The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06-23-1980 Planning PacketAGE N*D A' PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, JUNE 23, 1980 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL 1. Call to Order t Roll PUBLIC Information meeting 2. 7:30 P.M. #557 E. T. Mertz, 1820 Fox Street - SUBDIVISION » ACTION ITEMS 3. 4. 5. #482 #551 #555 Loren Klitzke, 555/575 Oxford Road - FINAL SUBDIVISION John L. Brooks, 795 North Ferndale Road - SUBDIVISION Cortlen Cloutier, 2480 Casco Point Road - VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 6. 7. 8. 9. #556 #560 #564 #565 10. #566 11. #567 Richard Hawkinson, 4625 West Bremch Road - SUBDIVISION Robert Mortenson, 1205 Arbor Street - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Russell Hagen, 1905 Eagerness Point Road - VARIANCE Alan Dale, 2690 Pheasant Road - VARIANCE Steve Haverberg, 3215 Crystal Bay Road - VARIANCE Michael Lynn, 1265 Bracketts Point Road - VARIANCE WORK SESSION 12. tio3 Stephen Ward, 4695 North Shore Drive - SUBDIVISION 13. #561 Kellers Market, 3800 Wayzata Boulevard - VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SKETCH PLAN REVIEW 14. #568 Daryle Uphoff, 2497/2499 & 2501/2503 Kelly Avenue » SUBDIVISION % APPROVAL OF MINUTES 15. Meeting of June 9, 1980 INFORMATION ITEMS 46. Cancel July 7, 1980 Meeting? • Si I CVoK\i City of Orono, Minnesota StiMt Nuntering Max Map ,w I >■- %\4- t m . if TO;Planning Commission and Council FROM:Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator DATE: June 3, 1980 SUBJECT; 1557 E.T. Mertz, 1820 Fox Street - SUBDIVISION WORK SESSION Zoning District RR-IB Subdivision - 2 lot plat:Lot 1 Lot 2 2 acres 4.72 acres The applicant proposes a division of his 6.72 acres homestead into two lots. Each lot meets the standards of the zoning district. Access shall be directly off Fox Street for both lots. There are no wetlands involved. The applicant has not submitted the required septic testing information for Lot 1. All existing structures meet the setbacks of the district. Staff will schedule a Public Information Meeting as soon as the septic infoitnation is received. JUNE 4, 1980 STAFF UPDATE Septic information has been received - a Public Information Meeting has been scheduled for 7:30 P.M. on June 23, 1980. JUNE 16, 1980 STAFF UPDATE The On-Site Manager recommends approval of the Mertz subdivision per his report dated June 6, 1980 (see enclosure). Staff recommends approval based on the following conditions; 1. Payment of park fee for Lot 1 of $200.00. . 2.All new septic installation to conform with on-site manager's report and recommended septic design of consultant. 3.Curb cut on Fox Street for Lot I's driveway subject to Public Works Coordinator's review. #557 TO: FROM: Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, On-Site Systems Manager DATE:Juhe 6# 1980 SUBJECT: Site Evaluation - #557 Edgar T. Mertz, 1820 Pox Street SUBDIVISION The soils and site evaluation report for the proposed new lot has been submitted and reviewed. My boring on the site confirmed the boring logs submitted. While slight mottling was found at a depth of 4ij feet, Indicating some seasonal saturation, it would appear that a shallow standard drainfield system can be installed on the site with room for an alternate system to the south of the lot. I also reviewed the existing septic system for the Mertz residence and it appears to be functioning correctly. There is ample area on the lot for future drainfield should reconstruction ever be necessary. Based on this infomation, I recommend approval of the subdivision as proposed. f TO:Planning Consnisslon and Council FROM:Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator DATE:June 17, 1980 SUBJECT: #482 Loren Klitzke, 555/575 Oxford Road - FINAL SUBDIVISION The applicant has met all of the conditions for final plat approval. Mr. Klitzke did not change the original drainage easements as designated in the Stielow Addition, the recorded Flowage and Conservation Easement is still in effect. Staff recommends approval of the final subdivision subject to the attached resolution. I V K'. ! ) . ,r <l ' ] . i } m : illllMiMIP jjiiri! In *1 !l 9 ii' |i i| I i I I i i ' • ! ! I i > I I I I 1 I I « f B II I 1 IkM I . I j N 7sm >oo 5 W Hi I! IP pII iii II III ill f r <1 ii f} • ^ I I ip |i i 11 Ii ;s! {;.!! Illi iiHL'Ii* 11 i I (I •iI 'f I ilii!ini! Ii’ I! 1 ftm i* I III Ii!I !!' 1 € ! ► I I :i. - ‘ M City of ORONO • 1 ‘CITY .^OF ^ ORONOA RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _______________ m A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF KLITZKE ADDITION ........TSfe SK ss;! WHPREAS the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted suMivisio^^lit^S. iS the orderly, economic and .afe develo(»ent of land within the Cityj and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including; 1. Dedication of drainage and utility easements. 2. Dedication on the plat of a drainage thedrainageway in Lot 1 and over the marsh area along the shoreline of Lot 1 and Lot 2. 3. Payment to the City for legal and engineering fees in the amount of $50.00. wnw therefore, be it resolved, that the City Council of the City of OrZ'h™^»io“. the pl.t of Klitzhe edition, Hennepin County, Minnesota; subject to the following conditions. 1.The aforesaid plat shall be «County Recorder's Office on or before Decen^r 30, 1980 together with a certified original copy of this Resolution. 2.Lot 1 has had a drainfield site tested and approved for installation of a shallow trench drainfield according to ordinance No. 210, which site just be ^eswed for said purpose. An alternate site has been designated and requires mound system. «*3.The originally approved drainfield site KlitzkeMdition, formerly 5, Stielow Addition, not be effected by the subdivision. • V PAGE_/of ri CITY V OF i ORONO.^ City of OR.ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4. ’ » All conditions of Resolution No. 939 approving the original Stielow Addition which applied to the pro^rty now redivided as Klitzke Addition shall continue in effect including all recorded easements easement over the drainage area now on Lot 1 and • Lot 2, Klitzke Addition. The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the plat has not^^been filed by the date Jh? event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated this day of 1980. william B. Van Nest, Mayor ATTEST: Walter R. Benson, City Administrator PAGE OF ^ #551 TO:Jeanne Manusth. Zoning Administrator FROM:Michael Gaffron, On-Site Systems Manager DATE:June 16» 1980 •SUBJECT: #551 SUBDIVISION - John L. Brooks, 795 North Ferndale Road The site evaluation report for the Brooks application has been submitted and reviewed. Soils were found to be suitable for a standard drainfield system. My boring on the site verified the soil types Indicated in the report. The lot with the existing home has ample area for future drainfield should it ever become necessary. I would recommend approval of the subdivision. If all of Orono had soils such as found on this site, we would have few septic system problems throughout tho City. •WW-.a-.- • I ♦ • • t ■ V i #551 «■ April 17, 1980 John L. Brooks 795 North Ferndale Road SUBDIVISION Page 2 JUNE 16, 1980 - STAFF UPDATE following conditions; 1. Flowage and conservation easement taken over the designated wetlands. 2 Lot 2 to grant a private driveway and utility easement to Lot 1. 4. Payment of park fee for Lot 2 of $200.00. - - i f n' t . ■ r> .. f ‘ •• Certificate of Survey ior John L. Broo’Ka of Trnet A, Haglatered Land Survey No, 1031 Hennopin County, Mlnneaota #551 L^ral Q<»?crli>tlon Ir*trt A, Hoc'lat^^r^d L/^nc SnT-v^^v Ite, X03l, of R^^iPtr^ir of Connty of Fy'iinonin. I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a surv’ey of the bo'-indarles of the abcve-^lescrlbed property, the location cl all existing? hulldlnKs thereor, ani the Location of ar. existing driveways It does not purix'rt to show other iRprovemerts or encroach- mentf. • *' i Gordon ri. Toff In He N -. 60^ Sea Lei 1" = 200* Date I 1-24-BO o I Iron r«r<er Cordon R. Coffin Co. Larid Surveyors and Planners Long Lake, Kirjieeots \ n ::aEaaK E TO: FROM: DATE: Planning Ccinmi'^sion and Council Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator June 19, 1980 SUBJECT:Cloutier, 2480 Casco Point Road VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT following?* meeting, staff was asked to respond to the A) Legalities of hookup to main house utilities: All such work would have required separate permits that is if had received ofticHl approval iith V laaued eh!® a b^lSg188UGQ for the connsctlno sower end i inAo ^ B) How is the subject property assessed? at $1,200. assessor values the boathouse C) Determination of new construction: "«« construction involved Review of Applicant's position: a*'boathois“Ld°gue?t*apLtSeit*valSed*at“$20^^ construct “spl^tl?? °Durto*^?8Sn2^p?oblSSs*'*the*^*" buildii^ 5uest apwtien? an alart — screened porih and or inteSsificStlon? ^ original plan and not additions :e «s 9 1 ? )' June 19, 1980 Cortlen Cloutier 2480 Casco Point Road Variance ft CUP Page 2 Staff's review of the application and recommendation: 30‘ invalid if an inspection has not been called within 120 days. A request for a new building permit opened the entire project up to a zoning review. At this point in time a screened porch and e remodelina of the second story room into a guest apartment cannot fall under simple repair or alteration. In 1971 the zoning code would have required a CUP for guest apartment use. ^he^athouse is non-conforming because of its location within the 0-75 setback area. Planning Commission should review the non-conforming use sections of the zoning code (31.100 - 31.110) specifically 31.105, 31.108, 31.109 and 31.110. The code defines the intent and future for all non-conforming uses and structures. . . . . . . to gradually fade away. . . The applicant can paint and repair his boathouse, ^pairs can be made to the second story deck and interior room. Planning Commission may grant a CUP for the applicant to construct a guest 5°“?® principal structure's setbacks and most certainly out of the 0-75 ledceshore setback area. Applicant would be charged for ^ additional water unit and sewer unit - an additional SAC charge would alf® collected with a building permit. Planning Commission may not legally grant a variance to the standards set forth in the non-conforming use sections of the code. 34'- “1 h ____i >£---------------------------------------------------------- > 7 -10 " \ RrepOS&D Add\”V<o*4 Dec<UK\ I A - * * r.A. u #556 TO: FROM: DATE: Council and Planning Conunission Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator June 19, 1980 'SUBJECT: #556 Subdivision - Richard Hawkinson, 4625 West Branch Read The On-Site Manager has advised the Zoning Administrator that he reels it unnecessary to delay preliminary approval of the Hawkinson plat. He notes the testing completed vinder the direction of the agricultural extension division has provided sufficient proof that the designated lot lines on preliminary plans will not have to be realigned because of septic concerns. There is adequate and suitable area for drainfield construction. The Zoning Administrator submits the following recommendation for your review: 1. 