Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
10-21-2002 Planning Packet
r Public A ttendance Meeting Date [ ^ 1- 2.0O-X □ C ouncil I3T Planning C ommission □ Park Commission □ Other Please fill out the information requested BELOW FOR our CITY RECORDS. PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME (j^ease print) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER 1."XCdi rn.-7 2. /V^r//V^'•y: / f , r* 11. 12. 13.. 14. 15. X:\0sU\A4iBWiMh*ur«nM. OlOvrOILVtS jrtYUC.ATT - ^ -ii-f ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday October 21,2002 6:30 PM 2750 Kelley Parkwav - Council Chambers AGENDA Council Representative: Bob Sansevere 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 November 12,2002 City Council meeting unless otherwise noted by the Chair. CONSENT 1, #02-2832 Randy Ameson, 625 Deborah Drive, Conditional Use Permit (StaiT: Wendy Bottenberg) 2. #02-2833 G&G Holding Co., 1160 Loma Linda, Variances (Staff: Paul Weinberger) 3. #02-2834 Robert and Julie Wiens, 1425 Bay Ridge Road, Conditional Use Permit (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg) 4. #02-2835 Thomas Adams, 500 Orchard Park Road, Renewal Variances (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg) 5. #02-2836 Charlesand Jennifer Phelps, 385 Turnham Road, Variance (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg) OLD BUSINESS 6. #02-2823 Ronald Cloud, 3460 North Shore Drive, Variances (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg) 7. #02-2831 Hope Chest for Breast Cancer, 3850 Shoreline Drive, Finding of Substantially Similar Use and Commercial Site Plan Review (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg) NEW BUSINESS 8. #02-2837 JeffDanberry, 3545 Ivy Place, Variance (Staff: Paul Weinberger) 9. #02-2841 David Dickey, 4425 North Shore Drive, Variance (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg) 10. #02-2844 Bruce and Carol Hedblom, 2601 Casco Point Road, Variance (Staff: Paul Weinberger) SCHEDULED HEARINGS 11.7:30 PM #02*2839 Boyer Building Corporation, 3320 Watertown Road, Subdivision (Staff: Wendy Bottenberg) 12. 8:00 PM #02-2842 Professional Properties of Orono, Inc., 2745 Kelley Parkway, Rezoning (Staff: Mike Gaffron) 13. 8:05 PM #02-2843 Professional Properties of Orono, Inc., 2765 Kelley Parkway, Final Development Plan Approval (Staff: Mike Gaffron) 14.8:30 PM #02-2840 Dahlstrom Development LLC, "2550” Kelley Parkway, Preliminary Plat Approval and Final Development Plan Approval (Staff: Mike Gaffron) PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS 15. Report of Planning Commission representatives attending Council meetings September 23, 2002 and October 14,2002. 16. Other issues for discussion. 17. Planning Commission approval of minutes for September 4,2002 and September 16, 2002. 18. Selection of representatives for City Council meetings on October 28,2002 and November 12,2002. ADJOURNMENT mi.SiK mm WXMM ■*mtS¥ .5nlmsm iSi: m m ir- iiii ifli wt.imiWM^smmm •ItH •KitJS 5^ms niAWtiii'imoj Uil im rtltTfl •)fz ^rtTil ► vp-.r^T TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner October 11,2002 SUBJECT: #02-2832 Randy Amcson 625 Deborah Drive Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: RR-1 AOnc Family Rural Residential District (5 acre) 4.949 acres Exhibits A Application B Permit C Sur\ey D Photo E Property Owner’s List F Sample Restrictive Covenant G Plat Map Pertinent Code Section: I. Section 10.03, Subd. 9 (F): Accessory Buildings-Plumbing; Installation of any combination of fixtures requiring wastewater plumbing that includes a toilet, shower or bathtub shall be allowed only in an accessory building that is conforming in location, size and height. Application Summary: The applicants have applied for a conditional use permit to allow plumbing in an accessory building. The accessory building will be used as a “work/storage room". It will be detached, 32’ x 60 ’ (1.920 s.f.), and located north of the residence. The work/storage room will be used for personal use and will include a bath room w ith sink and toilet. The property is located in the RR-1A zoning district. The City of Orono allows for the provision of plumbing in accessory buildings that includes a toilet, shower or bathtub. The accessory building is required to be conforming in location, size, and height. The accessoiy building (detached garage) does conform to location, size and height requirements set by code. In September 2002, the applicant applied for a building permit to construct the accessory building. Before a permit was issued setback, size and height requirements were reviewed for conformity. The accessory building meets all setback requirements for the RR-1 A zoning district. When the permit w as issued the applicant w as informed of the need for a conditional use permit. 002-2832 Randy Ameson 625 Deborah Drive Conditional Use Permit 10 M ^oo: Page 1 The subject property is serviced by an on-site septic system. The location of the storage building will not interfere with the current septic system or foture sites within the property. The existing septic system is conforming but located on the other side of the property and residence. The applicant is planning to install a holding tank. The holding tank proposal has been approved by the on-site system manager, Matt Bolterman. However, a holding tank does require City Council approval. issue of the holding tank ran be reviewed by the City Council simultaneously with the conditional use permit. Items for Dbcussion: 1. Does Planning Commission find that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the neighborhood? 2. Does Planning Commission find that the proposed fixtures are in keeping with the intended use as a work/storage room? 3. Does the property owner confirm acceptance of the restrictive covenant to be placed on the chain of title placing conditions on the accessory building? (See Exhibit E, which contains the standard limitations for such use on page 2). Staff Recommendation; Staff recommends approval for a Conditional Use Permit for plumbing in an accessory building for property located at 62S Deborah Drive based on the structure meets the requirements established by the Municipal Code for an "accessory structure with plumbing* CUP subject to the following condition: The property owner has agreed to filing the appropriate restrictive covenant on the property: accessory building with plumbing. #02-2832 Randy Arenson 62S Deborah Drive Conditional Use Permit 10/11/2002 Page 2 *• Application # -c^ Date Reccivcd~^'^7>C>^ Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address _______________ Type of Application to^be FiledCl Me,a I Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ^t -f (K - ~COO ^ APPLICANT Name~^i.tTl( ) A Address V Va Dy- OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) ~CC3p f Phone (work) J -Qj |^Q City 0\T\MJ ______Zip__f2!)333I Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address City Zip. Date Property Acquired_____________________________________ I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application X $175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _____$325.00 Commcrcial/Industrial Use _____$250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated w’etland 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 _____$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 I) • OHF¥.OF ORONO PERMIT B 2750 Kelley Parkway - PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 (952) 249-4600 Permit Number Permit Type: Date Issued: P05553 Addition/Remodel/Repair 9/9/2002 SITE ADDRESS: .625 Deborah Dr M^le Plain. MN5S3S9 PID: 3 M18-23-23-0003 DESCRIPTION: Proposed Use: Permit Class: Permit Type: Residential Building Addition/Remodel/Repair UBC Occupancy U1 Construction Type VN Census Code 438 Permit Sub-type(s): Garage - Detached DETAILS: Approved per resolution #: Separate permits required:Plumbing Mechanical Eiecirical (state) NOTICES/REMARKS: PIu-Tjjing ia Accessory' structure requires city' council ipproval FEE SUMMARY:Permit Fee: Plan Review Fee: State Surcharge Fee: $ 818.75 $ 532.28 $38.00 Valuation: $ 75,000.00 TOTAL FEE:$ 1,389.03 APPLICANT:Paul Sorenson Construction Inc. 525 County Road 92 Maple Plain. MN 55359 OWNER:Randy & Christiiu Ameson 625 Deborah Dr Maple Plain, MN 55359 THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY REQUESTS PERhflSSlON TO MAKE THE REAL IMPROVE.NENTS SPECIFIED AND AGREES TO DO ALL^DRK IN STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH ALLCTTY OF ORONO ORDINANCES AND STATE OF MINNESOTA BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS. ' ISSLlDBYllCNATL'M Copies: \-fiit(SgtdturaReatdredL l-AoolicanL 1-MonthIvReooiis. I-Assessina. I-Finaice Pmb 1 .«<m» T *r4.^<i D t *. ■I' i • ■ - ' L V'^a ; V. |^r.4V\f« •'Vfl'V:-.r.T »i LtllW'O *■ '; ■'» ' rf '4*^ . xt X*ipi '• ^A-s ^Stb^ I m •(TV;!f ■ »'* >■~v-'-‘i‘ r'cs^.’K^ •«% 4 4.'* i .•;X*'f i mm . F" -®1 ... ^ UX:'‘ . '.•** • ‘ ’*‘*1mm MTE li/zi/oa BATCH 5B2 - ‘ •• • '• * f' ‘ 'NENHIFXN COUNTY BROPEBTY INFORNATXON SYSTEH PROPERTY OHNERS LIST REPORT NO. P1A35<»01 PAGE SO ' f.r • , , . J PROP AOOR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR SB S1-11B-2S 21 0005 0A5BB NATERTONN RO KXP A NELSON KXP A NELSON' A5BI NATERTONN ROAD i(APLE pux^ m 55359^'V SB S1-11B-2S 22 OOOS 0A705 NATERTONN RD N A STALOCH B R J STALOCH HATTMEN A I ROBIN J STALOCH 9705 NATERTONN RO HAPLE PLAIN NN 55359 SB SI-11B-2S 22 0005 09550 NATERTONN RO H N B S E LURTON N N LURTON BSE LURTON 3135 JAHESTONN RO LONG LAKE HN 55355 J .) F I • PROP AOOR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER* NANE/AODR SB Sl-IlB-23 22 BOOB 00530 DEBORAH DR G T KARLEN B N J KARLEN GREGORY T KARLEN 530 DEBORAH OR HAPLE PLAIN NN 55359 SB 31-11B-23 22 0009 09505 NATERTONN RO JOHN F SERENA JOHN F B JOAN N SERENA 9505 NATERTONN RO HAPLE PLAIN NN 55359 3B 31-11B-23 23 0003 00525 DEBORAH OR RANDY ARNESON RANDY ARNESON 525 DEBORAH DR HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 C C c. c c PROr AODR ONNER MAKE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR • • Ir “ • . PROP AOOR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR SB 3I-IIB-23 23 0009 00975 DEBORAH DR J 6 NAIGHT B K N SNCETHAN JANES 0 NAIGHT 975 DEBORAH DRIVE HAPLE PLAIN NN 55359 *3B 3I-IIB-23 23 0007 009B0 DEBORAH DR G L HOFFNAN B S L HOFFHAH GEORGE L B SUSAN L HOFFNAN 9B0 DEBORAH DR NAPLE PLAIN NN 55359 SB 31-IIB-2S 23 0005 00550 DEBORAH DR N G LUTH B J NARCOUX LUTH N G LUTH B J NARCOUX LUTH 550 DEBORAH DR NAPLE PLAIN NN 55359 3B 3I-IIB-23 23 0010 0003B ADDRESS UNASSXGNED « HCCULLEY FARH NOHEONNERS ASS HCCULLEY FARH HOHEONHERS ASS 915 DEBORAH DR HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 SB 3I-IIB-23 2S 0005 00510 DEBORAH OR JOHANNA H HEGGELHAN JOHANNA H HEGGELHAN 510 DEBORAH DR HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 78 3I-IIB-2S 29 0009 09595 NATERTONN RD J L B N R BROIL JEFF BROLL 9595 NATERTONN RO ORONO HN 55559 C c PROPADDR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NANE/AODR SB 3I-IIB-23 29 0007 00915 DEBORAH DR T A HALLQUXST/N A HALLQUXST TON A HALLQUXST 915 DEBORAH DR NAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 TOTAL BATCH 502 00013 c c-)i I • i • •• * ■V '.- .r • » . • V A 1 F • I . . 4» I % * \ • •• • •; ■HUM.BATE . i t lATCN S$Z •*/• •V . ‘V . • . • • ,/• V,- •. '\‘- V‘-‘-: HENNEPIN COUNTY PROfERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH • PROPERTY OHHERS LIST <« • » ^* * * « •> ’*♦ Ir ' . . . * I **•Vi: . .. \ >•I. ;• I. . "*•* ‘ f i. tV‘ r 'v ^ ^EH • . ' j ;• •* , ^ /.REPORT NO. PX4SS40I / •> K*'. V.‘ ; *:- j r *; •■ • “ v* . ,PACE .5v ‘ .V.-,•• -v> - •. r\ *• . »'- : ‘ • • • ’ ‘ ' ' . I • ^ . > V . t ^ \. . « • • • . • ^ ,***, - '« . ' * I • .»•»>. •••* ^ ^ , .1 •;-f’V- f; .. • :’ • ( i. j I ! 1 I .,' ' • ■ ■• ir. ‘ ' * • * •' ? f t •. *. i • •• f .1 V • » -. (.. . • • /• 4 « V ^ » > * * * ; ) ». :. .. V' ,/ .-V .• • ••.; •- •\.v; •' " . ••.■•■■:S'•'/ •' • r- . •/ ,. •;. • . ••. • • .V, ;v'- •" V' ■ '*• •*.. * .,•.*• ' . . mV* . • *• ■ i*' • ' • •' • ' • " ' J j $ «•#« • • V . ( •: *'•’ '* I.-. ‘ ; '•' ■' ■ •'• • • ■'■•;'v;.'.:•• VV • . r *. • f t.-. V • V • . . • ■ » . . ‘ - * . . V • ' .V? k' -V • * :.V^-'V?: • ^ -'A./** 1*^ • .1 • •. *\ . •• A • : : v-vr. V_S • v-.:j <.;••>•) . . • ^ \ •' A * >■. 7;% A i • ;. /- » —« I.. « • <" • c c •'. • ./*.>.• • • • • ,.*/l ' * *<^ <^ *. .t-. ‘ * *• \* * ./! ■ j -i-i '. * T • I . I • S V** . v ,r. r of '•¥ • V X CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS XT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTHENT OF PROPERTY TARATXONb TO TMT BEST OF riY RNONLEDOE AND BELIEF ■ •: %• A •V * . ;•* . .1^ . s * I f. , ;,o , ‘ • V I ,.. .' . A \. o ^ '‘/V' • ». y'J A( V /••.A/ /.A*;-:. V • . «• • • • • » . ’ t« '• . ■ •*.* . •■■•.•>> ■■ V*. *' ** *. «.*T r ^ V ■*' f • \#28'^. -.4, V •' .' ■•.i-'.-.• *;x'»:A bRAFT CITY OF ORONO COVENANT FOR LIMITED WASTEWATER PLUMBING IN AN ACCESSORY BUILDING THIS COVENANT, made and entered into this day of ___________________, 2002, by Randy and Christina Ameson (husband and wife), (hereinafter referred to as "Applicants") and the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "City"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Applicants have made application to the City for the installation of limited wastewater plumbing in an accessory building on property in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, legally described as: Lot 3, Block 1, McCulley Farm. Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as "Subject Property"); and WHEREAS, 'litnited wastewater plumbing’ for purposes of this Covenant shall include all interior wastewater piping and fixtures; and WHEREAS, City staffhave reviewed Applicants' application and have found that the building proposed for the installation of limited wastewater plumbing has met the standards established within Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(F) of the Orono Municipal Code to allow installation of limited wastewater plumbing; and WHEREAS, Applicants arc aware that according to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(F), specific conditions exist under w'hich limited wastewater plumbing may be allowed within an accessory building; and WHEREAS, Section 10.03, Subdivision 9(F) allows issuance of a permit for installation of limited wastewater plumbing in an acce .%ory building conditioned upon the execution of this Covenant and its filing in Applicant ’s chain of tit.e; and WHEREAS, in order to identify all parties w ithin an interest in the subject property, the Applicants are required to provide title information to City staff as requested. All parties with an interest in this property shall sign this covenant. Page 1 of 5 NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES TO THIS COVENANT AGREE TO THE FOLLOWING; 1. Applicants' request for installation of limited wastewater plumbing within the accessory' building to include one toilet and one sink on the Subject Property if approved conditioned upon the execution of this Covenant by the City and the Applicants. 2. The following conditions shall control the installation and use of the limited wastewater plumbing: A) The accessory building shall not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the City or if allowed by City code. B) The accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unles.s a Guest House conditional use permit is obtained from the City. C) The accessory building will not be rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. 3. This Covenant shall be binding upon current and future owners of Subject Property, and shall be filed within the chain of title of the Subject Property. 4. Fee owner(s) of the Subject Pro,oerty, if not the Applicants, consent to the execution of this Covenant and to its terms, as shown by their signatures upon this document. Page 2 of 5 CITY OF ORONO: By:. Its Mayor By:. Its City Clerk ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this ___day of_____, 2002 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of___,2002 by Linda S. Vee, 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 of5 APPLICANT(S): By:___________ By:___________ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (APPLICANTS) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day personally appeared before me, ____ who is personally known to me ____whose identity I proved on the basis of ____ whose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of_________________ credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. ..a Notary Public day 20 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this ___ personally appeared before me, ____ who is personally known to me ____ whose identity I proved on the basis of ____ whose identity 1 proved on the oath/affirmation of credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. .a Notary Public FEE OWNERCS): Page 4 of 5 By:. By:. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (FEE OWNERS) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day personally appeared before me, ____who is personally known to me ____ whose identity I proved on the basis of ____whose identity I proved on the oath/afiirmation of_______________________ credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. ..a Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this ___ day of _____________, 2i personally appeared before me, ____ who is personally known to me ____ whose identity I proved on the basis of ____ whose identity I proved on the oath'afilrmation of_______________________ credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknow Icdged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed. ..a Notary Public Page 5 of 5 .'Vl X ■** -t r - • • ■ • • « -A *% v.r-^ *i>*,. r . ^ . f\*, ••. ir ^. - .'» **■ . ^ *, »» » . V. - V.. *4. ■».''#f «- v- v, .; t F w ♦ *-4 w • ■ t ' . : i • 4.V'.' ' . _/»*• ■* eg) r mS^mm^lit I r v;. ' • ''r ? >■ '' -"i feV;A:"W. -------------^-f.. fso |V^k*-l » * ^ * • • 1*1 •• — . .*« ^5'.:;;r^;5A:>{^v!-i'/-^ ':/sm'. ijK'T 3 1- (ig-- 23 - '-*•*,*» •• \A ' 4 ’tt* *'-*. « 2 M — • « I •(£) Complete Date: Deadline: 9/12/02 11/11/02 TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator October 15,2002 SUBJECT:#02-2833 G&G Holding Company 1160 Loma Linda Avenue Variances Lbt of Exhibits: A B C D E F G H Applicant letter and statement of hardship Application Site Plan Plat Map Hardcover Calculation Worksheets Building Plans/Elevation Views Preliminary Grading Plan Property Owners Notification List Application Summary: The property owners have requested lot area and lot width variances to permit removal of the existing house and construction of a new house on the property. Pertinent Code Sections: Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B): Lot Area/Width Standards for the LR-IB District Required Lot Area = 1 acre/43,560 s.f. or 34,848 s.f. -<80% of lot area standard) Actual Lot Area = 28,190 s.f Required Lot Width = 140’ or 112 ’ -<80% of lot width standard) Actual Lot Width = 113 ’ Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 of the zoning ordinance allows lots meeting 80% of the lot standard to area and width to be considered legal record lots. This lot docs meet the 80% standard for width only. •02*2833 GJ^G Holding ComiMny 1160 Loma Undi Avenue PMtl Analysis applicant’s property is a 0.6 acre lot with approximately 113’ of frontage on Lake Minnetonka. The lot IS located m the LR-1B zoning district where a minimum lot size of 1 acre and a lot width of 140 feet fs'required. According to Hennepin County records the lot was originally developed in This lot was part of a lot line rearrangement a year ago involving this property and two lots to the north. All pro^rties are commonly owned by G&G Holding Company (Goldberg ’s). The City did grant automatic lot area and width variances for the two adjacent properties. The City reviewed the fii^e redevelopment potential for those two lots and determined each is buildable. One was redeveloped immediately upon completion of the lot line rearrangement the second remains a vacant This property did not have automatic lot area and width variances because the property was currentlv developed and, at the time, did not have a redevelopment proposal planned. Review of Hardship The applicant’s stated hardships are detailed in Exhibit A. No variances other than lot area and width are proposed. Proposed Hardcover The property is in the Shorelwd Overlay District. The existing shed located within 75’ of the Iweshore will be removed with the existing house. No hardcover will remain within 75’ of the IsKcsnorc. 0-75 Setback 0% 75-250’ Setback 4,256 s.f (23.24%) (25% allowed) 250-500 ’ Setback 525 s.f. (24.4%) (30% allowed) * No hardcover variances are required. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variance application based on the following findings: • Tfic property has been developed as a single-family residential property since, at least, • The property is connected to sanitary sewer. • An adequate building site has been demonstrated that requires no variances to lot coverage, setbacks or hardcover. • The lot is consistent with other properties in the locality. •02-3UJ OaCKoldlfltCoai^ 1160 Loflu Linda Avenue Pdgc2 Subject to the following conditions: 1.All erosion control measures, as recommended by the City Engineer, shall be in place prior to construction of the new home. 2.The existing shed within 75 ’ of the lakeshore shall be removed simultaneously with the existing house. Options for Action: 1. Recommend approval. 2. Recommend denial, stating reasons. 3. Table, giving applicant direction. 