The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03-03-1980 Planning PacketIS—- AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 3, 1980 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER 1. Call to Order/Roll ACTION ITEMS 2. 7:00 P.M. - 8:00 P.M. Discussion of Proposed Accessory Structure Ordinance Village Planner vsill attend meeting. 3. 4. 5. f497 William Wear, 2160 Wayzata Boulevard - VARIANCE #537 David J. Butler, 4685 North Shore Drive - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #540 Steven Tibbetts, 1998 Shadywood Road - VARIANCE WORK SESSION 6. #539 James Rivers, 1440 Shoreline Drive -* RSZONIUG SKETCH PLAN REVIEW 7. #541 Ministers Life Development, 1484 Shoreline Drive - SUBDIVISION APPROVAL OF MINUTES 8. Meeting of February 19, 1980 INFORMATION ITEMS 9. Comprehensive Plan - Maple Plain 10. Planning Commission to determine how they wish to schedule review of Orono’s Comprehensive Plan with Gunnar Isberg ^ 11. Planning Commission to appoint two members to Marina Committee. .-t .. if !i • -i a H m City of Orono^ Mmesota fc- =r P®! •4 ’ ft TO; FROM: DATE: Planning Commission Alan P. Olson, Village Planner February 27, 1980 SUBJECT: Proposed Accessory Building Ordinance In early November, 1979, a joint Planning Commission-Council Meeting included discussion regarding improving our zoning regulations concerning accessory buildings. Recognized deficiencies included: -No limit on the number of accessory buildings -No corrolation between size or number and actual lot size -No differentiation between urban and rural needs -No differentiation between residential and commercial regulations A draft was prepared and a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on December 10, 1979, but to date you have not been comfortable enough with the detailed language to have made any recommendation to the Council. Hopefully, we can resolve the remaining issues in order to provide the Council with a proposed ordinance for their early consideration. To this end, I am planning to attend your March 3, 1980 meeting when we can really hammer this thing together. I would appreciate your arriving by 7:00 P.M. to allow an hour for discussion before your regular agenda. Your February 19, 1980 minutes contained several questions which I should address here: 1. Loft storage was inserted specifically to remove questions about this typical practice. A loft should not be considered as a second story or usable space. A clarification could be; 31.320 a) Storage shall be permitted in attic or loft spaces of one story accessory buildings (and then add:) without such area being termed a "story", provided that the maximum allowed height shall not be exceeded. 2. Lakeshore yards - a definition of "lakeshore yard" was included in the proposed fence ordinance. The intention is to preclude accessory buildings, certainly within 75 ft., but also anywhere between the principal structure and the lake, regardless of distance. 3. Dwelling Use - 31.360 is the section which precludes this premature use. I agree with McDonald that tents, RV's ere. are not accessory structures. Their use as dwellings must be regulated however, and the purpose for amending it is to include the RV language to be explicit. The existing section specifies "trailers" only and was drafted years ago before RV's became popular; before "RV" became the common terminology. I also agree that this location in the Code is not the best, but it is the existing location and, short of a major recodification, the amendment is suggested in its simplest form using the existing format. rm I r.February 21, 1980 Proposed Accessory Building Ordinance Page 2 4. Guest houses - The above does not affect guest houses as these are permitted and regulated under the Conditional Use Sections of 34.020. A clarification of intent should perhaps be included. How about adding a clause as follows: ADD: 31.333 Guest Houses Guest houses as regulated in Section 34.027 shall not be considered to be accessory structures but shall be permitted by Conditional Use Permit as a second dwelling on an undivided lot provided the guest house conforms to all setbacks required for the principal residence and provided the lot contains at least twice the — TO:Planning Commission and Council 7 FROM:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator DATE:February 25, 1980 SUBJECT: #497 William Wear, 2160 Wayzata Boulevard VARIAi-lCK At our July 23, 1979 meeting we advised Mr. Wear that a total signage plan for the shopping center must be submitted. Planning Commission acknowledged the limitations of the existing signage ordinances in dealing with the demands of a shopping center. The applicant has submitted a signage plan for Planning Commission review and approval. Staff review of Signage Plans Building Signage - all signage for the building will be limited to the specified area designated on the plans. The size of the lettering will be 18" high as opposed to 2' noted on the plans. Planning Commission should consider the following: 1. Should signs be limited to the name of company or type of business? Is uniformity necessary? 2. Should lettering be uniform - applicant has not specified? Highway Sign - the new highway sign sketch is still 30' in height with a 10* wide roof constructed of the same material used along the front of the building - see exhibit 11. The Orono Shopping Center sign appears to be larger than the allowed 50 sq. ft. Staff would recommend not exceeding 50 sq. ft. for an individual sign. The dimensions for the individual plaques have not been designated. Staff recommends uniform sizing for each plaque. The type of construction material should be noted. Lighting for the building signs and highway sign should be specified. In your recommendation. Planning Commission should advise the applicant that once the signage plan is approved, all additional ground signs (see photographs of site) must go. After this exercise. Planning Commission may wish to entertain a motion to amend the signage sections of our code. 1 - ^*-1 . infe A ox^iici^cs anning Commission B ordinances in applicant has /iew and approval. L be limited to se of the lettering )r type of business? 