2. Conservation and flowage easement over designated wetland. Road and utility easement over the 25' private driveway corridor length to equal distance of adjacent Moore easement. Applicant to supply metes and bounds description for driveway. 3. 4. 5. Dedication of additional right of way for West Br2Uich Road. Park dedication fee of $200.00 for Lot 2. Before final approval, the following must be submitted for On-Site Manager's review: a) Site plan for Lot 2 designating location of house, driveway, well, primary drainfield, secondary drainfield, and other proposed improvements. b) Test information for alternate drainfield site for existing house on Lot 1. c) Applicant to designate and preserve secondary drainfield site if need for mound system arises. d) Applicant enter into an agreement with the City to affirm the above items (A-C). 1 I?: sM TO: FBOM: DATE: SUBJECT: #560Planning Commission and Council Jeanne Mabusth« Zoning Administrator June 5, 1980 #560 Robert & Joanne Mortenson, 1205 Arbor Street Conditional Use Permit WORK SESSION Zoning District: RR-IB AREA: approximately 3.7 acres APPLICABLE ORDINANCE: 34.025 The applicant proposes construction of a 48' X 52.5' greenhouse» 13>s' in height, that meets all the setbacks of the zoning district. There is approximately a 100' setback between the proposed greenhouse and existing house. There is adeguate area for additional off-street parking on the site. The applicants have stated there will be no need for any extensive exterior lighting - only one outside light. The building inspector has reviewed the plans and type of greenhouse proposed and he finds no problem. Jacobs does request the information on "testing" referred to in the engineer's memo when the applicant submits plans for a building permit. AS for screening, there is a natural screening of trees along the rear and side of the greenhouse. The slope of the lot along the street side provides another natural barrier. The on—site manager will report on the location of the drainfield and the proposed location of the greenhouse for the June 23, 1980 meeting. STAFF UPDATE - JUNE 16, 1980 I have reviewed the wetlzmds maps and find there are no designated wetlands within the subject property. Questions to be answered in consideration of the Mortenson application are as follows: 1. Does this use appear compatible with pattern of neighborhood development? 2,. Does P. C. feel the access road is adequate for this kind of operation? 3. What specific limitations would an operation of this kind require? a) limitation of one physical plant b) limitation on "traffic generating" activities 4. Would there be a dimunition in neighbor's property values? 5. Would proposed operation be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare? TO: FROM: DATE: Jeanne Mabusth# Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, On-Site Systems Manag June 18, 1980 #560 SUBJECT: #560 Robert Mortenson, 1205 Arbor Street Conditional Use Permit - Septic System Report This site and the existing septic system have been reviewed. The existing system while not meeting current standards, appears to be functioning correctly and needs no chamges at this point. The proposed greenhouse and parking area will not restrict present or future drainfield, therefore I see no reason to deny the application based on the septic system. % See attached sketch. r. '1- •€ * 1-- if- , L-% t - t ■ (. r t>• - 1 I ij li LAND USE PLANNING ZONING VARIANCE APPLICATION EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF ORONO f.O. Bos 66, Cryttsi Bay, KSnneaota 33323 INSTRUCTIONS; Flcaat first read the attached Inforpatlon Sheet. Complete lte«a 1-13 (Typ. or Print). It n.rdrd, Attach lettrr or other Inforrvitlon to better ^r.erlbt your r.quct. lneoap1.tr appllc.tlon. will not b. accepted. 1. t 7. f PROPERTY ADDRESS/f^S'/V./f/ (^/^OA/C^ Oll^l^gal dcacrlptloo shall be shown oif/attached Survey. Cshlbit 3 2. APPLICANT R„ssf// Phon. y 7/ - O Mallinf Address If Applicant is not ovneY, explain 3. OWNER M.-. Rusre//Phone *i7/ - Mailing Address Bate Property Acquired 7^ H 73 (Month/vear) I (do) (do not) also own other adjacent parcels of land Phone ___A. AGENT rim Mailing Address Applicant5 . NOTICES Should be sent to: 6. PRESENT ZONING USE DISTRICT PRESENT USE lU.ldaneUl X (other) .X CX#ncr Agent LIST OF EXHIBITS Description Initial Appllcatlof^ Bust Include: Application Forw Certificate of Fee Receipt Staff Information ^ Plat Map Inventory Staff Coanenta Other Information 7 8 9 10 11 12 Vacant Land Vacant Bulldlng(a)Occupied Bullding(a) 8. DESCRIBE REQUEST ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $ ^ OOP. QO __ eatabliah new uae ___ continue or expand cxiating uat Describe request in detail; Tlui/J J 9- r build new add on ____ model replace ^rntr. ^ o> r tfjf. e.___________ '.tr • « 4^ I i __ \ — -^taad« ■ » . i> LAND USE PLANNING ZONING VARIANCE APPLICATION EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF ORONO r.O. >o» 66. Cry«t«l Bay. Klnn»»ola J5323 *73-7357 LIST OF EXHIBITS P I De ahown on/'attach.d Survay. Exhibit 3 ^•crlption Addre*i /fV! If Applicant la not ovmet, explain _______ , Initial AppHcaMofi o*uat l^ludc: Application Fona Property (Wmrra Llat Certificate of Survey F«« Receipt #5^ OWNER m, Mallln* Addr... /f^-T r, r< . JP^ Date Property Acquired _;7~ y ^(K.„th/veaO I (do) (do^not) also own other adjacent parcels of land agent ----------------------------- Date Received ^ »y Staff Tnfonnatlon ^ Plat Map Inventory Staff Cooxnenta Other Inforratlon Flr« Hailing Addreaa NOT*XOES Should be sent to:Appllcent oimer Agent PRESENT ZONING USE DISTRICT PRESENT USE Reeldenttal ^ (Ocher) -/ Vacant Land Vacant Bulldlng(a)Occupied Buildlng(a) • Z, build Deu _ edd 00 _ re«,del _ repUee Describe request in detail: flui/J 3 Cmr-. 9« V^RIANCE(S) REQUIRED to do the rcqueaced Work: >/ Setbeek ( i/Front ____ Side t^Rearl Other >nta:1C, Describe UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS preventing cooplUnce Vlth zoning Code requlr LoT Ro^Jc —y f.—^Trrj^ju^a—~y t4^ De.crlbe-SDUE or WTIC.-:L-SrmcULTY ^ rcgulatlona 12. Describe EFFECT OF PROPOSED wnpv m~T~ — i'OSED WORK on neighboring propertie. end on the neighborhood In g.n„,3: ^application. -I Ibe AFFIICAKT hereby egree. u, provide ell info^aflon ***‘"‘*tretor. egr.ea n? fr*' ? eapenaea Incurred In fevlew ruoillL fr i'* i eertlflea thet the Inloru-tlon supplied la true and correct to the beat of hla knowledge- acknowledge* and agraea to thia appllcatieai hv cf^ ’•"•““hie «,try onto the property ‘ end Co’ *4? *’ **’"•****•"*•• agenta, coaniaalon aeabera. Purpoaea of Inveatlgatlon and verification of rhle^e>quetL: 7 - EXHIBIT 1 - 13 better LIST OF EXHIBITS I. Detcrlotlcm Initial AppllcaMoti oiXMt Inaludc: JC> t ly] Application Fona Property CKmrra Llai Certificate of Surve Fee RMclpt P»te Recelv^ A By IKi ) Staff Infonnaticm 4 flat Hap 5 of land Inventory Staff CoBoenta Other Inforcatiofi . Agent )> AUCTION COST $ ^ oog go aid ocv edd on ^ ^ <P/- — remodel _ replace Lot Width Hardcover nee vlth Zoning Code requircaenta: r.aultlBf froa strict «iforeea«>t of aonlpt > -od «m the neighborhood In sorrel: ate this application. ^ eckfMwledgeo and agreea to thla applicacl^' ‘®*’^*** reaacmable entry onto the property onaultanta, egenta. coeatsalon aieabert, era for purpoaea of inveacifat ion and tMsRequest: JPr y HC 1233 I P^ROPERTY owners list Oe^RTMCNT OF FINANCE A-$03 GOVERNMENT CENTER MINNEAPOLIS MN $548 LIST SIZE \Sd O tlono RCPIIE- 7NI8 ------------- wo MiviVKriPv COUfiTV EU eT^—*** ^*** ***^ aMOWLEOSE BIN CO. FINANCE DIVISION «;^^'CA^NE an accunat V7n V tn L" n ann^Tioy» infonmation as it afpeans HENNEPIN 0 FEE OWNER TAXFAVgr DATE. PAYER/ MAILING ADDRESS T-in 'E-7'^ SSS'Ji -J 'VF-: MJCHACL _^E>A1 » , I At/A/4ABLg jiSl- pAa672A/gSS -pj. 122> 18^^ - F/\6egA/ess T>r T?r> ^^0' C0/^C01ZQ \ A 'C-J* LUJSh ti. -hTU^Pi ^AVIO L. SLA\/lkr GlKAltD A'/l= SMWX Sig-A.r: \^0S~ PA6eiz//e.ss TT /VIA n- A\»CI<A6L T>. Mi// XJC£ ic. CL>RTKs - \^ACoClZh4E%& 'fT tJi I mZ6l - TA&GILMS^ PTJZh levr 1IU£ CUl • l>ARLg/- •pAC>6EA/g^S T>r TZn NlA CZ-g^'F^.T SZiOVsci PROPERTY ADORES I |0 T' T: ' I f I ff FOR;CERTIFICA*^ OF SURVEY ./£ fSf /f^ yfift <t3^^k 1 NWOjrer WEBEv?' .-r— — T— -^- I -----r—x J#^ «. legal DESCRIPTTOm That part o£ Lr»h 17 r* Commencing at the NorthSlIt^c? «s follows: 3^|s r.^-' »M. i . f; nka \ . • Ih'i I r. - % i « It le ^ » > »* ■Hi—V -iV 1^; V m ! s: I CITY OF OKONO EXHIBIT 5 LAND USE PLANNING ZONING VARIANCE INVENTORY #564 Zoning Use District l^K tC. DENSITY lOMIKUW HtUOlKIP ACTUAL VAWlAJiCt coot StCTlOW _/oo‘ /</«' SETBACKS .M KIKIKUK mCOUlilED 3 DriSTJNC FMOFOSO SI4« VAI11A>ICZ COOC SCCTIC3U « ^ /«.2^/ / Bl«f« tx> Bldf. lM\m»howm V«t)ai»Bs 75 rt. 75 PL. HARDCOVER LOT AREA J2ML F£R.*UTTXX> MAROCOVCII aJL___ CXISTIKC HARDCOVOt ■ .1. FAOf»OSO> , _ ^ HARDCOVER f.x. TOTAL VARLAHCr agfejg iXx____JC CODE StCTlOf 31.031 ‘ 34.701 lAk« 7S - 350 PL. 34.303 UAm 350 - 500 PL. 30* //^ S 3 ^ 33^ ^ J ^34.303 LiJk« 500 - lOOO PL. 35*34.303 OTHER SECTIONS REQDIREP Exisrmc PROPOSED VARIANCE COPE SECTION Ouildiof Cmr.I P«rkiAO |Nin. I LAND OIVlSIOOi plat MJi - vnplatlaO O lota/p«rc«ls p«r applicatiM ___ AVAIlARILITYt ad^acant lota/parcala fO I vacant occvplad _____ aaaia ovnarahip t^aapagala owncrahip a . . - -- JU^alngle acparate _ _ _ combined with other parcels not in this applicationJanuary 1^ 1975 (kmerahip TOROCRAfKT includeai ____ laXaahora _____watlanda ______ high ground _____ level ground rolling hilla ataap alopaa ____ open aiagp _ _ _ %<oodad ——tan aia^ It w unuai unuaual building locationGEOCRATHT affecting applications ^ unuaual lot ahapo lot aiaayahapat conaiatant _____ inconaiatant with neighborhood develofmnt «ifj^ _ _ _ county/atata _ _ _ private ...W. connactedi City water _ available ^ ACCESSi exiating UTJLlTlESt City aewar ____ available l/" connected} City water _____ available ^ connected ••pcie .y.l,.. ------- n.. ptopommA -------- oLtli., confor»l^ _____ mnlmting ..b.t.nd.id _____ .st.tlnp LAND USE Subject lot la vacant occupied EXXSTme LARD USE PROPOSAL af/acta iparad to aoning principal diatxicLi conforming uao tccaaaory building or eaa conditional uaa non-oonforming mao STRUCTURES msrxjw so2LomGS Deflcianciaai lAL TTPSt do not iply with aoning performenca standards •ntiraly KEN building or maa review aa KDI building or maa fcost aacaads 50% rifV) MOPQSAL mill —^-------------------------------------------------------------— — w WWW rVfVI 1^ review aa EXPANSION of exiating feoat laaa than 50% PNV) _ biating bmilding PAIR MARKET VALUE (yr) __ _ _ _ _ _ ____will not rodmea an dating aubatandard yard dinanaioo TAXES & ASSESSMENTS PROPERTY XO g Lata/farcala JSAKSSt nad in a r_a_PA lD_cu r rant.-Me..__n.»jL legally combined for tax purpoaas. EXHIBIT 5 e District CQDI SCCTIOH CODE SCCTK / # 3^f. S-S-JL 7/S. 3£jrr^ i CODE SICTiq 3i.«n ‘ >4.302 >4.202 >4.202 >4.202 JIXMiCE rahip mmpmtmXm ownership tx parcels net in this application ^ - rollinf hiila ^ connected exiatinp »forminf »al eee -eonfoainf up# i \m CITY OF ORONO LAND USE PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS & RECOMMENDATIONS ^—r II ___ rVUTIlTT 1 piHIBIT 6 Page I prepared FOR: Marinin^ Coaiilaaltm Maatlng (Data) Owmell Naatiitg (bata) Utaff) (Staff) ^ ^ u\T 'M, APPLICATION reviewed BY: • Adniniatrator • a City Attorney City Eh#inner Village Planner *oning Adniniatrator Planning Oonmiaaion VarA Cowiiaaion . V^lic Works coordinator »^*blic Safety Director Pinance Director Awildlng Inspector Aaptic Inspector - H«nnepin Cty. BOp . Hlnn. State DOT Minn. DNS MCWD LMCD 2ii special comments If-*— 2- A » STAFF RECONMENZMTION APPA ove Spplication ea sokiaittod i«Sl awllcati^, ^ fU-ii,* ------ T*Bfc» appUcatloo fo, additional infomatioa —. Mwr apnic.tloo PYUTWTT 1 . exhibit 6 Page 1 #56 -4 . H€nncpiii cty. DOT , Mliifi. Stat« ttor Miim. JONJi MCWD LNCD iLe n : r • % ■Cm"5T- land use planning STAFF COMMENTS & RECOMMENDATIONS ^ si . Page 2 SUGGESTED FINDINGS f564 4. ------- 7»i» yrantiity ef th« applieatioB <. •ub.fntl.l propTty »l,ht et thTJ^piicJ^: "-'....or for th. pr.,.rv.tlon .od «joy«.