4. Other action. •02-2133 OaOHoMinfConioMor IIM Umu Ltadi Aveaic P^3 Luella G. Goldberg 7019 TUPA DRIVE MINNEAPOLIS. BlINNESOTA 05439-1643 TEL< (958) 941-8684 FAXi (958) 941-8640 • 6-^0 C. September 9,2002 To The Orono Planning Commission and City Council, We are requesting a variance in order to replace a very old existing cottage that is no longer functional or safe for us to use or occupy. We purchased this cottage at 1160 Loma Linda Avenue in 1966 from the family that had built h (approximately 100 years ago). For thirty- five years, our family has enjoyed and appreciated greatly this beautiful part of Lake Minnetonka. We would like very much to be able to continue to have a safe and functional home on this property and to be able to continue our fiunily’s enjoyment of this property. The proposed new structure will be in compliance entirely with Orono ’s hard-cover requirements, set-back requirements, etc. The variance relates only to the lot size (slightly under one acre) and width (110 feet wide by 300 feet deep). The lot at 1160 is among the larger in the area, has had a structure on it for almost 100 years, and is fully served by city sewer, which we have paid for since it was put in many years ago. The property on either side of the lot for which we are requesting a variance is owned by us, and each has a new structure on it, which is occupied ^ our children and grandchildren. Without a variance, 1160, the largest of the lots, will remain with an unusable and unsightly cottage on it. With the variance, a safe and functional home, that will be in keeping with the structures on the lots to either side of 1160, can be buih there to be enjoyed far into the future. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Luella G. Goldberg a •• • -. t : \\* ■ f •'a • • * * •• \) • \ ; \ V; I)V n V •B CITY PF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S250.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 Afler-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 1160 Loma Linda Avenue________ Property Identification Number (P.l.D.) 08-117-23-25-0014 Application U ~ Date Received" 2. - o 2- Amount Paid ^ ~ Attach legal description to applicailon if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired 1966________________________________(month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: v residential ___pother (specify)___________________ Zotring District: LR-IB _________________ APPLICANT Name Vintage Butldera Inc. Phone (home) Address: 3328 151at St. West _____ Phone (work) 651-423-5531 City: Rosemount. MN_____ Zip55Q68 OWNER (if different than applicant) Lueiia G Goldber|*hone (home)QS7,QAi-9ft->/. Name G&G Holding Co. Ltd. Partnership ______ Phone (work)________ Address: 7019 Tupa Drive_____________ City: Edina ____________Z\p: 55439-1643 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $510.000 Describe request in detail: Removal of old structure and the construction of a new home. “ ■ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED X Lot Area x Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:___________________________________ See Attached Hardship Letter (attach additional sheets if necessary) ' t o o o o OF LOTS 14 AND 15, LOMA HLNNEPIN COUNTY, MINN 30-* / / / / / / / / LAKE MIN NORTH S29.4 CONTOUR LtC PROPOSED I 1) Goroge • 2) First fl 3) Bosemer VL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : I 14 and 15, Lomo Undo dsnoles iron morker •ings shown ore based upon on ossurned dotun. D Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Depaitnient moi AVE 164 s ZOO LOMA LINDA AVE 40 90 90 50 50 3o:r\ to ^ 3t X (23) S *n «r> 29 S t« ' 50 %. /. 50 50 ('22; so 40 • 4 \ • e • a m 21 M 5 23 5 «n 24 5 25g (24) 40 50 50 50 40 ____________________________\ St 50f/; *g>»550* « 1 203 / ('to;» V C** 1705 . X / OM4 /■/ao4 *♦e iT<iy / 'i^arcel Information >• • ^ <Parcel ID 0811723230014 House Number 1160 Street Name LOMA UNOA AVI TNs Is not a legally noorOed map. It npnsenis a ampliation oflnlbnnaOon and data from Oty, County. an&State mad authorities and other sources. J •» • ( J l^/A/rACf B HARDCOVOLCALCULATION worksheet SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) ClC-753 75-250’ 250-500’ SOO-IOOO' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONF. A House Length X X X B. Garage 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 ZQNF/ A. House ___________ X Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Paiio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric 0. Other total HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _____________ Width a a a e C8 s 8 a a X 100 ~71^ Width m SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. - $HFO SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. _S.F. ___S.F. 0.89 % A B S.F. S.F. S.F. 0 7 S.F. /yVrtf S.F. SF. S F." • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. X 100 _SF. __________.SF. a. S3 % 7730 A B BP?*' HARDCOVER CALCULA TION WORKSHEET 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 • mm • • 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 ZONK A. House Length X X X eXT B. Oarage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Paiio/Deck x-f X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X C. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ___ B 75-250 ’250-500*SOO-1000’ Il0>t SF. WidJi s= s. =: X IOC Widih 9 St ss 5*^y ^oo Il5-S83 X 100 SF. SF. SF. S.F. S.F. SF. SF. A SF. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. fi SF. SF. A SF. B % 2588 s F //auJf S F. SF. S.F. SF. SF.- • SF. SF. SF. SF. SF. S.F. SF. __S.F. __SF. 2s. 2 y y « A B * ViKffA ^ S HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 9-iZ-OZ^ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House 0.75* Lenfih 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 G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ____________ + B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONK' A House ^______ X Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other total RaRDCO VER in ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A __ _ _ _ _ _ * B 75-250' ClTsb-SOO^500-1000' WiCih m 8^ s s X 100 /7sa Wi<ih s: S X 100 « /?^o S.F. S.F S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. A S.F. B % SF. SF. SF. S.F. S.F. S.F. SF. S.F. S.F SF. SF. S.F. _S.F. __________ S.F. <s»_____% A B :> iiiliSt' 3 l{ «, t iHi®iki !? •*’*X*I ■’••• iVItije •» U ui<i' i lillt'rJik'! I I I I! la iili.tt'tflLiml WfS&ijf:••' \imm m _____ I -’ll 9 0 © © © i I ! t if! in^iii' «'8j| mm il?i GOtOeERC CAUM exterior ELEVATIONS ■^nt* ! • .» $0 • .Lli— iliumimnnni :: -Jmn-jI i..r A3.02 T2T7 0- I ^r.;Uf.fvi>.f.rj.'i:,'[.'^;t,;.li:/ • M:iAT•;•K;f:^•:•:,•,:^r{^. iilS mmmi - =^5aS5iB5ii»*-j---1—j—---------il------- . ^:...... q.......^ I ,...............jj.. * yy f •_ f* i / Si * mITZSZwm-------- J, / 1 ^■Pk :ir;:‘i?i:‘:ri;! ;i:i:t;i;i7 ti ???ss:t:crvri;<^ft. W» n •atasr— *■»—■■_ «P> w— ro*» f r« «► rBsnnr' -0 0 0 0 0 UeCKtURSlMCWlCIS •MwM • MM* «IWI m»mm • mmm COlOi’CRC CABM SECOND =LOOR PLAN If* • ■•c \ '/ / \ \ 7 N .) ^ 4’f? IlKliiliiilif f ■iW'.yWliV'iVftV j. • 90 To ? i*:i i?SS ir .v^i|:l BsSism II fWMiti!, ;:i!,\Nm. fv>vi ili7;'i'. II IIIiiiiijiimill /lf|.||,'j/,|”|f| r..”J|B IDiiiJ 2IV.*,>J'f >'i'i I nil 111 II ■ liiii ll|•'f imi III) niuiiii m m ■■ mm »f <lilt III litmi mri Mf «V III III l| 111 Jim msk -*'W* SMS r.....j—j“|_“ ^s±±V. *:::;& ! illll r I'lii •il'i ijpiK 3 HlnjSuffjfnnr m. *i'j> m isa s» ijmi>>r .Tiff-----) I •9 90m trnmmt L----- .......J.iI ••»•«««« • ••** i. j £iivadqn ** '# #♦ lilB l/.i /| « / l«(mUQiMO«IICIS' ' J• wwMtm I y M ^ I. • IMi I ^ • *Nwra«i It ''I.-••I ; • .? m !Ix£!*'*'** l'■l»l'■lllt■llli■^! I •••■*•• Ml -H ~..J Plpiipii III mil iiitii |i|!| iini iifig iiiif I I'lrrrrrri UlAttL -^-"1 f ZjT^-- ------- I nroAtiftj COIDOERG CABW garage - EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS /■ **. n« RUN DATE tR/EVEE iATCH IE2 PROP ADDR DNHER NAHC TARPAYCR NANE/AODR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR PROP ADDR ONNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 3E E7-117-23 IE EE12 EllES LOHA LINDA AVE JEFFERY D JOHNSON ETAL JEFF D JOHNSON llES LOHA LINDA AV HOUND HN 55SE4 sa E0-U7-2S 23 EEE2 EllSE LOHA LINDA AVE HATTHEN N DURNS HATTHEN H BURNS llEE LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND HN 55344 SB E8-117-23 23 EEIS E114E LOHA LINDA AVE CEO HOLDING CO LTD PTNRSHP 6 a 0 HOLDING CO LTD PTNRSHP C/0 LUELLA GOLDBERG 7E1E TUPA DR EDINA HN 5543f 38 OB-117-23 23 0018 00038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORtXIO P 0 BOX 44 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 07-117-23 14 0013 01155 LOHA LINDA AVE EUGENE GEYEN ETAL EUGENE A GEYEN 1155 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND HN 55344 38 08-117-23 23 0003 01140 LOHA LINDA AVE H A 8 E C HITCHELL NARK A/ELIZABETH C HITCHELL 1140 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND HN 55344 38 08-117-23 23 0014 01140 LOHA LINDA AVE GIG HOLDING CO LTD PTNRSHP 080 HOLDING CO LTD PTNRSHP C/0 LUELLA GOLDBERG 7014 TUPA DR EDINA HN 55434 REPORT NO. PI435401 PACE 3 •* • 38 07-117-23 14 0048 01185 LOHA LINDA AVE S T LEON 8 N TORRES SANTIAGO TORRES LEON NATHALIE TORRES 1185 LOHA LINDA AVE HOUND HN 55344 38 08-117-23 23 0012 01130 LOHA LINDA AVE W H BOCKHANN 8 N L BOCKHANN WILLIAH 8 NANCY BOCKHANN 1130 LOHA LINDA AV HOUND HN 55344 38 08-117-23 23 0015 01170 LOHA LINDA AVE GIG HOLDING CO LTD PTNRSHP GAG HOLDING CO LTD PTNRSHP 7014 TUPA OR EDINA HN 55434 38 08-117-23 23 0024 01122 LOHA LINDA AVE 680 HOLDING CO LTD PTRSHP 086 HOLDING CO LTD PTRSHP C/O LUELLA GOLDBERG 7014 TUPA DR EDINA HN 55434 TOTAL BATCH 502 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 THE^BEST OF HY knowledge AND BELIEF. DATE l 5 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner October 7,2002 #02-2834 Robert Wiens 1425 Bay Ridge Road Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1A One Family Lakeshorc Residential District (2 acre) List of Exhibits: A Application B Survey C Engineer Comments D Sewer Map E Photo of Property F Plat Map G Property Owners Notification List Conditional Use Permit Required (Section 10.03, Subdivision 19): A conditional use permit is required for land alteration of greater than 500 cubic yards. The property is located within a shoreland area. The CUP allows the City to notify surrounding property ow ners and requires City Council approval for such proposed projects. Application Summary ’: The property owner has requested a conditional use permit to permit land alteration on the property- over 500 cubic yards. The project will be to build a berm along the northern border of the property along North Shore Drive. It will be located behind an e.xisting row of large evergreen trees. The berm will aid additionally to screen traffic noise from North Shore Drive. In September 2002, the Building Official issued a land alteration permit allowing 500 cubic yards to be brought onto the subject property. Approximately 1,500-2,000 cubic yards of additional fill will be required to build the berm. The applicants are obtaining the fill from projects in Long Lake. The berm is proposed to be approximately 8 feet at the highest point and will curve as indicated on the survey (Exhibit B). The applicant has indicated that the berm will be hydro seeded with prairie grass and 30-40 evergreens will be planted on it. There currently is a row of smaller evergreens where the berm is proposed to be located. These trees will be moved and upon completion of the berm will be planted on it. The berm and plantings will have no impact on traffic sight-lines and would appear to have no negative impacts on site drainage. «02-2834 1425 Bay Ridge Road October 11.2002 Page I of2 Land Alteration and Transporting the fill to the Site: 2,000 cubic yards of fill can be measured by the number of truck loads that will be required to transport the material to the site. A typical truck can haul between 10 to 15 yards of fill. That would mean a total of approximately 160+ truck loads would be delivered to the site. The access route to the property will be down Brown Road to Bay Ridge Road. Bay Ridge Road is a private road and the number of trucks hauling is a concern. The subject property is at the beginning of Bay Ridge Road. The trucks will drive to the site, drop the fill and back out onto North Shore Drive to Brown Road. The trucks will not be driving up and down Bay Ridge Road. The applicant has indicated the neighborhood has a meeting at the end of the month and one of tne discussion items is the repaving of Bay Ridge Road. He would like the fill to be on the property prior to repaving the road. Engineer Comments: The City Engineer has reviewed the plans. The comments are attached as Exhibit C. • Sanitary sewer. The subject property is two lots combined. They have been combined as one tax parcel since 1995. The parcel on which the berm is proposed to be located has been vacant. The sewer line runs along the lakeside of the residence. There is a sewer stub for the vacant property but nothing is connected to it. See Exhibit D. Since the easterly leg of the berm appears to be near the cleanout, special attention will be needed in that area. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. The applicants must obtain a land alteration permit from the city prior to hauling fill to the site. 2. The applicants must contact Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for an erosion control permit. 3. Erosion control measures shall be taken by installing a silt fence around the construction area upon receiving permit from City and MCWD. 4. A route map shall be provided to the city prior to the start of construction show ing which county/city streets are to be used. #02-2834 1425 Bay Ridge Road October 11,2002 Page 2 of2 A Application # Date Received 7-/7-0 2 Amount Paid ^2S*0 CITY OF-ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE' APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address iC. Aro \ Type of Application to be Fifed aawVjl. cType of Application to be Filed ___________________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) fO IH APPLICANT,.'! I • « ^ ' Name e»/n -C Addres s /ty2S \ Phone (home) ?vr2_ ______ Phone (work) -1-/-7<- i City C'^o r\t- _______ZipcrC.ST I OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home)_ Phone (work)_ Address City Zip. Date Property’ Acquired 7/v, I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____$ 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application _____$175.00 Residential Accessory Use _____$250.00 Instimtional (church, school, etc.) _____$225.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$200.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _____$325.00 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 w'ithin 75’ of lakeshore (month/year) 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 Conunercial 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 - — 4.L .. . ■ ■ • ■ # lO 'i;:. .> 5 \ V ‘AX' HENN COUNTY ROAD NO. 51 ------------------------------ ' ( / _______fjisuB ____*?49e /yy>^/=^t4y<r/.5'’p '9<T7/ I 4 ^ y'" 5/’-/i^/mm ^1/5 £d^e / ""'-1 ’ _ : >2 9 / « \ ■r*es ^<rv f»f -jiV 1\ /7/ -r V.# s ,1 ><5 '>nr<» -f • •'€ ' •,%< \. V i2*<i; 24* TM#'* ^ ^ r •iWI '^€T>5t^rrr?;f» i ' P'^ pl' 9^ I t ^/ • • • 4/ » jiii# 5 ' / iii#/ / .% -------— o- • P4 / --I v<-?-!'7/0 - i-;: r j *‘-')'5 I 0, r-—;r__ ■\ > «». K \ I #••••..:' /'y4 M tV ( .'/ W/'//t y rj // V■\5\ X.-^ kid V/ ^ ■ / »W / •. * •r W ......................—■;■—/..__.j.';;i'°—-V—/^7 — ______ r________ \ i- r'‘'T'\Wfmp ^ / /// ■ mMfi f9 v' '/i I.,«•-»-* ' -------^3/./o «95; 7 i /i /:» j ^^////- , ,»■ A;'/-' 4// / / .../ / / ■i.' i / X REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NUMBER 192, Hennepin County, Minnesota. J. REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NUMBER 192. lying easterly of Hennepin i, and southerly of a line parallej with and 75.00 feet south of the north line istered Land Survey. tment over TRACT R per Document Number 569266. sment per Document Number 883614. w / Oct' 09 2002 ll:03flH BONESTROO ROSENE RNDERLIK 6516361311 P* 1 C. ^ t Bonestroo Rpsene m fn Anderlik & Associates Engineers 4 Architects **?!??**’**' me. I« an Arflrmaw** AcuofV>4«MI OppaeNMlfy••Aa Bwaioyv# Owng^ October 9.2002 PrImiMta Ofio O. timftirea. PM. • i_ Swmi*. At . Ctenn a. <eok. rz. . Mea«rl a Sct«mlctic n . Jerry A. Botirtfofi. ^£. feiiler CcmeiUcami; eoetrt W. ffoscnc. f t • Joitpfi C AndcrMk. ff e ncAjrd £ lUmer. ft • UttMt lA ietrttt CfA. A Bonestroo. MB^ • Si^oy R tlRtf.omsost ft. LS • Agnts M. mng. MBA • ANon irkf ScMdL ft • Tliemai W. Petersoa ft • iapti f. Mafarxl. ft • MMes B ienscr\ ft • L mwp Gravtl m. ft • Jl Ctfooiton. ft • ****** • Thomas A. Syfko. ft • Iholdon J Johnson • Dilo A. Grevt. ft • Thornes A ftnahir. fX. •fob Oft A Do very, ft OfNevii Si. ffiA Sc. Cloud. Bochestcr end VMIhner. MN • IMitwaApe. Wt • ChiCfgo. fi wwwboneitfooxofn Wendy Bottenberg Zoning Administrator/Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Wiens Land Alteration File No. 139>02*000 Plat No. 02-2834 Dear Wendy; Wc have reviewed the plans for the proposed land alteration on the Wiens property. The site is located at 1425 Bay Ridge Road. The applicant is proposing to construct a berm along the C. R. 51 frontage. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters; The existing sanitary sewer located between the home and C.R, 15 should be located and shown on the plans. The proposed work should not place any fill over existing manholes and the site should be graded to direct water away from all sanitary sewer manholes. Manholes should be fenced to protect against damage from construction activity. The berm should be restored with seed and fiber blanket within five days after final grading. Heavy-duty silt fence should be installed between the berm and the C.R. 15 and C.R. 51 frontages. The silt fence should remain in place until vegetation is established. Slopes on the berm should not exceed 3:1. If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. BMC. Tom Kellogg Cc; Greg Oappa. City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 65I-636-4600 • Fox: 651*636*1311 7*, ^ Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Departrnent 5 n1 !(I03J ^ (17) a 72 SO to 93 PROSPECTIVE KVI u K CO QCs I ® I s B) I— 8 9 • a ^ (51) ITS LkE 8 (S2I 8173 ':2^(54) 8 ITS s 9(53) 4 173 (5S) 8 STS 8 « t79 f7S 8 gSfS % In n I o ”^p 10- m- I'fe -CA.i- ci-iu Parcel Information Parcel ID 1011723340017 . e House Number 1425 Street Name BAY RIDGE RD This is net a legally recorded map. It represents a compilation of information and data from Oiy. County, and State road authorities and other sources. I ■■■ ■ ' RUN DATE R^/tA/tE DATCH 5R2 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNPORNATION SYSTEN PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI4S5AR1 PAGE 5 SO 10-117-23 34 0005 3D 10-117-23 34 0000 36 10-117-23 34 0010 PROP ADDR 01473 DAY RIDGE RD 01465 DAY RIDGE RD 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NANE T R 1 N H HCCUNE SUSAN N KERDER 6 JOHN C HOLH VIL OF ORONO TAXPAYER THONAS R NCCUNE SUSAN N KERDER I JOHN C HOLN CITY OF ORONO NANE/AOOR 1473 DAY RIDGE RO 1405 DAY RIDGE RO PO DOX 00 WAYZATA NN 55391 • WAYZATA NN 55391 CRYSTAL DAY 101 55323 3D 10-117-23 34 0011 36 10-117-23 34 0012 36 10-117-23 34 0013 PROP ADDR 0003D ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NANE ROY E AHERN CITY OF ORONO ROY E AHERN TAXPAYER HENNEPIN COUNTY CITY OP ORONO ROY AHERN NANE/AOOR RIGHT OP WAY P 0 DOX 00 1120 FRONT ST •1000 PRAIRIE DRIVE CRYSTAL DAY NN 55323 HUDSON WI 54010 ^ HEDXNA NN 55SAR PROP ADOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR SO lf-117-2S S4 M17 01A25 DAY RIDGE RO R WIENS i J A WIENS ROOERT WIENS 1A25 DAY RIDGE RO WAYZATA NN 55SS1 TOTAL DATCH 502 00025 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE * REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS XT APPEARS THIS DATE ON Jm RECORDS 7 mm DATE fVt6/t2 lATCH 5E2 HENNEPIN CfXINTY PII0PE2TY XNfORHATXON sySTEN nrOPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PIA35401 PACE A PROP ADOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR 38 18-X17-2S IX AARR AAASa ADDRESS UNASSXGNED NCLEOO CNTY REG RAIL AUTH DAKOTA RAIL INC 2S ADANS ST N HUTCNXNSON NN 55S5A 38 IA-117-2S 31 AAAI A2A1A SHORELINE DR NXCHELLE NARXE HUDSM-NILLER HXCHELLE NARXE NUDSON-WINER 2A1A SHORELINE DR WAYZATA NN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 00A2 02090 NORTH SHORE OR K I L ERICKSON KEITH R ERICKSON 2090 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA NN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 38 10-117-23 31 0003 02000 NORTH SHORE DR L 0 GODFREY 8 N J GODFREY LYLE 6 8 NORHA J GODFREY 2000 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA NN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0009 02080 NORTH SHORE DR CAROL A LA QUEY CAROL A LA QUEY 2080 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA NN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0005 01390 RAILROAD AVE GROETHE-HXLL INVESTNENTS LLP GROETHE-HILL INVESTNENTS LLP 1818 LASALLE AVE NPLS NN 55903 PROP ADOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 38 10-117-23 31 0000 01380 RAILROAD AVE SNARON V EVANS SHARON V EVANS 1380 RAILROAD AVE WAYZATA NN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0007 01300 RAILROAD AVE NXCHAEL J LASHER NXCHAEL J LASHER 1300 RAILROAD AVE CRYSTAL DAY NN 55323 58 10-117-23 31 0008 02055 SPATES AVE NARIETTA H ANDERSON ET AL NARIETTA H ANDERSON 2055 SPATES AVE WAYZATA NN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 38 10-117-23 31 0020 00038 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 DOX 00 CRYSTAL DAY NN 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0098 01375 DROWN RD S CRAIG D SARNER CRAIG D SARNER 1375 DROWN RO S WAYZATA NN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0099 01380 ARDOR ST T W 8 K S SNITH TODD W 8 KRISTEN S SNITH 1380 ARDOR ST WAYZATA NN 55391 PROP ADDR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 38 10-117-23 31 0050 01395 DROWN RD S P F 8 L KALEY PHILIP KALEY 1395 DROWN RO S WAYZATA NN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0056 02190 NORTH SHORE DR P C 8 C D KRANER PETER C 8 CHERIE D KRANER 2190 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA NN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0101 01335 DROWN RD S CITY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO DOX 66 CRYSTAL SAY NN 55323 PROP ADOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 38 10-117-23 33 0002 02265 NORTH SHORE DR KINGSLEY H NURPHY JR KINGSLEY N NURPNY JR 2265 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA NN 55391 38 10-117-23 39 0003 01999 DAY RIDGE RD JUDITH K NCATHIE JUDITH K NCATHIE DANIEL J NCATHIE 1999 SAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA NN 55391 38 10-117-23 39 0009 01961 BAY RIDGE RO D W FLICK 8 K L FLICK DAVID 8 KARI FLICK 1961 DAY RIDGE RD WAYZATA NN 55391 /; r t ' »*• * . . ! i \/ K • TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner October 11,2002 SUBJECT:#02-2835 Thomas Adams 500 Orchard Park Road Variance Renewal - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: RR-lAOne Family Rural Residential District (5 acre) 4.803 acres List of Exhibits A Approved Site Plan At plication Staff Report and Resolution (July 17,2001) Planning Commission Minutes (July 16,2001) City Council Minutes (July 23,2001) B C D E Pertinent Code Section: 1. Section 10.27 - Standards for the RR-IA Zoning District 2. Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) - Location of Accessory Structures Application Summary: The applicant has applied to renew variances that would pennit relocation of the existing house to the center of the property and to permit an existing accessory building to be closer to the front property line than the principal residence. On July 23, 2001, the owner of the subject property was granted the variances and since a building permit was not requested within one year of the variance approval the variance has expired. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the variance renew al subject to the conditions as approved by the Orono City Council in the resolution approving the variance in 2001, including: -the accessory building shall be completed and a final inspection approved prior to issuing any permits to permit the house to be moved and/or remodeled. -All other accessory building (except for approved garage) shall be removed prior to issuance of any permits for relocation of the house. X02-2835 Thomas Adams 500 Orchard Park Road Variance Renewal 10 11/2002 Page I of 1 - 2. ' • ! =• I i=l CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR TOM aoaMs OF LOT 11, ORCHARD PARK HENNFPIKI PAi imxw . i..____ • • %• 1 j t r%c> I. ! ..- , V V ' CITY OF J)RONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $250.00 iance) B Application U Date Received" /7~ 200^ Amount Paid /SO• Oo ginal application) Variance for non-conforming strucnires $250.00 Aftcr-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address ^OO 0<^CHA^ RjpAD ^ ^ Property Identification Number (P.l.D.) Z-3 Oeo 3_____ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Properix^cquired QCTO(^^C . I ^ RgT________________(month/year) I (do)(^o also own the adjacent parcels'of land. PresenntSffm property: ^residential ___other (specify)_____________________ Zoning District: j^R.— / A ______________________________ APPLICANT A ^ (home ) 3 Name "TUftrVlftS FteeOEg-\Cf- hvnmS phone (work ) <7^2, > 93^ >2 ^37 eyl- • 23c Address: geo OecH^t^p P/V(ZK- IZOAO City: LO/0G> t^klJE Zip: grS3S~(o OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home). Phone (work) Address:City:Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: (A0\]£ EYISTIKG WOSE T^> CEt^T^fZ. OFy|goPe(^TV f\(^S> ^rre ok FoaNiD/VTioM _________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) ACCesSoiZv/ ID gefW\AlN g6TtME£A| srizeeT sg ’c/0.0S.7-/S HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code reauiremcnts:_^6T—AKJAOrKT WerUAMbS tfIKfcgP- teM0P6UN& AT PgeSE/vi-r fiflasir SIT^. I^AOllvifT riQlASF'r& aSNHimiNt-, S>ITP V'AAWAF’^ htces^o^y 5r»£f|‘rVo''A)SraRfem,/vr, use ft'<^€3 fi REQUIRED SUBMITTALS L ±:^ Completed Application Form 2- ^ 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 Fmance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-5910). ---- Ceitificatc of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 81^" x 11" for reproduction. ---- To^graphic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing ^de are proj^sed. In addition, provide one (1) copy SV2” x 11" for reproducUon. ---- Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 814" 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). ---- s 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. pie Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that vour mriaptt applkation i» not campMe if the above information hnVnnt h.en inri„HpH APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Admimstrator, 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 best of his/her knowledge. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. '~^l'<gyKao7. Dale 9-n~zooz- 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 7JOO?. 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 ^gements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. * J.\>. (/ U Application Date: 60 Day Deadline: 6/20/01 8/19/01 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: July 17, 2001 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Paul Weinberger Title Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zonins Item Description:#01-2695 Thomas Frederick Adams Variances SOO Orchard Park Road Zoning District:RR-IA One Family Rural Residential District List of Exhibits: A B C Resolution Site Plan Planning Report (June 28, 2001) Application Summary: Applicant has applied to the City of Orono for variances that would permit relocation of the existing house to the center of the property. Currently, the house is located at the far southwestern comer of the property. Removal of the house from its existing location requires a variance because the lot is less than 5 acres in the RR-1A district. Actual lot size is 4.8 acres. Excluding the areas designated as w etland the lot has a defined lot area of approximately 4.0 acres dry buildable. An accessory building is located behind the house. If the house is relocated the building w ould be closer to the front property line than the principal residence. The Zoning Ordinance prohibits accessory buildings from being located closer to the front property line than the principal building. A variance would be required to permit the existing accessory building to remain on the property subsequent to relocation of the house. The attached approval resolution requires the property owner complete construction of the accessory building and have a final inspection of the building approved prior to moving the principal building. The accessory building has had an active building permit since 1992. The building will be completed in the ne.xt 2 months. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt the attached resolution approving variances. CL A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (A) AND (D); AND SECTION 10.27, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE NO. #01-2695 WHEREAS, Thomas Frederick Adams, (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 500 Orchard Park Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and is legally described as follows: Lot 11, Orchard Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Plarming Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 16, 2001, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, the applicant applied to the City of Orono for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (A) and (D) to permit an accessory building to remain on the property following removal of the principal building and to permit the building to be located 167' from the front property line, closer to the front property line than the principal building, and Section 10.27, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit new construction on a lot containing 4.0 acres e.xclusive of wetlands in the RR-IA district where 5.0 acres is required. .Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #01-2695. The property is located in the RR-IA (5 acre) One Family Rural Residential Zoning District. Page I of 4 The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on July 16, 2001 and recommended approval on a vote of 7 to 0 for variances based upon the following findings and hardships: A.The existing lot area is 4.0 acres excluding wetlands, 4.8 acres including wetlands. The applicants property is one of many lots with a lot area just under 5 acres along Orchard Park Road. The lots east of Orchard Park Road are developed residentially. Relocating the house on this property will not change the use or character of the propertv. The existing house i.s located only 20’ from the side lot line and 41' from the front property h.-ie. B. C. ^ setback variances for the new house location are reejuired. In 1992 the City of Orono issued a permit for construction of a garace. The garage is the accessor}' building that would remain on the property following relocation of the house. The building is functional but has not been completed. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and dn no* apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the v.i.idnces would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fr .nazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; rnd would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the Citv. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commis<^ion. reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed v ariance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page .7 \>f 4 A CONCLUSIONS, ORL tIR AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (A) and (D) to permit an accessory building to remain on the property following removal of the principal building and to permit the building to be located 167' from the front property line, closer to the front property line than the principal building, and Section 10.27, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit new construction on a lot containing 4.0 acres exclusive of wetlands in the RR-IA district, where lot area of 5.0 acres is required, subject to the following conditions: 1. The accessory building shall be completed and a final inspection approved prior to issuing any permits to permit the house to be moved and'or remodeled. 2. All accessory buildings (except the garage for which the variance is approved) shall be removed prior to issuance of any permits for relocation of the house. 3. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, 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 (July 23, 2002). 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 applicant has read, understand and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the propert). Page 3 of 4 .• I, ^‘^y ®*" OfO"o* Minnesota at a regularmeeting held on the 23rd day of July, 2001. ® ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. ’001 bv B»-h J, A P f ® w-s acknowledged before me on this 23rd dav of July. 2001 by BA-bara 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 STATE OF MINNESOTA )Notary Public COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. On this day of said county, personally appeared 20— before me a Notary Public within and for that he(they) e.xecuted the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 4 of4 • >' CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR TOM aoaMs OF LOT 11, ORCHARD PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA irr !■ It iiiimii ti ■ 3 Application Date: 6/20/01 60 Day Deadline: 8/19/01 TO: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members - Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator/Planner DATE: June 28. 2001 SUBJECT: #01 -2695 Thomas Adams SOO Orchard Park Road Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District:RR-l A One Family Rural Residential District (5 acre) Lot Area:4.8 Acres List of Exhibits A B C D E F Application/Hardship Statement Plat Map Survey - Existing Site Survey - Proposed Site Plan Wetland Overlay Map Property Owners Notifica’ion List Application Summary Applicant has applied to the City ot Orono for variances that would permit relocation of the existing house to the center of the property. Currently, the house is located at the far southwestern comer of the property. Removal of the house from its existing location requires a variance because the lot is less than 5 acres in the RR-l A district. Actual lot size is 4.8 acres. Excluding the areas designated as wetland the lot has a defined lot area of approximately 4.0 acres dry buildablc. An accessory building is located behind the house. If the house is lelocated the building would be closer to the front property line than the principal residence. The Zoning Ordinance prohibits accessory buildings from being located closer to the front property line than the principal building. A variance would be required to permit the existing accessory building to remain on the property subsequent to relocation of the house. Pertinent Code Sections 1. Section 10.27 - Standards for the RR-l A Zoning District 2. Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) - Location of Accessory' Structures iO 1-2695 Thomas Adams 500 Orchard Park Road Variances Page 1 of 3 Discussion The applicants property is one of many lots with a lot area just under 5 acres along Orchard Park Road. Exhibit B is the plat map of properties surrounding the site. The lots east of Orchard Park Road are developed residentially. Relocating the house on this property will not change the use or character of the property. The existing house i.s located only 20 ’ from the side lot line and 41' from the front property line. No variance for the new house location is required. In 1992 the City of Orono issued a permit for construction of a garage. The garage is the accessor}^ building that would remain on the property following relocation of the house. The building is functional but has not been completed. The Planning Commission should discuss the completion of the building and determine what condition the building should be in prior to removal and relocation of the principal building, or if the building should be removed. (What about future of other acc. bldgs?j Required Setbacks Front 100' Side 50' Rear 100' Proposed Setbacks Front 350' Side 126' Rear 230' * Existing shed is 167 from the front property line. A variance is required to permit the building to remain. Applicant’s statement of hardship The applicant’s hardship statement is included as part of Exhibit A. Applicant should also be asked for his testimony regarding the variance requests. Options for Planning Commission Action 1 . Recommend approval of variance to permit the lot to be considered a RECORD LOT. 2. Recommend approval of the variance to permit the accessoiy building to remain on the property located closer to the front property line than the location of the principal building. #01-2695 Thomas Adams 500 Orchard Park Road Variances Page 2 of 3 t • A recommendation of approval shall include findings and/or conditions ret?ardinc the following issues. 2. 3. 4. A fmding the hardships are unique to the property and the development pattern is consistent with the surrounding properties. Future of the accessory building shall be determined. Primarily a determination shall be made when the accessory building, that has had an active building permit open since 1992, will be completed. Recommend denial, stating reasons. Table. Other action. •01*2695 Thomis Adams 500 Orchard Pvk Road Variances CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S2S0.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application # Date Recehed Ct Amount Paid . O O PROPERTY INFORMATION , „ , , Site Address 50O Pan< Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 3Z~N8 ‘~2.3 Z3 0003 .Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Pro^rty Acquired Ocfoloe.v^^ 1^88 _________________•• I (do) n^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: ^residential ____pother (specify)________ Zoning District: ______' ___________ .(month/year) APPLICANT Name THoMAS AddressT^O ORcMgD M^< R.0AP Phone (home) ^ ^2.-H-7Q? - C57 3 ____ Phone (woik) 'iSZ- ^ • 2-io City: LD% IA'<£ Zip: 553SU 0)VNER (if different than applicant) Name Address: Phone (home) Phone (vvork)_ City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $___________ Describe request in detail: K0i/€ H<5U5£ TO 6F P^OF^f^Tf, 8CULD MeiA/poMMTtoA/ • 4- (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED ^ Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakcshore FfCUSt ^STRSe-r sec-10.OS n-{S' HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance wth Zoning Code requirements: WETLAt^DS PREdLUDE QEHObtuHG AT EXISTING iiouse iocfirnGN /\s i>oa% zpmo ser^B/^eJe f &|L(/IZ&VE/V'rs ■ TH-E f4nuSF to a CONfORMfNC^ L0Cf\T(ON 6/V (attach additional sheets if necessary) Bdsr/A/q ACcesgoR.^ . ► 4 ..1 • * « •.> . - ^ • ■fi- teiS..'- 1 fv • ^z;eri*C' 5 ■i u .! <r^r^ iiliO sem':-.- ^ \^py n C S : ••A.# f:\< • ' %■ •i • 1 k '*f> 8 Ckcr* jHg Pm $ • •V • I Soo m 4 ' » • 5v'*‘\ j. >1 \ • •>• I*'-'■>•• ■•■' ■ • 5^ 10 •/' C j \‘ ■ ; ■ ! ’• ■• •• _______• ’~i}Z.5t •>• ■ A 4 ^ \ ROAD kf • tlB|.IS NOT A LEGAUV RCCOROCO PtAT. TimsryAT iscoMPtixo from the cescrip- HOMS IN THE COUNTT A'JOlTOR S TAX ^IpORO. PLArs Cf RECORD IN Jm£ COURT NOUS*. INFORMATION THE STATE AMO county highway OEPARfMCms AND 9THCE SOUACCS^ T -« .♦ *. * HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS I.IST PROP ADOR ONNIR NAHR TMPAYIR HAMR/ADDR 38 31 118 23 1# 0002 S2S ORCHARD PARK RD R J tfltSTRAND BT AL RANDAliL J HRtSTRAHD S2S ORCHARD PARK RD LONG LAKE MN SS3S6 CONDMH I 38 31 118 23 14 0008 4100 WATERTOWN RD CPV DEVELOPMENT COMP LLC CPV DBVELOPMPNT COMP LLC 1300 WILLOWBROOK DR WAYZA*<*A MN 55391 CONDMI i 38 32 lie 23 23 0003 500 ORCHARD PARK RD T P ADAMS fc J L WEAVER THOMAS P ADAMS 500 ORCHARD PARK RD LONG LAKE KN 55356 COta)MN I PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR 38 32 118 23 23 0004 580 ORCHARD PARK RD B W DEWITT 8 M H DEWITT B W DEWITT 8 M H DEWITT S80 ORCHARD PARK RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 CONDNN I 38 32 118 23 23 0009 460 ORGIARD PARK RD ROBERT J 8 LORRAINE E RODEN ROBERT J 8 LORRAINE E RODEN 460 ORCHARD PARK RU LONG LAKEMN 55356 CONDMN 8 38 32 118 23 23 0010 480 ORGIARD PARK RD NATHALIE GRAY NATHALIE GRAY 480 ORGIARD PARK RD LONG LAKE MN SS356 coNDw e ■5’ OF THE ORONO PLANNING COEVUSSION MEETING Monday, July 16,2001 (Hi) «0l-26<)5 TH02US ADAMS, 500 ORCHARD PARK ROAD, VARIANCES, 7:47 p.m. - 7:51 p.m. ■X. Thomas Adams, the Applicant, was present. The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. Weinberger stated that the Applicant has applied for variances that would permit the relocation of the e.\isting house to the center of the property. The current house is in a location that is non- conforming. The variance is required because when the house is relocated, it becomes new construction. The lot is non-conforming and less than the 5-acre minimum lot size. The lot is approximately 4.8 acres and consistent with other lots along Orchard Park Road. The Council recently approved a variance for a lot to the south and east to be considered a buildable lot at 4.7 acres. Septic testing designed for a 5-bedroom home has been approved by the City’s On-Site Septic Manager. Weinberger indicated the main issue with the application is the location of two accessory buildings on the site. A garage with a building permit issued in 1992 is nearing completion, and a smaller shed is located on the property. The Applicant has requested that the garage remain on the site but the shed would be removed prior to application for the building permit to move the house. • Staff recommends approval of the variance that would allow the lot to be considered a record lot; and recommends that the garage (located 167' from the front property line) be allowed to remain in the present location but must be completed with a final inspection and approval prior to issuing any additional building and moving permits. There were no comments from the Applicant or the public. Hawn confirmed with the Applicant that he was comfortable with the request to have the garage completed prior to any further permits being issued and the small shed being removed. The Applicant agreed. Smith suggested to the Applicant that this was also an opportunity to clean up the lot. Haw n moved, Stoddard seconded, to recommend approval of Application #01-2695, Thomas Adams, 500 Orchard Park Road, granting approval of a variance to permit the lot to be considered a record lot; and a variance to permit the existing garage to remain closer to the front property line than the principal residence, contingent on completion of the garage with a final inspection and removal of the small shed. Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#4) #0l-269Tlnf««UC6>iP SRARON GEHL, 1825 CONCORDIA STREET, VARLANCES, 7:52 p.m. - 8:09 p.m. Larry Gehl, the Applicant, and Gary Hansen, the builder, werep PAGES MINITTES OF THE ORON'O CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, July 23,2001 *(#7) «01-2694 BAtW©lIL£TOSTIAN CHURCH, 2477 SHADYWOOD RO.\D - CONDITIONAL USE PERiVOT^^^ESQUrTION NO. 4674 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve and ad'jpt^ESOLUXION NO. 4674, a Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit to permit a church use on the propeTty-tocated at 2477 Shadyvvood Road, B-4 Zoning District. VOTE; Ayes 5, Nays 0. *(#8) #01-2695 THOiNUS FREDERICK ADAMS, 5( 0 ORCHARD PARK ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 4675 Flint noted he requested this item be removed from the Consent Agenda because there is no recommendation of the Staff or Planning Commission contained within the report. Weinberger indicated Staff is in favor of the variances. Sansevere moved. White seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4675, a Resolution granting variances to permit an accessory building to remain on the property following removal of the principal building and to permit the building to be located 167’ from the front property line, and to permit new construction on a lot containing 4.0 acres e.xclusive of wetlands in the RR-IA district where 5.0 acres is required for the property located at 500 Orchard Park Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. .*(#9) 2845 LITTLE ORCHARD RO.\D - LAKESHORE REVTGETATION PLAN Flintihqved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the lakeshore understory vegetation restoration plan as presenle^by John Fleischhaker for the property- located at 2845 Little Orchard Road, subject to the conditibn^contained in the Staff report. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (Richard Flint leaves at 8:00 p.m.) MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT *(«10) PROCLAM.ATION - NATIO.V^LNIGHT OUT - RESOLUTION NO. 4676 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve and^qdopt RESOLUTION NO. 4676, a Resolution Proclaiming National Night Out 2001. V’OTE; Ajx^^L Navs 0. Mayor Peterson requested the local news reporters include an ahiqle in their newspapers promoting National Night Out. Peterson encouraged the residents of Orono amM^ng Lake to attend National Night Out being held at Super Valu In Navarre and at Nelson Beach onFvesday, August 7*, from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Mayor Peterson noted the official opening of the senior center in Mound is schedu!etiv(or Tuesday, July 24*. PACE 7 TO:Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner October 7,2002 SUBJECT:#02-2836 Charles Phelps 385 Tumham Road Variance — Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: RR-1A One Family Rural Residential District (5 acre) 362,047 s.f. (8.311 acres) List of Exhibits: A Application Survey/Site Plan Hardship Statement Photo of Property Septic Location Topographic Map Plat Map Property Owners List Building Plans B C D E F 0 H 1 Pertinent Code Section: 1. Section 10.27, Subdivision 5 (B): Front Yard Setback: Minimum front yard setback in the RR- 1A zoning district is 100’. Variance Requested: To permit an 11’ X 9* mud room to be 75.4’ from front property line. Application Summary: The applicant has requested a front yard setback variance to construct a mud room on the street side of the residence. The mud room is proposed to be 11’ X 9 ’ and will be constructed onto the original residence. Discussion: The property is located on Tumham Readjust before it becomes Chippewa Lane. The existing residence was built in 1910. The residence is located 82.6’ from the front property line. In 1975, the property was rezoned to 5-acre minimum zoning district. However, properties in the neighborhood range from 1 acre to 5+ acres in area. Front setbacks in the neighborhood range from 35’ to 100’+. The proposed 75’ setback will not be out of character with the overall neighborhood. #02-2836 Charlie Phelps 385 Tumham Road lOn/2002 Page I of3 5* i The property is serviced with a well. The well is located on the east side of the residence (in front of it). The property is also serviced with a septic system. It is located to the north of the residence and is not affected by this project. In 2001, a permit was issued to construct an addition to the existing residence. The addition met all setbacks and height requirements. A new septic system was installed as part of the addition project. Because the subject property is 8+ acres, lot coverage by structures in not an issue with this application. The interior layout of the house would make it difficult to construct a functional mud room at a location not needing a variance. Neighborhood: In 2001, two applications were submitted for properties on Tumham Road. Both applications involved front yard setback variances of a greater magnitude than what is being requested in this proposal. These two properties are located on the east side of Tumham Road directly across from the subject property. 380 Tumham Road - After-the-fact variance granted for 3 foot overhang to street side of residence. Side yard setback - 47’ where 50 ’ is required. Front yard setbcck - 35.5 ’ where 100’ is required. 340 Tumham Road - Variances to construct 2 stall attached garage to the north side and a two-stor>- family room to rear of the residence. Planning Commission recommended approval, however the applicant sold the property prior to City Council approval. Side yard setback - 24’ where 50 ’ is required. Front yard setback - 53.7 ’ where 100’ is required. Statement of Hardship: The applicant has included their statement of hardship in Exhibit A. The applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Issues for Consideration: I.TTie existing residence was built in 1910, prior to current zoning standards. #02-2836 Charlie Phelps 385 Tumham Road I0r7/2002 Page 2 of 3 2. The adjacent properties are not affected by the mud room addition. 3. The well and septic system are locations are not affected by the proposed addition. 4. Other issues raised by the Plaiming Commission. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the front yard setback variance to construct an 1'; X 9 ’ mud room on the residence. #02-2836 Charlie Phelps 385 Tumham Road I07-'2002 Page 3 of 3 A Application # Date Received Amount Paid O.ttO.QO 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 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION . . ^ Site Address M.AJ Property Identification Number (P.l.D.)^i-\l^~Q.*^ ?>|______QOC>(> Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date PfpT^ijj^cquired ___________________ I (do)\do^^^so own the adjacent p^els of land. Present use oTproperty: residentid ___other (specify)_________ Zoning District: -1A___________________________________ .(month/year) APPLICANT Phone (home )^>^»1 1 \ S, .r /- /M » *^none tnome jhnz» M Name (L Phone(work )<^Ty2 .“Hn » Address: A Cit^ P/z/ti Zip: OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address:City:.Zip:. vOr\je>^ ___Lot Width X Setback: Front __Side VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore 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) # O 4k • y t: REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All gf tht following information must be submitted hv th^ aDniication order for vour application to be gnn<idered rnmoletc! 1. 2. 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 Center, 348-5910). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing ^de are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8 Vi" x 11" for reproduction, oketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy SV2' 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 yarlancf application h not tomolete if the above info miation has not been APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Admimstrator, 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 mformation supplied is tru^d coircct to the best of his/her knowledge ^ ■ 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Applicant ’s Signature Date QC| • l'7 • 0 0\VNER'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 ^nvestiMtion and verification of this request. Owner ’s Signature i .1^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 Council. If an applicant is unable to anend a scheduled meeting, please make mangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. ^ r -A r Yr ■ * 4 «• ’ins ^ • }) W ' i • Phelps Mudroom Variance Application Attachment 385 Tumham Road, Maple Plain, MN 55359 P.I.D.: 31-118-2331 000638 Our house was buiit prior to 1864 and it straddles the setback line that was established later by the Orono ‘Front Setback Zoning Code requirement*. The house truly needs a mudroom. We would like to add a mudroom on the East side of our kitchea This is the only logical place for it as it is close to the driveway and adjacent to the kitchen and family room. It would allow us to enter the house without having to carry groceriv^ for a long distance and without having to bring dirt into our guestroom, family room, or kitchen. It does not make sense to attach a mudroom in a location that is far away from the driveway - especially with our winters. Not only is it inconvenient, but it can also be unsafe. Last winter, during construction of an addition, our family’s only practical * entrance to the house was through a side door near the northwest comer of the house. To get there we had to walk on a path that remained in the house ’s shadow for much of the winter. As a result the path was quite icy. Unfortunately a family member fell and dislocated a shoulder. The bulk of the homes in the Tumham Road neighboihood were built prior to the establishment of the Front Setback requirement. I believe that the 100 foot Front Setback requirement helps maintain a rural feel in those portions of Orono that are open and rural. However, the requirement is restrictive in our old neighborhood where many of the homes are very close to the road. As a matter of fact, it appears to me that the two houses closest to ours, both right across the street from us, are located completely between the street and the front setback linel Respectfully, Charles E. and Jennifer C. Phelps O o (952) 210-4489 (work)09/18/2002 i>/r \y - w *"* ^*^ _ ._ * ^s ■ i sm •7 ' \W ‘ .iv sa-' • • i jT’’"’" !*f*r* i ‘‘ i 91|' M I ^ I < ■ ! ’l ^ I f ' * |^•^i■:i.|•!r;^|.^^• i; i ! f \ t'-s MM1. . r V 1-. L».y,-%-5 V-’i ■- r!" r» i .< - t . i M v'.,|. !. .; r ;*r.<. ni‘i -J .: | KvJ. i i; ■i'' • ■' 1.1 -‘ • j ii ■ ■'■ ^' i#'T/ V'• *'^r*v.;H:rk ‘ " w !;iy * , ' -'i.- ,s,. ------ - 1------- 9rF/'v: ■,i.i -Jf •!l ’ ^rLrSv»^lct tSH •V-.^r- •' ^; 4\’>, ; ,if ■■ *.. • f ■ .i V* ' , »»%■■. - I _• j .‘|i ■•'• 4 ''' JT' f^ ' I - >y] •». .* '’ '',- I ’ - -ILL. 3r " V . f </~y ^1. ^ m : i.:;i--’-'T'’ ■:^‘ - •'«'. ■. ' >*y ^ . . ...i ^^ - *lv ^ V.:^' - ':; .r ■ ■; - v ^ ' Mkf'. ■- . A . ^: r- J wuft- ^.. -:,• '• Vi* -•' i % ^4a ^ ^ ^ .; •.Vy-:.'T:j,-.. -- ,.'\ '? ■ * : . -t’ j t-r§l% -.. ..fe: tp:,&f f|® •' *•‘‘-# ■■ -yi (• F .« . > V..TJ •:yyK^|S| K: ll|i' ^ ■’"r' ‘ \ 1 IDrnham fei -i il I /V bo SEPTIC S VSTEM INVENTOR Y Address: 385 Tumham Rd. Building Type: residence PID: 31-118-23 31 0001 BRs Install'd for: 4 In Musa: No Permit#: 4408 Date of Permit: 10/01/01 Installer: Peterson System Type: mound Experimental: no Appliances: Indry SYSTEM CONDITION Conformity: 1 Tank Condition: 5 DF condition: 11 Failure Pot: low SEPTIC TANKS Material: precast concrete Setback to Bldg: 50 Capacity: 1000,1000, 1000 Cesspool: no DRAINFIELD Length of Lines: 55 # Lines: 3 Trench Width: 10 Treatment Area: 44*105 Type of Filter: rock, clean sand Soil Boring: yes Tile Size: 2 Under Tile: 9 PercRate: 10 Setback DF-Bldg: 50 DF Ht above Wt: 3 Soil Type: loam, clay loam, silt loam Limitations: water table WELL DATA Setbacks - Well-Tanks: 50 Pump Type: subm. INSPECTION RECORD Well-DF: Depth: 197 50 Report in File yes Diameter: 4 Method: drilled PUMPOUT RECORD DATE DESCRIPTION COMPLIANCE DATE GALLONS 6/22/79 no surfacing 2 11/7/86 1500 11/2/81 no surfacing 2 10/17/91 1000 11/26/85 no surfacing 2 6/15/93 1000 9/9/86 no surfacing 2 11/10/98 1000 8/13/90 no surfacing 2 4/16/01 1600 7/11/91 no surfacing-pump tanks 2 5/13/93 no surfacing 2 10/7/96 non-compliant-repair by 12/31/2006 3 4/24/00 non-compliant, repair by 12/31/2006 3 10/05/01 installation 1 irnma c."1 3 /- /l^- -25''- V- / •»• • ' •' „ ’ '•\^-; Parcellnformation •T. .» V ''■ . V*’ V-^Farc«l ID 3111823310006 Housa Numbar 385 Straat Nama TURNHAM RO This IS not s legsKy nconM msp. It npnssnts a compilation of information and data from City. Cowity, and Stata road authoritias and odiar sourcas. turn RUN DATE 99/17/$2 iATCN 5t5 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORtUTlON SYST^.H PROPERTY OrnmUS LIST PROP ADDR OMNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR sa S1-U8-25 13 9992 99929 TURNHAH RD L E RERO i K N RERO LEONARD 8 KATHLEEN N RERO 929 TURNHAH RD NAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 PROP ADDR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 38 31-118-23 31 8985 00385 TURNHAH RD C E PHELPS I J C PHELPS CHARLES E/JENNIFER C PHELPS 385 TURNHAH RD ORONO HN 55359 PROP ADDR OMNER NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 31-118-23 31 0010 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIOIEO HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND 1027-NC PROP ADDR OMNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 38 31-118-23 92 0008 00380 TURNHAH RD D E 8 D F HERZ DOUGLAS E 8 DIANE F HERZ 380 TURNHAH RD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 PROP ADDR OMNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR TOTAL BATCH 505 00012 REPORT NO. PIA35A01 PAGE 23 38 31-118-23 24 0003 00425 TURNHAH RD MILLIAH M STEHPEL ETAL TIHOTHY M 8 ANNA H OTTEN 425 TURNHAH RD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 31 0005 04550 MOLVERTON PL J L HARSTAD 8 J R HARSTAD JAHES L HARSTAD 4550 MOLVERTON PL ORONO HN 55359 38 31-118-23 31 0008 04515 MOLVERTON PL G R 8 K A E KIRKPATRICK GREGORY 8 KATHY KIRKPATRICK 4515 MOLVERTON PL HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 31 0009 04435 MOLVERTON PL D P 8 K L GRANOSTRAND DAVID P/KAREN L GRANOSTRAND 4435 MOLVERTON PL ORONO HN 55359 38 31-118-23 31 0011 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND 1027-NC 38 31-118-23 42 0007 00340 TURNHAH RD ROLAND H JURGENS III ROLAND H JURGENS 340 TURNHAH RD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 42 0017 04385 CHIPPEMA LA J H FRITZLER ET AL J HARC FRITZLER DESYL L PETERSON 4385 CHIPPEMA LA HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 38 31-118-23 42 0018 00320 TURNHAH RD J L 8 R P ZELINSKY JR J L 8 R P ZELINSKY JR 320 TURNHAH RD HAPLE PLAIN HN 55359 O O•"S.'O mm L RUN DATE ff/lZ/RE iATCN 5f5 • • HCNNEPXN COUNTY rROPERTV INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST I O i *•'.V -4 -V ' f w*. REPORT NO. PI4554R1 PACE 24 I CERTIFY THAT TW FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTNENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, T4 THE REST OP IfV KNOMLEDCE AND BELIEF. dateT" r ' 0 WmI Elevation B,8^oi'sVi;’i *k»tt IV imim « ••! maaoi •m «iJ i»«<4i AMWatOM f«OOOC1UrT mto«n« 0 o c 0 •a "<o 0 111 ^ la £ sl (/> z C( VADIAMCC Si »TTAL •a it02 EIEVATIONS (2> East Ei#vat«n A2. 1 = = = US (2>NORTH f LEVATION S I C H !■•««>« f«MD«11VtT m iMCiir(«a Mm #«• ni«M •m t«i ANOCfttoM vvooeciurT •«»M»« mm •^rnm MM (Mil Mm 03 O C <D•g o, 'Ui S<D » (>^S| (A I c--S-ll f 31 V ftpa VAfUAMCe tUBMITTAL Of It 02 ELEVATIONS A2.2 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner October 11,2002 #02-2823 Ronald Cloud 3460 North Shore Drive Variances — Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (.5 acre) 13,272 s.f. less Co. Rd. 51 ROW = 10,673 s.f. Exhibits: A Assessor dimension of deck B Staff Report and Exhibits - 9/16/02 C Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting - 9/16/02 Application Summary: This application was before the Planning Commission at the September 16,2002 meeting. It was tabled due to the representative present was unable to answer/commit to many of the questions and issues addressed by the Planning Commission. Staff did contact the applicant to set up a meeting to discuss the application and issues the Planning Commission brought up at the meeting. After several traded messages, at the writing of this report the meeting had not occurred. Because this has not occurred the proposed plans for the deck and three season porch have not changed. The following are the issues the Planning Commission discussed at the meeting. These were also stated to the applicant on the phone the day after the Planning Commission meeting: # Remove lakeshore deck, can replace with lock box. Remove shed located at rear of property. Deck meet 10' side yard setback. Deck to be constructed to be same size as what existed. Three season porch not pennitted to be constructed because property is over allowed 15% structural coverage. Deck: The applicant did submit a picture including the removed deck. The deck that was removed was estimated by the applicant to be 512 s.f. However, researching tax assessor’s files, this property record has the deck that was removed to be 300 s.f. (Exhibit A). ni)2-28:} Ron Cloud 3460 Sorth Shore Drive 10/11/02 Page I of 2 Pertinent Code Section: 1. Section J 0.25, Subdivision 6(B); Side Yard Setback: Minimum side yard setback in the LR-1C zoning district is 10’. Variance Requested: To permit addition to be 7.5’ from side property line. 2. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1(B) and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (C)(6): Average Lakeshore Setback: The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. To permit a variance to encroach 19' into the average lakeshore setback. 3. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L)(2); Hardcover in 75-250 ’ Setback Zone: Within 75-250' of the lakeshore there shall be no greater than 25% hardcover. Variance Request: To permit 3,419 s.f (36%) hardcover where 2,369.5 s.f (25%) is allowed. 4. Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C): Lot Coverage by Structures: In all zoning district, for all lot of 0-1.99 acre in total area, the total combined footprint areas of all principal and accessory structures shall not exceed 15% of the lot area. Variance request: To permit 2,571 s.f (24%) where 1,600.95 s.f. (15%) is allowed. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommendation is the same as previously stated in the September 16,2002 report. Staff recommends the applicant be permitted to construct a new lakeside deck, replacing what existed with the following conditions: 1. The deck be the same size as existed. 2. The deck (and porch if approved) meet the 10’ side setback. 3. The shed located by the lake be removed. 4. The shed on the rear of the property meet a 3’ setback from the property line. 5. The porch be allowed only if Planning Commission concludes it will not encroach on lake views enjoyed by the neighbors. Planning Commission Options for Action: 1. Recommend approval. 2. Recommend denial, stating reasons. 3. Table, giving applicant direction. 4. Other action. U02-2823 Ron Cloud 3460 North Shore Drh e 10/11/02 Page 2 of 2 CITY »Pin (ll'J 7 •’» ■ •’ '■'fv’i'/-flnnnrss ‘1 .r rM < i V' C- >0 /\ I V I i - n ^7. 6 /' f ' // //f',i * 7 . r... DATl 7’J 1,100 • .V ^ ^ \ f, . ; V; .• ! L'Aii IriuMnrn I -‘I'-' h----------- ♦ - - " I T . 1. /- ^ - ! -r- ' ’ : f- • * - -♦- TV PI ♦ ij • * ----------------------4. f^L’.^VLS ‘'.AL‘ '- CG'iiriDl'iT's iuTj’^nrNT^, HUH UiTiii P» f'V * W01\' :o jj> V' UTY HT ■u____ DlMLnSiONO 3"«^ . 3C> SO FT « 7/771 c. < • 1 m a m ff n ■ 1 B V « w n « T VPf PORCHES »*« 1 a ■- ■ ■ a DECKS e • fm ' *,p^ - •. „ r.- _ • . 711 _ T' . /C n * X ATT GARAGES . _<T74 ff « 9 • other BUHD'NGS — 1 1 ■ ff m % 1 1 COMMENTS ---------------- " ’’ 1 f r ' ' > / '>:• i> i •':2 viy f ''t■'c , I 'J, UA’C I •Ce TO: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner DATE:September 5,2002 SUBJECT: #02-2823 Ronald Cloud 3460 North Shore Drive Variances — Public Hearing LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential District (.5 acre) 13,272 s.f. less Co. Rd. 51 ROW = 10,673 s.f. Zoning District: Lot Area: Exhibits: A r' pplication B Survey C Elevations D Letter to owner in 1 981 E Permit for deck in 1976 F Plat Map G Property Owmers List H Hand drawn sketch of deck removed 1 1990 Air Photo of Property J Photos of Property K Hardcover Worksheets Pertinent Code Section: 1 . Section 1 0.25, Subdivision 6 (B): Side Yard Setback: Minimum side yard setback in the LR-1 C zoning district is 10 ’. Variance Requested: To permit addition to be 7.5’ from side property line. 2. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1(B) and Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (C)(6): Average Lakeshore Setback: The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots. To permit a variance to encroach 19' into the average lakeshore setback. 3. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L)(2): Hardcover in 75-250’ Setback Zone: Within 75-250' of the lakeshore there shall be no greater than 25% hardcover. Variance Request: To permit 3,419 s.f. (36%) hardcover where 2,369.5 s.f. (25%) is allowed. 4. Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C): Lot Coverage by Structures: In all zoning district, for all lot of 0-1.99 acre in total area, the total combined footprint areas of all principal and accessory structures shall not exceed 1 5% of the lot area. Variance request: To permit 2,571 s.f. (24%) where 1,600.95 s.f. (15%) is allowed. #02-2823 Ronald Cloud 3460 North Shore Drive 9/5/2002 Page 1 of4 Application Summary: The applicant has requested variances to side yard setback, hardcover in 75-250’ setback zone, average lakeshore setback and lot coverage by structures to replace a deck and construct a three season porch to the lakeside of the existing residence. The applicint has removed the existing deck due to safely concerns. It had rotted and people were beginning to fall thru it. The proposed deck is slightly larger than what existed. The proposed deck is 20’ X 30’ X 17 ’ (571 s.f.). The deck that was removed was 19’ X 30’ X 15’ (512 s.f.). Discussion: The existing residence was built in 1976. At that lime a variance for lot area was granted. There have not been any additions just upgrades to the existing residence. A new roof has been put on the residence and the patio doors on the lake side were installed in 1999. Because the applicant has removed the deck and the permit on file did not specify the dimensions of the deck, the applicant has provided an air photo from the Spring of 1990 and submitted a hand drawn measurement of the deck that existed. Also, when visiting the property you can see the old footings. The photo shows the deck that was removed existed on the property for approximately 25 years. Side Yard Setback: The deck that was removed was in alignment with the east side of the residence. The proposed deck will continue in a straight line with the east side of the residence. The deck is proposed to be 7.5 from the side property line. The subject property is required to meet a 10’ side setback. The hardship, if one exists, is purely aesthetic. Average Lakeshore Setback: The deck including the railing is 6’ in height and is considered structure. The proposed deck encroaches 19 into the average lakeshore setback. The proposal also includes a three season porch to be constructed on top of the deck on the northeast section. This porch wall be more of a potential view encroachment than the former deck. Hardcover: The hardcover in the 75-250’ setback zone is more than the allowed 25%. The applicant is proposing to remove a substantial amount of driveway to lower what exists on the property. The property currently does not have a deck, therefore the deck is not included in the existing hardcover numbers. When the removed deck is calculated into that, the amount of hardcover drops from approximately 4,089 s.f (43%) to the proposed 3,419 s.f (36%). <<02-2823 Ronald Cloud 3460 North Shore Drive 9/3/2002 Page 2 of 4 Shed by Lakeshore: The shed located by the lakeshore is non conforming. Staff reviewed the record for this property and it was determined that staff had attempted to get the previous property owner in the 1980 ’s to remove the* shed. It w as referred to as a fish house on a concrete block foundation. Orono zoning Code prohibits the placing of temporary or permanent structures within 75 ’ of the lakeshore. The structure is larger than a permitted lock box. Lot Coverage by Structures: The amount of lot coverage by structures is increasing slightly due to the larger size of the deck. The lot coverage by structures was 2,000 s.f (2,512 s.f with old deck) and is proposed to be 2,571 s.f. an increase of 59 s.f to what previously existed. Statement of Hardship: The applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. Issues for Consideration: 1. The existing residence was built in 1976. 