30' in height il used along the ihopping Center Staff would sign. The designated. e type of construction signs and highway dvise the applicant al ground signs entertain a motion X ..o; (do not) also “’of land AGENT _______________ ^--------—----------------------- ntont Firm Killing Addreaa NOTICES Should bo lent to: Applicant PRESENT ZONING USE DISTRICT PRESENT USE R**ldentl«l _____ (Other) Agent ^ Stiff Coiosenti Other Tnfonnitlon > ft ( tut • jL 'Si¥a tl • O-rJ,---- 10 ✓ ffi. “ 4/*-^ - Vacant Land _____ Vacant fiulldlng(a)Occupied Bulldlng(a) - ‘CONSTRUCTION COST $. g ^ Describe request in detail: ^ ~ on __ re*,<j,i _ repUe# VARIANCE(S) REQUIRED .. d. .h, Lot Area Setbeck Front _S_ Side _____ other Hardcover Describe UNUSmL‘VR?)^SRT!f''^oSDI7IONS^-».C^t...fH^ Zoning Code requlrenwnta: "^='°Tine UNDUE HARDSHIP or PRACTICAL DIF fTcuttv ... ..a, ,-------------------- - WJ. X JU t of aonlng 12. Describe EFFECT OF PROPOSED WORK........------------------------------------------------------------ /9- /V T -■« • f -- * "* *" ot thi. eppItcetloB, and eertlfier?l^t -ppHed 1.to“.7.‘r::,‘:; ;i?:“kTo:ird.e: Applicant's Signature 7 f Date Owner's Signature Date exhibit 1 ^497 LIST OF EXHIBITS # ■Initia l Appllgarf^ include: 44. Application Fora Property (Wnera Liat — ■ - Certificate of Survey Fee Receipt 0*te Received 7 —23L- 74 landi * Plat Hap 5 Inventory j4 P/ »o i4 «i » f^AUs^u^fii LON COST $ ^ ^ ^rz> __ replace tot Width hardcover n-7^ h Zoning Code requircnenta: ’* -"torc—nt of aonln, '7~*~ * >* **»• nelshhorhood ia gcnerel: his application. •"< agreee to thle epplleetleti rMaoBable entry onto th« property •S*nta, ceeniaaion nnrtiaia, purpoaea of imreatigatloii and lueat: 2: •IC554 e » NAME finance ^'* ' r ■ a^fOLis. «N ilSr ^^4^ ^ PR^ERTY owners list h address ?2c/V’/'i Coni,-t ____ SS~4lu7/i . — ----------------------------- ^. r ndescription loT I BLK.I PARCEL g5*yof~ 7)------:-------—-^^—1-^^ 2^y s.~^n%~j~p g'4-/yy-z:ii _r> SrtH^ f\aj( y^c/^ I; p------1 5'5'‘^>iT6 1 certify that the facte repretented on this certificate are an accuratr*VPii «iiia vcdiiiwati? «iic ail a«.vMiav« and true representation of Informa* tion as It appears thiSrdafe"ofrthr- records of tho Henn» Co. Finance Oiv., to tha beVt brmy knowfedge- ancJ belief Henn. Co.Tlnance DIvtston #/ _a. .. Date,M.. b, CC'CJ I------- / A 37 «97 CITY OF ORONO LAND USE PLANNING ZONING VARIANCE INVENTORY EXHIBIT 5 # f /?. ,‘f^\ VARIANCES REQUIRED Zoning Use District n J DENSITY ftIMIHUW ACTUAL VARlAHCt coot StCTlOW tot A#«a lot wi«Oi Sifi6 * SETBACKS >>1K1KUK AtOOIHn) priSTlMC FKOrOSEO VAAlAJia COPE SECTIOU lSire«t frront) Si«« ___________ %%6m __________ A«ar ^<e>% llAf. to Biaf. 75 rt. i Vet) Anas 74 rt.< HARDCOVER U3T AJtCA .i«Ar. ■.f. FtF-'llTTEX) KAJADCOVril ■ -f. ______16 CX2ST1KC HAlUXrOVDI FKOFOSED HAAOCOVCA % m.f. _____ TOTAL VXJUAMGB % m,t^_____% coot sccTiq 31. an WtXa O - 74 rt. 096 loke O - 7S rt. 096 lolitt 75 - 750 rt. 7596 iuAm 750 - 500 rt. 3096 UAm 500 - lOOO rt. 355 34.707 34.707 34.707 34.707 OTHER SECTIONS .juqoird CXISTIKC rAOFOSCD VA9IIAHCE COOK sEcrigf OuiiaiMf B«iOht C om rerkiof CMin.) A/*3lO xSOi I HARDCOVER wfcid o - 3b rt. cnc L>k« 0 - 7S rt. ox &Ak« 7S - 3SO rt. 35X Lid>« 2SO - SOO rt. 30X Lak« SOO • 1000 rt. 3SS OTHER SECTIONS •uildin* Baiyht (m>.) __________ rackiaf (Nln.) -sgjjk. 9.i hot AH£A a.f. P£F-s?J7Tn> KAJlOCOVEJt •aJL_________Jg CX2STZHC MXADCOVEH s.f. FflOFOSED HAHOCOVEJi % s.f. TOTAl. VXJIIANCZ ___% e.f.< CCXIE StCTli 31.HJ1 %34.303 34.707 74.707 • 34.203 EXIST IKC »xopcgn>VAUf jwcr CODE SCCTIOf 30 9 ^3 Iunplattad « lota/p»rc«l* per appliratien *VAJIABJL1T7. adjacent lota/parrala (« t - - - vacant _ _ _ occupSed _ _ _ a aa* owner ah Ip m^pmrmXm ownership ...................................... CEOCRAPHY sffseting applications _____ unusual lot shape romj>9 hills unusual building location existing ------- Inc^iatent with nelchborhood development cx>unty/etste ir r\ r.M e> d ^ a ^corvr.ecled; City water existing confoorlng private _ __ available _ _ _ connected •^xl.tln, aub.tandard - - - eal.tln, non-contor .ln. occupied mSTlKC LAXD USE compared to soning use districts _ conditional use rkon-oonfooaing uee »piy with soning parformanee standards sntirely HIV buildir»g or use revise ss HIV building or oae fcost exceeds SOX r»fVl ^r\*T *«>•» *— «*•" so* rrw)KBietlJMi baildLng rAlN NUUCET VAUS (yrl ______ $ vil) not roduc* on •aietin^ eubatandard yard diiaenaloa bsta/Ssrrsls owned in comejii «**». -a rXXD currant ar.-gilljl^* ecaablnad for ta, p.rpoaaa. Water Cno}units UJ.1X ur UKONU LAND USE PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS & RECOMMENDATIONS EXHIBIT b Page. 1 PREPARED FOR: BY: CuMlasion Cbuficil !Uat«) _____ ___________________ iStaffI ________________ 4- 7f ,L u*j‘ APPLICATION REVIEWED BY: XHIBIT 6 ■ge. 1 P.e. v-- AiCp V • Um USE PUNNING staff comments & KECOMMENDATT omc SUGGESTED FINDINGS ■—.~n:x;22;- “ “• ....« -«• “« — 1. .Jr,ST"' *■ •"■■> •”? ~ —2:.;:;"“?! •' »• _____ ' 4. »>• 9r.ntl»» Of tJ. •‘••1th. CO . —•—» «•" ~ u»•“* b. M u» c» ^ "»• 9rMtlng of Uia oronn ^ Pr«^«n«ivo Land Oaa 2'.?K2i5 JL!!? ■•— «u ». ........... ” ““"~=.=:3r:rr": r “-----. TO* applicant has ^ ^ "acaasaty varianca ««>uld-*^atad no racoonisad K.-ai-wd-- .