„t ef . ■— ■ 5|r»ntli»9 of tho propoiad varianctt will i Morals or ganoral wlfara; oil iopair tha public healthy aafatyp« coaifort« 9«n«ral wlfara. **** **"*”••* variance may Impair the poblic heal^. aafety. eoaifort. aorala or Wan or Zooi^varlanca will not be contrary to the intent of the Coiaprehenalve Land One ___ granting of the propoaed variance would be contrarv < Wan or the toning code. contrary to the intent of the Comprehenaive Land Uae « -navlito «fW«?tin,"«* applicant, hot ie neceaaary ^ /< A - — ^ SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. 2. j. 4. %s 0 M m • / —* 'JSSHTT ’e Page 2 ar* paculiar to aach |vo|>erty or “ !•"< or atruetnraa 1m tha dlatrict Ma M peculiar to aueh property or **•' ** etrueturaa in the dlatrlet lo lor tha praaarvation and enJoyMnt Of a ilr tha public health. aafaty.> eoiafon. >al^. aafety. coofort. aorala tha intent of the Cooprahenalva tend Oaa Intent of tha Caaiprahanaleo lond Oaa nlanca to tha applicant, but la nmcmmmmry p«lty and tharafora thm 9r*ntinf of aodi LAND USE PLANNING ZONING VARIANCE APPLICATION exhibit 1 ^ CITT OF ORONO day, Mlnnaaota 55323 473-7357 I V iHSThUCnotl S; riaaat firat read the ottaehad lofn».»< *v (»ypd _or frlMt). If iraadad. JttafhT^J!! * - I*(»yMfrriMt). LIST OF EXHIBITS PROPERTY ADDRESS i<T Ac..,., A.., J>./ V»*l —erlptla. .KaU bo TbU. o, attached iJr^.Uhmt 3 ' ^ ^ APPLICANT M— (c Paacrlatlnn Initial AoBlleaHM» ■uat iMlwda: jAI MtUlm Addraaa CT i Applieatioo Fon * -JC ffoparty Ownara Uat^ 3 Cartlfieata of Swrvaj Fee Rocalpc #' OWNER Bata. Mcaived A Staff fafoToatloo 4 - Flat Hap 1 I (do) (do not)) also own other adjacent parcels of landl ‘ __ mi cm^u -- Inventory fhona NiiliBg Addrata 3 • NOTICES dheuld W oaat t/oi Applicant fiS!!S!Lj[tllfiXl££|2B PRESENT ZONING USE DISTRICT ___ 7a PRESFNif USE Sealdantlal^^^^^^ (Other) __ Vaeont Land_____ Vacant BiaU4iiit(a) . Omiar Ad«nt AA- I n __ Occupied Bulldliic^ 8. I>^CRMJ^™t^ _ ^ CONSTRUCTION COST ______ — naw _ add an rtnoiil u Describe request in det.il: lj^\d 0^4. “ r* a \a » ^ p Util'Ll ceCS 6>!IED to do the raqiMitad WoiIl: i«tbarfi (____Front X tida Lot Aroa Lot Width Kaar) Othar 10. Des^lbe UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Fravantl.^ co-pllaMeo ulth fa-U, Cod. culr—tas —s/fe_b __4^ C-VA Describe I^ue HARDSHIP or PRACTl'^kl DIFFICULTY «auui.. fm. .met -for raftilationo » dbww&jx A •wvtdh^uif rron r a . 4t a - «• >>escrihe mg^oP PHOPOSED ^ ■« I,. ■ . lO 1 I ^ ^ oeltfdM.rln« proparctaa aod «« Aa nalghbortuusd tm M I m e ^ m. B al I ^ ^ A,The APPLICANT and the PROPERTY ounpr m.«oa- J j ^ -- --—-- - - - «* ^*wc*in haraby agra.."^ all date this application•— ragutrad or raouaatad b* th. IL7.: “ff!****^ The OUNCR har.h. ...w_________"HpAicac .On. ThTi^ iie« J rnurejCTr OWNER. AFFUCAWT haraby ograaa to proatda all infomation F^F all faa# and/or taniaiaal anDanaaB a. a e of thla application, and cartlflaa chat tha Inforuetlm^*” •uppllad la true and correct to the beat of hla knouladge; __C4_d5a. s snSa5*::5:.:s:ri:s:L t?* -FFnaatK ho EXHIBIT 1 / - LIST OF EXHIBITSf lattUl AaalleaHi mmc laalMdc: 9&7i- :/ ApplicatlMi fmm Pro^rcjr Oim«r« List C«rtific«t« mt lurvc^ //r«« lUcalM # iff InforuBtiew of land! * — iZ ICTION COST $f/Oty^' ^ «d4 M ___ MTi*M -^^rty4> > iX.cS ^ toe Vtoth cm with toBiag Omdm wmqulwmmmntm: 4-C> lu ly /iL l '‘§' w«lttos fn» •erlce ••f.rMMC mt - a _____________ te this application. ^ f.r rv^*. .f l»^.,tlg.tlo« m4 maJL ___ HC 1233 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST OEPARTMCNT OF FINANCE A-S09 GOVERNMENT CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55487 0\Lt> dLMtr^ NO LIST SISC tM I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REFRESENTEO ON THIS CERTIFICATE ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REFRE- SENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT AFFEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEFIN COUNTY IINANCE DIVISION. TO TNt StST OF MV KNOWLEOOE ^NO SEUEF. INNEFIN CO. FINANCE DATE FEE OWNER SI *J:^UEN ^^OX\iLVhJD^‘^ "butXfAVNg L. SCHm^LL w,5T.B/eN. A. UAVCtBegeiv jggBegir 6. /VI1 iiXELiDN tiV lljf*.. ILMLUAM U)Oi.FE ^V. ■jggoy -3. e^feE^ TAX PAYER/ MAILING ADDRESS S-n T-M7 T^-Z3 PROPERTY ADDRESS aa-4\U/AVZATA 0 Z73Z- TINJO T)?:.C^VSTAL- -SAV -El> 3>Z3S‘- CE.>jSTAt- BAV -^T:> •3Z.|g- CZjySTAL ~e>^V T2J> K^- Ml/VA/gTZ)N^ •REACH 3'Z^^- CEWS.TAL BAY •£!:)/Z 3-Z6S - CF-YSTAL. ^AV /f SL>B^ec-T T>EO?gg.TV - NOT A^\GNET^ STR MOM TAXi M<M« tAXXJ Aa*««r wLxJtr^ 0’9-ONO FACTS RCFNCSCNTCO ON TNIS ACCURATC AND TRUt REFRE- NATION At IT ARREARS THIS DS OF THE NEHRERIN COUNTY rO THE REST OF NY RNONLEOSE ICE OlVItlON 7 ^PERTY ADDRESS ID • u /avz ATA41 , c0 - CKVSTAL. •BAV' TZIi « A'/.A n i iZ ! /f j fl SUB^ecT •PEorecTy ! . . < - NOT ASSA (0NEt^ 1 1 ! j "l . %f4‘ I ^566 3 .V^ Jt V'- l/ /■ (juUiCiVL Pl’it for ntovo; A, tlnv^V-:*;' In Lot 1, ^lorV T' vns-li'' Vir:rf!or. r.-irv V''T.r,r.,»n r.-.,nf.v, I'lnnorntj ' // 1 / / Ujtvs Certl Tj ca * *"? (1^ : I hf'r**';* *th^t thir ic H ^r^•o -.nr! reore«?ort-*i'^^o» or n :;ur»* vj- of* t.f'O Vo* **!*.■ * ^ *2*’ ^ Jy 1 ni V '• ,%wmA / rinrt of >' or M *r r>' no'-v *, .ykR .\***:' ^Ks. row varat^r, Tnvrr:i*« of L"."-.-1o’» PorV, or ^ollo^ r; tn-vit: Cor.'RT'rrin“ n*. +ho •v-.j..*\ v'v \> ^ ''S \ ror* i'^r n<- th". VortV'orl- lino o' ♦H q ri rht-«^-w;:’ qC «.hr- f.’vjot Vf'«»t^r>ro K-'llvoy with tho Sovf.'-.nrlv er- t«r> ii:> o' -iiviriinf lin« l-U-'-r..'’ Lr-1?; 1 In r-.io r>io»* • 'fAvr..*i*. of Lani'ilor. :"ark; thenoe ♦oH‘-wortorly alnn- the divi-ilrr lin» J-*tvoer R.-iid ;x>tr 1 :.nd P and r«no extonded, n '’Iptnnpc of 21'.14 thonre Kort^artorl • opflortinr- rl^ht at an arrlo i! dos'*rih^ri rourno, n dirtance o'' . IRO fnot to tbr» ortml nrint of berlnrinr of tho tr'ict > o. land to be desrrl’-'«d; thonoe continuin'- ‘'r'-- oaM nct\:al -x irt of lv»flrnirif ^'orthoasterl • cn tho ey^p’ ^io*- f dpscrlh-. iin„, ,, of 60 ''eot; ‘th.,noo .>outb.;nrterly in " rtral-'-' lin> P-V.^ ro„4 a rv^int in the line o. raid rirPt^of-v.-,;.- of t»-o Great Northern R,Uvav fo-nanv •* ?r -,r,3ur.c ,lor,- th- forthorl- 11.o s: Id mllroar: rl'+t-or-way, fror the Initial :y^i^* of co-w' noncr^nt; thence Sovthwesterl%- alonp said rorthcrl*' ripht-of-vav • *‘’7"^'* I]<'*‘*''‘'s'-erly In a stral/ht line Pi''.'; L^t^l"4r^“4i »>erinr.lnc; ALSC inrludinr all t.hat jirt of 'f ^ Lot 1 -n s.;id niooic 2 lylnf between tho Porthwesterlv line of the preniros hereinabove described and the rhore of LaVe Kinnotonka, lilI’°ortv.^;!J Jferfnoastcrl.v and Southwesterly side ItTntiZ "n dencri:y:-d; and the location of In oJ J “;^a^h^rtrr ^ i.*nprove.-«ntn I 1" = 40' «‘-P-76 Irr r mrker Ciord( *1 C cffiii Re^5^’-. ^(y,i fh.r"'i_'or rd PlanneT- Lonp L;'<p, I'.irwjorota ■ -V <’ '•'■w I# • yilll ' LAND USE PLANNING . ZONING VARIANCE INVENTORY EXHIBIT 5 ■VV'' I i\ i > > A VARIANCES REQUIRED • i ------------------------— B ^^^SITY WJWIMWW Ht>-MlkH> ACTUAL f It Araa ^ 1 lot widUi 4aife_ I * 1 SETBACKS KlKmm UOUiniB rviav...«, 1 Siraat ffronti • 1 flda - _ _a. 71 1 1 1 Sear 53df. to Bldg. Laleabora 75 rt. Uatlanda 26 Ft. fef^utted HARDCOVER lot area jax- a.f. MAADCOVEJt a,fa Zoning Use District - f vahii ^ct »O^OSP>vxnixNcr CODC SECTIOi CXZSTZKC haudcovcr wtJLd o - 26 rt. O - 75 Ft. 75 - 250 F^. 2 L»k« ISO - 500 F^. 5 UOk* 500 • 1000 Ft.. 3 OTHER SECTIONS 7AOFOSCD KXADCOVC5 ».f. TOTAL VAJHANCZ JK COPE SCCTfl^ 31.031 34.202 34.202 34.202 34.202 5ZO01IIEO CCZSTOtC •aildifif Baiffht fi F«rkiA« FOOFOSm VAAIAlfCC COOC SCCTlCat LAND -----f _.. VAC^nt < January I, 1975 Owncrahlp alnyla aaparata TOPOO«A«nr Inelua... m.aho,. -------- Wtlana. _____M,h _ _ at#«p alopaa _ _epan _ _ uoodad araaa CCOCMniy affact 1.9 appl^atloni _ _ unuaual let ahapa ^ >«parat« owner aliip eoaiblnad with other parcela net In thla application -------la*al pround ______ rellln, hllla iot ■isF/fthapoi ACCttlf _____ nm UTILITIES I City •< ••ptlc myrntmm conaialont onaaual buHdin, location , _ ^ »'*«* "•Ishborhood dav.lop.ant..latiof - - eounty/atat. _ _ •vaileble ^ w connectod; City water new proponed aiatin, conf;«i^-‘;:i_-7^,‘;';;;^;«; "» uoatanoacd -------- aalatlng non-confonlnyLAND USE iukject lot ie _____ vacant CX1STXM6 lAMD USE • FF0F06AL affectn principal occupiedvacant -•F.r.d to aoninp u.e di.triet. ^ confonalng - - •cceaaory building or eae c^^itlonal uae oon—oonTomlng uee STRUCTURES aiMTimS BU2LD2MGM Aaflclencleai foofcsal nr»Ei ■ply wi|h ^nce standarda PPCMtEL -------aatiraly MW bulldijtf or aae f t .latin, aubatandard yard dinanalon TAXES & ASSESSMENTS E xhibit 5 Use District ^ . COPt SCCTIOW I AMCZ &1 * __z nozszcncm Jt % )sm oven wutiweg TOTAL VAAIANCZ Jt coot SECT 3i.«n 34.202 34.202 34.202 34.202 coot SCCTIOf Bra>«t;p am«jrahlp >«r parcel* i»et In tbla applteatlon ------- rollij.* htllB ^ coniMet ird «xistiog noA-eonfonitii^ eonfooBiny STAFF RECOMME34DATION ATfOOfVX •p^lddtioa •• «iibNiitt«4 A»#MVE application aobjaet to (olloHlnt condition* ’‘**** “PPlJedtlon for addltlcNMl Information BtWf application for raaaon* M>tod above EXHIBIT 6 Page 1 H«nf>«pin Cty. DOT Mlmi* Btmtm DOT -r^'- pm h land use punning STAFF COMMENTS & RECOMMENDATIONS Page 2 SUGGESTED FINDINGS «»• ran«lUona •pplyin. *- _________ 3.n»« orAffitiM ___.. . ^ *• "et «.c..a.n. fr th. pr.a.rvation ...d a«Joy«.„t of . ■orala or 9«n«ral waHa^, %''*'**"'* •*V «*y iopair O.. public h.alth. aafaty. coofort. 4. 9.n.«rwUa«.‘^ ........................ -y i-P.lr tb. public haalo,. aafcty. ccfort. «„ala or M«. « i^r^a'i^^cSri;^ ^ ~"‘-nr to th. i„t.„t Of th. Co.paah«.iv. to„a Da. - ^ th. .f.. c.p„ - th. .ppaic.„t. hut i. „.e.a..ay ^to —ci^^i?~ - -.fot. th. .aotio. Of .uch SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL W/Vi \^/(^7C4A V --^5<: ...^'■T.^Zre^ I 1 ' ! Du WAYNE L. SCHIBILLA CCRTiriCD PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT SUITE 314. SONS OF NORWAY BUILOtNO I45S WEST LAKE STREET MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA SS40B TfLtPMONC CSI2) B27.Satl Kay 8, 1980 Mr. Thomas Jacobs, Building Inspector Village of Orono 1335 Brwn Road South Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Mr. Jacobs: I am vjriting this letter as you suggested to document our conversation of last week and my concerns over the current con~ struction taking place at 3215 Crystal Bay Road (the Haverberg property). As I indicated to you I own the property at 3235 Crystal Bay Road which shares a common property line with the "Haverberg property". A screen porch has been constructed over an existing slab within the last year, which I do not have any problems with. My concerns lie in the fact that I would not like any further improve ments made upon the screen porch (i.e. a three-seasons porch or permanent living space) for a number of reasons some of which are as follows: The existing screen porch is no more than 3-4 fwet from our common property line - at a maximum. I am not sure this is in com pliance with current building ordiances. I am sure it would restrict anything I might do to improve my own property. The position of the screen porch is set ahead of my house. As I indicated to you this is no problem at this point in time since the screen porch gives the illusion of not being there (i.e. you can see through it). I would not appreciate the porch being developed further, as mentioned above, since it would then restrict the view from my property. The drainage off the porch roof must effect my property simply because it is so close to the lot line. •V ■t i ! Ei: * FroB our conversation I listing screen porchnot been obtained for the construction of the existing scr and you are currently trying to resolve this problem. livable floor space. I am asking that this letter ^oS^JicUorSar""”® the "Haverberg property" so that aj;f ® Variances are adhered to. tSu^Sfs? ^^IriSn5Si?LS?'