Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-19-2002 Planning PacketPublic A ttendance Mek’unc D ate -V /*-(-. J C v ; ^ □ C ouncil ©Planning C ommission □ Park C ommission □ Other Pl.KASE nu.our rilE INFOICMAflON REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY REtT)RI)S. PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME (please print) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER 1. KBBBKBSn r- 2.i?,wxi lY-iil fn y /(. ' No^ \ /’^e:v X/'j 3.•>OiU 'ih:<■ /(ir\ A 4./ ' h1 J . v"* /J> y P' i»^ / 7 ^ ^ r /! /. //C ' V /* A ^ 1 ^ t ^ \ 6. k' f J[ /? 'fi /-:>(' I ^/' j / 7/ ■ ^ -V > V'/ 7, ^7^^ c* A .(* < 8. K at F A»rUMS I UPtO Al}.^ 9. (jci\\t ^______,_____,. 10. \Lu£.Lj^ ^ / Vi "^7~TT^C’ 11.. / / c* 12. M 13. ~/7yi -At ki •* A' //i r i 1 ’ r 7 1*1« ^ *__f* I !tiV.y ‘ * ^iAjul 15. t l>st« 4dmaMrati<e Support (Ionm • OMl MlltMS Pt BLU'. ATT MIMUKSOKTHK ORONO PLANNING C OMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. ROLL ‘Ilic Orono Planning Conimission met on the above date with the following members present Chair Lhzabeth Hawn, Commissioners Jeanne Mabusth. Daniel Kluth. Sands Smitli. David Rahn, and Alternate J Mark I'rit/ler Commissioners William Stoddard and Janice Ikrg were absent the following represented City Staff Planning Direetor Michael Ciaffron. /oning Administrator Paul Weinberger. Zoning Administrator Wends Hotteiiberg. and Recorder Lin Vee Chair I lawn called the meeting to order at 6 31 p m CONSENT («0I) «02-2750 MICHELLE AND EDWARD WINER. 2010 SHORELINE DRI\ E. VARIANCE Hawn inquired whether there were any public comments relating to this application riiere were no public comments regarding this application Smith inquired whether ans of the neighbors have commented on this application Weinberger stated Staff did receiv e one call from a neighbor who was not o|iposed to the project Haw n moved. Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application WU2-2750, Michelle and Edward Winer, 2010 Shoreline Drive, granting of an av erage lakeshore setback variance to construct the addition and deck to the existing residence. \ () I E: Ayes 6, Nays 0. OLD BUSINESS («02) «0I-2731 NAVARRE AMOCO, 3360 SHORELINE DRI\ E, COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANf ES Kluth moved, Smith .seconded, to table .Application ffOI-2731, Navarre tjnoco, 3360 Shoreline Drive, to allow the Applicant time to submit the requested items, \ O I E: A>es 6, Nays 0. («03) «01-2735 PROPOSED ZONING CODE AMENDMEN I, SEC I ION IU.03, SI BD. 14, STRl CTI R \L LOT ( ()\ ER/\GE ORDINANC E STANDARDS Bottenberg stated what is before the Planning Commission tonight is a proposed change to the pac ;e I MINMKSOKTHE ORONO PLANNING C OMMISSION Tuc*>day, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. /.oiling code dealing with structural lot coxerage ordinance standards Mottenberg noted the Planning Commission had discussed this item in a number of work sessions, and inquired whether there were any changes or concerns b\ the Planning Comimssion relating to diis item Kluth noted they were still working with the percentages Hawn commented the last time the\ rexiewed this item the> discussed the fact that this proposed amendment would aflect \er\ few pioperties but would require a large minibcr of properties to ha\e hardcover calculations done Hawn stated it was her understanding the Planning Coniniission had decided at that tune not to continue to pursue this item Mabiisth stated that was her understanding as well Kluth stated the PImining Coniniissioii did request StaITto draft the nuKlel ordinance I lawn stated the ordinance dws not include anything about non-lakeshore lots and percentage of liardcov cr on these lots Sniith stated it was her understanding prxiis were to be included in the hardcover, which appaiently lias changed since Uie last work session Mabusth stated Smith is correct, noting that Smith and I.indqiiist were opposed to the ordinance since swimming pwls were not included in the hardcover calculations, with the rest of the Planning ('oimmssion being in favor of the proposed amendment I lawn indicated what she was referring to was her proposal tlut non-lakeshore pioperties. in an elTort to insure that those lots did not have a large amount of hardcover on them, was to put a percentage limit on those properties as well as lakcshore lots Hawn staled since then StalFs studv has demonstrated that a limit on tliose lots is not needed at this lime Rahil inquired whether the Plaiimng ('oimmssion should put a .'5 percent limit on the >(MM0(j(i' setback area .Mabusth commented Stall did a survev of non-lakeshore lots and found that it was not an issue pa(;f2 MINUTES OF TlIK ORO.NO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. Rahn stated the unK other comment lie liad regarding the ordinance is under Item /O. which reads "all rtxifed structures that extend more than 6' abo\e grade lexel'’ Rahn stated he would like that to read all roofed structures more than 6” abo\e grade le\el Rahn stated m Ins opinion the word extend gives the impression of a hori/ontal extension rather than v ertical Havvn stated it is her understanding this is addressing structures that are cantilevered Rahn stated he understood it related to structures over six feet m height GafTron stated he is m agreement with Rahn that the word extend is somewhat confusing and that the word extend could be eliminated without changing the meaning of the ordmanee Haw n moved, Mabusth seconded, to recommend approval of Application #01-2735, Proposed Amendment of Zoning C'ode, Section 10.03, Subd. 14, Lot Coverage by Structures Standards, with the words, which extend, being removed from Item #1 under Section 1. \'0'1 E: Ayes 5, Nays 1, Smith Opposed. Smith indicated she voted in opposition to the motion because in her opinion swimming pools should be included in lot coverage (#04) #2333 PROPOSKI) ZONING CODE A.MENDMENT, SECTION 10.20 SUBD. 4C, HOME OCCUPATION STANDARDS GafTron stated before the Planning Commission tonight is a summarv of the conclusions reached during the December 20”' work session Galfron stated Section I eliminates provisions for home vKcupaiion licensing and makes them an aecessorx use m residential z(»ncs (iaffron stated the proposed zoning code amendment also elimiiutes most of the performance standards tliat were included m the current zoning code Section revises the Home Oecupalion accessory use entry as it appears m the list of R-l A allowed accessory uses fhe new language requires tlut all home PAGE 3 MINUTKSOFTIIK ORONO PJ.ANMNC; C OMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o ’clock p.in. occupations meet the special prov isions of Section 10 63 which has been added to the code GalTron noted Section 10 63 also contains a rec|uirenient that existing home oecupations become conftirming within one year GalTron stated the ordinance as currentiv dralkd does not establish multiple regulatory categories of home oecupations. but merely creates a set of standards that all home occupations must meet If an existing home occupation does not meet the standards, it would be m v iolation of the /oning code and would not be allowed A v lolation of the standards would be treated as a /oning v lolation rather than a licensing violation and would be subject to the legal processes already established in the code for remedy ing such v iolations Gallron stated the Planning Commission should also consider vvhetlicr multiple regulatory categories would be useful GalTron indicated it is ctmimon for cities to have a Iieensing requirement for those home occupations that have certain characteristics that have an impact upon the neighboihood. which might include employment of a nonHXCupant of the dwelling, having customers or clients or their vehicles coming to the property , manufacturing, assembly or processing of products or materials, parking more than one vehicle used in the home occupation that is % ton or less capacitv aiul has attachments such as a plow, et cetera, parking a vehicle used in the home occupation that exceeds % ton capacity. or if the business prcxluces any w aste tlut should be treated or regulated Additional categories for regulatory control could similarly be established for dealing w ith uses that do not meet one or more standards but might mitigate or eliminate the adverse impact upon the neighborhocxJ it it is subjected to certain conditions GalTron stated the Planning Commission could consider requiring a conditional use permit in which the Council s autliority to review or revoke the conditional use permit is spelled out if the conditions are not met or if the conditions fail to mitigate the adverse neighborhcHHl impacts Another option would be to require an annual license tor such uses that have the potential to be a problem Gaffron noted a public hearing on this matter was held by the Plaumng Commission on November I9*. pa(;f 4 MINIJTKS OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. with no public comments being rccci\cd This item was then tabled to a work session on December 20''’, which resulted in staff being directed to make a number of rcMsions to the draft approx ed bx the Planning Commission in 1998 GalTron noted lliosc revisions hax e been incorporated into the nexx draft before the Planning Commission tonu’lit Gaffron recommended the public hearing be reopened to sec if there are anx public comments GalTron stated if the Planning Commission xxould like to sec an additional category for licensing or conditional uses, some additional work xxould need to be d,Mc by Staff prior to its approval Smith inquired xxhelher Uie licensing or conditional use categorx xxould alloxx the (Tty to haxe some authority oxer those businesses which max not be able to meet all the criteria outlined m the ordinance GalTron stated it xxould Ilaxvii inquired xxliether there xxcre any public comments relating to this application Tliere xxcre no public comments Kluth noted Staff has listed a number of restrictions on home occupations without spccificallv identifying anx |iartieular home occupation Kluth inquired if a resident is unable to meet those requirements xvhether they xxould be able to apply for a license or a conditional use permit Gaftron stated if a business dcK's not meet those standards outlined m the ordinance, thev would not be eligible for a home occupation Kluth stated he xxould be in fax or ol including language in the ordinance xvhich xxould alloxx a home cKcupation to apply for a license or a conditional use permit if thex do not applx with all the criteria Kluth noted that the state licenses home dax care and xxould not be coxered under this ordinance GalTron stated home dax care is licensed through the state and not bx the CTtx. with the (Ttx being required to alloxx home dax care Mabusth stated the Planning ( ommission has not thoroughly discussed xx heftier a conditional use permit or a license xxouid be more appropriate in terms of enforcing anx possible x lolalions Mabusth inquired pa(;e 5 MINtTESOFTHK ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, Februar>' 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.in. whether StafTprefers one o\ er the other Mabuslli stated in her view she would prefer to see a conditional use permit GafTron stated one of the benefits of a conditional use permit is that the Council would only see the application once unless it becomes a problem Gaffron stated if a license is required, the Applicant would be required to apply once a year Gaflron stated it the City would like to see a particular business on an annual basis, that requirement could also be included m the conditional use permit I lawn stated she has concerns how the conditional use permit will be written, noting the City does not know what types of businesses will be applying for a conditional use permit Gallron stated Orono s Zoning C ode dcK's not acknowledge what is called a "special use permit", which the statutes may allow the City to do xy itliout ha\ ing to meet conditional use permit mandatory approx al standards. Kluth slated he is in taxor of the drafl ordinance, but xxould like to sec some language meluded m the ordinance saying tliat if a home occupation fails these standards, they need to appiv for a conditional use permit Gat Iron stated anytime a conditional use is listed in City f ixle. there should be enough standards attached to it so if those standards cannot be met. the Council can approx c some conditions specific to one particular home occupation Gaflron commented StafT xxould like the City Attorney to rexiew that language prior to it being approx ed CialTroii stated a third option could also be to broaden what home occupations would be allowed b.it to inc«>r|iorate stricter restrictions on the number of employees, et cetera Kluth stated the conditional use pemiit language could be included later Kluth stated the intent of the ordinance is to protect the neighborhood but still allow some businesses to be run out of the home llaxxTi stated the intent of the ordinance is also to allow the neighbors some recourse in the exent a pmblem does dexelop Hawn indicated she personally is happy with the restrictions contained in the PAGE 6 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. ordinance, but that if other members of the Planning C ommission would like to see slricier restrictions, then perhaps this should be discussed further GatTron noted he has incorporated thiee questions into the ordinance, with the first question being found under Item J Item J slates, “no equipment. machiner\. or materials other than of a 1>|k* normalU found in or compatible with a dwelling unit shall be allowed " fhe question asks, “will tins in eftecl prohibit operation of a landscape serv ice or contractor with a backhoe or dump Iruek'^ ’ (ialTroi. ..ated that l\pe of equipment generally is not associated with a home occupation and there is a potential that some conflicts could arise Kluth staled that also depends on how much land the person owns as well as the amount of screening that IS pro\ ided I lawn suggested adding the words, “to be parked outside**, noting there are some larger properties where tl'iose iv pes of businesses do exist Rahn inquired whether the City requires that this l\pe of equipment or vehicles be ;arked inside regardless of size GalTron st.ited the Citv does have an exterior storage ordinance that requires specific vehicles to be stored inside GatTron stated Items (j and H deal with outdoor storage and parking Mabuslh inquired whether the existing home occupations would be grandfathered, noting there are one or two landscaping businesses that currently exist in Orono that would not be able to comply with this ordinance Kluth inquired if liiev have an existing license currentlv. whether thev would be grandfathered in GatTron slated the way the ordinance is currently wriiten. all home occupations would need to be brought into conformance within a vear of its adoption GatTron stated the legislature has basieallv taken away the C ity's abilitv to eliminate non-conforming uses Hawn inquired whether the issue of despatching within the Cilv is currentlv a problem PAGE? MINUTES OF THE ORONO PEANMNC COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o ’clock p.m. CialTron stated the tjpical situation wiUi a contractor is where thc>' all show up at the residence and then lea\ e for the job site in the morning and are gone all day GafTron stated teclinieallN tliat could be considered a dispatch center Kluth pointed out the number of einpknees is co\ered in the ordinance Klutli staled the language in Section 10 63 sort of implies that a uispatch center could be run out of a residence Gatlron stated a business could also ha\e ofT-site empknees without opeialing as a dispatch center since thc\ do not come to the residence Hawn inquired whether a messenger or deli\cr> service would be considered a dispatch center Kluth stated in his view there are a number of conditions in the ordinance that would help prevent excessive noise and tratVic. Mabusth stated the concern is how to deal with a property owner when the use becomes excessive Gaffron suggested making that tv pe of business licensed to allow for more periodic rev iew bv the City liawTi stated when this issue was first looked at back in 1998. it became clear there were a number of existing businesses operating out of houses that were operating without licenses Hawn stated this ordinance prov ides some standards for how those businesses should be operated Rahn stated in Ins view there should be some tv pc of language to deal w ith a situation that might not be cov ered under this ordinance Smith stated the conditional use permit would allow additional standards to be imposed if needed I lawn slated the Planning Commission needs to give some direction to StalTon whether additional language should be added to the ordinance Mabusth stated there should be some language in the ordinance tlut gives the Citv the abilitv to deal with certain exemptions Mabusth stated in her view she would prefer a heense rather than a eondiiional use |)erniit. and questioned whether it should be considered a special use license or entitled something else Mabusth suggested Staff consult with the Citv Attoniev on the best method to utili/c PAGE 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION ruesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. GalTron stated one other issue that he had some questions concerning relate to Item R. "an\ actu ity or e\ent organized lor the purpose of displa\ ing or selling merehandise shall not be held more than four times per montii GafTron stated there was a situation in Cr>stal lia\ where a resident was holding a boutique e\er> weekend, and the neighbors began to eomplaiii about the situation CiaflVon questioned whether four times a month is too much and should be reduced Gaffron stated another situation to consider is a business that brings in a large number of peojrle at certain times and whether that l>pe of business should Ik restricted Fritzicr stated there are a number of businesses that ha\e been operating for some period of time w ithout any complaints Fritzler stated in his view a licensing procedure ma\ be better than a conditional use permit Smith commented in her view the language already contained in the ordinance dtKs not need to be changed, and that perhaps some additional performance standards need to be added Hawn stated she likes the simplicit> of not needing a license I lawn stated it is \er> difTicult to ha\e one set of performance standards for St) percent of the population and then grant spceial licenses for the other 20 percent who do not compl\ with these standards Hawn stated she would prefer that more exemptions not be included m the ordinance Klutli suggested leaving the language as is and amending it in the future if a problem arises Kahn stated he would be willing of a license if the home occupation could be reviewed upon a complaint being recewed Rahn stated in addition to some home occupations not being anticipated, there could also be some complaints that arc not specific to this ordinance Rahn stated the ( it> would need to deal with that type of complaints also Smith stated the City could also consider grandfathering those businesses in that ha\e been operating for a number of \ears Klutii stated it should be non-transferrable grandfatliering PAGE 9 I MIMITKS OF I NK ORONO PLAiNNiiNG COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. Hawn moved. Smith seconded, lo table Application tt2333. Proposed /.oning Code Amendment, Section 10.20, Subdivision 4C, Home Occupation Standards. \ () I E: Ayes 6, Nays 0. («5) «0l-27t)6 RICHARD AND lANE .STARK, 815 PARTF.NWOOD ROAD, \ \RIAN( E CHANGES, 7:19 p.m. - 7:21 p.m. Richard and Jane Stark. Applicants, were present Dotienberg stated the original variance on this properts was granted in I‘*97. and has been renewed every year since then The Applicants purchased the property and were granted a renewal of llie variances to permit construction of a four-stall garage and additional living area to a one level residence At the time the Apiilicant's builder applied for a building permit, it was discovered there was a conllict with the amount of hardcov er in the 0-75' setback zone v ersus the amount approv ed 1 he submitted plans showed a larger amount of hardcover than wliat had been approved Ilie Applicants have indicated they have decided not to construct the addition on the cast side of the residence and arc instead proposing slightly larger decks and changing one of the decks into a scieeii porch Doth decks are located on the lakeside of the residence holtenberg stated the City Council did review this item last week and voted .5 to 0 to bring the application back to the Planning Commission for fuither review Hie Citv Council slated thev did not have any coneerns with the changes but would like the Planning Commission to review the proposed citanges and make the appropriate recommendation Uottenberg slated the hardcover m the 0-75' setback zone was approved at 15 } percent, but the new proposal will reduce the hardcover to 15 percent Ilie new proposal also reduced the structural coverage by 148 square feel from what had previously been approved Richard Stark stated he can add to StalTs report if the Planning C omimssion desires Hawn stated the Planning Commission is familiar with this application pa(;e 10 MINUTES OK THE ORONO PLANNING C OMMISSION Tuesda>. February 19, 2002 6‘30 o’clock p.m. 'I'hcrc were no comments from the public regarding tins application Kluth moved. Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application ttOI-2706, Richard and Jane Stark, 815 Partenwood Road, grunting of variances to hardcover. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Hawn inquired w hether tlierc was any existing landscaping fabric on tlie property Stark indicated if there is any still remaining on the property, it will be removed NEW BUSINESS {HI) #02-2745 ILONA AND KENNETH PETERSON, 1074 WILDHL RSI TR.\IL, VARIANCES, 7:22 p.m. - 8:06 p.m. Kenneth Peterson. Applicant, and Jack Carter. Builder, were preseni Tlie Certifictite of Mailing and Allidavit of Publication were noted Weinberger stated the Ap|ilicants are requesting varianecs to permit construetion of a new house and detached gar.age on the property The \ ariancc is to permit land alteration and construction of the garage and a portion of the deck within a protected wetland area and within the 26 fwt buffer area around the wetland Weinberger stated tlie property is vacant and was originallv part of the Wildhurst restates subdiv ision in 1991 In 197.7. a sewer line was installed across the propertv. with the sewer line crossing through the present building site Weinberger stated the sewer line was relocated a couple of vears ago across the south propertv line Weinberger stated a large portion of this lot consists of wetland or shoreline area for lake Minnetonka, with the actual building pad consisting ol a small area Hie entire lot consists of approximatelv one acre in si/e In 1991. the assumed wetland boundarv went around the 930 contour and the entire area was protected w ith a drainage and utilitv casement PAfiE II MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION 1 uesday, February 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. having water draining directly towards the street I'he propertN is IcKated at a low point where water can reach cIc\ation where it will cross llie street Wildhursl Frail also docs not ha\c storm water drains or curb and gutter Weinberger stated a nuiliial agreement was reached with the NKAVD that allow- for only a minimum amount of nmoITto get to the street, w ith the remainder of the runoO'be:ng directed to a ditch area along Wildhurst Trail and then olTinto the mitigated area of the v .llands Fhis w ill allow the water to cross over as much land as possible before impacting the existing wetlands and lake llie Cit\ Engineer is recommending that the foundation of the building be located 15 feet from the actual sewer line, which creates a situation requiring the house to be located further to the north and caused a ponioa of the garage to be located into the wetland area Staff* recommends approval of the application based on the five hardships outlined in Staff’s report Peterson stated he has nothing additional to add to Staffs report 'ITcre were no public comments itlalmg to this application Hawn inquired what thoughts the Planning Commission had regarding access from Wildliursl Kluth inquired why two curb cuts rather than one Peterson staled two curb cuts make access to the propertv work the best Peterson noted under Item ^4 the Cit> is going to review that item Hawn inquired whether the Applicant would be okav with this application puKceding fonvard subject to that condition Peterson stated that would be okay Kluth staled it was his understanding a property owner was onlv allowed one curb cut Weinberger staled traditionally onlv one access is granted to a propertv. with each request being reviewed bv the Public Works Director Weinberger stated it has been the policy of the Citv m the past to only allow one curb cut. noting it might not be defined specifieallv m the axie Smith inquired whether the garage could be located closer to the house to ehminale the need to be within the wetland PAGE I3 MINI TKS OF TMK ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. Carter indicated they did discuss that with the MCWD, who had also suggested the garage be Icx'ated closer to the liousc Carter stated the\ originally located the garage 20 feet from the house and ha\c since relocated it si\ feet closer Carter stated the problem with coming any closer to the house with the garage is access into the garage Smitli inquired whetlier the garage doors could be relcKated Carter slated it is a tuck-under garage, which limits which direction the garage can be accessed from Kluth commented the hardships are ver> compelling in this case, but noted that there is nothing m the lay of the land that requires a two le\ el garage Kluth staled he is unsure what the hardship is for a two level garage Peterson stated he did not want to construct a single le\el four car garage, which would add to the hardco\cr Peterson stated the garage was stacked in an clTort to limit the footprint Ftalin inquired whether tins design was completed prior to the new zoning requirements were put into place Peterson stated at the time tJicy purchased the property. the\ understood there was a \ery definite spot for the he >se. and they designed the house to meet that specific building pad Peterson stated in December the issue with the builcimg pad came up. which reauced the size of the building pad b\ approximatch one-third Peterson stated they attempted to relcKate the house, but the situation with tlie sanitary sewer did not allow them to relocate the house very far Kalin stated in his v iew the garage could possibly be relocated out of the wetland area if the garage were redesigned and attached to the home Peterson stated the garage was stacked to lessen the footprint Peterson stated due to the ele\ atums of the land, the garage was located slightly away from the house Kahn stated m his view a four-car garage is not a necessity PAGE 14 MINI TKS OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. Haw n staied the Applicants in her \ icw ha\ c done a tairl\ good job at designing the house and garage given the fact that the\ were unaware of the sewer line Kluth commented they were also faced with the laws being changed Klulh noted the\ are doing wetland m.'.igation Kluth stated he has a problem with consmictmg the driveway in its present location Carter stated they will avoid constructing the dri\ewa> over the lift station Mabusth noted the Planning Commission docs not have a copy of the wetland delineation, and inquired w hat ty pe of a wetland is on this property Weinberger stated it is a Ty pe 3 Mabusth commented it would be nice if the City could give a little leeway on the 1.^ feet from the sewer line to tire residence Weinberger stated Staff can review that prior to this application going to Couned Fritzicr staied in Ins v levv the garage should be located a little closer to the house, vvitli onlv one curb cut m being allowed Klulh agreed with Frit/ler Rahil inquired how the garage would be supported in the wetlands Peterson stated there would be pilings in the wetlands Rahn commented he personally feels the land alteration on this site is excessive and that .t was designed to the old standards Mabusth nu|uircd vvliciher a preliminary grading plan has been completed Weinberger stated the area where the fill will be placed will raise the bidding pad for the garage and a portion of the house by approximately two feet Mabusth stated information relating ;o drainage and grading should be available prior to this application going to tlie Council Mabusth stated the Applicant would need to work with Staff to insure that these PAGE 15 MINIJTKSOF THK ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o ’clock p.m. issues are resolved prior lo proceedmii to the Cit> Council Mabusth stated tlie issues relating to access and grading and drainage should be resolved prior to approaching Council Kluth stated the Planning Commission could approve this application subject to certain conditions Smith inquired whether the Planning Commission should review this application once those issues are resolved. Hawn staled in her v iew the Planning Coininission does not have enough information to determine exactly how close the garage should be to the house Kluth stated a lot of these limitations are self-imposed by the architectural stvie of the house rather than bv the land 9 Rahil inquired where the Applicants were at on hardcover Weinberger stated they arc well below on the hardcover limits allowed on this propcrlv Hawn inquired e.xactiv what other information is still needed as far as drainage and grading Weinberger stated the approv al of the design is subject to the approv al of the City linginccr Weinberger stated the City Lngineer only reviewed an architectural plan of the grading prior to this meeting, which showed the house and garage located closer to the vvethuid than the plan before the Planning Commission Hawn stated she has gotten the impression from the other Planning Commission members that the garage located closer to the house Mabusth stated she would like to hear from the City Engineer on how far back the house can be moved back, which niav allow the garage to be relocated riavvn inquired whether this appitcalion should be tabled or have the approval subject to a number of conditions I lawn stated she personallv devs not have a problem vv ith the application, and if the garage IS relocated closer to the house, the Planning Commission in her view should rev lew it again Kluth staled the idea behind relocating the garage is to get it out of the wetland area PAGE 16 r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.ni. Hawn noted even if the garage is attached to the house, a portion would .still remain within the wetland buffer zone Peterson inquired whether the sewer line could be relocated back to where it was supposed to be Weinberger stated the sewer line could probably be relocated, noting that it was placed in its present location because the previous property owners had requested it be relocated Weinberger stated if the adjoining property owner agrees to gi\e an easement, the sewer line could be relocated Weinberger stated currently ,.ic City does not have an easement for tlie sewer line Hawn inquired whether the Applicant would like to ha\e this application tabled or proceed fonvard to the City Council Peterson stated they would like to mo\e alieail Hawn commented it is likely the City Council would send it back to the Planning Commission since there are a number of unresolved issues Peterson stated in terms of the drainage to the street, there is a drainage and utility casement that w ould handle the runoff from the street, w itli a ditch carry ing water from the north side of the road across into the wetlands Peterson staled they could construct a swale or ditch on their side of tlie road, which should address all of the drainage concerns Peterson stated if the garage is relocated closer to the house, it will impact the front yard setback Rahn stated he personally would like the garage to be closer to the front yard setback than where it is presently proposed It was the consensus of the Planning C ommission that they would rather see the garage closer to the front yard setback than in its present location Hawn commented it appears to be the recommendation of the Planning Commission that tins item be tabled, witii the idea that the Applicant look at revising his plans somewhat to rekKate the garage out of PAGE 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION 'I ucsdavt February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. the wetland area, depict access on the plan and the actual la> out of the dn\ ewa> I lawn stated b\ that time the City should have the comments of the City nnyineer coneermng drainage and the Public Works Director on the access issue Hawn stated the Planning Commission would like to see the garage rehK'ated further awa\ from the Type ? wetland Rahn stated he would be more receptive to grant<:ig a front >ard setback than a wetland varianee Peterson requested his application be tabled Hawn moved. Smith seconded, to table .Application ^02-2745, Ilona and Kenneth Peterson, 1074 Wildhurst Trail, to allow the Applicant time to rev ise his plans. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. SCHEDULED PI BLIC HEARINGS, 7:30 p.m. (^6) W02-2755 LONG LAKE FIRE ST.A ITON - CH Y OF ORONO, 340 WILLOW DRIN E NORTH, CLASS HI SUBDIVISION, CLP, VARIAN( E. 8:06 p.m. - 9:24 p.m. (iatTron stated this application deals with the new joint Long Lake Fire Station located at .''40 Willow Drive North, which consists of 6 17 acres and lies within the RR-IB or single familv rural residential /omng district Tlie area east of Willow Driv e and south of the railro.id right-of-way and nortli of Watertown Road is guided for single-family residential use at a densitv of 2-.4 units per acre (ialTron stated the same standards applv to the fire station that were used in constructing the citv facilities The general performance standards which applv to similar development in residential ^ones will applv. such as the .standard .4()‘ height hmilations.building setback from all lot lines. 10' parking setback, et cetera GatTron stated the joint building committee and Citv Councils have arrived at a mutual agreeable site plan, which involves a request for a conditional use periint for a possible 20' bv 22' hose tower extending to a height of 34 -8 " above grade where the masimum allowed height is 30' CiafTron stated the tower would l>e used primarilv for training pur|X)ses P.AGE 18 MINUTES OF THE ORONO I’l-ANMNG COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. Caflron indicated it is also tlic Cit\'s intention to subdivide this propertv so the lire station can be located on a separate parcel from the back lot which will ultimately be developed for single family, senior housing or another residential use not yet detennmed Future use of the residential parcel is likely to require some re/oning of the propertv Ciaflron stated the existence of delineated wetlands along the south boundary of the property has resulted in tlic road being placed further north than anticipated, which creates the need for a setback v ariance The setback from the south side of the building to the proposed road-of-way is 40’ instead of the required Gattron indicated some factors which hav e impacted site lav out include the necessarv north/south building orientation to allow for direct fire apparatus exit onto Willow Drive without requiring additional turning movements Gaftroii stated the Fire Department requires direct access onto the mam road without making a second turning maneuver In addition, it is also required that there be driveway aprons required on the cast and west sides ol the building bav s to allow for fire apparatus ingress/egress, necessitating that administrative and training spaces be ItKated on the north or south end of the building Fhird. the road'drivewav .access to the rear of the building must allow for the necessarv wide turning radius of fire apparatus, and four, there needs to be close proximitv to the existmg/future Willow Drive bridge over the railroad and the new I hghwav 12 route Gaflron stated there are also site limitations imposed by width ol the site, as well as bv the location of existing linear wetlands on the site and the need to create a road corridor to provide access to the rear of the propertv for future residential use GalTron noted soil conditions also require extensive soil correction work and limit use of the southerlv portion of the site for building purposes CJaffron slated the wetlands have been delineated as Tvpe 6 and 7. and the proposed proiect will require some filling ot the wetland as well as mitigation Ciaflron indicated the impact on the wetlands has been minimi/ed bv expanding the road corridor and routing tlic road'dnvcway northward over a narrow point of the wetland P.AGE 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. GatTroii stated development of the fire station site results m approximately 60 pereeni of Lot I being hardsiirfaced and will require some stormwater ponding Smith inquired whether the tower could be further explained GafTron stated the tower is located in the southeast comer of the site Tlie hose lower height is ncccssarx for it to perfonn a number of functions Its primarx purpose is for firefighter training, and will contain stairwas s. windows and a door to the riH>f that will allow for a varietx of realistic firefighting and rescue scenarios to be staged Its secondary use is to ele\ate hoses for dry ing (iafTron noted this tower w ill only be constructed if the budget allows GafTron stated hose towers are sometimes treated as an important architectural design element of fire stations where the location makes it suitable for use as a clock tower or signature design feature Hie Long Lake Station will be located m a neighborhood setting ratlier than a "town center" setting, and reducing the prominence of the tower will mmimi/x' its v isual impact on the iieighborluKid CialTron stated the tower is proposed to be .3,'v ’ tall where .^0' is the normal maximum allowed Its flat roof w ill extend approximatelv 12’ above the 23' fiat roof height of the maiority of the station building The 20 by 22' area of the lower :overs just under 3 percent of the total roof area of the station and is a rclativ cly small feature in tfic context of the ov erall v isual impaet of the station StalT is recommending that no signage be allowed on the tower and that its fayade materials match the rest of the building so that It does not become unnecessarily noticeable, and the tower itself will not be lighted Gabriel Jabbour. Building Committee, stated the exterior materials are similar to the bricks utilized on the Pioneer Museum SmiUt inquired vvlut impact there would be on the training if the height of the tower is kept to 30' Jabbour staled at the present time the sixth bay and hose lower may not be constructed unless the budget allows for it lollovving opening of the bids Jabbour stated the eommittee did discuss reducing the heigfil of the tower, but noted the costs to construct a smaller tower are hmher PAGE 20 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. GalTron stated the issues for considcfation b> the Planning Commission include whether an\ other conditions are necessary other than those proposed by Staff in order to allow the 35’ tower, whether the hardships stated in Stall's report support the granting of the setback variance, and whether there are anv signifieant impacts of the 40 setback th.it should be mitigated by attaching specific conditions to the variance approval In addition, the Planning Commission should consider whether there are any issues regarding the proposed plat of the two lots Mabusth stated it was her understanding the lire station was to have three acres Jabbour stated it is a three-acre lot Jabbour stated there should not be a problem with the setback since the road is 60’ wide instead of the standard .s()’ I lawn noted if tlic sixtii bay is not constructed, the setback variance would not be required I lawn inquired whether there were any public comments relating to this application Bob Miller. 270 Willow Drive, distributed photographs of the area Miller indicated he is not in favor of the design of the fire station Miller indicated he has v isitcd a number of fire stations, noting they have not been constructed with more than five bays .Miller stated the three and a half acres to the north will need to be addressed by Mn DOT. and suggested a road to tlie north be Cvnistrueted Miller stated in his view a hose tower is not needed Rah.i inquired whether Miller would prefer the height of the tower h * limited to .^()‘ Miller stated yes .Mabusth noted the wetland mitigation would require repl.icement of the same type of wetland Jim Dillman, 22.3 Willow Drive, questioned why the City ofOrono would get wetland credit Cafiron stated that issue has not yet been discussed bv the watershed district pa(;k 21 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. Dillman inquired uhal type of lighting would be installed on the fire station and what type of landscaping would be planted Dillman stated he would prefer there not be bright lights on during the nighttime GalTron commented one of the things that w ill liclp is that the majority of the w indow s arc on the east and west side of the building Gaffron stated the lighting would be a shoebox sty le and illuminate down rather than out Gaffron stated they are proposing to pro\ ide appropriate landscaping Jabbour indicated the building committee is very sensitive to the lighting to be installed on the new fire station as well as the type of landscaping to be planted jabbour stated the landscaping would b • appropriate for the area Jabbour suggested the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the use of this building be restricted to fire fighting activ ities I lawTi inquired how high tlie berm is on the south side of the road GafTron stated the height of the berm on the south and the north side is relatively small and w ill not really solkn the appearance of the building Jabbour noted the majority of the drawings are being showu to the City of Long Lake tonight, and apologized that Staff has a limited number of drawings available for the Planning Commission to rev lew Hawn inquired whether the Planning Commission should be looking at whether the hose tower should be constructed Gaffron stated the three issues the Planning Commission should address toniglit relate to the subdivision, the impact of the tower on the neighborhcxKi. and the setback variance (iatfron staled the ('ity Council might be interested in hearing whether this building will be used for any ancillary uses and the impact that would hav e on the surrounding neighborhood Gaffron noted the use of the building is not specifically related to any of the three issues before the Planning Commission tonight PAGE 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO puannint ; ( OMMISSION Tuesday, February- 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. Kluth inquired if there is an agreement on the aneillary uses, how that would be enforced Jabbour stated there could be a crxlc amendment relating to mumeipal facilities Klutli inquired whetlicr the City of Long Lake has agreed to tiiose restrictions on its use Jabbour slated originally the building was expected to be constructed m downtown I.ong Lake, and little by little the project mo\cd into the City of Orono Jabbour stated the committee in his uew understands what tile intent of the building is. and that the neighbors need to understand what this project entails and the impact that it will ha\e on their neighborluxxl Kluth expressed concern that if tliere is no formal agreement on what type of uses this building can be used for. there may be problems in the future that could dramatically change the character of the neighborhocxl Jabbour stated in Ins opinion the two cities should enter into a more formal agreement regarding the use of the building, and recommended the City of Orono consider adopting ordinances encompassing am municipal building Kluth stated m his view there should be a formal agreement m writing that perhaps runs with the land, such as a restrictsc covenant on the land restricting its use Mabusth noted the building is kxated w ithin the City of Orono and would therefore be subject to Orono's rules and regulations Mabusth stated the City of Orono has strict regulations eonc>.'Ming liquor consuinplion. cl cetera Jabbour stated he is not suggesting that there will be large amounts of liquor on the property Kluth stated m his view the two couneils and building committee will need to develop some type of agreement restricting the types of uses for this facility Hawn stated she would like to have the Planning Commission vote on each of the three issues before them tonight separately. and then discuss the use of this building or any other matter that mav arise and make the appropriate recommendations to the Council PA(;E 23 MIM TKS OK TIIK ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. Hawn inquired whether any members of the Planning Commission had an\ issues with the setback Kluth stated the City of Orono has the responsibility to insure that there is a correct mitigation plan in place fo*' those wetlands Mabusth inquired whether there is any benefit to make Lot 2 an outlot Gaffron stated it would be city-owtied property , noting Lot 2 is considered a buildable lot Gaffron slated if It IS made an outlot. there would need be conditions put on its uses Gaffron stated he is unsure whether there is any benefit that would be derived by making it an outlot Haw n suggested three separate motions be made on each of the items for consideration Smith moved, Kluth seconded, to recommend approval of the tw o-lot plat subject to MCWD wetland mitigation and stormwater management plan approval, subject to the Orono City Council determining whether any impact fees such as park dedication/fees and stormwater trunk fees are applicable. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Kluth moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of the side street setback to allow a 40’ side street setback where 50’ would normally be required based on the hardships outlined in the February 15, 2002 Staff Report, with the condition that if the sixth bay is not constructed, the variance will nut be used for any other purpose. Gaflron inquired what would happen if they decide to expand in the future, noting the variance is onlv good for one y car Kluth staled they could ask for a renewal Kluth noted they currently only have four bay s Kluth stated the motion restricts what tlie variance can be u.sed for Jabbour eommented the building committee kK'ked at numerous way s to avoid the need for a variance for a sixth bav but were unsuccessful I»A(;K 24 .MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. VOTE ON THE ABOVE MOTION: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Ralin inquired whcthci ilic sixth bay or the hose tower was of hiijher priority Jabbour stated the sixth bay was their first priority, with the hose tower bane their second priority Hawn stated she has not heard a ease for why the tower should be fi\e feel higher than the 30' residential limit Rahn commented the lower could potentially become a training facility for others also Fnlzler inquired whether the west metro area has a fire-lraining site that is axailable for training Jabbour staled he is unsure about the west metro area, but noted Fdma is proposing a training facility that would be available for all firemen Fritzler. Kluth, and Smilh staled tlie\ are against the hose lower since no hardship has been demonstrated GafTioii stated no hardship is required for the hose lower, but that the Planning Commission needs to look at the impact on the neighborhood and how it can be mitigated Galfron staled the primar> purpose of the hose tower is for training Kluth moved, Frit/ler seconded, to recommend denial of the conditional use permit for a hose tower 35' in height. \'()TE: A>es 6, Nays 0. Hawn inquired whether the Planning Commission would like to gi\e the Cii\ Council an\ admcmilions concerning this project Kluth noted other cities ha\e restrictions on uses m residential areas, and recommended the Coiineil kx^k at limning the use of this facility Smith recommended appropriate lighting for residential areas be utili/ed on this fire slalion. and requested no neon or flashing lights be ulili/ed 1 law n recommended use of this building be confined to fire-related purposes (Recess taken from 9:24 p.m. - 9:30 p.m.) FACE 25 MINUTES OK THE ORONO FLANMNC COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.in. NEW BUSINESS, CONTINUED (/^8) W02-2746 MARK KINNEY, 3210 NORTH SHORE DRIN E, V ARIANCE, 9:30 p.m. - 9:46 p.iii. Mark I'inncy, Applicant, was present Weinberger stated the .Applicant is requesting variances to permit construction ol a lakeside deck, a 15' by 10' screen porch, and a 1.164 sipiare f'cxit t\\o-stor\ addition to the house Hie aildition would contain a detached garage, three bedrooms, bathrooms, and utility room A variance is required to permit the .addition to encroach six feet into the ten-fcH>t side >ard setback requirement, and a \ ariancc is also needed to permit an alteration to existing non-conforming liardcoxcr in the 75-250' lakeshore setback Existing hardcover in the 75-250' area consists of 5..S5I square feet or 56 5 percent, with the Applicant proposing to reduce the hardcover to square feet or .’7 percent Weinberger stated the existing house is located adiacenl to the North Shore Marina, which does have two buildings used for storage and customer use just across the property line The addition, located only 4' from the property line, would leave a 10 8' separation between the Marina building and the house, which diKs meet the required setback distance between buildings The Applicant is also proposing a 32' b\ 24' detached garage A building of that si/.e would be required to meel a minimum setback of 15' to the propertv line The Applicant has stated he is vvilliing to construct a building 30" by 24' building, which is a structure under 750 square feet, thus onlv requiring a 10 setback 1 he detached garage is intended for storage and would not have a dnvewav. w ith the garage dvxvr located on the east side of the building W einberger stated tlie screen poreh is located at the 75 setb.iek. with the deck basicallv followum the 75 fixit line around the house llie Applicant has submiiied a statement of hardship basicallv saving that the existing house is kK'ated within the side vard setback and the attached garage will line up in the same area I he addition would also help screen the boat vard from the propertv In addition, the lot is FACE 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLA^M^G COMMISSION Tuesday, Fcbruan 19,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. narrow and long, and by locai'ng (he addition within the side setback, it would allow for some \ard space to remain east of the house Weinberger stated the existing garage would be remmed out of the 75-2.^()' setback and a new garage would be constructed in the setback Stair recommends (he addition be shiOcd to meet at least a imnimuii’ setback to match the existing setback of the house I hc existing house is not parallel w ith the propertx line Staff recommends approval of the hardeover variance subject to the hardcover being reduced from .^.X.x I sipiare feet to 3.83X square feet Finney stated he would like to construct the proposed garage as near to the property line as possible m order to screen a bathnxim facility located on the adjoining property Finney stated he also would like to scrt'cn off some of the boats There were no public comments regarding this application Kluth inquired whether the .Applicant has considered planting trees and shrubs to screen rather than using the garage for screening Finney stated he has shown Ins plans to the marina owner, who indicated he is happy with what is being proposed and agrees with it Finney slated the garage would also help create a pathway to one side, noting he is liKated next to a commercial property I lawn stated she does liave some sympathy towards this situation since it is kx-ated next to a commercial site and the desire to screen the adjoining property Hawn stated she would prefer to see the new attached garage match the house setback on the west side, especially near the neighbor's building Kahn and Kluth agreed with Kluth Smith moved. Miibnsth seconded, to recommend approval of .Application #02-2746, Mark Finney , <210 .Nor th Shore Drive, granting of a hardcover variance to allow 3,838 square feet of hardcover w ithin (he 75-250' setback, and (jranting of a side yard setback with the under standing the P/\(;e 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANMNC COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.ni. setback of the addition will match the setback of the existing house, and with the understanding the Applicant will not exceed 750 square feet on the detached garage. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#9) #02-2747 TONKA VENTURES, 3749 LIVINGSTON AVENUE. VACATION, 9:47 p.m. - 10:05 p.m. A rcprcscntati\ c of Eagle Crest was piescnt Tlic Certificate of Mailing and AfTidas it of Publication were noted Weinberger stated Eagle Crest is requesting a vacation of a portion of a dedicated drainage and utilit> easement Hie drainage and utilitv easement was dedicated on the plat of l.ake Mmnctinika W<kk1s in 1900 Hie purpose of the proposed v acation request is to contract an end town house unit I 5 feet into the casement area Tiie total request would vacate an area less than 10 square feet The easement area contains both a sewer line and water mam 'Hie sewer line would be hKatcd 7 X‘ when the building is constructed llie Citv has notified the utihtv companies of the request to vacate a portion of the easement No concerns from those utilities notified have been received Qwest and Reliant Energv/ Mmncgasco have both responded and stated thev have no facilities within the casement area Weinberger stated the Citv Engineer lias reviewed the plans, and commented that there is a low hkchhixHl that there would need to be maintenance done to this section of the pipe Weinberger stated if there is ever an issue with the sewer Itnc near the building, there arc methods available to the utilities to access the sewer line within the easeii'cnt Start'recommends approval of the vacation request to vacate a portion of die drainage and utility easement as shown on die plat of Lake Minnetonka Woods based on the fact that the public use of the easement for sewer and water purposes are not neg:itively impacted bv the vacation and no negative PA(;E 28 MINUTES OF TfIK ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. comments have been received by public utilities Weinberger recommended the apprcnal be mad.; siibiect to the Applicant pro\ iding final •'as-built ” plans for the entire development of Laf e Minnetonka Woods prior to review of the vacation request b\ the Cit> Council The Eagle Crest Representative had nothing in addition to Start ’s report Douglas Nieland, 3675 Lyric Avenue, distributed photos of the hill in the area Nieland staled he has experienced drainage problems following regarding of the hill Nieland stated the trees that were to be replaced have not vet been planted as well as some divots in his yard which also have not been rejiaired following construction of a trench Nieland slated he has spoken with Eagle Crest regarding those problems, who has indicated it was the developer that should be contacted Nieland stated he has vet to be contacted by the developer Hawn stated perhaps the Planning Commission could make the vacation contingent upon the builder resolv ing these problems I lawn inquired whether that would be acceptable to Nieland Nieland stated that would be acceptable Kav Rendson, Lyric .Avenue, also expressed concerns regarding drainage and erosion m the area of the hill Rendson stated she has coneerns if the grade is elev ated Hawn inquired what specific items Rendson needed rectified on her propertv Rendson stated the drainage needs to be corrected as well as trees replaced for sereenmg Hawn inquired whether the builder can be required to correct tliesc problems GafTron stated in his v levv the two issues are tolallv unrelated, and suggested the Planning Commission make a recommendation to Council that StafT follow up with the neighbors to find out wlut the issues are and see how thev can be rectified Klutli inquired whether Start has the authoritv to require the builder to rectify these issues (iafTion slated the builder needs to comply with the overall plan and permits for the mdiv idiial permits PAGE 29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 20U2 6:30 o’clock p.m. GaflVon stated in his opinion Staff should be able to request tlic builder cornpls wiUt the grading and drainage plan as well as the landscaping plan Constance Leaf. 3695 Ls ric .A\ enue. indicated this project has created a number of aesthetic problems in her back yard area Leaf expressed concerns lliat the hill is eroding and causing drainage problems in her \ard Leaf questioned whether there would be additional problems if the foundation is mo\ed closer to the hill lliere were no further public comments relating to this application Mabusth recommended the City F.ngmeer be requested to review the plans and \ isit the site to see whether they are being complied w ith Mabusth moved. Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application ti02-2747. Tonka N'entures, 3749 lavingston Avenue, vacating a portion of a dedicated drainage and utility easement on the plat of Lake Minnetonka NN oods, subject to Staff review and approval of the final grading and drainage plan and landscape plan on east side of property, and further subject to Stair assisting in the enforcement of the planting of appropriate trees as originally called for in the landscape plan. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. («I0) #02-2748 RICHARD A. AND NANCY MAR/.AN, 2795 FI1E.ASANT ROAD, V.ARIANCE, 10:06 p.m. - 10:28 p.m. Ricliard Marzan. Applicant, and Kathy Alexander. Home Designer, were present Tlie Certilicate of Mailing and Atfida\it of Publication were noted Uottenberg stated the Applicant is requesting a hardco\er \arianee in the 0-75’ setback .area to allow a 216 square fixit deck and 20 square foot shed located b\ the lakeshore to remain on the properts A portion of the deck has a roof but is not enclosed Uottenberg staled the .Applicant owns the propertx and recewed a building permit in Januarx of 2002. to construct a new residence on the propertx I he new residence meets all standards for the l.R-l H /oning PAGE 30 MI.MJTKSOF TIIK ORONO PLANNINX; COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.in. district All that remains in the setback zone arc the steps leading to the lake, a deck. shed, and two retaining walls Botteiiberg indicated the topography of the property is fairly flat except approximately 4.'>' from the lakcshore, at which point it drops signilicantK to the lake The City dws not ha\e a permit on file for the deck or shed, although it appears it has been there for main years A review of Cit\ files has determined that a boat house was located there at least until 19X6 The /onmg cik Ic allows stairwass uj) to 4’ wide, but landings no more than .^2 square feet m area Decks and rexifed shelters are not allowed Bottenberg indicated the shelter is painted white and is quite noticeable from the lake Ale.xander stated instead of remcxieling the existing house. the\ e!‘.',5ed to pull the house back be\ond the 75' mark, and also attempted to comply with all the other regulations and building standards applicable to this lot Alexander stated the Ap|)hcaiit would like to retain the shed and tr\ to blend it in more with the property Alexander noted this is a pre-existing condition There were no public comments relating to this application I lawn iiu|uired why the I’laiining Commission did not see this matter prior to the time the building permit was issued Weinberger stated the Applicants did contact Staff prior to apply mg for a building peniiit, noting an agreement was leachcd that if the deck and shed were not approx ed. they would be remox ed Kluth inquired xxhat the hardship is for keeping that structure Alexander stated her understanding is that since there is not a primary strueture eurrentlx. thex need a variance to keep the shed I lawn sl.ited there are two xarianees being requested tonight The first one relates to allowing an aecessiiry strueture to remain without a piinetpal strueture llaxxn stated xxheii the existing residence* is tom down and a new residence is to k* constructed on the lot. the project is then consideied to be new eonstruetion and a hardshi|i inherent xvith the land must be demonstrated on whv the shed should remain P.ACE 31 I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION 'Fucsday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. Alexander slated part of ihe hardship wilh the land is thal a portion of the propert> is located uiihm the bluff line Marzan slated there is a vcr>’ sleep incline down lo the lake, and that they like lo store items relating to their boat in the shed Hawn commented il probably is dangerous for people lo be carrxing ihitigs up and down ihal sleep embankment Hawn stated the Planning ('ommission tends to \er\ consistent at not allowing structures to be located within the 0-75* setback area. Kluth inquired whether structures are allowed within a bluff/one Mabustli stated 4' wide stairs are allowed as well as a lock box Mabustli suggested Uie Applieanl look at making the shed into a conforming IcKk box Hawn noted there is not much land available that is flat in this area Rahn commented he would not ha\e a problem with the stairwav or a 20 square fool IcKk box. but noted thal the Planning Commission has m the past required that structures be removed out of the 0-75* setback area on new construction Mar/nn staled the doek starts where the stairway ends Mar/an expressed safety concerns if he is required lo build a lock box m that area, noting that the area is \er> steep and narrow Smith commented the shed is oversized compared lo what is normally allowed m this area Hawn staled the land in this area is \er\ limited Mabusih stated in her view safelv issues need to be taken into consideration, and that she would be agreeable lo allowing the deck lo remain m light of those safety concerns Kluth staled he agrees with Mabustli Kluth indicated due lo the extreme steepness of the blufl'and the angle of the stairs, along with the condition of the structure, he would be willing to let the shed remain Smith staled ixpically on new construction the Planning Commission would not approve a structure of this size PAGE 32 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. Ralin stated the shed consists of 216 square feet Rahn noted there is no permit on file for the shed Mar/aii stated if he is required to remove and rebuild a IiKk box. he would like to excavate the hillside and repair the retaining w all Kluth commented the Planning Commission could allow this structure to remain, and if it is ever replaced, it needs to be reduced tn size Smith inquired whether the A|)plicant anticqiates repairing the retaining wall in the near future Marzan stated in his \ lew the stairwav and retaining wall have not been maintained well, and that he would like to remove die excess debris awav from the walls Mar/an indicated they would paint the shed more of an earth tone color to blend in better w ith the lakcshorc Rahn noted the shed is not in am one's line of sight Mabusth inquired whether the shed could be brought into conformance while construction is going on Marzan indicated he would really like to retain the shed and that he would be willing to paint it another color if possible Mar/oui staled if it is not possible to keep the shed he will compiv with whatever the Planning Commission decides I lawn stated it is her impression from the comments that the Planning Commission would like to see the shed replaced with a IcKk box Smith. Rahn. and Fritzler stated in their view the shed should be reduced in si/e Klutii reiterated he would allow the structure to remain until such time as it needs to be replaced Mabusth noted no major structural repairs are allowed on non-conforming structures Mabusth niuved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of .Application #02-2748, Richard A. and Nancy .Alarzan, 2795 Pheasant Road, granting of a hardcover variance to allow the existing stairway and 216 square foot deck to remain in the 0-75’ setback area, along with the 20 square foot shed, with the understanding the shed shall be painted an earth tone color, and further subject to the Applicants being placed on notice that the shed is a non-conforming PA(;E 33 MIMJTKSOFTIIK ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. structure, and that if major repairs are necessary in the future, the shed will need to be brought into conformance at that point. VO I F: Ayes 4, Nays 2. Smitli and FntzIcr staled they would like the shed to be broiiylil into conformance now (#11) #02-2749 THOMAS P. EGAN, 350, 360, AND 370 BIG ISLAND, VACATION, 10:29 p.m, - 11:10 p.m. Thomas l:gan. Applicant, was present llic Certificate of Mailing and Aflldaxit of Publication were noted Weinberger staled the Applicant has requested that a portion of platted Massasoil Avenue ” be vacated Massasoil Avenue is an undevelo|>ed right-of-vvav on Big Island originally dedicated on the pl;it of Morse Island Park Tlie right-of-way has been used by Big Island residents and guests for interior pedestrian access to parts of the lakeshore and. periodicallv . for v ehicular IralTic for transporting materials for home construction and septic installation 1 he right-of-way is also used bv utility companies for electric and phone service to the Island properties Weinberger indicated the Citv of Orono maintains public access to Uic Island for pedestrian and other types of use Weinberger stated the Citv does liave a policv not to vacate anv public accesses to the lake Weinberger stated the portion of the right-of-way requested for vacation is not a right-of-w av that provides access to the public waters llie Citv of Orono has notified all public utilities of the v acation request, and Reliant rnergv/Minnegasco has responded that they liave no facilities in the right-of-wav Owest did notify the Citv that they do have existing facilities within the right-of-wav and stated they respectfullv decline the right-of-wav vacation request Weinberger noted included with the Planning Commission packet is a letter from Rick Jorgenson with PAGE 34 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLAN.M.NC; COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. Qwest st,nting that they respectfully decline the vacation request Weinberger indicated he has spoken with Mr Jorgenson who indicated that Qwest would not be opposed to the vacation of the right-of-wav if it is determined that utility lines arc located within the public land and adequate easements are put in place for the utilities Weinberger staled it is anticipated that location of the lines will be verified this TInirsday by Gopher One Weinberger stated the I’ublie Works Director has rev lewed this request, and has no obiection to the vacation of the right-of-way. W'einberger stated the City at this time has no intention to ever use that portion of the right-of-wav for anv public purpose Weinberger stated the City likes to insure that access is maintained to each indiv idual island over public land. Weinberger stated public access remains open with the proposed vacation Egan presented pictures of the cabin, noting there are trees located on both sides of the cabin Egan staled he has a concern that Uie City may in the tutuie request that the cabin be moved since it is located within a right-of-way Egan slated if something happened to the cabin, thev would not be able to rebuild since it is located within the setback and would need to be relocated Eluan stated he is attempting to avoid any conllicts in the iuture. and that due to the trees m the area, the road is basicallv unusable Egan noted he has spoken with all the neighbors and he is unaware of anv obieetions to the vacation Smith questioned whether Qwest knows where their utihtv lines are located Egan stated Qwest did supply a drawing showing that their lines are located down the road Egan stated he personallv does not feel those are correct, noting there is a junction bo.