«.Ucaot ... da^nccc : ; * - - -c... vaFf^^oac.., - - «..F.foF. , ----7 it t 6 • **“ *'«»tl»9 Of aoch ►.*5 • • U b. ^CO COtL (d aL>OtLf }|<^ O^^brtiP i SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Jo 4o • - * • o r T I . I • I rv,i . I .1 I!* « I I I t '• I #4S7 I i’"'- I ‘ • t f • ' *-:J3 /' -4^iSiy, F 8B #497 ? . rI r-* ' ' # % I ;I •f 38.030. Signs in B and I Districts. Within the "B" and *'I" Districts nameplate signs and business signs are permitted subject to the following regulations: . . • - -a- 38.031. B-1, B-2 and B-4: Size. Within the "B-1"# **B-2", and "B-4" Districts* the aggregate square footage of sign space per lot shall not exceed the sum of one (1) square foot for each front foot of building* plus one square foot for each front foot of lot not occupied by a building. No individual sign shall sn (Amended Ord. 172* 12-19-74, effective 1-1-75) 38.032. B-3; Size. Within the "B-3" District* the aggregate square footage of sign space per lot shall not exceed the sum of four (4) square feet per front foot of building* plus one (1) square foot per front foot of property not occupied by a building. No individual sign surface shall exceed 100 square feet. 38.033. Ir Size. Within any "I" District* the aggre gate square footage of sign space per lot shall not exceed the sum of four (4) square feet per front foot of building* plus one (1) square foot per front foot of property not occupied by a building. No individual sign surface shall exceed 100 square feet. 38.034. B-1* B-2* and B-4: Height. Within the "B-1 "B-2"* and "B-4'* Districts* no sign shall extend in height more than two (2) feet above the highest outside wall or parapet of any principal building nor shall any sign be located closer than ten (10) feet from any prop erty line except that any sign over ten (10) square feet may project two (2) feet into any required yard area from the principal building. (Amended Ord. 172* 12-19-74* effective 1-1-75) 38.035. B-3 and I: Height. Within any “B-l" or "I" District* no sign shall extend in height more than six (6) feet in height above the highest outside wall or parapet of any principal building. No sign shall be located closer than ten (10) feet from any property line except that any sign exceeding ten (10) square feet may project only two (2) feet into the yard area from any building. Vi. I S '^1*' t :r r £iLUi- /<»I MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JULY 23, 1979 PAGE 3 - Mr. Wear was present. Mabusth entered into the record a letter from Mr. Sidney Rebers who stated that he could not attend the meeting and asked that the variance request be postponed. The consensus of the Planning Coninission was that Mr. Rebers had time to review the plans prior to the meeting and since he had talked to Jeanne Mabusth on Friday and did not state any specific objection, if possible, they would act on the and Yhr. Rebers could appear before the Council if he wished. Mr. Wear is requesting a 5' side setback variance and a 9' height variance for this particular sign, however, he feels he also will need an increase in the 200 s.f total signage allowed. He feels that the building has three front sides and not one which sets the 200 s.f. requirement. At this point the Planning Conmission felt that the signage should be presented as a total package (both highway sign and all building signs) so that sqme definite amount of signage can be determined. WILLIAM WEAR 2160 Wayzata Blvd. VARIANCE (#497) #497 hi i) !■ i. Adams moved to table this application until a complete signage plan can be submitted (both highway sign and all proposed building signs) showing size, graphics, landscaping, etc. Motion seconded by Jabboxjr. Vote: Ayes (7), Nays (0). Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Zltzloff was present. Frahm again vacated his seat as he is a resident of the area and has concerns regarding the drainage problems of this area. The access will now be a shared access with the gas station and has been approved by Hennepin Cotmty. Signing has not been submitted but code permits 175 s.f. Parking requirements have been met. LOWELL ZITZLOFF 3850 Shoreline Drive COND. USE PERMIT (#481) t 1 I* .. e-.:« r w ..»i •t t • T2P ! I ^JJUJbJh U OK CL^fiKEX OE • • • ••• •. /.*>' -V *■ •> .,ij I >-n Vf'L/ f; / * I . y • , •. • r V •‘.'ti.■ ’vj/;^v. •. . ** . * I • ‘1 t * • ./ •> f * V : ‘ V.' n y L. .x_:_ j- it ,, ir.:; r V .Jf • •J:•.*•; ••• « • : .• • i.v. • » V#.r-> f • • • • I ii-.; t » :• • • • vv. {:• «' , i *• « t. •. ♦ •i -5# . ,• ^ • *. I. i *. :• \ t % V*. i • t • • l* »*•.** _ •• • • :l II II li •*»II r ^2 * ii -4 I! r- ,1 • tf- t ••( • *•• • il ri. '• fcia r. Sill 1:5^ C Mi j!. —ra<j^ V ... n ii» "Ipr;; PEufi-: •iK52 hi.' o: r-ir .. •»’. I/I. . r-..“I X i I-’ f >. rrvw-*h*f ;i; »-•■T ’4t‘: ■I i-'ij • I- ,Mi!;^!..4 . I . inriMi- — •• /^497 ”VM*• F. • • I"' ’’’.•‘I r • »• , . J.‘ • • ? • ' *. • *. • •<’. 5'^ . .•,. •• • • • * hA*’ • Jt » •• • -};v- 4 . • • * * » ? •.» *...*. « • » .*. .V I J v.- - V > . » - • • j ^ ‘ • » ‘# V • • •• • »••..* ../’.I .. •* • «. • f . i I #; TO: FROM: DATE: Plcinning Commission and Council Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator February 27, 1980 #537 SUBJECT: #537 David J. Butler, 4685 North Shore Drive CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The applicant has staked the 20* easement from County Road 19 to Rest Point Lane. Staff has taken photographs of the staked access to be presented at the March 3, 1980 meeting and are available for review in the City offices. On an earlier inspection, the staff car had to be assisted up and out of the Butler driveway. Both accesses from County Road 19 are hazardous and that condition is magnified by the additional factor of the speed required to get up the driveway - staff can attest to that! The additional parking area on County Road 19 should be relocated on the property to accommodate the new access from Rest Point Lane. The applicant claims that guests need the additional parking area; additional parking can be satisfied on Rest Point Lane or a new graded area on the lot. Staff Recommendation: 1. All access from County Road 19 to be removed upon completion of access drivevay from Rest Point Lane. 2. All access to be from driveway off Rest Point Lane. 3. If approved by Council, applicant must submit construction plans for driveway containing the following: proposed elevations, profiles, drainage plans and erosion control steps during and after construction. 