?^l^Sv^renfr^ai re%ade to develop, the porch further. pursued. Sincerely , Du V/£OW^Schibilla DLS/cls cc* Orono City Council , ^ . i. ___c/o Mr. Walter R. Benson, City Administrator 1335 Brown Road South Crystal Bay, Minnesota 57325 d £ Telephone 473*73r>7 CITY of ORONO Fo«t Office Box 66*CrysUl Bey. MinnewU 55323* Municipal Office* On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka January 8, 1980 3215 Crystal Bay Road Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Re; Code Violations - 3215 Crystal Bay Road Dear Mr. Haverbergi An inspection of the subject property on December 26, 1979 revealed certain Building Code violations as follows: 1.Work done beyond the scope of the permit. The plans submitted with Permit #3371, September 13, 1976, did not include an all- season porch which has been constructed on the north side of your house, nor was the deck included on the south side. 2.The all season porch which is under construction is encroaching on the side yard setback which should be 10'. This was not included in the variance given to you on September 7, 1976. 3.With all of the work being done without City approval, you are also in violation of working without a building permit. To correct these violations, the following must be done: 1. You must apply for a building permit. Bring in two sets of plans and a new survey verifying the side yard setback. 2. If you do encroach on the side yard setback, a new variance is required. You can apply for the variance at the City offices. Your failure to eliminate the code violations leaves no alternative but to initiate legal proceedings against you. Action will be withheld until January 21, 1980, however, if at that time you have failed to comply, a citation will be issued and the matter will be referred to the office of the prosecutor for appropriate legal action. Very truly # Thomas J. Jacots Building Inspector TJJ:kh cc: Mr. Frederick Brown Mr. Alan Olson Ms. Jeanne Mabusth m- -IWWIIJ1.V * L . 1 t • • - # « ■^- ■ nUMlCIfAteOOWT K o.33 552450 3^ vehicle VC. HO. .coLon. MAKE. DATE: MO. _WT. Of€M: LC. NO. STATf ST AT. OR ORD SScJi^ng*; enoanoer It life OR mOFERTY AOCIOEN1 r-------1 1 UNSAFI j___I IcONOITIONSl niVISlOH METER HO.______ THE VI signature % • • mtea na NO.33 55EH50 B'' .ooton. a JM-' CM. ;/'' METEn NO._________ PjSTiSwST W r\AYS Al 5m1 mTrw?J5se * LAND USE PLANNING ZONING VARIANCE APPLICATION EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF ORONO r.O. ton M, Cryam fay, Mlnn«iot« 55323 *73-7357 IMSTnucnoiis. »««. 1 IIBITS raopraxY ADDRESS 26''/0 PHeTtxsA.iOT- p^'' n APPLICAHT fc«A6AA) CiALp. 4~7< MiTA,, If Applicant la not 'oimar, cxplaiii ^_ _ _ Application Fora t^^Fropwrty O^nara Uat ICartificata of Survaj Fm ll«e«lpt # ^9a Mctivad ^QJZ.J.2L^^i../7. //. Nailing Addraaa 1 / also own other adjacent parcels of land AGENT ■».---------------------------------------------- Fin Staff InforBM^tayi * j/ FUt Hap 5 Invaatety 6 1^ Staff CoMnta Other InfawaH.1.. 7 Y ^ Nailing AdAfraaa NOTICES Should ha aant to:Applicant CWnar Agent PRESENT ZONING USE DISTRICT T^gSID^nOT7Ah4 PRT3ENT USE S«*ldantlal (Othar) Vacant Land Vacant Bullying (a)Oecuplad Building(a) descr^^t^ cons™ COST S — OC*" •» — fmo4ml __ replaaa P6A/e»t.A^xu«; irequesc in detail: ATTTlr U ScgeSKigTs OF MD/y\g i^C.M C k 3 Lot Araa9« VARIANCE(S) REQUIRED to do th# ra^uaatad Uoth: —Setback (___Front ^ S14a ____Itear) Othar tot Width Hardcover 10. Describe UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS .-.lu— «oi i-i., okw Mowio T w t*s. Sir, f ' A7~ AMC5t£ ~7?> 1^0 t *. "y^ LOQO^O APPli.OA.CU ~7^ Opr »^iDg trWAO /A?~ Describe UNDUE HARDSHIP or PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY ~.«u. ^. i- (Atopco feg OAJA.&<£ TO Oftsefe.fVc- Uomi= ft.V "* 12 \tttkc M£C, scktseMti-y. i>'0ch s>.,g ^^Tt;r7v.r^ 12. Describe El'FECT OF proposed WORK .. ..u.e..cj ^ _ 1 . APpi^Tv^ JKc- nj— I.— ./ ^ ----------B--------------14,/O v^Q jAlr/^t^c i *• The applicant and the PROPERTY OWNER lm1c^ I j j ~ ——LZ— Af^icAicr hareb, agraea to provid. all tafoZTt^ signand date thls application. rasulrad or re^uaated by the Zoning A<fainlatrator. ograat ?”"* herety ochnewlodgco and agraaa to thla an>14e .< all faaa and/or lauisiaal axpanaaa Incurrcil In and further autlM>rlcaa rvaacHbnKiA ^ FP^l®ationof thla application, and certifiers; thrirr^riTtirT “‘•P5*»*««7 auppUed i. tr.. and correct to the beat oJ wiuI.T.rtn'r * S.__6 Applicant's SignatureDate OunpT“ * c 1 i^T5_aJMLirfLav exhibit 1 IBITS land 1 AppllMtlon roi« * Property Owncra List * ±:^Cartlfteata of Survay raa Racatpe # 9390 £2'/3 Vt? •y Sf ff ^ rimt Map 5 ^ Inventory ^ 1^ Staff C om anti Z.SW1U££ ON COST $ ^cret) * "* — *’«»4al __raplaaa PfcRCH CiKJ Lot: ViaUi NardcMor ^ Inning Codo rosuironenti: 7t> LoT"^ 'Tb SiOc VK<10 ** •*»!«« •DforcaMit •( aonl^ : »^v Home fey • ■ &Qg TO -^iOb vVtah ; . - : _ t0Q02,O i/np/^t/c imPKiif/? tax feASiT. :his application. a!^f “ *•'••• •• •ppiie-uo,;•"f'7 onto Cha propart* nta. aganta. aowtaalon M^ari. pwrpoaas of invaatigatlon and ^uaat: • * •, /ARl [pens 1233 ^52PE5l3LOWNERS_ysT KWRTMaiT OF FINANCE A-605 OOVERNMEMT CENTE MINNEAPOLIS, Ml --------0TlOA/t>_____ igmcAVlIIi Il'aww* ||NTATI0N op IMPOIIIlATmifVa***® aCPAC- tlPT 8«g SETl OWNER TAX PAYER/ Mailing Aonpccc* T^nn T?_rF, , oa tmc arco7o, oV tmV th 7s ^»*Cf DIVISION. TO TMt OCST**fl!I"*^'“ COONTV^ aeuep. "* or mv rnowlcosc MeancPiN CO. pinancc division . DATg-^./^.S^ property address SeBatiaiiasA. ^Avto, c. r —S^ilg -> - ^ f » il^Ag/7vA^ ^ *♦ Oo<-/ I fif: VAUL. t, LutaiPfn ^ Vr» ^<^d£UPH€ASAArr Z7(gs~- yHev\SAArr v^^ i?is ;27<^0 . PA^EASA^rr -p»p - PMe-As^AArr ^>S53/ ^^2g^-Bl&^SWn- -r^T. - Ai>yT7i\ C /) -7=-7 i;Bj£gr (5 LIST NO_______ * «i 'St »cS»*tV "• '""• •«« .nr.„rs;. >0. FINANCC OlVItiON property address CHQ-^zi BKcecsioiz. 1 1 ____1 Z/1 Q^Z4 1 5^9] • • war : DEN! * iwt A i itet w! 1 SET 11 ittraf dida i' Sida T' Aaar \ 1 T V ‘ JJit t STRUCTURES •• •• •• :M Lrf- 3 i ;:) 11^7 ■i \ ■t^■» . -t• • T* / V. *; * BISTUK SU2U>XJWS OafirlMiciiiai _____ pAorosAL msf _ do iiot comply vith maning tmrtormmncm standArdo •ntiwmly m Imildinf or o»« ri«w 08 WMM buildij»9 or os« (coat •xecada SOX rwl^r‘rr •* *••• »«'«*>Kxi^tiJif b«ildiji9 PAIR MAJUCET VAUS (yp| _____ |— ^ ------------------* lyri _■ f ________ »ot rodoco 80 8jii8tinf oubstandord yard^iMosloo 'AXES & ASSESSMENTS pROPurrr IX).______________ LDC8/Pirc8l8 i^mod in lAXCSi ____ mrm PAID corrant **'* *”* i»9.ny c<Mblt«»1 f.r t*. purpoaaa. •r. OKUMODOTT to yaar Aa«a«»aani8 Laviadi ir___Ijms I JL*_a_ 1 AK*ri ncr ^2S 1 land use punning ZONING VARIANCE INVENTORY VtARlANCES REOUIRFn DENSITY WIMIHUW llt«JUfl.|ni actual Zoning Use District vaniajict tM kMmm iot W|4Uk UASL_2 CODI SCCTIOM J 4* 3/. ¥jta setbacks irsant) «!«•___________ %mmr •Stff. %o 114f. lM\9mhorm VmUmnSm y.lKlMUK REOtllfcm PCJ5T1MC »»orosn>VAJlIXWtt —. ^VOt SCCTlOg 75 n. 74 Ft. HARDCOVER O - 24 Ft. OS O - 75 Ft. OS Lmhm 73 - 250 Ft. 75S 2SO . SOO Ft. JOS Lmkm 300 • 1000 Ft. J5S lot AJtCA .lax. ^ttFjxrn) HAMDCOVat Mxft ____________% 3qjs ___If CXJSTIKC HAJU)C0VEJI FtOPOSCD MXSDCOVOI TOTJO. VXMXAJtCS ggoc SEC7>ycM 31. on 34.202 34.202 34.202 34.202 OTHER SECTIONS Cmx.) _________ ParkiAf CiOa.I _________ PCISTIKC FtOPOSgP vahtawct gqpc sccTim UND BJVlSIOi. _✓ pl.t ------- pL« _____ unpl.tt«l ,1 lot./..„ 1 AVAJlAaiUTVt •dj.r.nt let./p.fc«la C«l v.c.«t January 1, 1973 O-n.r.hlp ,l„.l, — *"* _Vr«p.r.t. ownar.hlp «POCAA«y inclua... 1.L..AO,. -------- '*“• -PP”'-**-" ------ «^111»9 hill* ■t*«p slop**____ op*n *r«***r«**l«v*l pround ACCESSi VTlLITlEOt City **w*r ••pile *y«t«*•villabl* n*v proposed LAND USE Subject connected; city wet*, oiutinp conform!^ F*‘ivet*. -------- ^xiatlnp non-confoneijjg FSOPOSJtL effect* STRUCTURES nilSrXM SOILDIJIGS Aeflclencie*i ghOrOSAL lYFSf confomlnpprincipal -------- .cc.a.ory bulT^i;:, „condltlonel *** ocMi-oonfojW UM MOPOSAI.will •.tlr.ly IBM bulldii.9 or Om bulldir^ «U* a ” AXES & ASSESSMENTS SOFCSTY ID. Bt*/9urcel* KJLtSi _____ owned in •re FA ZD current eeeeeeni* JUaviedi _ .r. OtLIwooi^^ti^*^*^ cowbinad for t.a |urpo.... CITY OF ORONO ■ UND USE PUNNING staff comments e recommendations pCHIBIT 6 Page 1 BY: (•taffi (•taff) application reviewed BY: “*y Mmljii.trator • . Attorney City bifinoer rillage Flanner Soning Adninl*tr«tor Planning Co«il,«|^(dates) (^ttne) " Work, Ooordi„.t*r • '****« *afaty Oiraetor rinence Director Building Inspector **Ptlc Inspector - B^nnepin Cty. tiOt . Minn. Ctste dot Minn. DMii MCWD LMCD SPECIAL CaiMENTS I Staff R£cc^iMFKi>ATio!i AWHOW appllcatlo. ’‘ADIx epplicstion for nddiei.. . .' •Bditlonel infonsstion Va-* • •• exhibit 6Page 1 m'. Drdinator Lrector . N«nn«pia Cty, dot Stat« opr 'titui. OMR MCHD f ? LAND USE PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS & RECCMMENDATIONS Page 2 IIP SUGGESTED FINDINGS I. a« i A- Mmily •' *•"* "• P«e-li.N f ..a. property or 1» «4ilai elia lend 1^0^121 m ^ f*n«relly to other land or atrecteree la the diatriet nMO^ltlona apply^ to the atraetore or land In soaatton are net peealiar to each property or Sa Mld^r^'iTliStS!*"'*^ *** ^ t«~»«lly to other land or atraetaraa In the diatriet in *• rhm frantiof of tho •ppllcatioo ____ property ri^t of tho Applicoiit.is fiot fiscsBSSiy for ths prsssrvstiofi and anjoyawnt of a walI*S^*JilJai*telfri?^**Oll*****"” h«ilth. aafety. eeoiort. 2He?ir2iwari.**“ variance oay Inpair the pablie healU.. aafety. eoofort. aorala or f **'*“"” ”** ** contrary to th. lnt«.t of th. tevrahenaiee Land Oa. ^ contrary to the intent of the Oo-prrt-nalva tend Oae «ie srantlnip.ef aaeh variance alll not laerely aerve aa a convenience to the applicant, bat ia naceaaarv to alleviate daaonatratad hardahipa or difflealtiear OK n.eeaaary me applicant haa danonatratad no recepniaod hardahip or diffiealty and thorafore the yraatina of aadi vsrisncs %ioald Mrsly sarvo as a convanianca to such applicant. ^ 4 /- Ai > j| •. ! •I ! # ^ i| i t • I SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL I f 3. ? »•( Jd • ► I /. ' • i ■ V I- fv- »• • %. •* .*# /• I *• *'• V-■. -rtt . .* • ■ . . • •*•• • r • • ft ^ . • f . 1 • . •'. #10651 .* • I * ■• . X / ..:• . r I* / • 9 * 1. r I f 1 I >1 H ] a*!• '*1 I ^ ♦ • •r • ; •. • I • • •• • • i A.. 1 I .• I i.' t 4 # .1. ,------------------ .A. «5| Ji gs® O — «8» 9T" •• •>•.! •• • I ?. / •( I ’■. • . ■ . ; • 'H -iV . ,'j I I 1 m ‘ \ I.'- A ! y .•ij; !» J L * ( ft v/V k -V ■ 1 ! ; •! 1 - > 1 1 : > • O •7'\ I J ^ * *; •> • * / • •, JI •* • -. if' /.' /. 0 /a /v V' ‘•V V. ^ : r V >• I .................. VraA fr^LAND USE PTANKIMC • : . ■♦ ' •. • • - 0- ______:- - 4 If ’.ji'**, ! il • •.