\ that is appro\imately three feet tall IcKrated m the area where the lines come from, which is dilTereni than what Qwest's drawing depicts Egan noted the cabin was constructed sometime in the I900s John Birch. Big Island, indicated he owns the property to the lell Birch staled to his knowledge the phone lines were put in about 15 years ago and come up to the indiv idual cabins from poles that are PAGE 35 MINI TKSOFTHK ORO.NO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o ’clock p.ni. alony Lakes icw Avenue Tliere were no further public comments relating to this application Gafl'ron inquired whetlier the residents were surprised after the sur\e> was done as it related to location of the cabins and lot lines Egan stated before he purehased the properts . a survey had been completed which showed the propertv as depleted on the new survey Egan stated the survevor is also tise same on both survevs I lawn inquired whether there was furllier public comment regarding this application Egan stated Rick Hanson. 340 Hig Island, had to leave the meeting, but requested that the vaeation be taken all the wav to the edge of the road and up tlic adjacent road Hawn stated she has one reservation regarding this Hawn stated there mav come a time in the future when some members of the general public would bke to walk on Uig Island, and if this easement if vacated, they would no longer have that right Hawn stated the Planning Commission should discuss preserv mg the right of pedestrians to walk somew here in this area Egan asked if public meant landowners in the area. I lawn slated she means anv person l-gan stated the landowners in the area do not want members of the general public walking around liig Island, noting some of the roads have been closed to prevent people from walking around their cabins in the vvnilertime and summertime Egan stated he is unsure what the intent of the platted roads were at the time thev were originally platted, but tiuit the propertv owners would prefer that members of the general public not walk through their properties on Big Island llavvTi noted they are public roads, and if thev are vacated, the general public would not be allowed to access ceilain parts of Big Island Egan staled the public has not been able to use that road since approximatclv I960, when the cabin was originally built PAGE 36 MINtTES OF THE ORONO PLANMN(; COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. I I,i\\n slated theorclically the public has the right to use that right-of-way Hawn stated she would like the Planning Commission to look at ways to preserve the public's right to walk in that area Egan stated there is a road located behind the cabin that touches every one of the lots, so there would still be access a- ailable to the general public Egan stated in his view those platted roads were not designed to allow members of the general public access to every lot of the island but rather were designed to allow the property owners the ability to travel around the island I lavvTi stated all public roads in Orono are open to the general public E.gan stated since these are not developed roads and arc ditficult to recognize, he personally would not be comfortable with the general public walking around Big Island I lawn stated at the current time they possibly are not easily recognizable by the general public, but the question is whether they arc taking away someone's right to have access to certain parts of the island in the future Kluth commented if the right-of-way is v acated, it would no longer be public land Egan stated vacation of this right-of-way would not alTect access to any of the indiv idual lots Rahn stated the reality is that the Applicant s situation will probably not change wliether the ro,id is vacated or not, but tliat the Planning Commission needs to lotik at whether thev are denving access to the general public if the vacation is approved CiafTron suggested in exchange for this vacation that the City request a strip of land to the lake Gaffron noted the road corridor stops 20 feet from the lakeshore. and that this might be an ideal place to request a dedication of kind to the shoreline I:gan stated he does not own that piece of land, and that is it his understanding that piece of land is tied up in a lease PAGE 37 MINLTES OF THE ORONO PI.ANMNG COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. GalTron commcnlcd this area of land might have been intended as a swimming beaeh at the time it was platted Hawn reiterated that the Planning Commission has to insure that the general publie has aeeess to Big Island Egan stated in his view there might be a problem w ith granting that pieee of land to the shoreline, and that the public can use Lakcview A\enuc Egan stated he is unable to obtain a mortgage on this cabin because it is located in the right-of-way. and that in his view it would not be a problem for the City to vacate that right-of-way. noting that it is usable at this point for a road or a pedestrian trail Egan stated the road has not been utilized for a significant number of \ears Kluth recommended that this right-of-way not be \aeated since they are unable to know what future use this piece of land might be needed for and that the City needs to preserv e the right to use that piece of land Hawiv slated she would be in fav or of vacating the nghl-of-vvay if an alternativ e is prov ided Egan commented the general public can still access Lakevievv. which is a u.sed pathw.r. docs contain utility lines Egan slated Lakcview also has vehicular tratTic Egan comma ^ »V»e aic seasonal cabins and that most of the platted roads on Big Island are unrecognizable bv the general public Hawn stated the Planning Cornmission needs to protect access on Big Island for use m the future Kluth agreed with Hawn Egan staled the current situation is the fact that the Citv through the vears has allowed structures to be built in the right-of-vvavs, which prevents him from being able to obtain a mortgage tixlay Hawn stated she would like to see a pedestrian walkway somewhere in this area PAGE 38 MINI TESOF rHK ORONO PLANNINC COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.iii. Mabuslh suggested this application be tabled to allow the Park Commission time to re\ lew Ihg Island for possible trail use Hawn agreed that the Park ( ommission should reNiew this application. Kluth commented that there :s a value to this land that the ( it\ should recogni/e. and that it is the Planning Commiss'oirs duty to make decisions based on what is good for the public Egan stated he understands that but does not feel \acation of this portion of right-of-wa> would aOeet the general public Mabusth stated m her view perhaps this should become a policy of the Chty that the Park ('ommission reviews any vacation of land to determine if there is some public purpose for Uie land Egan indicated he would not be in favor of this going to the Park Commission Egan stated legally he cannot get clean title until tlie right-of-wa> is vacated, and he would like to proceed for^vard to tlie Council Hawn stated in her view it appears this application may be denied by tin. Planning Commission, and inquired whether Egan would like to have his application tabled or proceed before the ('ouneil Egan stated he would like the Planning Commission to act on this application Egan stated he is unsure what benefit would be gained b\ sending this application to the Park ( ommission Hawn moved, Kluth seconded, to recommend denial of Application ^02-2749, Thomas P. Kgan, 350,360, and 370 Uig Island, vacation of a portion of platted ^Massasoit Avenue'^, without further input from the Park Commission on possible trail use. NOTE: Ayes 5, Nays I, Mabusth Opposed. Mabusth indicated she would prefer the City follow a procedure of having the Park Commission review applications requesting v acation of public land Mabusth recommended the ( ouncil send this application to the Park C ommission PACE 39 MINI TKSOF THK ORO.NO PLANNING COMMISSION I'ucsday, Fcbtuary 19, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.ni. Kluth moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend that all vacations of platted public roads be sent to the Park Commission for their review as well as the Planning Commission. \'01E: Ayes 6, Nays 0. («I2) ^02-2751 MARK WELCH,3625 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCES, 11:11 p.m. - 11:29 p.m. Linda Welch. Sister, appeared on behalf of Mark Welsh 1'hc '’.’■.•rtillcatc of Mailing and AITidas it of Publication were noted Weinberger stated the .Applicant is requesting variances that would permit rcmcs al of an existing house and construction of a now house on the properts Weinbv I'ei stated the properts is located in the LR-IC zoning district and consists of 6.61.> square feet .Access to this properts and fi\e others is \ ia a private, shared driveway that accesses North Shore Drue The private dri\ewa\ is located across the back of the indr. idual lots I he driveway is required because the public road is located at a much higher elevation than the properties below Weinberger stated the existing house consists of 599 square feet, with the .Applicant proposing to construct a two-bedrixMii two bathroom home with a one-stall "tuck-under" garage Ilie new house would allow the propertv owners to have additional living sp.icc one garage stall Currentiv the propertv dws not fi.-.ve a garage and was constructed in 1920 The proposed house would be located the same distance from the dnvcvvav as the current house A number of variances are required for the new residence due to the small size of the lot. the drivewav location, and elevation change Ilie Applicant is requesting variances to lot area and lot width to permit construction of a new residence The defined lot area, minus the private driveway area, consists of 5.462 s(|uarc feet Tlie defined lot width is approximately 50' at the lakeshore. with the requirement being I0U‘ width at the lakeshore PAGE4(J MINUTES OF THE OKONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February I 2002 6:30 u’clucii p.in. Weinberger slated the proposed house would be located approximately 53' from the lakeshore. which exceeds the existing selbaek of the neighboring two houses W einberger noted a 75' setback is required Weinberger stated the proposed building pad is located between the dmeway and the 50' setback fhe Applicants are also requesting a variance to allow the house to be constructed five feet from the west property line where a 10' setback is required The 5' side setback lias been requested to prov ide one additional parking space on the propertv The C'ltv s zoning code requires residential properties have two olT-street parking spaces Weinberger noted no parking is av ailable on the opposite side of the shared driv eway due to the topographv’ of the land A variance is also need to allow the house to be built within 75' of the lakeshore and a variance to permit greater than 25 percent hardcover m the 75-250' of the lakeshore 1 he Applicants are proposing 16 4 percent hardcover where curreiitiv 17 6 percent exists in the 0-75' setback area and 51 6 percent hardcover in the 75-250' setback area where 54 4 percent currently exists The proposed house would consist of 1.176 square feet and would not contain a basement due to the high water level in tins area W'emberger stated a variance is also required to permit one off-street parking stall to be located three feet from an interior side property line where olT-street parking is required to be IcKated ten feet from a side propertv line Weinberger noted tlie Applicant has submitted a statement of hardship Weinberger stated the well would need to be reliKated if the house is rebuilt m this area Staff recommends approval of Uic appbcation based on the hardships noted subject to the following conditioiis 1 Drainage and utihtv easements shall be prov ided 10' along the north lot line and 5' along the interior propertv lines 2 A final grading plan shall be submitted prior to rev levv of the request bv the City Council PAGE 41 MINDTESOFTIIE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o ’clock p.m. 3 Ilic existing shed and all hardcoxcr proposed for renio\al is completed jirior to a final inspection 4 (iravel shall be removed from the proposed parking area to leave a minimum 3' setback to the property line Linda Welch stated she does not have ansthing to add to Stall’s report, .loting she does have pictures of the embankment and the lot Tliere were no public comments relating to this application Mabustli noted a lakeside deck is attached to the house, and questioned whether that is included as part of the house fcxitprmt Weinberger stated tlie proposal only includes the house footprint and •» • ■'Veinberger stated this lot would be entitled to L.^OO square feet of structural coverage, noting the proposed house is approximately 1, 100 square feet Weinberger stated tlie overhangs on the sides are approximatelv one foot, with the overhang on the lakeside being approximately three feet Hawn inquired whether the overhang has been included in the structural coverage calculation Weinberger stated it has not been included I law 11 stated since there is an existing house on this lot, the Applicant is entitled to a replacement, and in her view the .Applicants have done a pretty good job at designing the house Rahn inquired what the preferred width of a parking stall was Weinberger stated tn a commercial parking lot a stall is 9' b\ 20'. which is generallv what is lecommended Rahn commented he was Iwking at otlicr possible locations for the parking stall and whether that could be reduced somewhat GafTriui indicated thev v.ould also need to be 20' from a septic line Mabusth inquired where the well will be relocated to PAGE 42 MIMTKSOKTUK ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. Weinberger stated that is \ et to be determined Hawn moved. Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application ^02-2751, Mark Welch, 3625 North Shore Drive, granting of variances to permit construction of a new residence on this lot based on the structural coverage being under the l,5(M) square feet that is allowed; based on the Finding that there are hardships imposed by the land: and that the hardcover is being reduced in the 0-75’ and 75-250' setback: and subject to all of Staffs recommendations contained in the February 12, 2002 Planner ’s Report, and further subject to the relocation of the well in an approved location. VOTE: Ayes 6. Nays 0. («13) #02-2753 WESLEY BYRNE, 2817 CASCO POINT ROAD, V ARIANCE, 11:30 p.m. - 11:41 p.m. Wesley Byrne. Applicant, was present The Certifieate of Mailing and Affida\ it of Publication were noted Vv'einberger stated the Applicant is requesting \ariances to permit additions and reim>delmg to the existing house located on Casco Point Road The variances being requested would allow for two additions onto the house The first would replace an existing attached garage with a .'?2 ‘ bv 3.S' two- story addition I he second addition would be a 20 by 30' attached garage with future living space kx-ated above the garage The property owners only intend to keep the existing house and foundation The open porch, garage, and deck are being removed to make rimm for the new additions Weinberger stated the proposed plan would reduce the total hardcover on the property Hie drivewav and parking area on the property is proposed to be reduced m si/e Wembereer noted the total hardcover would still be over the 2.'> percent limit m the 75-2.*iO' lakeshore setback, with the Applicants requesting 32 1 percent hardcover Weinberger noted the existing hardcover is 36 5 percent flic PAGE 43 MINI I KS OF THK ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. Applicants arc also proposing to reduce the size of the lakeside deck and remove a shed located near the street. A sidewalk and wood planter box would also be remox ed from the west side of the propertx A variance is also required to permit a 9 7' side setback for the residential addition located at the northeast comer of the new house Weinberger stated StalThad requested the sur\e\or to reverify their final calculations to detemiine the actual size of the proposed house Tlie total structure was confirmed to be 2,612 square feet, which is 99 square feet more structure than the property is allowed The Applicant has submitted a hardship statement, noting that the> are attempting to protect an X()-\car old oak tree located in the front Staff recommends the Applicants reduce the size of the house to not encroach into the side \ard setbacks and meet the 15 percent lot coverage by structure B\ rne stated it was his intention to meet the 10*foot setback and that appareiUK an error was made on the plan Byrne stated he docs not have a problem meeting the 10' setback Byrne indicated he would be able to meet the 15 percent structural coverage limit by eliminating the stairs to llie proposed garage and reducing the size of the house somewhat Bv me stated thev can also reduce the size of the stairwell Hawn inquired whether those changes can be retlected on the plan prior to appearing before the Council B\ me stated thev can be Smith inquired about the use of space above the garage and separate access Bvrne commented that would be a guest bedroom, noting there is access to the second floor of the house Bvrne noted he will be removing the stairwav to that bcdrcx)m 1 lavvTi stated the onlv variance required would be the hardcover variance PAGE 44 L MINUTES OF THK ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. Weinberger noted the Applicant has indicated he intends to keep the original ruundation. and recommended that if any work needs to be done to the existing foundation that this issue be revisited Fritzlcr inquired how old the residence is B\ rne stated it was constructed in 1940 Hawn moved, Kluth seconded, to recommend approval of Application ^02-2753, Wesley Byrne, 2817 Casco Point Road, granting of a variance to hardcover in the 75-250’ setback area, w ith the understanding the hardcover in that area will be reduced from what currentlv exists; and contingent upon the fact that if the existing foundation needs to be replaced or repaired in any substantial amount that the variance granted with be withdrawn and that the plans will be resubmitted to the Planning Commission and viewed as new construction; and further with the understanding the side yard setback will be 10’ instead of 9.7’ and that structural coverage will not exceed 15 percent. VOTE: .Ayes 6, Nays 0. («I4) W02-2754 MATTHEW AND K-VfllY D01.LIFF, 2680 PHEASANT ROAD, VARIANCE. 11:42 p.m. - 11:44 p.m. Matthew DoIIiff. Applicant, was present 'Ilie Ccnificate of .Mailing and AITidav it of Publication were noted Bottenberg stated the Applicant is proposing to construct a 467 square foot addition and 164 square foot entryway and walk to the residence The addition and the walk will be located m the setback area and will be on the street side of the residence 1 he addition will increase the hardcover m the 7.S-2.SO' setback, and tlie Applicant is proposing to remove some existing hardcover to ofl'set the increase The hardcover projrosed to be removed is the brick patio and wall, the dog run. and a portion of the lakeside patio, which will keep the hardcover at the existing amount PAGE 45 MINUrKSOFTIIt: ORONO PLANNiNG COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. Bottenberg stated the addition would increase the lot coverage b\ structures on the propertv to 10 03 which is well below the 15 percent allowed A variance to Irrdcover in the 75-250' setback area is required to permit 34 19 percent hardcover StatT recommends approv al of the application Dolhfl'stated thev would like to increase the amount of liv ing space m the house Tliere were no public comments regarding this application Hawn moved. Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application 1^02-2754, Matthew and Kathy DoIlifT, 2680 Pheasant Road, granting of a hardcover variance for the 75-250* setback area, with the understanding the hardcover will not be increased from what is currently existing. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS («I5) REPORT OF PLANNINt; COMMISSION REPRESENTATIN ES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS JANUARY 28, 2002, AND FEBRUARY II, 2002 None («I6) OTHER ISSUES FOR DLSCUSSION The Planning Commission scheduled a work session for March 15. 2002. at X 00 a m («17) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF .MINUTES FOR JANUARY 22. 2002 Mabusth inuved, Kluth seconded, to approve the niimites of the January 22. 2002 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. PAGE 46 ■MM MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 19, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.ni. («18) SELECTION OI PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS FEBRUARY 25. 2002 AND MARCH 11, 2002 Fcbruarv 25 - Smith March 11 - Mabusth ADJOURNMENT Kluth moved, Hawn seconded, to adjourn (he meeting at 11:55 p.ni. \'OTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Tlicrc being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 11 55 p m Elizabeth Hawn. Chair PAGE 47 / • - V r: ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday February 19,2002 6:30 PM 2750 Kelley Parlovay - Council Chambers AGENDA Council Representative: Mayor Barbara Peterson AUDIENCE MEMBERS: Please sign in for the public record at the front podium if you wish to address the Planning Commission. Applicants will be asked to move to the front table to answer questions when the Chair announces the application. The Planning Commission is an advisory body to the City Council. If action is taken on any items on this agenda, they will be scheduled for the March 11,2002 City Council meeting unless otherwise noted by the Chair. CONSENT 1. #02-2750 Nlichelle and Edward Winer. 2010 Shoreline Drive, Variance (Staff: W'endy Bottenberg) OLD BUSINESS Review of these items will commence before or between scheduled public hearings. 2. #01-2731 Navarre Amuco, 3360 Shoreline Drive, Commercial Site Plan Review and Variances (Staff: Paul W einberger) 3. #01-2735 Proposed Zoning Code Amendmcm. Section 10.03 Subd. 14, Structural Lot Coverage Ordinance Standards (Staff: W'endy Bottenberg) 4. #2333 Proposed Zoning Code Amendment. Section 10.20 Subd. 4C, Home Occupation Sttuidards (Staff: Mike Gaffron) 5. #01-2706 Richard and Jane Stark. . Partenwood Road, V'ariance Changes (Staff: W'endy Bottenberg) SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:30 PM 6. #02-2755 Long Lake Fire Station - City of Orono, 340 Willow Drive North, Class III Subdivision. CUP, Variance (Staff: Mike Gaffron) NTW BUSINESS Review of these items will commence before or between scheduled public hearings. 7. #02-2745 Ilona and Kenneth Peteison, IP'-4 Wildhurst Trail, Variances (Staff: Paul W'einberger) 8. #02*2746 Mark Finney, 3210 North Shore Drive, Variance (Staff: Paul Weinberger) 9. #02-2747 Tonka Ventures, 3749 Livingston Avenue, Vacation (Staff: Paul Weinberger) 10. #02-2748 Richard A. and Nancy Marzan, 2795 Pheasant Road, Variance (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg) 11. #02-2749 Thomas P. Egan, 350,360, and 370 Big Island, Vacation (Staff: Paul Weinberger) 12. #02-2751 Mark Welsh, 3625 North Shore Drive, Variances (Staff: Paul Weinberger) 13. #02-2753 Wesley Byrne, 2817 Casco Point Road, Variance (Staff: Paul Weinberger) 14. #02-2754 Matthew and Kathy Dolliff, 2680 Pheasant Road, Variance (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg) PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS 15. Report of Planning Commission representatives attending Council meetings January' 28, 2002 and February 11,2002. 16. Other issues for discussion. 17. Planning Commi.ssion approval of minutes for January 22, 2002. 18. Selection of representatives for City Council meetings on Februarv 25 200'> and March 11,2002. ADJOURNMENT -V V V U>:; t' c>i: '-jr • ;» ■3»^^ p^pa® MEDINA 2g.-S—=^^Jj, L.lfo^J_Bft- nr a. f/jfe> S > r >n 111 V^l ^ I ^'f /'> X :1200 ____ PIYMO^B? ✓ ll^ ^400 mj:■M VI ■ I ■« ^ S WAYZATA .B£ACH on)^ Xffrr rr> % •■* i »»l // :v\ '\.5le^.^ L*/i HW€ ’C»#A .1 xl 4400 3:;^ 'V '\rrp^iK.Ax \',BAY S ^ 2800 p ■7> 2400 2000 1000 / t200 600 400 lity of Orono, Minnesota reel Numbering Index Map , jr%j5‘ :n!o mmCzi' t.:::ZZ'T^ £CiC^ i IHOC, t^*-*** mmmiat k. I •mIoo 1 JHBk north PCvijr?' R>nrj NO-'. I, Bt9 ffft t ffU Ai^ a,rfM N.C t«,#M «^: f\r»ts AiMC X?,BM AO'S It.BM NA^ ly.rfit ic»r f, itia aj K j. ii*« A^C I. »«»1 JMI If. iffS 5^ UKO.NO I'LA.NMNC; COM Ml.SSI ON Tuesday Februao 19, 2002 6:30 l‘.M 2750 Kelley Parkuay - Council Ctianihers a(;i:m)a Council Representative: Mayor Barbara Peterson AUDIENCK .MPL.MHERS: Please $ij;n in for the public record at the front podium ifyou ssish to address the Planning Commission. Applicants will be asked to move to the front table to answer <|uestions when the Chair announces the application. The Planning C'oininission is an advisory body to the City Council. If action is taken on any items on this agenda, they will be scheduled*for the March II, 2002 City Council meeting unless otherwise noted by the Chair. f :OS.SEM 1. »02-2750 Michelle and Edward Wmer. 2010 Shoreline Drive, Variance (Stafl Wendy Bottenberg) .Map II-7 OLD HLSINK.SS Review ol tliese items will commence before or between scheduled public hearings. 2 riOl -2731 Navarre .Ainaco. 3360 Shoreline Drive, Commercial Site Plan Review and Variances (Staff Paul Weinberger) .Map D-9 3 «0l-2735 Proposed Zoning Code Amendment, Section 10.03 Subd. 14, Structural l ot Coverage Ordinance Standards (Stall Wendy Bottenberg) ■* ^2-J33 Proposed Zoning Code Amendment. Section 10.20 Subd. 4C, I lome Occupation Standards (Staff: Mike Oal(ron) 5 <tOI-2 (06 Richard and Jane Stark. 815 Partenwood Road, Variance Changes (Staff Wendy Bottenberg) .Map D-5 SCIIEDL LED PUBLIC IlEARI.NfiS 7:3U P,M 6 K02-2755 Long 1 ake l ire Station - City of Orono. 340 Willow Drive North, CLiss 111 Subdivision. CUP. Varnince (Staff .Mike Gaffron) .Map G-3 NEW BLSINE.SS Review of these Hems will commence before or between scheduled public hearings. 7 «02-2745 Ilona and Kenneth Peterson, 1074 U ildhurst Trail, Variances (Staff: F’aul Weinberger) Map A-6 8 «02-2746 Mark Finney. 3210.North Shore Drive, Vari.ince (Staft: Paul Weinberger) Map I)-7 9 #02-2747 Tonka Ventures, 3749 Livingston Avenue, Vacation (Stair Paul Weinberger) .Map C-9 '” fc Pheasant Road. Variance(btaff: Wendy Bottenberg) Map K-li ' * ^San. 350, 360, and 3'0 Big Island, Vacation (btaff Paul Weinberger) .^IapI-Il 12 «02-275I Mark Welsh. 3625 North Shore Drive, Variances (Staff Paul Weinberger) .Nlap D-7 13 «02-2753 Wesley Byrne, 2817 Casco Point Road, Variance (Stafl Paul Weinberger) Map C-II I Variance(Stafl Weridy Bottenberg) Map E-IO PLANNINC; CO.M.MLSSIO.N CO.M.MEN I S ' ’ 2^.: sz,* f'zr'” c«,n.,I / lO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc. City Administrator Wendy Uottenberg, Zoning Administrator/PIanncr February 14. 20<'2 #02-2750 Edward & Michelle Winer 2010 Shoreline Drive V'ariance -- Public Hearing Zoning District: l.nt Area: List of Exhibits: LR-IA One [•amily Lakcshorc llcsidcntial District (2 acre) 50.623 s.f. (1.37 acres) A B C D E F G II I Analv sis Worksheet Application Sur\c\/Sitc Plan Floor Plans elevations Average lakeshore setback (Topographic Map) Photos ot Property Hardcover Worksheet Plat Map Property Owner's l ist Application Summary: The applicants applied for a building permit and it was determined tliat the proposal needed an average lakeshore setback variance. The applicants are proposing to construct an addition to the existing residence. I'he addition consists of an attached 2 stall garage with a bedroom above it. fhe garage is the .same level as the existing ba.semcnt. The new bedroom will be on the first lloor above the garage. The applicants arc also proposing to construct a deck to the lake side of the residence. The subject property is a corner lot. In this case, average lakeshore setback is determined by measuriiu: the distance of the residences from the ordinarv hiehwater mark of the lake for both W • S- properties, rather than the straight line between the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings. If one of the residences is closer to the Ol IWI . as in this case, average lakeshore setback is an issue. I he adjacent residence to the south is a corner lot also, and is oriented w ith its driv ewav off North Shore l)ri\ e. 1 hese two residences were used to determine the average lakeshore setback for the property (See Exhibit l{). Pcrliiu'iit Code Sections: I. Section 10.22. Subd. I (B)and Section 10.56. Subd. 16(C)(6): Average Lakeshore Setback: 1 he av erage lakeslmre setback line shall be a straight line connecting the nu>st lakevvard protnisions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. Vari;ince Request: fo permit a v ariance to encroach 10' into the average lakeshore setback. “02-275O I dvvard Michclic U incr 2010 Shoreline Drive Variance 2 8 2002 Pane lof2 Statement of Hardship: The applicants have included their statement of hardship in Exhibit B. The applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Issues for Consideration: 1. 2. 3. 4. The addition meets lot coverage by structures, yard setbacks and hardcover requirements for the property. The original existing house was built prior to lakcshore regulations. The shape of the shoreline makes it difficult for this property to meet the avei.n>e lakeshore .jctback. If the street was not between this property and the next lakeshore property to the north along Shoreline Drive, the residence would be behind the average lakeshore setback. The residences to the.nc*rth are closer to the lake than this property. Neighbors ’ views of the lake will not be negatively impacted by the addition or deck. 6. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the average lakeshore setback variance to construct the addition and deck to the existing residence. «02-2750 Kdward'Michellc Winer 2010 Shoreline Drive Variance 2 8 2002 Page 2 of 2 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET LR-IA Lot Area Required 2 Acre Actual 1.37 Acres Hardcover Calculations Distance from shoreline I'otal area in setback Allowed hardcover Existing 1 lardco\ er Proposed 1 lardcover 75-250'37J35 s.f.9.d33.75 s.r. (25%) 1.514 s.f. (4.01%) 3.554,75 s.f. (9.42“o) 250-500'21,935 s.f.6.580.5 s.f. (30%) 5.K89 s.f. (26.8%) 5.559 s.l. (25..3%) Structural Coverage Total Lot Si/e Total Structural Coverage Percentage 59,623 s.f.Allowed: 8.943.5 s.f.15% l-xistinu: 2.236 s.f. W'3.8% Proposed: 4.276.75 s.f. 7.1°o 6 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for hon-confomiing structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Shor*.li'^<. f^noc. Application U 0 7~~2."7S^ O Date Receh'ed /-Z. 3- 07.. Amount Paid ^ Z. S O Property Identification Number (P.l.D.) I 0^t-000| Attach legal description to applicmio;i if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_____ :anon (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own tlie adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: ^ residential ___other (specify) Zoning District: - I ___________________ APPLICANTrrL,iv./>.iN I , i Phone (home) - Name A^|ich^/i-£. ^CcluJanA VOmCTphone(work) 3 ? c.- f' Address: ^0(0 Sl^o<c,l > A/. Qt^_______ City: O_________ Zip: S'S'v OWTS'ER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:City:Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ \ oo, ooo» o o Describe request in detail: Z Car uji ’PU (attach additi mal sheets if necessary) VrVRlANCES REQUIRED Lot /Vre'i Lot Width Setback:Front Side I lardcover Rear ^ J •• .7. ___Lot Covt.age • )>,. •I fv:. Average Lakeshore ___Other (specify) IlARDSllIP/DESCIUPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty' or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requiretr.ents: Ka.g*__rh d . C4.c Vitfca.ucy giiVLi>^-F 44na dfi !l ~HAjiV.f ^4T^ylr ^a -I-Av U a 1/ rtuA' U. (attach additional sheets if neiessary) . , ^ \ \ ^ , , |V REQUIRED SUBMITT/\LS P 3^ ^ All of Ihg fallowing inKffnPtion must he suhmittetl hv Iho npniication donH Iinc date in order for vour application to be considered complete: '• _x Completed Application Form _ 2. Y- Certified Property Ovsners List of ov\Tiers withir^J^ labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance. A-603, Govt Center, 348-5910). tia- 3H%-'-30M Certificate of Sur\ey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover WLvI6 calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'/F* x 11" for * * ^ reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if anv chances in exi^tinn Lv'e grade are proposed. In addition,.provide one (I) copy 8'/:" x'l 1" for reproduction ^ Sketches or plans ot lloor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'/j" x 11") List of the legal names (include marital status) ot all persons with an interest in the propertv'. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owncr(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of anv other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your vamnfjLnpplicatipn 15 not complete if tljc jihoviMItfi>r mation has not hren inrlmto rr^ APPLICA.NT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered bv original fee payment*) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application.’and^ certifies that the infontiation supplied is true and correct to the best of his.1ier knowledce. W A а. б. 7. 8. vZ TlktUli Date OWTS'ER'S SIGNATURE Ihe owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entiy ot'.to the propertv bj Citj stall, consultants, agents. Ct'mniission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. jyiotuM/Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 d.ays before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrar'gtmcnis to have an autliorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting W 7 V/iner Residence Re$i(jefilial Fenc<]eiing S Addtion Pr«(:«r«d for SArt«r Brc(h«r« Construct Tt97^ WVrwOA Ai^ H, C/»r«.r»\ MM 55J>e RJJohnson •rchitvciui* 4 Utlsriors, tnc. Hi mC1077 tab wwjfctmrjfg a' r- ms ircM H»s bem MICROniMED o G-tyz-v'e r **/" e.nrtrc, r«»^.**'** T'^fc. C'^/y /Tor/ . « /S c:er^,/‘,ec/ c/ravKOn<^ / •7*v /C»«? ^ / */ > I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of: All that part of the Northeart 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 and Coverrjnent Lot 3 of Sectlcr. 1C. Tll7i:. P23W, described as follows: Cornencin^ at a point on the Southerly line o' Lot 6 of Elbridae S. Barnes* first Subdivision distant 320.C8 NEK DESCPIPT All that part of the Nor­ and Government Lot 3. Se^ 23 West of the 5th Princ Comnercing at the Southw. S. Barnes* First Tubdlvi Range 23; thence Southea of said Let S a distance o !r !i !l sK^ri!:! . r- U.X - -- JL- ------------------lU------ •i!...Ill ----i Eftft Exlcrtar ElMttan J!1 __ r»r f\iai 4-M —-**T^*^*^ r!____K Uohn ^i>n r__i T*^r. Qm -4- d ' 916.1 o 0 o / .tl o ^ OOO ft 159.0007 V«Ur < >V‘ / . - I ♦ / ' / : • r . f f f ••^ ^ ..4^ / ^mil « ! blHBII i . r5 * '" -B** ''W'':-0^ W/vC^; / 4« * 5 > '*'v iAi^'r —%'r^U^ ** k •' ^ ' 4 r.-'-*.' -k-' -sjof^-u, — ■'Mv. •* i •^'V^:^5. . yi*. f •V* • ••v K12, . k .■^*0^4 t»* ir^ :•^r*-.Vi f. .‘"v •hardcover calculation worksheet SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ 250-500’ o 500-1000’ T.yT5nTNG HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Width X X X B. Garase . •*-• • • • C. Driveway • •*X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Dcck jla X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ A (/114 B nV^Srj- * ICO PROPOSED -HARDCOVER IN ZONE ' A. House Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X £3 t= E. Patlo/Dcclc dli X X IQ b' hJL H F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE total ^^^aihzone ^ jrzkL S.F. /6/V S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. f3-/S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. u r. J % S.F. S.F. S.F. O . jL. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _______ ar S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S-F- '' ■fr Hennepin County Taxpay^ Seiylo^jpepartf^ t32 55 (^^J ^ ^ s ^ ^ ^ _^j25i (26) ft vC • (27}t§ Q ® I 52 24 p s c (3) 404 6 0 37791 s r 7— -^;iy lo~//~7~ z^ — i;j-: Parcel InfdnnatiJff. (T^ Parcel ID 1011723310001 House Number 201C Street Name SHORELINE DR • * i This is not a lega/ly raconied map. It fapraserts a compilation at irionretion and data from Ofy. Courfy, and Slate road authorities and other sources. ft X V.IJ RUN DATE 01/22/02 BATCH 502 PROP AOOR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ACDRnwiirn namp TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 5B 10-117-23 31 0001 02010 SHORELINE DR HICHELLE HARIE HUDSON-HILLER HICHEllE HARIE HUDSUN-MILLER 2010 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA HN 55391 3B 10-117-23 31 0005 01390 RAILROAD AVE niAT IIAN'^nN ITAI OLAI HANSON BOX 129 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 58 10-117-23 31 OOOfl 02055 SPATES AVE HARIETTA H ANDERSON ET AL HARIETTA H ANDERSON 2055 SPATES AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0096 02060 SPATES AVE HARRIET SPATES TOURANCEAU HARRIET SPATES TORANCEAU 2060 SPATES AVE WAYZATA HN 553«»1 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 10-117-23 31 0002 020^0 NORTH SIIURL DR K I I ERICKSON KEITH R ERICKSON 2090 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA HN 55391 30 10-117-23 31 0006 01380 RAILROAD AVE MIAIHIN V I VAtlS SHARON V EVANS 1360 RAILROAD AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0020 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 38 10-117-23 39 0010 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED VIL OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO PO BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 REPORT NO. PI935401 PAGE 9 38 10-117-23 31 0003 02060 NORTH SHORE OR L G GODFREY A N J GODFREY LYLE G i NORHA J GODFREY 2060 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0007 01360 RAILROAD AVE TlfinillY J PAflRIN 511 TIHOniY JON PATTRIN SR 1360 RAILROAD AVE PO UOX 51 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0090 02090 SPATES AVE MARY A STINSON MARY A STINSON 2090 SPATES AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 39 0011 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ROY E AHERN HENNEPIN COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY 917 STM ST N R320 MINNEAPOLIS HN 55901 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 10-117-23 39 0012 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED CITY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-23 92 0021 01980 SPATES AVE D CREAR C H B CREAR DANIEL CREAR 1980 SPATES AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 10-117-23 39 0013 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ROY E AHERN ROY AHERN 1120 FRONT ST HUDSON WI 59016 38 10-117-23 92 0022 01960 SHORELINE DR DANIEL i MARY CREAR DANIEL I MARY CREAR 1980 SPATES AVENUE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 92 0012 01950 SHORELINE DR MARIA LUISA CASTELLON MARIE L CASTELLON 1950 SHORELINE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 92 0923 01990 SPATES AVE TIMOTHY E BLANKENSHIP TIMOTHY BLANKENSHIP 1990 SPATES AVF. WAYZATA rIN 55391 RUN DATE 01/22/02 BATCH 502 PROP AODR OVNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 36 10-117-23 ^2 002<« 01955 SHORELINE DR GARY DESANTIS GARY DESANTIS SAILORS WORLD INC 1955 SHORELINE OR WAYZATA MN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI935^01 PACE 10 TOTAL BATCH 502 OOOlf I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS PATE ON THE RECORDS par *inr,V ' )) TO: FROM: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Wendy Bottenberg. Zoning Administrator/Planncr DATE February 19. 2002 SUBJECT: #01-2735 Proposed Amendment of Zoning Code - Section 10.03. Subd. 14(C): Lot Coverage by Structures Standards Exhibit.s: A Draft Ordinance - Proposed Revision to Lot Coverage by Structures Section B Minutes from Januars PC Meeting C Staff report from January PC Meeting Summary: The six members present at the January 22, 2002 Planning Commission meeting reiterated that in ground pools and their associated grade level patios uould no longer be considere'i as structures for the purpose of calculating "lot coverage by structures." Also, hardcover limits on non- shoreland properties less than 2 acres would not be appropriate. Staff was instructed to draft an Ordinance amendment to the February Planning Commission meeting. The draft is attached as Exhibit A. Staff Recommendation: Provide direction to stall'regarding amending lot coverage b> structures ordinance. Planning Commission Options: 1. Make a recommendation on the ordinance amendment and forward re\ iew of the amendment to the Council for review at the meeting scheduled March 11. 2002. 2. Other. ORDINANCE NO., SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10 OF THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SECTION 10.03 SUBI). 14 re (;arding lot coverage b^ struc ri res . The Cilv Council of Orono ordains as follows: Section 1. Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03. Subdivision 14. Item C "Lot Coverage" is hereby deleted and the following language submitted in its place: "C. Lot Coverage. In all zoning district, for all lots of 0-1.99 acres in total area, the total combined footprint areas of all principal and accessory structures shall not e.xceed 15% of the lot area. EXCLPI ION: Regardless of lot area, every developed lot shall be allowed at least 1500 square feet of lot coverage by principal residence and garage structures. I he follow ing shall be included in calculation of lot coverage by structures: 1. All roofed structures which c.xtend more than 6' above grade level. 2. 'lennis courts, patios, decks, and all similar "open" structures when partially or fully enclo.sed by fences, railings or walls which c.xtcnd more than 6’ above grade level (if any portion of such structures extends more than 6' above grade level, the entire structure shall count toward lot coverage). 3. Building pri>trusions w hieh are more than 6’ above grade, including the building footprint, and the vertical projection of any parts of the building more than 6* above grade. 4. Bays or bay windows that act as a window shal. not be considered lot coverage. Bav or bay windows that increase the tloor area (i.e. Iloor to ceiling) shall be considered lot coverage. 5. All but the outer 2 ’ ol root overhangs shall be included in the calculation of lot coveraue." Section 2. This Ordinance shall be published in THi; LAKLR PIONLLR newspaper and shall be effective upon approval and publication. Adopted by the City Council of the City ot Orono. Minnesota at its regular meeting held the Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at its regular meeting held the 11th day of March, 2002. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Cler, Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Bay window included in lot coverage Bay window included in lot coverage Bay window not included in lot coverage Roof overhang more than 2' included in lot coverage y TO: FROM: DATE Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator Planner January 17,2U02 SCB.IECT: /-'01-2735 Proposed Amendment of Zoning Code - Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C): Lot Coverage by Structures Standards Exhibits: A llackberry Hill B Chevy Cha.se Drive C Webber Hills D Chippewa Lane and Turnham Road E Map of non-shorelami'less tlian 2 acre lots in Orono F Surveys of properties Request: Planning Commission review scenarios regarding hardcover on non-shoreland lots that are less than 2 acres in area. Recommend whether a non-shoreland hardco\er maximum should be established for small lots. Summarv: Under the proposed amendment, in ground pools and their associated grade level patios would no longer be considered as structures for the purpose of calculating “lot coverage by structures.” The oiiginal lot coverage ordinance ad«>pted in 1989 did not include pools in fue calculation of lot coverage. I he ordinance was later amended six months after its adoption to include pools and their associated patios. October 22. 2001: City Council approved variance application to replace a home on Chex'y Chase Drive. Indicating the lot coverage ordinance should be revisited, specifically regarding in ground po*)ls. November 19. 2001: Planning Commission recommended approval of changing the lot coverage t)rdinance to not include pools and as.sociated patios in lot coverage by structures by a 4-3 vote. I he majority camp supported the change, but only if accompanied by a new hardco\ er limitation on all non shoreland residential lots under 2 acres in area (50*^o was suggested). 1 he min»>rity camp was against the proposed amendment stating pools and their associated patio'dccks should continue to be calculated as lot coverage by structure and suggested that decks regardless of height should alsi> be considered for inclusion as lot coverage. November 26. 2001: City Council tabled lot coverage ordinance in order to review it in a joint work .se.ssion with the Planning Commission and City Council. December 20. 2001; Joint work session with City Council and Planning Commission. The following points or changes came out of the work se.ssion: • Low pools and patios that have no elements higher than 6' above grade should NO f be included in the calculation of lot coverage by structures. Lot Coverage Ordinance Januar>' 17, 2002 Page 2 • Structural coverage calculations shall include building protrusions more than 6' above grade, i.e. not just the building footprint but the vertical projection of any parts of the building that are more than 6' above grade. • The outer 2' of roof overhangs shall not be considered as lot coverage. • Open decks with any portion of railing above 6' will be counted as lot coverage in their entiretv. i0 • Hardcover limits for non-.shoreland area needs to be looked at closer. The limit was not decided - ideas included but not limited to: 50% hardcover limit, some other percentage or a percentage of the bui Liable area on a property. Analysis: Of the appro.ximately 3.000 residential lots in Orono. 616 lots are non-shoreland and less than 2 acres in area. (Map-lixhibit K) A small .sampling of these properties was looked at to develop scenarios in which to determine the potential impacts of a hardcover limitation. Three .scenarios were developed- 50% hardcover on total lot area. 50% hardcov er on buildable area and SO^o hardcover on buildable area. Four different neighborhoods in the city were chosen where the lots are 2 acres or less in area - llackberry Hill. Chevy Chase Drive. Webber Hills, and Chippewa lane/lurnham Road. If a survey was on Hie for the properly dated 1990 or later the property was included in the study. Each area contains lots that are substandard in area as compared to the zoning requirement. Note; Man) of the properties did not hav e surv eys on fde because hardcover has not been an issue with non-shoreland properties or improvements have not occurred on the property. l or example, llackberry Hdl neighborhood has 20 properties and only 7 had surveys. Calculations of “total lot area" and "buildable area" (total lot area minus setbacks) were then completed for each property. The calculations are in table form (See Exhibits A-D). fkirdcover calculations were then completed for each lot showing; a. Allowed hardcover s.f at 50% of lot area. (Scenario 1) b. Allowed hardcover s.f at 50% of buildable area. (Scenario 2) c. Allowed hardcover s.f at 80% of buildable area. (Scenario 3) d. The amount of hardcover existing on lot and percentage of total lot area. Included in the existing, hardcover on lot calculation is the residence (including garage), detached garage, deck. pool, driv eway and walkways. In many cases, the size of the driveway and walk were estimated because in the past hardcover was not an issue with these properties so when a survey was completed hardcover items were not included. Lot Coverage Ordinance January 17, 2002 Page 3 The surveys arc included (Exhibit F) to aid visualizing hardcover on the properties. Analysis Results: The analysis shows the following: a. No properties are approaching 50% hardcover based on total lot area, even for the small lots, most are less than 30%. b. Some properties have hardcover over or close to 50% buildable area. c. A large proportion of small lots in a large zoning district (See Turnham Road'Chippewa Lane) already have hardcover over 80% of buildable area, because buildable area is so small. Staff Recommendation: Reviewing the three scenarios: -Staff concludes diat hardcover limited to 50% or 80% of buildable area does not provide equity to all property owners, because buildable area is so variable for a given size lot depending on the zoning district. -Staff concludes that limiting hardcover to 50% of total lot area is high. Of the properties reviewed, none were close to the 50% hardcover limit. -If 50% is the rea>inmended amount, will property owners add improvements so half of their property is covered .' Staff recommends using the total lot area and a percentage smaller than 50% for allowed hardcover, if a hardcov er standard is needed at all. Theilfiyp attached slows that the actual number of lots less than 2 acres and not in shoreland is a small percentage of the total lots in the city. Planning Cuniinission Options: 1. Recommend hardcover percentage based on total lot area.(Slafl'suggests .35%. consistent with the 500-1000’zone. 2. Recommend hardcover percentage based on buildable area. 3. Table the matter to a work session for further discussion; direct staff as to what additional infomiation could be provided that will be useful. 4. Other. <C Hackberry Hill .5 acre lots (21,780 s.f.)Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Address Total Lot Buildable Area 50% HC Total Lot 50% HC Buildable Area 80% HC Buildable Area Existing HC on lot 22 17,460 s.f.8,740 s.f.8,730 s.f.4,370 s.f.6,992 s.f 5,466.9s.f. 31.30% 35 21,049 S.f.11.704 s.f.10.524 s.f.5,852 s f.9,363.2 s.f.3,192 s.f. 15.20% 66 17,460 s.f.8,855 s.f.8,730 s.f.4,427.5 s.f.7,084 s.f.2,888.4s.f. 16.50% 96 17,050 s.f.8,230 s.f.8,525 s.f.4,115sf.6.584 s.f.2,719 8s.f. 15.90% 125 21,700 s.f.13,175 s.f.10,850 s.f.6.587.5 s.f.10,540 s.f.2,557 s.f. 11.80% 140 32,100 s.f.13,260 s.f.11.550 s.f.6.630 s.f.10,608 s.f.2,888.7s.f. 8.90% 185 24,150 s.f.13.760 s f.12,075 s.f.6,880 s.f.11,008 S.f.4,622.1s.f 19.10% QO Chevy Chase Drive 1 Acre Lot (43.560 s f.)Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Address Total Lot Buildable Area 50% HC Total Lot 50% HC Buildable Area 80% HC Buildable Area Existing HC on lot 102 16.847 s.f.7.800 s.f.8.423 5 s.f.3.900 s.f.6.240 s f.3.545.3 s.f 21% 123 21.294 s.f.10.564 s.f.10.647 s.f.5.282 s.f.8.451.2 s.f.3.309 s.f. 15.50% 125 19.886 s.f.9.794 s.f.9.943 s.f.4.897 s.f.7.835.2 s.f.2,780 s.f. 13 90% 129 27.586 s.f.18,536 5 s.f.13.793 s.f.9.268.25 S.f.14.829.2 s.f.4,113 s f 14.90% 133 21.709 s.f.11.250 s.f.10.854.5 s.f.5.625 s.f.9.000 s.f.4.210 s.f. 19.40% 142 29.346 s.f.16.900 s.f.14.673 s f.8.450 s f.13.520 s f.8,800 s f. 29.90% o Webber Hills 2 Acres Lots (87,120 s.f.)Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Address Total Lot Buitdable Area 50% HC Total Lot 50% HC Buildable Area 80% HC Buildable Area Existing HC on lot 2055 57.499 s.f.24.029 s.f 28.749 5 s f 12,014 5sf 19,223 2 s.f 4.190 s.f. 7% 2065 44,319 s f.20.625 s.f 22,159 5sf 10,312 5 sf.16,500 s f 4,4457sf. 10% 2090 51.023 s.f.21.528 s.f 25,511 5 s f 10,764 s f.17,222.4 sf 2.962.0s.f. 5.80% 2100 47.649 s.f.20.099 S.f 23.824.5 s.f 10,049.5 s f.16.079 2 s f 3.992.5s.f. e.30% 2265 51.298 Sf 21.298 s.f.25,649 s f.10,792 s f.17.267.2 s.f.1,485 s f. 2.80% Chippewa Lane and Turnham Road •5 acre lots (217.800 s.f)Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Address Total Lot Buildable Area 50% HC Total Lot 50% HC Buildable Area 80% HC Buildable Area Existing HC on lot 4305 Chippewa La 44.700 s.f.4.900 s f.22.350 s f.2.450 s.f.3.920 s f.3.621 s.f 8% 4315 Chippewa La 44.700 s.f.4.900 s.f.22.350 s.f.2.450 s.f.3.920 s.f.4.688 S.f. 10.50% 4325 Chippewa La 45.447 s.f.5.250 s f.22.723 5 s f.2.625 s f.A ?00 S.f.1.918.76 s f 4.20% 340 Turnham Rd 45.360 s.f.6.400 s.f.22.360 s.f.3.200 s.f.5.120 s.f.1.527.32 S.f. 3.40% 380 Turnham Rd 49.981 s.f.6.280.4 s.f.24.990 7 s.f.3.140 2 s.f.5.024 32 s.f.3.157.5 s.f. 6.30% Properties shown in the heaviest shade of grey indicate lots less than 2 acres in size and are located outside of the Shoreland Overlay District. Water elevations are based on 1997 Met Council Land Use Data and do not reflect the Ordinary High Water Level of Classified Lakes Classified Lakes Non-shoreland Properties Shoreland Overlay District M*4*4 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR flRONO COPY MICHAEL AND THERESA ERNHART OF LOT 8 . BLOCK 3. DANIELS LONG LAKE HEIGHTS HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESCTTA^^i;—--------—,^ I ^ 5SS.'S'" X >” q: q: LiJm o < !5 S 88*58' 20' ,1 ________ 179.82 ME AS, \ 180.0* [ S.O CM K a> cn CM CM4 8 O z Kr- -----------*1* 5! ? w * CiCfSTNG Ba«n N 88®59* W 180.00 MEAS. 180.00‘ iA < O) • r- O C7» O) m M' GOooo I/) « / Qt_£KLMa£S Lot a. uiock 3. Daniels long lake hemsmts o : denotes iron rrorker • : denotes distonce as on the plot of OANCLS LONG LAKE HEC h TS Beofings shoi^n ore boaed upon on ossumed dotom -4> This survey intends to shoe the boundofics of the obc^e described property. ond the locotioo of on existing house. decL, yord born, ond biocktop driveeoy thereon It does net purport to show ony other improverrents or encroochments 619^ fhck^lxA Ua fhll ^ •I • • • . I t • I : ‘Tr ORONO COPY p J. V Plat of Survey ^ for PJ.chard W. Wagmaii 3^ ^UckEcpn^^ /Ate : % •. of * lit B‘11 and 12/ Block 2, Daniel *8 Long Lake Height a •'Hennepin County, Minnesota■i i »r ♦S€>\So^ /^e>Acn \ i • ^; ‘i.il ■ -h 'vJ I . ; • •: J.-IV'."', '• •'•►'•r j*' ■■ite « ■ •: y »•« - i,U\' •• * *t • f • *» 11 « . *;' . t • •. •%».' }X\ - r - • ^ I 4 * .i U • 1. ' , • I • ^ • •• . /i.*V t • •217 ^*‘V - ■ ' / ■; 1 •- ••-; :'.i'5 ; 'rj .', • v»* •.. . r f‘ i V . - V- - •■: ■■. ' V • . • ■ 1 -II lii'-’- ■ • *> « . ;i • ^ ’> i * - ••* » 1 ;■• 1 VI/-- Zi V ‘4 T' CITY( Slic 'LAN approved APPROVED Vt p SAPPROVE )F ORONO , _ _ GRADING P^LAN .' U Li }■’; TH REVISIONS ) . ■ • ' • ••□ BY TE aJ V -r^ V- • • ; • ?-U» - .* •• • Certiflcatfcf,|9iirvi»y ‘ • » I* *' -• I ‘hereby -cert iryHhat**thlg*is *a* true and correct representation of a. “''"■'rTr~5^Irv'«y ofjtTiajSbundlrloarof jliota'll and 12,'Block 2,' Daniel's Lenp Lake' buildings, If any, thereon, and all , • • ‘ * i.-'p elhl A1 ehoTVia'ehjaental'Hf j'ltTm'' frop, or on said land« This survey is cade loan now being placed on the property; ,to'the holder of such nortgage or any ’ ■ i-'^j'.^^other .interest .acqulre^i^ufoason of^ cortEage. .It is undoratood and agreed :nbyadauaenta have-been'placed f^r the pui^^e) of establlshlnE lot' lines or iovuidary corners. / / X < .—> X t ; P('i^Wa. S. Kelley, 1342 r -• f 'V> . • * *\r Jk\ , • ’ • I w •: * •rr-Tjr-PTT* iV f' 1' •• • . • • •' *!i . .*•, 1 t n\K' -' I « * i ■'X, '’X . iiWM'- • ..• t ;• I ;V 1-rr. •• i- t-' % tki.Ct (jl\ tt/ llili CERTIFICAU OF SURVCf FOR BILL R. SIFORO IN lots 3. 4. DANIELS LONG LAK[ HEIGHTS Hennepin County. Minnesota MAPLE LANE 9 -J > (T OC LU CO y:o < X LfbAl dfscr : That part or erly of the Block 3. Dan I hereby ce» prepared t>v super V IsI on. r e 0 I M e f e (J C Surveyor un of Minnesol* C0FF|« ft GRC Mark S. Gron: [nomeers. i Long Lake, m Scale I me Date Au(jus* 0 Iron r Bearings sho_ assuned datu- 1 i i •4fi u • * 2 If. to ml <A-?n \« '.r-^IZ -----24 3 100 0 24* 2?/r* I r? o J ^ 4 M ^ «« « , i '<• HU/ ^ A ?9 594 71b 43 rT«t(\% o- fjw f tn UQ <TN O' 217' plot IM > oror U C 7 u < .1. I-.*' ?f ■ V;;; ■•^ ‘ "4# I Cl.TtJ -'l.^-t,; , r .-.u.-vcr: 1 l^orehv r<»rtl •’«• t»,»,* <h- i nin.'o.v or th. >wM.n*.,ri...; or /‘i;’ r.'f.n;;ontotJr., »ifvl Uu loc,“* Ion rjf nil ov;. li, .1' ■', ..on,; ;;e to nhow olhor inprovo.,.,,!, o, • Id \<^rl b. - V-' iV' ’ 1^-(ionlon n. CoffT.1 I/.r.} .‘.'.irv.,..( p ;‘l'.n:''.r t^’nr Iviko, I'JrujD.iotft :W■^ -t /.. "• !v i> T I * ' ■ ^'**"**" jwjWHwiiM, ' ■___________________________________________ ^ 5^^ (v* ?■ C:^ P: ■Vl \r.$k •; ‘A'»‘ • i' •'• v4.) V • ^ •■•''■> ■ A.:;A ■ ."'-J*♦ . *'' A'til- -.li ' -Alt'® •vfT' r '-f 4Jfll > •>■■,;'’/■'•-'t* . 'V • ••MM CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR LARRY GLEASON OF LOT 3. BLOCK 1. DANIELS LONG LAKE HEIGHTS ORONOCOPY \ q:on UJm 0 < 1 LFGA1 OrSCRlPTtQN OT PftTM'Sf*; ! Lot 3. Block 1. OANttLS LONG LAKE HEIGHTS 0 : danotot Iron marker Beoringi shown ore bosed upon on ossifned dotim This survey intends to show the boundories of the above described property, ond the locotion of on existing house, gorage. and shed thereoa it does not purport to show ony other improvements or encroocfvnents. x: O' Ir "V\ r-- Pi CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY Prepared for ‘I'hKHY lUJIilDKfK-l- l t 6o i~K \>;i i«^ J“ . r» -r • '\ N^vX ■H>x^ J.v5\ O Z4 t ^ • • •> % «r:. m BEEn I I 6o Lt:GAL UliSCRIPTION: l.ul 1, Ulock 2, DANIELS LONG LAKE HEIGHTS, accord ni9 to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. ^ CITYOFORONO X SITF t-LAN , GRADiNG PLAN ^PPROVf M • APPROVuO »VITH REVISIONS • f t —100.00--DATE.:6-:./..r-3.Q. ^.//weS r.rNFRAI N'^TFS -cr. tl ' v»?C" /CAC^LCi^^C/iajc t^f--. englnaerlna 7*22 iMmpti** OrM W«r«o'Q Hci^tt UN 55170 (051) 681-1014 fAX'681-0468 625 10 N C lioa^« MN &5«J« (612) 783-1860 FAX: 783-1883 C^Ftificot^-of Surve y for. CUYOFORONO JL SITE PLAN__ GRADING PUN a APmovEO- oecK. □ APPROVED W.-TH REVISIONS a DISAPBROyi THELRQTTLUJjD _CQM PANY, INC. O^CVf CWASC owvc 24 120.00 UTIUTY tASDJeNT-^--' P€R PLAT ;i?.0Na ccpi mmr+Y^gHI» ♦9 6X EXISTING^. <4^ /cT?7 /vr / b rr coNCPtn: ' SiOtWALX ^ «jr* 120.00 CHEVY CHASE O o XUi •“.......... tocc or air DRIVE MOfL p»oroap OiAOts »<oui fu ouomc a >um tr mOTL UASK OUOrMPri 90rn «MC fOR HOmOaTM. AM aUnCM. lOOnoi OX timjCFLMO <M.r Ml AACMUClUAi ^iWfl PON SUROM UO rau»<u.'«N OA^wcM. tto wane la i ar4tixu von hai kin comru ho or »n tor tr M *X wfamirr OF tai.t ro auAronr rnc vionc mjmt nRroo IS Ror «« ACv^vrsaurv or r»« mjRxran. RR*f *Wf ?T«fWV«1f Off% RT» m§m<mr *n !>•''« * .Efltt*QSLa flQVSL.ULYArii;2i LCXCST aooR nrvAnoN ____ TOP or BLOCH ciivAnoN ____ CAffACf sj^a arvAnoN ____ Toe • lOONOur acvAiioN____ CsUbliabed In 1002 LOT SURVEYS COMPANY. INC. LAND SURVEYORS REGISTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA INVOICE F.B.NO.. : NO..519S9 BIR-SB SCALE: r -30* 7aoi 7:6t£-6«0>90Q3 f«i No M0>3A2a IHnnoopoiU. UlanoooU &e42A &urup\jorB (Srrliftrair ROGTR STRAUHAN NOTE Property located In Section 36, lownship IIB, Ranne ?3, Hennepin County, Minnesota ^ ruiLMiUt 11 ✓i'f 1 1 ' »f>A t 0 O DonotM Iron Uom#non| n CWr«*«t Wood KA S#! for ticovollon or#y vC^U) 0«no(o« Ci^trg ESovoltoo OorwiM Proooood CWvollon ' ^ D«nol«« Stffoco Drotnogo to roolitt of oof toots f*ropoood biMIng InformotVon rrt«t bo ctTociiod with oppvovod buidbvg pton (fvJ dovoiopr^l or grocing p^on boforo oicovotlort and conotrucliorv .Pro(>oood Top of BiOch f*ropoood Corogo floor .f*ropoood Loooot floor Typo of Hulding §- vu XT nnmifi r.nnv 'oi3 CIk-ilu- Ct'^LjeOr f Ti A qp.!}HQ £slobiislied in 1902 LOT SURVEYS CORAPANY, INC. UNI) SUKVEY0R3 INVOICE NO _ F.O.NO____ 665-/7 SCALE I ' •is: nCGISTKHKl) UNDEIl LAWS OK STATE OK MINNESaFA 7C01 • 73iii Avtnu* North 66a30«3 O Dtnotii Iron Monumint O 0«not«« Wood Hub S«l * For EicovoHon Ork'i BOO 01. SON MlnntspolU, MlnnetoU 65438 #uritvi)ur0 <9(dlfir0t0 mOOOO Donotci Cilillog ElifOlton C ^ Diool#i Propottd Eltvollon ■ Dtnotti Surfoca Oralnogt _______ Propoiad Top of Block Propottd Corogt rioor Propottd Loiott? Floor Tjpt of Building - «V- fCl^-a(jQfr- ■UMOMaMI s'- A 111^ lUATE OP SURVEY for David and Jean Sahlstrom ORONOCOPy DETAIL B SEE detail b /—^ A DETAIL C invg OJ^♦ cr» o SEE detail a •7.95 LO A-SEE detail C PROPOSED addition • 33.ec CANTILEVCR riREPLACE loT^19.00 V <r/^ "»/ (/') Or oi Koo P.r y I .-j^ M f^iZa > ■la ^.46 'BRICK P" nREPLACC h----CYCLONE I FENCE —w«ir rjm 0 WNGlfUN I N 87-05'5V W W t.. 0.S,/ A - PROPOSED 27.586 SO. FT 2.J50 SO. FT. O DENOTES REOAR & CAP SET L.S. if 23945 ® DENOTES REBAR SET TOR nun DINH nrrcrT ADDITION AREA » 395 sq ct ^WZ%F^THE'wm^^^ A^rjO proposed ADDITION legal description Lot 15, Block 1. HIU. O'VMY UANOB nrmMfor, 4^ 4U^ MAHUK. I SURVEY FOR: JgBBY PgOULX ^ Util 1^3 eosemcn+ ORONO COPY • • c^e.—• — Prepared By:162182 »OOI 41716(5^ V SITE PLAN__ GRADING(ft^N/ B-APPROVED-CAOvi-ii /V □ APPROVED WITH REVISI(a>fe S"SHEDATE A p i/i cv'^''pci/c S-ifc' Thi$.drawing has been checked and vrevitwed this !day of vem be.r-_______, 19 ‘>3 . deJ f^'rxa - SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. N CNQINeeilS •SUnvCYOnS •FLAMMCnS SOIL TESTING • CNVIIIOMMCNTAL SCnVICCi lOM* WAVI AfA tivo. yiNNfTOMMA. MH «t}4a UIJI I***?**! fAli DESCRIPTION:Bi mf Lot 17. Block 1, HILL O'WAY MANOR, according to the recorded plat thereof. GENERAL NOTES: • - Denotes iron monument found, o - Denotes iron moument set. I hereby certify that this survey was prepared under my supervision and that I am a Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 1-Le Theodore D. Kemna *T\ Date: lo License No. 17006 I {1^ Rffe^-i ik ki MIT I »«* • m #•«« If UK} Bwva Mr«t mumt ■nc^t tAMM MM ttmrmi Mata** mmt I a «a>^a • rgifp^y 0 y oral bt *r ptsM 'ktri Itr U0 nl CBOt'ltB AMD lUMASD BT UiXMSM Ma 14714 UMvm 4 iwaa okm imrttsirr ttvKnr <:(X -------------- V l\ I M-*. MMM. / r \ Mmki awM ■— vl^ u ^T»*i»r •Ml MK iaM» »«<A . Mg IM !