4. Applicant is to relocate garbage can shelter. 5. Applicant to furnish additional parking area on lot or use Rest Point Lane. None to be located along County Road 19. The Public Works Director states there are no sewer lines located within the 20* easement so a hold harmless agreement with the City will not be necessary. t 5^537 Drive nty Road 19 to hie staked access re available for ion, the staff iveway. Both t condition is guired to get up tional parking property to The applicant a; additional ew graded area pon completion Lane. construction osed elevations, during and n lot or use Road 19. r lines located nt with the I t « Vi 1.ANU Ubfc I'LANNimi ZONING VARIANCE APPLICATION CITY OF ORONO P.O. Boa CryitAl lay, Hinneaota 55323 EXHIBIT 1 *73-7357 ixyUCnOHS: ru... t.U tw, mtt,A,4 Sh,.t. Om,Ut, U«« 1 . n If mm^6m4^ attach latter or other lAformation to better ^eaeribe your re^ueet. Incoeiplete applieatione will iiot be accepted. PROPERTY ADDRESS /V; begal deacriptloo ahall be ahown on attached Survey, Exhibit 3- #540 ---------------- APPLICANT A. PS’^9______ Itolllin *4ir..« ^ If Applicant la net o«#ner, explain ________________________ _______» LIST OF EXHIBITS t Peacrlottoft Initial Aopligatioi^ axiat include: ^ Application Fonay Property CWnera Liat OWNER Kane 7^//?A/:TT:S Phone ^7A7^2l9____________ Mailing Addreaa CofL Date Property Acquired _________ ~ Certificate of Fee Receipt # Date Eeceived ____ ■tV. d.HA, Survej (diuass:) (Month/Ycar) Staff lnfora>ation * Flat Hap 5 Inventory Staff Cneoenta fhone \ Other Information X,teg Mailing Addreaa ./ NOTICES Should be aent to: J Applicant ______ Cbmer PRESENT ZONING USE DISTRICT f (Other) ______________________ Ageac PRESENT USE «aaWenelal Vacant Land______ Vacant Buildingfa) ______ Occupied Suilding(a) DESCRIBE REQUEST . ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST _ aatabllah mw uaa CMtlmia or nspand nlaclng uae __ %4A m Describe request in detail: __raplaM 7V VARIANCE'S} REQUIRED to do the requeated Work:Lot Area Lot Vidtn Hardcover Setback C____ Front Sida Sear) Other 10.j Describe UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Fraventins e«^uei«e Code raquiraaenta: aAyt- — Describe UNDUE HARDSHIP or PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY ....l.u. i™It of aoning regulatione I - ^ «»gnoorfioon In gee ]The APPLICANT and the PROPERTY OWNER must sign and date this annlleat-lonJ The AriUCUir hereby agreea te pmiri4e all laferaetlon k ~ - appUCatlOn. , reeulreA ar raeuaataA by tha JSonti^ Adtalnlatrater. aeraae ■ aehnonlaAjiaa ai>4 apraaa to chla applleatla* ta pay all faae and/ar tametal anpensas IneorraA In review k. ”***~Me entry ante tha peoparty ' mt this appllcat'sn, and eertlflee that tha InferMtlon -T. f—"lfata. agenta. ceMlsalen ninli irs. eupytted Is trws snd eerrset t* tha hast af his knawladge: warlft^ion"fSl F"F»aea of Invastlfstlen and Applicant's Signature Date Owner"^s Signature 2//J/6 ture Date / / r T>T A KTMT r^rw.fyAT CC *r/VKT irPITILL EXHIBIT 1 #S40 9 sn^,r) ( of land _ *««*t LIST OF EXHIBITS P^acrlpttfla Ifittitl Applicptitwi m»Bt include:t Application Fon y■ Property CWncra List ^ Cartificata of Surva^] Faa Raccipt # Data Racaivad ■yV^ilVl Inventory Staff Other Information fVm ✓ 1/^ 13 ^ fttii iW • % n RUCTION COST $ •• _ twmoSml __ tmpUMbuild Lot Vidth lance uich looiag roguiranenta : raaulriag fron atrict ofori It mt aoni^ aa and on the oaighLorbood im gaaaral: \^tn\^9ry date this application. dmriaaa ault fo f t^ia r on and agraaa to tkia applicatii an oahla ontvy onto the panp ar ty • nganta. coaniaaion na^are, pur.poaaa of Invaatigation nod meat: £>r^ . -S-k'HC 1233 t^RTMOrr OF FINANCe *-608 OOVERNMCNT CENTER MINNEAPOLIS MN 8S467 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST LIST Sill iSi) #^>f TMC PAC tA i^IESEN iJLI CCRTIPV THAT THE _______________ _ CERTIPICATE ARE AH ACCURATE AND TRUE RERRE^ SCNTATIOR OF IRFORMATION At IT ARREARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNERIN COUNTY FINANCE DIVISION. TO THE REST OF MV KNOWLEOOE AND OEUEF. HENNERIN CO. FINANCE DIVISION Z,DATE. FEE OWNER CEoroe j. HAg/vy rg/e &u hi'T STgUe>i^ ^LLEN Tlggg- TAX PAYER/ MAILING ADDRESS Sil n'-iiy PROPERTY ADDRESS CXI‘Z4 SMAWUJOaCi H AT>Y IL>Q0 S ht /YD RD SHADY k /OOE^ 1ZJ> JOHA/ C UfEU^S 6/,AtW<; LUEL^S, lgg-3l Z^OO SMA-Dyfyoflo Tp JI A ICrH AEL—E__fyrftCNCfL \7jiH, SHfitT>ymn/in I2.n> —$—^ELSy_____I 20Z4 SHAnviLiOon *^^7 ^A^Z-4 CS'Z- SifAPyu/ooD 72.x> Zi /Z- SURjecT TToTEgny «%#540 V <SToc/tADS ‘ 4 '> \ \ V \ \^ -^_ AC^EV ------------ y~^-^---------------—' .iil V' ••• \ • 0 \ y^. 7< • DenctCG Iiun Monument Found 0 Denotes Iron Monument Set 1 hereby certify thet this is a true eral correct represctation of a suryay of the boundaries of: Lot 41, SHADY-WOOD ADDITION, Hennepin county, Minnesota i:iirrX“r:a*:b ‘^ix rorseTt::^tr!