2. Does the Planning Commission feel the deck and three season porch are in character with the neighborhood? Will the three season porch limit lake views by adjacent neighbors? If so, w hat is the hardship? 3. Would the Planning Commission rather have the deck be the same size as existed and meet the 10 ’ side yard setback in order to bring the deck into greater conformity? 4. The hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback zone is above the allowed 25%. The existing driveway is proposed to be reduced to 16 ’ wide and should not be reduced any further. Are there other items in the 75-250 ’ setback zone that can be removed to further reduce hardcover? 5. The lakeshore shed is .lon-conforming and should have been removed or relocated in 1981 6. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. «t02-2823 Ronald Cloud 3460 North Shore Drive 9/5/2002 Page 3 of 4 L. I ■ I H ■ aOi — Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the applicant be permitted to construct a new lakeside deck, replacing what existed with the following conditions: 1. The deck be the same size as existed. 2. The deck (and porch is approved) meet the 10 ’ side setback. 3. The shed located by the lake be removed. 4. The shed on the rear of the property meet a 3 ’ setback from the property line. 5. The porch be allowed only if Planning Commission concludes it will not encroach on lake views enjoyed by the neighbors. Options for Action: 1. Recommend approval of variances requested. 2. Recommend denial of variances. 3. Table, giving applicant direction. 4. Other action. #02-2823 Ronald Cloud 3460 North Shore Drive 9/5/2002 Page 4 of 4 ANALYSIS Structural Coverage Total Lot Size Total Structural Coverage Percentage 10,673 s.f. (Minus ROW)Allowed: 1,600,95 s.f.15.0% Existing: 2,000 s.f.18.7% (Does not include removed deck) Existing: 2,512 s.f.23.5% (Includes removed deck) Proposed: 2,571 s.f.24.0% Hardcover Distance from shoreline Total area in setback Allowed hardcover Existing hardcover Proposed hardcover 0-75'1,195 s.f.0 s.f.77 s.f.77 s.f. (Minus ROW)(0%)(6.4%)(6.4%) No Change 75-250'9,478 s.f.2,369.5 s.f. (25%) 4,089 s.f. (43%) -with removed deck 3,577 s.f. (37.7%)-\vithout deck 3,419 s.f. (36.0%) CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S2S0.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 Afrer-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Application U OZ.-'ZS 23 Date Received"8Jl / loT. Amount Paid S2SO PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address tsiAtCri f*lA» ^^391 Property Identification Number ff.I.D.) / 7 - - U Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey Date Property Acquired_.3u»3 ___________________________ ' (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: X residential ___pother (specify) Zoning District:__________________ APPLIC^ST Name ^t^i»»4tQ. Phone (home) _____________ Phone (work) 7b2> Address: SVfeO City: Zip: / OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Address: Phone (home) Phone (work) City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ ^ SGlGOO Describe request in detail: JiAasY^u S (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED ___Lot 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 difficultyor unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: V»^«o • (attach additional sheets if necessary) i I MhM* required SUB x \UTTALS 1. 2. 3. PPl'cgtion deadline da«> fp ^ Completed Application Form ^ .?sr.abe.l‘’J T"r (^°u Finance, A-603, C om Ce]SeV348-59IO) ™” Depanment of SSl“L"?equiref aTdiHon"“'V“"'""^- reproduction. ^ 8'/f x II" for — Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if anv rhano • • • - ^de are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'i"Tl r Liat of the legal names (includl marital samw afl'n!"' 'T * '‘"^■ <he propeny. TTus would includeZl “ As an addendum to this application, please anlh a separate lirof a"™'A persons you wish notified of this application. ^ '' Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this aoDlication Pis.s,c« t. . mtoce application l, not comp lete if thc ", ov e inLma.ia.. APFLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicMt hereby agrees to provide all information required or reouested hv n, v • “"-iirLr?»“S3 information suppHedJ^and correct to the best of Ws/SeftoXdg “ *' 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. z / ^iot£k Applicants .V, rO OWNER’S SIGNATURE X°r;irpX^“city suff '-o-we members for Council OO^ Pale OL^ Applicant must have all submittals into the Citv officer 9^ rH-iare- u r C^mlsslon and Council. If an applicant is unable 'to aTen7a”chSd*L«'ine ”T‘“* make arrangements to have an authorized acent atT<*nH in vn.,, i meeting, please & Zoning Office of this change 41 0 O Q ' i?'* O' ^ ^ ! , i U t • # }l\c\A{ iic,. 1\W ^ f f 'S^ i (JLMU S^rudorA^ K J :• < :/ * ••' / V • II0US6 •\ jr ( *•• • E|-et;«.47tf/v P • • C-Cjar- Ao»iin» •fo Co4^ ^ pi*tl-<- 2,^(0 ••.:C; IpjutA 3^kO k)9hor<V( !CJU i^icsilm fcpV'^3 McT^e^ - R-U X>«<-L <^+viAc+u.r< +£? •f-rr^v.-fircC — 5/1^ t)-cclC'V^ +0 be Ctd.u.k^ -"RaiUv^ 4-0 b< C^cUr- ifO r^sJ y-'"'' “J*o* pccificafion 3 Bay Victorian Roof i --- ^ ^ M 1 [w ^ ni— _ ^ /\ i-Wn 4^ V f 1 1 1 STD 19 1 '11 1 ! i f ==S ♦ • I * i * il*»t X>tJL^\C l‘h<'Or\Ron (^loucL 3H(eO h) pt, iO(K}/zj\yf-cLfn\iJ b • ;• ,? • • « • »4 CITY of ORf Pos,* Offici* llo* W»«CrytHiil Hay. Minnviiutu rK>:)'J:(*Muni On thv North Shorv of Lakv Minnetonka BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL CORRECTION ORDER February 2, 1982 John G. Nelson 3460 North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 Re: 3460 North Shore Drive - Fishhouse Dear Mr. Nelson: An inspection conducted at the above subject property on Januc 1982, revealed that the fishhouse has not been removed. You notified this department in a letter dated October 3, 198.' that you would need special equipment to move the fishhouse a- that time. You asked for an extension of time until the ice r safe to drive on. Now that the ice is safe to dr.we on, it sh< be possible to remove the fishhouse within 10 days (February Your failure to eliminate this code violation will leave no alternative but to refer the matter back to Council for direc If there is some reason why you can not comply, please feel f to contact the undersigned. Sincerely, t '• * * I . Thomas J. Jacobs Building Official cc: Council Walter R. Denson, City ^dministrator Alan P. Olson, Ci.ty Planner Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator »%<s.V' m m S j kiCuwW' p#i?%P#^-5S^ wm»mmferf’i'CV. r;A,'. v.iii/> i>vi/A’S •» >«^- ■ »_«i V • ■ r^'r. 7 *\ ' • V. • r*^ • .l/x\ ^■^/.. 4/ WWW^ • . •• • •• • •. % ^ • • « CITY of GROK 1’ii.Hl Offitv llox IMi«(’rysi.il Hay. Minnvxutii .'W»;)2;««Muiuri|>al ( On tht' Sorth Short’ of Lake Minnetonka March 12 f 1982 John G. Nelson 3460 North Shore Drive Wayzata, ^L^I 55391 Dear Mr. Nelson: I promised you that I would write this letter as a follov;-up of our meeting at your residence on V’ednesday morning, February 24, 1982. At our meeting, you agreed to lower the existing accessory structure into the lakeshoro bank and to remove the propane gas tank from the side of the structure. You stated you would complete this work sometime during June of this year. The City Council has recom-mended that in the future should residents: wish to rebuild such lakeshore storage sheds that they be constructc as a lock box not to e.xceed 4’ in height. Such structures may be allowed to cover more ground area if the 4' height is maintained. I'm glad we were able to clear up any misur. u-r'tanding that may have arisen over Council's original directive rmd to thank you"for your patience. mwbX: On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka September 17, 1981 rth ^ore Drive Rg : North Shore Drive riorr.eowners Dear Mr. MeXson: You and I have a problem which must be addressed. Several property owners in your neighborhood have been us^nq the area between the road and Crystal Bay for storaae of fish houses, lawn sheds, trailers and other similar items. The practice has gotten to the point where the City has received complaints about the situation. All affected property owners are receiving this same letter. An inspection of the entire area was conducted on August 31 1981. On your property we found: One 8 X 12 fishhouse on a concrete block foundation Orono zoning Code Section 34.202 prohibits the olcci.nc or keeping of any temporary or permanent building or struc'j-’ I realize most lots in your area are crowded and have special problems due to the location of the road. You may find^it dii-.icult to relocate the structures at all. if you do so they must be placed in the side or rear of vour property no- ^hey may not be ’placed between your hou.,e and the road. An; n^ slaS footing or foundation requires a building permit. oocing. HL'ILUIVG A ZOM.NC; - 47J-7J57 ASSKSSI.NG ADMI.MSTRATION A FI.NASCt - 47J 7JS«PLBLICHORKS .7 • • •••««' AmiCATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT AND aRTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY VlUAOl OF ORONO, MINNESOTA ItCnONS: ACESNUMBCPEO 1 THRU 13 MUST BE FILLED IN ;F0WE P6R^ IS ISSUED (Wm» Print or Typo) SITE AOONESS FERMI <Z{. 3378 LEGAL OESCRIPTICN ?- J'l ■ 7f PLAT NUMBER ^^^ PARCEL NUMBER (AdLirttt)ITfl. No.l ARCMITECl (Address)(TtL No.) BUILDER (N.m.1 (Address)(Ttf. No.) TYPE OP WORK L ilZE OF STRUCTURE ■••1^11 IWidtti) y lOvpIhl >6^ - tVMLiCC- 9 NO OP SrOPlES iwitfvii y •Ici^ /lACiJ^ / I 10 ESTIMATED COST completion DATE 12. PROPERTY DIMENSIONS ESTIMATED COST 13 NO OP PAMILIES(lf AppiicjblF*) PRONT YARD ir. REAR YARO 5IUL TAROS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND SIGNATURE: Th# undersigned hereby represents upon all of the penalties of law. for the purpose of inducing the VILLAGE OF 0R0F40 to take the action herein requested, that all slatcmcnts herein are true and that all work herein mentioned will be done in accordance with the ordinance of Ihe VILLAGE OF ORONO, the Slate of Minnesota, id rulings of the BuiUmg Department. PERMIT FEE ^ t> STATE FEE penalty fee___________ total FEE- ^3^* ZONING DISTRICT FIRE ZONE AGGREGATE FLOOR AREA FLOOR AREA RATIO material pile with OPFSTREET parking CONSTRUCTION footing__ FRAMING final CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY ISSUE DATE Iiu4 :vH( / • Bliiie r-- » , f ,pin County Tffi , . . ■ V • . cpayer Service!5 Depaitment' ParcpI Information I . I .r ; • . ' • f* Parc«l 10 0811723430026 \-v-:v> V H oum Niimbar 3460 , . r ‘ T-V’ OtTMt Nam* NORTH 6H0RI DR : .. This Is not a ItgaOy ncoftM mtp. ItrspnsoMsscomp^tionofinformaifon' -. ' and data from City. County, and Stata road authoridas and othar aourcas. . > RUN DATE 96/21/92 RATCH 691 HEftlEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY XNFORNATION SYSTCH PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. P1^35^91 PACE 1 PROP AOM OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 36 96-117-23 AS 9991 93A79 6XRCH LA T W 6ERNARD ILK 6ERNARD TNOf^S W 6ERNARD 3A79 BXRCH LA WAYZATA HN 55391 36 96-117-23 A3 9992 93A99 BXRCH LA E LXLJEQUXST A S LXLJEQUIST , ERXC J t SHELLY R LXLJEQUXST 3A99 BXRCH LA WAYZATA HN 55391 36 96-1X7-23 A3 0912 03A79 NORTH SHORE OR HAROLD J OROUELLETTE HAROLD J OROUELLETTE 3A70 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA HN 55391 PROP AOOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR 36 96-117-23 A3 9913 93A69 NORTH SHORE OR BRUCE A NUSBAUN BRUCE A NUSBAUN 3A69 NORTH SNORE OR WAYZATA NN 55391 36 96-117-23 A3 OOIA 93A90 NORTH SHORE OR JOHN R JONES JOHN R JONES 3A90 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA NN 55391 36 00-117-23 A3 0015 03A96 NORTH SHORE OR K H CARLSON 1 0 L CARLSON KENTON H S DIANE L CARLSON 3A96 NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATA NN 55391 PROP AOOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 36 96«117-23 A3 9929 93AA2 NORTH SHORE OR GERALD J RAY ETAL GERALD J RAY 3AA2 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA NN 55391 36 06-117-23 A3 0021 93A50 NORTH SHORE OR WXLLXAH C ODDEN WXLLXAN C ODDEN 3A59 NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATA NN 55391 36 06-1X7-23 A3 0023 03A50 BXRCH U E R ENGLER 1 B ENCLER EDWARD R t BONNIE ENGLER 3A50 BIRCH LA WAYZATA NN 55371 PROP AOOR OWNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 36 96-117-23 AS 992A 93AA6 NORTH SHORE DR JAN ERLER JANES I NARY ERLER SAAB NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATA NN 55391 36 06-X17-2S A3 9025 03A56 NORTH SHORE DR A X EVANS INK EVANS ANY K A NAONX X EVANS 3A56 M)RTH SHORE DR WAYZATA NN 55391 36 06-117-23 A3 0026 03A60 NORTH SHORE DR RONALD TRUHAN CLOUD RONALD TRUNAN CLOUD 3A60 NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATA NN 55391 PROP AOOR OWIttR NANE TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 36 96-117-23 AS 9027 •3A69 BXRCH LA D S A 0 X INGVALSON DOUGLAS A DEBORAH INGVALSON 3A60 BXRCH LA WAYZATA NN 55391 36 06-117-23 A3 0026 00036 ADDRESS UNASSXGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL DAY NN 55323 TOTAL BATCH 501 9991A f • • !T t L • • I I J /^6 i V. ■, .« ' K .V'. . .K .O .,jSfea3<^-. ;;TdPftK^^raW»W vri k’A .-•■S'^':^K V' v:?| . .'»t c.',- ^SK®3fe>^>:' >.v‘i^v »laB 4wM| ‘ V I*'- r-^fS . rA-^ ■a k :b ilii^A m 0r^- ' ■■ ■'■' f-^r '*' —-fi: .- . ' v- >'iML. (r>j » -tt; ■:?r5;s:v -5' ‘^r-'Z “i I f;.V.'.V.J L-Vi-i • : .TJCirv# < > tiL^ *» . . — • V • . - % *-»vv »-% ^ *• ^ •* : * habdcoverx :^ SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCIX ONE) rC gARPCOVERlN ZONE A. House • X CULATION WORKSHEET 75-250* 250-500’ LaasA B. 'Oen^e •*. • • • ’ •• • <5. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. l^dsc^e Uaderlaln. By Plastic Or Fabric « •• X X X .. X- X X X X X X X X • • *t G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE •A • • •______ . B . PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House_____________ Lt:|Ci B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk . * •• • E. Patio/Dcdc ‘ F; Ijudscape Uaderlaln By Plastic Or Fabric X X X X X X X X X X X X G. Ocher 500-1000' • • WUA S.F. • S.F. S.F. .S.F. S.F. •«• ^ # TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ‘ A _____________■ B. H n S.F. .S.F. S.F. 'S.F. S.F. _S.F. S.F. S.F. "S.F. S.F. S.F. xlOO 7lW _S.F. lr>.4- % • Width i= xlOO Jl ni BUSS3- S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ]S.F. S.F. ‘S.F. ^ • S.F. "S.F. mm • S.F. "S.F. "S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F- fi • A #•••.••t* ^ I hardcover calcula tion worksheet SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75* 250-500’ 500-1000' rO gABDCQVER IN ZONE A. House . Lbo|± • • • 1^0^ vnsA .. B. -Osxa2«• • • C. Drivewsy B. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric O. Odier *3 •• • X X X » ‘ X V .* • • • X- X X X X X X X X J." TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE •A ■ • • • . . B . PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE * A. House _____________ X Lc|di B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk • * E. Paclo/Dcck F; landscape Uaderlaln By Plastic Or Fabric X X X X X X X X X X X X G. Ocher \ -S.F. .S.F. _S.F. -S.F. S.F. • 'S.F. • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. • S.F. M S.F. 36 ^7 S.F. ■i'A ^ S.F. xlOO ^ 7. '7 Widdi - " —fsci— -Uq S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ^-37*.^ -S.F. S.F. ■67/ '^s.E. ^S.F. !CS: :SSI S.F. S.F. S.F. l/i S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE * A _____________+ B __XlOO « * MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. While the Applicant, Ronald Cloud, was absent, Doug Schmidt of Hastings Conservatories was present. Bottenberg explained that the applicant had requested variances to side yard setback, hardcover in 75-250’ setback zone, average lakeshore setback, and lot coverage by structures to replace a deck and construct a three-season porch to the lakeside of the existing residence. Bottenberg pointed out that the applicant had removed the existing deck due to safety concerns and the proposed deck was slightly larger than what existed. The proposed deck is 20’X30’X17’, (571 s.f.) while the deck that was removed was 19’X30’X15’ (512 s.f.). Since the original deck was removed and the permit on file does not specify its dimensions, the applicant had provided the City with an aerial photo and hand drawn measurements. The deck including the railing is 6’ in height and is considered structure and encroaches 19’ into the average lakeshore setback. Bottenberg noted that the hardcover in the 75-250’ setback zone is more than the allowed 25%, in fact, without the deck, the hardcover is 36%, down from 43%. She continued that the shed located by the lakeshore is non conforming and staff had attempted PAGE 26 of 26 “■ V MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o’clock pan. to get the previous property owner to remove it since the 1980’s. The lot coverage by structures was 2,000 s.^ (2,512 s.f. with the old deck) and is proposed to be 2,571 s.f., an increase of 59 s.f. to what previously existed. Mr. Schmidt stated that he was unfamiliar with the existence and history of the lakeside shed and could not commit for Mr. Cloud to tearing it down. Chair Smith suggested that Mr. Schmidt convey the Commission’s thoughts to Mr. Cloud and they table the application. Fritzler asked if the other outbuildings would be allowed to remain. Gaffron questioned whether a 10’X12’ shed by the driveway was to remain. Mabusth stated that it adds to the lot coverage. Hawn stated that, in her opinion, the proposed conservatory would be something that would be obtrusive to the neighbors. Having visited the site, Rahn indicated that the footings that are there dictate the size of the deck. He believed that the previous deck size had been overstated and would recommend it be replaced by something similar to the original. Gaffron suggested reviewing the assessor’s records to see if there was a measurement of the old deck recorded there. With regard to staffs recommendations. Chair Smitn agreed that, item #3, the shed located by the lake be removed. inquired as to whether the shed at the rear of the property near the driveway should be PAGE 21 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. removed also. Mabusth reminded the Commission that this is the first opportunity they’ve been given to mandate the removal of the rear shed. If a permit cannot support its existence, Hawn suggested the shed be removed. She asked what the hardcover would be at if these things were removed. Mabusth reminded the Commission that they required a grade level deck for the Livingston application and suggested the Commission offer the applicant the opportunity to replace the shed with a lockbox. While visiting the site, Hawn indicated that one of the neighbors approached her stating that they did not wish to see any additional hardcover on the property. In fact, due to the road being paved and the excessive amounts of hardcover in the area, the neighbor asked if there was anything the City could do about the poor overlaying job and nmoff. Gaffron stated he believed that the original overlay may have caused issues and he would follow- In conclusion. Chair Smith indicated that the deck needs to remain the same original size, the shed by the lake needs to be removed, the rear shed by the driveway removed, and due to the amount of structural coverage she felt the proposed three season porch would not fly. There were no public comments. Hawn moved, Chair Smith seconded, to tabie Appiication #02-2823, Ronaid Cloud, 3460 North Shore Drive, to allow the Applicant ’s representative to convey staff and Pianning Commbsion recommendations to the applicant. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. PAGE 28 of 28 (S TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Plarmer October 15,2002 SUBJECT: #02-2831 Hope Chest for Breast Cancer 3850 Shoreline Drive Finding of Substantially Similar Use/Commercial Site Plan Review - Public Hearing Zoning District: B-5 Limited Neighborhood Business District Lot Area:35,028 s.f. (.80 acres) Building Size: 6,720 s.f. Exhibits: A Applicant Letter B Draft Site Plan (Sketch) C 2002 Survey D City Engineer Comments (September 24, 2002) E Current Property Owner’s Engineer Comments (October 8,2002) F Planning Report (September 9, 2002) Application Review: This application is two fold: 1. Finding of Similar Use: The B-5 zoning district does not specifically list furniture store as cither a permitted or ''onditional use. The zoning code does give the Planning Commission and City Council the auth.uity to interpret when a proposed use is substantially similar to other uses in a specific zoning district. 