■< TMV m • V MR IRUKT taMa B iRadl « M ‘ f-M lOf %i Ta H t t/i (g i07 $ • M nMB :•«• uKA « m or UTT m.4 • IA.UO m ri I iM • 4Jt?« >u n ml * (t >4xm - L«T* ■! n /WAfKifttC; fO.O« I^L Leer- CP At*o ‘a 1T--..VCT ------r fe«. V¥V*ik£ fiaULTTi' Gerr H- ^^oiT-:.::. ^ • M M •• •*' **■» w UW 4 MiM 1 HI. pte ^•» OJLmii MMWU a. »«a I ^ M f- r !•%*>.•<.' ■ "X 1 o H CO cr^j ^ *g;*'fe'? • 'i w 5 / \ s *«O H o Ea M ::: U) z, p**o t;!c Ui S3 ai§ •T» II. Wt----Kair--- AT VOB* “-WV — ITT •>055 M6 Wleljhi/) UdU J w 3 Certificate of Survey for Kevin M. Krueger of Lot 6. BlocK 2. WEBBER MILLS Hennepin County, Minnesota •i ’ • , -FOX-- STREET^ 1 r*rtifw that tMs It A trof in<i correct representation of a survey cf the ^undarles of Lot 6, BlocK 2! WEBBER^HIUS. dniJ locilloo of any e*lsling Pulldings located thereon. It does not ourport to show any othff Ifliprove^ents or encroichmenis. • 1- . «;n'ron IH t r.or.Hnrpfi, IMC UOUBi 0-' s:-g; i:: £' r\ OROHO COPY cirfOfOWNO „ Jt, siteVlan __ qwdinowah gSw ‘irHTEV,SK)N3 0 OBAP^^, / / / / / / / -7 / / / / / c: ^ T\ Cer11f1 cate of Survey for JlB Comtek and Investors Title of Lot 3. Block I. CHIPPEWA Hennepin County, Minnesota -Iw ORONO COPY * l5Cfj < c i?'* CITY OF ORONP bill .'l/vi - D£CJ^ A OPn , M • DATc_ ^ tJ6V^4-'4b*h ‘f-i'lOl S?Chippewa L^ne VN LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES: Lot 3. 3lock I, CHIPPEWA. This sur^pey intends to shown t'»e boundaries of the above described property, and the location of an existing house and shed thereon. It does not purport to show any other iaproveoents or encroachaents 0 Iron marker Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. Corns’ & CRON'BtRC. Inc. t J L t' "«•«> » f 4*: ! »»,♦>> M\ m: inmi I heffbjr errfily iiul iha uin,rj «rai prrp^rc4 bv mr or under ai|r dwecl ftuprr- vUon. and that I am a July rr|;itirfrd OvB En|tnerr and Land Sunrryor urtdrr the laurs of the Stair iJ Mmr>«‘^tu 4 Mark S Cnmhrrp MmncaoO Lnm^r NumbiVl^TSS onn 9"^9'9J fCAlt NO 9J - d i c*; A \ ^ CITYOFORONO A SITE PLAM __ GRADIMG PLAM XAFPRC v IO ij A'PP'-'cD vvr>: rcviSiONS □ oiSAPPfiova 1 4^. 0! Chipp e.wa Z- and- ! copy ^/3/5 ChAfpucu, lo^h^e^ Certificate of Survey for Gregory J. Hal Id in of Lot 2, Block 1, Chippewa Hennepin County, Minnesota % \^5v--0 I hereby certify that tins is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of Lot 2, Block 1, Chippewa, the location of all existing buildings, if any, thereon, and the proposed location of a proposed deck. It does not purport to show other improvements or encroachments. COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. Mark S. Gronberg Lid^ No. Engineers, Land Surveyors & Planners Long Lake, Minnp«;ota—^ SEP 2 81987 ly • tItM r i/(0'Rc»vu-iun\'M TOWN NORTH 140.01 ROAC ------.... w I CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR DOUG MERZ IN THE SE 1/4 OF SEC. 31-118-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA N 89‘’J3‘ 00" W 357.01 ‘I To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Ilawn and Planning Commissioners Mike CialTron. Planning Director. F'ehniary 15. 2002 #2333 - Amend Home Occupation Standards - Section 10.20. Subd. 4 - Draft Ordinance For Rc\ icw and Recommendation List of Exhibits A - Draft Ordinraice U - Existing Code Sections 5.40 10.02 Def 30 10.20, Subd. 4C Sumniarx' of Conclusions - December 20 .Toint Work Session The consensus was to proceed with the 15-item amendment that Planning Commission recommended in 1098 and incorporate (he 4-item staff recommendation regarding non-resident employees, with the following revisions or exceptions: a) Add a line item that addresses noise impacts and limit those impacts to 8:00 a.m - 7:00 p.m. b) Need further discussion regarding home occupation in accessory structures (as written. onl\ allowed in rural /ones or with rural lot si/e...) c) Need to define which "certain vehicles" are allowed to be stored outside... d) 1-stabli.sh a threshold number above which parking of vehicles as.sociated with the home occupation must be screened. c) Consider adding a weight limit for vehicles used in the business... 0 Clarify that there can be no signage in relation to the home occupation. g) limit hours of operation to 8:00 a.m to 7:00 p.m. rather than 8:00 p.m. h) Add a limit on the number of customers or clients that can be on the site at one time. i) 'I he nomial delivery vehicles such as UPS and l edEx should be allowed. It was suggested that the code amendment include an introductory paragraph of intent in terms of maintaining neighborhood characteristics. It was also suggested that language be added giving the City ability to further regulate or even force the closure of any home occupation that is found to be having negati\ e impacts on the neighborhood. Staff has rc-dral\ed the amendment presented in 1998. incorp(>rating most of the changes or provisions noted ab<*\ e. #2333 Home Occupations February 15, 2002 Page 2 Draft Ordinance Summar}’ Section I. Section 1 eliminates the Section 5.40 provisions for home occupation licensing. Under the amendment as drafted, home occupations will no longer be licensed. Section 2. Section 2 revises the current definition of Home Occupation in 10.02. I he new definition eliminates mo.st of the perfonnance standards that were in the old definition. Section 3 . Section 3 revises the "I lome Occupation" accessory use entry as it appears in the list of R-IA allowed accessory uses. The new language no longer lists the perlbrmance standards but references Section 10.63, indicating that all nome occupations must meet the special provisions of Section 10.63. Section 4. Section 4 adds Section 10.63 to the Zoning Code, entitled "I lome Occupations". This is a separate section being added much in the same manner we addetl regulations for Adult Uses a few years ago. Section 10.6.3 includes: Subd. 1, the Purpose statement; Subd. 2, a detailed set of Regulations which all home occupations must follow; Subd. 3. a list of Prohibited Occupations Subd. 4, a policy statement regard Accommodation of Disabled Persons; and Subd. 5, a requirement that e.xisting home occupations become conforming within one year. What the Draft Ordinance Does Not Do It does not c.stablish multiple regulatory categories of home occupations. It merely creates a .set of standards which all home occupations must meet. As drafted, if a home tKcupation can't meet the standards, it is not allowed. If an e.xisting home occupation doesn't meet the standards, it is in violation of the zoning code and is treated as a zoning violation, subject to the legal processes alreadv established in the code for remedviim such violations. Options Planning Commission slmuld consider whether multiple regulatory categories would be useful. It is common for cities to have a licensing requirement just for those home occupations that have certain characteristics, for e.xample: - employment of a non-occupant of the dwelling - having customers or clients or their vehicles coming to the property - manufacturing, assembly or processing of products or materials - parking more than one vehicle used in the home occupation that is 3/4 ton or less capacity and has attachments such as a plow, a glass carrier, etc. - parking a vehicle used in the home occupation that e.xceeds 3/4 ton capacity - the business produces any waste that should be treated or regulated ^2333 Home Occupations I'cbruary 15, 2002 Page 3 Categories for regulator^' control could similarly be established for dealing with uses that can't or don’t meet one or more standards but which can mitigate or eliminate the adverse neighborhood impacts if operated subject to certain conditions. The options would include; a. Require a CUP. The CUP entry in the Zoning Code would have to be written such that the C'ouncil would have to find that the adverse impacts of the use can be remedied by adherence to specified conditions, and clearly spell out Coiineil’s authority to review or revoke if the conditions are not met or if the conditions fail to mitigate the adverse neighborhood impacts; OR b. Instead of a CUP, require an annual license for such u.ses. if it'.s important to review the use on a regular ongoing basis; or a one-time license subject to re\ iew or revocation only if the home occupation becomes a problem. Procedural Status of Amendment Planning Commission held a Public 1 learing on this matter on November 19. There were no public comments. You tabled this item to a work session, which was held on December 20. fhe result of the work ,ses.sion was direction to stafTto make a number of revisions to the draft approved by Planning Commission in 1998. .Staff Kecommendatioii Re-open the public hearing to see if there are any public comments. Review the draft ordinance and discuss w hether it accomplishes the Planning Commission's intent, whether it lea\ es any loose ends that should be tied up. whether it needs to be more or less restrictive in specific areas, and how it impacts e.xisting known home occupations. Discuss whether there should be different levels of regulatory control. Direct staff to make any appropriate revisions, and either table for further re\ iew- or send it on to Council with a recommendation. ORDINANCE NO._____, SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE ADDING ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 10.63 AND AMENDING SECTIONS 5.40, 10.02 AND 10.20, SUBD. 4C REGARDING FIOME OCCUPATION USE AND LICENSING The Citv Council of Orono ordains as follows: Section I. Orono Municipal Code Chapter 5, Section 5.40 regarding licensing of Home Occupations is hereby deleted. Section 2. Orono Municipal Zoning Code Chapter 10. Section 10.02. Definition 30; "Home Occupation" is hereby deleted and the following new definition of "lh)me Occupation" is hereby substituted in its place: "30. Home Occupation - Any gainful occupation carried out by the occupant of a residential dwelling unit that occurs within the principal or accessory building on the property and does not change the primar>- residential use of the propert\ ." Section 3. Orono Municipal Zoning Code Chapter 10, Section 10.20. Subdivision 4(C). "Home Occupations" is hereby deleted and the following language substituted in its place: "C. Home Occupations. Home occupations as defined in this Chapter. All home occupations shall comply with the provisions of Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.63." Section 4. Orono Municipal Zoning Code Chapter 10 is hereby amended by adding Section 10.63, "Home Occupations" to read as follows: "SEC. 10.63. HOME OCCUPATIONS. Subd. 1. Purpose. 1 lome occupation regulations arc established to ensure that home occupations will not adversely affect the character and livability of the surrounding residential neighborhood. The home occupation shall function as an accessory and subordinate use to tlie principal use of the dwelling unit. Page 1 of 5 Subd. 2. Home Occupation Reeulations. Tlic regulations recognize that many types of home occupations cun be conducted with minimal or no effect on the surrounding neighborhood. A. The home occupation shall be clearly incidental and secondary to the residential use of the premises, and shall result in no incompatibility with or disturbance to the surrounding area. B. 1-mployed Persons. No one other than the occupant(s) of the ilwelling; one (1 ) employee; customers or clients; and deliver) or ser\ ice personnel shall be on the property at any given time in relation to the home occupation. I’nder no circumstances shall there be more than one (1 ) employee working on the premises at one time. No employee or combination of employees shall work on the premises for more than forty (40) hours in one week, fhe home occupation mas employ additional non-resident employees only if their work activities are performed off the premises. Personal \ chicles of employees working off the premises shall be parked within a building or shall be fully screened from the street and from adjoining properties. Domestic employees shall not be considered employees of the home occupation. C. Hxterior alterations or modifications that change the residential character or appearance of the dwelling unit or accessory stnicture to that of a commercial nature shall be prohibited. D. Interior alterations or modifications that eliminate the kitchen, habitable areas for sleeping, and bathrooms, shall be prohibited. n. Hxcept iLs noted below , the home occupation shall be conducted w ithin the enclosed area of the dwelling unit, w ith the exception of le.ssons or instruction for outdoor activities such as equestrian training and riding, tennis and other court sports and swimming. F. Accessory Structures. In the RR-l.A and RR-IB. One Family Rural Residential Districts, home occupations or storage associated with the home occupation may be conducted within accessory stnictures subject to the following conditions: 1. No home occupation conducted wholly or in part in an accessor) structure shall produce noise, light and glare, odor, vibration or tralTic that will in any way have an objectionable effect upon adjacent or nearby property. The home occupation shall conform with all other applicable /lining requirements. Page 2 of 5 G. Outdoor Storage Prohibited. Outdoor storage or display of materials, goods, supplies or equipment related to the conduct of the home occupation shall be prohibited, e.xcept that licensed passenger vehicles used in the home occupation may be parked outside provided they are in contpliance with all other requirements of this section. II. Parking. All vehicle parking required for conduct of the home occupation shall be off-street. The off-street parking area required for the principal residential use shall not be reduced or made unusable by the home occupation. ()ff- street parking areas providing more than two spaces for the home occupation shall be visually screened from adjacent residential lots. I. Commercial or Non-passenger Vehicles. Parking/storage of any commercial or non-pas.senger vehicles u.sed in the home occupation shall be within a fully-enclosed building. Noise, odors or vibration Irom the operation of such vehicles shall not be discernible at the propertv line. J. No equipment, machinery, or materials other than of a t\ pe normallv found in or compatible with a dwelling unit shall be allowed (tv/.; It'ill this in effevt prohibit operation of a landscape service or contractor with a hackhoc or dump truck?). K. No retail sales and delivery of products or merchandi.se to the public shall occur on the premi.ses e.xcept when acces.sory to the ser\ ices provided 1.. No home occupation activity shall be discernable from any private or public street, fhere shall be no exterior signage or display, or interior signs or display which are visible from outside the dwellinu. M. fhe hmirs of operation that a home occupation !* av hr accessible to the public shall be limited to the hours between 8:00 am. and ''in. N. I he home occupation shall not generate excessive •'■alTic that is detrimental to the residential character of the surrounding properties or the neighborhood lv>r the purposes of this provision, more than five (5) customers or clients per da\. or more than two (2) customers .it any given time, may bedetennined to be an excessive and detrimental level of traffic, fhe number shall appA to each dwelling unit, regardle.ss of the number of home occupations conducted in the dwelling unit. I he criteria u.sed by the Zoning .Administrator to determine impact shall include, but not be limited to: I. The characteristics of the neighborhood, including current land use. lot si/es. lot widths, parking availability, and screening. Page 3 of 5 2. Type of street, width, and traffic volumes. 3. i he availability and location of off-street parking. O. Shipment and deliverv of products, merchandise, or supplies shall be limited to the hours of 8;00 a.m. to 7;00 p.m. and shall regularly occur only in single rear axle straight trucks or smaller vehicles typically used to serve residential areas. P. No sound or noise created by the operation of the home occupation shall be audible at the property lines except between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Home occupations shall otherwise comply with all noise provisions of the Zoning Chapter. Q. Ilaziirdous materials in excess of consumer quantities which are packaged for consumption by individual households for personal care or household use, shall be prohibited. R. Any activity or event organized for the purpose of displaying or selling merchandi.se shall not be held more than four (4) time per month (I'd.: assiiminf; this is like a tuppenvare party involving more than 2 customers at once, should this be limited to fewer such events???) Subd. 3. Prohibited Occupations in Residential Dwellings. The following uses, by their nature of operation, have a pronounced tendency to increase beyond the limits permitted for home occupations. These uses ha\e objectionable operational characteristics that adversely impact residential neighborhoods and shall be prohibited as home occupations: A. Service, repair, or painting ofany motorized vehicle, including but not limited to motor vehicles, trailers, boats, per.sonal watercraft, recreational vehicles, and snowmobiles. B. I lair styling establishments that serve more than one (1) person at a time. C. Adult uses, as defined in the Zoning Code. D. Dispatch centers where persons come to a site and arc dispatched to other locations (how does Heliotrope Gardens fit into this???). H.Medical or dental clinic. F.Rental businesses. O. Contracting, excavating, welding or machine shops. Page 4 of 5 II. Commercial kennels and veterinar\’ elinics. Churches and religious institutions. J.Tow truck scr\ ices. K. Ceramic studios with kilns of volume six (6) cubic feet or more. L. The sale, lease, trade or other transfer of firearms or ammunition bv 0 a firearms dealer. (Any state/federal rules on this (hat cause us a problem??) Subd. 4. Reasonable Accommodation for Disabled Persons. Persons with physical disabilities may request rea.sonable accommodation by requesting a waiver of one or more of the foregoing requirements. The Zoning Administrator may only grant waivers on the basis of the applicant ’s physical limitations to function within said requirements. Subd. 5. Conformance Required. All existing home occupations shall be brought into .onfonnity with this ordinance within one year of its adoption." Section 5. Adoption and Publication. This ordinance shall be published in The Pioneer and Tlie Laker newspapers and shall become effccti\ e imu. -diatcly upon publication. Adopted by the City Council of Onmo, Minnesota on this__day of_____, 2002 by a vote of___a>cs and____nays. ATILST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk *^"rbara Peterson. Mavor Page 5 of 5 § 5.40 S'/ SEC. 5.40. HOME OCCUPATIONS Subd 1. License Required. It is unlawful for any person to engage in, or carry on. a home occupation, as that term is defined in the Zoning Chapter of the City Code, without first having obtained a license therefor fi^om the City. Subd. 2. Regulation. Licenses will only be issued if the specific use is permitted or otherwise allowed by the Zoning Chapter, and if all conditions set forth in said Chapter are Rilly complied with. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1 -84 Subd. 3. License Period. All licenses for home occupations shall e.xpire on September 30 of each year. Application for renewal of an e.xisting home occupation license shall be made to the City Clerk at least si.xty (60) days prior to the expiration date. Source: Ordinance No. 140, Second Series Effective Date: August 28, 1995 IV SEC. 5.41. MACE Subd. 1 . License Required. It is unlawful for any person to sell or distribute, at wholesale or retail, the substance commonly referred to as mace, without first having obtained a license therefor from the City. Subd. 2. Limitations. \ \ \ / A. Only persons who are duly authorized and licensed Federal firearms dealers shall be licensed. /' f B. This section shall not apply ^c^official sales to, or purchases from, the City Police Department. / 0 SEC. 5.42 JOINT USE OF LAKE FACILITIES Subd. 1. Definitions. For the purpose of this Section\the following terms have the meanings given them: A. “Boat Slip, Water" means a structure, space, dock or other thing designed for the docking, mooring or storing of a boat temporarily or permanently in or on v>\(er, including mooring posts, buoys or other devices. B. ^J^oat Slip, Land ” means a structure, space or other thing designed or used for storing a boat terhporarily or permanently on la;id adjacent to a lake, w hether it is located on or off the licensed property. ORONO CC 126 (4-1-84) § 10.02 28. "Guest House" - An accessory separate dwelling constructed on an e.xisting undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants, including their domestic employees or their non-paying guests, of the primary dwelling. All regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 29. "Hard Cover" - Any structure, blacktop or other material which interferes to any degree with the direct absorption of rainfall into the ground. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 —; I 70 "Home Occupation" - Any gainful occupation meeting all of the following requiren wtn wter engaged in only by persons residing in their dwelling, when that occupation is conducicu ifiC principal structure only, when evidence of the occupation is not visible fro'n the street. Nv ?ns other than tliose permitted in "R" Districts are present, no e.xcessive stock •!> trade is storv . on the premises, over the counter retail sales are not involved, and entrance to the home occupation is gained from within the structure. A professional person may use his residence for consultation, emergency treatment or performance of religious rites but not for the general practice of his profession when such general practice will involve the need for more than three off- street parking spaces for the occupant and visitors. 31. "Hotel" - A building containing eight or more guest rooms in which lodging is provided with or without meals for compensation and which is open to transient or permanent guests or both, and where no provision is made for cooking in any guest room, and in which ingress and egress to and from all rooms is made through an inside lobby or office superv ised by a person in charge. 32. "Junk Yard" - An area where use, waste, discarded or salvaged materials are bought, sold, e.xchanged, stored, baled, cleaned, packed, disassembled or handled, including but not limited to scrap iron and other metals, paper, rags, rubber products, bottles and lumber. Storage of such material in conjunction with a permitted manufacturing process when within an enclosed area or building shall not be included. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 ORONO CC 246 (4-1-84) B-Z § 10.20 Subd. 4. Accessory Uses. Within any "R-1 A" One Family Residential District, no accessbry ,sh\icture or use of land shall be permit^except for one or more of the following uses: A. Garages. Private garages and parking space. B. Pools, etc. Private swimming pool, tennis courts, and paddocks. j C. Home Occupations. Any gainKfl'cccu^tioiTmeeting all of the following < requirements when engaged in only by persons residing in their dwelling, when there is no employed I assistant, when that occupation is conducted within the principal structure only, when evidence of I the occupation is not visible from the street, no signs other than those permitted in "R" Districts are } present, no excessive stock in trade is stored on the premises, over the counter retail sales are not involved, the entrance to the home occupation is gained from within the structure, and the use does not adversely affect the character of the uses permitted in the district in which it is located. A professional person may use his residence for consultation, emergency treatment or performance of religious rites but not for general practice of his profession when such general practice will involve the need for more than three off-street parking spaces for the occupant and visitors. ■. ;» •••• • • D. Signs. Signs as regulated in the Zoning Chapter. E. Temporary Structures. Buildings temporarily located for purposes of constructing on the premises for a period not to exceed time necessary for such constructing. F. Gardens, etc. Gardening and other horticultural uses including aviaries and decorative landscape features. G. Roadside Stands. One roadside stand offering for sale only farm products produced on the premises provided that such stand docs not exceed 200 square feet in area and that it is located at least thirty feet back from the public right-of-way. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 H. Communication Reception/Transmission Devices. 1. Acce.'sory Antennas. Accessory antennas shall be limited to radio and television receiving antennas, satellite dishes, TVRO's, and amateur short-wave radio transmitting and receiving antennas. Accessory antennas that are accessory to the principal use of tlie property are permitted accessory uses in all zoning districts provided they meet the following conditions: ORONO CC 281 (4-1-84) TO: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator FROM: Wendy Bottenberg. Zoning Administrator/Planner DATK: Febriiar> 14. 2002 SUBJECT: -'-01-2706 Richard R. Stark 815 Partenuood Road Variance Change - Public Hearing Zoning District: I.R-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District {1 Acre) Lot Area: 44,225 s.f. (1.02 acre) List of E.vhibits: •A Analysis B Proposed Site Plan C Council Report (2/11/02) Pertinent Code Sections: Section 10.22, Subd. 1: Lakeshore Setback Regulations .Section 10.22, .Subd. 2: Lakeshore Hardcover Requirements Application Summary : In September 2001 the City Council adopted, on consent. Resolution No. 4693 for Richard and Jane Stark to grant the renewal of variances to permit construction of a four stall garage and additional living area to a one le\ el residence at 815 Partenwo('d Road I he original variance was granted in 1997 and renewed in 1998. 1999. 2000. and 2001. Richard and Jane Stark bought the property in 2001 and were the owners when the \ ariances were renewed in '*001. The applicants builder. Ron l.auer applied for a building permit and when the plans were re\ lewed there was a conllict w ith the amount of hardcov er in the 0-75’ setback /one versus the amount appiov ed. fhe plans had a larger amount than the approved plan, fhe owner agreed to remov e the excess hardcover. On February 11. 2002. City Council rev iewed this application and by a 3 to 0 vote directed staff to bring the application to Planning Commission for further reviev.. Council members stated they did not have concerns with the changes but because the site plan is different than previously approved. Planning Commission should review the changes, make the appropria'e recommendation and then go forward to the City Council tor final action. -01-2706 RicharJ and Jane Stark 815 I’artcnwood Variance Changes page I of 3 It was during these discussion which the property owTiers decided not to construct the addition on the east side of the residence. Instead, they are proposing slightly larger decks and changing one of the decks into a screen porch, both are on the lakeside of the residence. I he proposed changes are as follows: (E.xhibit B) 1. Addition (*'A") on the east will be not be constructed. Approved for 344 s.f. Decrease of 344 s.f. 2. Deck ’“B" will be a screen porch. Approved for 84 s.f Proposing 141 s.f Increase of 57 s.f 3. Deck“C" Approved for 198 s.f Proposing 337 s.f Increase of 139 s.f The harda>\er in the 0-75' setback /one was approved at 4,413 s.f (15.3%). The new proposal reduces the hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone. It will decrease by 180 s.f to 4.233 s.f (15.0'*o). The lot coverage by structures was approved at 3.410 s.f (7.7%). The new proposal reduces the lot coverage by structures. It will decrease by 148 s.f to 3.262 s.f (7.4 “/o). The location of the structure is what changes. I he proposal incorporates nu)re structure in the 0- 75' setback zone on the lake side of the residence, rather than on the side of the residence further from the lake. (See E.xhibit B). The propo.sed deck and .screen porch are approximately 40' from the lake and arc not the two stor>’ addition previously approved. I he deck and screen porch do not affect anv adjacent properties. The house and garage are both located in the 0-75' setback zone. I he residence was built prior to current zoning standards. .Statement of Hardship: The application should be asked for his testimoin regarding this issue. Issues for Consideration: 1. 1 he residence and garage are both located in the 0-75' setback zone. "01-2706 Richard and Jane Stark 8 1 .s Panenwood Variance Changes page 2 of 3 2. The residence was built prior to current zoning standards. 3. The new proposal does reduce the lot coverage by structures still well below the allowed 15%. 4. Hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone will decrease from the previous approval. 5. The screen porch and additional decking does increase the amount of structure towards the lake rather than on the side of the residence as previously approved. 6. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Option.s for Action: 1. Recommend approval of variances. 2. Recommend denial of variances, stating reasons, 3. Table, giving applicant direction. 4. Other action. ^01-2706 Richard and Jane Slark 815 Parternvood Variance Changes page 3 of 3 ANALYSIS Loi Area: LR-IB Lot Area Required 43,560 s.f. (1 Acre) Actual 44.225 s.f. (1.02 Acre) Structural Coverage: Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentaue 44,225 s.f.2.520 s.f. (existing)5.7% 3,410 s.f. (approved)7.7% 3.262 s.f. (new proposal)7.4% Hardcover: Distance from Lakeshore Total Area in Setback Allowed 1 lardcovcr Existing Hardcover ,‘\pprt)ved I lardcovcr New proposal 0-75'28,210 s.f.0 s.f 5.815 s.f 4.413 s.f 4.233 s.f (0°/o)(20%)(15.3%)(15.0%) 75-200' 15,419 s.f 3.854.75 s.f 3.600 s.f 3.600 s.f 3,600 s.f (25%)(23%)(23%)(23%) \ ’* »»»4 Q^rwXT CL! XD c?XT'4^ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name Wendy Bottcnberg Title Zoning Adminstrator/Planner Item Description: t^Ol-2706 Richard «S: Jane Stark 815 Parlenwood Road Variances DATE: 2/5/02 ITEM NO.: ^ Agenda Section: Zoning Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (I Acre) 44,225 s.f. (1.02 acre) List of E.xhibits: A B C D Approved Plans Proposed Plans Resolution #4693 S .aft'Report and Exhibits of 9/17/2001 Application Summar>': The City Council adopted, on consent. Resolution No. 4693 for Richard and Jane Stark to grant the renewal of variances to permit construction of a four stall garage and additional li\ mg area to a one level residence at 815 Partenwood Road. The original variance uas granted in 1997 and was renewed in 1998. 1999, 2000 and 2001. Richard and Jane Stark bought the property in 2001 and were the owners when the variances were renewed in 2001. The applicants builder. Ron Lauer, applied for a building permit and when the plans were reviewed there was a contlict w ith the amount of hardcover in the 0-75' setback /one versus the amount approved. The plans had a larger amount than the approved plan. 1 he owner agreed to remove the e.xcess hardcover. It was during these discussions which the property owners decided not to construct the addition on the east side of the residence. Instead, they proposed slightly larger decks and changing one of the decks into a screen porch, both are on the lakeside of the residence. The proposed changes are as follows: 1. Addition (“A”) on the cast will be not be constructed. Approved for 301.5 s.f. Decrease of 301.5 s.f. 2. Deck ‘ B” will be a screen porch. Approved for 84 s.f. Proposing 141 s.f. Increase of 57 s.f. 3. Deck “C” Appro%ed for 198 s.f. Proposing 337 s.f. Increase of 139 s.f. The lot coverage by staictures was approved at 3,410 s.f. (7.7%). The lot coverage by structures will decrease by 148 s.f. with the new proposal. The new proposal meets the approved hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone. The location of the structure is what changes. The proposal incorporates more stmeture in the 0- 75 ’ setback zone on the lake side of the residence, rather than on the side of the residence further from the lake. (See Exhibit B). The proposed deck and screen porch are approximately 40’ from the lake and are not the two story addition previously approved. The deck and screen porch do not affect any adjacent properties. The house and garage are both located in the 0-75' setback zone. The residence was built prior to current zoning standards. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To direct staff regarding changes in application: 1. Bring resolution to next Council meeting reflecting changes to proposal; or 2. Refer back to Planning Commission for further review. /KFfior nrvAttgH ty A RESOLUTION GRANTING RENEWAL OF VARIANCES TO MLTSTCIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2 FILE NO. 01-2706 WHEREAS, Richard R. Stark and Jane M. Stark (hereinafter "tiie applicants") are owners of the propert>- located at 815 Partenwood Road within the Cit>- of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 2, Partenwood (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for the renewal of variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions I and 2 to allow the remodeling and e.xpansion of the e.xisting residence to include a four stall garage and additional iivinsj space located 34 ’ from the 929.4 ordinary' high water mark where ly is required and requiring! a hardcover variance of 4,413 s.f. (15.3%) where 5,815 s.f. (20%) is existing and none is allowed as shown on E.xhibit A. Minnesota: therefore, be If RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, 1. 3. FINDINGS Tliis application was reviewed as Zoning File 1-2706. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Resid<*ntial Zoning District requiring one acre in area. The property consists of 1.02 acre. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this renewal application on September ’.7, 2001 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: 1 . I he propc'ed additions would not further encroach on the OHWT. Page 1 of 5 4. 5. 2. The configuration of the lot severely restricts the allowable building pad. j. The amount of hardcover in the O' to 75’ lakeshore setback would be reduced from 20% to 15.3%. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this propertv arc peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; tiiat granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions'", light, air zot pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary' to preserve a substar.ual property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit ar.d intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the^ City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings ar.d recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by Citv staff, commer.ts by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safe?, and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIO.NS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono Citv Council here-, grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 arid 2 to allow u-.e remodeling and expansion of the existing residence located 34' from the OHWX where 7' 's required and hardcover of 4,415 s.f (15.3%) in the O' to 75’ lakeshore setback where 5,815 s f. (20%) is existing and none is allowed. 1. 3. All plastic under landscaping must be removed in the O' to 75' lakeshore setback prior to any new construction. No further variances will be granted to this property in the future. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicar.-s, but are permissive only and must be e.xercised bv application for a buildir.2 permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 24, 2002). Page 2 of 5 4. 5. 6. Violation of or non-compliance with ciny of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. Any substantial changes or revisions to the plan in Exhibit A will require reconsideration by the City Council. Adopted by the Citj’ Council of the City of Orono. Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 24th day of September, 2001. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mavor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINTs'ESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of September, 2001, by Barbara A. Peterson and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and Cit>- Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf o? the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this_________________ day of me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared 2001, before -----------^^-----------------known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF liENNEPIN ) On this ddv of 2001, before me a Notarv- Public within and for said County, personally appeared_______ *:----------■ .-------------------:—;-------------------------------------------------known to me to be me person(s) described in and who . vecuted the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 I < I w • ^ jC >< LA<e MISAGTOMCA MAN CNiyr CNTST f^ANTfsPC AUCMGNT GCJJCuN PLAf>iriS»G Sfik'VCf: CNlt?r AOO:?liG‘J WALL cxgtng t^chg to PZMAN S^•K)Vt:L PONT MK%fircn/fr I I I f* • •••<■ » « V I V ••r OLSEN RESiDENCE SITE PLAN O *o t>/> cu Application Date: 8/13/01 Completion Date: 8/13/01 60 Day Deadline: I0/I2/0I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title Zoning Adminstrator/Planner DATE: 9 21/01 ITEM NO.: ^ Agendj Section: Zoning Item Description: ^01-2706 Richard & Jane Stark 815 Panenwood Road V ranee Renewal Zoning District: Lot Area:LR-IB O : Family Lakeshore Residential District (I Acre) 44.225 s'- (1.02 acre) List of Exhibits: A Resolution B Staff Report and E.xhibits of 9/17/2001 Application Summary: The property has been sold and the new owner would like to renew the variances received to e.xpand and remodel the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living area. Variances were granted on October 23.2000. October 25. 1999 October '*6 1998 and November 24. 1997 for lakeshore setback to be located 34' from the lakesh.’ . where 75 ’ is required and for hardcover in the 0-75 ’ setback where 20% (5.815 s.f.) existed and 15.3”/o (4,413 s.t.) is proposed. 1. Section 10.22, Subd. 1(A); Lakeshore setback Regulations; No principal building shall be located closer than 75 feet to the natural ordinary high water mark of a lake abutting the property To allow remodeling per the plan in Exhibit A of the resolution where the residence is currentlv located 34' from the lakeshore where 34’ is proposed and 75' is required 2. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L)( 1); Hardcover in 0-75': Permit 4 413 s f. (15.3%' hardcover in the 0-75' where 5,815 s.f. (20%) exists and 0 s.f. (0%) is allovsed. PLANTSTNG COM.MISSION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 7 to 0 vote to: Approve the application as presented. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING RENEWAL OF VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2 FILE NO. 01-2706 WHEREAS, Richard R. Stark and Jane M. Stark (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 815 Partenwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 2, Partenwood (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for the renewal of variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodeling and expansion of the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living space located 34' from the 929.4 ordinary high water mark where 75’ is required and requiring a hardcover variance of 4,413 s.f. (15.3%) where 5,815 s.f (20%) is existing and none is alloued as shown on Exhibit A. Minnesota; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED bv the Citv Council of Orono. FINDINGS 1. 2. 3. This application was reviewed as Zoning File ^^O1-2706. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one acre in area. The property consists of 1.02 acre. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this renewal application on September 17, 2001 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed additions would not further encroach on tlte OHW'L Page 1 of 5 2. j. 5. The configuration of the lot severely restricts the allowable building pad. The amount of hardcover in the O' to 75* lakeshore setback would be reduced from 20% to 15.3%. The City Council finds that the conditions e.xisting on this property are peculiar to It and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a tire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merelv serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessar>- to alleviate L demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessaiy to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the" City. The City Council has considered this application including the findinus and recoimnendations of the Planning Commission, reports bv Citv staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on'the health, satetv and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CO.NDHTO.NS Based upa-- one or more of the above findings, the Orono Cilv Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions I and 2 to allow the reniode iiig and expansior. ol the e.vistiiig residence located 34’ from the OHWL where 75' is required and hardcover of 4,415 s.f. (15.3%) in the O' to 75' lakeshore setback where 5,815 s f (207o) is existing and none is allowed. 1. All plastic under landscaping must be removed in the O' to 75' lakeshore setback prior to any new construction. 2. No further variances will be granted to this property In the ftiture. 3. Authorities granted by this variance ran with the property not with the applicants. but are permissive only and must be e.xercised by application for a building permit within one yea, of the date of Council approval, or this variance will e.xpirc on that date (September 24, 2002). Page 2 of 5 4.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. 6.Any substantial changes or revisions to the plan in Exhibit A will require reconsideration by the City Council. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono. Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 24th day of September, 2001. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, Citv Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Propcny Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss, COUNTY OF HENTs’EPlN ) The foregoing instrument uas acknowledged before me on this 24th day of September, 2001, by Barbara A. Peterson and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. On this dav of .. 2001. beforeme a Notary Public u-ithin and for said County, personally appeared _____________ - --------;—^------------__^known to me to be the person(s) described in and who e.xecuted Ic! that he (they) executed the same os his (their) fret Notaty Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this ) ss. dav of 2001. before me a Notary Public within and forsaid County, personally appeared Notary Public Page 4 of 5 • • • • <mm* • m I < I aic X iU ir^<e M8N/n CT0NK'A MAN CNTt>Y tNTCY PLANING .. AUCMCNI LCLT:uN f\AN I IMG r>tL»VC(: CNlt?Y AOO:;^t:55 WALL CX15TNC TPCr.S TO c ?::man SWOVtL PONT; j I I I *«i.r ^v«**i*^ r« (v.i ft • »« I V •. r uk OLSEN ESIDENCE SITE PLAN o COna- TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner September 14,2001 *!01-2706 Richard R. Stark 815 Partenwood Road Variance Renewal -- Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) 44,225 s.f. (1.02 acre) List of Exhibits .A Analysis B Application C r ••'.sting and Proposed Site Plan D Resolution “4550 E Minutes from previous meetings (PC-10/16/2000, CC-10'23/2000) F Staff Report (10/23/2000) Pertinent Code Sections Section 10.22, Subd. 1: Lakeshore Setback Regulations Section 10.22, Subd. 2: Lakeshore Hardcover Requirements .Section 1073 t, Subd. 5(B>,-LR-46 Lot-RequifefttetHsr- Application Summary: The property has been sold and the new owr.er would like to renew the variances received to expand and remodel the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living area. Variances were granted on November 24. 1997. October 26, 1998, October 25, 1999 and October 23, 2000 for lakeshore setback to be located 34' from the la.keshore where 75’ is required and for hardcover in the 0 -75' setback where 20‘’/o (5,815 s.f.) was existing and 15.3?b (4,413 s.f.) was proposed. Staff Recommendation: The zoning lot conforms to lot area, lot width, and side yard setback requirements. The existing residence is located within the required lakeshore setback. The proposed plan reduces the amount of hardcover in the 0'-75’ setback. The existing amount of hardco\er on the site is 10,228 s.f. (23%). The proposed plan is for 6,595 s.f. (14.9%) total hardcover on the lot. If Planning Commission concludes that the findings of fact supporting this variance request are still valid, then a;i approval recommendation is appropriate. ^0!~2706 Richard and Jane S:ark 815 Partenwood yanance Rene\^ al poge-l ANALYSIS Lot Area and Yards LR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Lakeside Yard 1 acre 140 ft.35 ft.10 ft.75 ft. Subject Propert>- Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside 1.02 acres 225 ft. at 75’ setback 357 ft. at OHW 37 ft (existing) 35 ft. (proposed) 46 ft. (existing) 20 ft. (proposed) 34 ft. The zoning lot does not meet the lakeshore setback requirement of 75'. A variance is required for remodeling and e.xpanding an existing structure within the 75' lakeshore setback. The homeowners association has setback requirements that are more restrictive than the zoning code. Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 44,225 s.f.2,520 s.f. (existing) 3.410 s.f. (proposed) 5.7% 11% Structural coverage is not an issue with this application. Hardcover A Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 1 'ariance Requested 0'-75'28,810 s.f.5,815 s.f (20%) none 1 4,665 s.f fOi5 75'-250' 1 15,419 s.f 1 2,995 s.f (19%) 3,854.75 s.f (7.5%) 3,600 s.f i.25%) none A hardcover variance is required in the O' to 75' lakeshore setback. ird Lakeside Yard 75 ft. de Yard Lakeside S ft. (e.xisting)34 ft. 3 ft. iroposed) nt of 75’. A variance is required for lakeshore setback. The )re restrictive than the zoning code. Percentage 5.7% 1.1% Proposed Variance Hardcover Requested i4qi2> 4,665 s.f j (h6i'b) (5,5 ft •3,600 s.f none (23%) >ack. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures S250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTl Site Address r INFORNIA'npN ^ tSS S'/ ^ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) - j t y . 2 A.ttach legal description to application if not included on requii Date Property Acquired ! _______________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential ____other (srecify) Zoning District: /C . S~_______Z- /C- < ^ APPLICANT, 9 3/1 Phone (h Name k iCLH /t/P } Sr/\P,t_______ Phone (vv Address:. 7 V~ /I y • // /) tif'/ A City: r/l-, OWTS’ER (if different than applicant) Name Address: Phone (h Phone (v C=ty:, DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: Estimated Coniroction (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARI.ANCES REQUIRED Lot Area ___Lot Width Setback: Other (specify) Front Side )i^L id ILARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CO? Descri’ue undue hardship or practical difficult or unusual pro compliance with Zoning Code requirements:_______ ------------------------------------------------------------------ lo. m (attach additional sheets if necessary) ^ '-.J Kj •y N * :'fli i J • • #* • • J* >» p \ 33G<V)50 'ij'l CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 45 5 u Co Coc: s*. C7 A RESOLUTION GRANTING RENEWAL OF VARIANCES TO MU'NICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIMSIONS 1 AND 2 - FILE NO. \624 vcy-H'9f >VHEREAS, Roger Olsen and Elizabeth Olsen (hereinafter "the applicants") are ovNners of the property located at 815 Partenwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 2, Partenwood (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the Cit>' for the renewal of variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodeling and e.xpansion of the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living space located 34' from the 929.4 ordinaiy high water mark where 75’ is required and requiring a hardcover variance of 4,413 s.f. (15.3%) where 5,S15 s.f. (20%) is existing and none is allowed as shown on E.xhibit A. Minnesota: 1. ? j. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2624. The propertv’ is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one acre in area. The property consists of 1.02 acre. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this renewal application on October 16, 2000 and recommended approval of the proposed varia.nces based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed additions would not further encroach on the OHWX. Page 1 of 5 i ml J\ :>T CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^ 4 5 50 2. 3. The configuration of the lot severely restricts the allowable building pad. 4. to'lt S“n"o1'ap^* «"tf:r prrn'rt'hraT:; xr - property rieht of the annliVcntc V ^^cessary to preserve a substantialr.47,;n:';rcSi:;x^7'i.^tX‘;? *• - D. recomniendations of tL^^pf^hiaVo appltcation including the findings and by the applicants and the effect of by City staff, comments and welt^'e of the^^imunS:' health, safety CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS grants variances to Municipal Zonillg'^CoL'^SecUon^lo"^^^^ Council hereby remodeling <md expansion of the existing re?iH.» i 1 and 2 to allow the required and hardcover of Ml5 s T( 5^ ,'f (20%) is existing and none is albwed ^ ^ "here 5,815 s.f 1.All plastic under landscaping must be removed in the O’ to 75’ Iake«;hnr,. i prior to any new construction. ' lakeshore setback 3. No ftmher variances will be granted to this propern- in the future. buTX peX«l:.e o„!v r"i"’ '*>' Wiicams, pemit within one veXf the d”w of S'uncf ‘ building expire on that date (October 23. 2001). approval, or this variance will Page 2 of 5 - !■—r-rr^trTi^Uia CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. '4 S 5 0 Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. 6.Any substantial changes or revisions to the plan in Exhibit A will require reconsideration by the City Council. .. .vi 'ivv., V Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular 23rd day of October, 2000. Property 0\vncr (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HEN^NEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of October, 2000, by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the Cit> of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was e.xecuted on behalf of the City. __ •^S*BACHELDOO^ Notary ’ Public Page 3 of 5 ) SS. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^ jS 5 0 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) OnthisjjiMayof foe said county, personally appeared / /r- . ' kno\%7i to me to be the Dersonr<;'i -----7"^' j —^^ ackno'vl,dg,dtohc(toy)»ecu«dU.csj"aThisVeiirS.td'S”* ‘ , 200i_ before me a Notary Public uithin and ^ / ~) /•* _________ instrument,and RACHEL OOOGE CKm notary Pli'SUC-MNMtSOTA My Conrlucn Ex;k« Jan. 31, SOS , .0 _Kct-'-r- IJcr- '• cC Nota.7 Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) for said counti^personaUy'lpVi^e? knov.-n to me to be the personfs'i d»«;rn'^!..^ ; j \ ^ ac^daowUdgad ,ha= he (they) exeeute'd the same « hhlS^oTefacfand d«f ^ RACHEL DODGE notary public • MWNESOTA Commiuion Jan. )i, 2001 .) '-rCH. C\<r' >'l NotJuy Public Page 4 of 5 • JD ui o ao la:<s mbssseto.\’.<a main entrt ENTRY R. ANTING ■ . .. i-r r^r^nrr^^ • amt»mC MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANTING COMNUSSION MEETING __________Monday. October 16, 2000 L ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Ch^r Elizabeth Hawn, Commissioners Jay Nygard, William Stoddard, Dale Lindquist. Janice Berg, and Daniel KJuth. Commissioner Sandra Smith was absent. The following represented City Staff. Senior Planning Coordinator Nlichael Gaffron, Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, and Recorder Jackie Young. City Council Representative Barbara Peterson was present. Chair Hawn called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS («1) #2624 ROGER OLSEN, 815 PARTEiNWOOD ROAD - REiNEWAL VARIANCES, 6:31 p.m. — 6:37 p.m. Roger Olsen, Applicant, was present. The Certificate of NIailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Bottenberg stated the Applicants arc requesting to reiK^^'^^^^lhat were granted in November, 1997, October, 1993, and October, 1999. would like to expand and remodel the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living space. Vari^ccs were approved by the City Council for lakeshorc setback and hardcover in the 0-75 zone. Variances were required for remodeling to the c.xisting residence that is located 34 from the lakeshore where 75* is required. A hardcover variance in the 0-75’ zone s required to allow 15.3 percent where 20 percent c.xists and zero is allowed Bottenberg stated the lot conforms to lot area, lot width, and side >*ard setback requirements, with the existing residence being located within the required lakeshore setback. The proposed plan reduces the amount of hardcover in the 0-75’ setback. Citv* Staff recommends renewing the variances for lakeshore setback and hardcover in the 0-75’ setback. Olsen stated he has renewed the variances in the past due to financial issues and may not be able to complete the project this year either. Olsen stated he would like to undertake this project in the future, and inquired whether it would be best to let the variances e.xpire or to continue to renew them. Hawn inquired what would happen if the variances were alloucd to lapse. GaSfron stated if the variances lapsed, the Applicant would need to submit a new plan and pay a new fee. Gaffron noted the Applicant is only required to pav one-half of the fee if he requests renewal. PAGEl ORONO fh^Socom^O^i MEETING Alonday, Octaber 16,2000 (*12624 Roger Olsen, Continued) H.™ con«„=„«d ,h. do« no. hnvo a problem ,vi:h renerving ,be variances. Lindquist suted ho also doos no. have a problem .vid. d,- renenal. There Were no public comments regarding this applit Roger rOlfen^'MSpTru'nS^ and hardcover in the 0-75 ’ setback V'OTE- A>*es 6* Nayst^keshorc se litation. setback Jim Gimi^and Doug Ault, Applicants, were pr.,„t The Ccrtificat^^f Mailing and Affidavit of Publicadon were noted. vari.ee .0 permit of Lake Ntie„,.Lv, ^ «ns.,m.mg.addil,orv,| hardcover uithin 75 • fee. of rh.feet of the OHWX the no parking signs have been erected, the Ci^'N^rnL along County Road 19. Since these lots. ^ 1--= creation of parking for each of had been increased in sizcl'o^ccommTdiM^^^^^^^^ parking area located within 75 ’ of the lake. ■ . - '''^^erger noted the entire lot is uStT;“A"' Hardship, ui,that these docks have existed for a numbero'f vel-. ^V><mary hardship being hvo parking spaces are needed sine® hardship being that a minimum ofi«o pariong spaces are needed since there areWn nr7 IT oemg mat a mimmui gravel parking area would allow the area to be bc--r Weinb>cfier stated the ;o park on the grass. rtuictained rather than t^jrmit one car A W 2000 tocfWlicatioubascd on d.:hardships listed in their Gmthcr stated Weinberger has represented the situadon quite well. and due to the fact that there PAGE 2 MINTITES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October 23, 2000 •(Jill) U2610 PAUL PUSCUZZI, 3320 NAVARRE LANE - AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 4543 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTIf)?rffO. 4548, a Re^solution approving a variance to allow placement of an accejsofy^ructure between the principal building and the front lot line where no accessojy^ffructures are normally allowed and 15 feet from the front lot line where 30fe<rfTs required for the property located at 3330 Navarre Lane. VOTE; Ayes 3, Nays Q. •(#12) #2621 JAMES BARTi RESOLUTION NO. 454! 75 TOGO ROAD - PRELIMI.NARY PLAT- Flint moved^^artsevere seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4549, a ResoltKipiT^proving preliminary plat subject to the conditions outlined in the Resolution. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. •(#13) #2624 ROGER OLSEN, 815 PARTENWOOD ROAD - RENEWAL VARI.ANCES RESOLUTION NO. 4550 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4550, a Resolution granting renewal of variances to allow the remodeling and expansion of the eristing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living space for property located at 815 Partenw ood Road, subject to the conditions outlined in the resolution. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. r ^t I ' - Applicatioo Date: 9/20/00 Completion Date: 9/20/00 60 Day Deadline: 11/20/00 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Departmeot Approval: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title Zoning Adminstrator/Planner Item Description:if2624 Roger Olsen 8 i 5 Panenwood Road Variance Renewal M' DATE: 10/23/00 _ ITEM NO.: / 3 Agenda Section: Zoning Zoning District: LR-IB One Family La.keshore Res-dential District (I Acre) Lot Area: 44,225 s.f. (1.02 acre) List of Exhibits: A Resolution B Notice of Platming Commission Action C Staff Report and Exhibits ofi0/I6.'2000 Application Summary: The applicants are requesting approved to renew variances that were granted on October 25, 1999, October 26, 1998 and November 24, 1997 to allow e.xpansion and remodeling of an existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living area. Applicants have indicated they hope to begin this project within the next year. 1. Section 10.22, Subd. 1(A): Lakesbore Setback Regulations: No principal building shall be located closer than 75 feet to the natural ordinary high water mark of a lake abutting the property. To allow remodeling per the plan in Exhibit A of the resolution where the residence is currently located 34' from the lakeshore where 34 ’ is proposed and 75 ’ is required. 2. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L)(1): Hardcover in 0-75’: Permit 4,413 s.f. (15.3%) hardcover in the 0-75' where 5,815 s.f. (20%) e.xists and 0 s.f. (0%) is allowed. PLANNING COMMISSION: The Planning Commission recommended by a 7 to 0 vote to: Approve the application as presented. STAFF RECO.MMEND.ATION: To approve the enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING RENEWAL OF VARIANCES _ TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2 FILE NO. 2624 ovNTicrs of the P^^lo^edtrs^S applicants") are "the City") and legally described as foll^v^ (hereinafter Lot 2. Block 2. Partenwood (hereinafter "the property"); and to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22 ^SubdiSl 1 of variances e.\pansion of the existing residence to inc’lude a fo. » . ^ ° ^ remodeling and located 34' from the 929.4 ordinary high water maV i additional living space hardcover variance of 4.413 s.f (15.30/i) where 5 8?5 s f nQo//' " as shown on Exhibit A. ’ ^ existing and none is allowed Minnesota: ’ THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Oroao, findings This application was reviewed as Zoning File /^2624. J. The property is located in the LR-IR r •! r i Zoning District requiring one acre in area Thl Lakeshore Residential 5 *"®rea. The property consists of 1.02 acre.* a------y i.u-L acic. following findings ‘ based upon the 1.The proposed additions would not further encroach on the OHVVL. Page 1 of 5 2. The configuration of the lot severely restricts the allowable building pad. 3. The amount of hardcover in the O' to 75' ladceshore setback would be reduced from 20% to 15.3%. 4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this propert>' are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that fitanting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The Cit>’ Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safetv’ and welfare of the communitv-. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodeling and expansion of the existing residence located 34' from the OH\VL where 75' is required and hardcover of 4,415 s.f. (15.3%) in the O' to 75* lakeshore setback where 5,815 s.f (20%) is existing and none is allowed. 1. 2. 3. All plastic under landscaping must be removed in the O' to 75' lakeshore setback prior to any new construction. No further variances will be granted to this property in the future. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (October 23, 2001). Page 2 of 5 4. variMce shairco^"timt ”^a^^oh^^ conditions of this terminate any authority wanted he e‘ u automatically misdcmtanor ^ =''^‘ t" punishable as a 5.otrsri'^^roo Tr^ ■» ■*’'assigns, hereby agree to the remra* aj^selves, their heirs, successors and •he property. ^ ' ""'““S «“' "“'“io- ■" <he Chain of Title of r«L'“'bfrcV°Vo»:r meeting held on the 23rd^ day of'octSih 2000*^ *' °™"°' a: a regular ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mavor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. 23rd dav of City.municipal corporation and said Z on behalf of the Notary Public Page 3 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. ) On this day of 200 _before me aNotary Public within and for said county, personally appeared__________________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notar>’ Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )ss. ) On this day of , 200 before me a Public within a; for said county, personally appeared____________________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing insunment, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notar>' Public Page 4 of 5 LAKE .VlINi\eTa\’.<A C ♦-* • •-4•o w MAIM GNTi;!Y ENTRY PI.ANTING • • • .0% ir-^ rr r"M r«i A^^irisic CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 612-249-4600 ZONING FILE U 2624 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSIC i ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: October 17,2000 TO:Roger Olsen 815 Partenwood Road Long Lake, MN 55356 COPIES: T\TE OF APPLICATION: Variance Renewal DATE OF MEETING: October 16,2000 VOTE: 6 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the followin*’: Approval as submitted. Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council on October 23,2000 at 7:00 p.m. If )0u uesire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. TO: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Wendy Bonenberg. Zoning Adrainistrator/Planner DATE: October 16,2000 SUBJECT;<r2624 Roger J. Olsen 815 Partenwood Road Variance Renewal ~ Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre! Lot Area: 44,225 s.f. (1.02 acre) / ListorE.\hibits A Application B Report from previous renewal (10/25/99) C Minutes from previous meetings (PC- 10/18/99, CC- 10/25/99) D Res. 4367 The applicants are applying to renew variances that were granted on November 24 1997 October 26, 1998^d October 25, 1999. The plans are to expand and remodel the e.xistbs residence to inciude a four stall gairage and additional living area. \ ariances were approved for lakeshore setback and hardcover in the 0-75' zone. Variances were required for remodeling to the existing residence that is located 34' from the lakeshore where 75' IS required^Also h^dcover in the 0-75' zone where 4,413 s.f. (15.3%) proposed, 5,815 s.f. (20%) exists and 0 s.f. (0%) IS allowed. :>.i. v-w/o,; Staff Recommendation: s.f. {2M). The proposed plan is for 6,595 s.f (14.9%) total hardcover on th.e lot. Staft recommends renewing the variance for Kkeshore setback and hardcover in the 0-75' setback i‘2624 RogtrJ. Ohtn 8Ii Parumvood Variance Rental page ! a 20Z‘4Application Date Recerved 9 /Oc/cT) Amount Paid /S'O. ct\ ^/5£W©(;aL-CITY OF ORONO - VARUNCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S250.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee SI50.00 (no change &om origmal application) Variance for non-conforming structures S2S0.00 /J;er-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFOI^LATION Site Address Poh'T^yntroci/ CDt'orm j>5*^ X. Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) OS'-il'7-^ O-'i V? 0/D'J3 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey Date ProgedJC^Acquired ______5~ - ______________________ I (do)<(do na l)> also own the adjacent parcels of laud. Present use of property: X residential ___pother (specify)_________ Zoning District: ' in - 0 V. T LR- \R_____________ (montb'year) 'u % 7' APPLICANT Name Rcn^> J- Aidress: sVC fh> 0^^■^'ER (if different than applicant) Name ___________• _________ Phone fhome l 7:>0' 7 711 Phone (work ) r t? - H y; City:Zip:_£5UOl Phone (home). Phone (work). Address:City:Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: ___ Estimated Construction Cost S (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback:Front Side Olier (specif-) / . Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:. (attach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBi\nXTALS 1. •7 AppUcation Form »'.. '•» «j pf.. »* fe^TiS”S«’:•■”? °'~ "•■ llr=3SHr’.S“',;ss?.Si-s^^ List of the legal names (bclude marital stams^of'^n' ^PLIC^^’T'S SIGNATURE Ar^istraror. a^«s ,Tp“ '^S'toe *’>' '^' Zoning U^o.