
Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#H
pre-addressed to each of the namet
on the above list.
hure t. J -W—
Owner's Signature^ UJ i >
________a. 4 ir AP rMRIttSi
tI,
(' /K ' k-L.- - - - - Oimer s rmnt \ — required or requested by
Applicant hereby agrees ^ City Attorney, Planning Oosmiission
?his application and further agr... to pay
ell f««» •• established by ordinance.cy7S
' I
:•
I
1m
Milr^^£fi I ^L'j^
^■ h
1^
'"Hi
rf ^ ^
/ i
1
■ H 4^ m
» •
> ' -‘ -7
f
R
o ^3 0
JamoAjy 15, 1910
City oj Oajom
Ptaiming CoimUl/jon
City CouncUt
1535 Bfiom Pood S,
OAxmo, HumtAota
VteUL Gtntlemtn,
I uUh to Jitqut6t youJL eoMidtnatlon and appfvovat to aJUovi me to
buiZd a dAlvtioay bettoten NoAth Shone VnJive and Put Point Pood,
booAdlng Lot6 74, 75, 76, ana Loti 77, 7t, which I ohm.
Thli twenty feet itneet nlght-oi~way wai tued many yeaju a^o, ^
Jti puApoiC, I’m iiifie., wai to give acceii to tot 77, Now It iM
ovoignown with tJieti and bnuih.
The pAobtem I have ti the topognaphy oj the loti. They have a
iteep gnade ^nom Nonth Shone Vnlve to the take, Jt wai neceiiony
to ptace the fume and the ganage on the toti In Iti toeatlon io
oi to meet the city nequJinxMenti and atio £on pfMctieatlty,
Beeauie the gnade li io iteep It li Impoulbte In the ipnlng,
iatt, and winten to dnive a eonventlonat vehieU back up the
dnlveway to Nonth Shone Vnlve, It li atio a dii^lcutt watk.
The exlitlng dnlvemy I have had fon mat^ yeau pnlon to having
a ganage, Jt enteni Nonth Shone Vnlve.on the went ilde o^ Lot
7%, li li neceii '.xy iSon me to keep thli dnlvemy ai to
facUltate the vwk oi my ganage, (on the beit uie of the land,
and Ingneu all yean, tang, I need a way to dnive inom (egAeA4)
my pnopenty that li uiobte,
I feet that It li euentlat to uie the twenty ieet itneet
nlght~oi~way ion pnactlcaZlty and iaiety, I atio ieet the
nlght~oi~way wai onlglnatty planned io make Loti 77, and 7i
uicable ion a building ilte.
Thank-you ion youn eonildenatlan.
Slneenety,
Vavld J. Batten.
4015 Nonth Shone Vnlve
Onono, Mlnneiota
47i-675t/47t-511$
t