2. The second part of this application is the commercial site plan review . The applicant, Barbara Hensley, intends to purchase the property at 3850 Shoreline Drive which is currently operated as “Bay Furniture.” The applicant intends to operate an upscale resale store called “Hope Chest for Breast Cancer”. The proposed business will continue to sell fumiture. antiques. cr> stal/china, jewelry and home accessories such as lamps, pictures and rugs. 1 here w ill be a limited amount of clothing and accessories. There will also be a section devoted to gifts for women with breast cancer and books, supplies, etc. regarding breast cancer. The proceeds of “Hope Chest for Breast Cancer” will go to organizations dedicated to breast cancer research, education and care for the under-served (limited or no health insurance). The property is zoned B-5, Limited Neighborhood business District. A fumiture store is not listed in the B-5 district as either a permitted or conditional use. In April 1986, the City Council determined that the proposed ftimiturc store was compatible with the other uses in the zoning district and would operate substantially similar to a “gallery”. In October 1986. the City Council approved the commercial site plan for the fumiture store. Again in June 1998, the City Council approved the commercial site plan for the current fumiture store. Ms. Hensley is asking for the same consideration that was granted, noting ''Hope Chest for Breast Cancer ” is compatible with the other uses in the zoning district and would operate substantially similar to a "gallery ” and furniture store (as the proj^erty has functioned since 1987;. "Hope Chest for Breast Cancer ” is very similar in use to the furniture sales use currently in the building, the only difference being resale of "pre-ovvTied” furniture and accessories versus sale of new furniture and accessories. Outstanding Issues: The Planning Commission tabled this application in September to provide additional time for the applicants and the City tc determine what impacts the parking lot expansion has on the property. Secondly, the City had to determine what erosion control measures arc neccssaiy to ensure the parking lot improvements work. Applicant’s surveyor indicates the existing site hardcover is 45“/b. Proposed parking lot revisions will reduce it to 43%. Staff has met with the future owners of the building. Rather than delaying their acquisition until/unless the parking lot issues are resolved by the seller, the future owners have agreed to complete the requirements as suggested by the City Engineer to improve the parking lot and eliminate impacts to the wetland to the north. Barbara S. Hensley has submitted a letter to the City detailing what Hope Chest is willing to do to accommodate the requirements as suggested by the Citj. I. Erosion on the north side of the property: a) Erect a silt fence ASAP at the base of the slope where the new parking lot was installed. b) Place topsoil and seed/sod on the existing slope. II.Wetland Delineation a) Complete a wetland delineation next spring to determine the wetland boundary and if any encroachment of the wetland or 26 ’ buffer has occurred. b) Any encroachment of the wetland will have to be reviewed by the City of Orono and likely the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. III. Removal of parts of the existing parking lot and additional parking lot improvements. a) Remove parking surface to leave a 5’ setback to the west property line. Concrete curb and gutter to be installed to the specifications set by the City Engineer. b) The 5’ shall be graded and seeded/sodded. IV. Storm Water Management a)Complete a plan for curb and gutter with a catch basin that will collect sediment from the parking lot. Request revi«-w of the storm water management plan by the MCWD. V. Additional Parking Lot Improvements a)Discuss requirements for protecting the fire hydrant with the Fire Marshal and install posts to protect the hydrant and restrict parking around the hydrant. Stripe parking lot for 13 - 9' X 20' spaces, including one handicap accessible space. Since the applicants will not take ownership of the property until mid-November much of the above stated work will not be completed until after occupancy of the building and some items might not be completed until spring, 2003. The applicant's have expressed a willingness to do all the above improvements to the property. The City of Orono will enter into a Development Agreement with the applicants. The improvements will require a letter of credit for 150% of the estimated costs of the improvements. A koter of credit will allow the City to draw funds to complete any improvements should they not be completed. Staff Recommendation: 1. Staff reconunends approval based on a conclusion that the proposed use is substantially similar to the existing use as a furniture store and to other permitted uses in the district. 2. Staff recommends approval of the commercial site plan, subject to the applicants complete the items listed as items 1-V on page iwo of this memo. HOPE Chest FOR ».REAST C ur/inekit}\‘ the <kt*er3J,2 <%firOlRM» Fa Bor 66 Oon^MN 55123 UtarWea^. /I ANCC.R r Cl eif h Itp*. ^■iM-ii>iwi^^fte|Kiyet^yRt3IspSharfaeDriwiRiieliR«a|eairB^it?ig>ajBg>ioe. I^albdkiT«rpllgigDBrf tocoRoahvaction. lln(eutoJTqoiKdhMrRlettcrd<eJSeFai6ier24,2W!lnajiiri'in. L EiiMinoRtiheaDi&«d|BeofllR|Hi|Kay: • nisistobedoBentoORRSjnsdhle X Brlinraiinn nrtfm nrthnrtr Tinrr ilrfiiirtfinn ntpiimT tfir Tfnitirrri/rtnit-ffriir nt* rfrnr tftrfi~ritnt tit ifn imr toteftiWMiinn of tbc proper^ OBtgNovco*cTl!^aO(ttma (iptoghifly flUBOHi} oT2003 3. FKetoattaflis'oo • ltomiR>eSrortiluawiiouscowfiomtwgimwgofflacfefcroppw«lBMtolOOftct • ♦ • • I ilin «DmHD this property wfcatbcwETtctionhgretaroed king ftooi das icport. • TobeoQM]^cttdtoibe6iaiagl^naiiicraf20(B(fepfaidmoow«tlicr.coidUkm$afifae9oiI»cfc • Co^ikteR|droforcqrt^gBttBrni!cMclilMBii:flBibi{ndpnig-riLiijewetfaiidHW>U«leafpBAnctot <~17D too) RBto cndi 1n^ oa ^ floiiii «6e lias to tp oorapfetod oiicr dbeonaer. • OuditoteiviilitlieMiancUM crack IIMasbdl^^ • ]B9AEineati6iDiDB|BingfRia3toeraf2003(l(|MDiSqgoi«adlKr,coiifitiaascflfaeaoatete. Addilioad iieau £soasa^ to a meciiag wttk Wendy, Paol aad ijOac OR Sqxanber 25.2002: 5. nan fnsiOs) to irtMitaftiKfiralqrdiaautbeiralciqg late protect k torn beii^lak 6. Stripe paachs lot fig 13 pwlnigiilaceK; 12 i|i|rocitiBtriy !rR2g*;itociBiylyirithhaoficapwpiaeBicigs We abo ^giee to piDvirie a fiomoal ‘I ‘I ••of t50K of cariottted CCS for itcaa 3 ad 4 ribora. For Ibe PboeSiv CkmuiisBoe cseedog 00 October 21. soon S 6l30 p m. we Mill provide m Doa8MveliSof6lKeu • AifaBtdi«ittMi<igiy iiyiy shoMAigttie 13 paASiggptMcs Bid ihcfcnKwaloCitoSftBiiifWiwBiinoigoiitte West aide oEttrperidfig lot | Iftfaacbaitbii^dtttraBeBdtofcBiefrTletsebCsaDlanr. *|baiik]aiaooe4gtoBforsoraiimaFa]d^ad3oor fupport foribeHope Cbest for Bros Coccr. Btotrag^ c/ todain^MN 55179 " (^y>"?o3 ‘^(2'^y;(^4.('5 >«y^ = .5^2. -rf. - 2»*^ % East 175.07 .... FLOWAGE- & CONSERVATION EASEMENT ’ PER DOC. No. 5549621 •••••••«. > atf. fence north of fine V+/- __ __ _w _ ^ __ w _ . _ . w ---------------------- 175.00 80.0 ^elec. meter rr,' Jivdcflit..3 1“STORY FRAME 3 to ® No.3850 00 5 i V 1 1 1 3 C hc7cn?r,..Ar%:80.0 roof over concrete wolk * • • • I ••••••( 15 J6.9 □ •«s o o « V « « • 15.i Sign ^West 175.07 power pole __Ijblock wol plonterj overheod wirea on line -, concrete w 0 I k light. I catch I basin j. curb cut SKDRELINE DRIVE (COUNTY ROAD No. 15) HEWCW COUNTY STATE AD HI<»WAY No. 15. PLAT 68 curb B 00 o•oow o b 2o CQ CO CO SOUTH LINE OF GOVT. LOT 8. SEC. 17. 1HP. /17. R. 28 Cfl(OC£^*rviA't HfOtL)FlU letfV/S/OAJ-X Z".3o' C- L 200Z J/1 Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & ^ I Associates Engineers & Architects Ooncilroo. Roi^nc. Anderlik and Auoclaiet. Inc It in Aflirmative Aciien/Equal Opportunity Employer «nd Employe* Owned PrIncipAU. Olto G Boneifroo, P£ • Marvtn L SorvAta. PE • Glerm R Cook, P£ • Robert G Schumcht. PE • Jerry A Bourdon PE Senior ContultAnit: Robert W Rosene. P£ • Joseph C Anderlik, P£ • Richard E Turner. PE • Susan M Eberiin. CPA Attoclate PrlncipAlr Keith a Gordon. P£ • Robert R r»fefferie. PE • Richard W Foster. P£ • David O Loskota PE • Mark A Hanson. PE • Michael T Rautmann P£ • Ted K Field. PE • Kenneth P Anderson. PE • Mark R Rolfs. PE • David A Bonestroo. MBA* Sidney P Wifiiarrson. P£ . I S • Agnes M Ring. *4 B A • Allan Rick Schmidt. PE • Thomas W Peterson. PE • James R Maiand PE • Miles B Jensen. PE • L Phiiiip Gravel Ml. PE • Daniel J Edgerton. P£ • Ismael Martme/ PE • Tficmas Syfko PE • Sheldon j Johnson • Dale A Grove PE • Thomas A Roushar PE • Robert J Devery PE September 24,2002 Offices: St Paul. St Cloud. Rochester and Wilimar MN • Milwaukee Wi • Chicago, It 'SMebsiie. WWW bonestroo com Wendy Boitenberg Zoning Admiiistrator/Planner City of Oroiio Post Office Bo.x 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 or ClIYOrOfJO.Vg Re; 3:<5U Shoreline Drive File No. 139-02-000 Plat No. 02-0000 Dear Wendv: We in>p-cted the parking lot improvements at 3850 Shoreline Drive ye-iterday prior to the council mectrng. The parking lot was recently enlx''ged and ’Surfaced with bituminous pa* cment. The wes-. edge of tne parking lot was paved to the lot line and the north'.ve.s: eomer of »he i'.'i was e.xpunde.i tc\va;-c.s a;' existing w etland. It appears most of the parking lot draina.gc is directed ncrthetly towards the c.xi.iting wetland. The parking lot has r.o curb and gutter to contain drainage from the site. .Itopn water l1J.^ euuJed .several .ircas along the north edge oi the parking lot w/ashing gravel, sediments and debris towaid;. the wetland. We have the following coinment.-t with regards to engineering matter.^: • Sill fence should be installed immediately at the toe of the slope along the north edge oi' the pai king lot. The area betw een the parking lot and thr foe of the slope should be covered v* ;ih a minimum of 4-inches of topsoil and seeded or sodded to minimize further erosion • I'he e.'usting wetland should be delineated and acopy of the delineation report submiued »o the Citv for review. • Wc recommend at ieast 5-fcei of bituminous be mmoved along the west lot hne. This area should be vegciaicd to provide a oulfer lu the • The cw ner should provide a plan for parking lot rev isions that wili manage the storm w aier. The plan should include concrete curb and gutter, storm sew cr and water quality provisions for sioirn water discharges to the north. Water quality provisions inigh: include siim.p catch basins seuimentaiii'n basins, or vvater gardens Plans should bo submitted to the Minncli.'.ha Crees Watershed District for ll’cii review and appu'val If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4S6.V Voe.iS verv totl v. nONFSTRt KX l.'OSrNT. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Cc: Gmg G.ippCity «*f Orono 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 651-636-4600 • Fax; 651-636 1311 All Engineering • Pianning • Surveying . Landscape Architecture ( KUUSISTO LTD~~) »s22 October 8,2002 Mr. Greg Gappa Director of Community Services City of Orono P. O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55323-0066 !• • 'j'-’f ' 0 CITY Ur Cf?o,Vo Re: Bay Home Furnishings, 3850 Shoreline Drive, Orono, MN RLK Project» 2002 616-M Dear Mr. Gappa, Yesterday afternoon you and I met with your consulting engineer, Tom Kellogg, regarding the work that Mr. John Chenowelh had done on the above referenced propertj', specifical*-. overlaying his parking lot. After discussing the issues raised in Tom Kellogg’s letter of September 24,2002, with you and Tom yesterday, Mr. Chenoweth is willina to do the following; Item I A) Erect a silt fence at the base of the slope that supports the parking lot. B) Place topsoil and seed on top of the existing slope and place a fiber mat over the topsoil until the grass has been established. C) Remove the silt fence once the grass on the slope *’as been established. Item 2 Mr. Chenoweth does not feel that the placement of asphalt on an e.xisting parking lot should necessitate a wetland delineation. Item 3 Mr. Chenowith’s neighbor recently constructed a new curb for a new parking lot nearly right on the property line considerably above the existing ground (which will require fill on Mr. Chenoweth’s property' to provide backfill for the new curb). Mr. Chenoweth paved over his c.\isting parking area at the same grade. The bituminous is up against the fence and it has to be to allow trucks access to the existing loading dock. If a five foot setback is constructed, trucks will not be able to back into the loading dock. Therefore Mr. Chenoweth can not agree to the five foot setback. Item 4 Storm sewer was never needed on the site and once Item i is completed, Mr. Chenoweth believes that the storm water will not erode the bank and in fact since the water is not concentrated, will flow uniformly dowu the bank, rather than concentrated in one area. This will also allow the new grass on the bank to absorb anything that may be on the parking lot. Offices: Hibbing • Minnetonka • Ham Lake • Twin Ports (952)933-0972 • 6110 Blue Circle Drive-* Suite K)0 • Minnetonka, MN 55343 • FAX (952) 933-1153 Equal Opportunity Employer ♦ * Mr. Chenoweth requests that this letter be placed on the Planning Commission’s next regular agenda fgf consideration. Mr. Chenoweth will be in attendance to answer any questions you or •he Planning Commission Members may have. Sincerely, RLK-Ksosisto, Ltd. Senior Professional Engineer Cc: John Chenoweth, 3850 South Shoreline Drive, Orono, MN 55391 Complete Date: Deadline: TO: 9/25/02 11/24/02 Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator DATE: SUBJECT: October 11,2002 #02-2837 JeffDanberry 3545 Ivy Place Variances Lbt of Exhibits: A Applicant Letter of Hardship B Application C Site Plan D Elevation Views E Plat Map F Hardcover Calculation Worksheet G Site Photos H Permit Record Application Summary: The property owner has requested a front yard setback variance to permit a 14 ’ addition to the attached garage. The purpose for the addition is to allow a third stall to the attached garage. The proposed addition would encroach 12’ into the required 30’ setback to the front/street property line. Pertinent Code Section: 1 . Section 1 0.25, Subdivision 6 (B): Setback Required = 30’ Current Building Setback = 30’ Building Setback Requested »18 ’ Variance ° 12’ Encroachment Analysis: The applicant ’s property is a 1 acre lot at the northwest end of Ivy Place with 225 feet of frontage on Lake Minnetonka and 230 feet of frontage on Ivy Place. The lot is located in th'* LR- IC zoning district where a minimum lot size of ‘A acre and a lot width of 100 feet is required. According to City records a permit was issued in 1984 for a new residence and an addition was constructed in 1997. The City Code requires a 30’ setback to the street property line (I'7 Place). •02-2817 JefrOinbeny 3541 Ivy PUee Pinion At the time Ae house was constructed in the 1980s the zoning ordinance was in place for Casco Point to require a jO setback. The house and two-stall attached garage were constructed at that time «<baVk si^Zrsrce'im '» LR-IC zoning distric. Review of Hardship Statements in regards to the garage addition request. The applicant s stated hardships are detailed in Exhibit A. ^ Shoreland Development Standards: “^e property is located in the Shoreland Overlay District, therefore hardcover standards do apolv approximately •/. of the lot within 75* of the lakeshore and the o^Sier hdlf locdtcd in the 75-250 setback zone. Existing/Proposed Hardcover 0-75 Existmg H^dcover 20 s.f. of stairway leading down from the deck. (No changes are proposed within 75 ’ of the lakeshore. ^ 75-250 Existing Hardcover = 5,816 s.f. (25.8%) where r2 5% is allowed^ * Approximately 800 s.f is landscaping plastic, some would be removed to lower overall hardcover on the lot. 75-250 ’ Toul Proposed Hardcover - 5.569 s.f. f24.8»/.r Includes removal of 667 s.f. landscape plastic and including 420 s.f garage/driveway additions. Staff Recommendation: staff does not support th^e application for a variance to a property tvith a conforming structure on a confotmmg lot, bu.ll after the standards for dte zoning disuic. were established AldtoS this prqec does a n.ce job reducing hardcover, it is a change to a conforming house built after die cumen. zomng code st^dards. The City has had many new building projects Uta. meet all cunm fn! »da r approving a variance for this project sets a negative precedent for addttions and a terations to conforming structures on conforming lots. Esoeciallv sinL .hi. i... was developed under the current standards for th<» district. --------- «02-3U7JeirD«iberry J545 Ivy Place Pi^2of2 r I •I * * Options for Action: 1. Recommend approval. 2. Recommend denial, stating reasons. 3. Table, giving applicant direction. 4. Other action. •02-2137 Jeff OaOcny 3S45l«yrU4C ri«t3or3 Ofono Zoning Dept. Wendy Bollenburg 2750 Kelly Parkway Orono, Mn 55356 \ A Dear Wendy, owntr tr354sT4;°P,ace ‘! rLereb'fs "h" 'Z' I’ pertaining to my lot in resoeci tn ^ following as hardships ".Tio" .'"'"" '. ss\X“ST^':^r5,“ r “? »" Please note: 1. My proposed addition does not block anyones view of the cov. i„ , , 9 2. It is the most efficient use of hardcover as it uses existing driveway. I will not need a hardcover variance. 3. It does not adversely effect drainage to my or any other property. 4. Aesthetically it does not go against the existing structure or the prevailing surrounding properties* many of which have detached garages which have closer front setbacks than I am proposing- including the property at 3534 Ivy place- directly across the street. 5. There have been several building projects Involving principal structures, detached garages, and/or attached gar? ;]es-2649, 2807, 2617, 2965 and 2677 Casco Pt Rd that have encroached on the front. 6. I have discussed my plans with my only adjacent property owner- the Lindgens- and have their support- as well as the support of the Jewetts across the street- who potentially have the best view of my new garage. Application if 37 Date Received ' z“ss *™" “ ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $150.00 (no change from original application) ywance for non-conforming structures $250 00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address JjTu v Pi Property Identification Number fP ID V ^97 -----~,T=i-----__________________ Attach legal description to application!? not in //i a—^^^ ~ CO‘3^ Udo) (do not) also ow^ the adjacent parcels of land ---------------------------(month/year) l^ent use of property: residential other Zoning District;___________/ P IC. ~~— (5P«ofy)------------------------- applicant t ^ II Name 3e»PF Q^. „ jb<f*rr v (home), Addres!T pi f ------p— Phone (work)_ 7 r l--------- Clty:_Or(r^-<- Zin: /~ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name __ Address: Phone (home)_ Phone (work)_ description of request Describe request in detail: Zip: Estimated Construction Cost $ •/a?*'/ . yy •/< variances required ------Area ___Lot Width (attach addition^ sheets If necessary) Setback: Front Other (specify) Side ____ Hardcover __Rear .Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore compliance with Zoning Code tequirements: ^ *’"''“•“8 (attach additional sheets if necessary) ^ '• ' ,f Tr As." ___^ I w’xa'y' C /)JAi4iev) ZfiT / , BlddJC Jj CA^CO C0\/£> • *Xia^ 4)9 0^*1 .* e*itn/^ ec^ SXi seifnr ti ^^»mc f^ei//c9j^ Pe>/^n Zoa-z 1 htitliy ctfUly Uial IIUi plan, aiiiway or *apoil «at piapaiail Uy ma of uiMiar Miy illiaci lopai viiloii amJ Uial 1 am • duly naolalaiad laud 8uivayo# uiHlai Uia la«a ol Uia tlala •I Mliuiaiola. ^ JOOf 49^- 03 -J?37 Oook • rago A ^a ^ mt G^. i%f If •• t'tMtt oa« Ml M):i n.1.- Z7 /9^97_ n.^-<ii«neniiii t4ioo •cala /•lr30 j dUM^IUUlia] ■: >d^(paJabEaar5(^l*^J^ liss' 6Q ^^^2^:-3te;iHria.yisl..esi^s-C-/ D / • • y• • I ' • I ^2) • # • 26-^^ 3 ^ (3) 18* vSUn ^ 11 (2)c^ ^ . tJ’- • /M^ART 01 *> s 125 too:)- - r L OT 18^ |y« ‘^^>#<'6^ .7.^ y 174 A (17) 175 l:► ) (l8)^-5 ♦ ^ •m^. IT7'^ 178 (19V •‘2NJV Tp. *■^ XTi 7 / /'# feo®• • :763-S72-322i Sep ‘0 2002 n.-.:^, o ww WSuysiv a.vij(Mr»>- iC / «r n > ^ wf-w flRlIlCKjkJI^ A. Keuit B. Oarafc C. Drlviwiy D. SI4<waUe # E. Patio/D«ck ^hryttA F. ijadKipt UndsUta By FUiiie Or Pabrifi 0. Oiher^ M IT JS. // 2^.__ 3d> 7 __;5: —(^ /B J4 /2- *^/^Z X JC - ^20zs //o 2 g nt. r 5*/ 7*2 . total Hardcover in zone TOTAL PBOPfiRTV AREA IN ZONE A - a "Z'Z. Ogo X lOO FftOFOSim HAaPCQVER 04 ZONE A. Housa ____________ % ■Z^SO iMfCl wu* B. Carait C. Driveway D. Sidewalk & Pailo/Daek F. Lafldteape L’o4tr!ale By Plude Or fabric lA 1± IZ C. Oibcr Z^L/Z a X z X X .S.F. .S.F. ,S.F. .S.F. ,S.P. «.F. S.F. S.F. 8.P. S.F. S.F. S.F. % 25^.S’ 7i fi 2^■^ i\nv. S.F. TOTAL KABOCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PBOPBATY AREA IN ZONE A 2120 a 02-3^37 ♦ 8 2Z^.COO X100 . G 1^!,. • •r j- - ' . i- • -^rr^^l7r V- f G-.. ^45>»^4i'V?iv ■ )0\ Lw.-d Pi #j S*b«v:;f*r-mm^mm wim ira®*'".lJi ,:-^j jsj r-'. ' ir p • r '. *^ * ^M-*•/ i fe-fe'. '&5:v’i0i'- - r?«f • -..** ** • # • •■« .V •V— /I 3Svs Permit Nn, 7£a*J permit record Date 4- 3. - / --------------------^--S> f-. Type of Jatt^ ^/jgra’to/O —(h£cA-ay%-iy J- ^ ✓ 74i3g --------------------- _____________ -------------------------_______________________ —— “7- AO Lm Hit ^-/■/-s^___ ^x2u _c.o . -9^77 QjL3'^>-’llr Lp_^ -°i7 Tlp-c_;fe; ~-2sJLl37 1 TO: FROM: DATE: ■ SUBJECT: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner October 11,2002 #02-2841 David Dickey 4425 North Shore Drive Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre) 42,103 s.f. (.96 acre) Exhibits: A Application B Survey C Hardship Statement D Elevations E Photo of Property F Plat Map G Property Owners List Pertinent Code Section: 1. Section 10.22, Subd. 2: Hardcover in 75-250': Within 75-250’ of the lake.shore there shall be no greater than 25% hardcover. Variance Request: To permit 4,965.4 s.f. (33.0%) hardcover where 3,706.5 s.f. (25%) is allowed. Application Summar}’: The applicant has recently acquired the subject property and is proposing to make improvements to it. The applicant has requested a hardcov er in 75-250’ setback /one variance to permit construction of an attached garage and foyer to the existing residence, 'fhe garage and foyer addition consists of a three stall garage and foyer totalling 1.293 s.f fhe proposed garage and foyer addition is on the north side of the existing residence. The existing tuck under garage will be turned into living space. fhe existing residence and other items located in the 75-250' setback zone comprise 4,565.4 s.f t30.8%) hardcover. The garage and foyer addition increases the hardcover to 4,965.4 s f (33.0%). A portion of the proposed garage w ill be over existing driveway. The residence was built in 1971 in its present location. There have not been any improvements to the property according to city records. There was an accessory building on the property that was in disrepair and the present owner demolished it in March 2002. A gazebo t>pc suiicture still exists at the south end of the lot near the lakeshore. «02-2841 David Dickey 4425 North Shore Drive to 11/2002 Page 1 of3 Discussion: The property is located on the west side of the channel going to Forest Lake. It has water on tw o sides limitmg the buildable area of the property. Because of this uniqueness, almost 80% of the property lies within 75’ of the lakeshore. This is similar to the Pheasant Road proj>erty w hich was granted hardcover variances earlier this year, partly based on the fact that the runoff from th e residence an driveway has a significant area of 0-75’ to filter through as compared to the typical lakeshore lot; in this case it is spread over a 0-75’ zone that is 150’+ in width. The subject property shares a driveway with the adjacent neighbor to the west. There is a turnaround enabling the property owner to exit the property to drive out onto North Shore Drive rather than backing out. Statement of Hardship: The applicant has included their statement of hardship in Exhibit A. The applicant should also be asked for their testimony regarding this issue. The property owner feels a variance should be granted due to the disproportionate amount of land located within 75’ of the lakeshore. Issues for Consideration: 1. 