- consul,an, a.panaas incurrod in rev ! fo^^“' fee poymem) mfo.-map.on supplied is true and correc. ,o d.r;sro?“Ms,Sftwi:dgr Applicant’s Signature ^ 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. . ^ ____________ Commssion Meefeg.' pILS^gTo^^sL'tleeU^ *' P'enaing monm. Applicants must be present at all sche/*l a' of each Commission and CouncU. If a„ applicant s^w Platmlng ma.<e t-iangements to have an authored aaen, aSTa ' meedng, please & Zoning Office of this change p.-ior to ti meed^g. “' °“ Building •* O.ppvT/v;'^B Application Date: Completion Date: 60 Day Deadline: 9/22/99 9/22199 11/21/99 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 10/20/99 ITEM NO.Ip Department Approval: Administrator Review ed: Name Wendy Bottenberg Title Assistant Zoning Administrator/Planner Agenda Section: Item Description:#f2531 Roger J. and Elizabeth Olsen 815 Partenwood Road Variance Renewal Zoning District:LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area:44,225 s.f (1.02 acres) Application: The applicants are requesting approval to renew variances that were granted on November 24, 1997 and October 26, 1998 to allow expansion and remodeling of an existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living area. The requested variances are for: 1. To allow remodeling per the plan in Exhibit A of the resolution where the residence is currently loc!*.ted 34' from the lakeshore where 34' is proposed and 75' is required. 2. To allow 15.3% (4,413 s.f.) of hardcover to be located within the 0'-75' lakeshore setback w here (20%) 5,815 s.f. is existing and none is allowed. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: To approve renewal of the requested variances on a vote of 7-0. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To approve die enclosed resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING RENEWAL OF VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 ANT) 2 FILE NO. 2531 WHEREAS, Roger Olsen and Elizabeth Olsen (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 815 Partenwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City”) and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 2, Partenwood (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for the renewal of variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodeling and e.xpansion of the e.xisting residence to include a four stall garage and additional living space located 34' from the 929.4 ordinary high water mark where 75' is required and requiring a hardcover variance of 4,413 s.f. (15.3%) where 5,815 s.f. (20%) is e.xisting and none is allowed as shown on Exhibit A. Minnesota; NOW', THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2531. 2. The propert>- is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one acre in area. The property consists of 1.02 acre. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this renewal application on October 18, 1999 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed additions would not further encroach on the OHWL. Page 1 of 5 2. J. The configuration of fite lo, aeverely remicB the allowable building pad. The amount of hardcover in the n* tn •tc i t l reduced from 20% to 15.3%. lakeshore setback would be grantmg the variances would not^adverselv ^ zonmg distnct; that pose a fire hazard or other dancer to conditions, light, air nor serve as a convenience to thf applican^^Tu? demonstrable hardship or difficult^^ k neV ^ necessary to alleviate a property right of the applicants- aL^d would ^ substantial mtem of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan ^nhe at^ *' r«:,,ST„dSo “'“ft -h' and by the applicants and the Sof .r:!!’”"' 7°".“ conunems and weifare of the community-. ^ variance on the health, safety CONCLUSIO.VS. ORDER AND CO.NDITIONS grants variances rn'lEpaTzOTi^rCoL^L^^^^^ •°™"° "«'b.v remodeling and e.xpansion of the e>cistino ta -d Subdivisions I and 2 to allow the required and hardcover of 4,415 sf 05 sV/Zn "here 75’ is (20%) is existing and none is aRowed ^ ® «'b^'b where 5,815 s.f. 1 P^ilrttrnt c“fsS^^ ~ «• •» '^<«b-e setbach 2. J. No further variances will be granted to this property in the future. but are P'r^ssive mly ™ ewcU^^^^ r°‘ Page 2 of 5 4. 5. Violation of or non-compliance \vith any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The imdersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. 6. Any substantial changes or revisions to the plan in Exhibit A will require reconsideration by the City Council. Adopted by the Cit>’ Coimcil of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 25lh day of October, 1999. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property' Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 25th day of October. 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mavor and Cirv Clerk of the Citv- of Orono, a NIinnesota mumcipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City-. Notary Public Page 3 of 5 • • STATE OF NHNNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. Oathis day of 199__ before me a Notary Public within and forsaid county, personally appeared NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. On this day of said couoty. p«soaaUy~lipeared----------->59_ bafore ma a Notary Pitblic wiihin ard for SS'nowI!d^,VJ’h?,*w,rT°® '^“‘cribad in and who execuwd the foregoing mstnrmaa.aod acknowladsad that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deal NOTARY PUBUC Page 4 of 5 • • LAXS MINNETONKA < M Xi MAIN CNTCY • TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenbeig, Assistant Zoning Administrator/Planner October 8,1999 #2531 Roger J. Olsen 815 Partenwood Road Variance Renewal - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR*1B One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 Acre) Lot Area:44,225 s.f. (1.02 acre) This application requires the following variances: Section 10.22, Subd. 1, Lakeshore Setback Regulations Section 10.22, Subd. 2, Lakeshore Hardcover Requirements Section 10.24, Subd. 5(B), LR-IB Lot Requirements Application Summary: The applicants received variances to expand and remodel the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living area. Variances were granted on November 24, 1997 and October 26,1998 for lakeshore setback to be located 34' from the lakeshore where 75 is required and for hardcover in the 0'-75' setback where 20% (5,815 s.f) was existing and 15.3% (4,413 s.f.) was proposed. »2JJ/ Roger J, Olsen 815 Partensvood Vcriance Renewal PC-lO/8s99 page-l analysis Lot Area and LR-IB District Standards Lot Area Lot Width Street Yard Side Yard Lakeside Yard 1 acre 140 ft.35ft.10 ft.75 ft. Subject Property Lot Area and Yards Lot Area Lot Width 1.02 acres 225 ft. at 75’ setback; 357 ft. at OHWL Street Yard ft. (existing) 35 ft. (proposed) Side Yard 45 ft. (existing) 20 ft. (proposed) i'odadon ^'mSre “dfvJdT-b Ti- *« garage was placed 20' instead oflO' from 4e sWe yarfse6al“ Hardcover Distance from Shoreline 0'-75 ’ 75'-250' Total Area in Setback 28,810 sq. ft. 15,415 sq. ft. Existing Hardcover 5,815 sq. ft. (20%) 2,995 sq. ft. (19%) Allowed None 25% Proposed Variance Hardcover Requested 4,413 sq. ft. (15.3%) 15.3% 3,600 sq. ft. (23%) None The applicant was granted a hardcover variance m n- 7^- c t. hardcover from 20% to 15.3%. ' ^ setoack to reduce the' amount of “2 SSI Roger J. Olsen SIS Pcrtenwood ycrianee Renewal PC-lQ/S/99 pagi ‘2 Statement of Hardship : See Exhibit B Staff Recommendation: The zoning lot confoims to lot area, lot width, and side yard setback requirements. The existing residence is located within the required lakeshore setback. The proposed plan reduces the amo'jnt of hardcover in the 0'-75* setback. The existing amount of hardcover on the site is 10,228 s.f. (23%). The proposed plan is for 6,595 s.f. (14.9%) total hardcover on the lot. Staff recommends renewing the variance for lakeshore setback and hardcover in the 0 ’-75' setback. Attachments A Application B Applicant's letter C Architect's letter D Elevation E Site Plan F Hardcover worksheets G Minutes from previous meetings (10/20/97, 11/17/97,11/24/97) H Res. 4004 1 Minutes from previous meetings (10//19/98,10/26/98) J Res. 4185 ^2331 RogtrJ. Olsen 813 Partenwood t'aricnce Renewal PC-10/&99 pagt-3 • • A AppUcation Date Received " Amount Paid /SO^ CITY OF ORONO - VAJUANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S250.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) ^ Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 —s^ (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures S250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address HoAi> Oc.c/^0 rnr^f CS- ^30003Property Identification Number (PJ.D.)_ Attach legal description to applicadon if not included on required survey. Date Proper^ Acquired_________________________________________^(month/year) I (do) (do*j ^) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present tise of property: X residendd Zoning District: other (specif'). jC-A^.zi LA-tB APPLICANT A-F. Name J- A.ddress: A/'T i^/i/g/yAVvo >^> Ro/h^ 0\^7'>'ZR (if different than applicant) Name _____________ Phone (home) ^1/~7 73S_____ ____ Phone (work) V/ 7 - '/30^____ City; <g/gc ’A.^c________Zip: 5~S'3SO Phone (homeX Phone (work)_ i . V. Address:City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail; __ Estimated Construedon Cost S (attach addidonal sheets if necessary) t: VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore VL Other (specify) ^r/£i-.'AL HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or pracdcal difficulty or unusual property condidons prevendng compliance with Zoning Code requirements:_____________________________________ (attach addidonal sheets if necessa^'y) required SUBiVniTALS • •% ' ^ ApplicaUon Form caJcuIatioa. as „,4d. ^ a/dWoo"n'^„'l’“"'’'°? “■* reproduction. ’ one (1) copy 854" x 11" for Tnn#^errar»Vit#% «..____ , 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. — injs would include* r ' V. — r—Writh an interest irx As an addendum to this application olL« ^ current owner(s). “j^s-Sr—”•■•'"'•*•■ M.ts'SXT.zass',ass'-, A ^3 O T Y A ^ ^ M «» 0\VNER'S SIGNATURE i ^lun a_n venfication of this request. _ I M I MOwner's Signature 7^^ ,--------------------------Date Co^«!orM«tog' p1L^“cotm^^oQ*M 'ita *' nisrisr.s£';s “ ras *■ ”•" “ rac September 22,1999 To: The City of Orooo From: Roger Olsea ■ Subject: Renewal of Variance for my home at 815 Partenwood Road. I am requesting a one-year extension of the e.xisting variance on my property due to the followina circumstances: * Several general contactors have turned down my project after initiating the bid process due to a lack of tune and their inability to get reliable commitments from their sub contractors. After receivmg a firm bid four weeks ago from a general contractor willing to do the project, the price is over one hundred thousand dollars higher than my initial expectations and financial ability at this time. This represents a 25% increase in construction costs over the initial estimates. 1 Thank you for your considering this renewal variance. Sincerely, '.A-'- Roger Olsen c. 5 November, 1997 ALEXANDER To the City Planners of Orono: In response to your inquiry about the extent of remodelina After being on the market for over a year, the Olsen ’s purchased the property In June with the intent of immediatelv iTiU°r?o^ house. The house has a sagging roof that IS in need of re-construction. The structure Is of 2x4 v/all constructiori & not up to current energy codes, is in need of window replacement, the porch foundLion is In need of flnuneeding much updating to pass any building inspection for current code compL.ce. r^eas whVra^ hrefbeing re-built. The lower level Is walkout and h« f ’ foundation will be either have 2x6 studrpigaSed the wall. Rebuilding the Sfa rnu^h nl?? ^ v/hat we hope to do. The same ontinne ni hiethod of remodeling and main floor walls that will remain The nain^r?"* applied to the lakeside further than^lenTcodir 1,^ atlakeside further than current codes allow ^ cantilevered at back and re-build it without cantilevers Given that Th ? " wall needs to be re-built to eliminate thfcantilllir^f hf/htn®'"wan needs to be re-built to ehmS fh» . ^''’® "*°'® "'®'"'a'" by contractors to rebuild the floor- fir i=veral rlTsoni' to im®®" ®“99®®'®® eliminate rebuilding of sub-standard a^eis to ^elimTnate rebuiidlnrot ^®®®°®®- >® co'nstr. a level to current ceiling heights, and allow lo deatlBensThil r' now been incorporated into our olan<; The spans. This concept has and a totally new roof truss system installed ' ^ heights will be raised o\trlarn1“e She iSittoilafv^rfaTceT^ please feel free to contact the Olsens or mysetf. ‘'p®®''®"® " " \“:\L 5' r:r AC D£5:c Sincerely,£‘.5TL\%£r^££ V. mzat.\ (612) 4rj.j"r rw (9ii)4-j.i::: r'' ■Rev IS eb LWC€SlD\5 &L€\/Mlow ,<r^ . p- "'3 ' ■ I - 7'/^ tf- c?V5/ o el I balio^'t i-AKE^ioe R^>pe»JL-ggvje^nu^^=»^ OL^(R4 pC44C>©4Ce r» »l ■fci.xfci* >iC. l'lJ20/97 10:04 FAX 812 473 3222 ALEXA.NDER DESIGN tlAKDCOVER CALCULATIOr^ "VORKSHEET f 75-250'250-5QQ*(lof ' existing WARDCOVrn iv mvr A.House X • •LeniajO • ^ X• • • ••X• • X B.Caxagt • ■ •*• X • C.Driveway •X X D.2 ids walk X X • E. • Patlo/Deck X X F. • Ltsd5ca;<e X Uadcflain • X 3y Plastic •% G.Other • i Wide*s.? s.i S.J S.r . S.r TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERl'Y AREA IN ZONE ________ ‘ -f- B X ICO - PROPOSED KAmPCO'VTR TN VOSTr A. H3U5« ________ X B. C. Driveway D. SidewaUc E. Pailo/Uesk F. Ludscase Ucderlaia _ By Plastic cicKlG. _ G. Other X X total hardcover in zone TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ______________ + B jr*=5r) S.F ________ S.5 S.: ______ S.r S.F _________ -b.r I^^o4^(0 S.F _______ S.i __________ S.I S.I g?^ft|g=b S.i s.'t Tj l.tgSO S.t A S S 5 s. s. S. s. s s s s 5 s s X 100 - '2>S.^IC? S AluJtOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET setback ON., ^ Lcn|iK^ I B.Garage C.Driveway D.StdewaDc E.Patto/Deck F.Landscape Underlain By Plastic G.Other X X X Width p 500.1000-(^0^^ -22SaQ_s.F. X X X X X X X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. Ivuio^A tv~> A\ s P ----LCgt^ S.F. total hardcover in zone TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B- "T X ICO Lt.-.j'Ji B. Garage X X X width D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck F. Landscape Undcrlaia By Plasdc G. Other X X X X X X X X X total hardcover m zone total property area in zone -----------------+ B X 100 » o.r, S.F, X5 S.F. B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SS S.F. =S.F. •*2 .^^=7 S.F. •« S.F. ~ iq % ='h?Dn _ S.F. C3 S.F. =S.F. S=S.F. s=S.F. e S.F. «S.F. S3 IrvlviV-rl \r\ Cf S.F. -------------------------------------S.F. -[&n S.F. »S.F. B A S.F. S.F. S.F. B n S.F. S.F. -__LS,4lS-S.F. % minute )F the ORONO planning CO^ ISSION MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 20,1997 (#12 - #2304 Deborah ShoU - Continued) Scnroeder moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2304. Vote: Ayes 6, NaysO. ... ^ (#13) #2305 ROGER AND ELIZABETH OLSEN, 815 PARTENWOOD ROAD - VARLANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 10:45-11:03 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Dressier reported that the application is for re.Tiodeling and expansion of an existing residence to include an attached 4-stall garage and loop driveway requiring a lakeshore setback, and hardcover variances in the 0-75' and 75-250' lakeshore setbacks. A revised survey was presented. Bressler indicated that due to the lot configuration, the building pad on the lot is restricted. Staff recocunends approval of the application subject to conditions noted which include elimination of the loop portion of the driveway, plastic under landscaping, and with the notation that no further hardcover would be allowed in the flimre. Bressler reported that the applicant has agreed to remove the plastic under the landscaping. Olsen said the plans have changed due to the homeowners’ association covenants requiring a 20' side setback. The plan currently calls for a 10' side setback. He would like to move tne design down 10' to satisfy this requirement. Hawn said in order for this to occur, a new plan would have to be submitted. Bressler noted that hardcover calculations would change. Berg questioned what existing foundation and walls would be used. The existing foundation and walls to be used were noted. The house is a walk-out stjie. Lindquist said he would agree in principle to this change but would require reviewing the plan. Olsen said there was a time limit problem for beginning construction this year. Hawn asked about the elimination of the loop a.nd location of the well. Olsen said he has reduced hardcover 1185 s.f. in the 0-75’ setback with the elimination of driveway and retalrung walls. The applicant s designer asked if approval could be based on percentages and changes meeting the percentages required. MINUTE; («13 - #2305 Schroeder indicated he WQtiW»„„ » what the impacts are. Schroeder s^IcvdliM* Berg said she would like to see . asked that the hardcover ca!cuIatiot^V<!S^d^nce be given to the appUcaat. Lmdquir. Commission must review the Planning •appucation tnat wiU be seen by the CouncU. Schroadar questioned the need for 4 garage stalls. 75' laJceshOT s^'ac*' City dees not liJce to see any structure ssithin the the covenanterss'^id^“ onU^lIJ^a J v''' >>}' apace. Ltndqutst suggested the architecturai design °e coosid«e?ar°eU.''’“ Schroeder moved, Berg seconded, to table Application ^2305. association. He sub^nS a°etter'fom°tt,r^ ">’"“=‘^’'8 '*>' homeou-ners' . restrictive covenants. He noted their committee regarding their He said the homeowners’ association Ivn^f than those of the City, lot. A copy of the letter sslTuWa m -a-T' 'm much distance be^veen the homes as possible'’ ^sociatio.n prefers to see as Vote; Ayes 6, Nays 0. ■ TheAfadavitofPublie^^aCertifieati^.T 'of Mailing were rioted. The Applicant was present. x Photos were sho-.%-n of the nt^rtj'. \ minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17,1997 \ Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ^ (#3) #2305 ROGER AND ELIZABETH OLSEN, 815 PARTENWOOD ROAD - VARIANCES - 6:47-7:03 P.M. The applicant and architect, Kathr>-n Alexander, were present. Bressler presented pictures of the propertj*. Tee applicant is proposing remodeling and e^^ansion of the residence to include a 4-staIl attached garage. The aoplicatioa requires variances for lakeshore setback and hardcover in the 0-75' setback. There is no problem wita average lakeshore setback as noted in the topographical map. The residence currently has a 3-stall side loading garage. The driveway conSguration has been enanged. The existing residence encroaches the lakeshore setback. The allowable building space is limited by the property. Only a portion of the existing inundation will remain; further information is included m the packet. The total hardcover is proposed at 19%. Tne 1.02 acre property is located in the one acre zoning district with 3/4 acre in the 6-75' setback. The street setback is also restricted. Bressler reported Staft recommended approval subject to maintaining a 34' lakeshore setback from the designated OHW where 75' is required. Encroachment on the lakeshore setback will not be increased by the improvements. Staff recommends hardcover be main tained at a maximum of 14.5% in the 0-75' lakeshore setback where 20% is existing, 16% is proposed, and none is allow'ed. Bressler indicated that the amount of existing hardcover excluding landscaping underlain by plastic is 14.5%. This figure could largely \ ?. \ la*c.p,uad«Iambypte,icha,e0 7JM. u S‘*ftKcomm«dsaa commaacmaa. of na. cooa.uc.ion. Th, aT '“ "' " “ alao racoounaoda .hat no fi«h„ haadcova- v!'T future. ‘ to tWs property in the Mr. Olsen, in noting the difficult lot snid h. c than the proposed 16%'to 14.5«/a. Ms ai ' ^ t-’^* ^»ardcover further 25% allowed. *°tal hardcover is less than the • • °« not juatify t".a addiUooal hardcover. Lindquiataaidhe agreed noting ftera is a la-,. , , of the opinion that &e appiicant shou'd • ° “n ® shucture on the property and is PP anouid marntah. ft= ,4.5./. hardcover maximum. Stoddard asked Bressler to exolain th. no.edd.ataaauggeated,.hehardcoversruMTh'"‘"'"r"""^'""“^" McMillan that he arrived at the I4.50/, ^ i^ormed pi«ic a,, ft. ftift omted hun that if the residence was new i i ^•K4i [STmi«1«L4 i^^WsLiSi rifYilC.*[iStlfil r«UM4I«l > \ ^ 7f)* .' M fr w A ' .:• ■r«K MINUTE )F THE REGULAR ORONO CIT COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 24,1997 . 4* ZONING ADMINISTRATORS REPORT ^2279 G. MARC AND TRACY WHllEHEAD, 1220 LYMiCN AVE RIXONSIDERPRELBnNARY PLAT APPROVAL / Mrs. V/mHhead v,-asp>estQt. GaSroa reporteclsthat discussioa was t«ld at tiie last Council xn^ilng regarding the park dedication fee. PuH^^t to Staff discussions. Staff recommepds reopening the preliminary plat resoluHm to enable Staff to draft for incopjioratioa into the resolution addidonal findings relateclv^o the nexus aadproportion^i^' issues related to the park fee. M'S. Whitehead had no cotamehts. She verified Staff and Council reviewed her letter faxed to the City Office. Gaffion ib4icated th^/€^ was received on this date and cis-ibuted for Council review. • Jabbour informed Whitehead that the Gounhil plans on acting on the applicafion in a timely manner. Mrs. Whitehead sard!she appreciates that. Jabbour said the Council must also protect the interests oftne City. « Jabbour moved, Petersonponded, to reconsider Res^tioaflr3966 for purposes noted. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0.^ Jabbour moved, J-imTseconded, to duact Staff to draft CndingsV^ nexus and proportionalftyfor inclusion in Resolution #3966. B arett ycrified that the findings will hclude the nexus aid proportionality of the ' subdj>ision*s impact on paks. >'ote; Ayes 3, Nays 0. (#4) #2305 ROGER AND ELIZABETH OI.SEN, 814 PARTENWOOD ROAD - VARLANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 4003 The applicaits and achitcct were present. Vai Zomeren reported that the 1.02 acre property is located m the LP.-IB Residential District aid meets the m.inimum lot requirements. Pictures were presented of the property. The existing house is located within 75’ of the lakeshore. The lot is unusual as the lot e.xtends along the lake but is nanow in its depth. The application is a proposal for a 4-car gaage aid add.tioas to the residence. A patio with pavers currently exists. The Planning CommI sion unanimously recommended approval of the 41' variance for la-:es.“.ore setback for the residence 34' fiom the lakeshore and 15.3hadcover variance in the 0-/5’ setback where 20/'a exists and none is allowed. " fr2305 T T*!* ____;cr and EUzat^ •v> Jcth OIscQ - Continued) Tie applicant had no additional commcntj, Jabbour asked if any of th^ ^ hardcover with structural hadct “rv2f«pla«cacnt of non-structuxal Jabbour explained the issu- of where illegally noa-coofos4iino hSv^' applications have been review-dbecoming leaallv _______ ? na^dcover is approved as oar. of an flnr,Tre,-,.:._ •; va Fro^erT^es. Jabbour said when the non confn . permanent structure Plaunmg UsU-rciision assumes i^„ f hardcover is reviewed, the process but bar been added sb-e 'trough the permit was maiB. 'ae City has not verified if on the propetf appiicaion rma -it hardcover is ...-a r. P™P«ty has changed sbee the last arts used for tradbg for additional structure. ■ Tv a f n A 1 -r _ j ^ original permits terfiLued ‘^^sted when the • • Jabbour said his point ref*-T^M ♦^ to otner situations. * CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 0 0 4 . A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARLANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2 FILE NO. 2305 WHEREAS, Roger and Elizabeth Olsen (hereinafter "the applicants") are ov,r.ers of the property located at 815 Partenwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 2, Partenwood (hereinafter "the property"); and W'HEREAS, the applicant has applied to.the City for variances to M'anicipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodeling and expansion of the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living space located 34' tom the 929.4 ordinary* high water mark where 75' is required ar.d requiring a hardcover variance of 4,413 s.f. (15.3%) where 5,815 s.f. (20%) is existing and none is allowed as sho\%n on Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL\ED by the City. Council of Orono, MLnnesota: 1. 2. j. FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2305. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one acre in area. The propcrtj* consists of 1.02 acre. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 17, 1997 and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed additions would not further encroach on the OHWL. Page 1 of 5 r • ••• 4. CITVof OROJVO resolution os the city council WO- —4 r\ r\ ^ ssducss ftoia MK*b "ly^ ° '=E=sE™s sEibsTk uutitS bs £4;«vSSiiSS SSi'Lrl'i. ^ d«Ser to rLtw light, eir nor serve as a convenience to tri annlfr! i.^ Property; would not mer-Iy demonstrable hardship or difficult- r^ecessary to allevia^- a property right of the applicif 2^’ " ^ub^itia!—-.. tbN, cS «i.'^ss^Kis,* *'» “ by th, app|i,„a and welfare of the comrau.-i;tv ^ CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS prior to any r.e'wcon!Sn"'“''^ >^<«bo:e sttiac!: S. 1. •n J. ~ EE-b., ..I b. „„ ,. »s"'h“SS ““‘.s »'*?••“>•■■» ■«•»«,, .„j„„ permit within on. b' hr aoolieatinn <■„. JC^ b« are Par^ritaile O.V irrnS'^r"o" -d* the applicants permit witWn one year of the'date of'cor ’n'* ‘^’P’‘“'roa for a building ■ P're on that date (November i4,'l99j) ®r this variance will Paje2of 5 . CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 4 0 0 4NO. 4.Violatioa of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, mdcrstood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in tne Chain of Title of the property. Adopted by the Citj* Council of the Cit>* of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 24th day of November, 1997. xi ATjffiS:; Dorothy M. City Clerk GabrieV^abbour, Mayor'^ Prop^ Owner (s) STATE Or MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day o>. November, 1997 by Gabriel Jabbour and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and Cit>* Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said inscument was executed on behalf of the City. !i Noti-J PubU'i WWffPJBUMBWBOtt 1I leiefiOouKiY ] \J Page 3 of 5 • • - CITY of OROJVO resolution of the city council NO. _ 4 0 04 - STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. for soid counqr, porsooallvl;^ff*??'=‘^^%r-; known to me acknowledged ih NOI^Y PUBLIC <-<1^ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) OaHus^____day of .. ^55--b«^oremeaNotaiyPublic withii INUTARY PUBLIC ?a«e 4 of 5 ri> »^AJV^iTkii£J • • rV o V V o 4J • Y. V> Ula a: lU Ia < rl • n • n ; •-> * ^ . ri I '!> y. U« •-4 O • • r> H <r^« Ok •H •-« H LAKS iVllNNETON'.<A 3QlJ / / V /A _main cntcy FMTPY PI. ANTING ' -----;...................... r-r'CM-r-sx r.i amtiMC • 0 X ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, October 19,1998 ROLL: The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Sandra Smith. William Stoddard. Elizabeth Hawn. Dale Lindquist. Commissioner Charles Schroeder arrived at 6:45 p.m.. and Commissions Janice Berg and Lili McMillan were absent. The following represented City Staff: City Planner/Zoning Administrator Elizabeth Van Zomeren, Assistant Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger. Senior Planning Coordinator Mike Gaffron, and Recorder Jackie Young. Chair Smith called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. RENEWALS AND AMENDMENTS: PUBLIC HEARINGS (#1) ^24Sl<sJOANN JUNDT, 1400 BR^GKETS POINT ROAD - VARIANCE RENEWAL. 6:32 p.m. 6:34 p.m. There v/ere no public cpelrrl^ Lindquist mpv^ Stoddard seconded>OsqMrove Application #2421,1400 Bracketts Point Road,rendwal of setback and hardcover variances per the findings and conditions of A # e • Mm M As ... __ ___Resolutions ^ (#2) #2431 ROGER OLSEN, 815 PARTEMV/OOD - VARIANCE RENEWAL, 6:34 p.m. - 6:3S p.m There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2431,815 Partenv/ood, renewal of variances for lakeshore setback and hardcover in the 0-75* setback per the finding:, and conditions of Resolution #4004. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#3)"2434.C^OL OLSON. KID'S ART SCHOOL. 2180 NORTH SHORE AMENDMENTj-icJ^.m. - 6:40 p.m. Carol Olson was present. Van Zomeren stated the Applicant is requesbpg;^ amendment to the conditional use permit to allov/ a tipi to be located on the properly for e^pc^lionai>»p^ses. vrhich Is considered to be an accessory use to the art school. Lindquist Inquired whelh^h^pplicant had any concerns with City Olson statedsjve-^^ fine with the recommended conditions. Th^^e^re no public comments. recommendations, Page 1 (#2430 Paul Phillips, Continued) renewal - RE^Q]^TI0N N^ " VARUNCE andlTo^'^^SOrUTIO^^ 815 Partenwood Road. E^^SmENT^UBm 4755/4775 BAYSTDE ROAD/ Laurie lih^Greenneld Corporarion. and Jin. DeBcrg. were present. resolution to ^^^odate^a ^ ^he final plat Lot 1. The private d\eway element Zt ^ «o/ovnde access to final plat, which shov^^utlot for all three"ln mM^\ resolution for the Staff IS generally not in fav^f private drivewav Van Zomeren stated may result. driveway easements duyb the possible problems that Applicant ap1jly°for'"aToTlinTrrrran^^ suggested that theLot 3. «2rrang,m.^wh.ch w^ require a lot width variance for Jim DeBerg. 1551 Hunter Lane M-dina • . ow-ner and offered the private driveway easemeJStAl^ property what was originally approved in the Resoliifir/ n conflict with building official that he could not have a pX dri«wf^«™''*« L=ude Lond.cn s.a.cd ,he, vv.c. ona^4c, cou.d no. g.anSL,. .^vewa, casc.cn. Mayo, dahbou. a.a.cd ,h. Ci.y do^o. officiaiiy ..cognia. a p.iva.cX«y weeds the minimim'lot™iz^^*'' f'™' driveway easeraMt>«(^Iot still rearrfng^TOrfoTthe'm^f^t ” CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 1 S .S______ A RESOLUTION GRANTING REiNEWAL OF VARLA.NCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2 FILE NO. 2431 WHEREAS, Roger Olsen and Elizabeth Olsen (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 815 Panenwood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter ?the City") and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 2, Partenwood (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for the renewal of variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodeling and expansion of the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living space located 34' from the 929.4 ordinary high water mark where 75' is required and requiring a hardcover variance of 4,413 s.f. (15.3%) where 5,815 s.f (20%) is existing and none is allowed as shown on Exhibit A. Minnesota: 1. 2. 3. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FENTDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2431. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one acre in area. The propert>t consists of 1.02 acre The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this renewal application on October 19, 1998 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon tne following findings: 1, The proposed additions would not ftinher encroach on the OHWX. Page 1 of 5 CITY of ORONO resolution of the city council NO. ^ 4 1 fi .fa The configuration of the lot severely restricts the allowable building pad. Su4rfrom°20%“oald b. '■ 0" prop.., granting the variances would not ^adversely a^ecrt^ffT district; that pose a fire hazard or other danger to neiehborin/^'^ conditions, light, air nor ser\e as a convenience to the aonlicants merely demonstrable hardship or difficult^^ 5 n!’ ^ ** necessary to aUevnate a property right of the atiplicants- aSd preserve a substantia! .ntent of the Zoning Code and ^ompreh'lte pi‘i recommendationfof tL^S^fnTc^^^ including the findings and by the applicants and the eF« "of and welfare of the commuiS^ ^ the health, safety CONCLUSrO.NS, ORDER .^\D CONDITIONS grants variances to ^^unicipa'!Vo'ni^^Co°dVs^^^^^ hereby remodeling and expansion of the ^stinfreri^^^^^^^^^ ' 2 to allow the required and hardcover of 4.415 s.f fiswv »t 1 ^rom the OH\VL where 75’ is (20%) is e.xisting and none is allowed. ^ « 0 to 75’ lakeshore setback whe.-e 5,815 s.f. priof t^^y"removed in the O’ to 75' lakeshore setback 2. No fuaher variances will be granted to this property in the future. but are pe>^tssfve^ordy^^ property not with the applicants, permit within one year^of the date^of application for a building expire on that date (October2V 1999) ' Page 2 of 5 Ll, • • CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^4 1 ft S 4. variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the properly. 6.Any substantial changes or revisions to the plan in Exhibit A will require reconsideration by the City Council. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 26th day of October, 1993. ATTEST: ^t'^/l (/a Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabriel'^bbour, Mayor \ Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HEN'NTEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 25th day of October, 1993, by Gabriel Jabbour and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. <r i• «i.* • > v. ‘* C«01E A. H;«E.V;4'I (J)t;or;nYfi:tuc-v.!:.!;t«arA H I . KIN:.t?..NCClJMrY Kota."/ Public Page 3 of 5 ! LA!<e MIN'NeTO\'<A OQ (9 O Ml % ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 18,1999 (^S2530 William V/ear, Continued) compliance. Lindquist stated he would like to table this application to allow the Applicant time to submit a revised plan, and that he would not be opposed to total signage In the amount ^f,380 square feet. City Council Member Kelley suggested that the Planning Commission tal^Iiito consideration what they would like to see for signage along the old Highway 12 corridor as,well as the new Highway 12 corridor, along with lighting and building materials. Kelley stated thatmost of these guidelines were established vrith the understanding that Highway 12 would remain 1n its present location and that these issues now need to be reviewed / Motion by Lindquist, second by Smith, to table Application #2530, 2160 Wayzata Boulevard, to a ow the Applicant time to submit a revised srgnage plan for the entire property. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0, ^ (#5) #2537 CITY OF ORONO RE\^ION TO ADULT USE ORDINANCE. 8:31 p.m. - 8:33 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and^ffidavit of Publication were noted. There were no public comments regarding this application. Hav/n stated due )o the arnouni of information involved vvith this revision to the ordinance, in her oomion d.scussidn of this issue v.ou!d be belte;* suited to a work session. Hawn requested that tne appropriate notice be given to the general public regarding this ordinance revision. Motiorfby Hawn, second by Kluth, to table Application #2537, City of Orono Revision to Adult Use Ordinance to a Planning Commission v/ork session to be scheduled this evening. '*^OTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#9) #2531 ROGER AND ELIZABETH OLSEN. 815 PARTEN'.VOOD ROAD - RENEWAL VARIANCES, 8:34 p.m. *8:43 p.m. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Roger Olsen. Applicant, vras present. B:ttenberg stated the Applicant received variances to expand and remodel the existing residence to include a four-stall garage and additional living area. Vanances to lakeshore setback and hardcover were granted on October 26.1993. The Applicant is requesting that these variances be renewed. Olsen slated that he is havir.g a ulfficult time retaining a contractor to do the work at a reasonable price, but that he would like to have the work completed within the next year. Smith commented that she does not see any problems with this application. There were no public comments regarding this application. Klulh inquired whether the hardcover that was requested to be removed has :n fact Lec.i c Page 11 i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NDNUTES for OCTOBER 18,1999 c (#25 J1 Roger and Elizabeth Olsen, Continued) eliminated. porches and the concrete dog removed along with elimination of one of the 815*prrfenwood approval of Application IS!2531, previously approved In Resolution No. 4004. VOlIf A^es ^NaysT 8:43 p^m!-L47 MARILYN CRAWFORD. 4745 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCES. Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Heht^ and Marilyn Crawford. Applicants, were present. haS^®4^^^^^ variances to the rear yard setback and garage wouX located tS feet ^«idence. The attached hardcover In the'75-250 ’ setback where 23 required and for 25 percent is allowed, The existino oar-np u Pei’cent is proposed, and whereR^ne existing garage will be removed when the new one is constructed. door^viirffce^ County Road 19. but the garage existi^gravel/driveway will remain and will be used as a turn-around. of very mature trees^located°on°his^^ * Sarage in this location in order to preserve .a number The Applicants had no comment regar^ng their application. Hswn Inquired whelher Ihe existing g,,..,. \ Bollenberg sleted Ihe existing garage is included i^lhe^hantcover numbers. smith in,ui. ed Whether the decK wit, be repiaced or whether e nesv decs is being added along the Herman Cra .vto,d staled that the size or the deck is being reduced., Klulh questioned whether Ihe grave, ddveway was Included In the handover numbers. Bdllenberg sleted mat the driveway was Included in the hardcover calculation... There were no public comrr«nts regarding this application. Smith noted that the hardcover for fhic nrnnnH,,. ^ ipj •P pert/ would increase slightly with this proposal. Nygard inquired whether me plastic underlaymen, would be removed. Botlenberg slated there is a small section .«ter. some plastic undedaymen, will be removed, which Page 12 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 25.1995 Jabbour amended hts motion to include denial of the comprehensive plan amendmi to guide the land use designation from two acre density to one acre denjitMr Peterson seconded the motion. ^ Mayor Jabbour inquired whether therejms'Say'pubUc comments regarding this application. Tnere were no public coi 'N^M^ION: Ayes 5, Nays 0. •(#6) #2531 ROGER AND ELIZABETH OLSEN, 815 PARTENWOOD ROAD - RENEWAL VARIANCES - RESOLUTIO.N NO. 4367 Flint mcved, Peterson seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4367, a Resolution Granting Renewal of Variances to Allow Remodeling and Expansion of the Existing Residence Located at 815 Partcnwood Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. . 7) «253S ROB AND TORI JAFFR.^Y, 540 B/ RRETT AVENUE - VARIANCE - F ESqLUTION NO. 4368 Flint mov^d^eterson seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4368 a Resolution l^^^nting Variances to Permit Construction of Dormers on the Second Story of an Exisfiqs Residence Located at 540 Barrett Avenue. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. C -(^^3) #2541 PAUL PHILIPPS, 2140 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH. FINAL PLAT OF PHILLIPS WOODLAND TERRACE THIRD ADDITION - RESOLUTION NO. 4369 Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to^porove and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4369, A Resolution Approving the Plat of PhiHips Woodland Terrace Third Addition. \ OTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#9) REQUEST FOR DOCK ACCESS - D.WID DQVEL.^CE, 220 BIG ISLAND David Lovelace. Applica."*, was present. Weinberger stated the Applica.nt is requcstir.g dock access to his pro^e^’ located at 220 Big Island. Back in April, 1999, the City Council granted a lot area varian^for this property to permit the construction of a seasonal dwelling on the property. As of today's datei^ e City has rot recei\cd a request for a bi.ildi.ng permit from the Applicant. The property is 4^3\acres in size and is landlocked. This property is one of several lots on Big Isla.nd that potenti^>s\Mll request dock rights. \\ eLnberger staged tha. according to Municipal Code, Lnstalling, maintaining, keeping or private dock on any platted public right-of-way, when such a dock has been specifically ^ •authorized as part of a perni’t issued by the Council, is allowed. Not more than one seasonal dock r 7 « •* » D CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF NO. ^HJE CITY COUNCIL A RESOLUTION GRANTING REN*EWAL OF VARL<VNCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 ANT) 2 FILE NO. 2531 WHEREAS, Roger Olsen and Elizabeth Olsen (hereinafter "the applicants”) are “r civ") d"d« Lot 2, Block 2, Partenwood (hereinafter "the property"); and ., . . , the applicants have applied to the Cit>* for the renewal of variances to . IJrucipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the remodelins and expansion of the existing residence to include a four stall garage and additional living space located from the 929.4 ordinary high water mark where 75’ is required and requirmz a hardcover van^ce of 4,413 s.f (15.3%) where 5,815 s.f. (20%) is e.xisting and none is allowed as shown on Exhibit A. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RES0L\T:D by the City Council of Orono, F..'’DESGS 1. 0 This application was reviewed as Zoning File ii2531. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring one acre in area. The property consists of 1.02 acre. J.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this renewal application on October 18, 1999 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following fmdings: 1. The proposed additions would not further encroach on the OHWL. Page 1 of 5 tiUm CITY of ORONO iM IrJ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __4 8 6? 2. 3. The configuration of the lot severely restricts the allowable building pad. 4. '''' '-"S«ins on ihis proptru- are peculi- tht ^ district; to r I, T ^dvetsely affect traffic conditions' liaht air nor s-ive as^^a ^ danger to neighboring property; would not merely d;mons “Jl.ZriuT;r“diLrrn^„^^^^^^prooertv riffht of th^ r “ necessary to preserve a substantia' 5. reconSt^ndSLof the dndlnas and bv trappSs ^ Com„.ission, repons by City staff cor^encs aAd ^If^ 0" dralth, safety conclusions , order and conditions grants variances to iMu^rricip^rz^onh^g' remodeling and expansion of the exi«:fincy m •/^ i » Subdivisions 1 and 2 to allow the required and hardcLr of 4 4 15 s f OHWX where 7i* is (20%) is existing a-r^nonet auteA ^ ^ 1. pto\T^yl"'coSrion.'’“'' ** “■ “ No funhet variances will be granted to this ptoperty in the futute. J. but'n!Srit'’n ''f ““ Ad propeny not with the applicants, permit within one vea ^ u c.xercised by application for a building expire on that date (OembeJ^'s 2000).^°'“'" Page 2 of 5 nriT.^ nr.mr^-jvnjirfb^^.k CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 A 5. 6. Violation of c non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property. ^iny substantial changes or revisions to the plan in Exhibit A v'-dll require leconsideration by the City Council. Adopted by the City .Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 25th day of October, ’999. ATTEST: ^ . . / Linda S. Vee, Citv' Clerk Property^ Owner (s STATE OF J^’NESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 25th day of October, 1999, by Gabriel Jabbour and Li.nda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the 01 , sLjuui/?i^za/>CJ i^RSniRMAN if.a» S Notary Public Page 3 of 5 r’ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPE^ ) CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.A tn 7 On this ,,..i(g^day of—tefore me a Notary Public within and for said county, personaUy appeared _ arj known to me to be the person(s) dcscrioed in and who executed the foregoing inscrumen£,and acknowledged that he (they) e.xecuteJ the same as his (their) free act and deed. .^Ss. NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF ^UNNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of said count}', personally appeared , 199 _before me a Kota:}' Public within and for known to me to be the pecson(s) deserfoed in and who executed the furegolog instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 4 of 5 To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Hawn and Planning Commission Ron Moorse, City Administrator Mike Gaffron, Planning Director February 15,2002 #2755 City of Orono, 340 Willow Drive North - Long Lake Fire Station 1) Conditional Use Permit for Hose Tower 2) 2-Lot Subdivision including Setback Variance Site Area: 6.17 acres including Willow Drive Zoning District: RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential, 2-acre minimum Comprehensive Plan: The area cast of Willow Drive to the Long Lake border, south of the railroad right-of- way and north of Watertown Road, is guided for single-family residential use at a density of 2-3 units per acre. Thsi area was added to Orono ’s MUSA with the recently adopted 2000-2020 Comp I’lan. Summars’ of Request The new Long Lake Fire Station will be located on property in Orono at 340 Willow Drive North. This property was purchased by the City of Orono with the primary intent of providing a fire station site approximately 3 acres in area, per the agreement between Orono and Long Lake. The remaining easterly portion of the site is intended to be divided off, creating a building site to be owned by O- 'mo and likely used for residential purposes. As a municipal building owned in part by Orono. the Fire Station is a permitted use in this residential zone, with no specific code requirement for a formal site plan review by Planning Commission. For purposes of applying appropriate development standards to the Fire Station development, it is being considered most similar to an institutional use such as a church or a school. The general performance standards which apply to similar development in residential zones will apply, such as the standard 30' height limitations, 50’ building setback from all lot lines, 10' parking setback, etc. The site planning and building design process has resulted in a plan which meets Orono ’s development standards with the exception of two items: 1) The existence of delineated wetlands along the south boundary’ has resulted in the road being placed slightly furtlier north on the site than originally anticipated, ai.d it w ill curv e northw ard as it nears the rear of the fire station site. This results in the need for a setback variance for the station. The setback from the south side of the buildinii to the proposed road right-of-w ay is 40’ instead of the required 50’. 2) The fire station building plans include the possibility (as a bid alternate) of a 20’.\22' hose tow er w'ith flat roof extending to a height of 34'-8" above grade w here the rna.ximum allow eil heiuht is 30.’. This tower could be allowed only via a conditional use permit per Zoning Code Section 10.75, Subd. 1. i k vl , r,.. w • t ^ i ^ * a- (- \ t:. A ^ i^' fI' V'•'■ft 1 1^2755 Long Lake Fire Station Site February 1 5,2002 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Preliminary Plat Drawing/Survey B - Site Plan C - Wetland Mitigation Plans D • Stormwater Ponding Plan E - Fire Station Elevation Views F - Comments by Adjacent Neighbor G - Applications H - Plat Map I - Property Owners List Factors Affecting Site Layout The site plan for the Fire Station has been developed by the joint Fire Station Committee and reviewed by both City Councils. Site layout has been significantly influenced by a number of factors including: 1) the necessary north-south building orientation to allow for direct fire apparatus c.xit onto Willow Drive without requiring additional turning movements; 2) driveway aprons required on east and west sides of the building bays to allow for fire apparatus ingress/egress, necessitating that administrative and training spaces be located on the north or south ends of the building; 3) road / driveway access to the rear of the building must uilow for the necessary wide turning radius of fire apparatus; 4) pro,ximity to the e.xisting/future Willow Drive bridge over the RR and the new Highway 12 route; 5) site li:nitations imposed by width of the site, as well as by the location of existing linear wetlands on the site, and the need to create a road corridor to provide access to the rear of the property for future residential use; 6) soil condition^ which requite extensive soil correction work and which limit use of the southerly portion of the site for building purposes. 1. Proposed Subdivision The intent of the subdivision is to create a building lot for the fire station and a future residential parcel behind it which will likely ultimately be developed lor single family, senior housing or other residential use not yet determined. Future use of the residential parcel is likely to be the subject of a rezoning to cither RPUD or some new’ zoning district allowing SFR at 2-3 units per acre. Therefore, the 2-acrc minimum area requirement for the RR-1B zone would not necessarily come into plav (if this is an issue for Planning Commission, the residential site could be platted as an outlet, requiring future City approval to use it as a building site). The fronl/back lot configuration requires that a road or dri vew ay corridor be Proposed Subdivision Lot Area/Width Gross Area Kvisting Wetland Area Net Area Exclusive of Wetland* Lot Width (N-S) Lot 1 (Fire Station)2.04 ac.0.14 ac.1.90 ac.327 ’i Lot 2 (East Lot)3.42 ac.0J7 ac.3.05 ac.388* + Road Outlot 0.42 ac.0.07 ac.0J5 ac.60*+ Willow Drive R.O.W.0.29 ac.0.29 ac.33 ’ Total 6.17 ac.0.58 ac.5.59 ac. * Prior to wetland flllint;. miti{>alion and stormwater ponding ^2755 Long Lake Fire Slalion Site February 15.2002 Page 3 platted. The proximity of the north boundary of the property to the future new bndge over the railroad and new Highway 12, makes it necessary for this corridor to be along the south boundary of the site. Orono normally requires a 50’ public or private road corridor to scr\c the range and magnitude of potential uses expected on this site. At this time there is no plan to make a future through road connection to Long Lake, although the 50’ corridor would accommodate such a roadway. Because Orono has not determined a final use for the proposed easterly parcel, the road corridor is not being platted past the fire station lot. The proposed road corridor exceeds 50 feet in width to avoid impacting the drainageway along the south boundary of the site. It also curves northward at the rear of Lot 1 to minimi/.e the amount of wetland filling nccessar>’. Wetland Impacts. Delineation of wetlands on the site has resulted in a number of site layout impacts, and wetlands thcmse'ves will be impacted to some extent. First, the wetlands on the site are not shown on either the National Wetland Inventory or the City of Orono’s protected wetland maps. These newly defined w etiands arc linear in nature, wooded wetlands, following the drainageway or intcmiittent creek bed as it traverses from west to east near the southern border of the site. A finger of delineated wetland extends northwestward from the creek bed toward the fire station, and portions of this will have to be filled in order to accommodate the station, its access driveway, and the road leading to Lot 2. The wetland filling cannot be totally avoided; however, it has been minimized by expanding the road corridor and routing the road'driveway northward over a narrow point of the wetland finger. Nearly all the wetland filling will occur in Lot 1 . Mitigation of this filling is proposed to occur in Lot 2 on the south side of the creek at a 2:1 ratio as required by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. MCWD requires a 16' buffer be maintained around the existing wetlands and around the mitigation area. The mitigation boundary has been held back 16 from the south lot line so that use of the adjoining property is not affected by current MCW D buffer requirements. MCWD has a rule change process undervvay that would increase the wetland buffer requirements; however, those requirements arc not in effect at the time of this review and are not expected to impact this application. The MCWD will require that easements be created for protection of the existing and newly created w etlands as well as for the required buffer areas. Remember that the wetlands delineated on the site are not specifically protected by Orono’s current ordinances, but arc protected under tne Wetland Conscr\ation Act which MCWD administers on Orono s behalf. No variance for the wetland impacts is required under Orono’s current ordinances. H.vccrpts from the wetland mitigation and stormwater ponding plan for the fire station arc attached as Exhibits C & D. The sketch on the following page shows the relationships between the fire station layout, the existing wetlands and areas that need to be filled, proposed mitigation areas, proposed stormwater ponding, and utility corridors. «2755 Long Lake Fire Station Site February 15,2002 Page 4 Stormwater Management. Development of the fire station site results in approximately 60% of Lot 1 being hardsurfaced. A stormwater pond sized to serve the needs of Lot 1 cannot be constructed within Lot 1 unless Lot 1 is substantially expanded. A pond location directly east of Lot 1 could have possible negative impacts on the future development potential of Lot 2. However, a somewhat linear pond that could serve Lot 1 with the ability to expand it to serve Lot 2, is feasible north of the creek in Lot 2. This pond would be sandwiched between the creek and the seweravater lines which will cross Lot 2 (see Preliminary Plat drawing). Ifadditional ponding is ultimately needed to ser\'e a higher intensity use than anticipated on Lot 2, it could be developed as a second linear cell north of the sewer water line corridor. Because the actual use of Lot 2 has not been determined, it is the City ’s intent to delay expansion of ponding to serve Lot 2 until Lot 2 is developed. A City stormwater trunk fee would normally be charged to a plat such as this, based on the acreage and use of the site per the cunent fee schedule. The Fire Station site (Lot 1) would be considered as commcrciaL'industrial if the fee is charged, currently S6,480 per acre. Lot 2 would be charged as a residential site, although the per acre fee amount is based on the actual development density which is not yet known. The City Council will ultimately determine whether any stormwater trunk fees should be due for this subdivision. City ordinance allows the City to develop policies in regards to trunk fee credits when a developer provides stormwater facilities that provide benefits greater than just to the development site. Such policies are not currently in place. #2755 Long Lake Fire Station Site February 15,2002 Page 5 Sewer & Water Service. Sewer and water scr\ ice to the site will be provided by Long Lake. Water lines will come from the ea.st and be looped north along Willow to the e.xisting Long Lake water tower. Lots 1 and 2 will be served with sewer by an extension of Long Lake lines from the east. The sewerAvater lines have been located to allow for the most efficient layout possible for Lot 2 given all the necessary encroachments. The preliminary plat as proposed leaves approximately 1.6 acres in Lot 2 unencumbered by w etlands, buffers, stormwater ponding or sewerAvater easements. A future roaJ/'driveway in Lot 2 could be constructed above the sewerAvater lines. Because the sewer and water lines will be tied into the Long Lake systems, no sewer or wat"r connection charges w ill be due to Orono for the fire station site. Sew er and water connection charges for future development of residential uses on Lot 2 will have to be coordinated with Long Lake. Woodlands . The site is mostly open, w ith some w ooded areas along the creek beds near the south and cast boundaries of the property. The City ’s goal will be minimize tree removals w hen the stonnw ater pond is expanded to serve Lot 2. Park Dedication . The Orono Comprehensive Trail System Plan includes a future trail link along Willow Drive from Hackberry Park northward to a future trail that would parallel the new Highway"l2 route westward to County Road 6 and Baker Park. In addition, the City has had discussions w ith MnDOT regarding a trail connection along the south side of the new 12 corridor cast from Willow, connecting fr relocated Holbrook Park in Long Lake, which abuts the cast boundarv of Lot 2. Park Commission should review this preliminary' plat and make a recommendation as to whether any land dedication or trail casements arc necessary from this property. The City Council will ultimately decide whether park dedication will be waived for part or all of this plat, given the public ow nership of the site. 11. Fire Station Setback Variance The setback variance for the fire station is directly attribu'able to the occurrcnccof linear wetlands along the south property boundary. These wetlands must be preserved to the greatest extent possible, and a 16' buffer is additionally required. Due lO minimum City requirements for road and shoulder w idths, the road driveway corridor had to be widened to 60' as it enters the site fror Willow, and even wider to minimize wetland impacts ’oward the rear of Lot 1. Nevertheless, a road corridor is necessary' to access the rear of the site. A road corridor along the north lot line would be undesirable from a safety standpoint due to proximity to the Willow Drive Bridge over new 12 coupled w ith the dual fire apparatus return accc^s and residential use this corridor must scr\e. The most feasible location for the road corridor is south of the station, and the characteristics of the land dictate ihc location of the corridor. The location of the fire station is relatively fixed based on the need for parking lot access and parking stalls on the north end of the building, minimum setback requirements, and the required length of the building to serve the needs of the fire department. Moving the building an additional 10’ northward to avoid the variance would have resulted in re-design of the site plan and the building. tin55 Long Lal;e Fire Station Site February 15,2002 Page 6 The basis for a 50' side street setback requirement for institutional/municipal buildings is Jo minimize the impact on the surrounding neighborhood. The fire station will be situated 100 feet from the south lot line of the property, and the road will be moved further off the lot line to avoid impacting the linear wetlands. Both factors tend to minimize impact of the variance on the only directly affected neighboring property, the Miller residence to the south. That residence is located approximately 100' from its north lot line, or about 20C from the fire station building. Stuff Recommendation . Staff recommends approval of the setback variance as proposed, based on the site factors noted above which pose hardships preventing the station from being moved to meet the required setback. III. CUP for Hose Tower Height 1 he hose tower height is necessary for it to perform a number of functions. Its primary purpose is for firefighter training, containing stairways, windows, a door to the roof, etc. which allow for a variety of realistic firefighting and rescue scenarios to be staged. Its secondary use is to elevate hoses for drying. This dual purpose makes the tower an important element of the station if budget allows. Hose towers arc sometimes treated as an important architectural design element of fire stations where the location makes it suitable for use as a clock tower or signature design feature. The Long Lake station will be located in a neighborhood setting rather than u ‘town center ’ setting, and reducing the prominence of the tower will minimize its visual impact on the neighborhood. The tower is proposed to be located at the southeast comer of the building where it will be relatively unobtrusive in the neighborhood as opposed to if it was located near the front of the building. Its flat roof will extend approximately 12' above the 23' flat roof height of the majority of the station huildint. or a total of 35' in height where 30' is the normal maximum allowed. The 20' x 22 ’ area of the tower covers just under 3% of the total roof area of the station, hence it is a relatively small feature in the context of the overall visual impact of the station. Comments received from the adjacent property owner have been included as Exhibit F. btaff Recommendation . In addition to recommending approval of the CUPfor the tower in its pi oposed configuration, staff recommends that no signage be allowed on the tower, and that its facade materials match the rest of the building so that it does not become unnecessarily noticeable, and the tower itself should not be lighted. Summary' of Issues for Discussion 1.There are no specific code standards for granting a CUP for hose tower height in Zoning Code Section 10.75 Subd. 1. Does Planning Commission feel any conditions other than those proposed by '.taff are necessary in order to allow the 35' tower? V V i W V V I I I \r\\u vj \j\ N V /J / . — >Mum^ -»'V i :^^..r—275.02----- ^ / ,■ / -T--69i00 N8935*19’W----- "" ,-c?’ "^y >y/¥7 L i/tL i !i lOiJv i , r“^a •!; • I li I ii i'll I - '•.■>; 5^v-’i?r '!■! .!• ' ii ?v-4'• '■^' ;.il' ■/! i: •> , *N .<r>QTv™ r^Mt *V I1 ......'.r’ ---------- •' ' ' -* • / '••>/K, N ^1 f 'in^, /“ . '• ■ V.' • ! I*— X/ ^0 / V* ^crir ("Y 1 '\ *;?• / /r‘X / / V L, _______n)‘ •-‘iw''- ■•' '• -■* ■ N*«p—— ■■ ‘i7,<»d%-4^ j^/: •» Ki^ itjJ-^ t ' N ■«?./; ' fCIJHO F ar W a or hji/ > x> fe" $S ’¥> _4f‘ / ^ 'V. ^ V *4t^' mr.f£\ V* ■ •p On?f 0 I ! = *» * c: f I ' lliilImb ^'iii Or^^T. ‘ill i.sL.&i, X k ■\ Slilft-i 4 0 ;XAR£A tT‘SlTE=5.88>c' I ‘iR/W^Ol^g Ac , jX fOTAL=6.17 Ac ! H .o »n ‘fl X ^^0 \ / 7" C^3 / 'TM| ?» r?i,-N ?st; ' / *3' ^ ' Sr© ■s/ ■?f V . ^ O) (-■{ 7 ■>'\ ai ; Jtf I i ,»» V o < Xi53' ^ «a 1 \ ^* y' ■K“-w/ 5 ./ f^^ ®ite Iw f r i XJ 'i >^"'7,4 ^/V7* I r\ V X> . i j 0 J /1-S // ^^^5i58 ,--------------------------------- ^4» V • -I • > y' »"• \ • X-0X / M r -. i <•> ■,^i-'-.:fv-=r. 1 >D; - > w y >' ■ —i-^-^lrnuMP P 2.1* W • QJ' N r^^.. (Q- G 0 'xV /V,'\__f 1-:>»;!? •mm*.: / v^2x /" -'<:.o' t MARK 1004.69 I • - .... PRELIMINARY PLA FOR WILLOWFIRE ADDITION trJSi5rs*Si lMb| fli • »eM «■ “ 1l7t (Ml IM 9m M »■ mj9 !■ h M V • MM M •« Ml II M .M«M M. f«MMM na STmTimMM C mI P«MM •f «3 Msa av MM tMI aai MM M M* «MmM ao7^jtt« M W M*. asrttuKu IM. tasTt. Ml \ \ / \ \ mmttr. WJIM a/M • oif um • a.17 ^ af u«a UNO OODUED foa PVMJC UK; un KK KouaMMi urVfMaLT'-'srr ir Ml IM1 Frwi - acr MM - aor 1 nmt - ao* MM M aMM M pmm pMM • MbtM M m Mi<M M - ioo4.aa M N mM omm. v-iv * Uiurr EKKIffa MC GRAPHIC SCALE * M ( 01 FBT ) 1 iMk • ae a .in. TJl JLA. AM NC DAH OCVISONS ® SHCM* CLUOn h TNIMCKSON INC 2002 ANY MU 00 otusc V ruts plan /ooaknc AMO T>€ CQWIC9ON0MC COMPl/TCM AlOCD KSlOi/OAAmNG r\l% KTHOUt THC OCPU5S UtTJlH CONSCNT OT $CH. t« PR0N«ITn) KM SMAU HOT U MCS^MlC roo ANY uNAuiHonzcD use 00 ofust v thi MATCmAuS. ON OAMAGCS OCSULTMC VHCOCTIIOM S*gr>«Ujr« Ar»il»c Nom« te. totc PH f00.t3a MM 3t0 MAIN A>C MCSr PC OOX 770 QAYLOOO. MN MW__________ CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA PRELIMINARY PUT WILLOWFIRE ADDITION file no uasu0201.35 DATE 02/01/02 o o © OI o •k BCMCN MARK ^SPK M • 1010. BOCH MARK SPK M POU OXV » 1004.1 9 "N euRCD orrcH V —lUOO---- sa»i5’iit iHEDQ O G O o ww ^5i» SW CORNER or SECTION la. TI18. R23 s UNC or SW1/4 or section is ^SRI ♦ legend •Found Iron P|pe A $ Traverse Station G Deciduous Tree Coniferous Tree Soi Boring qWCU.Wdl Monhoie o«>Cleon Out *Yard Light o"*Flog Pole Power Pole Guy Anchor SJyi Sorted Wire Fence Wooden Fence Wire Mesh Fence total UAPACTEO WETLANDS • AREA ■ 6440 SF for BK) package f 1 AND FUTTJRE MO PACKAGE P52AV>6S ni£0 WETLAND- AR£A>9004 8T VOLUME •1t2CY fixed WETLANDS area • S479 SF VOLUME-203CY APPROVED RECORD DRAWm ~WM€—wi uat «eeg <Waii« Welland Impacts exctngcoktours WNG LAKE FWE STATION BIO PAQCAiGEfI MFOPUATmM reji v S'jWr REMOVE A RSNSTALL OOSTNO SCT PENCE NECESSARY FOR CONSTRUCTION EARTHWORK SUMMARY DfCAVATION n jMC Y (•*) TORSOE STTUPRINQ 2000 CY(P) EXCESS OVERBURDEN (PAD SURCHARGE) lAWC.Y. (P) EMBAMCMENT 1.813 CY (P) MmOATXMPONO 1»CY.(P) SALVAGED TORSOS. 500CV(C.V) BACKFli. 5MaY-(C-V) ---------------------------------i». ^ TOPOfWAU.100a.S ^ RCTAPINOWAU. (SEE ARCHITECTS PIANS) ^ Ml2 CURB A GUTTER ^ Mil CURB A GUTTER ^ COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY ^ CONCRETE SIDEWALK pedestrian CURB RAMP 12121 boinMNunM ON SITE GRANULAR BORROW SOO OY. (UV.)I DETENTION PONO ^ C.Y (P) t2S« SHABMAGE FACTOR USED FROM LOOSE VOLUME (L.V4TO COMPACTED VQLUME(C V) AU EXCESA MATIMAL SHALL BECXMC PROPERTY OF CONTRACTOR BOT OF WALL 1FT BELOW GRADE RETAINING WALL ELEVATION STORM STRUCTURE SCHEDULE STRUCTURE NO.TC.MV PIPE SIZE LENGTH SLOPE FLOWS TO 101 -994 00 --•- 102 1001J 996»ir ISO-12S%101 103 9905 98050 ir 4r 100%102 10«-904JA ••-. IQS •90900 24*31*50%104 REVISIONS No date DATE iLan CHECKED BY COMMISSIONNO 151SXM e 2nni SKVOmwn ■ifm..V »II 1000 » • • • • » • « • •» • » • • > • • • • • ••«•••••••••••• «••••••••••••• ••:::::::::: • • • • • 1. • ••••).• • • • • ::: :::: * *•••••■•••••••• ••••••••••••••• • •■••••••••••a* *•••••• •*•••• •• ••••••♦♦•♦•♦••a ^ • •••• ••••••#••«, • a • a a a • • • a a a • • a a a a • aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaa*** ***• aaaaaaaaaaaaaa • *** aaaaaaaaaaaaaa 1000 •••••»«»«• • • » •• • • ♦ ' WStVIQ ocncH' ': :. f lOraseO MCTLAMB • ♦ • a a a a a a • a a :::::si:. .T. :::: »*•*• ‘aaaaaaaaaaaaaa 995 :TS,pi::::• • • • •:::iS * * • • ‘•••••••••••••• •••••♦••••a ••• -.