••;• .>■ •; • j.—r-ih ■ 5..‘ • • * **i • .1^ . * . it / !;*:•• V-*!**/ r '• •**' \ - ‘ %• .4 • -tv ^ * 'if i .’M V. •» *•*.•• *.K ,\^vs• • (. ■■■'.,-S''^ , :■■ .■?r//h;:#=v ■ .. ■'•* ■'■ ^■ ^ /f • '•w** I .t. "V tl .- •?■..•* • ' • •/*1 * •• • • . • •• /> * ! V. * }'• ■ -.•^ VVa r . V . .! ■ . V •• '*•• .'j ..,• '< ■ •• A*’........... • O'. ’ ■ ■ • »• •*•.•'.. • V • *: ■■ ■ -. f V. "i' • •.-■• ‘ •' ’ ' i • * c o • X *. • • * “} I : * f ^ I * • V- • - -.7 *• *• - v' -l.. v; ;x LAND USE PLANNING ZONING VARIANCE APPLICATION EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF ORONO p,0. Bo» 66, Cry§t«l tay, Mlnne*ot« »323 473-7357 INSTKUCTIONS: Fl«»te flrit read th« *lt#ch»d Infomitlcm Shrtt. Complete 1tr«t I • 13 ~ (7yp« or Frlnt). If ntrdrd, ittBch letter or other Inforr^tlon to better deecrfbt your request. Incotaplete sppllcstlons will not be accepted. 1. 2, 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. « t! I LIST OF EXHIBITS PROPERTY ADDRESS 1265 Brackett^s Poij3t Legal description shall be shoun on attached Survey, Exhibit 3 APPLICANT lu.. Michael E. Lvnn III rhon.__92Q-6866 Hilling Addr... 1265 Brackett’s Poinh OronOi Minnesota 55391 If Applicant is not om^tr, explain'-------------------------------!----- 3. OWNER r-ftirhnri F i ,T-rjB -------92Q^6fl&fc Hilling Addr... 1265 Bracketf s Point, Qrono Date Property Acquired July ,1976--------- (Honth/r-O I lirindc (do oot) also own other adjacent parcels of land A naH-<r>e 375?JJJifl Milling Addr... 438 IDS Center Mpla,, Mn. 554Q2 NOTICES 6h«ild h* •«« to: ____Appllcnt _____CWn.r _2J— Ag«it PRESENT ZONING USE DISTRICT X LR 1 A Pescrlptlon Initial Application vast inalude: 1 2 3 It Application Fora Property Cbmers List Corel!let. of Sur»( ^ Foe Receipt # Dito Received ^ ~ 74 “fd »y Staff Infonaation 4 Piet Hep 5 ^ „Inventory76 Staff Coaoents Other Information 7 _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 8 _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 9 _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ 10 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 11 _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 12 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PRESENT USE Ro'W'nt*-* -II- - (other) - - - - - - - - --- - - - - --- - - V.eent Und_ _ _ V.cent lulldlngC.) _ _ _ Occupied Bulldlng(.) DESCRIBE REQUEST ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $ 14,000^----- _ establish nee uaa _ cootinua or axpand exiatlng wat build oeu _ add on _ reaodal _ replaea Describe request in detail: • court. Approve location fnr conal-r.ucf-inn nf 1 EXHIBIT 1 ^567 LIST OF EXHIBITS £Petcrlptfon Initial Application ■oat iyludc: IT i ✓ Application Toro Property Owntra Listy \ Ir Certxticate of Survo] ^ Fae Receipt # Data llecalv«4 «y a. ly^ Staff InfonrJtion Plat Map 5 ^Inventory land 6 Staff CoBDcnta Other Inforeiation ION COST $ 14^000.00 '^i ^ao _ add on ^ rew>del __replocc gQTlgp,1Ml<?f-i on ■Paanni q V.RUNcf.°ppu„„0N exhibit 1 list of exhibits £ OefcrlpM^ Kflllns Addrraa 12fl;i&a66. ----- § -E-* .Tnrja Lywjf'«»n«------.a2ii:H6flfi£ 4. ^dodc (do not) also owiTother ----------(Honth/vear) P—U Of land! “ «axtiw,—-------—a2irixafi___ ' —- ^PPHcatlon Fora **ropert7 U,t| Certificate of Surv< Receipt if0b ®*te Received ^ » ------—^^ngis & Kaplan, p » Infortnetfofi Plat Hap —^ Inventory Staff Coweenta 1*^ notices k. . Mn. 55402 —-----Applicant present zoning use district lr 1 a ^Amer present use ^ --------- Occupied Buildlngfa)describe request ■—'___ — ••teMlafc QM uae ESTIMATED CONSTRlIPTTrtM Descr^K " “ *“• '"STRUCTION COST $_l4p00Q.on Describe request in detail- a„ -‘•-ii-«ev _ .da- - - - - .court. - -^EErove_locatl«« ~'-^i _ re^u.. Ltr.uci-.-^n nt •! ^RI ance (s) required r, cK~~ —, w r., , ^ cj,e requaated Work: -X— *«tback (------ front side — »ror) Other l^t Area l^t Width Hardcover Other i| =------------------------------------------ -------Ji^-^cxu xaKe arA i»... in put couirt wX"12. liri-fcOT OF PROPOSED WORV ----------- No adverse effect ^ "" "•‘*hbon«, properti,. , -------------- *ni^fp5iL?f2I,i*V* the PROPERTY OWNER -------------------- "‘“ho* .-iS«=r-?isg£r- verlfi#»Me.d^^^^ . * purw^d ^ *aaiow *r »auL EXHIBIT 1 ‘‘J3-73i7 »i*»» I - 13 Ion to better accepted.list of exhibits I ^•erlntt^ Jnltlel A pd H^.>, a*«t ip^i^----^ Applleactofi ror« 5391 J^rroptrtj Owner. LUt Ccrtiricatc of Survi -S^ Receipt tfp6 «»aca Received L ^ Ji ‘Q— h/YMr) :els of land] iaif lnfor».-.>«-TT * ^lat Map —Inventory ‘ Staff Co»,»„t. fi£Ji«£-Lnfona.rt»p »t(«} STRUCTION cost $ 14,000 — r«FUe« viatii Hardcover >>•— «ek CM. 75 feet towaiU lake al^»' ! ------------------- ^ are lower and ' I feet ■both- r acknowle^ae. a»4 . raa.anabU *® **“* •RR*‘ca»l<^""auitanta, ""*» *>»• oron,,.: r HC 1233 m OCr^RTMCIlT OF FINANCE A-OOB OOVCRNMENT CENTER MINNEAFOLIB^ MN 554S7 MiT tntj^ I CCRTirv THAT THC ——_______________ CCHTIFICATC AHC AM ACCURATC AND THUf^mnRM *• " this ”Oil TfIK Ilieoiios OF TMf NCmmiiin-..e^.m...,, .V./'.rjJ’I.Si. HCMNCHIN CO. FINANCC DIVISION 0ATC( fee owner tax payer / WAIUNG ADDRESS PROPERTY ADDRESS -JAVy/K ■?. SjSfAiZ^ ,42»y<»vj ^ Cf7»€K, Sj^ \/X a ^ s /?;,^y //A<r nitj/t^nks /7>-,y 22c;»/ ■AgWrifi S'.*/;* 4T - rS? -Lof^'/r <7^ ♦ -r fc ii 567 ! 1 CITY OF ORONO LAND USE PLANNING ZONING VARIANCE INVENTORY VARIANCES REQUIRED DENSITY MlttlMUW HrJUlHIP ACTUAL Lot Kimm - Lot WfiUl ^ — SETBACKS tir*«t ffiontl y.lKlKUK ATOUimi BSdf. to tiaf< Lft\«s>H»ro V€tlan4« 75 FL. 24 FL HARDCOVER wtia o - a« rt. lAko O - 75 Ft. loko 75 - 250 Ft. * LOT AlUCA JSML --------- OTHER SECTIONS azodiazp Oaiiding B«ifht Cmk-I --------------- rarkiof ClIiA. I ■ LAND PlVlSlOOt plat A VAl LAB 2 LI TVs % ■t«ap slopes LAND USE fiO>^sct lot is OClSTlIfG LAND USE FAOrOSAL affects STRUCTURES CCISTIJIG UVllDUfOm Defleieficieai FAOraAL lYFCs FAOSOSAL will TAXES & ASSESSMEOTS unplatted Bl^parrela per applScatiofi adjacent lota/paicela f« • . vacant occupied - - - a- January 1« 1975 Ownership single separate _ _ _ conbined with other parcels not in this application TOFOCAAPHY includest lakeshore - wetlands _____high ground „ levsl gremnd «<x>ded sreasopen CtOCAAPinr affecting applicationi unuaual lot shape _____ unusual huilding location sise/shapet conalstent _ inconaistent with neighborhood dcvelopraeat ACCESSt __ no^ ^ eaiating city — oounty/atate _ private UrjLlTZtti City aever ____ available ___ connected; City water available ___ connected septic systen _____ new proposed _____ exlating conform!^ _____ existing substandard existing non-con fora inf vacant T, occupied ipared to soning HF* districtx 1^ conforaing use __ principal ecceaaory building or use conditional u ■ply ^ith soning perforaancs antiraly NZM building or uas Review as NEM building or eaa fcoat axcaads 50% FMV) “Sr ruview as EXPANSION of existing fcost lass than 50% FMV) existing building FAIR MARKET VALIS (yr) ______ ill not reduce an existing substandard yard dieswaion EXHIBIT 5 5 0 *7 Ufig District iff- copg ttCT>Olf . s UK>»Cg roDC sccTlOi 3^ OPOSCD ocovcm f. TOTXL VXJIlAlta It M.f. ! '] % CCX>C StCTlCi 31.131 I 34.302 34.203 34.202 34.302 V3III3WCE CODE OCCTICW tlo. / ownership ^ sepsrsts ownership K other parcels net in this application - rolliof hills •tsffidard rtoO existing noo-conroMinf ditional non-eonfom inf osa LAND USE PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS & RECOMMENDATIONI EXHIBIT 6 Pace 1 PREPARED FOR: n > i FJsniiinf OMxaission Msetinf fOate) o (kmnell‘Mating fiMt.) (•taff) ____________ M (Staff ) APPLICATION REVIEWED BY: —■ City hdninistrator a ^ -----City Attorney t City Engineer _ Villei^e Planner Jl^^oninf Administrator -Planning Opsnisaion _ Park Oospiiaaion Public tiorks Ooordinator Public Safety Director Finance Director Dutiding Inspector Septic Inspector . Hennepin cty. DOT Minn. State DOT Hinn. CM MCSID SPECIAL COM^^TS TAFF RECOMMENDATION APPAOVE spplicatiem as submitted Aaraovc application anbjMrt to foUo.in« conditlona table application for additional infonaatlon DtWf application for raaaona notad abova EXHIBIT 6 Pace 1 Mcnncpin Cly. OOT Minn. Slat* DOT Minn, urn c Ttyo ^rono land use punning STAFF COMMENTS & RECOMMENDATIOl EXHIBIT 6 Page 2 SUGGESTED FINDINGS ** -- -’'*• nf th* aBBiicatiM . .abauntial proparty ,|^t .( thj^ii'e^^ '«r th. yr.aarvation and . ■orala or ‘jInaraWmJ^**J,''“'**"” *" •*» -r 1-I^ir th. public haalth. a.»«y. c«tf«rt. »»• yrantiny of tha prepoaad variant-. «... < ^•ral ualfarc. ^ «*• P«*lie baalO,. aalaty. ccfort. noral. or••fM eSr*" “ “”•'•■» •• « o» ^ ^ u .ii«i.2 *—.nj.nii'sj.sjj.'tj ~ *»• -ppucm. m i. ^....^ .. ”* ——.t -li 9^ 0 SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 2. 4o ia » I \ # TO; PROM; DATE: Planning Commission and Council Jeanne Mabusth» Zoning Administrator June 19» 1980 #563 SUBJECT: 1563 Stephen Ward - 4695 North Shore Drive VARIANCE SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Subdivision - Metes and bounds division Zoning District LR-IB - 1 acre minimum - lot line realignment Mr. Ward, the applicant, proposes a metes ^d^unds division of his neighbor's (Dennis Meyer) property. The division will create a smaller parcel to be combined with Ward's substandard lot. It should be noted that Meyer's lot does not meet the minium area will correct setback problems for the principal structure. Staff will schedule a Public Information Meeting for July 21, 1980. 1 •« 563 ive a realignment Ls division of .on will create idard lot. It minimum area i lot r.ize of i>>. The division rueture. for July 21f 1980. A.1X I'^Sl OROm, MINNESOTA Z> -- I ' f Land Use Application • lOCATION OP PROPOSAL (or property) Hn>etl4 Legal Description /y[ applicant Na»NgrEPf4€(4 #47^-/, Name^rSt/F . Tel ~ Mailxng ---------* 4'7C>5^ H pvi H • 3^35* Present Zoning Z _ _ _ a^t ^ • Conditional UseasO Variamce $50 Rezoning $250 Riprap $15 ($65) ysc./ Present Use Da^ Rec*d /> *’4^ *" Pa aiaffitrAT Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request _ Specify Ordinance Requirements / MI Kj . Bq>lain your request and reasons for same. Qj(^ Z-Vm^P ir\T\dK>tLj O^b-^riri . ResidentialSUBDmsiON application L^\ i/•a.In. ^ iTr* Other, explain (M,... V material necessary for complete APPIICATION o <7, 0~‘y- (H..t b. sutaitted 10 day, prior to Plam.i„g 0oJSs^I“”“ti„g) Application OOT.^laad-..-,1. Application conpleted 2. Plat map section- - - -Certified Property Owner's list (p certificate of survey of property fr Sketch location and setbacks of ' Dept, of FinanceSketch location and setbacks of * proposal /fv Government Center Construction plans, if applicable (1^ envelopes P^®~e^dressed to each of the nam- on the above list DATE_^ 4>jH Applicant •. Signature cm OF ORONO, MINNESOTA ^ ‘ ' ' I*and Use Application • MCMICW op proposal (or property) »<'• pp/oi:; - Conditional Use^^O Variance $50 .SMon^ [yuu(^ , Present Zoning l^J\ (^__________Present diT JjfejDKTl Rezoning $250 Riprap $15 ($65) ^^Hame^l^f ' Tel 12, (. / Da^ Rec*d ByXjl^ ^ —I vz 2toning Ordinance Section Relating to Request 3 S) . specify Ordinance Requirements __I t^ll Kl . ! (>7 S/2a Explain your request and reasons for same. CX))^ t^duj .^itT ^ hlg PftOPEfZ-M Lt.