-'^™-" -• I ^‘^COMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES. INC Land Surveyor, Minn. Reg, wo. 772 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY for SCALf >ii« wa \3T£\/£A/ T/B5ETT^ CITY OF ORONO EXHIBIT 5- - LAND USE PLANNING ZONING VARIANCE INVENTORY VARIANCES REQUIRED Zoning DENSITY MiNiKun ncvuiKa>ACTUAL VAKlANCt rCDC &CCTIC3|g tmt ktmrn lot vldOi 7 7A 7^.juL^a, 3^. SETBACKS Strict fffontl %i6m %%6m___________ KIKIKUK fUDOUlATP DfISTINC PUOPQ^tJ}VARIANCE coot StCTiO* 7, ^ '44ti 3^- / ' »<ar ai4f. tA ■]««. lM\99hOf v«i]»nds 75 Ft.. 76 FLa HARDCOVER wtra 0 - 3k rt. ok |Ak« O "* 7S Ft. cm Law 7S - 250 Ft. 7SS iPiim 250 • 500 Ft. 2Cm LAktt 500 - lOOO Ft. 35» LOT AJITA •slji______ P1F.-J7TED KXRDCOVUI ___Ailjs EDC1S7LKC HAAXXrOVCR PROFOSCD TOTAL HAADCOVXA ^ . VARIANCE ^ ..f. ^4k a.f. £OOt_S£CT15 31.*31 a F 34.702 7Y tS^O^ 7A y 34.702 7^ 34.202 34.207 OTHER SECTIONS reodirtp •MiiOifif o«ifht C mr .I ____________ FRrkiAf (Min. I _ _ _ _ _ _ EXIST PIC fl PROPOSED VARIAWCE CODE SCCTIOW_ LAND OlVlSlOlit plat ____ RLS ______ unplttttad O AVAlLABJLJTVt •d^«c«nt lot»/p«rc«l« (•! vacant acparata owncrahip January 1» 1975 CAmerahlp TOPOCRAPHY includes I laksahors ___ _____ atasp slopes __ open areas GEOCRAPMY affecting applicstioni ___ lot aiae/ahapes consistent ACCZdfti ne^ l/^ existing ____ lota/parcela per application f occupied _____ aafw# owncrahip J^^aingle aeparste combined with other parcels not in this application _ wetlands _ _ high grenmd _ _ _ level ground __ rolling hills ____ wooded areas unusual lot ahape _unusual building location Incof^istent with neighborhood develoFvsent county/state availableOriLlTIESt City sever _ _ septic systen ___ new proposed co^ 'tty Ir connected;City water caiatlng confonsing private _ _ available connected existing substandard existing non-conforaifig LAND USE Subject lot is ✓occupied EXlSTXliC LAND USE PROPOSAL affects vacant ired to aoning use districts’Z y principal conformIng conditionaluse acccaaory building or ose non-oonfoming use STRUCTURES =\ f4 niSTUKS aUXLDIi^ Deficiencies I PROPOSAL TYFEt do not ctuaply with aoning performance standards 4tTXtm/ ,_7 it > ntixaly lOM building or use review as ITD# building or use (coat exceeds SDK FHV} review es EXPANSXGM of existing (cost leas then 50X FNV) filiating building FAIR MARKET VALUE (yr) ______ f,________ PROPOSAL will will not reduce an existing eubatanderd yard dimension TAXES & ASSESSMENTS MorutTY n>. iota/Parcele tAXESi ere PAID current are not legally conblned for tax purpoaaa. ere DELtHQUEin to year Aaaeaaeenta Levied • Sewer unite Water (no|unite ujLir ur ORONO LAND USE PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS & RECOMMENDATIONS EXHIBIT 6 P^ge 1 PREPARED FOR: BY: N*r>nii«t Cu»wi««lon Mtrctlnq (Dale) OMincil »h>etln9 |lMt«) ____________ Ittaffl _____________ Utaff) _______ Aft^juoL 3. /f^£> # K 4 Q APPLICATION REVIEWED BY:\ •. AdminifltrAtor • ^ _ City Attorney . City D>9inMr Vill»9# Hennor Jj^Zoning Adainistrater Planning Gojaiiaaion Park ODawiaaion Public Worka Coordinator Public Safety Director Finance Director Building Xnapector Hennepin Cty. DOT Minn. State DOT Minn. Offs MCWD SPECIAI. COMMENTS P ‘ •; * R r*1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION —' APPBOVE application eo aubnittod ArrMWE •pplleattam to followlnf coadltioM ------ TAUX •pplleatloo for MMltienal iofeiaatlon —~ application for aeaaona notod above SUGGESTED FINDINGS 11 1.Ihm •pacial conditions spplyiny to the etructure or land in question ere peculiar to such proficrty Of isssadiataly aurroundinq property and do not apply qencrally to other land or atructuras in the district in which said land is located; OM The conditions applyinq to the structure or land in question are not peculiar to such piopcrty or ineiediataly aurroundinq property but do apply qenerally to other land or structures in the district in %diich said land is located. qrantinq of the application ie ______ is not necessary for the preservation and anloyisent of a 1. substantial property riqht of the applicant. Ihe qrantinq of the proposed variance will not in any way impair the public health, safety, comfort, morals or qenexal welfare; Oil Ihe qrantinq of the proposed variance may impair the public health, safety, comfort, sorals or qaneral welfare. 4.the qrantinq of thq proposal Plan or the toning Code; Oil riance will not be contrary to the intent of the Comprehensive Land Dae The qrantinq of the proposed variance would be contrary to the intent of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan or the Zoninq code. S.y_ The qrantinq.of auch variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrated hardships or difficulties? OP the applicant has demonstrated no recognised hardship or difficulty and therefore the qrantinq of such variance tioold merely serve as a convenience to such applicant. 4.t>J> 7. / jjj li'* r^'*'rr 1^ ^ AaJk _^-*1^ JL— SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 3. >1 J. 4. S. 4. »ss m a « 0tkii£r7 #540 SCO"’'-■ Tr 0 or X^.^ r Z n e -0 I % CP >oo -• ' « -------^ I — I^- •‘ I ” i <=3 #540 T 1 1 *xs •p- s I? i8 SB ■;5 ■o ii •~* 2 *n If o «» S £ \ Qsd »> y S o iS§ilii>% I ^ f^1*1 *1? i o X Ov VN >*“ ®9 ■i'- i)' I I" S: 6 "Z_ \ ^ • ✓I ^540 /d #540 t 7* ft '' •■a o 581^1* ■i Ii‘ ^ i Io j£kUch /-a #540 L Ell. ■ w f ;• i - .