-a..a^**** *• 'aaaaaaaaaaaaaa *• 'aaa*«««*»Baaaa 99S 990 • • • • ::::::• • •«:::: a*aaaaaa**««»,*, • •aaaaaaa***,^,, • •aa**aaa«aaaaa. :::::: aaaaa*aaa aaaaaaaaa •aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa**** aaaaaaaaa*** **** - aaaaaaaaaaaaaa ***• • »aa*aa*a*aaaaa ***• • >a«aa**.«aaaaa *••• 'aaaaaaaaaaaaaa 990 • ♦ • • 1 ••••••••••■•ft*** 5 —i ••••«« •«•••• • • • • S'''''‘i' • «»*«•••••••••• • ••••♦♦•••••••a wi......''n aaa*aaaaa««*,a^« aaaaaaaaa*aa«aa< aa*aaaa.»««»as^, —r a a a a a a a a a a a • nr^ •aaaaaaaa a aaaaaaaaa*** aaaaaaaa**** aaaaaaaaa*** *••* aaaaaaaaaaaaaa ••** aa«aaa*a*aaaaa •V^• V-. - DAI CHt SH£C h HM tm» p» O ? ^^TAIR rCWEB ^ pOP OP precast ”^ jtt 134’-6* 1 SCUPPER « 0 5. -lirTM RN MOUKTCO I CAST ALuniNun tmEP*. I ('BRASS finish ; AoP Of PRECAST EL 123* O* ^ PREFtN METAL COP*HG r2* INSULATED PRECAST PANEL MEZZAHINC FLOOR, TOP OF PLAF«C CL 112*-O* 4* PRCCAST COPING W/ 6* SOLOtER COURSE BELOW DRlCJC MAINSCOT I SOLDIER COURSE ‘APPARATUS FL( __---------—-------------------------------- T.O. SLA0 EL toct-cr I . V January 31,2002 Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Permit Application Long Lake Fire Station Prepared for the City of Orono, Minnesota Introduction This permit application has been prepared to describe the proposed construction of a new fire station in the City of Orono, Minnesota. The Long Lake Fire Department serves the City of Long Lake, part or Orono, and part of Medina, Minnesota. The construction of the new fire station is a result of the impending loss of the current firehouse to the expansion of Trunk Highway (TH) 12. The demonstration of wetland impact avoidance and minimization in this application follows the sequencing process of the Minnesota Welland Conservation Act of 1991 (WCA) and Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. Unavoidable wetland impacts will occur due to this project. The loss of wetland for the creation of the fire station, vehicle access, parking areas, and turning space is subject to wetland replacement through the creation or restoration of mitigation sites spiecific to this project as required bv the WC.-^ and the U.S. Armv Corps of Eneinecrs (USACE).' This application contains the information required by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) to fulfill the requirements of Rule B (Erosion Control), Rule C (Floodplain .Alteration), Rule D (Wetland Protection), and Rule N (Stormwater Management). These Rules have been summarized in Appendix G. This permit application was reviewed by the MCWT) and brought before the Board for approval at the December 13. 2001 meeting. At this meeting the initial grading plan was approved which allowed for soils correction and impacting the wetland on the site. The mitigation design, erosion control plan, and storm water management plan have not yet been approved by the MCWD for this project. A-LONGL0204.00 Page 1 Project Description Project Location The new fire station is located in the NW of the SW */4 of Section 34, Township 118N, Range 23W, in Hennepin County, Minnesota (Figure 1). The project is within the city limits of Orono, Minnesota. The property faces Willow Drive to the west and is bound by private property on the remaining three sides. The Burlington Northern rail line passes just to the north of the project area outside of the property. The project site is accessible to traffic only from Willow Drive. Existing Conditions Land use in the project area is primarily single-family residential or undeveloped. An existing house and bam on the west half of the property have been removed under the initial grading permit issued by the MCWD. The remainder of the property is undeveloped. The undeveloped areas include both open pasture and wooded / scrub- shrub habitats. This includes a single wooded / scrub-shrub wetland in the western half of the property. This wetland has been impacted under the terms of the initial grading permit issued by the MCWD and a LOP-B issued by the USACE. An unnamed drainage ditch enters near the southwest comer of the property and runs parallel to the southern property line for approximately 325 feet. At this point, it enters the property and meanders to the east-northeast within the project area. The area of the site selected for the creation of a wetland mitigation site, upland buffer, and a storm water treatment pond is currently a nearly level plateau adjacent to the unnamed ditch. Vegetation in these areas is approximately 909c common buckthorn {Rliamnus cathartica). Proposed Improvements The new fire station will serve the communities on Orono, Medina, and Long Lake. The proposed fire station will be approximately 18,360 feet^ which includes administrative and training areas, and six pull-through bays. The bays will be designed so that the trucks can enter directly onto Willow Drive, as required for minimum response time. To do this, sufficient space must be constructed behind the fire station to maneuver the larger vehicles to be facing properly. Access roadw'ays will be constructed on the north and south sides of the building. These roads will provide access to the firehouse for responders and for parking the fire trucks. The south access road will also provide a throughway to the remainder of the property to the east. An overhead layout of the property that shows the wetland impacts and construction limits is available in Figure 2. Additional plan sheets of the project are available in ^opendix A and Appendix B. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Permit Application City of Orono, Minnesota A-LONGL0204.00 Page 2 Conslruction of the building pad requires that the existing soils be removed and replaced with proper building material. The existing silty clay topsoil will be stockpiled and replaced atop a sand and gravel base. The stockpile will be on-site, but will be placed away from existing wetlands and will have proper erosion control. As required by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for Rule D an average 16.5 -foot buffer will be maintained along the unnamed drainage ditch. The location and widths of this buffer along with the site plans showing the grading limits are available in Appendix A. The initial grading and soils corrections have been completed as allowed by the MCWD and the USAGE. Project Justification The Minnesota Department of Transportation purchased the current fire station as a right-ofrway for the future realignment of TH 12. The fire station is considered to be an essential service and must be replaced prior to the start of TH 12 reconstruction in January 2003. The new fire station will jointly serve the communities of Long Lake, Medina, and Orono, Minnesota. Wetlands Wetland Delineation Mr. Deric Deuschle (SEH) delineated the wetlands in the western half of the property on December 5, 2001. The field delineation was done to identify and delineate any areas meeting the wetland cnteria in accordance with the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (USAGE, 1987). Because the wetland delineation was conducted outside of the normal growing season, a more conservative boundary was determined. Staff from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (Jim Hafncr and Mike Wyatt), the Hennepin Conservation District, and the City or Orono reviewed and accepted the delineation on December 6, 2001. The delineated wetland boundary was surveyed with a Trimble ProXR® GPS system and converted into AutoCAD" format. The remaining wetlands on the eastern half of the property were delineated and surveyed using GPS on December 8, 2001. The wetland delineation completed for the eastern halt of the property has not yet been reviewed or approved, but was detennined under similar conditions as the portion of the property that w as reviewed. Topographic maps (Figure 3), the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map (Figure 4), the Soil Survey for Hennepin County (Figure 5). the hydric soil list for Hennepin County, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MND.NR) Protected Waters Inventory (PWI) map (Figure 6), and aerial photographs (Figure 7) were reviewed to locate potential wetland habitats prior to the field visit. Minnehaha Creek Watershed DistrKt Permit Application City of Orono, Minnesota A-LONGL0204 00 Page 3 In addition to the unnamed ditch that enters the property from the west, a single wetland (wooded, scrub-shrub swamp) was identified. This was located in the southwest quarter of the property and will be unavoidably impacted by the siting of the new fire station. The wetland identified on the property is dominated by mature black willow (SalLx nigra), red-osier dogwood {Comus stolonifera), and common buckthorn {Rhamnus cathartica). Fringe species include eastern cottonwood {Popitlus deltoides), tanarian honeysuckle {Lonicera japonica), prickly ash (Zxmthoxyium americanum) and common buckthorn. Herbaceous vegetation was sparse, but included reed canary grass {Phalaris arundinacea), an unidentified woodland sedge {Carex sp.), unidentified ferns, and ground ivy {Glechoma hederacea). Common buckthorn was a dominant plant throughout most of the upland and wetland areas. Soils in the wetland were composed of dense, black clay (2.5Y2.5/1). Some higher chroma inclusions were also observed and appeared to be the result of past disturbance. At approximately 14 inches, the soils changed to massive black clay (2.5/N) with no other colors being observed. Within the wetland areas, there were inclusions of disturbed soil (2.5Y4/4 and 2.5Y5/5) that displayed distinct mottling (7.5YR4/4) that may have been masked by the darker components. Organic content of the soils was very high within the wetland boundary. Heavy dark clays dominated upland soils. Higher chroma inclusions were also observed in the upland soils, but the frequency and contrast of mottling was less than in the wetland samples. Organic content was also less in the upland soil samples. The Hennepin County Soil Survey has mapped the site as Glencoe silty clay loam. Minnetoka silty clay loam, and Shorewood silty clay loam. The obser\'ed soil profiles were similar to the mapped soils, with the exception of the disturbed areas. Minnetonka and Glencoe silty clay loams are identified on the Hennepin County hydric soils list. Hydrology was not observed within the top 18 inches in either the wetland or upland samples. This may oe due to numerous factors including the abnormally dry fall or start of the winter season. Because of the time of year the delineation w as conducted, hydrology was assumed within the area of hydrophytic vegetation exhibiting hydric soil. Secondary hydrologic indicators including drainage patterns, and shallow and exposed roots suggest hydrologic conditions in the wetland area. The wetlands on the remainder of the site are restricted to the areas between the lop of the bank along the drainage ditch. This drainage ditch ha: a very shallow gradient and low banks on the west half of the property, but has become more deeply fissured as it flows east. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Permit Application City of Orono, Minnesota A-LONGL0204.00 Page 4 shallow areas have vegetation composed primarily of reed canary grass and a few isolated cattail stands. The portion of the ditch with steeper banks has very sparse reed canary grass at the bottom of the ditch and exposed banks. The wetland has been identified as the top of the bank for the entire drainage ditch. This is a conservative estimate under the assumption that surface and groundwater to not saturate the soils to the top of the bank under normal conditions. Hydraulic calculations on the existing drainage ditch support this assumption (Appendix F). Wetland soils on the eastern half of the property are either a mucky silty clay in are *s with little or no flow to sandy accumulations were the ditch h^ flowing water. Upland areas on the eastern half of the property are composed of dark (10YR2/2) silty clay loams. The banks along the ditch are steep and have becomes exposed and unstable. Hydrology was observed within the ditch as flowing water or saturated soils. On the banks and m the upland areas, hydrology within the top 20 inches was not observed. Routine Onsite Delineation Method field datasheets for the wetland delineation are included in Appendix C. Photographs of the impacted wetland are included in Appendix D. Sequencing Alternatives Alternatives for this project are limited. The no-build alternative was considered, but not accepted. The fire station is considered an essential service and must be located within quick access of the cities ser\ed and be convenient to the existing volunteer firefighters. This property is the only available site found to be suitably located for setA’ice to the communities and with access to major transportation corridors. A second alternative was to rotate the building 90 degrees so that it would be perpendicular to Willow Drive. This was not accepted for numerous reasons, including reduced response time by not having direct access to Willow Drive. It was also determined that rotating the building would not reduce wetland impacts. Because the fire trucks must pull through the bays, the amount of driveway lot space required to make the turns into the building would impact the same amount of wetland. Backing the fire trucks into the bays poses major traffic safety concerns as the trucks would be blocking Willow Drive. Because of poor sight lines caused by the bridge over the Burlington Northern Railroad north of the property, any alternative that involved trucks backing up on Willow Drive was rejected. Minnehaha Creek Watershed Oistnct Permit Application City of Orono. Minnesota A-LONGL0204.00 Page 5 Furtlicr reducing the size of the building to avoid wetland impacts was also i:onsidered but would make the fire department less functional, and may require an additional fire station to be constructed within one of the communities. Avoidance and Minimization The construction of a new fire station will have unavoidable wetland impacts. Minimization of wetland impacts was achieved by moving the building as far north as possible. The distance the fire station can be moved is limited by existing property lines. The property to the north is not owned by either city and would need to be condemned before it could be purchased. There is not enough calendar lime available to condemn the property and still construct the fire station before the existing fire station is removed Reducing the size of the fire station also minimized wetland impacts. The original plan for the building had a footprint of 26,000 square feet. The current building footprint is 18,360 square feet resulting in a reduction of 7,600 square feet from the original design. The width of the southern access road has been reduced to 28 feet and provides main access to the site and the remnant parcel to the east. Both access drives to the north and south of the site arc required so that first responders can access the site during a fire call without traffic conflict. The north access drive will be reconfigured twice during the construction of TH 12 as the Willow Drive bridge over the railroad is replaced and a temporary bridge is in place during TH 12 construction. The south access road will be critical during this period. The circulation area around the firehouse has been reduced as much as possible. These leaves the minimal space needed to park responder s vehicles and still maneuver fire trucks into the bays. Wetland Impacts and Regulatory Jurisdiction The wetland on the property will be impacted by the creation of a new fire station and the creation of a required storm water treatment pond. The areas of the building pad and lot within the wetland are shown on Figure 2 and in the detailed plan sheets in Appendix A. A total of 8,480 square feet of wetland will be impacted for the construction of an access road to the fire station. A storm w ater pond is also proposed to provide treatment to runoff from the fire station property. This pond will release the treated water back into the drainage ditch that crosses the property. To protect the pond outlet, 110 square feet of riprap will be placed around it. A total of 8,590 square feet of wetland will be impacted by thia project. Mnnehaha Creek Watershed District Permit Appleation City of Orono. Minnesota A-LONGL0204.00 Pages L The impacted wetland is connected to the unnamed ditch, which ultimately drains into Long Lake. This ditch is part of a large system of public ditches in the project vicinity. Because it is connected to a navigable water. The United States Army Corps of Engineers has determined that the impacted wetland is under their junsdiction. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources does not identify the impacted wetland and associated ditch as a Protected Water or Wetland and does not have jurisdiction over wetland impacts for this project. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has jurisdiction over wetland impacts within the cities of Orono and Long Lake as the Local Government Unit implementing the rules of the WCA in the project area. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District also has specific wetland regulations that it enforces in addition to those identifies in the WCA. The Combined Permit Application Notice for General Projects, and the Combined Joint Notification Form for the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District have been included at the beginning of this document. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Impacts to Wetlands on the property are under the jurisdiction of the USACE as the basin is connected to a navigable water (Long Lake). A permit (LOP-B) has been granted for this project provided the submittal of an acceptable mitigation plan. A copy of the permit has been included in Appendix E Minnesota Department of Natural Resources The wetland being impacted by this project is not listed as a Protected Water or Wetland. The MNDNR has waived jurisdiction on this project and no permit is required. Wetland Conservation Act - Minnehaha Creek Watershed District The Minnehaha Creek Watershed Distnet is the Local Government Unit responsible for implementing the Wetland Conservation Act in the project area. This is a request for approval of the proposed wetland replacement plan under the WCA, and erosion control plan, and storm water management plan under the rules of the MCWD. A grading plan for the building site was approved on December 14, 2001 to allow the project to continue. The wetland present on the property has been impacted under this initial grading plan agreement. Wetland Replacement The Minnesota W'etland Conservation Act requires replacement of wetland impacts at a ratio of two acres for each acre filled or drained. Application of the 2:1 replacement ratio results in the need for the MinnshatMi Craek Watershed District Permit Application City of Orono. Minnesota A-LONGL0204 OC Page 7 •w-nr> 1. l&AJkM fla Jt i&V* following area of wetland replacement: 8,590 fr wetland fill x 2 = 17,180 ft* (0.39 acres) replacement. Replacement for wetlands that are filled due to the project will be done through the creation of a single mitigation site. The location of the mitigation site will be on-site and will be located south of the drainage ditch and along the eastern and southern property boundaries (Appendix B). Wetland Mitigation Design Site Selection The opportunity for on-site mitigation exists within the project area. Examination of the site indicated that there was potential to create new wetland by excavating an area adjacent to the ditch in the southeast comer of the property. Currently, this area of the property is a monotypic stand of buckthorn. Few other species have been observed. This is also true of the area north of the drainage ditch, which will be converted into upland buffer and a storm water treatment pond. This area is owned by the City of Orono and will be placed under an easement associated with the fire station. A utility easement may be placed over the storm water pond. Construction of the mitigation site will be concurrent with construction of the fire station. The site has not been used for prior wetland restoration or construction. Mitigation Design Plan The mitigation site is proposed to be constructed adjacent to the unnamed drainage ditch in the southeast comer of the property. This area of the property is currently undeveloped, and has become overgrown with buckthorn. This area is not wetland currently, and is not known to have been a wetland based on a review of historical aerial photographs. Plan sheets detailing the grading, planting, and erosion control for the mitigation site are available in Appendix B. Grading, Hydrolog}', and Soils Grading of the mitigation site has been designed as a floodplain wetland that will intercept floodwater and slow ly release it back to the ditch (Appendix B, Sheet 1). Functionally, this is similar to the wetland impacted by the construction of the fire station. Grading elevations have been designed so that the mitigation site will remain an average of one-foot higher in elevation than the adjacent ditch. This is lO keep the wetland isolated from the ditch except dunng flooding events. A low berm, designed to be one-foot tall by three-feet wide, will be constructed at the far eastern and western portion of the mitigation site where floodwater will enter and leave. The grading has Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Permit Application City of Ororw, Minnesota A-LONGL0204 00 Page 8 been designed so that an adjacent wetland will be created, not a side channel to the drainage ditch. Side slopes within the mitigation site will be a minimum 5:1 along the southern property line and a minimum of 10:1 where it lies adjacent to the existing ditch. The bottom elevations of the wetland will be left rough to provide a diverse bottom contour and to decrease possible channelization by moving water. No construction shall take place if the site is inundated or has potential floodwater in the immediate future. Hydrology in the mitigation area will be primarily from natural flooding of the drainage ditch. Hydrologic modeling of the existing drainage ditch has indicated that it is a very' flashy system with rapid rises and falls in water elevation and discharge (Appendix F). The elevation of the mitigation site has been designed so that when water levels rise one foot above base flow in the ditch, water will be allowed to enter the mitigacion site. This water will be held in the mitigation area by a second berm. Hydrology is expected to mimic a small floodplain area with short term, seasonal inundation. It is anticipated that the mitigation site will appear to be dry for most of the growing season. This is similai to the hydrology in the impacted wetland. Hydrology will also enter the mitigation site as surface runoff from the south, but most of the hydrology will be from the adjacent stream. Ground water is not expected to be a significant hydrology source. Soils in the wetland mitigation area are silty clay loam or clay loam. This is consistent with the soils on the remainder of the site. During construction, all soils within the mitigation site will be removed and taken off-site. A one-foot subcut will be dug and replaced with clean upland topsoil. The replacement soil must also be a silty clay loam or clav loam and must not contain buckthorn or other known invasive 0 species. This soil will be finished to final grade and loosened if excessive compaction has occurred. Using the same soil type as the impacted wetland will further reproduc; similar conditions. Heavy soils, such as silty clay loam or day loam will also reduce infiltration rates and increase retention folloving flooding events. To prevent erosion, the entire site will be disk anchored with clean weed-free straw immediately after final grading, loosening, and seeding. Vegetation Prior to construction, existing buckthorn in the area w ill be cleared and grubbed. In areas that will not be graded, the buckthorn will be cleared and have stumps treated with a 2% solution of glyphosphatc. This is especially important in the buffer area north of the ditch. This area will be planted with native vegetation and will require the iwfinnehaha Crsek Watershed District Permit Application City ol Orono, Minnesota A-LONGL0204 00 Page 9 buckthorn be eliminated. No planting should occur for at least two weeks following glyphosphate treatment. In the wetland mitigation site, trees, shrubs and ground cover will be planted to restore native vegetation to the area (Appendix B, Sheet 2). Inunediately following final grading, the soil should be loosened and broadcast with a wetland seed mix. The Mn/DOT seed mixture 25A modified (26B) (Prairie Meadow & Streambank) or equivalent will be used in the wetland area to provide a mixture of native forbs and ground cover. The Mn/DOT mixture 5A Modified (5B) (Savanna and Woodland Edge) will be used in the upland buffer areas south of the mitigation site and north of the existing ditch (Appendix B, Sheet 1). Both of these mixes will be applied at a rate of 30 pounds per acre, and will not be seeded prior to April 15. Seed will only be broadcast into dry or saturated soils. Seed should not be placed into standing or moving water. The site should be disk anchored immediately following seeding to provide erosion control on the site. Mulching will be done at a rate of 2 tons per acre and must be certified weed free. Because the site is designed to be a floodplain, trees such as silver maple (Acer saccarinum), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and American elm (Ulmus americana) will be planted (Appendix B. Sheet 2). If these species are unavailable they may be substituted with black ash (Fraxinus nigra), red maple (Acer rubra) or hackberry (Celtus occidenialis). At least one third of the planted trees must be five-year or older trees with intact root balls. This is necessary to increase the survival rate and ensure the proper vegetation becomes established. Additional tree plantings can be seedlings. In the buffer area, bur oak (Quercus macrocarpa) w ill be planted to provide additional tree cover. If bur oak is unavailable, than red oak (Quercus rubra) or white oak (Quercus alba) maybe substituted. Half of the oaks should be mature trees. For all trees, the mature stock should be spread throughout the site to provide maximum coverage. At least three inches of hardwood mulch will be spread at the base of all the trees and shaped to help retain moisture. No trees should be planted in standing water, and all trees should be a minimum of ten feet apart. No trees will be planted in the buffer area north of the drainage ditch. The large black willow (SalLx nigra) within the drainage ditch on the east side of the property will be preserved. No black willow or cottonwood (Populus deUoides) should be planted in the mitigation site. Because these species can be grown from cuttings, any branches of these trees should ^ removed from the mitigation area. Minnehaha Craak Watarahad District Permit Application City of Orono. Minnaaota A-LONGL0204.00 Page 10 Native shrubs will also be planted in the mitigation site to provide additional cover and diversity (Appendix B, Sheet 2). Shrubs will be planted in a random pattern within the designated areas and will be a mixture of red osier dogwood (Comus stolonifera), eldc»berry iSambitciis canadensis), and several willow species (SrlU exigua, 5. bebbiana, S. amygdaloides, and S. discolor). Nannyberry (Viburnum Icntago) may also be used to increase diversity if available. Willow species should be concentrated around the existing drainage ditch to provide maximum erosion control. Cuttings from the various willow species and red osier dogwood should be used in and around the banks of the drainage ditch to provide a cost-effective method of revegetating the exposed banks. Cutting should be collected from native stock and kept moist until they are planted. The few red osier dogwood on site may be salvaged and transplanted or used for cuttings. If thej arc transplanted, care should be taken that buckthorn is not incidentally transplanted as well. Container plants should be used throughout the remainder of the site. Erosion Control Appropriate erosion control piocedures will be used for the construction of the mitigation site and the storm water treatment pond. These methods are shown in Appendix A. Appendix B Sheet 3, and detailed in Appendix G. Silt fencing will surround the entire project site and the existing drainage ditch. Silt fencing will also be placed in the ditch to collect any additional material that may enter. Construction will also be timed so that no activity wilt be done if the site is inundated or flooding. Wood fiber blanket will be placed in the mitiaation area w’here water mav be flowinc into or out of the site. W ^ ^ These areas will also be planted with dense willow shrubs to provide rapid soil stabilization. Summary of Wetland Replacement The impacts from the creation of a new fire station will require the creation of 17,180 feet^ (0.39 acres) of wetland as a combination of new wetland or permanent upland buffer. The construction of the mitigation site, upland buffer, and storm water treatment pond will create 15,033 feet* of New Wetland Credit fN'WC) and 14.584 feet* of Public V'alue Credit. These credits are summarized in Table 1. Public Value Credit is composed of 12,605 feet* for upland buffer and 1,979 feet* for the storm water pond (The normal pool area of the storm water pond is 2,638 feet*, of which 759c can be claimed for credit). The City of Orono has an approved storm water management plan, which is a requirement to allow PVC credits from storm water ponds to be allowed. Under the WC.A, replacement of wetland impacts can be done as a combination of N^'C and PVC. We propose to use 8,590 feet* of the new wetland and 8,590 feet* of the upland buffer area to Minnehaha Creek Watershed Oislrtci Permit Application City of Orono, Minnesota A-LONGL0204.00 Page 11 replace the impacted wetland at a ratio of 2:1. This will leave 6,443 feet* of NWC and 5,994 feet^ of PVC beyond the required replacement. This additional area will be placed in a wetland bank under the ownership of the fire station for future use or sale. An application to deposit these credits into a new wetland bank has been included at the beginning of this document. Table 1 Summary of Wetland Replacement Created Basin ID Wetland Credits Credit Source New Wetland Credits Public Value Credits Wetland A Creation of Type 6/7 Wetland 15,033 feet^0 Wetland A Creation of Puffer Area 0 12,605 feet* Storm Water Pond Creation Storm Water Treatment Basin 0 1,979 feet* (75% of normal pool area of 2,638 feet*) Sum of Credits 15,033 feet*14,584 feet* Monitoring Pian The Cities of Orono and Long Lake will be responsible for the required monitoring of the mitigation site. Staff from Short Elliott Hendrickson will assist with the monitoring and w ill be the authors of the required annual reports. Monitoring of the replacement area will be conducted for a minimum five-year period to evaluate the success of the mitigation area, identify maintenance and monitoring needs, and correct any identified problems. Hydrology will be monitored annually at least three times between early May and August. Shallow monitoring wells will be installed in all created basins and nearby existing wetlands to monitor changes in hydrology over the monitoring period. Wetland vegetation will be both qualitatively and quantitatively evaluated once per year during the period between July and August. Photographs documenting the changes in vegetation will also be taken at this time from fixed reference points. At the end of five years, or when the monitoring data suggests the replacement areas arc successful, functioning wetlands, a final Minn*haha Creek Watershed District Permit Application City of Orono, Minnesota A-l.ONGL0204.00 Page 12 delineation will be conducted to verify that the areas meet the three- parameter wetland criteria as set forth by the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (1987). A monitoring report will be prepared annually during the five-year monitoring period. The report will describe the status of the wetland replacement, summarize the results of the vegetative and hydrologic monitoring, and discuss management activities and corrective actions conducted during the previous year, as well as activities planned for the upcoming year. The report will be submitted to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District by December 15 of each year. The annual reports will .contain the following information: • In the first report only, a comparison of the as-built specifications with the design specifications and an explanation for significant modifications. • A brief description of the wetland mitigation areas, including location, size, vegetative and hydrologic monitoring reports, current wetland types, and desired wetland types. • For each subsequent year, a comparison of existing conditions in the wetlands with as-built specifications and an explanation for any significant differences. • A summary of water level measurements collected to date and a determination as to whether the hydrology in the wetland/s meets the design elevations and wetland hydrology critena as defined in Corps <?/Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (1987). • A summary of plant species growing in the wetland and a determination whether the vegetation meets the wetland catena as defined in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (1987). Plant species data will be provided from at least two sample locations for each wetland. Percent dominance will be recorded at each sample location with emphasis placed upon species comprising greater than 10% of the spatial area. • A summarv of manaaement activities and/or conective actions conducted in the wetlands during the previous year and activities planned for the following year (i.e., burning, mulching, retilling, regrading, herbicide application, mowing, or reseeding). • Color photographs of the wetland mitigation sites taken between July and August each year at the designated photo-reference points. Minnehaha Creek Watershed Oistnct Permit Application City of Orono, Minnesota A-LONGL0204.00 Page 13 Vegetation Management Plan In conjunction with the annual monitoring, vegetation will be monitored for establishment and the presence of noxious or exotic species. The primary concern for this wetland is the establishment of common buckthorn. If buckthorn becomes problematic within the wetland or upland buffer it will be manually removed, or spot treated with glyphosphate if it is found in an isolated area. The treatment and removal of buckthorn on the property and the replacement of soils contaminated with buckthorn seeds will reduce the likelihood of buckthorn becoming established in the mitigation site. Successful revegetation of the site will also reduce buckthorn’s competitive advantage over native species in disturbed areas. Reed canary grass is also known to be in the area and will more than likely appear within the mitigation site. If reed canary grass becomes established and begins to dominate, appropriate control methods will be used to reduce its presence. The successful creation of the floodplain forest should reduce the likelihood of significant reed canary grass establishment. Other exotic species will be controlled appropriately if they are identified on the site. Trees, shrubs, and seeded areas that do not become established will be promptly replaced. Recommendations of vegetation maintenance and actions will be summarized in the annual monitoring report. Seeded areas will be mowed tw ice during the first year if weed species are present. The site may also be mowed in subsequent years. Because the site is proposed to develop into a scrub-shrub / floodplain forest, burning is not recommended as a management tool. Storm Water Treatment (Rule N) A summary of the information required by MCWD Rule N is provided in Appendix G. A storm water ueatment pond is proposed on the eastern half of the properly north of the drainage ditch. The pond w ill be outside of the required buffer area along the stream. The pond is designed as a treatment pond and will have standing water and wetland vegetation. The hydraulics of the pond have been calculated and are available in Appendix H. The design efficiencies for total suspended solids and phosphorus removal have also been calculated. The pond design will meet NURP Standards with a modeled removal rate of 93.3^c for suspended solids and 65.19c for phosphorus. The efficiency calculations are available in Appendix 1. Minnehaha Creek Watershed Distnet Permit Application City ol Orono, Minnesota ALONGL0204.00 Page 14 Midi Erosion Control (Rule B) and Flood Storage Capacity (RuleC) The erosion control plan and flood storage requirements are summarized in Appendix G. Plan sheets in Appendices A and B shown the required erosion control structures and BMPs that will be used during construction. Floodplain storage will be increased with this project through the creation of an adjacent wetland. Minn«haha Creak Watershed District Permit Application City ol Orono, Minnesota ALONGL0204.00 Page 15 February 14,2002 F-/ The Planning Coounissioa CityofOrono 2750 Kelley Piarkway For Fdnaiy Meeting Regarding Application #02-2755, Located at 340 Willow Drive (site of new Long Lake Fire Station) 1. A variance for the SO foot road setback. 2. Conditional Use Permit for hose tower, greater than 30 feet in height. We would expect the new fire station to look at least as good as the Orono Municipal Building or the Long Lake Sewer Station. The proposed station does not and will only look worse with a tower. Possibly with a nice looking roof I would have no otjection to something some what higher. Right now it will look like a gun tower and guard station. There has been plenty of time to make decisions to allow for the 50 foot minimum set back. Either leave the set back, move the building or don’t take the alternate for the sixth bay. The more garage doors you have the more commercial it looks. The building is a proposed 29 feet and already too high without the tower. The least we could expect after getting a very average looking commercial building in a RESIDEbrnAI neighborhood, that it stay within reasonaUc residential regulations. Sincerely. Ron Miller 270 N. Willow Drive (952)473-1265 Enclosed are pictures of ordinary commercial fire stations and some NICE lodcing neighborhood fire statioits. Also enclosed is a previous letter and pictures sent to the Orono Council. .jJ-4 .-■w Commercial looking Fire Stations. The only way to make them look worse is to make it higher (which the new Long Lake Fire Station is and add a hose tower which they are tryi to do. —^ ^ i >• ■mi - r ■ rv.v --,»T¥? VV^ l«ittuao Aau^oMV f JotauuiH M31BH •>»«« iiiP.r .4 ui<Vk SUCU* i''® •doq OirVieLfi'S rio» . m UO P»...<. t. p«n iq Atu. pu. „„ ,M, o» >Hin33» pue anj> »■ noA u»».fl .a.u i uotfuiiotu- >MX Nice* looking Neighborhood Fire SFat- i ons. K '«).t • ■ - ..1. ,V.> . , v; ^ ^ ‘ V L . . . F'3 if URL iiTAMOXS Those first 2 pages show 0 photos of fire stations west of Orotu) on Highwas •“i: What (Jo the\ all have in common ’ Thev are unattractive buiUmgs located in commercial areas vviih an excess amount of garaue doors Garage doors are the least desirable feature of commeicial buildim»s l.and has alreadv been purchased at >10 Willow Dine It has becti proposed, that a 12 (low class) garage door lire station be put m at thi> location Aliei looking at these photos vou might come to the conclusi(>n that there IS onlv one wav that these lire stations ciHild look even less attractive, bv havinc 12 earace doors M PJLUHQl^Lli LOC\IiaN - lire station - Lonu Lake municipal buildmus At first ulance you might think this is a junk yard, but it’s not Junk yards have a 8 foot pri\ ac\ fence around iher;. so no one can sec ;:ie scrap that has been discarded These are photos of an auto instirance recvchng lot This would be the ideal location for the fire station It's a piece of \er> under­ used propeiis Because response time IS an issue, this location is only 16 seconds awa> from the ->-lu Willow locatKui. and is in a commercial area where a a>mmercial tniildme belones i r- . /.•x-i.. . ! * * ij - * •* r / Kwinotinci liicic IU‘ . .tJ iaiu\- nccvlcd U) pul \i|- a uiauiacliNc iMar.Kip*il Vi»iuinciCM* A ncul'v /v»r;cil Taulicf dcnNil\ i C ^ivlC^U til ’ .1* w'»l * \ ff l;^ P r .—______ - % :vi w .. :i4'■-S .•• *- *•_^ iNiiiGjmQKUooD:: FIRP STATIO\ Ihis is what a "neighborhood" fire station should look like Ihe "neighborhood" the station typically has 2 uaraee doors ^ W and is as small and attractive as possible Almost without exception. the "neighborhood" fire station stands alone, is on the fringe of a residential area or is in a commercial area r-7 2 mw ..................."" ’ FTH •* ^ G,-) Application ft Q“C''ZnS>'^ Date Received z- -/g“>oa. Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION ^ Site address ______^ O IU-L-^ Ca) Property Identification Number (PIP) Please check one - Property____abstract or_____torrens? Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT Name ^|-ry ___________________________ Address P.b, feox tnL» A7AJ Phone (home) Zip^^S23*hone (work^S ? - •/^ OWNl^'li (it different than applicant) Name AdJrvss _ tr Zip _ Phone (home) _ Phone (work) '.ach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Ta.x Parcels Development Size Present use (check) / i0..gg A./7 Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify)______ / Present Zoning District f S PROPOSAL _________ Division for Tax Purposes _________ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) ^ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites /z Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Units per.$tS?Acres Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land _ Reside^tial y Other (specify) /V/CP /«*r 6-L Applkation # Date Received Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ($50.00 per each additional varianc^^ Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION . Site Addres s hJ • Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 3Z_ Attach leaal descriotion to aoDlication if not included on reouin: property laenuiicauon iNumoer tr.i.u.) ^ ^00^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date ^ _______________________(moti’ii/year) I (doW^ noO^so own the adjacent parcels of land. Prescm-BsetJfpr^rty: V^residential ___other (specify)______________________ Zoning District: | __________________ APPLICANT Name /* iT*V Address: PQ ftoC Phone (home) Phone (work) T ^ 0>VNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:City:.Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $__________ Describe request in detail: S!t>S ^tfA>T^T7auc.r-70AJ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot WidUi Setback:Front Side I lardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshorc Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements'__ (attach additional sheets if necessary) Appljcation U ^2 ^ T DateReceK'cd Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION ^ , , Site Address 3y^ j/if Type of Application to be Filed S Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) APPLICANT Name /C^r*V Addres sPQ goy /g, ^ Phone (home) ______ Phone (work) City ^A'f Zip gT “g OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (work) Address City Zip. Date ProMEtWNAcquired /^ ♦ - OO____ I (do) notj^lso own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____S 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use ^ S250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duple.x Credit/Bldg _____$325.00 Commercial/Industrial Use _____$250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 5 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakcshorc PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule $150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$275.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _____$300.00 Vacation _____$200.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____$350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____$375.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment $100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule ■f ff rlSTt'tnap^'rt C)'^l>?IT'^flMfli H//^ ^ ^ ^ 4 ** * "^ * • * .' 1 •” - • • • , ' k-’O-///. I .*\.. t 1 ?ES !•; I »' ► r-w^ • ■ > Jf • 1W| 1. /r^l --m *•'»'. *.'•) r' ' ■* -^-» •>« i '^ r'’i r .-.''j-Zi Vr.-r '•{.V-.i-< 5* ■J«» ' > *r -,k'■ :-v: '^^■ ■' ' ■) - rI--^’i^A^- ' • ■• 7 r'v-' - 'r '•> I, ■ « j fJii \ 7 r'V- ' - '/‘<-.?4Tr5WF.ir»- a r •-■' ,Kf >■ ar/''' r- • 1 \:smm! :fc'- ■":'■'Aip^l lt^.'>J 1i-* • , '^JT* R»:i:..v'‘‘v;^i ••! M 1.. « r •W«i ♦- -#ci**' ” L * % ^?v »' .■ • *fel . -*^ r ' * ; •*! It Ni.tfA-^f fi;74»rvs I • ••# f ; ^ •>••• •»»» . = i j GRAND ^RM i 4.4i • I M ■ I f :^, *.'»• . •.^.7v;’ , - ‘ i \ r - V 4 ••• -1 «t 1 k•i t 1 • a 4 i ? «•1 C •«| .*1 • !« ^ Uj •• • f 1 • 1 DRm» • • >*r f • • 4 M ' ^ * «• M 2.’ 1 •*t • Uj • t 2 * O\ ’ or, * w. •1 /•i 1 v **k_ s-gN f S' ■ . . < 1^.MrSs\- ^arc^mmmfmm N- Wn'l')' .'rV,V| i ’.'/(L I.,)’,'/ i);} .'1 ^ ^ /J*y \t f:lfj:l]t'^ 1 ^ -»*;*r. f- ; ,i* ... . i.,- • /■ « 02 -27rr RUN DATf 11/18/01 BATCH S02 NENNCriN COUNTY rROPERTY INFORNATION'SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO.' PXASMOl PAOE . 5 PROP AODR OWNER NAUR TAXPAYfR NAHE/AODR SB S5-U8-2S SI OBIO •••SB ADORESS UNASSICNEO ON HY CO B N B SANTA PE RR CO PROPERTY TAX OEPT PO BOX MIBSB PORT WORTH TX 7*1*1 38 SS-11B-2S S2 ••62 00058 ADORES* UNASSICNEO 8URLINOTON NORTHERN INC ^ B N I SANTA PE RR CO PROPERTY TAX DEPT PO BOX 9*10S9 FORT WORTH TX 7*1*1 ’ SB SS-118-25 *1 OOOS •0225 WILLOW DR N JANES D DILLHAN JANES D OILLHAN 225 WILLOW DR NO LONB LAKE NN 5SS5* PROP ADim owNcii mm > TAXP/^YCR . * KANf/APM owNctiuim TAXPAYCII v^L NANE/AOM S8 33-118-23. A1 0004 02400 NOODHAVEN DR HILTON H 8XXr • HILTON H niX..^^ '24O0VWOOOHAVEH DR . :LONg LAKE MN 55354 38 33-118-23 41 0012 O034S VXLLOII DR N 6E0R0E L OSOOOD ETAL GEORGE L OSGOOD ; 345vRXLL0ll PR N . • long' LAKE HN 5S354 ? • f t i I •X . V \ ; • « • « •* * 38 3S-118>2S *1 0010 02**S WOODHAVEN OR J 8 P HARRIS JOHN T 8 PATRICIA'L HARRIS 2**5 WOODHAVEN OR . LONO LAKE HN S5SS* 58 33-118-23 *1 0015 0««38 ADDRESS UNASSICNEO C N 8 S L GRONBERC GLENN N 8 SANDRA L CRONBERG 525 N WILLOW OR LONG LAKE HN 55S5* •t 38 33-U8-23 *1 0011 00038 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED ' WOODNAVEN HONEOWNERS ASSN WOODHAVEN HONEOWNERS ASSN C/0 LINDA HOTCHINS . 2550 WOODHAVEN DR ' ' LONO LAKE HN 55S5*' 58 S4-118-2S S2 00*2 •••SB ADOBESS UNASSII E H HILLER ETAL EDWARD H HILLER. .. W 1188 WAYZATA BLVD ' LONO LAKE HN 5535* 3 cP. ’ o • • • •' <r • • 0 \ PROP ADDR ORNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 58 34-1X8-23 32 0003 00340 WILLdR DR N CITY OF OROHO CITY OF OROHO’ ,P 0 BOX 64 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 38 34-118-23 32 0004 00260 RZLLOR DR N RONALD E HILLER RONALD E HILLER 270 N NILLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE KN 55356 38 34-118-23 32 0005 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED WH L HURSH LYOLA HURSH 744 HILLTOP CT • HOUKT DORA FL 32757 # . j • PROP ADDR ORNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR /* • PROP AODR ORNER HAHE TAXPAYER ' NAHE/ADDR 38 34-118-23 33 0001 00177 GLENDALE PR PRESBYTERY Of HPLS INC CALVIN PRESBY CHURCH GRAND ;AVE 8 GLENDALE LONG LAKE, HN 55356 ■ V. . .V 1 72 M-118-2S S2 •••? ••?•! GLENDALE DR CALVIN PRESS CHURCH OP ORONQ CALVIN PRESBY CHURCH GRAND AVE 8 GLENDALE LONO LAKE HN 555*5 58 5A-118-25 55 005* \ 00190 WILLOW DR N KEITH A WILLIANSON ET AL KEITH A WILLIANSON 190 N WILLOW DR , LONG LAKE NN 5535* ■' 72 S4-118>25 32 0008 00231 HARRINGTON OR H C. PESCHEL ET AL HXCHAEL C PESCHEL 35* HARRINGTON OR LONO LAKE NN 5535* • •• • • , . •• I • f . ' I ■. •* 72 S*-118-2S 31 0077 00072 ADORESS UNASSIGNED BURLINGTON NORTHERN INC B N 8 SANTA PC RR CO .PROPERTY TAX DEPT ' PO BOX 9*1089 FORT WORTH TX 7*1*1 4 >1 72 S*>118*2S S2 0011 002S2 GLENDALE DR , A J 8 B AHLSTRON ARVXD J AHLSTRON 252 GLENDALE OR LONG LAKE NN 5535* I » s ■ . • .■* i. ^ # . 4b *. . . * » /. 02.-2.7SS if- •• • mM DATE lX/«8/0l| »ATCH 502 * \HENNEPIN COUNTY PHOPEIItX INEOMUTION ^STEtf ' • PROPERTY ONNERS LIST • • • ^ MPOKT MO; mSS401 > PAGE 6 \ ‘ w 72 * S4-UG-2S 32 0tl6 PROP ADDR 002A1 HARRINGTON DR OWNER NANE^ CNRXSTOPHEI| J KXESER TAXPAYER CHRISTOPHER J KXESER NANE/ADOR 241«HARRXN6T0N OR IONO'LAKE/HN 55354 f* • ‘ . J.” PROP ADDR OHNER NAHC TAXPAYER (' > NAHE/AODR 72 • S4*lia-2S 52 0010. • 00275 HARRINGTON CIR' ^ . V K H REAH 5.J L REAM . ‘ KRISTOPHER I JENNIFER REAH 275^RRXN0T0N CIR, '.' LONO.LA^E'HN ■ 55556 .0 . I • ‘. V. PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR 72 .34-115-23 32 0022 00307 HARRINGTON DR STATE OF HN HN DEPT OF. TRANSPORATION DXR-RXGHT OP WAY OPERATIONS ST PAUL HN 55155 ( * PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYjER NAHE/AOOR . I * 72 . 34-118-23 32 0025 00341 HARRINGTON DR STATE OF HN • ' HN DEPT OF TRANSPORATION DIR-RIGHT or WAY OPERATIONS ST ^AUL HN 55155 ' •• • ' • 72 34-116-23 32 0017 00253 HARRINGTON CIR JOHN T HIDING JOHN T HIDING 253 HARRINGTON CIRCLE LONG LAKE HN 55356 72 34-115-23 32* 0020 00255 HARRINGTON CIR 8 5 J DROEN 5RXAN H' DROEN 285 HARRINGTON CIR LONG LAKE HN 55354 •4* ^• • 72 34-118-23 32 0023 00319 HARRINGTON DR STATE OFHINN HN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION DIR-RIGHT OF HAY OPERATIONS ST PAUL HN 55155 72 34-110-23 32 0024 00351 . HARRINGTON DR r . STATE OF HN HN DEPT OF TRANSPORATION DIR- RIGHT OF HAY OPERATIONS ST PAUL HN 55155 i*' •• 1 72 34-118-23 32 0015 00243 HARRINGTON CIR DAVID J REID DAVID J REID 243 HARRINGTON CIR . LONG LAKE HN 55354 / 72 34-118-23 32 0021 00297 HARRINGTON CIR *L S 8 H L GUSTAFSON >tINDA S 8 HAYNE L.GUSTAFSON *297 HARRINGTON CIR LONG LAKE HN 55354 ‘. r* ■' • V 72 34-118-:^3 32 0024^ 00321 HARRINGTON DR STATE OF HN HN DEPT OF TRANSPORATION. *• \^DXR-RIGHT OF HAY OPERATIONS ST PAUL HN 55155 72 34-118-23 32 0027 00354. HARRINGTON DR STATE OF HN HN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION* DIR-RIGHT OF WAY OPERATIONS ST PAUL HN 55155 • a J ■J ■\oa O • -o ■ O’ J f N 72.34-115-23 32 0025 ’ . 003M. ' HARRINGTON DR OWNED NAHE . STATE Of .HN I • HN DEfT OF TRANSf^RATION . DXR-RXGHT OP HAY'OPERATIOiO ST PAUL HN 55155 ‘ •• .» : FXOF ADDR TAXFAYf R .V- NAHOAOOR • i • .. •.FRPI|'AI»R> ONMR^NAM yutTMiK'-: NAHC/AOOfl J- \ 72.^’56-m?25 S2..eOM '\ - • 00275 * HARRINGTON* DR r //V ^ • f. A'OCLAW * A MUELLER ' V; •' FEteY OeLAND/WUL-Xiut MUELLER* ; 27R HMRZNeT0N OR PO BOX S L0N8 LAKE HN S5SS6 ■V .... I *. • • % 72 34*118-23 32 0030 00322 ^^RRINGTON OR VIL OF LONG LAKE CITY OF LONG LAKE PO ROX L* - 1944 PARK AVE^ LONG LAKE HN 55354 } . . V'* • * ♦ >*•1 .*.72 134-118-23 32 .0035 ^ 00244 HARRINGTON DR (^ ^ G H STXCKNEY 8 .J O'STXCKNEY. V ' t? GEORGE H STICKNEY ' \ t . • \ JOAN OLIVERIUS STICKNEY * • / 2590 COUNTRYSIDE DR LONG LAKE HN 55354 j ' 72 34-115-23 32 0033 00285 HARRINGTON DR VIL OF LONG LAKE*V . ; CITY OF LONG LAKE • ' PO BOX L - 1944 PAnC'AVE LONG LAKE HN 55354 . ^9 5 •'7? * 34-115-23 32 0049 ' V .00072 ADDRESS. PENDING , /*BURLINGTON NORTHERN R R CO B N 8 SANTA FE (RR CO ; - ..PROPERTY TAX DEPT PO BOX 941089 ‘FORT WORTH TX 74141 I / :• O x\ > d ’ 7 Completion Date: 2/14/02 60 Day Deadline: 4/16/02 TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Hauii and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Paul Weinberger. Zoning Administrator/Planner February I, 2002 SUBJECT: <^02-2745 Ilona and Kenneth Peterson 1074 Wildhurst Trail Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: Eot Area: LR-IU One Family Lakeshore Residential District (I acre) List of Exhibits: A B C D L I G II I J Application Plat Map MCWD Permit Approval (Januaiy 25.2002 Letter) Site Plan W etland Impact Map r ty Engineer Comments (. opy of Plat of W ildhurst Estates Building Elevation Views Floor Pans Property Ovsners Notification List Application/Background: Property owners have requested variances to permit construction of a new house and detached garage on the property. The variance is to permit Ind alteration and construction of the garage and a portion of the deck w ithin a protected wetland area and w ithin the 26’ buffer area around the wetland. The City's Flood Plain and Wetlands Management ordinance (Section 10.55) does not permit filling, grading, excavation, hardcover, and structures within a protected wetland and w ithin 26' of the edge of the wetland. 1 he property owners were aware of the wetland regulati . and required setbacks, however the actual regulator) boundary of the wetland was rev ised whe . • new wetland delineation report was completed on the property in December, 2001. The property owners had done their original design based on wetland information that was detennined in 1991 before the Wetland Conserv ation Act rules for delineation were established when the plat of Wildhurst Estates was filed. In 2002. determination of a wetland boundary must be completed by methods required by the Wetland Conserv ation Act. Attached is a copy of the Plat of the Wildhurst Estates showing the edge of the wetland as defined in 1991. The edge of the wetland is shown on the plat as a Drainage and Utility Easement. When properties are platted it is standard procedure for the City to obtain a public drainage and utility easement over a..‘ protected wetlands, as was done in 1991. •>02*2745 Ilona and Kenneth Peterson 1074 Wildhurst Trail Februar> 19. 2002 Page 1 of 4 The property met all code requirements in 1991 and was considered a buildable lot at that time. The new wetland boundar>’ as determined by Aquatic EcoSoIutions, Inc.. Golden Valley, Minnesota, shows a larger wetland basin than what was thought to be located on the property. The larger wetland basin causes two development issues for the property owners. First, the wetland basin’s size has limited the building envelope to a small comer of the property. The area available to develop is then substantially reduced by the required 30' setback to the back property line and side yard setback. Secondly, because the area of the wetland is larger it then reduces the actual lot size. Properties in the LR-1B zoning district are required to have a minimum lot size of 1 acre. In 1991 the lot size of the property was 1 acre. Lot size is measured as the area of a property that does not include lakes, rivers, or areas of the property that is frequently under water or which sustains emergent aquatic growth (wetlands). Because the area of the wetland is larger than first believed the actual area of the lot is reduced to less than one acre. Additionally, in 1998 the City eliminated the use of wetland credit for sewered properties. A variance to lot area is required to pcmiit construction on the property. Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.24. Subdivision 5 (B): A variance is required to lot area to allow construction on the property since the defined lot area is less than 1 acre. Section 10.55. Subdivision 8: Variance to permit land alteration and construction of a garage w ithin a protected wetland and 26' wetland buffer. Wetland Impact The MCWD has stated the total wetland impact of the garage is 130 s.f. Total impacts to the buffer encompass 776.1 s.f. The MCWD reviewed the application and variances were approved by the MCWD on January 24. 2002. There appro\ al was subject to the property owners completing the following: 1. The property owners will mitigate a total of 2,180 s.f. of wetland on the property to compensate for the wetlands lost to fill and stmetures. 2. Property owners will execute a declaration for the preservation of w etland buffers. 3. Site will be graded to direct stormwater away from the wetlands and towards Wildhurst Trail. City staff has discussed the issue of water runoffbeing directed towards Wildhurst Trail. The City of Orono is not in favor of having water draining directly towards the street. The property is located at a low point where water can reach elevation where it w ill cross the street. Wildhurst Trail also does not have stormwater drains, curb and gutter, etc. To protect the street and meet the intent of the MCWD approval the site drainage from the site will be managed by allowing only a minimum amount of runoff that will get to the street. The remainder of the runoff would be directed to a ditch #02-2745 Ilona and Kcnnclh Pclcrson 1074 \^ildhuntl rail Fcbfuao 19. 2002 Page 2 of 4 area to be graded along Wildhurst Trail and will be directed to the new mitigated wetlands. This w ill allow' the water to cross over as much land as possible before impacting the existing wetlands and lake. Sewer Location A sewer line has recently been relocated out of the building pad of the lot. 1 he sewer line is now- located about 10’ north of the south property line. Because of the sew er location it is not possible to construct the proposed house to the 10’ side yard setback. The City Engineer has recommended the house not be constructed w ithin 15 ’ of the sewer line. The result is a house that can not be built within 25 ’ of the side property line. If the proposed house was allowed to be built only 10’ from the property line, it could be done to not encroach into the wetland, and only have a partial impact on the 26’ wetland buffer. Since the line was relocated there is no record of a new utility and access easement being recorded on the property. Because of the man hole locations on the property and sewer line the City may be required to access the property for routine maintenance, hence an easement is necessar>-. Citv' Engineer Comments City Engineer comments are attached as Exhibit F. Review of Hardships 1. The property met all code requirements in 1991 and was considered a buildable lot at that time. The new wetland boundary as determined by Aquatic EcoSolutions. Inc.. Golden Valley. iMinnesota. show s a larger wetland basin than what w as thought to be located on the property. 2. The larger wetland basin causes two development issues for the property owners. First, the wetland basin's size has limited the building envelope to a small comer of the property. 7 he area available to develop is then substantially reduced by the required 30 ’ setback to the back property line and side yard setback. 3. Becau.se the area of the wetland is larger than first believed, the actual area of the lot is reduced in size to le.ss than one acre. The City of Orono did find in 1991 that the area of the property was 1 acre. The change to the wetland dctemiination method has changed the defined lot area of the property, as has the ability to credit w etland as buildable area. 4. The location of the sew er service 1 O' from the south property line shifts the building location an additional 15 ’ to the north, which causes the wetland impact. If a house could be constructed at the 10’ setback the proposed development would not impact the wetland. 5. 1 he property owners have identified areas on the property to mitigate a total of 2,180 s.f. of wetland on the property to compensate for the wetlands lost to fill and structures. i02-2745 Ilona and Kenneth Pe'er&on 1074 Wildhuni Trail Tebruaf) 19, 2002 Page 3 of 4 Site Plan Issues The City of Orono only permits one curb cut to an individual property. The property owners have shown two access points on the property. It appears the primaiy purpose in having the two access points is to provide better access since the garage is a two story building. The two story design also contributes to some of the additional fill that is required. The additional fill is required for the driveway elevation to be raised to the level garage stalls. The City Public Works Director did not approve the concept for two driveway access points to the property and has recommended the driveway access be reduced to one. It would be possible to construct a single story garage with 4 stalls, but doing so would require variances to permit the garage to impact the wetland buffer and would require setback variances for an oversized accessory building. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the application based on the hardships noted. A recommendation of approval is conditioned on the following: 1. The property owners will mitigate a total of 2,180 s.f. of wetland on the property to compensate for the wetlands lost to fill and structures, as also required by the MCWD. 2. Site will be graded to direct stormwater away from the wetlands and into the ditch along Wildhurst Trail. 3. All silt fence should be installed prior to any clearing, filling or grading activity. Silt fence shall remain in place until all vegetation has been established. 4. The City shall review the proposed drivewa) design and determine the appropriate access to the property. 5. A public drainage, utility and access easement shall be granted over the south 25* of the property. 6. No grading or hea%7 equipment should be allowed within the easement area. Planning Commission Options for Action A.Appro\e B.Denv C.Table D.Other Action i02>2745 Ilona and Kenneth PetcrM>n 1074 Wildhuni Trail FcbrtMry 19.2002 Pa(e4or4 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 (SSO.OO per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 Afier-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Applicatioii # ^ Date Rccewed"’# Amount Paid ______ PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address {(TIA IaJ\LOI^\JS^X Property Identification Number (?.I.D.) o-n if/r Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired________________________________________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: ___presidential y other (specify) VACAtAf*f Zoning District:______________________________________________ (month/year) APPLICANT CAftiTwaC. W/ Phone (home) • 3*^*7 ■ Name 0g4t<vJ THoMA^ Z.u4rtbrv^ iNL- Phone (work)q6^. Address: Uf»l \A/AQ7A‘V^ tjJLMJ. fck 21g City:U/At/ZArTiv_______Zip: 0%VNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)_________________ Name ltL6NA- f PET02-*?flrsi Phone (work) Giz- .6ZT2, Address: NftLO pu. N/gfiLTU City: Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost S I j AAf\_____ Describe request in detail: /OkI 4 :2^igr__________________________________________ * (attach additional sheets if nccessaiy) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore ^ Other (specify) oF l/l/gf/AAiO t HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: IdPuifig LUgfl^NO —LAa/0 AOisA ^ voczrm t g.^LngA^tan> ^pim^ \A/mflfvJ ftOlLPW^ AXiKA |MpA£;r<» pfagp. (attach additional sheets if necessary) >• -> • -I r • •* 1 2 REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All 9tiht foltowing information must bt submitted by (ht applitafion deadline date in order for vour annlicaHon to he cnnaidered fnn^pietg; __ Completed Application Form ---- Certified Prope^ Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Fmance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-5910). ---- Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/j" x 11" for reproduction. ---- Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing g^e are proposed. In addition, provide one H) copy S'/i" x 11" for reproduction. ___ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views :j;r<»vide or.? f l) copy 8'/i" x II") ---- List of the legal names (include marital status) of all pers^-ns with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). ---- As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. ---- Additional items as may be requested by City staff. 5, 6. 7. 8. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE T^e applicant hereby agrees to provide all infoimation required or requested by the Zoning Administrator agrees to pay additional lees (staff lime not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies tliit the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge.true and corre Date /• IS • ^ 2-Applicant's Signature ----------------------------------------- OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigati^and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date Applicant m^t have dl submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Comimssion Meetmg. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Bdlding & Zomng Office of this change prior to the meeting. * ^ • / •' V • .v> •• . sr f j V'‘ iH^epin County Taxj^yer ^i|os!p^ AMT wa< 1^*0/W*>OUf «VW (2) mn LAFAYB *4 ]| t 4*v f *• \ t 1 4 9 ' f f'# 9 t • *• f t t •4 (16) % 9 II •% "5n TojI 1* I ' R 9 * i t • 1f7>: 9 9,'*•: 9 4 9 • : 9 9 • ; 9 9 9 V*• i9 9 * • • * ^ <?>: n t\4 ilL• .*9 i'': 9 !f J 14 : 1 •: ** • f« <^'(6f ; 9! *• ; •,’f^1 , \ .) .- »• Mt n •mr/Tvrw l*itf 1 HEATHERCROFT \ I Parcel h Pvcol ID 0711723240046 Houm Numbor 1074 StTMt Nam* WILOHURST TR : ’ <V' . . ^^ ^ AMI ^ * This is not a legally recorded map. It represents a compifathn 6( tnfdtmatm^ and data from Oty, County, and State road authorities and other sources. . JAN-28-20e2 12:11 CREEK URTER9CD 61247106T2 P.02/22 QnifRartiMtarCanlw H«y«.1S&19,Nmni IM SSOO Shadywood Rovt EnWar.MNSSaSI-8578 Plwnc (062) 471<0690 Fine (0S2) 471-0682 Emat; •dmfeiOmlnMtahacfMli.010 WibSIla: wMiLffllnfMhihiMdtora Boifri of llmigtrt RMTMlaG.B|il James Caldns LinoeFWier Monies Qrau Scott TDomu lUaoiinneid Robert Schreeder 0»£:sss.’