\P- < lalP ^an..U- Og. MkJ;./- y^^L ,TODt/ A^£ iVOi-rt- TC> (Soy iTj variance reqjiired Lot Width residential^^^ISION application -------^^3L/C5NMgAsff ' other, explain WO. o£ Lots ^ije..oraER (Must be suta^t™ 10 d«s n? a COMPLETE APPLICATICWomitted 10 days prior to Planning Commission meeting) «cS:r‘-'" O Property O^erl’^ist proposal A-b03 Government Center _ —-----------------Wei. Jt'-fc ^op^saf'"*^™ ^ '^-«03 covernmeni Ce«e; ^<5> . construction plans, if applicable & pr^SiesHftrerh'orttrni;^ ' ' on the above list. owner's SignatureO’ —^ --------------------- a signature ■> .red or reoruest t% < ^ . K-w***%*'^» i .V ^ .*1 #563 '‘trllilf^t# of fwrv.»y fcr JUptivr. r. •ira If yoi I, Slrc»r 5. P^rj^ulct 4 fclrilufid'i ?ar«, ”9rr.»-1r • • • • :. • •* . •• • . • • t•• % • • • r -V, : f i F'rt . V • . ! • » • rlS . If i: . t i . I « •*.. . • # *. •• • •• • : . • • * t .n ; »; i t *ri -j • • • • . •? -.1 :» I . *...-4 V ♦. : v; v : • • * • it t '• .trii' 7, I . . . « •..-i . i •;?. cf Ic.i^ -Ion, • . it ' • **r ?• I * :*. .i*. • .J, t rr' ' * 7 ' ; ‘ .1 rt. •* •» ;jf Ci-rrj .. . u •• •'* ' •* .• •• t . -: . !. If., ► f l- * - A • i .# j Uf.-' ... C’llli' n. . vr**' I !.'» ..r’,r ^ y. M— «. • .g . 4,,. p ./'rv 4.' . it r 't 'J ‘ 'f. TO; PROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Pleuining Conunission and Council Alan P. Olson, Village Planner #561 June 19, 1980 #561 Kellers Market, 3800 Wayzata Boulevard Variance & conditional Use Pennit The Applicant, Orton Wisegarver, so'addition, existing Kellera Market building by f ^“^"rgreenhoM sales area,‘’pKrSxpa^sioro1 p«Wn^which may include excavation of an embank- ment'east of the present building. This application is " nln“on”fo™?ng S«s'“SS%“p«ra4tiiitJ on the site which appears to constitute violations of our orv^inances. this property. BASIC ISSUE Should this property at this location be ultimately used tor commercial or residential purposes?or rosxdentiai • -1 rRonf 1 •• then this use inust continue as a non— “nfo'rmtSru^e^eitrtSf SI Sith ourisTr^d^lao^cImpreheMive iMd use districting since original provisions were appli f^ora'^SlnnesotrSup^emrCourt Case upholding enforcement of an ordinance •prohibiting expansion of a non-conforming use. zoning 1974 RR-IB 2 acre rural residential 1967 aVIC 1 family residential PROPERTY SPECS 75,550 s.f. = 1.73 acre June 19, 1980 Kellers Market 3800 Wayzata Boulevard Variance fc C.U.P. Page 2 #561 history 1. Built as a fruit stand in the 1920's. 2. occupied as the ^Jgvy^Shen^residential occupancyWisegarver on September 9, xy// W21S t6nnin2itcd • 3. issued a "°''-T'°^?ru!t “Ind''v^?ab?f «^d"“A 4^X 50 Sdr,rriu°s%«Kpnranra cold sto»,e sbed. 4. DUXXaXIKJ, E- - Jt f f " Wisegarver converted ‘^e living guarters^in^^^^ S‘°”’%rceltilicate irociup»criarre “uesled. No building permits were taXen out. ___________Ko4-Xi 5. or ocuut^cuiv^jf — a it^v-Aonhonse" was added sometime between A plastic covered temporary ^ permits. Does not conform to November, 1978 and May, 2 building. Does not conform tobuilding code requirements for a B 2 ouxxa y zoning setback requirements. 6. zoning setoacj^ ------- ^ Since Nay, 1979, staff «YcVuo"n mluj Sldfln"l”l-Sor* Se SIS“SociS2nte5 ISlSenlf of numerous letters and meetings trying to have this resolved earlier. apparent CONFliK^ia I. occupancy was c.a e^ ll.lSl”chaSrin^o54infoL^g use »d -fal^ed^iSth :n“a?^catSn°ror ‘'l ?Sr^erewal woSld be reguired This was never done.done . • lAi r- Building was t5!^6?^?lgutrinrbil?dlng'peS?f and^ permits. Conflict with • i ictis with individual UBC, ”1;. ='s-“:;s t;. »,..... by 3303b. 3. *. vAf-aii <;ales) is a conditional use in the "Greenhouse*; (but applied for or issued for rr-IB district, wiseqarv^ar or to the previous owner,greenhouse use, either t ^ 34.025. A determination He has applied herein f®^/^J®„gt%his additional use is or is not ol Se"Sfn-cL?orSing use prohibited by 31.109 and State Statute. !f June 19, 1980 Kellers Market 3800 Wayzata Boulevard Variance « C.U.P. Page 3 #561 ai.lOO^Md^State^tatute/^*^^^^®^ definitely prohibited by 5. 6. setback If the greenhouse use could be approved 34^842!°^ ® setback variance 7. lo^J^r^Vor proSucrL^Jtnj^Ir'^°2?r^!fwinter) between the building and^he hioh trees in the and even witnin the ri,h?^f 8. 9. for tS*^ize of‘^buildiJ|*propoLd**but''d required setbeclis (38.201/202) and'^woSld r4aui^.^m«."°‘ meet required side exrstinq hill, requiring an additioniircOT pe^®3!?7SS?°''“’ °* There is no loading doolc indicated as required by 38.330. S!rwS 2«rrS:“efa“e?'’c2?y “^spect!“ w — — MS w W 10. With construction of the revised i TH-ov=««a. • acquired and a new ditch cut throiSh easement was To date, this has not been reoalr^d Previous septic system. orders issued May 21, 1980. Effluent ir^lfacinl^ = oo^flirtsT°“rivewayf were'’revifed and ~l traffic access directly off Highway 12 with"^?!?^^* total elimination of Hoad 6 Where sUe disiaS are mSch^“e?? ““"‘I- built «|thout“^riitro^“|oMcil''fpp?oval‘*^^^^ re^val of the greenhouse enforced pending a review of thi^ T ■*'Z • orders have not been Planning Commislion a^rcou^cU ^ decision by the advised that he had the right to make sich^a^ beginning was no guarantee of favorable action larticuiaJf^'^K®^^®" conforming status of the property ' P®f^^'^“tarly because of the non- T #561 June 19, 1980 Kellers Market 3800 Wayzata Boulevcurd Variance & C.U.P. Page 4 As Building Official, I am concerned about the ongoing code problems with the plastic "greenhouse". A letter was finally sent on 4-15-80 stating that condemnation would be made on June 1, 1980 if no application were made. This was received 5-29-80. I recommend a prompt decision so that the existing code violations can be corrected ASAP, either by removal or by replacement with a building code-conforming structure. POSSIBLE COURSES OF ACTION 1. To allow greenhouse expansion only: requires: a) CUP for non-conforming use transfer b) determinatior that greenhouse does not expand non-conforming use c) CUP for greenhouse d) Veuricuice for setbacks or relocation to meet setbacks - this is possible e) better parking plan f) staff issued permits for building code compliance 2. To allow greenhouse and meat market: requires: a) amendment of comprehensive plan b) rezoning c) cup's and Variances as above 3.Denial of non-conforming use additions. Staff would enforce full code compliance. 4.Requirement for reinstatement of residential occupancy per September 7, 1977, or complete cessation of non-conforming use per 31.105. f-'*TATI% / CIWjOF ORONO, JMi^NESOJ^r^/ Address 3800 Wavzata Blvd.. Lone Lake \/Legal Description _ _ _ _]_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Wiseearve^sra73-i406APPLICANT Name Orton and Vicki Mailing Address 6625 Co. Rd. 26. Mound. MN 55364 Tel #OWNER Name _ Mailing Address _ _ _ Present Zoning TYPE OF REOUFST Subdivision $1504^0.OOj Lol X Conditional Use $50 \/^ K. __ Rezoning $250 _ Riprap $15 ($65) FEE - -^ Date Rec'd By • \ y —- j Rec'd Residential Present Use Commercial Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request Specify Ordinance Requirements_______________ gyplain youi' request and reasons for same to transfer and expand existing conditional use permit to Include green house and delicatessen ♦ / % ORONO, JH^ES^ v!r J Jl^/ toCATld^^ PROPOSAL-i©r pr ----aaOQ Wavzata Blvd. r^pg. v/Legal Description _ _ _’ APPLICANT NameOrton and Vicki Mailing Mdtesa _ 6625 Co. Rd. 26. Mound. MN 55364 - - - - - - - -Tel #OWNER Name Mailing Address same '^Present Zoning Residential TYPE OF REQUEST Subdivision $150+$i0,00i La JL Conditional Use $50 _ _ Rezoning $250 _ _ Riprap $15 ($65) FEE ^ T3Cf(^ Date Rec By __ 22L Present Use i/Zoning Ordinance Section Relating to Request \/ Specify Ordinance Requirements Comm^arcial Explain your request and reasons for same to transfer and AvpnnH existing conditional use permit to include green house and delicatessen VARIANCE required - extent of nonconformity Area _ _ Setback Front_ _ _ Other, explainWid Side Rear Specify hardships to SUBDIVISION application Residential Other, explain Mb. of Lots CONDITIONAL USB AND OTHER - explain proposed use of property in detail See attached marketing p)nn. MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE APPLICATION (Must be submitted 10 days prior to Planning Commission meeting) Application completed Plat map section Certificate of survey of property sketcA location and setbacks of proposal Construction ^lans, if applicable Applicant's Signature [i 5. Certified Property Owner's list • owners within (300') («•»')- fro Hennepin Co. Dept, of Finance A—603 Government Center 6. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (# pre-add£^sed to each of the nam / Owner's Signature information required or r.qu.st.dJ>y| i) aunty tjttdice. 'wn his •city in County, uid hit Jy used d repair Kl. the e which at In upersed- ■fee bom red to be linances , repair, lent was defend* With two mtaininf 4 of the table for brother is alto a property. t began storage aipaat, be open, cial in* tion was tg ordi* snt peti* of Com* ig Advi- ; of bit -1, light Mvitory )f reaon* county pted the petition. owledge itruction naterialt buildiog FlITT or FREEBOBN ?. 0LAU88EK CMettmK.waan Minn. 325 (1] 1. The county argues that defend ant should have taken a direct appeal to the district court from the action of the county board denying hit petition to rexone and that, in the absence of such appeal, he is precluded from raising the defense that the county toning ordinance, as applied to him, is unconstitutional. We disagree with this contention and adopt the reasoning of County of Lake v. MacNeal, 24 III.2d 253, 181 K.E.2d 85 (1962). That case involved somewhat similar facts, and the same con tention was made that the defendant should have pursued his claim of nnconsti- tutionality through an appeal from the leg islative determination rather than as a de fense in a separate action commenced by the county. The Illinois court suted (24 lll2d 260, 181 N.E2d 90): M •^ So loni: as dOcal authoriiies institute an action, a defendant should be entitled to defend on the p’ound of the invalidity of the ordinance and to have the issue determined If it arere to be otherwise, the result could be that judi cial machinery would be used to enforce an ordinance that is unconstitutional'* We do net condone the action of defendant in continuing the construction of the build ing after the denial of his rexomrsg peti tion, but we conclude that he should not be dep.*ived of the right to raise constitutional issues in defending this action. 2. An important question, and one of first impression in Minnesota, it whether the construction of the building was an ex pansion or extension of the nonconforming use. The Freeborn County Zoning Ordinance, I 423, provides: *The nonconforming use of land wher^ a structure thereon is not so em ployed, existing at the time Jiat this Or dinance becomes effective, may be con tinued provided: 1. The nonconforming use of land shall not ta any way be ex panded or extended either on the same or adjoining property. 2. That if the nonconforming use of land, existing at the time this Ordinance became effec tive, is thereafter discontinued or changed, then the future use of such land shall be in conformity with the pro visions of this Ordinance.” (Italics sup plied.) [2] A residential toning ordinance may constitutionally prohibit the creation of uses which are nonconforming, but exist ing nonconforming uses must either be permitted to remain or be eliminated by use of eminent domain. Hawkins v. Tal bot, 248 Minn. 549, 80 N.W2d 863 (1957). It is not reouired. however, that preexist? ing nonconforming uses be allowed to ex pand or enlarge. '1 ne public policy behind that clocthne is to increase ^e 3Ianu3^se^wniinnme be eliminated ^uMoobsoiScSicerTxhaustion or oestruc- tion. This in turn will lead tO-a^nni(gng^ use of the land consistent with the overall ^^omprehra We have found no Minnesou cases di rectly in point, but there are cases from other jurisdictions that are helpful In Shannahan v. Ringgold, 212 Md. 481, 129 A2d 797 (1957), the landowners had erect ed a large warehouse, proposing to use the ground floor for storage of equipment, ve hicles, and mschinery —the .