-L'' ♦», . £x.klUf- /3 TO: FROM: DATE: Planning Commission and Council Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator February 27, 1980 #541 SUBJECT: #541 Ministers Life Development, 1484 Shoreline Drive SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Zoning District LR-lA Subdivision - 6 lot plat - total acreage 15.8 acres jjjg applicant proposes a subdivision of six lots for the Halpin property. In this plan, the developer has attempted to retain the same feeling and character of the old estate. The original plantings have been saved and tied into logical ovmership patterns. The developer proposes realigning the road from the intersection of County Road 15, retaining the same access location but this will not involve a change or loss in landscaping. Plat Review Access Road - the access on County Road 15 will remain but as noted above the plat road will be realigned. The plat road will be private and designated as a 50* wide outlot and a 100' width at the cul-de-sac. In keeping with the developer's plan to maintain the unique character of the property and the City's environmental concern, the road is to be paved and of a minimum width similar to the P. Gerald Mills platting to the south. The City engineer will review and determine a feasible and adequate width. The applicants have placed the cul-de-sac at the edge of Lot 2 and ask the Planning Commission to consider a private driveway easement through Lot 2 serving Lot 3. This will allow ^e use of an existing driveway serving the main house and the Wakefield house. The driveway is in excellent condition and surrounded by many plantings. A cul-de-sac located further west on the property would destroy many of those plantings. A road outlot through Lot 2 will create another riparian outlot. Riparian Rights - Three of the six lots have direct lakeshore access. The remaining lots are to have riparian rights through a designated outlot on Smiths Bay. In the Mills application. Council was specifically concerned that each outlot on Smiths Bay have the required 200' width along lakeshore. How does Planning Commission feel about the 90', 85' and 80' outlets? How many would you approve for this plat? Lot Requirements - It appears that all lots but Lot 2 will meet the required 200' of width along the front line of the house. Lot 2 is hindered by the attempt of the developer to keep the plantings (specifically a line of shrubs) within ownership of the estate lot. The existing structures meet all of the setbacks for the zoning district. The structure on Lot 2 will be removed when a main structure is built. February 27, 1980 #541 Ministers Life Dev. Subdivision Page 2 #541 Septic Information - Please review Mike Gaffron's memo. He cautions provisions be made to protect designated drainfield area of Lot 1 during the period of road construction. Hennepin County Highway Department - Please note the change in County Road 15 proposed by Highway Department. A complete realignment of some 500* of road is proposed taking at one point a 100* wide corridor from the subject property. The City is very much in favor of making that curve safer for Orono residents and requests the additional right of way. The City would like to review all fJuture plans the County has for County Road 15. ^ .*4 5^541 •s memo. He cautions ield area of Lot 1 ;e the change in County ilete realignment of some 100' wide corridor from I favor of making that le additional right of way. the County has for County • • • * Land Use Application * . ' »PE OF REQUEST LOCATION OF PROPOSAL (or property) . .^g^^bdivision ?150+?10.00/ Address Cm. Legal Description _ _ applicant Name^^^,^^^'^4K< (P/iAU^ SS:3^/ CMNER Name Tel it Mailing address ionalgKJse Lot ^ o ^ _ _ Rezoning $250 _ _ Riprap $15 ($65) FEE ^ SJyy Date Rec' d 9'Q ^yr/Aj. Present u7e _ _ Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request Specify Ordinance Requirements __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ your request and reasons for same i PbJ- n>+ z9>‘ VARIANCE required - extent of nonconformity ____Area __________ Setback Front___ Side _^^i<ridth Other, explain Rear Specify hardships to property L/^tutt/fK SUBDIVISION application Residential Other, explain No. of Lots CONDITIONAL USE AND OTHER - explain proposed use of property in detail MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE APPLICATICMI (Must be submitted 10 days prior to Planning Commission meeting) Application completed Plat map section Certificate of survey of property sketch location and setbacks of proposal Construction plans, if applicable 5.Certified Property Owner's list of owners within (300') (150*)- from Hennepin Co. Dept, of Finance A-603 Government Center Stamped, legal sized envelopes(#10 pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list. DATE Applicant's Signature DATE Omer's Signature Applicant hereby agrees to provide all informatfion required or requested bv the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning CommissiSi and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all fees as established by ordinance. t - - - - -- -- - - - - 5/78 #541 TO;Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator FROM:Michael P. Gaffron, On-Site Systems Manager DATE:February 25, 1980 SUBJECT: On-Site Evaluation/ Green Trees Subdivision #541 I have reviewed the soil testing and evaluation report submitted by the applicant and recommend approval of the proposed division subject to the items noted below: Lot 1 - Percolation rate and indicated water table depth will allow a standard drainfield. Extreme care must be taken to protect this area from construction trafficand disturbance due to its proximity to the existing road. Lot 2 - Percolation rate and water table depth will allow a standard drainfield. Depending on final placement of house, additional testing might be necessary prior to issuing a building permit. Lot 3 - Has existing house and drainfield. No problems with existing drainfield were noted. Testing showed adequate area and soils for future drainfield. A new well to be located on the lot will not encroach on drainfield areas. Lot 4 - Existing mansion - will have new drainfield installed in tested area. Percolation rate and water table will allow standard drainfield. Lots 5 & 6 - Soil testing indicated fair percolation rate for those holes which did not