=r Hiimehalia Creek ratersked District Improving Quality efWater, Quality ofL^ January 25,2002 Ken Potenon 14820 13th Place North Plymouth, MN 5S447 R£: MCWD Pennit Application No. 01 >470 Dear Sirs: Ihc Mmnehaha Creek Watershed District Board of Managers reviewed the above mentioned pennit applieetian ai their Board meeting on Jaouaty 24,2001. It was the action of the Board to approve this application widi the following conditions: Reimbunement of mailing costs in the amount of $96.40 Payment of Role J fees in die amount of $1 12J0 Submittal of a declaration for the preservation of wirdand buffen which must be executed and recorded A revised site plan must be submitted showing the lediiection of stormwater &om impervious iurfacca away from the wetland and towards Wildhurst Trail Due to -^.e size and conqilexity of certain projects, the Board, by Rule J, requires that site inspections be conducted. In these cases, the applicant is required to pay to tlie District, a fee equal to Ac actual costs of analysis of Ae project, field inspection, engineering services, legal services, and any lubtcquent monitoring of the work. These costs are referred to os Rule 7 fees. Once Ae above mentioned fees I .ve been paid and Ae oAer conditions have been met staff will issue Ae permit You are reminded Aat work on Ae prcject cannot begin until Ae permit has been issued. This permit expires one year from Ac date of this letter. If final municipal approval of Ae project results in changes to Ae project yon must submit revised plans to Ae MCWD for review. Please call me at 952-471 >0590 wtA any quuliunS. Sincerely, Micrtael D. Wy«U Disrricr Technician c:Lisa Tilman, Wer jc As3oriate« Paul Wienberger, C-ity of Orono $ 8B*0<*afe» I WILDHURST TRAIL Legal Descrtptfoo Lot 4, Block J, WJLDHVRS7 ESTATES. ^ ~ * 0*a»tmw ajO' r»«i«ur. #/•»• *90 tfUBUo^ry PUt ^ • — • —^ 0m9miopm P»r ’00 Pr»timtfi0rj eut O*m0U0 19-Ji.fl# •.U..9 IVa«r«0 M* Mia«r* fr«/s Otaottt Buffer Area ti0aote0 ^o^.tmre^l/itiiMUmn Are* “<03.94 neas. - N 88*06'24" V (nirr«»0^*a(t la Buffer- Car»s0 - «4XI« 0^ n ftr<»0Vf0rr0c0 - J ?3 3 H ftfial - j n ^«0» —< t*M4«rr ■••w 0a< • r^nof^i Iron fn^nuis#nl * Ornotra rfftrt atak* .f OMOrWn^lrf rfatiog aU* a taae *«m0 «/ <a« W Mm* *• 4*mnaa4 M /O0OO' Drnolra grnmoarj rite. -------• Drttotea aur/tce 4raiuage f—— •« <*• —o«0>»4«tr MMW •< * Mp>« I ana 4— i0«*«« •• M II—■•0 >»irn0 «0 aurra *«<>—» »» *«.«aa r? M«» ia« •MtafV »0a La< a i« t0« ama* et te PrjpoarJ top of founJaUon #f«v • 0J0 J fr -foarg garaga Haar alme a 0|J 5 Pfjpaaag /u««il f/oar «lrv^ 0Jl9 J Ua*a« 0ip«t0 00 0Ma<— 00 A.0VIM f9 t»a« J0J4 I*a0a« ta.40 M M »>«a4M l« i—iaJi iba« *0>0 t»M. Ua«a« 0Ml0 00 0|0W« 00 0» a-a»*0« 00a< 0 .0 'aaa .« «a««0aa f 0*a «0 ■bj0 t«« « <0aa« iar\«M#Ua0 OeU»n4 Outfer area JJ*#^ai 0^ /I Pra^taa4 WillgaUatt Area !l§0 i aa ft Total Ataa OtlStm DatiaeateJ OeUaog 7g iai J 0^ /» rum ptkcyi. iti.ua 5 af. n. APJU IS llAPDCO^Eii ZQ.SIS PKt)Pii:iED ItAkDUHEH a MEA O' - 73 tone m 30.140 B a^ ft------------0 ft • ^0’ itffir • 4f.4X:B 01 ft -----------llouaa » 195a 4 a^ ft Garage • 60J 7 aq ft Wdlka A Dnta a 3/aj §*4. ft. Peck ■ at? 5 aq ft *Prapaaag ateeaiioma aea praUannar,a ang not ial^nsl#^ for t^onairuetioo Total Propoaed HanUoerr » 6I72B mq ft Area in tone »4?.4JJ»f aq It Percent Mardeo*er • t? 0 "• 2Z0* - 300* tone m 27.5T5 4 aq aq ft **■ 9rvi«oc«nrm • use % esattma i^a , 9*«« tM*^ • «W* memm^o ^ • 4B^ 4» • #• •9 *• * * iT# J I a-*«*»0*0. CUmnCATE OF SVnVEY FOR: :*.e a ^ » M •>. «»• ■* 0 • .. t-a •\ •c -;i—I MR. KENNETH PETERSON »• •«, N0 JZ* J—L Us. **“** Ut'noIrM 030* vnntutir» "wrtlitnti •*lr\\** i$^r *00 Pn liuthiMrr /*/<•( - , ^ hitiltliti^ sfhttck t-nx'rhipe /icT *UU VivUinittniy Vltti l3-:ii-01 iMiffftflion 30 '^fttutrfs from t3"“3l'^0l wfiOm.t %lrtitifiifion \ ^ V \ \ - V frvUititO Hum-r Arvo iv - i,,* Ihmot^n rmiu»svO Uitig»ti,m Arm 2 * Hoose- \ Kl M/Mi•*<••/ f*roposcti fr prot'tfmrnijt in hntter, IN Ob Ub d4 V iinrns^ - t*/. ft, ih*vk Trrrmm - I7.*i f$ 5«/. A- fi#l«l - 770.1 54/. fl. ^ !•»#* fc*^ »•'f* W vIIhw I Onffrr Ar^n 10,^17,51 .%q. ft* Prop*ifi»**t MitigMtion ArrM 3i00.3 5</. ft, Tutnl Jr»*4# thtlnii P» tin**Mltul Wfllitiut 70.403.3 *4/. ft. lOTM V.m'Kl. Mit:A: III.NH.n sg. ft ^ 1 Bonestroo Rosene V ■ Anderlik & Ivj* Associates Engineers & Architects February 5,2002 *"** ^‘“’'****'- '* Acl(on/£qujl Opportunity Cmptoyrr Ffintipsit: Oflo G Bonestroo PE • Marvirs t Sofvala PC • Giersn R Cook. P£ • Robert G Schursicht PE • Jerry A Bourdon. PE iwlOf Contultants. Robert «r Roteoe. Rt • Jotepti C AoOetlik. P{ . R,<rM,p e Turner. RE . luion M Eberlin. C RA AtiocUte Rrindpjli; Xeitn A Gordon RE . Robert R Rfefferle. RE . Rnhaid W Totter. PE . Oovid O loikot.i Rf . Mork A Menton. RE . Micneel T Reutmenn. RE . T,d it field. PE • kenneth P Anderion PE . Merk R Roitt PE . Oevid A Soneitroo. MBA. Sidney P Wiii.emton. PE. I $ • Agnei M R.nq MBA. Alien Rick Sctirndt PE . Thomet W Peterton. PE . Jemet R Meiend PE . M.let B Jrn,tn. PE . i Pmiup Grevel W. PE • Oemet J Edoerion Pf . Itmeel Mertmer. PE . Tnomet A Syfko Pf . Sheldon j Johnion . Dele A Grove. PE • Thomet A Roother PE . Robert J Oevery PE Otficet: St Paui. St Cloud. Rochpitrr and O'dimar. MN • Miiwvauitee. Wl • CbicaQo. IL U^biite* WWW bonestroo com Paul Weinberger Zoning Administrator/Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: 1074 Wildhurst Trail File No. 139-02-000 Plat No. 02-2745 Dear Paul: .:j ' •: ;j /, Wit « WI- WiL.'..•wv.o We have reviewed the proposed site plan for the proposed home construction located at 1074 Wildhurst Trail. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: • The proposed home location abuts the proposed sanit;u> sewer easement. It is critical that the home construction not encroach into the easement to protect the City ’s future access to the sewer. We assume the home will be slab on grade so that no basement excavation is necessary. • All silt fence should be installed prior to any clearing, filling or grading activity. Silt fence should remain in place until vegetation has been established. • We have no problem with the proposed wetland fill and mitigation provided the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) concurs. • It appears the proposed driveway will be constructed over the existing lift station. The City should review the proposed driveway design and detemiine whether this will create conflicts. • A grading plan should be provided for review. No grading activity or heavy equipment should be allowed within the sanitary sewer easement. If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul. MN S5II3 • 651-636-4600 • Fax: 651-636-1311 287^0 ... s.oo S88*06'36TE J iS4.es A.00 WILOHURST ju TRAIUS 888*06 36 ‘ea'------- H ^^«49*39f2r '•tioSTiiS'c ‘ •'' iL____ ^'AC H w ^ ^4 « 505§/^' <^4* * s’^ ,\C M< ,» l\ J ‘' V. V* » i SLV ^<3«' Nxrr _«6J)0 Nj^ ;5rfi S84*40 ’0tfr^l0 ^ /."./P y, I I 7 o<'^ /, oOA.oo_.^re ^' i B r' y - 7 e p :» K 0 R i F. 3 2'/a** c*<"~ r>« ^^ • i.L# I 260./ DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT 10* \ 3: //3 403.99 //^^ORE LINE AS OF r// II-I9-90 , 7gt - '239.69 164.30 S88*06 ’24"E 4I5.00 TONKAVIEW GARDENS 4I5.79 meos. TC^JKAV:^:^V v'iAROFNS i^./7 •I /SO. UME OF No. I/2 OF VAC. 8 i SHAOYSr.______I____ 3^■!A0Y STJ^F.FT 'O I w-.4y <b V/ A f A I u I e mV /-\v^ r-A « 3 LAKE ELEV«0^75FT .II-I9-90 K. 63.12 • ' \ o.«»I00.04 S89*49 ‘29*E FU4 vJ;UWs4 fs+«>-W ItlOB 60 60 120 ^£M o lO SCALE IN feet ; \* 52.0a ;ne L!/ .> \ N-' «#■ PT ■i fiiiiwi i!! !'':■;, i!"*. !•:' 5 i-4-i.i i i ^■i■4■ ^■^ ■i i ITK IN •'ll s 1tr a r ill TKONT HLC.VATION • rC.TC.K50N RC.SIDC.NCC. //■' G r ' 3 .»*•■ * ^ '* • *m£Li* '7^^ y v' ^ KE.AK ;E.A.ST) LLr.VATION ^MI fi ••' f .; • *' *r* / I *...• » •»*/ I r f, r M u r RUN DATE 01/07/02 BATCH 505 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORNATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI^35^01 PAGE PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR 36 07-117-23 13 0217 01000 WILOHURST TR DAVID A TIHP t MICHELLE TIMP DAVID A TIMP 1000 HILDHURST TR MOUND MN 55364 36 07-117-23 21 0002 04505 WEST BRANCH RD HARRIET J MORGART HARRIET J MORGART 1003 WILDHURST TR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 21 6013 01001 WILDHURST TR NANCY L FERRELL NANCY L FERRELL 1001 WILDHURST TR MOUND MN 55364 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADPR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 36 07-117-23 21 0016 01003 WILDHURST TR HARRIET J MOROART HARRIET J MORGART 1003 WILDHURST TR MOUND MN 55364 36 07-117-23 24 0030 01045 WILDHURST TR MICHAEL V MCKENNEY MICHAEL V MC KENNEY 1045 WILDHURST TRAIL MOUND MN 55364 36 07-117-23 24 0011 01060 WILDHURST TR RVC HOMES INC RVC HOMES INC 15500 WAY2ATA BLVD WAYZATA MN 55341 38 07-117-23 24 0031 01055 CITY OF CITY OF P O BOX WILDHURST TR ORONO ORONO 66 CRYSTAL DAY MN 55323 36 07-117-23 24 0029 01085 WILDHURST TR H A SCHULTZ ETAL HARVEY A SCHULTZ 1085 WILDHURST TR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 24 0032 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED MICHAEL/CHRISTINE LITTMANN MICHAEL LITTMANN 9172 UTICA AVE S BLOOMINGTON MN 55437 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 36 07-117-23 24 0041 01090 WILOHURST TR J M PREW I K L PREW JOHN t KAREN PREW 1090 WILDHURST TR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 24 0045 01006 WILDHURST TR F G JORGENSEN 8 R M ASHER F G JORGENSEN ARM ASHER 1006 WILDHURST TR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 24 0046 01074 WILDHURST TR ILONA J PETERSON KENNETH C PETERSON 14820 13TH PL N PLYMOUTH MN 55447 3 I. • ( TOTAL BATCH 505 00012 TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator February 11, 2002 SUBJECT: «02-2746 Mark Finney 3210 North Shore Drive Variances Zoning District:LR-IB, One Family Lakcshorc Residential District List of Exhibits: A B C D E Application Plat Map Survey/Site Plan Floor Plans • Elevation Sketches Property Owners Notification l.ist Application Summary Applicant has requested variances to permit construction of a lakeside deck, a 15' X 10’ screen porch, and a 1.164 s.f. two-story addition to the house. The addition would contain a detached garage. 3 bedrooms, bathrooms and utility room. A variance is required to permit the addition to encroach 6' into the 10' side yard setback requirement. A variance is also required to permit an alteration to e.visting non-confomiing hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback. Required variances; 1. Section 10.22. Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (2). Total proposed hardcover exceeds allowed hardcover by 1.249 s.f. 75-250 Lot Area = 10.355 s.f l:\isting Hardcover = 5,851 s.f (56.5%) Proposed Hardcover = 3.838 s.f (37%) .Allowed Hardcover = 2.589 s.f (25%) 2. Section 10.24. Subdivision 5 (B) To permit a 4' side setback for the residential addition. The existing house is set back 7.4' from the property line. I hc required setback is 10’. »02-2746 Mark Finnf> 3210 North Shore Drive Februan 10 2fX)2 Page 1 of3 Setback Variance - Addition The existing house on the property is located adjacent to the North Shore Marina which docs have two buildings used tor storage and customer use just across the property line. The addition, located only 4’ from the property line, would leave a 10.8' separation between the Marina building and the house. This does meet the required setback distance between buildings. However, the 4’ propertv setback is closer to the property line than the existing house setback of 7.4*. The house is situated on the property so the corner of the house located near the lake is 7.4' and the corner towards the street is 8.0' from the property line. The City of Orono has tried to require new construction, additions and new buildings meet minimum requirements when possible. The setbacks not only provide additional space between buildings, but also leave additional land area for proper drainage systems. This is especially important on lakeshore lots. Detached Garatie The proposed detached garage shown on the survey is drawn at a size of 32' X 24'. A building of that size would be required to meet a minimum setback of 15' to a property line. The applicant has stated he is willing to construct a building 30' X 24' building which is a structure under 750 s.f., thus only requiring a 10’ setback. Tlte detached garage is intended for storage and would not have a driveway. A garage door would be located on the east side of the building. Hardcover As a result of the proposed plan the total hardcover on the property would be reduced. There is currently a large gravel driveway and parking area on the property that would be removed for the new driveway and garage addition. I he total hardcover is still over the 25% limitation in the 75-250' lakeshore setback requiring the variance, fotal hardcover would be reduced by a total of 2.013 s.f. Additional hardcover removal includes removal of the existing detached garage and drivew ay. The existing garage and drive are shown on the attached survey/site plan. Applicant has also agreed to locate the driveway to not be w ithin 5' of the property line. Applicant's Statement of Hardship Refer to Fxhibit A. (Summary' Below) 1. r.xisting house is inside the setback and the attached garage will line up in the same area. 2. The property is located next to a marina. The addition would help to screen the boat yard from the property. 3. The lot is narrow and long. By locating the addition in the side setb,ack it would leave yard space east of the house. 4. fhe existing garage would be removed out cf the 75-250' setback and a new garage would be constructed in the 250-500' setback. •02*2746 Maik Finnc) 3210 Ni>fth Shore Dn>c Februio 19. 2002 Page 2 of 3 PLANNING COMMISSION OPTIONS FOR ACTION 1.Approve variances to permit the proposed plan as is. This applicant has agreed to reduce the size of the detached garage to not be over 750 s.f. 2.Table 3. Deny, stating reasons 4.Other Action Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the addition be shifted to meet at least a minimum setback to match the e.xisting setback of the house. The existing house is not parallel with the property line. The exterior wall moves further from the property line as the house distance increases from the lakeshore. Staff reeommends approval of the hardcover variance subject to the hardcover per the proposed plan subject to the condition the side setback is increased. Total hardcover in the 75-250' setback is being reduced from 5,851 s.f. (56.5%) to 3,838 s.f. (37%). r «02-2?46 Mark Finney 3210 North Shore Dfivo Felnijvy 19.2002 Page 3 of3 A CITV’ OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee SI50.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) * •• Application U 03^ • Date Received Amount Paid oa d f! •* *’ V r ; -V • .•'I /Tb ^ i.-t —J PROPERTY INFORMATION Site AUdress J^/0 TUi/Jx. JJiru^ Pjuik Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)^__________________________ ,^^ch‘^legal description;to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_______________________ I (do)(r3o not))also ovm the adjacent parcels of land. .(month/year) Present use of property: ^residential Zoning District:___________________ other (specify) APPLICANT Name /ifirK /~/ A/ D City: Phone (home) C/Z-^o^-/?2o Phone (work) 7tJ 2 ~.?JY? ^rcAyc________Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name L/bbi^ Address: !2 U/ I fik'B 'JjF Phone (home) C !2 - 9 ?i~/I ?1 ____ Phone (u ork) Pc g City:_ yfiy2fir/9______Zip: ^^^4/ ocvDESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Constniction Cost $ Describe request in detail: a. JaciL( (alhich ^diiional ^eets if^^e^arv) f' VARIANCES REQUIRED ___Lot Aren ___Lot Width ^'^'^Hnrdcov'cr Setback:Front \yi\c Lot Coverage Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERl V CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance «ith ^ning Code feguiremenla: ^ I iMitionalP.U sheets if necessary) JU REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. All of the fQlloivin2 information mu»t be submiHed bv the application dpaHlin> j|. order for vour application to be conaidtrgd fnmpletg; __r' Completed Application Form ---- Certified Propei^ Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Ceme^348-5910). ---- Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/j" x 11" for reproduction. ---- Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/2" x* 11" for reproduction. ---- Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'/i" x 11"). ---- List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). ---- As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. __ Additional items as may be requested by City staff. 5, 6, 8 The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that ygpr yariame appUcation is not compleu if the above information has not been inci..dpd APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) md/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the bc;.t of his/her know ledge. Applicant's Signature ^.t Date ^ ^ OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation an^erification^of this request. Owner's Signature . \ ^ 7y Applicant must have all subWlttals li«f6 the CiWoffices 25 davs before the Planning Commission Mectmg. Planning Commission Meeting^ are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make ^gements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting f/ f 3j '■‘n "frnv.'’ f * ..• <»<%- T • • •___- Ot- lit--® • I..--. ''Vrl ;'r.t^Crv * '• * :'Vii'r:t'« . J -;Parcellnformatlon »‘t •V'.v/ .•:. • Mil N««. NORTHiiiS^^ * :• to /K>/ • hgatty recorded map. It represonts a compilatioh ------ ^ (tofd from Ofy, County, and State road authoriUea and oiher ID 08117234:1 liquM Number 9210 ’ A 'i i'js # 2 7 /I I DBUAFS'^GABRIEL LAND SUKVEYOKS. INC. ^y> Hotbor Lofif Nq. Plymouth, MN 55447 Phono:(7$3) 559-0500 Toi- (76J) 559-0479 Tift Mto. lISff C flO0 0 ^*•0 f Crooft 1 ------------------------------^• • # • CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY S<o% ' r-jo’• PRCPARCO fOR: Mr. MtLrk Finney 17600 14th Ave No. PIjrmouth. Mn, 55447 • # • )LLnr r lii^ ‘HBf^ •♦^ /•• . % ^,vt • , *f • . ■• *il^\i ■ ^\ h '/*- mI M </tf w S^'V'vv^ ft'./'r.tv.u,,", X;. I, ■•'•><••' -».#sMM4 m ^4 -!■ . 4 .r. ■' ^r,<- -r-j wp4-.;^S^TK8i ■'' jj’’''7 jggjg ' ,'■••' C!^(j d,<C '/'• •/< »X»4< f■‘Xi ' . .. I >.>g;c)< .•'.*.'■';^:xi*{>^. ,«i *■ 'S • •'• > '-V 'jK' ‘>^ w • 4)^/. ti f . ’SZ’! '■/' . V • -• •..• — ^ f i \ -V. .« ^I iwiaiiWBiteigR V;1 •>“I A;)' »**•' fr' •» • • • . V’. 1 • • ‘ • • •• : •i.v *. * 4 . •• « • :.v ’ ^ :* •1 m mm^ 1 U* * Vf r r»- ■ ««• *« ’V ■ X ■ • i*' .I*. — 1 . t* •#. 1 1 1 f /• 1- JL.'1t t ■i ’ J 't' # ^ L i , t__■^l' A 1 1 i; 1 • •• 1K*.. .**»««-•*• •• MiiMI iUN DATE Ol/U/92 BATCH 502 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PmSSAOl PAGE 3 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR SB 06-117-23 A1 0001 03200 NORTH SHORE DR SHIRLEY J HENDRICKSON ET AL SHIRLEY J HENDRICKSON RICK A WINDENBURG 3200 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA HN 55391 3B OB-117-23 91 0002 03210 NORTH SHORE DR DENNIS LEROY LIBBY DENNIS LEROY LIBBY 3301 BROWNLOW AVE ST LOUIS PARK HN 55926 36 OB-117-23 91 0003 03202 NORTH SHORE OR ROBERT 6 I JANET L LABATT ROBERT B JANET LABATT 3202 NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR SB OB-117-23 91 0009 03229 NORTH SHORE DR NORTH SNORE HARINA INC NORTH SHORE HARINA INC 3222 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA HN 55391 3B OB-117-23 91 0005 03290 NORTH SHORE DR NORTH SHORE HARINA INC NORTH SHORE HARINA INC 3222 NORTH SNORE DR WAYZATA HN 55391 36 09-117-23 32 0009 031BO NORTH SHORE DR P J BLOHBERG i B J BLOHBERGI PAUL J I BEVERLY J BLOHBERG 31B0 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA m 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 3B 09-117-23 32 0010 031B6 NORTH SHORE DR F P PACOVSKY B H L PACOVSKY FREDRICK HICHELLE PACOVSKY PACOVSKY 3B 09-117-23 32 0011 031BB NORTH SHORE DR J A B D L ROSATI JAHES A B DEBRA L ROSATI 31BB NORTH SHORE DR SB 09-117-23 32 0012 03190 NORTH SHORE DR C A B A C TRAPANESE CHERYL B ALBERT TRAPANESE 3165 NORTH SHORE DR 1 Complete Date: 60 Day Deadline: 2/5/02 4/6/02 TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator Paul Weinberger. Zoning Administrator Februar>' 11, 2002 SUBJECT: #02-2747 Eagle Crest North West Townhomes/Tonka V'entures 3749 Livingston Avenue Vacation of a portion of a dedicated Drainage and Utility Easement Zoning District: List of Exhibits: LR-IC - Single Family Lakeshore Residential District A B C D i; I G H I Application Plat Map Survcv'Sitc Plan 0 Preconstruction Utility Plans Plat of l.ake Minnetonka Woods City Engineer Comments (February' 6, 2002) Reliant Energy Minnegasco Comments (February 5, 2002) Qwest Comments (February 5, 2002) Property Owners Notification List Application: Eagle Crest has requested a vacation of a portion of a dedicated drainage and utility easement. The drainage and utility easement was dedicated on the plat of Lake Minnetonka Woods in 1999. Lake Minnetonka Woods is the 29-unit town house development on Livingston Avenue. I he purpose of the vacation request Is to construct an end town house unit 1.5' into the casement area. Copies ot the plat showing the easement area and proposed vacation are attached. The total request would vacate an area of less than 10 s.f The easement area contains both a sewer line and watermain. The closest ser\'ice is the sewer line which would be located 7.8' when the building is constructed. The City has notified utility companies of the request to vacate a portion of the easement. No concerns from those utilities notified have been received as of the date of this memo. Qwest and Reliant Energy/Minnegasco have both responded and stated they have no facilities within the easement area. The City of Orono has determined there are methods available to provide maintenance to the service lines w ithout impacting the building based on 7.8' to the comer of the building. *02-2747 Crcsl North West Townhomci/Tonki Ventures 3749 Livingston Avenue Febryaiy 19.2002 Page I of 2 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the vacation request to vacate a portion of the drainage and utility easement as shown on the plat of Lake Minnetonka Woods based on the fact that the public use of the easement for sewer and water purposes are not negatively impacted by the vacation and no negative comments have been received by public utilities, subject to the following conditio.. 1.The applicant shall provide final “as-built ” plans for the entire development of Lake Minnetonka Woods prior to review of the vacation request by the City Council. PLANNING COMMISSION OPTIONS FOR ACTION 1. Approve 2. Table 3. Deny, stating reasons 4.Other Action 102-2747 Eafk Crest Koith West Toisnhofnes/Tonkm Ventures 3749 Livingston Avenue February 19.2002 Page 2 of 2 4• • CITV OF |)RONO - GENERAL LAND USE AfPLICATION AppSurtoB» CQ07*-iy DileH»ctlvta~~"I -• ocr,^ Amouot Pakl 3 co. C' o PROPERT Sit* Adti Type cf Proptry LOCATION **** —aj?. Application to b* Filed Identification Number (P I D.) ----- APPLICANT Nam Address'1 l(i^ -10®r Date Pro Hrty Acquired P I rdoi((J^ also own the ^di»^^:r;:;:r'2 --------------------------(niontn'yean ----- K ^ _ t___I I #v - ^ *^50 own the adjacent parcels of lanJ FEES - CO MDITIONAL USE PERMITS - ’i7< OA rccjcst with CU? application175 00 Residential Accessory Use 250 00 Institutional (church, school, etc).. i.wvu;juuiia, tenuren. school, ett . 225.00 Guest Hoiue/Gaest Apaamcr;ts „ 1 200.00 Duplex Credit'Bldg . 325.00 Cominercial/lndustrial Use 1 250 00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - des.gnated vEetiard cr flocxlplain Grading and filling - 501 cu yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining u^dls within 7:i' of laiceshore ilJ • P*aa * - — ■■ ■ —4cuai . T^^-D/PID • see Fee Schedule ----1J Y cnangc irom origtr.al rppl ---->iftcr-the-Fact Pee Double Current Application fee OTHER applications ~~Z^ 4100 on Review (♦ cop.su lam fees)4300 00 Vacation 1200.00 Easement Vacation 4100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision 350 00 Rezoning (PUD . refer to fee schedule) 375.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment 100 00 Appeals (|)thcr • see F«e Schedule c__i Q. t.vji IS ;:-c'. c: t (vem 0 gir;i r;;-i ^Rln :County T^pkyer Servjceg^b|p:ti ?R------(HCSAH-Ne^5rPtAT^e8)----------------------------------------- /7-((7-a3-<3^ (f • . / // . - V. 1 1 ------2 ^;^Parcel Information /Y li«re«l iO 17117233400ai Houm Mumb«r 3749 9tr««t Nam* LIVINGSTON CT ^ V- ■ . V This is not a taga^ recorded mafj. It represents a compilation of ^nformatkin 4 and data from Ctty. County, anp State road autfuMles and other soircM//J} " •Tu^t^>J|C>0Z-. lota 14, 15, 16 and 17, Block 2,lAinr imaiB^ravA • • IV I 4" PVC SDR 26 SANITARY SERVICE (TYP.) - ^ r COPPER SERVICE w/CURB STOP (TYP.) RETAlNI BY OTH COMMON LOT 18 IJVINGSTON AVET REMOVE PLUG AND CONNECT TO EX. 6** DIP WM WITH GI WALL (TYP.) I * s 4 • ^ y % ^ ^ L JL . r K ' U J. . ^ % < % 0 -r r • % * LIVINGSTON AVENUE / •' —J i ^ J Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & ^ ^ Associates Engineers & Architects Boi)«ftroo. Botcnt. Anderlik and Associates. Inc. Is an Affirmative ActJon/Cqual Opportunity Employer and Employee Ovened tF Frincipali: Otto G. Bonestroo. PE. • Marvin L Sorvaia. PE • Glenn ff Cook. PC • Robert G Schunicht. PE. • Jerry A. Bourdon. PC February 6,2002 Paul Weinberger Zoning Administrator/Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN S5323 Senior Consultanci: Robert W Rosene. PE • Joseph C Anderlik. PE • Richard E Turner. PE • Susan M Eberim. C PA Associate Principalt: Keith A Gordon PE • Robert R Pfefferie. PC • Richard W foster. PC • Oavid O Loskota. PE. • Mark A Hansoa PC • Michael T Rautmann. PC • Ted K field. PC • Kersneth P Andersor PE • Mark R Rolfs. PE • David A Borsesiroo. MBA. • Sidney P WilJiamsoa PE. L S • Agnes M Rmg. MBA • Allan Rick Schmidt. PE • Thomas W. Peterson. F£ • James R. Maland. PE • Miles B Jensen. PC. • L PhiUtp Gravel III. PE • Oarsief J Edgerton. PE. • Ismael Marursei. PE. • Thomas A Syfko. PE • Sheldon j Johnson • Dale A Grove. PE. • Thomas A Roushar. PE • Robert J. Oevery. PC Offices: St Paul. St Cloud. Rochester arsd Wtilmar MN • Mii¥vaukee. Wl • Chicago. IL MAbslte: wwwborsestroo com p»f . * . Fee; 0 7'-'; Ul I r vr UnC/iVo Re: Tonka Ventures Easement Vacation File No. 139-02-000 Plat No. 02-2747 Dear Paul: We have reviewed the request from Tonka Ventures for the easement vacation on Lot 17, Block 2, Lake Minnetonka Woods. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: • The construction plans submitted are not adequate to review the proposed easement vacation. The applicant must provide “as-built ” plans of the sewer and water in this area. • Once the “as-built ” plans are submitted wc will provide comments. If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul. MN 55113 • 651-636-4600 • Fax: 651-636-1311 JImhi Reliant Energy Attn: Steve Von Bargen Real Estate Specialist 700 West Linden Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55440-1165 Xcel Energy Attn: Sharon M. Price Siting and Land Rights 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, MN 55401-1993 Wright Hennepin Electric Company P.O. Box 330 Rockford. MN 55373 Located at 3749 Livingston Avenue City File iN)2-2747 Mediacom 1504 2*^ Street S.E. Waseca, MN 56093 06 Qwest 9700 Schmidt Lake Road Plymouth, MN 55442 Verizon/GTE Telephone Operations 2378 Wilshire Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 ^ttj 0 7 Ot 11 v^r o.-.u,YO City of Orono Attn: Greg Gappa, Public Services Director P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Date: Applicant: Request: Purpose: Comments: January 31,2002 Tonka Ventures, L.L.C. 7760 France Avenue South #770 Minneapolis, MN 55435 (952) 924-4614 The City of Orono has received a request by the property owner of 3 749 Livingston Avenue to vacate a small portion of a public drainage and utility easement. The drainage and utility easement was dedicated on the plat of Lake Minnetonka Woods in 1999. Property owner has requested to vacate 1.5' of the easement to permit construction of an end townhouse unit encroaching into the easement area. A copy of a survey indicating the portion of the easement to be vacated is attached. Any comments should be received by the City of Orono by February 18, 2002. A public hearing to consider the vacation request is scheduled for Tuesday, February 19,2002. Comments should be mailed or faxed to: Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323-0066 phone: 952-249-4600 fax: 952-249-4616___________________________________ Reliant Energy Minnegasco has nc facilities within the above-described area and has no objection to its vacation. Thank you for the advance notice Steven Von Bargeiv ~ Right-Of-Way Administrator Reliant Energy Minnegasco JH • •••. Jij FEB 0 7 /tn cm wruoO, .o ride the 9700 Schmidt Lake Road Room 344 Plymouth, Minnesota 55442 Qwest February 5, 2002 City of Orono Paul Weinberger. Zoning Administrator P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 RE: Vacation Notice 3749 Livingston Avenue Dear Mr Weinberger Qwest Communications has no facilities in area in question for the vacation notice at 3749 Livingston Avenue City File Number 02-2747. Sincerely, Rick Jorgensen Senior Design Engineer (612) 531-6385 ■iiiMlliliiL RUN DATE 01/11/02 BATCH 501 PROF ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 3S 17-117-23 3A 007^ 03733 LIVINCSTON CT EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC P 0 BOX A7333 HPLS HN 55^^7 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 3B 17-117-23 3A 0075 03735 LIVINGSTON CT EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC P 0 BOX ^7333 MPLS MN 55^47 REPORT NO. PX^35A01 PAGE 3 36 17-117-23 3<i 0076 03739 LIVINGSTON CT MITCHELL N LUTZ MITCHELL N LUTZ 3739 LIVINCSTON CT WAYZATA MN 55391 PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 17-117-23 39 0077 03791 LIVINGSTON CT H AKHTAR 6 A JOHRI HASAN AKHTAR/ANVITA JOHRI 3791 LIVINGSTON CT WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 39 0076 03793 LIVINGSTON CT KATHLEEN HANSBERGER KATHLEEN HANSBERGER 3793 LIVINGSTON CT WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 39 0079 03795 LIVINGSTON CT TONKA VENTURES LLC TONKA VENTURES LLC 77b0 FRANCE AVE S 6770 EDINA MN 55935 PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 36 17-117-23 39 0060 03797 LIVINGSTON CT TONKA VENTURES LLC TONKA VENTURES LLC 7760 FRANCE AVE S 1770 EDINA MN 55935 36 17-117-23 39 0061 03799 LIVINGSTON CT TONKA VENTURES LLC TONKA VENTURES LLC 7760 FRANCE AVE S R770 EDINA MN 55935 36 17-117-23 39 0082 03751 LIVINGSTON CT TONKA VENTURES LLC TONKA VENTURES LLC 7760 FRANCE AVE S 6770 EDINA HN 55935 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 36 17-117-23 39 0063 00036 ADDRESS PENDING LAKE HTKA WOODS ASSOC LAKE HTKA WOODS ASSOC C/0 EAGLE CREST NORTHWST INC P 0 BOX 97333 PLYMOUTH MN 55997 36 17-117-23 39 0069 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED LAKE HTKA WOODS ASSOC LAKE HTKA WOODS ASSOC C/O EAGLE CREST NORTHWST INC P 0 BOX 97333 PLYMOUTH MN 55997 36 17-117-23 39 0065 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED TONKA VENTURES LLC TONKA VENTURES LLC 7760 FRANCE AVE S B770 EDINA MN 55935 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR TOTAL BATCH 501 00096 RUN DATE El/11/02 DATCH SOI PROP AODR ONHER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 36 17-117-23 3A 0056 03720 LIVINGSTON AVE EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC P 0 BOX A7333 PLYNOUTH HN 55<i^7 HErOIEPXN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 36 17-117-23 34 0057 05716 LIVINGSTON AVE EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC P 0 BOX 47333 PLYMOUTH MN 55447 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 2 36 17-117-23 34 0056 03714 LIVINGSTON AVE SONJA HENGESTEG SONJA HENGESTEO 3714 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 36 17-117-23 34 0059 03712 LIVINGSTON AVE EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC P 0 BOX 47333 PLYMOUTH HN 55447 36 17-117-23 34 0060 03710 LIVINGSTON AVE M S MUPPERT IMS HUPPERT MATTHEW/MELISSA HUPPERT 3710 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 34 0061 03706 LIVINGSTON AVE CALE E RAMAKER CALE E RAMAKER 3706 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 V. PROP ADDR OWNER name TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 36 17-117-23 34 0062 03704 LIVINGSTON AVE JULIE M WILSON JULIE M WILSON 3704 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 34 0063 03702 LIVINGSTON AVE KRISTIN OHE KRISTIN OHE 3702 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 34 0064 03700 LIVINGSTON AVE DANA E NYBO I SARAH K SPIVAK DANA E NYBO I SARAH K SPIVAK 3700 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 C (. L PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 36 17-117-23 34 0065 00036 ADDRESS PENDING LAKE MTKA WOODS ASSOC LAKE MTKA WOODS ASSOC C/0 EAGLE CREST NORTHWST INC P 0 BOX 47333 PLYMOUTH MN 55447 36 17-117-23 34 0066 03715 LIVINGSTON AVE TRACI M SINGHER TRACI M SINGHER 3715 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 34 0067 03713 LIVINGSTON AVE C S HUNT1N6T0N/J WRIGGINS CRAIG S HUNTINGTON JAMIE WRIGGINS 3713 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 36 17-117-23 34 0066 03711 LIVINGSTON AVE B V BESSINGPAS I B J STANTON BRIAN V BESSINGPAS BRIAN J STANTON 3711 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 34 0069 03707 LIVINGSTON AVE DAWN M TANABE DAWN M TANABE 3707 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 34 0070 03705 LIVINGSTON AVE LORI SCHAEFER LORI SCHAEFER 3705 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 (. L PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 36 17-117-23 34 0071 03703 LIVINGSTON AVE VANESSA K ARNOLD VAMESSA K ARNOLD 3703 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 34 0072 03701 LIVINGSTON AVE LISA M GUSTAFSON LISA M GUSTAFSON 3701 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 36 17-117-23 34 0073 03731 LIVINGSTON CT EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC P 0 BOX 47333 MPLS MN 55447 ( t.*j7 ^ ^ 4 V t;0.' r> i: V,. > RUN DATE 01/11/02 BATCH 501 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP AODR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST SB 17-117-2S SA 0030 03060 LIVINGSTON AVE T G TNOHA I J A KOBERNUS T TNOHA I J THOHA 3660 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 36 0053 03692 LYRIC AVE JANE P GROSS JANE P GROSS 3692 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 36 0036 03660 LYRIC AVE GERALD LEE SINONSON GERALD LEE SINONSON 3660 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 36 0039 03665 LYRIC AVE C N ROBBINS A K AHRENS KATHERINE AHRENS 3665 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 36 0062 03655 LYRIC AVE H I L EELKER HARLAN I LOLA FELKER 3655 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 36 0065 03625 LYRIC AVE KATHLEEN L FINE KATHLEEN L FINE 3625 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 JJ.C '■! 36 17-117-23 36 0031 03670 LIVINGSTON AVE RICHARD W EPLAND RICHARD W EPLAND 3670 LIVINGSTON AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 36 0036 03690 LYRIC AVE JOHN J LAGIESKI JOHN J LAGIESKI 3690 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 36 0037 03697 LYRIC AVE JOSEPH J ARONE JOSEPH J ARONE 3697 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 36 0060 03675 LYRIC AVE DOUGLAS J NIELAND DOUGLAS J NIELAND 3675 LYRIC aVE ORONO HN 55391 36 17-117-23 36 0063 03665 LYRIC AVE THOHAS H PENN THOHAS H PENN 6270 CIR RD TONKA DAY HN 55331 36 17-117-23 36 0056 03726 LIVINGSTON AVE EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC P 0 BOX 67333 PLYHOUTH HN 55667 REPORT NO. PI635601 PACE 1 36 17-117-23 36 0032 03680 LIVINGSTON AVE CHERYL K HOUH CHERYL K HOUH 10801 WAYZATA BLVO R120 HINNETONKA HN 55305 36 17-117-23 36 0035 03650 LYRIC AVE C D LENNON I T J NICOL CHAD D LENNON 6 TARA J NICOL 3650 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 36 0036 03695 LYRIC AVE CONSTANCE C LEAF CONSTANCE C LEAF 3695 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 36 0061 03665 LYRIC AVE JEFFREY G KOCH JEFFREY G KOCH 3665 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 36 17-117-23 36 0066 03635 LYRIC AVE DEAN W I HURIEL LATTIN DEAN W t HURIEL LATTIN 3635 LYRIC AVE WAYZATA HN 55391 38 17-117-23 36 0055 03722 LIVINGSTON AVE EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC EAGLE CREST NORTHWEST INC P 0 BOX 67333 PLYHOUTH HN 55667 10 TO:Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM:Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner DATE:February 4,2002 SUBJECT: #02-2748 Kathryn Alexander on behalf of Richard and Nancy Mar/an 2795 Pheasant Road Variance -- Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IB One Family Lakeshorc Residential District (1 acre) 46.560 s.f. (1.069 acres) List of Exhibits A Analysis Worksheet Application Sur\'ey/Site Plan Photo of Property Plat Map Property Owner's List Hardcover Worksheets Section 10.56 Subds. 16(E,F) B C D E F G H Pertinent Code Section: I. Section 10.22. Subd. 1 (B); Lakeshore Setback: No principal or accessory structure shall be located w ithin 75 feet of the lakeshore. Variance Request: To permit a variance to allow a deck to be w ithin 75' of the lakeshore. 2. Section 10.56. Subd. 16 (E.F): Water Oriented Accessory Structures/Stairways Lifts and Landings; The only water oriented accessoiy structures that are allowed in the 0-75' setback /one are lock boxes up to 20 s.f. area and no more than 4' high. Stairwa> s up to 4' wide are allowed in the 0-75' zone with landings (i.e. decks) no more than 32 s.f in area. Application Summary: 1 he applicants own the subject property and are requesting a hardcover variance (0-75') to allow' a 216 s.f deck and 20 s.f shed located by the lakeshore to remain on the property. A portion of the deck has a roof, but is not enclosed. Discussion: January. 2002 the applicants received a permit to build a new residence on the property. 1 he new residence meets all standards lor the LR-1B zoning district All th". remains in the 0-75' .setback zone is steps leading to the lake, deck, shed, and two retaining walls. #02-2748 Richard Nancy .Marzan 2795 Pheasant Road Variance 2/4/2002 Page I of 2 The topography of the property is fairly flat except approximately 45’ from the lakeshore. At that point it drops significantly to the lake. (See Exhibit C). There is not a permit on file for the deck or shed, however it appears it has been there for many years. Researching city files, a boat house was located there at least until 1986. The zoning code allows stairways up to 4' wide, but landings no more than 32 s.f. in area. Decks and roofed shelters are not allowed. The shelter is painted white and is quite conspicuous against the brown retaining wall as viewed from the lake. Statement of Hardship The applicants have included their statement of hardship in E.xhibit B. The applicants should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Issues for Consideration 1. The steep topography to the lake requires some form of landing to transition from the steps to a dock. 2. There is not a permit on file for the deck or shed by the lake, however it appears it has been there for many years. 3. The deck and shed are in good condition and structurally sound. 4. The deck and shed do not obscure adjacent neighbors views of the lake. 5. The new residence conforms to all zoning standards. 6.Is there a legitimate hardship that supports approval for keeping the roofed structure and the deck? 7. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation: Plaiming Commission should determine whether the.se are sufficient hardships shown to allow ’ anything more than the stairway and a 32 s.f. platform to remain. #02-2748 Richard "Nancy Marzan 2795 Pheasant Road Variance 2/4/2002 Page 2 of 2 riy 45' from the lakeshore. At that ANALYSIS WORKSHEET ppears it has been there for many least until 1986. lore than 32 s.f. in area. Decks and J is quite conspicuous against the LR-IB Lot Area Required 1 Acre Actual 1.069 Acres ibit B. The applicants should also Hardcover Calculations anding to transition from the steps ike, however it appears it has been ' sound. L*\vs of the lake. icping the roofed structure and the Distance from shoreline Total area in setback Allowed hardcover E.xisting Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 0-75'11,415 s.f.Os.f. (0%) 258 s.f. (2.26%) 258 s.f. (2.26%)* 75-250 ’26,426 s.f.6,606.5 s.f. (25%) 6,549 s.f. (23.6%) 6.549 s.f. (23.6%) 250-500'8,719 s.f.2.615.7 s.f. (30%) 910 s.f. (10.4%) 910 s.f. (10.4%) ♦ Steps net included in calculations, they arc allowed by code. Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 46,560 s.f.Allowed: 6.984 s.L E.xisting: 4.694 s.f. 15% 10.08% ficient hardships shovsn to allow -3 r Application # OZ-Zl*^^ I^te Received !-Z Z-0 Z. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 ^ ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming strucUires $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Amount Paid PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P.l.D.) 0.1-117 •—CCO^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date I (do)Iso own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: ^ residential ___^other (specify). Zoning District:__^_________________ .(month/year) APPLICAN*^ . Name AugXAdJpgflg, Address :^0\ Phone (home) ____ Phone (work) -Q City; Zip:_ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (work) Address: City: Zip: Estimated Construction Cost $DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST ________________ Describe request in detail: (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback: Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Y__Other (specify) Ac< *JjO'y ^ fi MARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY' CONDITIONS Describe imdue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: 1 -P4/P ^ \VJ (attach additional sheets if necessary) / I lii=2 / '•.‘uv \ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information muat be submitted hv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete; 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-5910). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed sur\eyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/i" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (I) copy SVz" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of fioor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'/j" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not hpi»n inclnH«»#l APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true a^fl correct to the best of his-Tier knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City stalT, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature Dale Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have w authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. • « :iJ T Pheasant Road HAim aWTWN-f27 5 ON IO«t2-00 ^ ^i^inary Hia^4 WATER ELEVATION=927.5 ON 10-12-00 3££lftSKi@% 9Si£E@L['U J) ■l4^c:x '_____________^ • ■ '■ ■. J * •. : f) im '(42) <»?<* s . 33AS2to —3^ S ' 3 111 »S5 ^ § >Hi I* 112Ji__i> , S83*0^e I4«.3 yj 05 *7 3: >- 2 S S ^7; S9 |3o: i "'10002 :z/-//7- :23~ //7 / 0[rr A-j A' *'fr Wa:*J ? va3 Parcel InformaUoh i» if ' V Gi ^ ^*jJVare«l ID 2^___ f Hoiis. ^11^^5 - I** 1.1 .-.r::i2s!ssss®^ (MahomOfy. County, and Staia n»d authorWaa and oltm stlur^^ ‘ KU1 1 iUN DATE tl/lA/AE HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PIA35A01 PAGE 6 DATCN 5f2 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 36 21-U7-2S 23 OOIH 00636 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED PHEASANT LAWN HOMEOWNERS PHEASANT LAWN HOMEOWNERS 2700 PLEASANT RO EXCELSIOR MN 55331 36 21-117-23 23 0015 02760 PHEASANT RD T J MAHONEY OKA MAHONEY TIMOTHY J MAHONEY 2760 PMEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 36 21-117-23 23 0025 02765 PHEASANT RD STEPHEN L BAKKE ETAL STEPHEN L BAKKE 2765 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 36 21-117-23 32 0001 02701 PHEASANT RD L N A L C SUNDET LELANO N SUNDET 2701 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 36 21-117-23 32 0002 02705 PHEASANT RD R A NARZAN I N MARZAN RICHARD A 1 NANCY MARZAN 2705 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 36 21-117-23 32 0003 02709 PHEASANT RO ELMER J MARTINSON ELMER J MARTINSON 2799 PHEASANT RO EXCELSIOR MN 55331 PROP AMR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 36 21-117-23 32 0000 02600 PIOEASANT RD LARSON PROPERTIES LLC D W LARSON 301 BROADWAY AVE S WAYZATA MN 55391 36 21-117-23 32 0005 02760 PHEASANT RD JIG TEYNOR GAIL M I JOSEPH T TEYNOR 2769 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 total batch 502 00006 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST n i • 4 J J V.* • ) v'^ • •• , HARDCOVER CALCLTATION WORKSHEET 25i-*cirAScTBACX ZOtiZ: (CTKCLE ONE)/" 0-Tr £I rs-isr .IKlirSG PfARDCOVra IN TOST. A. Kdae Lsarh W!d± X X X B. Cang9 • • • • C DrWcwiy -X X a SidmCc X X E. Padc/Cedc X X Undciaia -________ By Plastic_____________ X X X G. Other : LiAil6 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B _ _ X ICO PPnPOSgD HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________ 3C X X X B. Camge C Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E Pado/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underbia_____________ By Plasric —_______ X X X a C±er total hardcover in ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE + B ___X ICO 500*1 OGO' ■ & //- ‘ ST. • ST. c r S-r. S'. Zo ST. *,ST. ST. ST. ST. •ST. S..'. %S. SJ. zz.ST. • diz^S.F. II.S*r • '6.% S.F. ST. S.F. S.F. J2t>S.F. •S.F. ST. ST. ss. cS.llr S.F. ST. 11^ST. ST. ST. cXc2 S5. ..as-s 1.. C/l C/lVa I , bt, cC ciO ___/ar:2 HA2DC0VER C■VLCX^LA7IG^’ W0RXSEES7 -50-5CC*STTBAOC ZONE: (CTKCLS OiNZ) 0-TF *i 5-250* ^1N¥1[>*G HAHDC0V1SJN20>T A. Ko38 z z z B. Gcrag? • • • • C Cnvew^z X D. Sidsmik X X E. Pzdorecx X X F- Lacdscaps Undgriaia By Plastic X X X G. Other ; lA/jiib .•• TOTAL HARDCOVER- IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE B X ICO PBOPOSEP BAPDCOVER IN ZONE A. House LS3|^ X X X B. Garage C Dnveway X X D. Sidewalk X X £• Pado/Dcck X X F, Lacdserpe UnderJah By Plasdc X X X a C±er TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY ARE.A IN ZONs + B ___X ICO *-:o-iccc’ t -I Cir Zj • .* '^r 7 o. Lr I icf 0'7d< ■l , ii.Zj * I ^ S-R SJf. c ~ c ~ S*. S^. S^. S-R s=. s=. S.F. ss. SJ. S.F. S.F. Si: y. A B SI. ST. SI. s ^ S.F. SI. SI. SI. SI. S.F. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. ■ SI. A S^. 5 y. <■> -r " y I-k EASDCOVXR CALCULATION WORXSESZT Sfc73AC< ZONZ: (CIKCL2 OIHZ) O-TT *rs-tsy 2S)-5:C*,5-:0-I2C0’ rtARDCQV giR Ty ZO^c. A. Kc« X X X B. Gsist • • • • 4 C CrWew X X D. SIdsmSc X X E. ?3Ca*Dcdc X X F. Lssicace UcdsrUun By Plastic X X X C. Other total hardcover in zone TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -f 3 X ICO fttOPOSED HARDCOVER TN ZONE A* House _______ - * WIcX^ X X X B. Gamgt C Driveway X X D. SiciswaDc X X E. Pedc/Deck X X F. Lsxcscrre Ucderxa By Plasdc C C±er X X X total KAJCCCVsil IN ZCNc total property area in ZONc ^ B ____X ICO - •ItL' X'// »> ^ 3 ' r S^. S^. Si'. c ~ c r c r c - Si'. Si'. Wm • c r S.F. SJ. Sj. s - SS. A SJT 3 S.r. S.F. S.F. S.F. S -w*« • S--. S--. s s s ^ ST. S.?, ST ST. • ST. A ■ c s S § 10.56 3. Bluff impact zones. Structures and accessory facilities, except stairways, laifdmgs, and lock boxes, must not be placed within bluff impact zones. 4. Uses without water-oriented needs. Uses without water-oriented needs must be located^on lots or parcels without public waters frontage, or, if located on lots or parcels with public watCT^tontage, must either be set back double the normal Ordinary High Water level setback or be substa^dly screened from view from the water by vegetation or topography, assuming summer, leaf-on c^ditions. 5. FtjMes, docks, retaining walls. No fence shall be placed within the shore setback zone. Portions of do^located landward of the OHWL shall be considered as a landing, subject to the regulations for^dings per Subdivision 16 (F) of this section. Retaining walls shall not be placed withinthe shore setback zone. 6.* Average laknlmre setback.' No principal or accessory structure shall be located closer to the lakeshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots, except that this^s not apply to stairways, lifts, landings, and lockboxes. Further, the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes, and shall not apply to tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line sl&l be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the imm^ately adjacent lakeshore lots. D. Minimum Lowest Floor Elevations. All structures located within the Shoreland Overlay District which are subject to the flood plain regulhfions of Section 10.55 of this ordinance shall be placed at an elevation consistent with the requir^ents of that section. The regulatory flood protection elevation shall be established as set forth in Secin 10.55, Subd. 7 of this code. All structures constructed within the Shoreland Overlay District shall Htwe their lowest floor, including basement, placed at an elevation no lower than the regulatory flood^tection elevation. Where the regulatory flood plain elevation cannot reasonably be determined, the rmpraum elevation at which the lowest floor, including basement, may be placed shall be determined^ follows: 1 . For lakes, by placing the lowest floor at a level at least 3^t above the highest known water level, or 3 feet above the Ordinary High Water Level, whichever islugher. above the flood of record. 2. For rivers and streams, by placing the lowest floor at least 3 f^ \ E. Water-oriented Accessory Structures. The only water-oriented accessory structure allowed to be located nearer the Ordinary High Water Level than the normal structure setback as specified in this section shall be a lock box no greater than 20 square feet in area and no higher than 48 inches in height. Such a structure requires a building permit from the City. ORONO CC 376-12 (2-24-92) § 10.56 F. Stairways, Lifts and Landings. Stairways and lifts are the preferred alternative to major topographic alterations for achieving access up and down bluffs and steep slopes to shore areas. Stairways, lifts and landings shall be allowed in the shore setback zone and must meet the following design requirements: 1. Stairways and lifts must not exceed 4 feet in width. 2. Landings for stairways and lifts shall not exceed 32 square feet in area. 3. Canopies or roofs are not allowed on stairways, lifts, or landings. 4. Stairways, lifts and landings may be either constructed above the ground on posts or pilings or placed into the ground, provided they are designed and built in a manner that ensures control of soil erosion. 5. Stairways, lifts and landings must be located in the most visually inconspicuous portions of lots, as viewed from the surface of the public water assuming summer, leaf- on conditions, whenever practical. 6. Facilities necessary to provide shore area access to physically handicapped persons shall be allowed provided that the dimensional and performance standards of subitems 1 - 5 are completed in addition to the requirements of the Minnesota Regulations, Chapter 1340. 7. A building permit shall be obtained fo» fvuiv!ruction of stairways, lifts and landings regardless of whether such improvements are construct. e, at or below grade. G. Steep Slopes. Any applicant requesting a permit for construction of sewage treatTrient-systems, roads, driveways, structures, or other improvements on steep slopes, shall provide adequate mfbrmaUon to allow the City to evaluate possible soil erosion impacts and development of visibility fronTpuhlic waters before such permit may be issued. When determined necessary, conditions shall be attacheiHais^ed permits to prevent erosion and preserve existing vegetation screening of structures, vehicles, and'othgT^facilities as viewed from the surface of public waters, assuming summer, leaf-on vegetation. H. Height of Structures. No structure within the'Shotelmd Overlay District shall exceed the height limitations set forth in the standards for the underlying^Cmine district. ORONO CC 376-13 (2-24-92) di Complete Date: 2/5/02 60 Day Deadline: 4/6/02 TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator February 12, 2002 SUBJECT: #02-2749 Thomas P. Egan, on behalf of all properly owners 350, 360 and 370 Big Island Vacation of a portion of a dedicated Right-of-Way Zoning District: List of Exhibits: RS - Seasonal Recreational District A D C D E F Application Plat Map Survey Qwest Comments Reliant Energy/Minnegasco Property Owners Notification List Property Owners 350 Big Island 360 Big Island 370 Big Island Gary and Cynthia Craswell Thomas and Chery 1 ligan Lowell and Gwendolvn Larson Application: Property owners have requested to vacate ofa portion of platted ‘Massasoit Avenue*'. .Mas.sasoit Avenue is undeveloped right of way on Big Island originally dedicated on the plat of Morse Island Park. Right ot w’ay has been used by Big Island residents and guests for interior pedestrian access to parts of the lakeshore and, periodically, for vehicular traffic for transporting materials for home construction and septic installation. The right of way is also used by utility companies for electric and phone serv ice to the Island properties. There are two houses either fully inside or partially inside the Massasoit Avenue right of way that is proposed for vacation. Attached Exhibit C is a survey document the indicates the location of the right of way and structures. The City notifies all public utilities of the vacation request since they reserve the right to use public right of way for their facilities. Reliant Energy/Minnegasco responded that they have no facilities in the right-of-way. Qwest did notify the City that they do ha\ e existing facilities within the right of way and stated they respectfully decline the right of way vacation request. Please review the attached letter, dated February 6. 2002, and maps provided by Qwest. i02-2749 rhomas P. Egm 350.360 and 370 Dig hlmd Fcbfuar> 13. 2002 Page I of 2 II wners raswell Hgon l\n I,arson n ol platted "Massasoit Avenue", iginally dedicated on the plat of nterior pedestrian access to parts ansporting materials for home by utility companies for electric ssasoit Avenue right of way that t the indicates the location of the cy reserve the right to use public •nded that they have no facilities xisting facilities within the right ition request. Please review the ■est. Lake and Interior Land Access Individual access to public right of way is necessary to Big Island properties. The vacation of the right of way does not eliminate public access to each lot because each lot has access to the lakeshore and access to other right of way. The plat map shows each of the lots adjacent to other public land. Access to public right of way for other lots on the island would not change. According to information available to the City, property surveys and City topo maps, it does not appear any part of Massasoit Avenue or Metacomet Avenue have direct public access to the lakeshore. Staff Recommendation The property owners have the opportunity to ncgociate with Qwest to allow Qwest to use and access their facilities. Staff camiot support vacation of the Massasoit Avenue until Qwest and the property owners reach an agreement on how to allow continued access to the telephone facilities. This could •'c done by the property owners granting a public utility and access casement along the utility lines, or provide a private easement for Qwest for the service lines. The second option would be to have utilities relocated out of Massasoit Avenue. Either option would require all property owners and Qwest ar>eeing on a solution. Final approval of a vacation could be considered by the City only after resolution of the issue. Staff recommends the application be tabled until the issue with Qwest is resolved. Any future redevelopment of the properties would require new structures to have a minimum setback of 75' to the lakeshore. The survey indicates nearly all of Massasoit Avenue, proposed for vacation, is located within 75' of the lakeshore. Vacating the right of way will not alUnv further development on those portions of the nroperty. Public Hearing Required Stafl'did notice the hearing for the vacation request, for the Februaiy 19, 2002 meeting of the Planning Commission. Notices w ere also mailed to all property ow ners w ithin 350' of the property. Staff requests the Planning Commission open a public hearing for public comment. If the request is tabled the hearing w ill be continued to a future meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION OPTIONS FOR ACTION 1 . Approve 2. Table 3. Deny, stating reasons 4. Other Action ^02-2749 Thomas P Egan 350.360 and 370 Big Island February 13,2002 Page 2 of 2 • t Application # 0 2.-27^ 9 Date Received i-2 3^c Z Amount Paid <9 3 CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 3S~0. 3qo 4 3 70 R>im Type of Application to be Filed Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) APPLICANT Name OM f. £T.^ ok ) Address ATOP Phone (home) 7/2- I 7/ _____ Phone (work) V£>-^ ' Citvuy^y ? _______Zip jCTJ 9/ OWNER (if dififerent than applicant) Name Address Phone (home) Phone (work)_ City Zip Date Pr^rty Acquired /P\«.re,k t 7 ?f'___________ I (do) (^ no0 also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERiVUTS • _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Cues, 'louse/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _____$300.00 Commercial/Industrial Use _____$250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____ Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75* of lakeshore _____PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule _____$150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) _____After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee (month/year) OTHER APPLICATIONS $250.00 Conwercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $300.00 Vaca tlorr*" $200.00 Easement Vacation _ $100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _ $350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _ $350.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _ $100.00 Appeals _ Other - see Fee Schedule A-r • iJ A Q I 2. 3. c»** <r X ' REQUIRED SUBMITTALS I* ____Completed Application Form. ____Describe request in detail. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350’, labels and plat map (you must obtam this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603, Government Center, 348-3271). -------Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey — Attach leg^ description to application if not included on required survey. ------Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes m elevation (grades).' ------List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s) Copstruction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As, an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application • • you ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY REPRODUCTION (tl" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOn[^l>>»TS ^.UBMITTED. (Staff will require to scale drawings of all documents. p..n. ^ i<ibmitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information Im not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete Initials of Clerical Staff:_______________________Date 5. 6. 7. 8. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Adnurustrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied IS true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature -------------------- A OWNER'S SIGNATURE The o\wer hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the propeity by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Date ^j/^2 Owner's signature Date ^2. AppUcint must have ijU submitUls into the Cry offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting f »he third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at f 1 jj *<r\ » * • u> Ui (t CITY OF ORONO ooo o o o UJ.ZUJ|ll^ i/> “ u.o February 6,2002 — • 4*1 ^ :■ .' '.! ^,11 w<" Wi"i0i\'0 ■<?ride the lighter Qwest Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 RE'. Vacation of Public Right-of-way City File # 02-2749 Dear Mr Weinberger Qwest Corporation has existing facilities in Right-of-way shown as Massasoit Avenue in letter dated 1-31-02. We must respectfully decline the Right-of- way vacation request. Sincerely, Rick Jorgensen Senior Design Engineer (763) 531-6385 9700 Schmidt Lake Road Room 344 Plymouth, Minnesota 55442 r ^ lui ■,0»friC-CNTlAL C^ictot# or>d Dil('!bgfff 5tlf*r t® 0««Sl £">P«c,*<» Mo.ir.g O Need to ►noe r Reliant Energy Attn: Steve Von Bargen Real Estate Specialist 700 West Linden Avenue Minneapolis, MN SS440-II6S Xcel Energy Attn: Sharon M. Price Siting and Land Rights 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, MN SS40M993 Wright Hennepin Electric Company P.O. Box 330 Rockford, MN 55373 • a4h aAiJlA * M AJAg City File #02-2749 Mediacom 1504 2"^ Street S.E. Waseca, MN 56093 Qwest 9700 Schmidt Lake Road Plymouth, MN 55442 j 0 7I k. O.! 1 w.- „ Verizon/GTE Telephone Operations 2378 Wilshire Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 City of Orono Attn: Greg Gappa, Public Services Director P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Date: Applicant: Request: Purpose: January 3 1, 2002 Thomas Egan 1408 Holdridge Circle Wayzata, MN 55391 952-476-8376 The City of Orono has receiv ed a request by the owners of properties located at 350, 360 and 370 Big Island to vacate a potion of undeveloped platted right-of-way. The right-of-way was dedicated, and shown as “Massasoit Avenue" on the original plat of Morse Island Park. The right-of-way on Big Island in undeveloped, but is open to allow prop* * t. owners interior island access. The property owners primary reason to vacate the roads is that the individual houses are partly or fully within the public right of way. Sec anached Certificate of Survev. Comments: Any comments should be received by the City of Orono by February 18, 2002. A public hearing to consider the vacation request is scheduled for Tuesday, February 19, 2002. Comments should be mailed or faxed to: Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323-0061) phone: 952-249-4600 fax: 952-249-4616 ^ S'O Reliant Energy Minnegasco has no facilities within the above-described area and has no objection to its vacation. Thank you for the advance notice. Steven Von Bargen v Rght-of-Way Administrator Reliant Energy Minnegasco . t t « mJN DATE 11/IA/Ol BATCH 502 % fBOf ADDt ONNEB NAHE TAXPAYER riAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR ONNER MANE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR PROP ADOR OWtf R MANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR PROP ADOR OMNER MANE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR 56 25-117-25 52 0005 005A0 BIG ISLAND RICHARD C HANSON MARILYN LATHAM 625 LAKE ST E WAYZATA NN 55591 56 25-117-25 52 0059 00550 BIG ISLAM) 6 If CRASNELL 6 C D CRASWELL GARY N i CYNTHIA D CRASHELL 5951 CALLE QUATRO N GREiN VALLEY AZ 65619 56 25-117-25 52 0097 00510 BIG ISLAND NANCY LEE FARNES NANCY LEE FARNES 2710 FOXGATE DR MINNETONKA NN 55505 56 25-117-25 52 0057 00590 BIG ISLAND ROBERT If BAILEY ETAL ROBERT If BAILEY 2700 HILLOALE AVE N£ ST ANTHONY NN 55916 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORNATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 56 25-117-25 52 0055 00590 BIG ISLAND RICHARD G HANSON MARILYN LATHAM 625 LAKE ST E WAYZATA MN 55591 56 25-117-25 52 0090 00590 BIG ISLAND RICHARD G HANSON RICHARD G HANSON 370 UNIVERSITY AVE W ST PAUL MN 55103 56 23-117-23 32 0099 00510 BIG ISLAND NANCY LEE FARNES NANCY LEE FARNES 2710 FOXGATE DR MINNETONKA MN 55305 36 23-117-25 32 0056 00560 DIG ISLAND KATHERINE SCRIVER ETAL JEANNETTE S BURCH BOX 1 CAfRfON FALLS MN 55009 REPORT NO. PI935901 PAGE 9 36 23-117-23 32 0037 00370 BIG ISLANDDIG ISLAND i CHENDOUN S LARSON ETAL/ L«.rS»r\ CUFNDni VN S I AR<;ON /GWENDOLYN S LARSON 6500 JAMES AVE S RICHFIELD MN 55923 36 25-117-25 52 0096 00510 BIG ISLAND NANCY LEE FARNES NANCY LEE FARNES 2710 FOXGATE DR MINNETONKA MN 55305 36 25-117-25 32 0055 00900 BIG ISLAND NANCY L GRANRUD ETAL ROBERT E GRANRUD 1609 COLVIN AVE ST PAUL MN 55116 36 25-117-25 32 0060 00360 BIG ISLAND T P EGAN I C A EGAN THOMAS P EGAN/CHERYL A EGAN 1906 HOLDRIDCE CIR WAYZATA MN 55591 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 56 23-117-25 52 0061 00520 BIG ISLAND JOHN S DEAN JOHN S DEAN 637 N 65RD ST WAUWATOSA W1 55215 58 25-117-23 32 0065 00920 BIG ISLAND M B FRUEN ARM FPUEN MICHAEL FRUEN 9911 15TN AVE N MPLS HN 55991 36 23-117-25 52 0065 00910 BIG ISLAND RICHARD W FRUEN ET AL GREGORY B O'CONNOR 1925 66TH ST W UPPER INVER GROVE HEIGHTS MN 55077 \ PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 56 25-117-25 52 0066 00530 BIG ISLAND JOHN ALLEN EIDEN JOHN ALLEN EIDEN P 0 BOX 29 550 BIG ISLAND EXCELSIOR MN 55331 / I/. A V T 36 25-117-23 32 0067 00950 BIG ISLAND ELIZABETH ANN BRENNAN TIMOTHY C LOVETT 12900 MARION LN W R3306 MINNETONKA MN 55505 i i / / 56 23-117-23 32 0071 00990 BIG ISLAND W L I P A THORKELSON W L t P A THORKELSON 7600 GOLDEN VALLEY RD B209 GOLDEN VALLEY MN 55927 hi /2 Completion Date: 1/23/02 60 Day Deadline: 3/20/02 TO: FROM: DATE; SUBJECT: Chair I lawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner Fcbruar>’ 12, 2002 #01-2751 Mark Welch 3625 North Shore Drive Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: List of Kshibils: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 acre) 6,615 s.f. - (5,462 s.f. when the shared driveway is rcmo\cd from the lot area) A n C D F. F 0 II 1 J Application Applicant Description of Request'! lardship Statements Plat Map Fxisting Property Survey Proposed Site Plan Survey llardctjver Calculation Worksheets Floor Plans Idevation Sketches Site Neighborhood I'opography City Fngineer Comments (February 6. 