-ame uses to which the open land had been put prior to the erection of the building. The business was in a residentially toned area but was a valid nonconforming use. The toning or dinance was no more restrictive than the one involved here. The Maryland Court of Appeals stated that they could find nothing in the ordinance that would permit the use of the new building merely because a similar use had been esUblished on open land and held that the construction of a new building was an unlawful extension of a nonconforming use. Weber v. Pieretti, 72 N.J.Super. 184, 178 A2d 92 (1962), involved an addition to an existing building. The contention was that the addition was designed to park trucks and to carry on the same activities which d W if t J r r • m 326 Minn. SOS NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, ^onnerly conducted in the preciic ®P*t> •ten in which the addition wai to be built and that, therefore, it was not an ex tension of the nonconforming use. The ^ that the constTST - tion of a building to House an ouBlnSr Sn. conforming use constituted an enlargSncnt ol such user""””*" " ■ In addition to the storage of earth-mov ing equipment, defendant's valid noncon forming use includes repair and mainte nance of the equipment The harshness of Minnesota winters implies that much repair and maintenance work can be done in a building when similar work cannot be done outside. The building would no doubt fa- ciliute defendant’s operations in other ways. (^>4] An-addi|ion to an existing build- ing is clearly jn e^Oensioi^l^TSnlBSfnf A nrsnw ^.T_^^**^^*^^^^***a*>^* i>tiilding where none existed before constitutes an expan sion of a nonconforming use in the same manner as an addition to an existing build ing. Furthermore, the building will pro long the continuation of the nonconform ing use and considerably lessen the likeli hood that it will be eliminated in ^e fore- •ceable future,^ Oefendani cites Pennsylvania cases to •unport his contention that the erection of the building is not an expansion or exten- •ion of his nonconforming use.* We have considered those cases and decline to fol low thenia We hold that the construciion of this building to house the outdoor nonconform- i^ use constitutes an expansion and exten sion of that use and is in violation of the ordinance. 3. The trial court found that the denial of defendant's petition to rexone bore no reasonable iflationship to public health, safety, or public welfare, and constituted a deprivation without due proc'*^ of law of I. E. f., EUoler v. KrdU Oorp., 40# Pa. 400, 172 A.2d 820 (1001); la rv Paiiet defendant's constitutional rights to full en joyment of his property. Several well-esUblished princi- pies control the determination of this question. This court has established that before the exercise of the police power can "T>e held unconstitutional, it must be found that it has no substantial relationship to public health, safety, morals, or general welfa-e. Naegele Outdoor Advertising Co. V. Village of Minnetonka, 281 Mina 492, 162 N.W2d 206 (1968). The burden of proof is upon defendant to esUblish that the legislative body has acted arbitrarily or unreasonably and that there is no eubsUn- tial relationship to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare. What best furthers public welfare is a matter primarily for de termination by the legislative body con cerned. State ex rel. Howard v. Village of Roseville, 244 Minn. 343, 70 N.W2d 404 (1955). Even where the reasonableness of a aoning ordinance is debatable or where opinions differ as to the desirability of the restriction it imposes, the courts are not to interfere with the legislative discretioa We said in Sute v. Modem Box Makers, Inc., 217 Mina 41, 47, 13 N.W2d 731, 734 (1944): ''Defendant finally contends that the ordinance is arbitrary and unreasonable in its application to the property here^in- volved. • • • Xhe general rule is that if reasonableness of an ordinance is debatable, courts will not interfere with the legislative discretioa" [3] The trial court placed considerable emphasis on the fact that defendant's brother conducts a similar nonconforming business adjacent to the subject premises, and that enclosing within a building that whach was formerly performed in the open will be aesthetically beneficial to the area. While these factors may create some doubt about the reasonableness of the enforce ment of the ordinance in this case, we can- Appeal, 884 Pa. lOa 118 A.2d 508 C1806) J not affct that they are sufficient to over come the presumption that the legislative body has acted reasonably and in a manner consistent with the feneral welfare of the community. BOWS T. FBEDLUND csta ••aoiN.w.aaan We have held many times that residen-" tial aoninf is a valid exercise of the police power, is in the public interest, and ad- the public welfare. JState ex rel.vances 146, 204 N. W. 569. 54 A.L.R. 1012 (1925), affirmed per curiam. 273 U.S. 671, 47 S.Cl 474, 71 LEd. S32 (1927); Sute ex rel. Howard v. Village of Roseville, supra; State v. Mod- em Box Makers, Inc., supra; Naegele Outdoor Advertising Co. v. Village ofUuldoor Advertising^;©, v. Village Minnetonka, Jfnier^nffTvidg him of the right to have the Und reaooed. An offer of proof was made, but objection to it was susUined by the trial court and no finding was made on that question. If, in fact, the land cannot be used for resi dential purposes, it may well be an uncon stitutional taking without due process of law to deny defendant the right to reaone. We reverse the trial court without preju dice to the right of defendant to petition again for rezoning on the ground Uut the land is not suitable for use for residential purposes. In the event defendant petitions for rezoning, all proceedings should be stayed until a final determination is made on the petition. •V •W -------------------------ICnCe TRSThecsTanisIm^^ of this residential area was unreasonable or that it was not in the public interest. Similarly, a careful review of the record reveals no subsUntial evidence to support the finding that the en forcement of the ordinance is unconstitu tional as to defendant. Defendant is enti- tledjo_ttwtiiu^ hU__preyn^^ncon7oBSi^ Reversed. use m the same manner and to the same extent mat jt_was operated at the time the Mningordinai^ JJSSt cvcrnn^nTorcCTncn^PPi^prB^ will «fcance_Uie posiibinty that defendant's S^»n?orminguse"%rnr^ventoair^^^ ^ Tbis is a reasonable means to *he end of esUblishing a uniform residen tial area. Altns A BOWC, at al., Raspandaats, V. John rREOLUNO, at al., Appellaata. Na. 43441. Biipreme Court of IHnncaota. Dec. 15, 1P72. The issues involved in this case are novel and unusual, and it is obvious from the record that the trial court has spent con siderable time ai^ effort in attempt ing to •• _______, mat tiie attempted construction of s build-^ ing on defendant ’s land was an expansion and extension of the nonconforming use and that the enforcement of the ordinance against defendant is not unconstitutional. Therefore, we reverse. [10,11] It appears from the record that defendant asserU that the land cannot be used for residential purposes and that, therefore, it is unconstitutional to deprive Action for injuries sustained by pas senger when automobile in which she was riding was struck from rear by a car driv en by defendant The District Court, Goodhue County, John’B. Friedrich, J., en tered judgment adverse to defendant, and denied defendant's alternative motion for a new trial or a remittitur, and defendant appealed. The Supreme Court, Mac- J.jiughlin, J., held that defendant overtak ing motorist, who, when there were ap proximately seven car lengths between her car and overtaken car, noticed an insect on her arm, who claimed that she was afraid of insects, that she screamed and brushed insect off her arm, and that she looked up to find that she was only about one and a r Lf ■ i. .r 't (• r -H t 4 \ I f ./ •M '.‘‘1 Ii- . i #•c; r' I i M: 1' __J « •Z > • CD lO r=i m o ooco H2fl tag u. O CiD UJ OGSfl OSfl CS9 3 / - / I lir ^1^§i< c/ —J •"> 4* inari 1—'Z § •4 •i >-Q (y'J ^.'0 s Zty. « id J- C^ttJ ttls a-c^ S 4 i: • ; .* • X ‘ L*., I ill - t* 1 I Vf tH O 10 =te A r z'ir\ IPrA mx ^ail■X "J' <%: 'iM, )? \ •j£=«^ . 9 *zr^ » • ^ .0' • > 4>«. V£i 1 • »m. iT V1U.AGH 01 OKONC Applj cation coNnniWAL USE PER'in rox a non ■ conforming use )UlJ #561 4Prior to the adoption of 2ere*^classifled as non business activities in reside o occupations as a conforming uses. The Zoning Code^n^^^ (34.033). Home Occupations permitted accessory use in t ^ gainful occupation meeting We defined as follows: when erg^ged in only by personsall of the following requirements when eg g^^ conducted within residing in their ^.[Jen evidence of the occupation is not the principal structure other than those permitted m Rvisible from the street, no signs otner^^ stored on the Districts are present, no ®^ccss involved, and ^"^rance premises, over the counter re within the structure. A professiona to the hone occupation is gain consultation, emergency ^reatment^r re;r«“ce“rF l-ofvrjHl off-Ftreet'p^rlin/spaces for the ocjup^n^ and vis^^ors^------ All other businesses in tesidentialzones^ remain in non^con^^ „:1.° but under 5:.480 may appl ' for a condit^o^^ Non-Conforming Uses « 480 reads as follows: "Co^L^q. Mh-rSh IH. All non-conforming uses actual l> ■ application therefor not shall be issued a fR"-* S tioLl Us? Permit shall allna the continuation of the ^ [q ^957. Such permits shall be frl^red-^ir/a^^ri? tron ?'r';a??i:;'to'?bl’’?J?:'.nrusir”"si?h%?S?s Shall not be subiec to periodic review. Your attention is called to the^foUo^^tng^^^^l^^^^».^ Uses. .Any 10^ 31*.l04 and quoted as folio s. — ” ^g —g- ^ nor.- ' land or buildings which Se continued in said ''cn-conf oi ming conforming use on permit granted pursuant to. sub ,ect to ?he ron?u;j8*?4°is"iR"" ' 31 101. Changed to another non-conforming use: ri;i“o^iin “u:nre-h^Mit?a?Jrd%??Tr'??>:sfn-urrr - • i' U . C-ondi tional Ilr-c Permit l*or a Non-Conforming list SJ.103. Extended in area. 31.104. No "junk Yard" may continue as a non-conforming use under any circumstances. * permitted continuance of non-conforming uses until March 11, 1967, but only in accordance with limitations similar to those quoted above, accordingly a non - conforming use was existing legally on March 11, 1967, only if not been changed or enlarged in the preceding ten years. - - The enclosed questionaire is designed to guide you in your application. Please answer all questions as completely as possible. Sincerely yours. Mike Scheller INSPECTION DEPARTMENT i I 'I *c *A* VJLLACU OF OROXO QUm.OXA.RE ,:0. EX.ST.KC NON-CONFORH.NG CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT APPUCATI Date;1) Name of business and owner ------------------------- M p, f~7 leRU descHpUen^, 3ad„ss oT pro^ty wEe.e busi„„s is conduced —z. <Tir. ■iirc^^ c,.