freeze. Soil textures would indicate no problems will be encountered with a standard drainfield system, although some additional testing to verify water table depth and extent of good soils will be required prior to issuance of permits. Based on the information presented and the soil types indicated, I am confident that adequate areas of suitable soil exist on each proposed lot to support satisfactory septic systems. Some additional testing will be required on certain lots prior to issuance of permits; however, I feel we are justified in approving the proposed lots based on the information presented. Please note that about one-third of the percolation tests on this division failed due to freezing and frost depth. We always warn prospective developers that perc tests taken in the winter may very well fail due to frost. This case again proves the point. •T-ia~T-'T in- . TO: FROM: ^ g <o Planning Cominission and Council Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator DATE: February 28, 1980 SUBJECT: #539 Jcunes Rivers, 1440 Shoreline Drive - REZONING In the process of reviewing the 1979 Marina application of Windward Marine, staff noted a discrepancy in the assumed zoning boundary line between the commercial and residential properties owned by Mr. Rivers. Please refer to Exhibit 1. Mr. River's application involves a request to rezone Areas A, B & C from LR-IA to B-2. Previous to the 1979 review, it was assvimed that Area A was zoned B-2 and all marina operations were limited to Areas A and D. Area B was utilized for overflow parking from the marina operation. Last year the applicant presented a plan that would have utilized Areas A, B, C and D for the marina operation. See Exhibit 2. It was this further encroachment into what was always assumed a residential zone that necessitated a more in-depth study of the zoning boundaries and the discovery that Area A was zoned residential. Brief Review of Zoning for Subject Property AREA A AREA B AREA C AREA D 1950 Commercial Residential Residential Commercial 1967 LR-IA LR-IA LR-IA B-2 1974 LR-IA LR-IA LR-IA B-2 I have enclosed the Council's resolution £unending Windward Marine's 1979 Commercial Dock License. See Exhibit 3. The applicant has accepted the City's position on the existing zoning boundaries. In his application he states the following reasons for the rezoning: "the rezoning of the above described property to conform with actual use and to be in accordance with the zoning map as published and representations of the City with reference to prior zoning classifications and allowed use". Council has made no commitments and has recommended that "the City and Windward Marine investigate the issues and alternatives surrounding the proper zoning district boundary location". Mr. River's rezoning application asks for an entire rezoning of the property including Area C which was never part of the marina operation. Planning Commission members be advised to call the staff offices if they have any questions. n •x Jk \JZ\\Jv*\J 0 V/ strator ne Drive - REZONING 1 application of Windward ssumed zoning boundary line parties owned by Mr. Rivers, plication involves a request . Previous to the 1979 review, nd all marina operations were ized for overflow parking from cant presented a plan that r the marina operation, chment into what was always ed a more in-depth study of ^ at Area A was zoned residential. C AREA D ential Commercial t B-2 B-2 amending Windward Marine's t 3. The applicant has ing zoning boundaries. In easons for the rezoning: lerty to conform with actual ,ng map as published and :e to prior zoning classifications recommended that "the City and id alternatives surrounding :ion". Mr. River's rezoning 5f the property including i operation. D call the staff offices if Land Use Application * LOCATION OP PROPOSAL (or property) Legal Description See Attached_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Tel #_423-B249 OF REQUEST Lvision $150+$l0.00/ Lot ±ional Use $50 APPLICANT Name Tnmoa Mailing Address 1A44 Shoreline Drive, Wayzata, MN 55391 James RiversOWNER Name Mailing Address 1444 Shoreline Drive Tel #_673-al49 __ Rezoning $250 (no fee) ___ Riprap $15 ($65) Date Rec'd A — By ^ ■ /I. AVxl____________ The legal description of city is _______________________ Present Zoning lakeshore residential _______ Present Use Lakeshore copwn*-^^'t*»T Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request Specify Ordinance Requirements ________________ Explain your request and reasons for same The ^eqltoa^ ie fho ro-rnn<T'g above-described property to conform with actual use and to be in accordance with the zoning map as published and representations of the cltv with reference to prior zoning classifications and allowed use. VARIANCE required - extent of nonconformity _ _ _ Lot Area _ _ _ Setback Front _ _ _ Width _ _ _ Other, explain Side Rear Specify hardships to property SUBDIVISION application Residential Other, explain ! i No. of Lots CONDITIONAL USE AND OTHER - explain proposed use of property in detail MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE APPLICATION (Must be submitted 10 days prior to Planning Commission meeting) 1. Application completed 2. Plat map section - i 3. Certificate of survey of property sketch location and setbacks of proposal 4. Construction plans, if applicable 5. Certified Property Owner's list of owners within (300*) (150')- from Hennepin Co. Dept, of Finance A-603 Government Center 6. Staunped, legal sized envelopes(#10 pre-addressed to each of the names on the ed)ove list. ♦ » DATE » ^ 4 Applicant's Signature DATE V Owner*8 Signature Applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and -Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all fees as established by ordinance. __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ 5/78 % o>-------------- I 1 ..................