2002) Property Owners Notification l ist Application Summary: The applicant holds the property by a Contraet for Deed. Me has requested variances to permit retnoval of the existing house and construction of a new house. I he new house would be a two bedroom/two bathroom home with a one stall “tuck under" garage space. Access to this property and 5 others is via a private, shared driveway that accesses North Shore Drive. The private driveway is located across the back of the individual lots. The applicant ’s property is the 4"’ of 6 properties that require the drive for access. The driveway is required because the public road is located at a much higher elevation than the properties below. According to I Icnnepin County records the existing house was constructed in 1920. The house is 599 s.l. in size. 1 he new house would allow the property owners to have additional living space and one garage stall. Currently the property does not have a garage. The proposed house would be located the same distance from the driveway as the current house. Please refer to the attached surv ey that shows the location of the house. Due to the small size of the lot, the driveway location, and elevation change between the roadway above and the lot it is not possible to rebuild on the property without requiring variances. Below is a summarv of pertinent ordinances that require variance review. •0I ’7.M Mali Welch 3625 North Shore Dri\c Fehruan 19. 2002 Page I of 4 ■’.•rtinent Ordinances 2. Section 10.25. Subdivision 6 (B): Variances requested to lot area and lot width to permit construction of a new' residence on the property in the LR-IC district less than */i acre and 100' w'idth. The defined lot area, absent the private driveway area, is 5.462 s.f. The defined lot width is 50' at the lakeshore and defined structure setback. The City of Orono has routinely granted variances to lot area and lot width for redevelopment on non-conforming lots in the City. The property does meet the criteria that is normally considered when reviewing such proposals. The property is connected to sanitary sewer and the house would he located in an area above the regulatory flood plain Section 10.55. Subdivision 8. Section 10.22. Subdivisions 1 and 2. and Subdivision 10.56. Subdivision 16(1.) 1 and 2: Variances requested for hardcover and structure within 75' of the lakeshore. where no hardcover or structure is allowed, and a variance to permit greater than 25% hardcover in the 75-250’ of the lakeshore. Total Area 0-75 ’ = 3.750 s.f. Allowed 0-75' = 0 s.f. Proposed 0-75' = 615 s.f. (16.4%) Existing 0-75'= 660 (17.6%) Total Area 75-250' = 1.712 s.f. * Does not include 1.153 s.f. of shared drivewav Allowed 75-250’ = 428 s.f. Proposed 75-250’ = 884 s.f. (51.6%) Existing 75-250’ = 932 (54.4%) Overall hardcover on the property would decrease, however a greater percentage of the hardcover would be for the house. The size of the existing house is 599 s.f the proposed house would be 1,1 76 s.f. The land elevation is about 4' higher than the ordinary high water level of Lake Minnetonka. The lot cannot accommodate a basement. The new house is proposed to he located 53'from the lakeshore where a 75' setback is reipdred. Both adjacent lutuses are within 50' of the lakeshore The new hou.se is located to meet the minimum 5 0' lakeshore setback as required by the D.\R. DXR staff has re vie wed the plans and staled they do not have any requirements on the development based on the building being located outside the 50' setback. «0I-27$I Mjfk Welch 3625 Nonh Shore Drive l ebraarv 19. 2002 Page 2 of 4 3.Section 10.25. Subdivision 6 fB): Variances requested to allow encroachment into the I O' side/rear yard setbacks, and to permit the house to be located 5' from the west side property line. Required Side Setback = 10' Proposed = 5' west property line The proposed house has one garage stall proposed within the house. The 5'.side setback has been requested to provide one additional parking space on the property. The Zoning Code requires residential properties to have 2 off-street parking spaces. To accommodate a second parking space next to the house, a side setback variance is required because the house is shifted towards the west side property line. The parking stall must be located between the house and side property line due to the shared driveway located behind the house. The driveway is narrow and permanent parking within the driveway area would block through traffic. No parking is available on the opposite side of the shared driveway as the land immediately begins to rise to the elevation of North Shore Drive. A typical parking space in a commercial area is 9'X 20' in size. The proposed parking area adjacent to the house is approximately 13'X 20'. 4.Section 10.61. Subdivision 5 ( A): To permit one off-street parking stall to be located 3' from an interior side property line where off-street parking is required to be located 1 O' from a side property line. Please refer to di.scussion above. Review of Hardships: Applicant's hardships are noted in the attached hardship statements. To summarize the hardships, the four main problem areas are. the access road, lot size, and limited p.arking. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the application based on the hardships noted. A recommendation of approval is conditioned on the following: I. Drainage and Utility casements shall be provided 10 ’ along the north lot line and 5' along th interior property lines. 2. A final grading plan shall be submitted prior to review of the request by the City Council. •OI-275I Mark Welch 3625 North -Shofc Drive Febniar)* 2002 Page3of4 ¥ ik The existing shed and all hardcover proposed for removal is completed prior to a final inspection. 4.Gravel shall be removed from the proposed parking area to leave a minimum 3' setback to the property line. Planning Commission Options for Action A.Approve B.Deny C.Table D.Other Action *01-275 1 Maik Welwh 3625 Nofth Shore Dri\c Febniary 19. 2002 Page 4 of4 h CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION ^)hutial Application Fee $250.00 (SS0.(M per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-confonning structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address^! Application U 02.- 2.1 5* J Dale Received . l^ZS-QZ. Amount Paid 4 Z.S'O ificatlon Number (P.LD.) Soo9 _________________Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 08 .Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired _______________________ I (do) (5o notj)also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X residentid ___other (specify)_________ Zoning District: QRok^^)_____________________________ .(month'year) APPLICANT Name Phone (home) Address: ____ Phone (work) 9^ City:\JL)ai^gOL:kx^ Z\y\£S'3^X OWNER (if different than applicant)-------77i-/i'r —(home).^^-%(y-1^7.2Nameti^ol^4(-MjMlA) ^ Phone (woA) Address IRL? I ftp City-VolL-V DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: SeL. Oddbout* Ka.<L.4-- (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback:Front Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshorc Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS E)escribe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual pro[>ertv conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: Qjgtrur 3ir^oo '4^________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) i- I. rC-- .* h 2l <0^ iy-' 3 • 6. yf a: REQUIRED SUBMITTALS AJl.Of thf foliowing information mmf be «uhmlHPd bv the «pnHcati^n rf^arfUne date in flEdCr for VQUr aPDlication to h> cnn«iden?d cntnplrt^; ___ Completed Application Form — Certified Property Owners List of owTiers within 150 ’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department' cf Finance. .\-603, Govt Center, 34 ’?-5910). ---- Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) ar,d include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one copy 8vV' x H" for reproduction. To^graphic surv'ey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing are picpow»d. In addition, provide one fl) copy 8'/i“ x 11" for reproducUon. ---- Skctchji? or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'/j'' x 11"). ---- List of the leeal names (include marital status) of all persons with'an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applic.'mfi s) if not current owner(s). — As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any oth- r persons you wish notified of this application. __ Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour Mnante aPPllCtltlQn not complete jf abpve information has not hgen iiiduded. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all infomntion required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered bv original fee payment) and/or consultant e.xpenses incurred in review of this application,' and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of hishcr knowledge. Applicant's Signature ^Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature__/, LAJ!_Date /— y.:i Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning ommission .Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday cf each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in yoiu place and to advise the Building & Zoning Orficc of this change prior to the meeting /v. . r DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Request to constaict a new 'lindal Cedar" home at 3625 North Shore Drive for residential use. The "28 x 42" 2 bedroom/2 bath home would have a 50 foot set back from the lake shore and a 5-7 inch graduating west side line to allow the face of the home to follow the lake shore property line. Allowances on hardcover and tot coverage will be necessary. (see attached Aspen sketch for general design layout) Lindal Cedar homes provide an efTcient layout within a modest amount of space in a quaint Lakeside Cottage style. HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS: The four main problem areas are, the access road, lot size, well position and limited parking. The access road has a steep embankment ^ich runs parallel with county road 51 and provides access to this tot and five other neighboring properties. The access road is narrow and congested due to resident and gusst parking. The lot size is extremely narrow and the current home does not fall within the new city allowances. The new design is designed to accommodate the lot size and is position behind the two existing neighbor's homes. The well position - is currently out side of the city variances. Limited space for safe parking - due to the narrowness of the lot and access road there is limited parking available for the residents and or guests. n 7 . r " ‘ • 1 fr kA ,1 * CRYSTAL BAYo : denotes iron marker (908.3): denotes existing, spot elevation, mean sea level datum —cy/jr^/V*^ c^a/oof/* Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house and shed, the proposed location of a proposed house, and the location of all visible "hardcover" thereon. It does not purport to show any other innprovements or encroachments. NOTE: For purposes of this survey the North property line is shown 33 feet south from the centerline of travel for North Shore Drive. Verify title information for any road easements that exist. GRONBERG k ASSOCIATES, INC. (miK EKMnS; UIN) 445 R lli.0W (HVE LONC UU(E; lli 55356 952-473-4141 I hereby cerlify Uiol Ui$ srrvey ws prepffcd by me or mJer my ikccl sifer- visioa (Dd Hull om 0 diiy re^slered CivI Engineer and Lend Sti veyor under Ihc lows of the Stole of Mkinesolo. Mi''l S r.rnri-’Itf Minne':<'‘'i li'»c'r SCALE 1"»20' DATE 1-10-02 /-/.y~oz_____ JUU NU. 02-004 1^ (908 HN LUI a, AUU. aUD. INU. Z/0 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA —CENTERUNE OF TRAVEL fU67 RD. NO. 61 north shore drive HOUSE ^:5ao^i«''”lR=9®'7-®® \^=s49.80»casw«o t^S)l **v \ GRAVEL qrIVEVJA'^I EXISTING HOUSE BE lOVED) .A / % I / \ \ r\ V^oosE \. EXISTING tN# •ItftltTtlCfA •Bt t V yf . ? im »co CORMER »•••• ON Lie EXISTINQ....... SHED , dfMO\/€0 WELL EXISTING 8CU0VC0 [93^0) HOUSE {93i.»} 9J^ HOUSE (9:16) SURVEY GLINE 49.9g:t^ ........... •^jvSl |fe^if^42'45' ...... LEGAL DESCRif’TION OF PREMISES LAKE 929.4 CONTOUR LINE Lot 9, Auditor's Subdivision No. 263 denotes iron marker MINNETONKA CRYSTAL BAY (908.3): denotes existing, spot elevation, mean sea level datum - 9JJ—;' ey#///>y can Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house and shed, the proposed location of a proposed house, and the location of all visible "hordcover" thereon. It does not ouroort to show ony other • * ?/ m. 51 ?E DRIVE SUNG HOUSE UNE ONKA BAY r ibed oposed ^4 GRAVEL EXISTING HOUSE (TO BE AMOVED) I / /1 I /P GARAGE <='A PROI'a\ T«S SHED .... CORNER »...... ON LMC EXISTING........... SHED (ro«( [*.o\\ \\ HOUSE " n vACRAVCL T( «\ ^ EXISTING HOUSE EXISTING HOUSE 933 (932.7) (932.6)Vj )SURVEY a LINE % |(932.7)«^*^ CD L ^ ' ,f^A2'45 • .••• LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES LAKE G29.4 CONTOUR LINE Lot 9, Auditor's Subdivision No. 263 denotes iron marker MINNETONKA CRYSTAL BAY (908.3). denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum ; CX/jr^/V»5 Bearings shown are based upon an ossumed datum. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house and shed, the proposed location of a proposed house, and the location of all visible "hardcover" thereon. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. NOTE: For purposes of this survey the North property line is shown 33 feet south from the centerline of travel for North Shore Drive. _ _ _Verify title information for any road easements that exist. 6R0NBERG k ASSOCIATES. INC. 445 RILLON OmE UMC UXE M S6» 952-473-4141 I hereby certify that this sifvey wos prepared by me or indcr my direct sr^ier- viskn, end that I am a diiy registered Civil Engneer and Land Suveyor under the lows of the Stote of Mirmesoto. SCALE 1"-20' DATE 1-10-02 /-ZJ'Oy i» JOB NO. 02-004 07-004 EXiSTMG HOUSE ^ CONTOUR LINE ^ETONKA TAL BAY datum Dve described , the proposed I visible other line is shown h Shore Drive, exist. vf direct s|ier- Saveyor under 2755 SCALE r*-20' DATE 1-10-02 II ^ joe NO. 02-004 T» V r. • ) HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ..CENTERl-Wt OF FRAVEL- feo. RD. NU. o. i NORTH SHORE DRIVE /.c AT mtuwbnous roadway --.. SOiTH EDGE Of —g3T^u LssSO.O *«> ts49.80wE^ Ra987.68 HOUSE THS SHCO CORNER ».... ON LME EXISTING., SHED {rp *( 4fM0t/r*J EXISTING HOUSE SURVEY a LINE 1-4 I1 I 5{W2.7)3 ^ ^ LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES LAKE 029.4 CONTOUR LWE Lot 9, Auditor's Subdivision No. 263 MINNETONKA denotes iron marker CRYSTAL BAY (9083)‘> denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum Bearings shown are based upon an asstmed datum. This survey Intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house and shed, the proposed location of a proposed house, and the location of all visible "hardcover" thereon. It does not purport to show any other Improvements or encroaclments. / SETBACK EXISTINC A. House B. Garage C. Drivewa D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dec F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric G. Other PROPOSEE A House B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Ded. F. Landscape Underlain By Pla.stic Or Fabric G. Other TOTi •. 0 J • HARPrOVF.R CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 75-250' 250-500’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length 6 X X X B. Oarage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Paiio/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A House ____ _______ X Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER FN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A I* -j - B. 500-1000’ 9____SF-H^ys£ Widih 3.1 26 625' CCo X 100 Wi-ih 375^ X 100 ac-j C; *>■1 ii ^ ^ K lA. S.F. S.F. S.F. s F. 'offive SF. SF SF. SF SF. SF S.F. SF. 37^0 i SF y 7. <f e % A B PRc>PCJ5irO ST ' S.F. S.F. S.F. ST'o<?IV£ SF S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. V. A B y AtAAK Uf^icN UAIO)COVER CALCULATION VVORKSUEE7 SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 250-500’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X ______________ “ 500-1000* 5^0____s F L<ngUi X X X B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A - B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabnc X \ X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE total property area in zone A______________> D - 7 -. ' * .V f tL.ri Widih SF. SF. S.F. S.F. 14-79 S F OPr'/ts n/s3j.p. ^ SF SF. SF. S.F. S.F. 'W S.F. X 100 ___S.F. t S.F. 72.17 % mjf: A B ri7 Width - _ PdoFPStO S r 'HOt/Sg m m S.F S.F. S.F. 8S CS l4An c c DC've 8 8 S F Z//fS s. ^ S F, f *34f-fP ) S.F. SF. 8 U St SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. zon 1065" X100 -71.1 SF. A SF. B % r- SmbhISim 4-n- . I ' toft i »Tii6*r • I I lAw .1 '^1!Omni V I __ i Ml to ntn L-~ .T+T-.—.r.i -_“rii ^%n.tm»^§rwn^yf*j I FinI Floor ►-r-' J..^ : i— - 4 ••' / *1L'4. jii %^i,\ \\ i I t: - i /o 1 m J Bonestroo ffs Rosene V ■ Anderlik & 1 vll Associates Engineers & Architects ■ontitroo. Roi«n«. Andtrllk and Aisoclatcs. Inc. It an Affirmailva Acilon/Cqual Opportunity employer and Employe# Owned February 6,2002 Principalt: Otto G Borettroo. PE • Marvin L Sorvaia. PE • Glenn R Coo«. PE • Robert G Senument. f£ • Jerry A BourOo''. PE Senior Consultants: Robert W Rosene. PE • Joseph C AnaerUk. PE • Richard E Turner. PE • Susan M Eberiin, C PA Associate Principals: Keuh A Gordon. PE. • Robert R Pfefferle. PE • Richard W foster. PE • Oavid O Loskora. PE • Mark A Hanson. PE. • Michael T Rautmann. PE • Ted K field. PE • Kerweth P Anderson. PE • Mark R Rolfs. PE • David A Bonestroo. MB A • Sidney P Williamson. PE. L S • Aqnes M Ring. .MB A • Allan Rick Schmidt. PE • Thomas W Peterson. PE • James R Maland. PE • Miles B Jensen • t Phiiiip Gravel m. PE • Darnel J Edgerton PE • Ismael Martinez. PE • Thomas A. Syfko. PE • Sheldon J Johnson • Dale A Grove PE • Thomas A Roushar PE • Robert J Oevery. PE Offices: St. Paul. St Cloud. Rochester and Wiiimar MN • Milwaukee. Wl • Chicago. IL M%blitc; wwwbortestroo com Paul Weinberger Zoning Administrator/Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 w’ii I '-*• Re:3625 North Shore Drive File No. 139-02-000 Plat No. 02-2751 Dear Paul: We have reviewed the survey for the proposed home con.struction at 3625 North Shore Drive. Wc have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: Drainage and utility easements should be provided 10-feet wide along the north lot line and 5-feet wide along the east and west lot lines. A grading plan showing proposed contours should be provided. If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono 233S West Highway 3i • St. Paul. MN 55II3 • 65t 636-4600 • Fax: 65I-636-I3II r RUN DATE 01/15/02 BATCH 502 RROf ADDR UNNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR SB 08-117-23 3A 0001 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN COUNTY HENNEPIN COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY A17 5TH ST N 8320 HINNEAPOLIS HN S5401 38 08-117-23 3A OOOA 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN COUNTY HENNEPIN COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY 417 5TH ST N R320 HINNEAPOLIS HN 55401 38 08-117-23 34 0007 03445 NORTH SHORE DR D T COLGAN 8 C J COLGAN DANIEL T COLGAN 3645 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA HN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 08-117-23 34 0002 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN COUNTY HENNEPIN COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY 417 5TH ST N R320 HINNEAPOLIS fW 55401 38 08-117-23 34 0005 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN COUNTY HENNEPIN COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY 417 5TH ST N R320 HINNEAPOLIS HN 55401 38 08-117-23 34 0008 03635 NORTH SHORE DR Z t H LIBERMAN ZVI I MIRIAM LIBERMAN 2228 TERRITORIAL RD ST PAUL HN 55114 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 3 38 08-117-23 34 0003 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN COUNTY HENNEPIN COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY 417 5TH ST N 8320 HINNEAPOLIS HN 55401 38 08-117-23 34 0006 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED JOUNTY OF HENNEPIN HENNEPIN COUNTY RIGHT WAY 417 5TH ST N 8320 HINNEAPOLIS HN 55401 38 ne-117-23 34 0009 03625 NORTH SHORE DR R A t C K EBERLE HARK E WELCH 3625 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 08-117-23 34 0010 03619 NORTH SHORE DR G E BARON t S H BARON GARY E t SANDRA H BARON 4745 YORKTOWN LA N PLiHOUTH HN 55442 38 0f.-117-23 34 0011 03605 mnJH SHORE DR LAURENCE A JONES I WIFE LAURENCE t ARDELL JONES 3605 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA HN 55391 38 08-117-23 34 OOtu 03655 NORTH SHORk AID HAGEN AL I DONNA HAGEN 3655 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA HN 55X.«: PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 08-117-23 34 0056 03587 NORTH SHORE DR S R I J S SUNDRY STEVEN R I JANNA S SUNDBY 3587 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA HN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 502 00013 cTI .J > /3 TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, Cit>' Administrator Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator February 14, 2002 SUBJECT: #02-2753 Wesley Byrne 2817 Casco Point Road Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: List of Exhibits: LR-IC, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (V2 acre) A D C D C F G II Application Plat Map Survey. Existing Property Conditions Survey/Proposed Property Conditions Elevation Views Main Level Floor Plan Hardcover Calculation Workshec's Property Owners Notification List Application Summary Property owners have requested variances to pcimit additions and remodeling to the existing house. There are two proposed additions to the house. The first would replace an existing attached garage V ith a 32’ X 35' two story addition. The second .iddition would be a 20' X 30' attached garage with future living space located above the garage. The propertv ow tiers only intend to keep the existing house and foundation. The open porch, garage, and deck are being removed to make room for the new additions. Pertinent OrdinancesA’ariances requested 1.Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (2). Total proposed hardcover exceeds allowed hardcover bv 813 s.f 75-250 I.ot Area = 11.375 s.f Fxisting Hardcover -• 4.155 s.f (36.5%) Proposed Hardcover = 3.657 s.f (32.1%) Allowed Hardcover = 2,844 s.f (25%) ,4 v a result of the proposed plan the total hardcover on the property would be reduced. There is currently a lar^ie driveway and parking area on the property that would he reduced in size. The total haracover is still over the 25% limitation in the ~5~23U'lakeshore setback reipiiring the variance. •o:-275.l Wc^le> lUmt 2817 Cstkco Point RoaJ Februin 19. 2002 1 of 4 Other hardcover removals include reducing the she ofthe lakeside deck, removal of a shed located near the street, an open porch ou the streetside of the house would he removed for the garage addition, and a sidewalk and wood planter box would he removed from the west side of the property. Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B). To permit a 9.7 side setback for the residential addition located at the nonheast comer of the new house. The property lines are slightly narrower hy the street than at the lakeshore. This situation caused the corner of the house to encroach intc the required setback. It was not until after the house was designed and drawn on the survey that the encroachment was discovered. Section 10.03. Subdivision 14 (C). The proposed lot coverage by structure is 2.612 s.f. (15.6%). The Zoning Code permits up to 15% of the lot area to be used for structure on the property. The total lot area is 16,750 s.f, which allows a total of 2.513 s.f (15%) of lot coverage by structure on the property. Lot coverage hy .structure ordinances were adopted to preserve space between buildings and regulate the massing of structures Additional structure also contributes towards additional hardcover uhich can negatively impact water quality by not allowing storm water to run across natural ground surface. The concept is to allow storm water to be slowed and to infiltrate into the ground. Staff had tequested Gronherg and A.s.sociate.s. .surveyor/engineer, to re verify their final calculations to determine the actual size of the proposed hou.se. The total structure u as confirmed to be 2.612 s.f. which is 99 s.f more structure than the property is allowed. Statement of Hardship Applicant has included a hardship statement that is included as part of Exhibit A. To summarize the hardship the property owners state they are expanding the house to be comparable to other houses in the neighborhood, and they are adding to the existing house closer to lake rather than towards the street to protect an 80 year old oak tree. Site Drainage Staff received the final site grading and drainage plans on February H"* and have not had an opportunity to complete review as of the date of this memo. Any recommendation of approval shall require additional City Staff review of the plans prior to any Council action. i02-2753 Wcjlc> B>mc 2f 17 Casco Point Road Fcbfuar> 19,2002 Page 2 of 4 PLANNING COMMISSION OPTIONS FOR ACTION I. Approve \ ariances noted above 2.Table 3. Deny, stating reasons 4.Other Action Staff Recommendation StaiThas recommended the applicants reduce the size of the house to not encroach into the side yard setbacks. Staff also recommends the additions be reduced in size to not e.xceed 15% lot coverage b\ structure. Staff s opinion is the hardship statement does not support a structural lot coverage variance and a side setback encroachment. As noted above, the City looks at what is best for the long term plan for the City. When ordinances were adopted for Gtrjetural lot coverage the City adopted this to limit the amount of development in neighborhoods, and create space between buildings. Additional structure also contributes towards additional hardcover which can negatively impact water quality by not allowing storm water to run across natural ground surface. 1 he concept is to allow storm water to be slowed and to infiltrate into the ground. Property owners and Planning Commission may want to consider additional hardcover removals on the property, notably the 0-75' lake setback zone. A review of the final grading and drainage plan w ill determine if the lot can accommodate the proposed additions. A copy of the plan has been forwarded to the City Engineer for comment. •02-2753 Wesley Byme 28 17 Casco Point Road rebruao 19, 2002 Page 3 ol 4 LotArea; ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Structural Coverage; LR-IC Lot Area Required '/i acre Actual 16,750 s.f.(0.77 acre) Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage 16.750 s.f.Allowed: 2,512 s.f. (15%) Existing: 2,044 s.f (12.2%) Proposed: 2,612 s.f (15.6%) Hardcover Calcuh»tion! Distance from shoreline Total area in setback Allowed hardco\er lixisting hardco\er Proposed hardcov er 0-75*4,875 s.f 0 s.f 462 s.f (9.4»/b)462 (9.4%) 75-250’11,375 s.f 2,843 s.f (25%)4,155 s.f (36.5%)3,657 s.f (32.1%) 250-500’500 s.f 150 .s.f (30%)138 s.f (27.6%)119«!.f (23.8%) »02-27?3 Weslej B>Tne 2817 Casco PuiiU Road Fcbniaiy 19. 2002 Page 4 of4 A CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 (SSO.OO per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee SI50.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address ^y/7 Cik,., Application # OS' ^'^53 Date Received /' Amount Paid Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date PropsityAcquire d 1 f______________________________(month/year) I (do) raonoj) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ~ Present use of property: t^sidential Zoning District:, other (specify) APPLICANT Name ff v CLn ^ ft ^ Phone (home ) ^ ^X'H 7/' Jf7'j Phone (work) frJL '’*f?l-00i'7 Address:__^3iy' C/seo j City: ^c>,'o^a) Zip: S's~ff / OWNER (if different than applicant) 'iCame______________________ iddrcis: Phone (home) Phone (work)_ City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ J oo Cao Describe request in detail: ijc ^ 7l if »■> —7T /v k/^'J fiMt h> , . (anach additional sheets if necessary) tit T7 // di</ hCli A ftff-fi. Oh iU or f-W /»«».•.«,, I hi t»*// ARIANCES RBOUIRED^r*.J ,'t curr«*J\^, 9 ( VARIANCES REQUIRED ___Lot Area ___Lot Width •)___Setback: •C Lot Coverage Front Side ^ Hardcover 7 S'-2 so5«H acK., __Rear ___ Average Lakeshore 5 Other (specify) ^V«ARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: r/, /. • cL,; . ^ Id L J*- (eih^rx kf t. efLu- /L ^yL /,Jj. ... ^ rsdJi—(rfj 1 fcCArjf or rU^ffUf__/J rtdu, (attach additional shee(/ if necessary) • ^e rt^tve-f of A*' €0 olj Odk fttr- Aid '/wr'^lLr l>/or.k, T/f /e>v>e U/C^lJ ke. A^'9k.dJ ^ ^•4%e> tutr ^id* of cf/-«eA-. 6 Wi rc. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS AM..of tht following ipformation nm\ bt Mibmittfd hv the aoDiicaHnn *- order for VOUH aPDlication to be coiMldgrcd compl^tg; 1 2, 5, 6. 8 Completed Application Form Certified Propei^ Owners List of owners within 150 ’, labels and plat map (you must obtmn this list, la^: - and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance. A-603. Govt CeiR6f. 348-5910). J Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8*/j" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/j" x II" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy x 11 ”) List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour YftriaiKt-iIPPllcatlOn is not comnlcte if the ^bove information has nnt been inrl^dtdi APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered bv original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application,' and^certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge Applicant's Signature <r Date A >13 OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature ^----------- Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and CouncU. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting please ^e arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zomng Office of this change prior to the meeting. u c ' : :-S. n >•* -1 o ;/ % U idjL ygig^ty^axpayer S^^eagg u *.t i.*/.j / u ^ Zlo'/n- :ZZ'(3^ ?;•• I . (3 .. , . ' '. v..;i.v-.“».*4\v?:h''- ^^KParcetInformation^' ^ !*•* T.C-1-*^ r.T* V.\.f v/i'* ’ »*_j_r*'’ ’ ^' #‘^5 V'*■••*’•* N*«t*TfiA 1$ not s hgaOy f9COfd9d map. It raprasania • coSjipMon oflnwinnwo^' and data ltx)m Cdy, County, and State mad authofUaa and ottm$ouroaa!\?,' ir ^1 LAKE ....SHORE .... AVENUE R ^ I i . .ijr i'^... / ' I f , > / , LAKE i./ < / / I N 66"29' 0(WJ ^ - J5?»J32jcA9Mo^ ^ iSS* ! SHORE (VACATED) ^ V (■ AVENUE l«» «l 7y srreACK t»c ^^ , ^ ^ \ / / --------------------r/-------------- 1/ \ \Ni€7*?8' 31 "_W — /' ' / / V* 929.4 CONTOUR tIC I kV ^SifBmmfSk 7.7.f; • It t ' I I I^j: z i u^ g III III III i III III nil irnni iti iii si diisd!MMMjB firS!/ 'w^'7i 7,y/l ■ i t7ry!mS^p5^/.’7^y/f5 ^ U i *'f"'^f"’''l• 111 . . . I ■ . • f I I I I I II ■ tn I l.in fl It I IH l>t Ir 7^ f /• Mi PJ II'J'IP/13 Ilf»• I • If t • I • I • I !•:’ • •' ’ 11 j 1,1 u |if^ I II f 11 M(I V*5 S^lf!'l!l!!!l*!‘- Ml .JiHKIi:.m^m !/tt;;r.;:::;.i:........X, •• •• I :::i.;:::r ::::^r::::::) %• • ••••«»•••••••••••••• »••••••••••••••*«*••• «^4**«*« »••»••••••••«« • •• •••••«••••••••••• 1 raONT ELEVATON 1-—- •f»l Jt IS • »n # // / ;/ /• /• jj .■ EXIS' I PROPO^i ADOmON I /C - 0Q SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) CJ)-7 sD EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE HARDCOVER CA LCULATION WORKSHEET /-Z9-OZ A House Length X X X B. Oarage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X 0. Other SrefS /Vj j TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERT i fiSI£A FN ZOl'FE A_____________+ B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE' A House X Length X X X B. Oarage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A + B 75-250 ’250-500 ’SOO-IOOO* Width SF. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 2^/ S.F. SP. S m SP. S.F. S.F. /sz ^ ^ S P. Y6Z SF. xlOO •^2 75 SF. 9 yg Width SF. m S.F. S.F. ■■S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SA/Hf Af A6At/e S.F. S.F. S.F. SP. SP. SP. SP. S.F. A B XlOO SP. A S.F. B % c- r '■I ' oct F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. 0. Other U/AtiS Vy SF. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A • _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ^ B xlOO - S.F. A //■ 1-7 S' S.F. B y ? % PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONF.' A. House ____________ X Length ZSO\ Width X X X S.F. SJ. S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway S.F. X X ts a S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X E Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X SE SE JJLL S.F. SE SF. S.F. SF. 0. Other S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ _ _ _ _ _ _ + B nsi xlOO - ll.37r SE _32.I5 “ % A B HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSBQEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A House 0-75 ’ Length X X X B. Oarage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X 0. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ____________ B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A House X Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk E. Palio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X 0- Other U/ALL TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _____ ^ B 75-250*500-1000* Width ss X 100 Width S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. /2S S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. /Sff S.F. A _________SI. B y 7. go ®/o Soo S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. \QS.-ppiVEvv/ SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. S.F. SF. SF. 119 xlOO - _____S.F. ___________S.F. ZB.fl Vo SOO A B Run date 01/16/02 BATCH 505 HErmEPXN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI435^0I PAGE 12 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 50 20-117-23 32 0006 02026 CASCO POINT RD HARK E i PATRICIA A THOMPSON HARK E 0 PATRICIA A THOHPSON 2026 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA HN 55391 30 20-117-23 32 0007 02029 CASCO POINT RD B E PETERSON i H P PETERSON BRYCE E PETERSON AND HARY PAT PETERSON 2029 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA HN 55391 30 20-117-23 32 0000 02025 CASCO POINT RD DAVID J YORKS I WIFE DAVID J YORKS 2025 CASCO POINT ROAD WAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 80 20-117-23 32 0009 02021 CASCO POINT RD R E DENSNAR I H H DEHSHAR RONALD I HARGARET DEHSHAR 2021 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA HN 55391 30 20-117-23 32 0010 02017 CASCO POINT RD WESLEY C BYRNE WESLEY C BYRNE 2017 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA HN 55391 30 20-117-23 32 0011 02015 CASCO POINT RD G I C SCANLON GENE I CATHERINE SCANLON 2015 CASCO POINT ROAD WAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 30 20-117-23 32 0012 •2013 CASCO POINT RD J L STERN J L STERN 2013 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA HN 55391 30 20-117-23 32 0013 02011 CASCO POINT RD THERESA A WORSTED THERESA A WORSTED 2011 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA HN 55391 30 20-117-23 32 0016 02007 CASCO POINT RD J H I P S BAILEY JOHN H I PATRICIA S DAILEY 2007 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 30 20-117-23 32 0016 02000 CASCO POINT RD THOHAS B KING THOHAS D KING 2000 CASCO POINT ROAD WAYZATA HN 55391 30 20-117-23 32 0017 02010 CASCO POINT RD TAHHY L WCODIS TAHHY L WOODIS 2010 CASCO POINT ROAD WAYZATA HN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 505 00011 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTHENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THLJIEST OF HY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. dl. ^>v-'A / A TO: FROM; DATE: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator Wendy Bottcnberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner February 4, 2002 SUBJECT: #02-2754 Matthew/Kathy Dolliff 2680 Pheasant Road Variance -- Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (I acre) 34.625 s.f. (.79 acres) List of Exhibits A Analysis Worksheet B Application C Survey/Site Plan D Description ofProposal/flardships E Floor Plans/ elevations F Photo of Property G Plat Map H Property Owner ’s List I Hardcover Worksheets Application Summary: The applicants are proposing to construct a 467 s.f. addition and 164 s.f entryway and walk to the residence. I he additioti and walk will be on the street side of the residence. The e.xisting residence is in the shape ot an "H". I he addition will be in the middle of the residence creating u “U” shape. Ihe addition will consist of a entry way. dining room and mud room. The addition and walk are to be located in the 7;i-250' setback zone. A pi-rtion of the addition is over existing hardcover. The other portion will increase the amount ofhardco\er in the setback zone, however the applicant is proposing to remove existing hardcover in the 75-250' zone to offset the increase. The hardcover proposed to be remos ed is the brick patio and wall, the dog run and a portion . the lake side patio 1 herefure. the hardcover in the 75-250' setback zone is not increasing with the proposed addition and walk. 1 he addition will increa.se the lot coverage by structures on the property to 3,476 s.f (10.03%) but still below the allowed 15% Pertinent Code Section: 1. Section 10.22. Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L)(2). Hardcover in 75-250': Within 75- 250' of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 25% hardcover. To permit 6,355 s.f (34.19%) hardcovei where 4.646.75 s.f (2$%) is al'owed. “02-2754 Xtatthew Kat:<y Duilitf 2680 Plicasant Road Variance 2/4.'2002 Page I of2 Statement of Hardship: The applicants have included their statement of hardship in Exhibit D. The applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Issues for Consideration: I.The addition and walk increase the amount of hardcover in the 75-250' setback zone, however the applicant is proposing to remove hardcover in this setback zone to offset the increase. 2.Lot coverage by structures is increasing to 3.476 s.f (10.03%), still well below the allowed 15%. 3.The residence was constructed in 1951. The only addition to the residence since has been a screen porch. 4. 5. The residence was constructed prior to current zoning standards. Hardcover is decreasing on the lakeside of the residence and being added to the street side. 6. Other issues by Planning Commission. Staff Recommendation: StatT recommends approval of the hardcover variance in the 75-250' setback zone to permit the additions to the residence. #02-2754 Matthew/Kathy DollifT 2680 Pheasant Road Variance 2'4/2002 Page 2 of2 ANALYSIS WORKSHEET LR-IB Lot Area Required 1 Acre Actual .79 Acres Hardcover Calculations Structural Coverage Distance from I'otal area in Allowed Lxisting Proposed shoreline setback hardcover Hardcover 1 lardcover 0-75*7170 s.f.Os.f.Os.f.Os.f (0%)(0%)(0%) 75-250*18587 s.f.4646.75 s.f.6355 s.f 6355 s.f (25%)(34.19%)(34.19%) 250-500*8868 s.f.2660.4 s.f.905 s.f 905 s.f (30%)(10.21%) (10.21%) 11 Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 34625 s.f Allowed: 5193.75 s.f 15.00% E.xisting: 2967.00 s.f 8.57% Proposed:3476.00 s.f 10.03% . Jan*?2-200Z Q2:t9pB Proi-CITY OF ORCNO ^9522494618 T-530 P OOr/015 F-959 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION V mmai Apphcauon 2-ee 5250.00 j ($50.00 per each additiooal variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $;150.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application U OQ-JlSH I^te Received / a aZ* Amount Paid ^ S~0 . o t> PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address ‘2.Ce»<^o , OgOfJO , I Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 2.\- -'oolfl Attach legal description to application if not included on reouired survev Date Propeity Acquired OVNF rmonrh/vMA I (do) (3o noQ also own the adjacent parcels of land. " '■ use ofpropertyi ^ residential _ other (specify) Zoning L torict: KgSIOCNClAL lAtgSHOflg. APPLICANT^v/vtJe«S') Name NATTHEW AM) boUlPP Address: ■ THe frfPMOK'O^VNER (if different than appliottm) City: 0/24?NJQ.Mr4 Phone (home )ftS'^4ni-gfe n g Phone (work ) 3^3-eg _____ Zip:J Phone Name $ ip teJ\r^ ClAce coom^'^ Phone (work)f4<WATA-1al Address:_334 $^f^J0 S'Ve^__________City: CXCELpoL ZiD:^S33i DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Constriction Cost $ Describe request in detail: ftfp)cHgD SHtgTc (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED —_ Area ___ Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side-Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAl- PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical diffitnilty or unusual property conditions preventing comphance with Zonmg Code requirements- Megrs ______ __________—---------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) :# O ■- 7 ?? „/! n d m£L J ^ ^041? rr' - T •-:* -j ‘">.1 r;-=7 \j ^ 75-3, "/ \9 ^ CT -.EMOVED PATIO - 197 SO FT .a _ K^rrOJir^* fU. ,io fs /kS EcnvcLR- nSz--f- f i Ih.t-pL-nho-'-.^'*^-''^''^- flj 1 ^■h-..... 2 MQ I’hcaiiaill Read. Orono Variance Annllcailtin______lirm P- PmpmnI ^iifplan I i CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION ADDENDUM TO APPLICATION FOR: Matthew A. & Kathleen M. DollifT Residence 2680 Pheasant Road, Orono, MN 55331 Application # (Addendum) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Hbtory & Current Situation • The applicant and his family have lived in the house on this property since June of 1998, having purchased the house from his parents who are the original builders of the house back in 1951. It is a relatively decent sized parcel (nearly 35.000 SF). but relatively long and thin. The house is set back 134.3 feet from the high water mark and 110 feet from the street side property line, putting nearly all of the impervious surfaces on the property within the 75* to 250’ setback zone. There are many impervious elements in this typical lakeshore home, and their sum total results in a hardcover percentage of 34.2% due to the narrowness of the lot (average lot width through the zone is only 106.2 ft). So even though the lot is 34,625 SF, the relatively modest house, driveway and turnaround, patios and decks, and retaining walls result in an impervious coverage ratio that is 9.2% above the 25% orJ::iance. The current house is oddly designed, which creates two major negatives impacts on the house (refer to Item A attached). 1. The “H-shape” design is quite narrow in the middle, making the center living space a “bridge” between ends of the house. This makes the spaces somewhat dysfunctional, as they have a difficult time relating and socializing with each other from ends of the house. 2. The “H-shape” design creates a trough for surface water to gather, giving them an annual water problem in the basement. The water travels downward towards the house from the street and gets caught between the garage extension on the north end and the bedroom extension on the southern end. Proposed Project The applicant has developed a design with the assistance of Lake Country Builders that will place an addition on the street side of the house between the two side extensions of the house, turning the “H-shape” into a “U-shape” [refer to Items B & C attached). This will help solve the two major problems in the house (previously noted above). The 467 SF addition fills in the “trough ” betw een ends of the house, allow ing simple positive drainage to guide the surface waters around the sides and towards the backyard. With the added square footage, a new mudroom, entry and dining room can become a part of the narrow center section of the house. This w ill result in a much more social and functional house, (refer to Item B attached) W ith the wet basement issues solved, the owners can improve the fin: hes in their lower level and make use of the family space there. In the area w here the addition is proposed, an existing brick wall and brick patio exist. To compensate for the additional hardcover, the applicant has proposed to remove the brick patio and wall, and 312 SF from the two lakeside irapervious surfaces (a 115 SF dog run and 197 SF from the lower lake side patio) to maintain the current hardcover ratio w here it is. at 34.2%. Please refer lo the attached hardcover spreadsheet as well as Item E attached. HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDllIONS Unique to the land in question The current house and property conditions already qualify as non-conforming (refer to hardcover table and Item D atuched). The hardcover ordinance is already exceeded in the 75 to 250* setback zone. This is due to. in large part as mentioned above, to the narrowness (106 foot width) of the lot The lot runs 386.6 feet along its northern border which is significantly unusual it relation to its width. With only 18,587 square feet in this zone, the 25% hardcover ordinance allows for only 4646 square feet for house, drivew'ay and outdoor living spaces. Currently, the house and garage footprint account for 2591 SF and the modest driveway with turnaround is 2201 SF - these two items alone (4792 SF) put the zone in a IbVo ratio, not including any of the existing sidewalks, retaining walls, decks and patios. It doesn’t seem reasonable that a • / k ^ 0 r/y f h nearly 3S,000 SF property be limited to a house and garage footprint of 2591 SF. Therefore, wc can conclude that the lot is unusually narrow for its length. Unique to the existing structure location The existing structure sits well back from the lake (134.3 ft at its nearest point), but because of the lot depth, the garage sits 145 feet from the street side property line, accounting for a very long driveway. The garage sits along the northern border of the property and requires a turn-around to back vehicles out before traversing the 145-foot driveway. Because of its location and need for a turnaround, the vehicular aspect of the property is somewhat unique. 2201 SF of impervious driveway, all necessary to allow cars to safely enter the garage, turn around, and exit the property. It is conceivable that the driveway be reduced in size to allow vehicles to enter the garage, but to eliminate enough square footage to bring the property into compliance would require the elimination of the turnaround. It is certainly possible to argue that the unique nature of the garage location, along with its distance back from the street requires a degree of impervious surface that makes it a hardship. The applicant docs not wish to remove the turnaround area of the driveway for safety reasons. Pheasant Road is a neighborly area of many young families, and to require the owners and visitors to the house to back up into the street is putting impervious surface issues ahead of the public welfare. Further Arguments The intent of the hardcover ordinance is to prevent overcrowding on Orono properties, w hich can lead to negative impacts on water and drainage issues in the lakcshore impact zones. Many Lake Minnetonka communities embrace a similar 25% impervious surface ratio for the same reasons. Orono is unique in its breakdown of the impervious coverage ordinances into separate zones. Although the 75’-250 ’ setback zone is at 34.2®/o hardcover (9.2% over the ordinance), no hardcover exists in the 0’-75’ zone and the hardcover in the 250 ’*f zone is at 10.2%, putting the entire property in a impervious to property ratio of 20.9% It is the narrowness of the property and the concentration of the hardcover in one zone that makes this property non-conforming and problematic. The proposed plan assists drainage and accommodates a design that increases the functionality of the house. The plan eliminates 312 SF of impervious surface in areas closer to the lake than where it is being added, and the proposed property will, at project completion, have an impervious surface ratio equal to the current level (i.e. we are not adding to the hardcover total). This b simply a request to allow the current conditions to be maintained in order to refurbish, remodel and improve the existing house. The proposed project has no negative implications to this specific lot, its immediate neighbors, or to the neighborhood in general. The public welfare is not in harm ’s way, and the granting of a variance for this project provides no special provisions to this lot that other residents of Orono arc not entitled, as it is an already non-conforming property and a clear hardship is present, as noted above. APPLICANTS’ LEGAL NAMES Matthew A. & Kathleen M. Dolliff (husband and wife) J .. .? /I / .J . :.r. • I ,H f. 5/ -4 • / t >-•4 I v‘. I* %.• •M 2680 PhfflS^nt Road^ Orono Variance Application Itrm ('.: Proposed Front l*.lcvfltion Twrr u .|'«:» r^") N. « • J / .».••» t f / I'-. • ‘ 'V 26Pf^ Phcfl^j^nt Road, Orono Variance AppHcation______Item A: Hxisting Floorplan r . JW-l.- .t ^- ■ >^.'*V-^ ■ /■>/ / / ■ 5 V" ■'••^•'V '• '••Ik- *^V. '-^ *: '>11! ■;'' ::5^ ■« .'•o• >‘WT-' ;• B V*/ '' ^ ^ •'■.VU.fi>.:.'.V. .. ■ ... -‘?ISfe">,.../f;t <*Y '■ .^1' >;v, . •V'’*. ‘v- -■•« l\. ’ ''. ‘ ■••. ■ ' < I: - & a J * .;V-'v:- .•it ^ ^ .nt-i JiJ^anxI Inhnnalion Parcel ID 2111723230020 House Number 2680 Street Name PHEASANT RD Thisisnotalogaltynoaxiednwp HrepnsertsacomMaiSondihhmwtjon ------fnSfy. ‘and data from Oty, County, and Stata mad authoribaa and other aouroea ---- RUN DATE 01/22/02 BATCH 503 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR 3B 21-117-23 23 0010 02075 PHEASANT RD S W SHERF I J B SHERF S W SHERF t J B SHERF 2075 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 PROP ADDR OWNER NANS TAXPAYER NAME/AODR SB 21-117-23 23 0013 02705 PHEASANT RD 6 I X JOHNSTON G P t K A JOHNSTON 2705 PHEASANT RD S EXCELSIOR MN 55331 PROP ADDR OWNER NANS TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 3B 21-117-23 23 0019 02090 PHEASANT RD H J A 0 R PUDIL MICHAEL J A GAIL R PUDIL 2090 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 21-117-23 23 0022 02000 PHEASANT RD G W NAYHURST A G L HAYHURST GREGORY W A GAYLE L HAYHURST 2000 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 21-117-23 29 0053 02075 SHADYWOOD RD GARY E HEGENES GARY HEGENES 2075 SHADYWOOD RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 JA !’ in- •- REPORT NO. PI935901 PAGE 11 38 21-117-23 23 02065 PHEASANT G H HEBERT A J A G H HEBERT A J A 2085 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 0011 Ui) HEBERT HEBERT 38 21-117-23 23 0012 02095 PHEASANT RD BARBARA J REDDICK BARBARA J REDDICK 2095 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 21-117-23 23 0019 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED PHEASANT LAWN HOMEOWNERS PHEASANT LAWN HOMEOWNERS 2700 PLEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 21-117-23 23 02700 PHEASANT MICHAEL J CULLEN MICHAEL J CULLEN 2700 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 553 0017 RD ET AL 38 21-117-23 23 0020 02080 PHEASANT RD M A I K M DOLLIFF MATTHEW A KATHLEEN DOLLIFF 2080 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 21-117-23 23 GU2i 02070 PHEASANT RD RAYMOND E JOHNSON RAY E JOHNSON 090 FERNDALE RD W WAYZATA MN 55391 38 21-117-23 23 0050 02085 SHADYWOOD RD R W BROWN A H N BROWN RICHARD W A MARION H DROWN 2085 SHADYWOOD RD S EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 21-117-23 23 0050 02073 PHEASANT RD G C JONES A J L JONES GEORGE C JONES/JACKl L JONES 2073 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 t. ) ‘ TOTAL BATCH 503 00013 ^ i. r V . '• *j i • • r Ijl -^.< RANGE OF AREA OHWM to,75' range 75‘ to 250*range ^ „250’ and beyond range OVERALL PROPERTY^. llMPER\n'0US ITEM*'EXISTING PROPOSED EXISTING PROPOSED EXISTING PROPOSED EXISTING PROPOSED iOUSB 0 0 2591 3058 0 0 2591 3058 FRONT BRICK PATIO 0 0 249 0 0 0 249 0 NEW SIDEWALK AND STOOP 164 164 FRONT BRICK WALL 0 0 70 0 0 0 70 0 STONE RETAINING WALL AT NW 0 0 35 35 0 0 35 35 STEPS 0 0 50 50 0 0 50 50 DRIVEWAY 0 0 2201 2201 905 905 3106 3106 CONC PATIO 0 0 115 115 0 0 115 115 REAR BRICK PATIO 0 0 649 337 0 0 649 337 REAR DECK OFF PORCH 0 0 145 145 0 0 145 145 REAR DECKS (SKINNY ONES)0 0 231 231 0 0 231 231 REAR STONE RET. WALL 0 0 19 19 0 0 19 19 TOTAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE 0 0 6355 6355 905 905 7260 7260 AREA IN LOT SECTION 7170 7170 18587 18587 8868 8868 34625 34625 changes in no changes boldface no changes RATIO 0.00%0.00%34.19% 34.19% 10.21%10.21%20.97%20.97% u li ti A* 'V/' »J \ d ...J •j t'" ' ■'• ;'■ t?’ H MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Elizabeth Hawn, Commissioners Jeanne Mabusth, Janice Berg. Daniel Kluth, and Alternates J. Mark Fritzler, and David Rahn. Commissioners William Stoddard and Sandra Smith were absent. The following represented City Staff: Planning Director Michael Gaffron, Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, and Recorder Jackie >’oung. Chair Hawn called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. OLD BUSINESS (#1) #01-2699 JAY AND KENDALL NYGARD. 1386 REST POINT T^OAD, VARIANCES, 6:32 p.m. - 6:49 p.m. Jay Nygard, Applicant, was present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is requesting variances to permit a two-story addition to the e.xisting house, which will provide for an entryway and second floor living space. The addition is proposed to be located eight feet from the cast property line encroaching two feet into the 10-foot required side yard setback. The two-foot variance is being requested to allow the proposed addition to match the e.xisting exterior wall on the house. The residence is currently located eight feet from the property line and was constructed prior to current zoning standards. A second variance is also being requested to permit additional hardcover in the 75-250’ lakeshorc setback. The tot-l hardcover would be increased by 120 square feet. The addition would he partially located over an existing concrete walk, stoop, and rock garden. The Applicant has agreed to remove a portion of the landscape rock and plastic, which will keep the existing hardcover at the current amount of 52.4 percent. Weinberger stated the hardcover nu.mbcrs included in the Staff report do not reflect the amount of non-conforming landscaping plastic, noting the amount of landscape plastic was deducted from the hardcover numbers and will be removed from the property upon approval of the application. The Applicant has submitted a statement indicating he suffers.»hardship because the house was built prior to the adoption of the current zoning standards and was located only eight feet from the existing property line. Weinberger reiterated the addition would not increase the total hardcover on the property, w ith the existing hardcover remaining at 52.4 percent w here 25 percent is allowed. Weinberger stated the addition would be considered structural coverage that would be replacing essentially a rock garden. Weinberger stated the addition would no longer increase the hardcover by 120 square feet since the Applicant has agreed to remove additional hardcover on that portion of the property. W'einbergcr noted the total structural coverage on the property is 14.6 pcrc.’nt. Staff recommends approval of the application subject to the three conditions outlined in the January 2. 2002 Staff memorandum based on the fact the house was originally constructed eight feet from the property line and the new addition would not increase the total structural co\ erage on the property over the maximum 15 percent limit. PAGEl r pL MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#01-2699 Jay and Kendall Nygard, Continued) Hawn inquired how much hardcover the driveway consists of in that zone. Weinberger stated the driveway is almost 900 square feet, which would be between 15 and 20 percent of the entire hardcover of the lot located within the 75-250’ setback area. Nygard stated he does have appro.ximately a 50-gallon drain trap located in the driveway which docs help alleviate the drainage in this area. Nygard noted the structural coverage being requested is 14.6 percent, and inquired whether he could increase the structural coverage by .4 percent. Nygard stated he understands his lot would then be considered fully built and that no other increases to structural coverage would be allowed. Nygard stated he is agreeable to removing the plastic and rock, and would be installing gutters on the house as well as drain tile to help alleviate the drainage. There were no public comments regarding this application. Hawn stated typically the Planning Commission only approves the plan that is in front of them, noting the Applicant did request he be allowed to increase the rtructural coverage slightly. Hawn noted the hardcover on this lot is well over the allowable 25 percent, and questioned whether a hardship really docs exist. Hawn stated the Planning Commission generally considers a hardship to be imposed by the land itself, but in her opinion a hardship may exist since the house was constructed prior to current zoning ordinances. Mabusth stated the comments by Hawn arc consistent with the Planning Commission ’s recommendations in the past. Mabusth stated this application could be tabled which would give the Applicant a chance to bring a revised plan back before the Planning Comm.ssion. Mabusth stated she personally does not have a problem with the application, and inquired what the current overhang is. Weinberger stated the eurrent overhang is under one foot. Mabusth stated she did not observe any overhangs on the other part of the structure. Nygard stated the overhang is one foot total. Mabusth stated it was her recollection the survey showed a three-fo<it overhang. Nygard stated the sur\eyor may have assumed a standard three-foot overhang, which is incorrect. Nygard stated he docs not have a problem removing the request for the extra .4 percent structural coverage, noting he originally added his numbers incorrectly. Mabusth stated typically the Planning Commission likes to sec the final plan before approving any increase in structural coverage. Nygard stated he basically would extend the addition one foot. Hawn inquired whether he would be willing to remove a little additional hardcover. PAGE 2 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o’clock p.oi. (II0I>2699 Jay and Kendall Nygard, Continued) Nygard stated he would remove more of the rock garden. Kiuth noted although it is unusual for the Planning Commission to approve plans that have been amended prior to the changes being reflected on a final drawing, they have in certain cases done that in the past. Hawn inquired whether the neighbors are fine with this proposal. Nygard stated they are. Mabusth inquired how the Applicant is able to deal with backing out onto Rest Point Road. Nygard stated he generally backs up into the driveway to avoid having to back out onto the street. Nygard indicated the neighborhood generally encourages everyone to drive slow through this area. Mabusth stated in her view issue number two should be further discussed at their ne.xt Planning Commission meeting. Mabusth stated she would also like a clarification on overhangs by the City Attorney. Mabusth noted residents are allowed a 1.5 foot overhang. Hawn stated it was her understanding that had been changed to two feet. Nygard indicated the Planning Commission agreed that tt should not encroach into the ten-foot setback. Nygard stated you are allowed two feet of overhang that does not count as structural coverage but it should not encroach into the 10-foot setback. Mabusth stated she would like to know where that 10-foot setback ends, whether it is 8.5 feet from the overhang or from the house. Mabusth stated it was her understanding if the structure met the setback, you were then allowed a 1.5 foot overhang. Weinberger stated that basically is the definition. Hawn stated if the Planning Commission does approve the application w ith the .4 percent increase in hardcover, the Applicant would be required to have final plans submitted reflecting that change pnor to the City Council meeting. Nygard stated he would. Rahn stated the Applicant did indicate the square footage would be added towards the front and not the back of the structure. Rahn stated he does not want to see it encroach any closer to the side setbacks. Hawn moved, Mabusth seconded, to recommend approval of Application t^OI-2699, Jay and Kendall Nygard, 1386 Rest Point Road, granting of a variance to permit an addition to encroach two feel into the 10 foot required side yard setback, with the understanding the structural coverage will not escec the allowable 15 percent, and subject to, one, the Applicant submitting a Final plan prior to the City Council meeting showing the additional .4 percent structural coverage; two, a drainage and gutter plan will also be submitted at the same time prior to the City Council PAGE 3 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#01-2699 Jay and Kendall Nygard, Continued) meeting; three, the existing rock garden will be reduced by such size that the total project does not exceed the 52.4 percent existing hardcover; and four, all landscaping fabric will be removed. VOTE: Aves 6, Navs 0. (#2) #01-2730 ACE PROPERTIES, 3375 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD, VARIANCES Larry Palm and Gary Gniffke, Ace Properties, were present. Weinberger stated the application was before the Planning Commission in November, at which lime the application was tabled to allow the Applicant time to revise his plan. The Planning Commission at that time had recommended the si/e of the house be reduced to meet the 15 percent structural co\crage as well as meet the 10-foot side yard setbacks on each side of the house. This property is located at 3375 Crystal Bay Road, which runs along the lake and is narrow m depth, with all the properties having access onto the road. Located behind each of the properties m this area is the Dakota Rail, which is now in the process of being converted into a regional trail system. Weinberger stated the Applicants have revised the plan to reduce the size of the structure from the previous proposal, but are still requesting to construct a 1.643 square foot house. This property has a defined lot area of 6,690 square feet. Properties less than 10,000 square feet are allowed a ma.