-^. C ^ Ct o MIH Date business began_/2^j^-vrxr- SX^S_-gF_^INESS fN MARCH 11, ia<;7 Khat was the nature of_your busine^ on this date' 2) How many buildings of what tvn#. onTT^ 7^ -- -g or wnat type and size, and location were used for your business on this aate 3) How much and what kinH n.*a Hnat Kind of equipment used for business STAnJS_OF_BUSINESS ON MARCH 10. 196 7 Khat was the nature of your business on this date A..T.n r I • *» •• • • ■«.^t •»PaRC 4 How many buildioRS of what type, size, and location were used for yoi business on this date /ILL 3) How much and what kind of equipment used for business on this date // /• //' ' ‘71 1 *-f~ /^ ( I i V ^ t I V - V % t 4) What was the condition of buildings on this date _ _ _ - Ci V t - i-» '-TV < If there were any additions to buildings, used for business between March 11, 195^Z^and March 10, 1968, please state date and size______ V ^ c-<*: •/ ) ^ t---T" Please enclose plat of your property, showing location of all buildings and dimensions of that part of lot and size of buildings being used for business purposes. Enclosed is a sample that may be used for this purpose and guidance. c Jt'C<“y^ cl- (■ r CS.U , .• 4 M •%CUN.,1 i IfSAi. llSi f'i L->\F0-MJ NC. ^ f|' ,') r e ^ T ii i ^•Mi • nWiX-J •] rjg^ » »<*M «>l I* I'a <i>: Telephone 473-7357 CCITY '“OF ORONO CITY of ORONO Foil Office Box 66*CrysUl Bay, Minnesota 55323 •Mumdpal Office* f 4 On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka July 24, 1979 Mr. Orton Wiaegarver 6625 County Road 26 Mound, MN 55364 Re: Plastic Addition - Keller’s Market, 3800 Wayrata Boulevard Dear Mr. Wisegarver; An inspection of the above property was made earlier this spring. I found that a plastic addition on the east side of the existing structure is being used as a salesroom. To construct any addi tion a building permit is required. However, because the existing structure exists under a Conditional Use Permit, an addition must first be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and Council. A number-of violations of the State Building Code exist in the plastic addition and must be corrected: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Addition must have one-hour fire protected walls. Roof must support 30 pound live load per square foot and 10 poxind dead load per sqpiare foot. Electrical permit is required and must meet the National t:iectrical Code. Structure must have frost tk >tings 42 inches minimum depth. Structure roust meet State Energy Code. The existing addition does not meet building or safety codes and cannot be used for sales or storage. Please call me within 10 days to discuss arriangeroents for removing this unauthorized addition and, if desired, the steps necessary to have a legal addition permitted. Sincerely, Telephone 473*7357 :iTX PgpNO ClTYofORONO Po.l Ofn« Bo« 66.Cry.ul B.y, MinnewU 55323*Municip.1 Oflictt On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka August 22, 1979 Mr. Orton Wisegarver 6625 county Road 26 Mound, Minnesota 55364 #561 Rei Plastic Addition - Keller's Market, 3800 Mayrata Boulevard Dear Mr. Wisegarver: rSrmS still erected and this matter must be resolved ^ Thriddition must be removed by SEPTEMBER 4, 1979 obtained. If you have any further questions, please contact ne at 473-7357. S.’tncerely, 'l/bitA4 Thomas J.' Jacobs Building Inspector TJJ:kh cc; Mr. Alan Olson f il ' ; Telephon* 473-7357 i m\ 1I i-rciTY I tOF S ^DRONC^ CITY of ORONO Poat ornce Boa 66*CrysUl Bay, MinneMU 65323*Municipal Officca On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka December 11, 1979 Mr. Orton Wisegarver 6625 County Road 26 Moxind, Minnesota 55364 Re: Kellers Market - 3800 Wayzata Boulevard Dear Mr. Wisegarver: Yesterday, I received a sketch plan from Gordon Metcalf apparently indicating your expansion intentions for the market. I note that he wishes to meet with me which is fine, however, I also note that I have never received the lot survey that you promised me last September. I will find it extremely difficult to evaluate your proposal without an accurate site plan or measured setbacks to property lines. I hope that you or he will supply the survey by the date of the meeting. On another matter, you told Tom Jacobs that you would be in to obtain a permit for the temporary sign now on your property. To date you have not done so. I am looking forward to the meeting. Perhaps we can now proceed with a formal application and review. Sincerely, am*. Olson Village Planner APO:kh be: Mr. Gordon Metcalf Telephone 473*7357 CITYof ORONO F«.t Office Bok 66.Cry.Ul Bay. MinnewU 55323.Municip.l Office. On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka April 15, 1980 i 1 . 1 #561 Mr. Orton Wisegarver , 6625 County Road 26 Mound, Minnesota 55364 Re: Kellers Market, 3800 Wayzata Boulevard Proposed Conditional Use Permit Dear Mr. Wisegarver: YOU called »e about a ^nth that your Ion, awaited^ ^^^fetun^iSeLlved a tor^al application. « m;,v 1979 when Mr. Jacobs first inspected This situation began in May, * _ so-called greenhouse your property e"« noted tte Presence . building addition. As of today, nermit as we have been awaiting reJT» S1^Su^°P-Sul^ .rtS^Sr^jVnd ronlng applications. AS Building Official, I can not £iie^as"'of'^May°30, 1980, occupancy without a certificate. M we have discussed, you »ust provide the following for a conditional use and variance review: Application form completed and signed. Property owners list (300M - note the list dated Septes4»r, is now outdated and must be replaced. iLuflcate of survey of the property showing all buildings, parking and setbacks. 1 * 1. 2. 1979, 3. 4.cLtruction plans of Pr°P^“?ior^S2«rnof tolS^fo^'to |^ilMnr?£r i{hUir^^Von.lUT. you iS“1roeidrntrS««ai ana^^sis and certification from a registered architect or engineer. mi L April 15, 1980 Mr. Orton V7isegarver Re: 3800 Wayzata Boulevard Page 2 If you have any questions, please call Mr. Jacobs or Mrs. Mabusth at 473-7357. Sincerely, Alan P. Olson 't Village Planner APO:kh 1 : TO; FROM: DATE: Planning Conunission and Council Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator June 20, 1980 #568 SUBJECT: #568 Daryle L. Uphoff, 2497/99 & 2501/03 Kelly Avenue SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Subdivision: 4 lot plat Zoning District: LR-IB Required - 1 acre minimum Proposed - 1/2 acre minimum The applicant proposes a four lot plat of Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 1, Navarre Cove. The purpose of the subdivision is to create owner occupied units. In dividing the lots in half to create the homestead parcels, the applicant also creates substandard lots. Each lot would contain a 1/2 acre as opposed to the required 1 acre. I reviewed the City's concern with this type of division and suggested a PRD concept - zero lot line through duplex structure retaining 10' patio area within ownership lot and retaining common open area. In this type of proposal, the integrity of the zoning district is maintained and the need {^1^03 variance is eliminated. Uphoff advises that mortgage companies would not consider lending mortgage money to proposed buyers of units with lots of such minimal area (see Uphoff letter of June 13, 1980). Please review the proposed plat. The following options are presented for Planning Commission consideration: 1. Rezone to LR-IC (1/2 acre minimum) - maintain integrity of the code - no variance required with the subdivision. 2. Require a PRD application (1 acre retained as open space) - maintain the integrity of the code - no variance required with this application 3. Retain LR-IB zoning - approve plat as submitted - grant variance for lot area based on lending institution position on minimal lots and hope that theargument of the existing duplex structures seeking zero lot line ownership will be strong enough to fight off future developers seeking simil£u: concessions. n 568 >i 03 Kelly Avenue nixnuin miniinuni Lot 2, Block 1» create owner sate the homestead 5. Each lot would e* I reviewed the sted a PRD ' hil type o ‘ ^rtqage sea buyere °£ af June 13» 1^® , tions ate presentea integrity of the .on. enare) ” maintain °Hith Si. appUoation "^ > fight off *“t«e V Lana use Appxicav*wi* « IOCATIC3N OF PROPOSAL (or property) Address 2497-99 > 2501-03 Kelly Avenue__________ Lots 1 and 2, Block 1» Legal Description Navarre Cove- - --- - applicant Wain*. Daryle L. Uphoff Mailing 371- Tel # 3211^ OWNER Name Kelly Avenue Duplexes ^%el Mailing type of request _ _ Rezoning $250 _ _ Riprap $15 ($65) PEE^!^5*i^ » Date ' £m^ By yH Present Zoning LR-IB Present Use Residential^ 39.0 zoning Orainance Section Relating to Request . specify orainance Requirements / _ _ _ _ _- - - - - - - - - - - - - - • -- « Wish to subdivide Loth 1 and 2 Explain your request and reasons for sam - - - - - - in fhar each u.^t of the two exisflng duplexes may be inaividu^ owned. var;required - extent of nonconformity Width Setback Froj Other Side Rear Specify hardships ^ SUBDIVISION application X _ Residential Other, explain No. of lots CONDITIO^ USE AND OTHER - explain proposed use of property xn detail minimum material NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE . a (Must be submitted 10 days prior to Planning Commissxon meetxng) Application completed Plat map section Certificate of survey of property sketch location and setbacks of proposal Construction plans, if applicable Certified Property Owner's list c owners within (300*) (150*)- fro* Hennepin Co. Dept, of Finance A-603 Government Center Stamped, legal sized envelopes(#: pre-addressed to each of the naiM on the above list. June 16, 1980 naTF. June 16, 1980 Applicant's Signature . < j |sted 1 \h- Applicant ”'“®/°c?trEnglnier^"«ir Attorney, Planning Commission Z r^cll «ce«“r^ t^pr^Ls ?his application and further agrees to pay all fees as established by ordinance. . ^'#***.*«^. s,vnv««w**4 ‘ 'j . . r r. -» ^ .* -r ■ ?>** I r .■. •- •••*•' •—.-r ". •.-•--•.»- 11-* ,v-••c' • " .. •••••■ t •. • t ••.“•*••••••. lU* •* ■ ,W. -------•- •■•- ..<1 NAVARRE COVE #56 SCALE « reel • H CORDON R. COFFIN LANO ftUllVCniAS A CMCiNCCAt tONO LARC . WIANCSOTA SkeDiwiSf»<v V ~ ’J :>: fj^ IIK ;.'£-5 L^'J June 13, 1980 #§w Jean Mabusth Orono City Hall Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Jean: Lots 1 fnd'n? subdivision of on which the old duplex is iSted recall. Lot 3,subdivide Lots 1 and r l°=sted, has been sold. I would like to Lots 1 and^^arinS?cS?efb^°thrrJri"J^f,^'"°'^^‘^ subdivide survey. Lot 1 is pi^entlv i!?// attached I am requesting that the lots be divided ^ acre. In brief, buildings are constructed so that they Lj"be"efsily"dIv?deS?^' that we’’Slsirr?S Save subdivided is one time yourpSefereScS fL indicated at that the units could be separatelv^oSiiid"i"? S?® property in order the units be common grSuSir Suhou^E ? surrounding procedure, I am infoLed bv'vartS,,* 2^ J ^ objection to that and loans institutions in^thiS ®«d savings lending mortgage money to orSLJeH consider lot-liLd on any prSiLt of *ero course, provide^ortgage money ifwould, of buying the lot on which the bJIilSing waS loSSed''''''*'^®®'' . have attached rath« iha? z«o ^ of Obtaining mortgages for prospectii^p^riLsersT”’' 'I . 'I’, .f •r'.tiiHel ■ ■ i* April 15, 1980 Mr. Orton V7isegarver Re: 3800 Wayzata Boulevard Page 2 If you have any questions, please call Mr. Jacobs or Mrs. Mabusth at 473-7357. Sincerely, Alan P. Olson ^ Village Planner APO:kh /