•-■•• CiKTlflCAtt OF SUlWn ItR JAWS 0. WF« »„ Cc«rr™.«t U.t 1. S.CU-. ij •A*' C m ^\\ ^ V V % vf» \. i s; Vonx •» / c.o •>€ 7^n\ 7^. n\ 4’-*^ Ni) ^ L L^ at 1,1ns «orU-rU »" ^ «" • "- crru“; .. - - Se*i*» 22 Diit I 6-lV^ Gomon J4. v«.“- " -- Und S'"^ ®** •*'•* *^^‘**^ Lrrw ti.<*. V.tnre^rt* ; trir-rurf.^ Iron nnrktr ••x0 • ----------- # ^. • fc *r • • • » 1 r-.rU.t •■fi''. ;' * ^ ' J.. ,. . •• M •' V • 'f r.' "“!. . -‘r • ••• ••; ■*; •?. ■ «, •-• * "jrl * , • • -r> ^ '**’**• ^ ,* / , ,. .• I .• .*rl»» ./• ' • , , ,r< .1 •• » • • % ^I . .r; f !.♦. I*.*-* ' - • • * • )f.. V ^ 4 .» »* r Ai” L • !»••■ .... •..'. ••■- •' . .In *. * ' • • * !•**• * • ^ , •-. •• •. ■ r*. • f ..1 • •. T I *•"• • »• • ‘ . .1 • . —. - • 7 r •! ; •, . • •! •• f • • I • .. • rl**^ • V 4* ’ • ’ . .r* *i»» ••*• • •. ; I ^ ^ • I . » • ^ Inin ! 2-^80 ulilft I . -•»*il-.. v-.l3«> 'L'^L .. M . k -«\t.^k ---------» I ^ 0 1 po *(•VP:.V • r;% •%•• ► til «» » flfel #539 ! li I I ^ ?5 5Om Ocn O 33 O ; ■ (s^ (ahI ts CO IatI AHENDMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. 1023 VINDKARO MARINE 1979 COMMERCIAL DOCK LICENSE WHEREAS, Resolution 1023 was adopted on April 3, 1979, thereby granting a 1979 Conmercial Dock Liccnre for 75 slips to Windward Marine in accordance with the approved dock plan. Exhibit B, which license specifically excluded approval for 9 additional slips and 30 moorings (buoys) located north of the official zoning district boundary line, which slips and moorings have been licensed by the City in 1977 and 1978; and WHEREAS, the location of the zoning district boundary are in dispute; and WHEREAS, Mr. James Rivers and Windward Marine have in past years worked in good faith with the City in improving the appearance and operation of the marina and have made substantial improvements and entered into lease agreements for the 1979 boating season in the belief that the operations in 1978 and prior years were within a proper commercial zone; and WHEREAS, Mr. James Rivers and Windward Marine have requested the City to permit continued lease and use of the subject 9 slips and 30 moorings for the 1979 boating season with the understanding that such authorization would not constitute an admission on the part of the City that Mr. Rivers is entitled to use the disputed property for commercial purposes in any subsequent year or an admission on the part of James Rivers that he is not entitled to use said pro perty as he has been using same in prior years. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby amends Resolution No. 1023 and the 1979 Conmiercial Dock License of Windward Marine to permit use of all 84 slips and 30 moorings shown on Exhibit B during the 1979 boating season, without a commitment by the City to license or permit such use in any subsequent year, while the City and Windward Marine investigate the issues a" ■ alternatives surrounding the proper zoning district boundary location as a goc ' faith effort by the City to continue the working relationship with Mr. Rivers and Windward Marine. This license amendment shall be effective upon agreement by James Rivers and Windward Marine to the stipulation that this approval is for the 1979 boating season only and does not constitute an admilsion on the part of the City to the continuation of such use of any subsequent year. I (we) hereby agree to the above stipulation with the express understanding that I (we) do not waive any existing or future right to contest any determination by the City Council regarding the location of the zoning district boundary or the existance of a non conforming use. AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. 1023 Page 2 /: / *{'iu’1*^1 I James P. Rivers, Wibdward Marine, Inc.Date / Lt lUc o.. Mary H. Rivers, Windward Marine, Inc.D^t e f The City Council hereby agrees to undertake a full review of the issues involved in determining a proper zoning boundary location in the area of Windward Marine. Adopted as an Amendment to Resolution No. 1023 on this 12_ _^day of June 1979. William B. Van Nest, Mayor ATTEST: Walter son, Clerk/Administrator % . / o> ^m0 / •<• »*/ •« •« • • t»mt% mf ► I «• if ; 4 i c &aT]»ic 4I& cr suiwn fca ji>js D. Kjvgis In CovnmcMnt Lot I, SocUor. IU117.2> \ % Xnt 4••»»••«»•«»» 4 • S*t. vSTitWv*<,y Y‘'€%ansAd *f$h: P*^^ #/ €9^uf*^ /4< /W 0 *%N \ \"S t :i^N If U0H •/ ^%^ff 00-apt^f •« ^•%0r»Pu^00 mm0i. A m^. Ha0000p»0t C00^/ ' ^ 1 CortifievU of Sunr^i 1 horotagr c«rtlf> D m! tMi lo o Ira oral eorroet ropr^oontatioo of o ourvojr of tho bouo- d? riot of tho NoribMotorlj UJ foot of tho Soutbooot- orlgr IB5 foot of tut port of Cooomoont Lot I, Soctlon U, •'" Tbioiohlp 117 Nortlif Monot 2j boot of Uio 5U* Prlnclpol Ivtrloioo, Itorthorlj of tho foUooing-ooocilbod lino ond Ito SouUioootorl/ oitoMflooi Cooroncln^ «t tho Modor comor on tho North lino of oold (oofualoc North lln# of oold Goromoont Lot 1 oo booriB4 WEST) o dlo- foiiit of boclnnln,: of tho lino bolng doocrlbod: thoneo North 67® 4«* loot to tho oUro or iaN o moMionko, ond Uioro onciu^. Sooloi 1* s x>* fioU • 6-l>7» o I Iron oorkor fcurvi 0 I Iron oorkor oot 1 ! ‘.r*: * I ri •• • • • .» t 1 • « I * * ' . ! J I r .1- ' ; ^ 7 - ; ^ m\-\ •: t : . tr*ro f, ...... ----i fiou t Gonlon A. Cofho iS^JnhTlS^ Locd Surro^-or ond Plonnor Lon« Uko, Klnnoocto # ‘ # O * 4« . It : • . . T . r.t «, .1 'r r. 4 - ■ - n 4 • . 1 i • f r\t' ; : •:. i u* . ri* i j 4 i.-;i. t • • . .r tr r * * * ». *» .*»r\ .1 • ‘ ' * • * . • * i • * • -V *• . : . M • * •* If « :•w. . . *i , . ..I . t , , , • '• *7 f U • - ;, . •* '• ’•* f: i. i*.., i: I . Cor: If iw-4<yr\ ».:*4 >4vif. I , i I- ft » • ‘ * . .