\imum lot coverage by structure up to 1.500 square feet. The proposed building e.xceeds the allowed coverage by 143 square feet. The Applicants are requesting variances to lot area and lot w idth to permit construction of the new residence on the property, w hich is located in the LR-IC district, and consists of less than one-half acre and less than 100 feet w ide. I he defined lot w idth is 50 feet at the lakeshore and defined structure setback. Variances arc also being requested for hardcover and structure within 75 feet of the lakeshore, where no hardcover or structure is allowed, and a variance to permit greater than 25 percent hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback. The Applicants arc proposing 53.4 percent hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback where 72.5 percent currently c.xists Weinberger stated there is a possibility the hardcover in this area could be reduced further by the removal of some concrete and steps. Hardcover in the 0-75’ area is proposed at 748 square feet or 23.8 percent, where currently 45.1 percent exists and none is allowed. In addition, variances are also being requested to allow a one-foot encroachment into the side setback. Weinberger stated the proposed residence is 31 feet wide, w ith the lot being 50 feet wide, and a 10-foot side setback being required on cither side of the house. Weinberger stated if the house is reduced by one foot, it would meet the 10-foot side setback on either side of the house. In addition, the applicants are requesting a vanance to the rear yard setback to allow the structure to be located 19.2 feet from the rear property line w here 30 feet is required. Weinberger noted this lot docs not back up to another residential lot. VV einberger stated a variance is also required to permit the eaves and gutters to encroach more than 1.5 feet into the side setback. The proposed caves encroach three feel into the east setback and two feet into the west setback. PAGE 4 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o ’clock p.m. (#01-2730 Ace Properties, Continued) Staff recommends that the size of the structure be reduced to a size not to exceed 1,500 square feet, with the building meeting the minimum 10-foot side setbacks on either side of the house. Weinberger stated drainage to the lake is a concern in this area and would require the Applicant to submit a drainage and grading plan for review and approval by City Staff. Staff does support approval of the variances to lot area and lot width as well as rear setback and hardcover variances for the 0-75’ setback for the driveway and to permit over 25 percent hardcover in the 75-250’ setback to allow a reasonable sized house. Palm stated he has no additional remarks to add to Staff’s report. There were no public comments regarding this application. Kluth noted the minutes from the November Planning Commission meeting clearly indicate the direction of the Planning Commission was to reduce the size of the house so it would not exceed the 1,500 square feet. Kluth stated the Planning Commission in the past has been fairly consistent on that requirement. Mabusth stated meeting the 10-foot side setback was also recommended. Mabusth noted the new plan is proposing to reduce hardcover in the 0-75’ as well as the 75-250’ setback areas from what currently exists. Mabusth stated her only concerns with this application relate to the structural coverage and the side yard setback. Berg stated the minutes reflect it was clearly stated to the applicants that structural coverage needs to be reduced down to 1,500 square feet. Berg inquired whether there is any hardship that exists for the overage. Gnifflcc requested the picture of the house be shown to the Planning Commission. Weinberger stated he does not have an actual picture of the house. Weinberger stated Staff did not make a finding of hardship for a house in excess of 1,500 square feet. Weinberger indicated the current house is 1,900 square feet, one and a half stories, with the proposed residence being two and a half stories. Berg noted this would be considered new construction. Palm stated he does not neces.sarily agree with that. Rahn stated the Applicant docs have the option of remodeling within the existing structure without expanding the footprint. Rahn stated he is confused why the plan indicates a 30-foot width while the surv'cy shows a ? 1 -foot width. Palm stated it was his understanding the width of the house is 30 feet. Rahn inquired whether the Applicants have a problem complying with the 10-foot side setback requirement. PAGES MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#01-2730 Ace Properties, Continued) Palm stated they do not. Palm stated their designer was directed to design a house with a 10-foot setback on either side. Rahn noted the survey also does not indicate the first floor bay, and inquired whether that is a legal encroachment onto the rear setback. Mabusth inquired what the area of the v indow is. Weinberger stated the bay window would be considered part of the building. Rahn stated that bay window may affect the rear setback and may also not be included in the square foot calculations for the first floor. Palm stated the window is cantilevered and not hardcover. Hawn stated it would still be considered structural coverage, llawn stated the Planning Commission needs to know how far the bay window sticks out from the structure to determine the rear setback. Weinberger stated he is unable to give an c.xact dimension, but that he would estimate it would make the rear setback appro.ximately 18 feet. Palm stated he does not have the dimensions on the window. Hawn stated it appears the consensus of the Planning Commission is that the structural coverage of 1,500 square feet be complied with along with the 10-foot side setbacks. Palm pointed out the design of the new residence docs correct a number of e.xisting deficiencies that exist on the property. Palm stated they could remodel the e.xisting structure, which would result in the drainage problems not being corrected. Palm stated they would be agreeable to reducing the hardcover further by removing that concrete pad. Palm stated they are incurring considerable e.xpcnsc by reducing the size of the footprint and correcting the drainage in the area. Palm indicated they are approximately 90 square feet over what is allowed. Hawn stated the bay w mdow would also need to be included. Palm stated he would take the bay window out. Kluth commented it is the job of the Planning Commission to hold the line on these types of applications and make the applicants comply w ith the requirements as much as possible. Palm noted they have reduced the stze of the strucnirc already. Palm stated when you arc dealing with a house of this size, the removal of 93 square feet could have a huge impact on the house. Hawn stated the Planning Commission in the past has made applicants comply with the 15 percent structural coverage limit. 5t PAGE 6 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (1^01-2730 Ace Properties, Continued) Palm stated he would like to resolve this issue tonight rather than table the application another 30 days. Hawn stated the Planning Commission does not have a drawing in front of them that would reflect the house if it was 93 square feet less. Palm noted the Planning Commission approved the prior application without a final plan in front of them. Palm stated they are agreeable to reducing one foot off the side of the house and howevet many feet are necessary in the front to meet the 15 percent limit. Weinberger noted the lot in the prior application was almost 1 1.000 square feet, with the square feet on this lot consisting of 6,690. Weinberger stated there are also drainage problems that e.xist on this lot which need to be resolved prior to this application proceeding to the City Council. Berg inquired what the heigh: of the structure is proposed to be. Weinberger stated it has a defined height of 25 feet, w'ith the height of the peak being around 31 feet. Rahn stated he also would prefer the plans match the sur\ey. Gnifikc stated it was their understanding from the last meeting that they would be given some leeway on the structural coverage since they were correcting other problems with the lot. Hawn stated the Planning Commission has always been very consistent on the 15 percent structural coverage limit. Palm stated he remembers the 1.500 square feet being discussed previously, and indicated he would be agreeable to reducing it to 1.500 square feet. Palm stated he did ask specifically at the last meeting what is needed to meet their requirements, and at no point was hr told that a drainage and grading plan needed to be submitted. Hawn stated she would acknow ledge the fact that the drainage and grading plan probably was not discussed at the previous meeting. Palm stated they w ould be happy to w ork with Staff on the drainage and grading plan prior to the City Council meeting. Hawn stated the Planning Commission docs prefer to sec a grading and drainage plan, but that it is not unusual for an application to be approved w ith it being subject to a plan being submitted for review and approval by Staff pnor to the City Council. Hawn stated she has a bigger concern w ith what exactly will be built once the excess structural coverage is removed. Palm stated they are agreeable to meeting the 10-foot side setback on either side, which eliminates the need for that variance. Palm stated they are willing to reduce the house three feet from the northerly structure line to the south, which will accommodate the average lakeshore setback, and address the drainage issues. PAGE? MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22, 2002 6:30 o’clock p.in. (#01-2730 Ace Properties, Continued) Rahn stated to his understanding that would work. Rahn commented it appears on the plans the Applicant did comply with the 10-foot side setbacks, and it would be relatively simple to comply with the structural coverage. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission they would approve a house that does not exceed the 15 percent structural coverage, removal of the bay window, and no encroachment on the side setbacks. Weinberger stated it appears the architect drew a 30-foot interior space and did not count the six-inch exterior walls. Hawn inquired whether a variance would be needed for the overhangs. Weinberger staled if the overhangs are reduced to 1.5 feet, they w ould not need a variance. Palm stated they would be agreeable to reducing the overhang to 1.5 feet. Hawn moved, iMabusth seconded, to recommend approval of Application #01-2730, Ace Properties, 3375 Crystal Bay Road, granting variances to lot area and lot width, a variance to the rear yard setback permitting a 19-foot setback rather than the required 30-foot setback, a variance to the hardcover in the 0-75’ setback of 23.8 percent, a variance to hardcover in the 75-250' setback, with the understanding the total hardcover in that area will be less than 53 percent, subject to the Applicants submitting a drainage and grading plan and a new draw ing rellecting the 10-foot setback on either side of the residence for Staff review and approval prior to the City Council meeting, and further subject to the Applicants reducing the overhangs from two feet to 1.5 feet, and with the understanding the total structural coverage will not exceed 1,500 square feet. \'OTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#3) #01-2731 NAVARRE AMOCO, 3360 SHORELINE DRIVE, CO.M.MERC'IAL SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCES (#9) #02-2740 JEFFREY AND NANCY TWIDWELL, 1865 CONCORDIA STREET, VARIA.NCES Mabusth moved, Kluth seconded, to table Application #01-2731, Navarre Amoco, 3360 Shoreline Drive, and to table .Application #01-2740, Jeffrey Twidwell, 1865 C oncordia Street, at the request of the Applicants. VOTE: Ayes 6. NAYS 0. (#4) #01-2735 PROPOSED ZONING CODE ADMEND.ME.NT, SECTION 10.03, SI BD. 14, STRUCTURAL LOT CO\ ERAGE ORDINANCE STANDARDS, 7:25 p.m. - 7:42 p.m. Bottenberg reviewed the proposed zoning code amendment to structural lot coverage standards, noting this matter was discussed at a previous Planning Commission meeting and a work session where it was discussed that in-ground swimming pools and their associated grade level patios would no longer be PAGES r L MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#01-2735 Proposed Zoning Code Amendment, Continued) considered as structures for the purpose of calculating “lot coverage by structures” as long as they had no elements higher than six feet over grade. Bottenberg stated other items also discussed at the work session included the fact that sUoictural coverage calculations shall include building protrusions more than six feet above grade; the outer two feet of roof overhangs shall not be considered as lot coverage; open decks with any portion of railing above six feet will be counted as lot coverage in their entirety; and hardcover limits for non-shoreland areas need to be looked at closer. Bottenberg indicated included within Staff s report is an analysis done of the approximately 3,000 residential lots, with there being 616 lots which are considered non-shoreland and less than two acres in area. Staff looked at four different neighborhoods within the City where the lots were two acres or less in area - Hackberry Hill, Chevy Chase Drive. Webber Hills, and Chippewa Laneffumham Road. Each area contains lots that are substandard in area as compared to the zoning requirement. Staff utilized three difTerent scenarios to determine the potential impacts of a hardcover limitation; one. 50 percent hardcover on total lot area; two. 50 percent hardcover on buildablc area; and 80 percent hardcover on buildablc area. Bottenberg stated those calculations are included within Exhibit A. Bottenberg indicated in many cases the size of the dnveway and walk were estimated because in the past hardcover was not an issue with the.se properttes and were not included on the survev. The analysis showed that there were no properties approaching 50 percent hardcover based on total lot area, even for the small lots, with most lots being less than 30 percent hardcover. In addition, the analysis showed that some properties have hardcover over or close to 50 percent buildable area, and a large proportion of small lots in a large zoning district already have hardcover over 80 percent buildable area because the buildable area is so small. Upon review mg the three scenarios. Staff recommends that hardcover limits to 50 percent or 80 percent of buiKi.ible area does not provide equity to all propern- owners m the City beeause buildable area is so variable for a given size lot depending on the zoning distnet. Also. Staff concludes that limiting hardcover to 50 pereent of total lot area is high. Of the properties revewed, none were close to the 50 percent hardcover limit. If 50 percent is the recommended amount, w ill property owners add improvements so half of their property is covered. Stafl'recommends using the total lot area and a percentage smaller than 50 percent for allowed hardcover, if a hardcover standard is needed at all. Bottenberg noted the attached map shows that the actual number of lots less than tw o acres and not in shoreland is a small percentage of the total lots in the City. Bottenberg stated Staff is looking for direction on what the Planning Commission would recommend for a hardcover percentage. There were no public comments relating to this application. PAGE 9 'I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNnSSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (1101>2735 Proposed Zoning Code Amendment, Continued) Hawn noted she had to leave the work session early and is not aware of what the conclusion w as regarding the six-foot building protrusions. HawTi stated it was her undci standing when she left the discussion was regarding any protrusion regardless of height. Mabusth stated it was her understanding it was higher. Mabusth stated she recalls eight feet. Gaffron stated he only recalls discussing six feet. Weinberger stated there w’as some discussion over counting building protrusions over six feet, which arc currently not in the ordinance. Mabusth concurred w’ith Weinberger’s recollection of the work session. Gaffron stated decks over six feet have always been included in the calculation. Hawn inquired why six feet and not three feet. Gaflron stated that was a decision reached back in 1989 or 1990. and he is unsure of what the rationale was for the six feet height. Gaffron stated most small sheds tend to be six feet in height and were considered to have a visual impact, with anything below that not considered to have a visual impact. Gaffron noted the maximum height of a fence is also six feet. Hawn questioned whether something that protrudes out from a residence four feet would be considered sUnctural. Gaffron stated what Hawn is talking about is called a wing wall that sticks out to screen the side of a deck. Mabusth staled a bay would be considered because it is higher than six feet. Gaffron stated in his view bay windows should normally be considered as part of lot coverage. Gaffron indicated he is unsure whether a wing wall should be included in the lot coverage. Hawn stated it is her sense that this issue was not thoroughly discussed at the work session, and recommended the Council discuss this aspect specifically and whether there should be this six fool c.xception. Kluth stated the intent of the ordinance for structural coverage is for massing or aesthetic reasons, and suggested it be reduced to zero. Mabusth stated Weinberger’s comment in the first application regarding lot coverage was nght on target concerning a few of the applications dealing w ith structural coverage, hardcover, and setbacks on newr construction. Mabusth stated perhaps the Planning Commission should review some of those limited lots and whether they should be given 15 percent structural coverage when they cannot meet the 0-75 ’ setback. PAGE 10 r i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (1101-2735 Proposed Zoning Code Am . 'inent. Continued) Gaffron inquired whether Mabusth feels that lot coverage and hardcover are mutually exclusive, and even though you are allowed 15 percent, that does not automatically say you can have 70 percent hardcover. Mabusth stated if the setbacks cannot be met or there is structure located within the 0-75 ’ setback, should the City allow two and a half story structures or massing of structure on the smaller lots. Mabusth commented she would like to discuss that issue in a work session. Kluth stated the philosophy behind the ordinance is to avoid massing on the lot. Rahn commented the City limits the footprint, which then encourages people to build up. Mabusth stated the City in the past has encouraged property owners to build up if they had hardcover con.straints. Kluth stated the intent of the hardcover ordinance is to permit the infiltration of water. Hawn inquired how the Planning Commission felt about the hardcover at 35 percent. Kluth questioned w'hy a number even needs to be set if everyone is currently in compliance. Mabusth stated that is her feeling also. Mabusth stated after seeing the analysis that w as completed, she would withdraw her request for hardcover controls on rural lots that do not meet two acres. Kluth stated there are other controls in place lor i'tf'jrickV. ,;r such as a ma.ximum for the number of square feet that can be built. Mabusth commented that lots under two acres are also allowed 2,000 square feet of accessory structures. Mabusth stated she does not currently sec that happening. Gaftron stated in his view he does not see the neeu for that limitation in the rural area at this point. Kluth stated the City should look at it from the perspective of massing. Haw-n inquired what Staff would like the Planning Commission to do with this proposal. Gatfron stated Staff could draff an ordinance for review' by the Planning Commission at their ne.xt meeting or schedule a work session w here these issues can be discussed. Hawn stated she would like some guidance on the si.x-foot height on protrusions from structures. Hawn moved, Kluth seconded, to recommend Staff draft a sample ordinance for review at the next Planning Commission meeting, with a request that Staff obtain some guidance on the issue of the six-foot height limitation for protrusions from structures and the need for the limit. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. PAGE 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANT^'ING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. («5) #2333 PROPOSED ZOMNC, CODE AMENDMENT, SECmON 10.20, SUBD. 4C, HOME OCCUPATION STANDARDS, 7:42 p.m. - 7:43 p.m. Berg moved, Kluth seconded, to table Application #2333, Proposed Zoning Code Amendment, Section 10.20, Subd. 4C, Home Occupation Standards. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS (#6) #02-2737 CHARLES PYLE, JR., 3548 IV Y PLACE, AFTER-THE-F.\CT VARIANCES, 7:44 p.m. - 7:48 p.m. Charles Pyle. Applicant, was present. Bottenberg stated the Applicant is requesting after-the-fact variances to permit the replacement of an c.xisting lakeside deck and repair a walkway. The deck and walkw ay are located within 75 feet of the lakeshore. The deck and some boards in the walkw ay were old and deteriorated. A variance to structural lot coverage is required to permit 20 percent lot coverage by structures where 15 percent is allowed. A variance to hardcover w ithin the 0-75’ is also required to permit 18.67 percent hardcover where none is allow ed, and a variance to lakeshore setback is necessary to permit 243 square feet of structure w ithin 75 feet of the lakeshore. Bottenberg stated the design of the deck is an equal replacement to what e.xistcd. 1 o meet today’s code standards, the footings were required to be raised above grade, higher than what e.xisted. so an additional step W'as added. 1 he square footage of the deck increased by appro.ximately 30 square feet to meet the standard. Staff recommends approval of the lot coverage by structure and hardcover vanances. I he Applicant is required to remove 177 square feet of landscape fabric under rock. Pyle stated they w ere unaw are at the time this project w as started of the number of railroad ties that e.Msted in the area. Pyle stated they ended up removing 20 railroad ties, w hich were then replaced w ith keystone. Pyle stated he was unaware they needed a permit to replace the ties. There were no public comments regarding this application. Hawn moved, .Mabusth seconded, to recommend approval oI Application #02-2737, C harles Pyle. Jr., 3548 Ivy Place, granting of arier-lhe-racl variances to structural lot coverage, hardcover in the 0-75' setback, and lakeshore setback to permit the replacement of an existing lakeside deck and repair a svalkway, with the understanding 177 square feet of landscape fabric will be removed. VOTE: Aves 6. Navs 0. P.AGE 12 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#7) #02-2738 G & G HOLDING COMPANY LTD., PARTNERSHIP, 1170 LOMA LINDA AVENUE, AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCES, 7:49 p.m. - 7:56 p.m. Scott Kutz, Vintage Builders, was presctil. Bottenberg stated the Applicants are requesting after-the-fact variances to replace a lakeside porch to the same footprint that existed. The porch was built in 1978 and the wood is rotting on the roof. A permit was obtained from the City, and during the process of the maintenance work and roof repair it was discovered that the floor of the porch was also rotten. In 1978 a variance was granted to enclose an existing concrete patio on the lakeside of the residence that encroached into the 75’ lakeshore setback and into the side yard setback. The plan approved is the same as what is being proposed today. The footprint, hardcover, roof height or lot coverage by structures is not changing from what existed and was approved in 1978. A variance to the side yard setback is required to allow the porch to be 2.7 feet from the side lot line where 10 feet is required, and a variance to the average lakeshore setback is also required to permit an encroachment of 67 feet. Variances to hardcover in the 0-75’ and 75-250’ setback are also needed as well as a variance to the lakeshore setback to allow a portion of the residence footprint to be within 75’ of the lakeshore. Kutz stated they are not changing the footprint at all. Kutz slated he was unaware that correcting an unsafe condition in the porch would require a variance since the footprint of the building was not being changed. Kutz stated they did stop work on the porch until approval is received on the variances. Bill Bockman, 830 Loma Linda Road, stated he just had a question regarding why after-the-fact variances were needed, noting that it sounds like they were doing something they weren't supposed to be doing and then got caught. Haw n inquired w hether Bockman heard the explanation of the builder. Bockman st-ted he did. Hawn inquired w hether the neighbor has had a problem with the porch in the past. Bockman stated he docs not. There were no further public comments regarding this application. Mabusth stated she does not have a problem w ith this application since they are not expanding the building envelope. Kluth moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2738, G & G Holding Company Ltd. Partnership, 1170 Loma Linda Avenue, granting of after-the-fact variances for side yard setback, average lakeshore setback, hardcover in the 0-75’ setback, hardcover in the 75-250’ setback, and lakeshore setback to permit the enclosure of an existing concrete pa-.lo on the lakeside of the residence. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. PAGE 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLATTING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#8) #02-2739 THOMAS AND MARY ANN DAHLQUIST, 4070 DAHL ROAD, VARIANCES, 7:57 p.m.-8:31 p.m. Thomas Dahlquist, Applicant, was present. Bottenberg stated the Applicants are propo^^ing to extend the existing lakeside deck at the northwest comer of the residence by seven feet and construct a 3.5 by 25’ walxway that would connect the lakeside deck to a small deck on the west side. The extension and walkway consists of 165 square feet. Bottenberg stated this extension will provide wheelchair access-ability to the lakeside deck from inside the residence. The interior of the residence has a step that one must go down in order to access the lakeside deck. The applicants’ mother-ir.-law lives with them and is in a wheelchair. In June of 2001, the Applicants applied for and received a permit to repair the existing lakeside deck and to construct a shed on the rear of the property. When the shed was built, it w as believed to be built ten feet olT of the property line. When a survey was completed for the deck addition, it found to be 7 line and 8.9 feet from the property line. The 120 square foot shed needs to be set ten feet back from the property line. The variances that are required for this application include a variance to hardcover within the 75-250’ of the lakeshore to permit 27.9 percent hardcover where 25 percent is allowed. Staff recommends approval of the hardcover variance and moving the shed to mee: the 10 foot yard setback, subject to removal of 1,462 square feet of non-conforming plastic rock bed underlayment m the 75-250’ 7one. Dahlquist stated currently his mother-in-law is not residing at the residence, but they expect her to be back in the house shoit^y. Dahlquist indicated at the time the shed was built, they believed it was located 10 feet olTthe property line until the surv ey was completed. Dahlquist stated the location of the shed currently is in a spot that is the least obtrusive to the adjoining residence, noting the neighbor does not object to the shed in its current location. Dahlquist stated it would be vety difficult to relocate the shed towards the driveway. Mabusth stated the Planning Commission does have a letter indicating the neighbors do not object to the shed. Hawn inquired whether a drawing was submitted at ’iie time the building permit was granted. Dahlquist stated the shed was already partially built at the time the building permit was issued. Weinberger stated the City does not require a survey for a shed of that size, which is considered to be a temporary building which cannot be moved. Dahlquist indicated the survey was done in conjunction with the deck. There were no public comments regarding this application. Kluth noted there is very little change in the hardcover calculations. PAGE 14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PI.ANMNG COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2739 Thomas and Mary Dahlquist, Continued) Rahn commented he personally docs not have an issue with the location of the shed since the neighbors are not objecting to it. Mabusth noted th. . arc no visual problems for the adjoining neighbor with the shed in that 'ocat'on. Hawn stated the shed being located clo.ser than 10 feet lo the property line docs set a precedence. Hawn commented by code a hardship must be imposed by the layout of the land, not by one’s persona, circumstances. Mabusth inquired whether the deck would be a grade level deck or elevated. Dalhquist stated the deck and walkway w ould be at the same level as the other deck. Weinberger stated the deck on the lakeside is above a fuU ir .el Mabusth inquired how access is currently gained to the deck. Dahlquist stated through a sliding glass door from the living room. Mabusth inquired what the new deck w ill provide access to. Dahlquist stated it would provide access from another room, with the other deck being used for grilling. Rahn noted this addition to the deck would be connecting the two decks with a walkway. Hawn inquired whether the Applicant was okay with removing the rock and plastic. Dahlquist stated he does not have a problem with removing the landscape fabne. Kluth inquired whether the deck could be reduced somewhat to meet the 25 percent standard. Dahlquist stated once the survey was completed, he did calculate the hardcover and arrived at 22,8 percent, with the addition of the deck and walkway resulting in 23.38 percent. Dahlquist stated Staff then went out and measured it and arrived at 26 or 27 percent. Dahlquist stated he is unsure how that number was arrived at. Bottenberg stated she omitted the plastic from the calculations. Dahlquist stated he dio include the landscape fabric in his calculations, which amounted to 14.62 square feet for the fabric, came up with 22.82 percent for the area between 75-250’. Dahlquist stated he then added the 165 square feet for the new deck and walkway and came up with 23.38 percent. Dahlquist stated that includes the landscape fabric, which will be removed. Dahlquist stated he took the numbers off the survey. r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (II02-2739 Thomas and Mary Ann Dahlquist, Continued) Boltenberg stated the difTercncc is in the total area in the 75-250’ setback. Bottenberg stated the Ap; ..cant had 29,919 square feet where it is actually 19,865, which resulted in some confusion. Bottenberg stated Gaffron reviewed the hardcover numbers to make sure the number was correct. Mabusth inquired what the increase in hardcover is with the new deck and walkway. Bottenberg stated it is 165 square feet. Mabusth inquired whether the hardcover could be reduced somewhere. Dahlquist stated he could remove the 1,462 square feet of landscape fabric. Mabusth staled that is normally not included in the hardcover calculations. Dahlquist stated he is not aware of any other place where the hardcover could be reduced. Weinberger inquired whether there is a parking stall located next to the garage. Dahlquist replied that it is. Bottenberg stated Staff did review this site, and it would be difficult to remove a portion of the driveway since some area is needed for a turn-around. Weinberger indicated the wooden steps are also needed due to the grade in the area. Mabusth pointed out those steps would be allowed in the 0-75’ setback. Mabusth stated she did look at the property and there really is no other place to reduce the hardcover. Mabusth indicated she would recommend approval on this application. Hawn commented she has a problem with approving this application since the Planning Commission in the past has denied other applications that exceed the 25 percent limit. Mabusth inquired whether the decks need to be connected. Dahlquist stated it is to assist his mother-in-law and to help fit with their needs. Dahlquist stated they would like to access the other deck without having to go through the house. Hawn inquired whether the front deck could be made narrower. Dahlquist stated the old decking material on that deck has already been replaced. Hawn indicated she is speaking of the deck located on the street side of the house. Dahlquist stated the deck on the street side has cement underneath it. PAGE 16 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2739 Thomas and Mary Dahlquist, Continued) Rahn inquired whether the Applicant would be willing to eliminate the little bump-out on the new deck toward the side. Rahn stated in his view that really is the only area to reduce the deck. Hawn noted the hardcover would still be in excess of what he is allowed. Dahlquist stated in the hardcover calculations there is not a total area under A, with B showing 19.865 square feet. Dahlquist inquired what that number is. Hawn stated the number is 6,841.61 square feet. Dahlquist indicated his number is 6,829 square feet, which is less. Dahlquist reiterated he arrives at 22.8 being increased to 23.38 percent. Gaffron inquired whether that number is based on the 29.919 square feet total. Gaffron stated Staff has calculated 19.865 in the 75-250’ area. Upon remo% al of the rock and plastic, the hardcover would be reduced to 53 79 percent. Bottenberg stated that is correct. Gaffron stated 53.79 divided by 19,865 is more than 25 percent and would be closer to 26 percent. Dahlquist stated that would make the existing hardcover at 27.1 percent, with it being increased to 27.9 percent. Mabusth stated the Planning Commission generally prefers the hardcover stay at the existing level or be reduced rather than increased, which would be 27.1 percent. Mabusth inquired whether the Applicant would be able to keep the hardcover at 27.1 percent. Mrs. Dahlquist stated they attempted to design a deck that was aesthetically pleasing to the house as well as functional. Dahlquist stated they have reviewed their plans a number of times in order to see if it could be revised somehow, and in order to get access off the deck from the outside, they would need to construct a walkway to connect the two decks. Dahlquist stated the little bump-out at the end gives them an exit from the deck. Dahlquist stated the deck is long but not very deep. Mabusth inquired whether there is access to that upper deck from somewhere other than inside the house. Mr. Dahlquist stated the only access is through the house. Mabusth commented that could be considered a safety issue. Mrs. Dahlquist stated that was where they started, and from there they attempted to provide access for their mothcr-in-law. Dahlquist stated the deck cannot be made narrower if they w ant to use the existing footings. Dahlquist stated she is not sure what other options they have for reducing the deck. Hawn inquired whether both decks are over cement. PAGE 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#02-2739 Thomas and Mary Ann Dahlquist, Continued) Mrs. Dahlquist indicated the one deck is a privacy deck off of their bedroom and is located totally under the roof line. Dahlquist stated the catwalk is 3.5 feet wide and is located under an existing overhang of almost three feet. Dahlquist noted she did include the overhangs in the dimensions of the house. Mabusth stated it would be nice to have the numbers confirmed. Weinberger stated the sur\'ey does show the footprint of the house without the overhang. Mabusth stated the overhangs should have been included on the sur\ey, and suggested the numbers be recalculated. Mabusth suggested this item be tabled to have the numbers recalculated, and inquired whether the Applicants would be agreeable to tabling this. Mrs. Dahlquist stated they are not in that big of a hurry and would have to wait until spring before the work could be commenced. Rahn stated he would like the numbers confirmed. Weinberger stated the overhangs would be considered as hardcover, w hich would increase the hardcover numbers if it is over three feet. Mabusth stated if the overhang is over a majority of the walkway, it probably would not result in a big increase. Kluth commented the decisions of the Planning Commission need to based on facts, and in his view there would be a very slight increase in the existing hardcover. Kluth moved, Berg seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2739, Thomas and Mary Ann Dahlquist, 4070 Dahl Road, granting of a variance to hardcover in the 75-250’ setback, subject to the hardcover numbers being verified, and further subject to the Applicants removing 1,462 square feet of landscape fabric. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays I, Hawn Opposed. Hawn stated she voted in opposition based on the application in front of them since it could be setting a precedent, and if the hardcover increase is diminutive, she would support the application, Hawn inquired how the Planning Commission felt about the shed. Kluth inquired w hether it could be relocated. Dahlquist stated he is unsure whether the shed can be moved, noting that he constructed it himself and he is unsure whether it would stay together it it is moved. Dahlquist stated the foundation consists of clay, w ith the four beams resting on brick. Mrs. Dahlquist stated she has a concern with moving the shed any close to her neighbor ’s front door, noting the shed was originally located as far from the neighbor ’s front door as possible with the understanding that it w as ten feet off the property line. Dahlquist stated at the time the shed w as PAGE 18 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#01*2739 Thomas and Mary Ann Dahlquist, Continued) constructed, they did talk with the neighbors regarding placement of the shed, noting they were told the incorrect property line. Kluth suggested City Staff or a sunxyor locate the monuments. Gaffron stated it is a hardship on City Staff to have them locate the monuments. Kluth suggested perhaps the City require just the monuments be located rather than a full sun ey. Gaffron stated there is some cost involved with locating the monuments. Gaffron stated the past practice of the City has been to just let the property owners locate the monuments to show the building inspector rather than having a formal suney done. Gaffron questioned whether the impact on the neighbors’ view would become greater by relocating the shed further away from the property line. Berg moved, Kluth seconded, to recommend on Application #02-2739, Thomas and .Mary Ann Dahlquist, 40780 Dahl Road, that the existing 120 square foot shed remain in its current location. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Item #9 follows Item #3. (#10) #02-2741 CALVIN PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, 177 GLENDALE DRIVE, CONDITIONAL I SE PERMIT, 8:32 p.m. - 8:43 p.m. Terry .Phillips, Vanman Companies, appeared on behalf of the Calvin Fresbylcrian Church. Bottenberg staled the Calvin Presbyterian Church is proposing to construct a 3.335 square foot Fellowship Hall with an adjoining kitchen and storage space, an expanded gathering area and new toilet rooms on the upper level. The Fellowship Hall would be located on the back or west side of the church. Both additions will be two floors, with the bottom levels containing the mechanicals for the building and storage space. The Applicant is also proposing a new dnveway off Glendale Drive which will lead to a parking area consisting of six parking stalls, two of which are handicapped accessible. Bottenberg indicated the church’s pnmary use is Sunday morning services, but does have ongoing limited daily activities. Bottenberg stated the Calvin Presbyterian Church has existed since the early 1960s. but no conditional use permit to allow the church in an “R" District is of record. Approval w as granted in 1967 to construct a Boy Scout clubhouse, and in 1990. approval was granted to construct a storage building on the property. At neither time was a full review for a conditional use permit done to allow a church in a residential property. Bottenberg indicated the Planning Commission should review that to formalize the church’s use of the site. Bottenberg noted a portion of the church property is located w ithin the City of Long Lake, with all buildings on the site being located in Orono. The property is currently serviced by an on-site treatment PAGE 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2741 Calvin Presbyterian Church, Continued) system and water is provided from Long Lake. The propcrt>' is located in the RR-IB zoning district, with the surrounding properties also being zoned RR-IB. The property consists of almost seven acres, with substantial land between the church and the adjacent homes. Bottenberg indicated the church is proposing an additional access off Glendale Drive, which will lead to the back of the church and provide some parking stalls. The Public Works Director has reviewed the proposal and has no issues with the additional access. Bottenberg noted a lighting plan would need to be submitted prior to the issuance of a permit if additional lighting is being requested. Bottenberg noted the property is landscaped, with the Applicant not planning on modifying the existing landscape. The property contains a private sewage treatment system, with routine inspections having determined the septic system on the property is currently non-compliant and must be replaced by 2010. The current septic code does not prohibit use of the property due to non-compliant systems. However, if it determined to be failing, the system will require mmcdiate replacement or hookup to City sewer since this properly has recently been included in the MUSA. The septic inspector did review the proposal and has determined the existing septic system would need to be upgraded before an occupancy permit would be issued. Bottenberg stated if the signage of the lot is changed, they would need to submit a plan for review prior to issuance of a permit. Bottenberg indicated minimal change to tiie existing grade is expected, with the church being advised to contact the MCWD. A grading plan should be submitted prior to final Council action on this application. Bottenberg indicated the existing and proposed use of the stte complies with all the standards applicable to a church use. with Stall recommending approval of the conditional use permit subject to the following conditions: 1. The resolution shall contain language formalizing the church use of the property. 2. Additions approved per submitted site plan are subject to: a. The kitchen not being installed until unless the septic system is upgraded to accommodate that additional use, or the building is connected to sanitary sewer. b. A grading plan including any stormwater management systems required by MCWD must be submitted prior to final Council action. 3. Any change or more intense use of the property will require an amendment to the conditional use permit. 4. A conditional use permit shall remain in effect as long as the conditions agreed upon are observed, and the use does not cease for a period of more than six months. If the use of the property as a church would cease for a period of six months, a new conditional use permit is required. PAGE 20 r MIMITES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (II02>2739 Thomas and Mary Ann Dahlquist, Continued) Phillips noted the report says each addition is two levels, and it may be more accurate to indicate that there are two levels that are tied into each other, with the vast majority of each addition being simply a slab on grade and not the main level of the church. Phillips stated with regard to landscaping, the addition to the west would result in the loss of at least one spruce tree and possibly two. Phillips stated the trees are close to the end of their life space, noting the church is agreeable to following the landscape guidelines of the City. There were no public comments regarding this application. Phillips stated they do note a couple of options regarding their septic, and they will be reviewing them in the near future. Mabusth noted the Public Works Director did suggest that some landscaping be completed near the parking area by the west addition. Bottenberg stated that was merely a suggestion by the Public Works Director and is not a formal requirement of the City. Phillips stated they are agreeable to discussing landscaping and follow the City’s guidelines for landscaping. Hawn moved, Mabusth seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2741, Calvin Presbyterian Church, 177 Glendale Drive, grant 'n'’ of a Conditional Use Permit to operate a church on this site, subject to the conditions outlined in the January 14, 2002 Planner’s Report; and further subject to the church upgrading its sewer or connecting to City sewer prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being issued; two, a lighting and/or signage plan will be submitted if any changes arc being requested; three, any lands aping of the parking area near the west addition will be subject to Staffs review and approval; and four, the additions will meet all setback requirements for this zoning district. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#11) #02-2742 DOUGLAS AM) ROr*^ N *r<liTH, 4195 UIGIIWOOD ROAD, VARIANCES. 8:43 p.m. - 8:59 p.m. Douglas and Roban Smith, Applicants, were present, and Shesh Aandahl, Architect, was present. Bottenberg stated the Applicants are proposing to construct a 10-foot addition to the side of the residence to enlarge the kitchen and mudroom. The bedrooms below the kitchen would also be increased by 10-feet and a dormer would be added to the second floor bedroom. In 1991, the former owmers of the property applied for and were granted an average lakeshore setback to permit construction of a major addition and other work to the res-Oci*. e. The proposed addition lies behind the average lakeshore setback determined in 1991 Bottenberg stated the second part of the application is an addition to the detached garage. The Applicants arc proposing to construct a 12-foot wide storage area to the c.xisting detached garage. In PAGE 21 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#02-2742 Douglas and Roban Smith, Continued) 198>, a variance was granted to allow a 24’ by 32’ garage to be located 9.6 feet from the street property line instead of the required 35 feet. The addition would be on the south side of the building and would bring it to within approximately 25 feet of the residence. 1 he garage addition increases the garage footprint to 24’ by 44 ’, making it an oversize accessory structure subject to greater setback restrictions. The Applicants arc requesting variances to the average lakeshore setback to permit a 25-foot encroachment into the average lakeshore setback and to permit an oversi/ed accessory structure to be located 9.6 feet from the street property line. Aandahl presented some photographs of the existing residence to the Planning Commission depicting the location of the proposed addition. Aandahl stated the Applicants are interested in making the kitchen larger, which was not remodeled at the time the other w ork in the house w as done. I he Applicants would like to upgrade the kitchen and make it larger to accommodate their family and friends. Aandah! slated the adjoining property owners' view of the lake would not be hampered by the proposed addition smec there is quite a steep drop-off to the lake and would be located behind the deck. Aandahl indicated this residence is fairly blocked by a number of trees and the proposed addition should not affect their view' at all. Aandahl showed pictures to the Planning Commission of the existing garage. Aandahl noted hardcover is not an issue, and during the priKess they took into consideration the impact to the neighbors as well as aesthetics and personal needs. Mr. Smith stated there is an existing three-car garage, but due to the fact they have a live-in nanny and three cars, along with a number of b'cycles and other items requiring storage, they would like to construct a garage that would provide them with additional storage. Smith stated they did review their options for location of the garage, noting there are some issues with topography and a big oak tree that dictated the need for the garage to be located closer to the house. Smith stated the garage would also not impact the neighbors’ view of the lake. Aandahl stated they also did look at the possibility of adding to the back of the garage, which did seem appear to be a good idea since the garage would still be located close to the street and would impact the neighbors more. Aandahl stated the topography of the land does not lend itself well to a third building, with three buildings not being aesthetically pleasing. There were no public comments regarding this application. llawn stated she does not see a problem with this application, but does not see a hardship imposed by this property that would prompt the need for a third oversized accessory building and the need to encroach on the setbacks. Hawn inquired whether the building could be reduced to 1,000 square feet versus the 1056 square feet. Mr. Smith stated the reason for the additional feet was to provide some storage. Smith indicated the building they are proposing is not tremendously large and they would like to avoid another shed. Smith PAGE 22 L. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#02*2739 Thomas and Mary Ann Dahlquist, Continued) stated he looked at the hardship in relation to the other choices they have and the impact it would have on the neighborhood. Kluth inquired whether they w'ould be permitted to add another building to the property without a variance. Mabusth stated they could. Mabusth noted once a building exceeds 1,000 square feet, they would be subject to far more restrictions. Mabusth inquired whether the garage in 1991 was granted a setback variance. Mrs. Smith stated they were. Mabusth commented she would hate to see a third structure on this property. Aandahl stated she did discuss the size of the garage with the Applicants earlier today, and they w ould be agreeable to reducing the size of the garage to 1,000 square feet if necessary. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that they w ould prefer the building not c.xceed 1,000 square feet. Hawn stated in her view the proposed kitchen is perfectly acceptable. Hawn inquired whether this project has been discussed with the neighbors. Mrs. Smith stated the one house is vacant, which is owned by the hospital, and the person who resides on the other property is approximately 92 years old and is apparently very ill. Berg moved, Mabusth seconded, to recommend approval of Applicaticn #02*2742, Douglas and Roban Smith, 4195 Highwood Road, granting of a variance to average lakeshore setback to permit a 25*foot encroachment, with the understanding the size of the garage svill not exceed 1,000 square feet. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#12) #02*2744 PAUL JOHNCOX, 2948 CASCO POINT ROAD, VARIANCES Hawn noted this application has been withdrawn at the request of the Applicant. SKETCH PLAN (#13) #02-2743 THO.MAS J. DUNS.MORE, 2525/2545 SHADYWOOD RO.AD AND 2525 KELLY AVENUE Thomas Dunsmorc, Applicant, and Clay Moorse were present. Weinberger stated the Applicant is proposing a nine-unit office development on a 3.7 acre property located at 2525/2535 and 2545 Shadywood Road. The proposed office buildings would be one-story. PAGE 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#02-2743 Thomas Dunsmorc, Continued) six of which would be 2,530 square feet and three at 2,120 square feet. Weinberger stated these lots are considered three separate lots that are all commonly owned. The intent would be to sell each individual building into independent ownerships and plat a common area to be ow ned by the building ownership group. Each building would be located on a separate parcel, with the tenth parcel being a common area. The common area would contain the shared parking facilities, ponds, landscaped areas, and sidew'alks. Weinberger stated under Orono ’s current comprehensive plan and zoning, some changes in land use and zoning would be required to change the land use of the portion of the property zoned residential to allow the property to be rezoned to commercial. The Applicants are requesting coneeptua' approval of the site plan, including discussion of a proposed CMP Amendment and rezoning. Weinberger stated the east one-half of the property is zoned B-4 and is guided for commercial use by the Comprehensive Plan. 1 he zoning code states the district is intended to provide a disu-ict that is related to and may adjoin residential districts or other business districts for the location of administrative office buildings and related offices. The office uses allowed in this district arc those in which there is limited contact w ith the public and no exterior display or selling or me.'chandisc to the general public. Weinberger noted offices are a permitted use in the B-4 District as well as churches and schools. Weinberger indicated the west one-half of the propo.sed development is zoned residential. Any office use would require the property to be rezoned. Under the current zoning district the property could be used for single-family residential use. A duplex could be constructed on the property only after approval of a conditional use permit. Weinberger noted this property does not have direct access onto Kelley Parkway because of a pond. Weinberger stated currently Orono ’s Zoning Ordinance docs not have a process that would allow the proposed development. A PUD process is only available to commercial properties located w ithin the Highway 12 Development Corridor. Properties in the B-4 District arc required to have a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet and a lot width of 100 feet. The proposed plat can be compared to a “town house ” plat, where each individual building is located on an individual lot. A process would be required to allow commercial properties to have the tlcxibility to allow the development to create individual building lots that w ould allow zero setbacks and lots less than 20,000 square feet in the zoning district. Weinberger noted the property has municipal sewer and water available in the Shadywood Road right-of-way. The C'lty ’s new surface water management plan has identified a need for a regional water quality pond located somew here near this site. The City Engineer indicated the size of the pond w as based on the runoff from this individual site, but does have water runoff to this site fro ' other areas. Weinberger stated this development would be required to pay a fee under the new ly adopted surface water management plan in addition to the sewer and water fees. Weinberger stated .Staff did calculate a surface w ater nianngcment fee of approximately S25.000. Weinberger indicated the size of the pond would need to be determined based on the total runoff to this site. Weinberger stated the Planning Commission should discuss whether this property should be rezoned and whether the City should review the option of creating a PUD ordinance that would allow PAGE 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#02-2743 Thomas J. Dunsmore, Continued) commercial developments. Weinberger stated without a PUD ordinance, the proposed development could not happen with separate lots for each office building. Dunsmore stated he has done some other properties that are adjacent to residential, and in h's opinion this type of development is a great transition from residential to commercial. Dunsmore stated they are very conscious in providing adequate screening between the residential and the office buildings and in trying to limit the amount of hardcover. There were no public comments regarding'this application. Berg inquired what the ma.ximum number of residential lots would be allowed on this property. Berg indicated it w’as her recollection it would be two twin homes consisting of four units. Weinberger stated he is unsure of the number. Kluth stated he is unclear regarding the drainage in this area. Kluth e.xprcssed a concern the pond would not be able to adequately handle the runoff from the parking lot and buildings. Mabusth commented that was also her concern. Dunsmore stated they are willing to look at that issue more closely. Berg indicated this is an area that does e.xpericnce drainage problems currently, and with this type of massing, the runoff would become a bigger issue. Berg questioned why so many buildings were being proposed for this property. Dunsmore stated they are considering reversing the drainage so it docs not go towards Kelley. Dunsmore indicated he would need to have his engineers address that issue and ensure that the water runoff goes in the opposite direction from Kelley. Dunsmore stated from an aesthetic point of view, they have tried to create the atmosphere that this is pnvate little community. Berg inquired whether from an economical standpoint it is necessary to have nine buildings. Dunsmore stated at this time it is. Kluth stated there are two major issues, the PUD. the rezoning, and w hether this plan fits this property. Kluth stated those would need to be addressed together. Dunsmore stated they have encountered the need for a PUD in every other city they have had a project in, noting that this is a unique product that does not currently exist out in the market, with most cities not having developed the zoning ordinance that encompasses that. Dunsmore stated a PUD has been very effectiv e because it gives the city a lot of latitude. Kluth inquired why this has been designed as separate buildings rather than one larger ofllce building. PAGE 25 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o ’clock p.m. |i (^02-2743 Thomas J. Dunsmore, Continued) Dunsmore stated typically the 1 ,500 square foot tenants are typically found in buildings that ouners neglect, and they pay higher rates because that smaller office space is generally more difficult to find. Dunsmore stated the person has more control over the rent, owm the space, and take depreciation. Kluth indicated he does understand that concept, noting that condominiums arc generally ouncd separately but arc part of a single structure. Kluth inquired why the buildings were not all one structure. Dunsmore stated there >»n assoc:-3*ion. Kluth inquired whether there were two tenants to a building. Dunsmore slated in his view there are people who reside in this area who would prefer to have an office in the city rather than downtown Minneapolis, with this type of building catering to the smaller businesses. Berg inquired whether these would be walkouts. Dunsmore replied they would be. Ilawn stated in her view if the drainage could be handled, this is not a bad proposal for this site, noting there have been a number of other proposals for this area that have come and gone. Ilawn commented this project might work for this area, but noted she docs not know what the neighborhood reaction would be to this type of project. HawTi stated she would like to get their input on this project. Mabusth stated in her view the City should continue to look at this project for this area. Dunsmore stated they are in the process of constructing a similar project in Plymouth off of Highway 55 and I'cmbrook. Kluth staled he personally is not opposed to the PUD but does have concerns regarding the drainage and the number of buildings being proposed. Mabu.sth commented this is a sensitive area and that one has to question whether the number of buildings being proposed is a little loo much for this site. Mabusth stated she docs like the idea. Berg agreed the City needs to be sensitive to the drainage problems in this area. Dunsmore stat«*d they have designed drainage systems that handle the drainage in other areas, and in his view the drainage in this area can also be corrected. Berg commented she is unsure if the City is aw are w here all the w ater comes from in this area. Kluth stated the Planning Commission needs to look at the rezoning of this property, which does require a public hearing. Kluth stated in his opinion the Planning Commission cannot make a recommendation w ithout a public hearing and w ould hold off coming to a conclusion until he hears the input from the public. PAGE 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22, 2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (1^02-2743 Thomas J. Dunsinorc, Continued) Hawn noted this is just a sketch plan review. Berg indicated she does live in this area, and stated the impact down the road needs to be Icniked at. Weinberger stated if the City is going to rezone this property, it would be approved at the time of final plat. Weinberger stated the PUD zoning would apply to this property only, and if the project is not commenced within a certain period of time, the PUD would expire. Berg stated as an individual who lives in the area, the fact that it looks more residential is appealing, noting one of the properties next to this is a duplex, with some other residential in the area. Berg stated the drainage would impact one of the properties in this area since it is lower than this property, which w ill need to be addressed. Berg noted the w ater runoff in this area w as so bad the City h; d to close off the street at times. Berg commented the concept of the building works well w ith a residential neighborhood, but suggested the developer look at th j possibility look at reducing the number of buildings proposed for this site. Dunsmorc stated the challenge would be to come back with some good statistics on the drainage. Dunsmore invited the Planning Commission to visit his other project in Plymouth on Highway 55 and Fembrook past Mulligan's. Fritzlcr inquired how many parking stalls are being proposed. Weinberger stated 98 parking stalls arc proposed. Dunsmorc stated they t>pically need eight parking stalls per unit. Dunsmorc stated they have on other projects done proof t>f parking, noting they intentionally leave areas as green space initially unti' parking becomes an issue and then those areas can be turned into parking. Gaffron noted the City of Orono has al.so done that w ith the Serv ice 800 building. Fritzlcr staled one issue w ould be traffic ingress and egress and the amount of traffic currently on County Road 19. Fritzlcr noted the 98 parking stalls would increase the traffic in this area eonsiderablv. Mabusth suggested the developer speak with Hennepin County regarding any necessary changes in access that may be needed. Dunsmore stated they are also considenng the possibility of shared parking w ;th the church. Moorse stated they would like the Planning Commission to approve the concept tonight, and then they would work on addressing the issues relating to drainage and grading and traffic. Moorse stated they arc looking at a combined entrance w ith the church. Mabusth inquired whether this concept w ould be brought before the Council before Staff began working on the PUD. Weinberger stated that it would be. PAGE 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 1%, 2002 6:30 o ’clock p.m. (M02-27431 homas J'. Dunsmore, Continued) Fritzlcr stated aside from the drainage, he has a major concern with the amount of traffic that would be generated from ■:his project. Mabusth stated aside from the concerns raised tonight, the proposed development in her \iew is very appealing. Mabusth recommended the developer look at reducing the number of buildings being proposed for this site, noting there is a lot of hardcover being proposed that would impact the drainage, Dunsmore indicated he would eontinue to work with staff on these issues. Hawn stated she does not have an opinion on the number of units at this time until after the issues with drainage are addressed further. Hawn suggesU:d the developer do some planting on the side of the church behind the parking spaces. Hawn stated she likes the idea of having s'v>..-ed parking with the church. Rahn commented he likes the residential look of t .c development. Rahn inquired whether all of the buildings would be walkouts. Dunsmore stated they \sould be. Rahn noted the elevation woii'a decrease as they get closer to County Road 19. which should help with the drainage. Dunsmore stated there would be appro.ximately an eight-foot drop. Rahn inquired whether there would also be sidewalks across the back of the ouildings. Dunsmore stated he does no? know at this time Dunsmore stated there would be screening behind the buildings. Moorse stated it is not their intention for the tenants of the buildmgs to travel from one building to another from the rear. Moorse stated the walkout area is merely intended to provide an area w here people can go outside and get some air. Uerg reiterated she does have a concern with the number of buildings being proposed. Gaflfon inquired whether the buildings could be tw isted somew hat so there is not a 200-foot wall along the east lot line with 20-foot gaps. Dunsmore stated they can look at that. Dunsmore indicated they would continue to w ork w ith Staff to resolve these i.».sues. Hawn stated it would also be helpful to have numbers indicating the amount of traffic that would be peneiatcd from this type of development. FAGE 28 M. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 22,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION C OMMENTS (#14) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS ON NOVEMBER 26,2001, DECEMBER 10, 2001, ANT) JANUARY 14, 2002 This item was not discussed. (#15) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Gaffron stated the City would probably be receiving an application thi*- seek for a proposed development on the 50 acres next to City Hall. Gaffron stated the*' are proposing 250 units of residential ranging from twin homes to senior housing. Gaffron stated on the northwest comer of this site they are proposing some commercial, which might include an 18,000 square foot groceiy store. Gafiron noted in a recent work session the Council indicated they would like to keep the retail focused more on Long Lake. Gaffron indicated some work sessions will need to be held on this development over this next couple of months, and requested the Planning Commission review the application prior to the meeting. (#16) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR NOVE.MBER 19, 2001 Kluth moved, Mabusth seconded, to appro\e the minutes of the November 19,2001 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0, Berg Abstained. (#17) SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL .MEETLNGS ON JANUARY 28,2002 AND FEBRUARY 11,2002 January 28"* - Ilawm February 11* - Berg ADJOURN.MENT Kluth moved, Hawn seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 9:55 p.m. There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. Elizabeth Hawn, Chair PAGE 29