2. 3. 4. The existing residence was built in 1971, prior to current zoning standards. The topography of the property is such that runoff will drain towards the lake and not toward neighboring properties. All the property w ithin 75’ of the lakeshore would provide an adequate absorption area. The adjacent properties arc not affected by the garage and foyer addition. A neighbor did call in support of the proposed project. 5. A portion of the garage addition is over existing driveway hardcover. 6. 'I hc subject property shares a driveway with the adjacent property to the west. 7. Is there any hardcover on the propert>' which could be removed to bring it more into conformity or to at least keep the hardcover at is present level? 8. 1 he lot coverage by structures is well below the allowed 1 5%. 9. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. 002-2841 David Dickey 4425 North Shore Dnve lO/l 1/2002 Page 2 of 3 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the hardcover in 75*250' setback zone variance to construct an attached garage and foyer to the existing residence. Option for Actions: 1. Recommend approval of variance. 2. Recommend denial of variance. 3. Table, giving applicant direction. 4. Other action. #02-2841 David Dickey 442S North Shore Drive IO/n/2002 Page 3 of3 Application U Date Received Amount Paid -<5/V/ 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 $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) • , A PROPERTY n^ORMATlON Site Address SftOife Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) -ooc^a Attach legal description to application if not included on required siuvey. Date Pronerty Acquired I (do) (d^^t) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: )C residential ___^other (specify) •istrict: \Q»1H4(pi .(month/year) Zoning District: APPLIC Name 52f\ru-(^ 6,feW>hone (home ) V)flX\ttafc>Phone (woric ) Address: ms Umitt DflWl City:_ftMM Zip: SS^Ui(- OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Address: Phone (home). Phone (work) City:.Zip:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in .detail: __ Estimated Construction Cost $ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width % Hardcover .Lot Coverage Setback:.Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSmP/DESCRlPTlON 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) #2841 A REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All Qf tht following information must be submitted hv the anniication deadline order for vour application to be conaidcred complete: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. I Completed Torm Certified r.operty Owners List of owners within 150’, labels and plat man (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 surveyor) and* include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy g'A" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if.imy changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'A" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8'/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. , • • • • -. - • • > - % t * * * * L-* The Applicant iaod Property Owner must sign thiS application. Please Tcmember. that vour y.ariance application is not complete if the above information ha^ not hggn igpiiuipii APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide alljnfhrmation required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees t^nay additiond^eds^l^time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expends incurred'‘ >*'• ••'• information supplied is\yue atul corre Applicant’s Signature \ iV / f\^ J review|yf this/^application, and certifies that the ctl to the >t of hji^er knowledge. Date S0\ OV OWNER'S SIGNATl The owner hereby acknowledges and agre^c^is Application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by Wfy siaft coMsufant^, ^enLs, Commission members, and Council members for purposes Winmtigatiqn Owner’s Signature of this request. Date Applicant must have all submittals iWo the City\offi^s 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning CommisVion Meetings ffC 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 Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. o 1 1 •1 HAfO COYER AfOUtt 0 - moot Zoiit ^ > .-4 ,4 MOAOSED NARO COVER. 79-t90* ZoM IL f II MHn u H n. T. H n rjT7 u n • Ul HARD COVER AREAS. 7S • W Zmm CHANNEL T 0 FOREST LAKE AJLS« IMS ililsr-sm* •r Ma il •wi LAKE MINNETONKA (WEST ARM) VAIDI Q/VATXM: «• a tt. SOOt • t»M M OROMAIIT MGM «A1CH CL£VAT1GH: m« tart 9k»,^-mK) IfQCST tHOVN «A1DI QXVAnON. »• Ova a 0 ^ o T »»_ S mm'U.KfiV .1 (Ilf-75) mo ROOK: aS5 PAGL S3 I 8CHOELL & MAOSON. INC< • smms • Yosto «otZATA touifVMa func 1OBtCIOKA. m (ffD 54*-7101 rAft(M2) 1 -■s , ~ »a;iiiaCATION 1 mtWf fwt fite y y mo omo/lm* l>M»yor m#v 5m •f fa Mo •# Mo. 15540 A cuemt TTTANIUM CONSTRUCTION # ?. R ^H S.y.1. PROJECT NO. 63818-002 • AfjO^ HARD COVER AREA81 0 • 7S' foot ZOR* mnn t.f H rt T#H n. Ntt T«t«l Niri Om I7J77 u n 340 H ft • U I ^ Kir »«» , / <! T- ■933 tKC or CHAMNCL BUILOMC -SCTBACX UNCS HARD COVER AREASi 76 • 260’ Zon# flgt«hDit MitHgjghH______ N«l Tgttf Hm4 Cm ijiaj H rt nrs u n. iJt9 1% rt 71 w rt________ i<m.o H rt 4J114 H rt jaa I UNOCROK)UNO fUCTIhC * «0 PROPOSED HARD COVERi 7S - 260' 2on« RCHOVC^ ^935 3 OHVCWAY V MOPOKl^) •133 3 \|- VsOARACC ssa.*CSK PrMM AddKlon ijic3t«.rt 1119 H rt tats ig.rt 71 1% rt 1313 H rt fXAllWtV . *in or tOT 2 f\ i f . ^ ^ inoposto /^'^AOOlTWN Md I A tm TM Nvi C m 14.131.0 H rt 4.M14 u rt 33 t ■934 1 1C1AMNC X ■AU “ “ •137 0V <*o ■9374 \ l.MT 2 Mifl yPlRMlU* 117. Ivifs 131 ittarly MM Ul 1. IM 1. fHiM MM Of mM M, IM •# 1M \ \ V ac »i < 132 3^' CHANNEL T 0 FOREST LAKE p:| A B09TWC \ \ \ IVILMNG \\ — — —- - - ■AlA 1 .■930 3 932 7 •9301 300*^ 931 7 _10T COHMCR fAUS M lAAC •fH of 1 •motod tfomotof LAKE INNETONKA (WEST ARM) WATER ELEVATION: Ag gl AMfggt 11 3003 • 929 94 ImI (NCV 0.-1939) OROtNARv HIGH WATER EirVATinN 979 40 «g»< rN0V0-«171l /•‘ so L. To whom it may concern: We would like to request a hardcover hardship variance for our property located at 4425 North Shore Drive, Orono, MN. Our property is located on the Forest Lake Channel and West Arm. Figuring in setbacks from the channel, the lake. North Shore Drive and our neighbors, our building pad is reduced to a small portion of the actual property. Presently the hardcover area in the 75’ - 250’ zone is 30.8%. We would like to make a modest increase in hard cover to 33% in the 75’ - 250’ zone by adding a garage and foyer. We feel these changes would improve the appearance of our house, help it blend into its sunoundings and have a positive impact on the neighborhood. In addition, our plan would not encroach on our neighbors ’ lines of sight. Thank You for your consideration. David and Jennifer Dickey #2841 Hi’-' '' !^?2za^g —pL-Ai4-----Vi--v-i'* g>-_'*: • u V .-' "i #1 iMiflMHiiiliiSii lijWliliiAi&iMiillilMi ii^. 15 ^ /'-I )'> y L ' . ■ ■■■■^ y:,•■ 1?'"% 8 • » ^ . 'V* » I V' I, I ?'/r‘*4. *i^ ^* *' , • -5 \ . ..' j. - ■•< ■ *;• ■'■' •, ‘' /.-"•s. > ’4!!W $m #!'-■ ■Fi/' ” H i ii iW. A I / - /■/ ^ .V-n.S'V- ,v j iMJlJ ii r- ^ ; . *^ * 4 \V# /• yU m' li **•> "■-'t ' V'/ i :■• ife f ;^. -J- ,‘ J" .^- o’ •^s ;,i ,o4vy ,.5.V.. '■ ;1' • %- ■•i-'rj ■♦W-T* i;'»& .-^ ^ s' ? •' ->, ‘i Wi n ; ,-^'II *n ^'' *'• 5' • ' .OTf'.* - , *:;«S» - ^ • jt -f^\r • ., -, •#. < ■'■•••.«''“ ■'•■••jfc . :'Orr:ip'in cjojyiily r tfr 11) r) 1; i ---- (m /!/Mf . — * V4COOC NOJTtBXO m m ■ note LOT Assssar" CBRT OF mi£ imtet X. VACpOCNO$OS999 ^ :j * . ri ■pi' , f>*’ . MQ^it ^ n I’07- /1 7 - 23 - i ; r* ■ i ■ j1177?I f. ._^;,,:^.it3ax-> ;:tiFA'x!7. ■., MN OATt I9/23/I2 t iATCN 504 lEPZN COUNTY PROPERTY XNfORHATlON SYSTEM PROPERTY ONNERS LIST REPORT NO. PZ4S5401 PACE 12 : sa 07-I17-2S SI 0001 •4445 NORTH SHORE DR GAYLE ERNEST HITTI6 GAYLE E NZTTIG NANE/ADON 4445 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55S44 PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER. Sa 07-117-23 31 0002 04455 NORTH SHORE DR GREGG D KLOmi GREGG KLOHN 4455 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55344 3a 07-117-23 31 0013 0444a NORTH SHORE DR MURIEL 6 SENN MURIEL G SENN 444a NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55344 • I » i i.y • - PROP ADOR OHNER NAN^ TAXPAYER . Sa 07-117-2S 34 0001 04423 NORTH SHORE DR J A HILLER A E N HILLER JOHN A HILLER NAffE/ADDR ELZZAIETN N HILLER 442S NORTH SHORE JIR HOUND HN 55344 3a 07-117-23 34 0004 PROP ADOR 04435 NORTH SHORE DR OHNER NAME GORDON H LUNDHAN TAXPAYER GORDON H LUNDHAN ^ NAHE/ADDR 4435 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55344 PROP ADDR . .. OHNER NAME* TAXPAYER TOTAL DATCH NAHE/ADDR 504 00009 .*» I • • \ t * • 38 07-U7-2S 34 0002 00038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED HENNERIN COUNTY HENNERIN COUNTY RIGHT OF NAY 1400 RRAIRIE DRIVE HEDINA NN SS340 38 07-117-23 42 0008 01375 VINE RL HARK D 8 JULIE A RARTEN HARK D 8 JULIE A RARTEN n75 VINE RL HOUND HN 55364 58 07-117-23 34 0003 04425 , NORTH SHORE DR DAVID J DICKEY ET AL DAVID J DICKEY 4425 NORTH SHORE OR HOUND NN 55364 ' ,vv.. - ” 0 38 07-117-23 43 0017 04415 NORTH SHORE DR NANCY J SETTERLUND SUBJ/L E NANCY J SETTERLUND 4415 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55364 4 f «.* < • ‘ \ J 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS RERRESENTED ARC AN ACCURATE AND TRUE RERRESENTATION OF INFORHATION AS IT ARREARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HCNNCRIN COUNTY DERARTHCNT OF RRORCRTY TAXATION^ TO BEST OF HY KNONIEDGE AND BELIEF. . DATE X \ % !• 0 •• • •.»•' •* • m • 4 * . . / e • \ '• C • E. . •f . • ' ' • . I “) V ) 1 3 ) • J I ' • • V* E. ••, *•. •», .. •' 3 Complete Date: Deadline: TO: FROM: DATE: 9/12/02 11/11/02 Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Paul Weinberger, Zoning Administrator October 15,2002 SUBJECT: #02-2844 Bruce Hcdblom and Carol Clinc-Hedblom 2601 Casco Point Road Variances List of Exhibits: A Applicant Letter of Request B Application C Existing Survey D Proposed Site Plan (With Staff Recommended Hardcover Removals) E Elevation Views/Plans F Hardcover Calculation Worksheets G Excerpt - Code Section 6 (Driveway Standards) H Plat Map 1 Property Owners Notification List Application Summary: The property owners have requested a hardcover variance to permit alteration to existing hardcover in the 75-250’ setback to permit construction of a residential addition. The addition will replace an existing three season porch and add another 223 s.f of living space to the house. The additions are noted on the survey, attached as E.xhibit D. The actual hardcover will not increase on the property. Since there is an alteration to existing hardcover over 25% a variance is required. The total addition will place a 19’ X 28’ addition connecting the main residence with the garage. The house and garage are currently connected by a 16’ X 19’ three season porch. The purpose for the new addition is for a master bedroom suite and storage space. A family room would be added on the second level above the existing house. No variances are required for the second stoiy addition. Pertinent Code Sections: Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) (2); Hardcover 0-75’ 75-250’ 237 s.f (6.3%) No Change proposed 6.310 s.f (42.6%) No Change proposed i02-2844 Bruce Hcdblom and Carol CIine*Hcdblom 2601 Casco Poim Road Page I of 3 Background/Analysis The existing house was constructed in 1973. A three-season porch was added to the lakeside of the house in 1999 (this is a second porch not the porch proposed to be removed). The lakeside porch required variances to hardcover and average lakeshore setback. Like this application, the 1999 hardcover variance did not increase hardcover on the property since the three-season porch replaced a deck. One condition of approval of the 1999 variance was all landscaping plastic be removed from the property within 90 days of building permit being issued. The permit was issued in November. 1999 but the plastic was never removed, or if it was it was later replaced. For the purposes of this review the City should review the hardcover to assume no plastic is used for calculating the existing hardcover totals. Thus, the statement that “the amount of hardcover is not increasing with this project” is not a true statement. The adjusted hardcover calculatioi\s arc as follows: 75-250 ’ Setback Existing 5,826 s.f. (39.3%) excluding 484 s.f. of landscape pla.stic Proposed 6,049 s.f. (40.8%) additional 223 s.f. An addition would not appear to alter the character of the property or change how the property drains. The adjacent property to the south had variances to allow similar alterations to the house. A drainage swale is located between the two properties that does a good job channeling runoff from the site. The applicant’s house is located 11 ’ to the property line. The actual addition would be 17’ to the property line. The neighboring house is located only 3’ to the property line. Review of Hard.ship The applicant’s stated hardships are detailed in Exhibit A, Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variance application based on the following findings: • The property has been developed as a single-family residential property since 1973. • The property is comiected to sanitary sewer. • The bt is consistent w ith other properties in the locality. • The addition partially replaces an existing porch connection between the house and garage. The building expansion will only include an area that is surrounded on three sides by Uic existing structure. • No encroachment into the side yard setback will be required. The addition is 17’ from the property line. •02-2844 Bruce Hedblom and Carol Ciine-Hcdblom 2601 Casco Point Ruad Pa«e2or3 BRUCE J. HEDBLOM CAROL J. CLINE-HEDBLOM 2601 CASCO POINT ROAD WAYZATA, MN 55391 (952) 471-0242 <b.hedblom@mchsi.com> September 26, 2002 City of Orono Planning Commission 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Dear Commission Members; We request a hardcover variance for a building project on our property at 2601 Casco Point Road. We have a long, narrow lot that runs from Casco Point Road to Lake Minnetonka. Our pie shaped lot is located just south of where Dunwoody Avenue comes into Casco Point Road, and where Casco Point turns south. Our plan, developed with our builder, Jeff Danberry of The Danberry Company, will not extend the house beyond its current dimensions, but rather, will replace an existing three season porch and a patio covered with plastic underlayment and rock, both of which are already calculated in our hardcover analysis. These two areas, together measuring 19 x 28 feet, will become a master bedroom suite which will provide additional living space, and storage space. In addition, we will add a family room on a second level, above two existing bedrooms. We do not believe that our project raises any issues regarding the location of our house on the lot - we do not move any closer to the side lot lines than the existing house. To the best of our knowledge, we do not have any side setback issues, nor do we move any closer to the lakeshore. The design of the project does not negatively affect drainage for our property, or that of our adjoining neighbors, nor does it impact our neighbors’ views of the lake. In conclusion, the design of this project most efficiently uses existing hardcover setbacks. Bruce J. Hedblom Carol / Cline-Hedblom % *•/ » A i2lp4J Subject to the following conditions: 1. All landscape plastic shall removed prior to the issuance of a building permit and shall not be replaced after the project is completed. 2. Staff also feels additional hardcover from the driveway can be removed to accommodate the additional hardcover being added. Approximately 470 s.f. can be removed from the south side of the driveway. Staff recommends the width of the driveway at the property line and at Casco Point Road be reduced to 20 ’. Why 20'? Chapter 6 of the Municipal Code only allows residential driveway approaches a maximum width of 20 ’ at the intersected right-of- way line. The variance application is a good oppommity to reduce the w idth of the driveway and reduce hardcover that may not be necessary. 3. To reduce the impact of drainage from the new addition gutters shall be installed that w ill direct water from the south side of the house towards the lake and not directly at the neighbor. The neighbors house is lower than the applicant’s house which has a potential impact if the drainage swale would not handle all the runoff. Options for Action: 1. Recommend approval. 2. Recommend denial, stating reasons. 3. Table, giving applicant direction. 4. Other action. «02-2S44 Brace HtdblomndCmiClioe-Hcdbloffl 2601 Casco PoiM Road P^3of3 1 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 $250.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFO^^TIOI^ Site Address JlCtOl C/SOa Application # ^^ Date Received" Amount Paid Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 11*7. 2.^ 2.*l Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_____NO\/. 19^^ __________________ I j(d^ (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential ___pother (specify)________ Zoning District:_____________________ .(month/year) *PLICAI5JJ ^ ^ Phone (home) 9^2--*/7/-024' Name PB4£.f O-jiJMfe&gLJMfhone (work) 9Si -So P> APPLIC Name ________ Address: 3-401 CMco _____________________ City: _________Zip: / OWNER (if different than applicant) Name __________ Address: Phone (home) Phone (work) City:Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: See LtT'nJt __ (attach additional sheets if necessary ) VARIANCES REQUIRED ___Lot Area ___Lot Width Setback:Front Side Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property condition compliance with Zoning Code requirements: LtvrUi^ (attach additional sheets if necessary) / ii •f t U i! SL — ^ r f? •..If ■ •j^waodo Ukitb SURVEYING 1 twrvby etnify that thia plan, aurvay or japort was praparad by ma or under my diraci auparvWon and that I am • duly Rpgitlsrsd Und Surveyor undsr ths Iswt of ths Statt ? IMC.!!lISJOBi Book - Pag* SCM . fhftt ptrt of mioek l« i part of aPoiiOomM Oroiu Virit, )n0 olvijiM*, di tot 141* fpriaf Park I i Una of laid Loc 141 a Porthwaaearly# dailaot: taka Minnatoote* aald ! Morfeharly alo»t aald ft tha point of Uitariact* parallal with and 30 fi tko waatarly liaa of U of tot 1( ^riap Park* Una to Ito loooraaetlc thanea NortltMoatarly a: ba^inAlnt, aoamrdinp tf If' Hfikr^c^u^r K««Aoy«>U #S3'44 I Q^/^Z/y^g /}r7~.a./f99 :<■; Thtt ptrt oe Vloelt !• Md ttei part df Loti U, if uU if, siook f« ui4 «hte port of iPOAdMPd OroM AViooi. oil ia •wiaAldD'i foMlolsioa of LoK 1* dpxiof Mrk, ind Plvijian*» dojorlbod a« eo—w>olftf um l»rtA«Mtorlr mrm»M of Vt i«l* tpriaf Parkt tPoiico HorCJtiAJioriy alaop %hm Moasloo of tLo Baoiorlr Uao of iiid Lpo 111 • dlitaacp of fl,t c«o« to tJM point of LofiJutAofi tPooco Portlproieorly* doilootUf to tJto loft 101 doproo* n aiootis, to tho ■fcoro of LiAo NUiiotoalM* iild lino horoiMftir roforrod to to Lino *a*i tMoco HMthorly oloaf oold tAero eo tlio porU lino of itld Itooli It Oiooet late to tfo point of Uatoraoctioo of tJio Marth lino of aaid Lot lil«ritl| • lino drown partiiol viUt ond 30 fast ooraAwaatorly fron Uo Horepooitaaiy mmoIoo of tPo wootorly lino of Loco !«» IS. If ood If. Plooli s. •wlnaPip'i toPdlvloioo of Lot 1. fpriBp Fatk. 2nd Oi«iolon«f Uiopco ioucji«>iatorly oloof told porallol ItM to ltd Ipfeorffctlon «*itJi tJio tootJUMtorly wtoooioo of Mid Uoo •A«i ‘tktaco norUnmodovly aXonp tJio ontonoloo of^ooid Lino *a« to tPo pout of P«0ioitA«tf» iootaodUf to tko rooopiod plat tPorood. 1 hofpby eortity mot this plan* survpy or jspoit was propifod ^ ffld or uhdof my iflioet ttfpofvision and that 1 dm aduiyWaginafadLahdSufvayofyhdafttiaiawiolthaStata Joa» fzU ■ooa*Pag# 44 ft. Seal* . * -------- ' VA. -r 6 \ i I»l t- \ . « a. ii) P k \ • ••♦IJL. :l j/^/z:.,i I i*.- <uu.t rdism ‘ I r“ liiiliitliiiiltf^ : i^yi'sf 4 ^ I sklits r f' i ll r •J j . •) ■ •!. — •1 4 ;; i». !‘ ».• I •| “ li-^)d-^._____ i »• "*Vf ^ ~ .^K ii24'C)C ^Zy6.fl<^^ , " HAt^- Iviii-C-fr^rsj: |»rpl / ’/ ■ ip.LesilifcL^i Hit p^lv (pr.fi. fo]M -^-fj’ . Jla_5i4ri:tr2jbdi. j^iUu Offuii tf4JS6 Jip. j?.'2rte^ •SAjf’lp >[*2!l:l.4< pioo // 4 □23601 i ' ^IXCLOITbTI-Sdt^lV^ ________________________—11——^ 2>'UlccHii ,^U/*p , vi\ fir* fsrxnuQ iJ /V-l H ::i r sasrm *? — * * '/ •^ JT ' ‘ 7- V »• • • . ^ j .<] i :5 r. >-••V-* ^ .i / ’. ;•-„ .V'- Yi <w ---^ •dkik^ ktTA ■ SETBACK ZONE: CUIATION WORKSHEET 75-250* 250-500’500-1000’ G HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X ■i SP. Length X width «■SP.m X SP. X ,SP. • * . . B.’ Cange • • • *x « ••.*• • • • ••SP.• % i C Driveway X i ■B SP. X .SP. D. StdewaDc /3 X SP.. .±i X /72 SP. • E. Pado/Deck X SP. X •SP. F. Landseaoe X SP. Underiain X SP. By Plastic X SP. G. Other X SP. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE 237 SP.A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE • •’^’7 SO S.F.B A -2.37 B X 100 . a.G.3Z % ■ • ■ A •♦B X 100 «% PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE • A. House X •a.SP. Length X width SP. X *-i SP.‘ J X • SP.; 1 B. Garatte X -to1V. • • I C Driveway X SP. *1 1 f • . • •**'•: / t•••• JXa.SP. D. Sidewalk X •• SP, (■ -•" \X SP. ' E. Pado/Deck X SP. X SP. F. Landscape X SP. Underl^X SP.r • By Plasde X a SP. G. Other X mm SP. • TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE ••’• • • • • m SP.A TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE m SP.B A ♦B X 100 m mk HARDCOVER CAL SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCIE ONE) 0-7S* EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A House CULA310I>MV( f 75-2S0’y ORKSHEET 2S0-S00'500-1000' *25 IliC width y •• X X X 73 B/ Garage -Z§ C. Driveway SPio D. Sidewalk ^ OtuH SCuK & Padc/Deck CVVC. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X 3d7 ^6, r X X // X X ■2.0 7.2- 2SL X X X /W7h G. o±st/oer../ 22- A A TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _____________+ B X 100 . - X 100 - PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE ^/O N£ A. House _____________ X, Leagih Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X SJ. ~ ST. _______^ S J. ■237^? S.F. SJ. SJ. SJ. TP SI. SJ. 93 SI. SI. -7^ Z2 SI. SI. SI. SI. 2Z ZT7o SJ. / 437P S.F. 5~7 % SJ. SJ. SJf. SI. SJ. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. SI. G. Other SJ. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ___ B _X 100 - SJ. SI. % H A B •I \ ! •4 I it' \ I % A B S 6.05 ^ P. The owner and contractor shall protect the public from injury or damage during the construction 'of the sidewalkr curb and gutter# driveway# driveway approach# driveway turnaround* curb cuts# roadway surfacing or private improvement in ® street or other public property in the City and any permit issued pursuant to this Ordinance shall contain the agreement of the applicant that the City shall not be liable for damage Vhich may arise from the result of work# and that the applicant will hold the City harmless for any liability incurred bv the City as a result of such activity. ^ ^ Trees or shrubs shall not be placed adjacent to a driveway so as to constitute a site distance problem. H. If a parcel of land has frontage on both a cul- de-sac portion and a "lead-in" portion of the public road# the driveway shall be constructed off the "lead-in" portion of the public road and not the cul-de-sac. Subd. 9. Resident Driveways# Approaches and Turnaround. A. One driveway approach shall be allowed from up to two single residential parcels of land to the same public road provided that appropriate easements exist between parties sharing the driveway and driveway approach. Parcels having frontage on more than one public road shall be allowed a driveway approach to one public road. _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ B. Residential driveway approach shall not exceed 20 feet in width at the intersected right-of-way line. The total width of driveway approaches to up to two single parcels of land from a single public road shall not exceed 20 feet. , . D. A curb cut shall not exceed the width of the driveway approach at the property line by more than 10 feet. E. No portion of a driveway approach, except the curb return, shall be constructed within 100 feet of a corner. ORONO CC 141-2 (7-25-88) 1 S 6.05 •r shall protect the construction of the ay approach, driveway >*‘ivate improvement in ' in the city and any i shall contain the ill not be liable for f work, and that the liability incurred by be placed adjacent to e problem. ontage on both a cul- the public road, the id-in" portion of the iches and Turnaround. LI be allowed from up the same public road tween parties sharing s having frontage on driveway approach to ach shall not exceed fay line. y approaches to up to iblic road shall not ied the width of the than 10 feet. approach, except the 'eet of a corner. (7-25-88) Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department V (15)^ I I '•»/ (17) (20) (18) TWRBNS CAS£tM24 (20) I JGOO/V (23) (30) (24) (31)( * >»at .. (34) 1 (36) 1 (35) s:>rc¥' / ^ jLoris# /> ^ 313 53 , STE ^ COVE , W24 __________I N9T35Vf 215 42 CASCO POINT RD ^ I# I ^1 40 \ 40 I 40 I 40 Ic (42)i 9/ 9 u»t HZJ "W/A LO 2Nl 0OCNO2921404 20-/17-2:3- Is ^ Parcel Information Parcel ID 2011723240036 House Number 2601 Street Name CASCO POINT RD This is not a iegally reconted map. It mpmsents a compilation of information and data from City, County, and Stata road authorities and other sources. mm DATE tVEA/EE BATCH 507 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPEIITY INTOUHATION SYSTEH PBOPEIITY OHNEBS LIST BEPOBT NO. PIA35A0I PAGE 32 PBOP ADOB ONNER NAME TAXPAYEII NANE/ADDB SB 20-117-23 21 0031 0250S DUMNOOBY AVE CHRISTINE NARGARET BIELRE CMIISTINE NAROARET BIELKE 2505 DUNWOODY AVE WAYZATA HN 55301 3B 20-117-23 21 0032 02565 DUNVOODY AVE SYLVIA L BLANCHARD SYLVIA L BLANCHARD 2565 DUNNOODY AVE NAYZATA HN 55391 36 20-117-23 21 0035 02596 CASCO POINT RD P D I P Z FITZGERALD PATRICK FITZGERALD 2596 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR 36 26-117-23 24 0031 02635 CASCO POINT RD NARILYN B THORNE NARILYN B THORNE 2635 CASCO POINT RD NAYZATA HN 55391 36 20-117-23 29 0032 02623 CASCO POINT RD J i N STINSON JANES L i NAOHI L STINSON 2623 CASCO POINT RD HAYZATA HN 55391 36 20-117-23 29 0035 02617 CASCO POINT RD 6 L HARQUARDT/J H HARGUAROT GARY L t JOAN N HARQUARDT 2617 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADDR ONNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR 36 20-117-23 29 0036 02601 CASCO POINT RD BRUCE J HEDBLON £T AL BRUCE J HEDBLON AND CAROL J CLINE-HEDBLON 2601 CASCO POINT RD HAYZATA NN 55391 36 20-117-23 29 0036 02616 CASCO POINT RD JOYCE A THEDT JOYCE A THEDT 2616 CASCO POINT RO HAYZATA HN 55391 36 20-117-23 29 0039 02696 CASCO POINT RD J W I B J ESSEN JEFFREY i BARBARA ESSEN 2696 CASCO PT RD HAYZATA HN 55391 PROP ADOR OHNER NANE TAXPAYER NANE/ADOR 36 20-117-23 29 0092 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED PAU!. J • NARY E RASTER PAUL J RASTER 2600 CASCO POINT RD HAYZATA NN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 507 00010 oo ■) ■j/ T CEtTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORNATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTNENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF NY KNOWLEOCE AND BELIEF. 4!/ ^ tv; ^ I ; A TO: FROM: DATE; SUBJECT: Chair Smith and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner October 11,2002 #02-2839 Boyer Building Corp. 3320 Watertown Road Subdivision Public Hearing Zoning: RR-1B One Family Rural Residential District (2 acres) Exhibits A Application B Site Siuvey/Proposed property lines C 1975 Aerial Photo of Property D Plat Map E Orono Wetlands Map F Septic Review by Matt Bolterman, On-Site Systems Manager 0 Property O'vners Notification List H Section 10.03, Subdivision 27 - Front Lot/Back Lot Standards 1 City Engineer Comments J MCWD Comments K John Boyer Letter - Storm Water Fee Application: The applicant has applied for a Preliminary Plat for a two-lot subdivision of a 50+ acre site located on Watertown Road. The property is located in a 2 acre zone and will be divided by creating two building sites (Lots 1 and 2) and shared driveway (Outlot A). The lot division is a front/back lot split, hence the back lot needs to be 3 acres. Lot 1 = 44.04+ acres (5.84+ dry contiguous) Lot 2 = 3.96+ acres (3.09+ dry contiguous) Outlot A = 2.91 acres (Driveway Pertinent Code Sections: Section 10.28, RR-IB, Subd. 5(B): Lot Standards for RR-IB Zoning District Section 10.03, Subdivision 27 - Standards for the creation and use of lots which do not abut a public or private road. I02-2U9 Boyer BuUdin( Corp 3320 WMcrtown Ro«l Subdivbkn October 11.2002 Pile I of 4 Section 11.03, Subd. 2, Deflnition 24- “Lot Area, Mmimum"-Each lot shall contain the minimum area required for each proposed lot as prescribed in the Zoning Chapter of the City Code. In rural zones not served by sanitary sewer, each lot must contain a minimum of two acres of contiguous dry buildable l^d exclusive of wetlands, public and private rights-of-way. All rural lots must comply with the City’s on-site septic system provisions of the City Code. Subdivision Standards: The general site plan meets all requirements for a front lot/ back lot subdivision. Back lots are defined as “a lot typically separated from a public or private road by another lot and which gains access to the public or private road via a narrow corridor. Such a separated lot is considered to be a back lot when the corridor is platted as an outlot..” The special requirements for a front lot/back lot division are the back lot (Lot 1), because the property does not have direct access to a road, must meet a minimum of 150% of the minimum lot standards in the zoning district, in this case Lot 1 must have a minimum lot size of 3 acres, and a principal building shall meet a minimum setback 150% of the district standard. The lot is in the RR-IB district, which requires a minimum lot size of 2 acres. Setbacks in the district are 50’front and rear yard, and 30 ’ for the side yard. Back lots are required to have a driveway access a minimum of 30 ’ in width. The shared driveway access meets the minimum requirements. Outlot A is much wider than 30 ’ at the road. This was done to allow the driveway approach to be located at the highest point to provide the best site lines for the driveway. Septic Review: Each lot has demonstrated two septic sites for each lot meeting local and state standards. Matt Bolterman, On-Site Systems Manager, has approved the designs that were submitted. Wetlands: The surveyed area noted above reflects the recent wetland delineation. The wetlands on Lot 1 and Lot 2 are City protected. There will be some impact on wetlands by this development. Air photos indicate the access has been through the wetlands for many years. This driveway access is very narrow and may require widening. The Fire Code requires a minimum 20 ’ driveway access, including the portion that crosses the wetland. If that impact does occur the WCA guidelines would suggest that additional wetland area be created on the property. A variance will need to be granted to allow access to go thru the wetlands. #02-2139 Boytr Building Corp J320WtfMmnRoid SubdivlikMi October II. 2002 Pt^2of4 » • Driveway Access/Outlot A: The City Fire Marshal and Long Lake Fire Department are reviewing the individual access for each lot. The Fire Marshal and Fire Department are being asked to comment on the driveway length/widUi and ability to turn emergency vehicles on each lot. It is likely that a circular driveway will be required for each lot. A detailed grading plan and driveway construction plan will require further engineering review. The City Engineer has recommended each driveway be designed to not exceed a 10% grade. Outlot A would be commonly owned as an access outlot for the driveway. The City’s front lot/back lot standards require a minimum width of access outlets to be 30* to accommodate drainage, snow removal and screening without encroaching on neighboring properties. Outlot A is 110 ’ wide meeting the 30 ’ requirement. Staff does not believe additional screening to the driveway will be required since the property is heavily wooded. Some existing trees will be required to be removed to accommodate a wider road surface and grading improvements to reduce driveway slope. Easements and Covenants; 1. Standard drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated on the final plat 10 ’ along the exterior property lines. Ten-foot drainage and utility easements along the . A drainage and utility easement 5’ either side of the boundary between Outlot A and Lot 12 shall be granted. 2. The delineated wetland in the north and west quadrant of Lot 1 shall be subject to a protective covenant filed in the chain of title of the affected property, as an advisory to property owner and future owners that said wetland is subject to WCA regulation and/or U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction. 3. Covenants shall be filed on the chain of title for each lot as an advisory to future property owTiers that a primary and secondary drainfield site exist on the property and are protected. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat and a wetland alteration variance for the shared driveway based on the following findings: 1. The layout of the lots meets the Zoning Code requirements for a front/back lot subdivision. 2. The proposed use of the land is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The variance for the wetland crossing is justified based on the fact the wetland crossing is required for access and the access minimizes impact on the wetland and buffer area. 4. Each lot has demonstrated two septic sites for each lot meeting local and state standards. i02-2839 Boytr Building Corp 3320WitenownRoid Subdivbion October 11.2002 Pite3or4 Such recommendation is based on the following conditions: 1. All preliminary grading and driveway plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to placing this application on the City Council agenda for preliminary plat approval. 2. The preliminary grading and driveway plans shall also indicate how the grading will impact the existing mature tree growth along Watertown Road. 2. Standard drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated on the final plat overall wetlands, 5 ’ along all interior property lines and 10’ along all exterior property lines. 3. Required setbacks for Lots 1 and 2: Lot 2 Front 50 ’ Side 30 ’ Rear 50 ’ Side Adjacent to Outlot A 50 ’ Lot 1 Front 75 ’ Side 45 ’ Rear 75 ’ 4.Final plat shall include recording of a shared driveway maintenance agreement for Lots 1 and 5.Final Plat application shall include all required application fees, including pavment of park dedication fees of 8% of the land value prior to subdivision, not to e.xceed $5,550 per lot and stormwater fee of $135,000 based on $2700 per acre. The Stormwater Trunk Fee of $135,000 is a concern to this applicant since the truck fee amounts to $67,500 per lot. The Cit> has recently started a proaram that aenerates fees for City stormwater improvements that are specified in the Surface Water Management Plan. Staff will have individual discussions with the applicant about this issue and the City Council will review the fee structure and impact this development has on the overall management program. This fee will be reviewed by the Public Works Department and City Engineer prior to this preliminary plat application review bv the City Council. Planning Commission Option for Action: 1. To approve. A recommendation of approval shall be subject to the condition noted above, 2. To deny, stating reasons. 3. To table. 4. Other Action. i02-2S39 Bo>tr Building Corp 3320 Waicftown Road Subdivision Ociobrr 11. 2002 Fife 4 of 4 SiHS-2002 02:34pi Frea-CITY OF ORQNO 49522404SI8 T-979 P.flll/018 F-873 Application # 0 7^^ Date Recel7ed]_^- /(P-oa. Amount Paid s 2Qt CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION , Siteaddress ^S2.0 v/o/rw4twK\ 0(^>oko._______ Property Identification Number ffioi 7/^ » SL? - ^ ooo I ~------ Please check one - Property ____abstortor tokens? ~ Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT. n .1 ‘ Nam e Tb<gtjd>Kl3t>i/d IKIA - ToUki gg w« Address ihr\(^/i3k gUVO Phnni.n,';;^ *-------------------------— -----—^ -______Phone (home).. . D4?-^P _________ ZipPhone (work)9^ */75**2 >c^7 OWNER (if dififerent than ^plicant) 'Name ^ > Address City (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels . Development Size Present use (check) Present Zoning District -Zip Phone (home) .Phone (work) /• 4C^/KO.o J- Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units , / Other (specify) ._____ PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) _________ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites / Existing Units / New Units 'Z'__Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) Z Units per Acres 2. Sq. Ft Dry BuHdable Land Residential _______Other (specify)________ I2.R_.-I6 .• r ‘V-V-•vv- i U .. . (T\. Q ) I,, .ti I »€**4«WC<M»Tf lOAACJit CERTIFICATE 0- SURVEY FOR BOYER BUILDING CORPORATION IN SECTION 32-118-23 s 00*37*30** w 1328.12 COUNTY, MINNESOTA T /; c' \ [,t'---f// A---------- ✓ 9^66 \ f *tf u< or *c »/•.* l/«. «CtCN AJ / X' -7^ // 'A' I \ \fASt i*ff or < M*. ^•. «C'C» l/«.'0« A| 8.®)cx K ■^Sii * o* 44 044- ACRES 584-4- acres ORr ti SOCTH P4A: r^' jM ll'< «) ,» % / S 00*37' 30" W K f / / I / '/'vj ',\ umT: V -;ACRts -UcRtS \\ 1 11 k',/ L “iirrryn^ K“y/^AzJ '' / ','..1^ , ■ ... ->-----5 .' ^,Mm **7 ^ \ C - T ■• ■- 7Tr5r\li — 4C*£S L'/'// ‘!///M/'/ M':---■• li ScS ^ «.•rot M N. ■csr lAC or ic «/«. *a i/«. «cToi r'tOI / s. y C0^2 ‘ 27** V/1032.00 / C-'-iTLi \,l*l» IM or Wt^f 30 I40CS f«»> rr» or )C l/«. 54 ./•- WC»^>I .*i / /■ .5/6 .* - A r * :••1 1 $owt*« i»< or St i/«K </«. SCC’O* 3} i#c or K i/«. 'U t/4. KOTO* 11 N ‘00-C6* 45- E 432.20 N 00*02* 27** W 1326.32 ei5 §|2; *«||g ^ h 8 IK C:^'5»ri CJ35? .4 S?fi .m I ■ ^ -jI.s* N 'i *:!» V. V V teCAL DESCPIPTiON QT PftrmRF*; [ Tht Nor t hoot t Ouorttr of th« Southtotl Ouoricr of Soction 32. Townthlp 1J8 Worth WongV. tv«tt of th« Sih Princiool U«r s’?..'s.T:::.!’o;;;:,i‘:)t;:!;! •' "• ~ ............ • of thi Sowlh40tl Ouorttr d»$lonl 14 *£* Wttt 30 rodt (493 ftio 1.032 ftit, thtr^ct South.,»ttfly to 0 point .« »ht ^ of I c! 'V* •«'*«htofltHj oiSJg ,oid!’"• *rM9f9cUon with tht Eoft !•»'# of Iht Wttt 30 rods (493 fttlj of Ouorttr of tht Southiott Ouorli? ALSO Thot port of Covtrmwnt Lot 1. lyinfl South of Roilrood Right of Woy in SfCtion Jcwnihip 118. Rang# 23. ' uuorttr. -f o : dtnottt iron morlitr ••! O dtnottt iron morktr found fyy*t0tt0»t 0f r«r» *y m»m>m 0*009, Btoringt shown ert bottd upon on otiiJ^d dotvm. rtyt s*«M % f^.9* 1 This surety inttndt to Show tht boundoritt of Iht obort dttcf J^td proptMv, ond tht focotion of thrtt t*itting buildings thtrton. II dots wiol puporI to Show ony othtr inprowntnlt or oneroocfnwntt '. i . - - . • ^^ Jt .f ta'-X, ill k- JT*- rwf^i r ,r/^ ’C&'i i HEsIKi m ®®fciMir^ jr<»S|>VA -. je> S?5? L< « ‘■•>?S '^mA SS^ r ' ‘ v “®M si n ®4- 1 W\^Ci m,Si ii fymi Ym 1.1 isvi- 'ir W^W-m^': a V- ra »Wli r?^'-If^lS p»i?''-'.,^Wii1^ wm■^m^m wm i? KS**r>’L4-/2 L ;??•.* >j 1?^mr:, f J. r.:> :*r.m W.ilk il-1 * jS i^S.'' i •• W ;•» ■ ''i * \ j- .-• 4^-:' * ^ ^Stirnf 1^ 11 •" ^ w^ylwSt GITYoT ORONO Municipal Offices r StTNt iliMrtu; 2750 Kelley F-arlmay Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066 TO; FROM: DATE: Wendy Bottenberg Matt Bohemian, On-Site Systems Manager October 9, 2002 SUBJECT: Septic Review for Boyer/Lund Property 2-lot Subdivision The property for Boyer/Limd has two approved plans for mound septic systems on each of the two proposed lots. The report was done by Steve Schirmers on September 19,2002. The sites are for 5-bedroom septic systems. These sites meet all Orono and State Septic Code requirements. 1 recommend approval based on septic concerns. Telcpbooc (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 wwwxl.oronojan.a5 RUN DATE 19/17/02 DATCN £92 HEIMEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATlON SYSTEH PROPERTY ONHERS LIST 0002 PROP AODR OUNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 56 05-117-23 11 •SA05 NIGH LA K H • D D REILLY KEVIN t DENISE REILLY SA05 HIGH LA LONG LAKE HN 55356 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 30 32-110*23 13 0003 00600 STUBBS BAY RD N TODD H I DONNA H CAUSE TODD I DOMIA CAUSE 600 STUBBS BAY RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 30 32-110-23 21 0006 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED BURLINGTON NORTHERN RY B N i SANTA FE RR CO PROPERTY TAX DEPT PO BOX 961009 FORT WORTH TX 76161 PROP AODR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 30 32-110-23 62 0006 00350 STUBBS BAY RD N JERRY CAE HYRENE IVERSON JERRY CAE HYRENE IVERSON 350 STUBBS BAY RD N ORONO HN 55356 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 30 32-110-23 66 0002 03200 WATERTOWN RD 6 L ROLLER A C J ROLLER GARY L ROLLER 3200 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 PROP ADDR OWNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 30 32-110-23 66 0005 03360 WATERTOWN RD V A H NUBBELL VERNE H HUBBELL 3360 WATERTOWN ROAD L»IG LAKE HN 55356 0005SO 05-117-23 11 00095 LEAF ST E C GRANAH JR E C GRANAH JR 95 LEAF ST LONG LAKE HN 55356 30 32-110-23 13 0006 00660 STUBBS BAY RD N FREDERIC P RIEBEL FREDERIC P RIEBEL P 0 BOX 196 LONG LAKE HN 55356 30 32-110-23 61 0001 03320 WATERTOWN RD ROBERT T LUND ROBERT T LUND 6100 50TH ST W R2100 EDINA HN 55626 10-23-63 0012 RESS 30 32- 00030 JAHES D HitcKlNNON ET AL JAHES D H/C^NNON ^ 2630 HUT t INoVt WAYZATA HN W91 UNASSIGNED 30 32-110-23 66 0003 03200 WATERTOWN RD G L ROLLER A C J ROLLER GARY L ROLLtK 3200 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 30 32-110-23 66 0006 03300 WATERTOWN RD ROSS R REPKE ROSS R REPKE 3300 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 REPORT NO. PZ635601 PAGE 7 30 32-110-23 13 0001 03507 WAYZATA BLVD W DON BRIAN FULHER D BRIAN FULHER 350*. WAYZATA BLVD LONG LAKE HN 55356 30 32-110-23 16 0002 03265 WAYZATA BLVD W H F EISINGER ETAL HOWARD F EISINGER 3265 WAYZATA BLVD W LONG LAKE HN 55356 30 32-110-23 62 0003 00200 STUBBS BAY RD N C J 0 G H BOLLIS CHRISTOPHER I GAIL BOLLIS 200 STUBBS BAY RD N LONG LAKE HN 55356 ' ■)) 30 32-110-23 63 0013 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED JAHES D HACKINNON ET AL JAHES D HACKINNON 2630 HEETINC ST WAYZATA HN 55391 30 32-110-23 66 0006 03360 WATERTOWN.RD VERNE HUBBELL VERNE HUBBELL 3360 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 s 30 32-110-23 66 0009 03605 WATERTOWN RD S E ESKOLA A L J ESKOLA SCOTT E I LORI J ESKOLA 3605 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 \G' RUN DATE 69/17/02 BATTH 562 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI935461 PACE 8 PROf .ADOR OWNER NAIC TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 38 32-118-23 64 6616 66638 ADDRESS UNASSICNED MARY FARRELL ETAL WARD FERRELL 3415 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE NN 553S6 38 32-118-23 44 6611 63415 WATERTOWN RD L K FERRELL ET AL SUBJAE WARD 6 NARY FERRELL 3415 WATERTOWN RD LONC LAKE NN 55356 38 32-118-23 44 0012 03246 WATERTOWN RD W HENDERSON 8 R L HENDERSON WILLIAM A ROSLYN L HENDERSON 430 WAKEFIELD RD WAYZATA NN 55391 V PROf ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 38 32-118-23 44 0613 63226 WATERTOWN RD W HENDERSON 6 R L HENDERSON WILLIAM 8 ROSLYN HENDERSON 436 WAKEFIELD RD WAYZATA NN 55391 38 33-118-23 23 6002 63025 WAYZATA BLVO W ROBERT E 8 KATHRYN DUMAS ROBERT E 8 KATHRYN DUMAS 3025 WAYZATA BLVD LONO LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 31 0010 00038 ADDRESS UNASSICNED CN RY CO B N 8 SANTA FE RR CO PROPERTY TAX DEPT PO BOX 961089 FORT WORTH TX 76161 PROP Aivn OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AOOR 38 33-118-23 32 0002 66638 ADDRESS UNASSICNED BURLINGTON NORTHERN INC B N 8 SANTA FE RR CO PROPERTY TAX DEPT PO BOX 961689 FORT WORTH TX 76161 38 33-118-23 32 0065 00375 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N CITY OF ORONO CITY OF ORONO P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 33-118-23 32 0006 00038 ADDRESS PENDING CITY OF ORONO CITY OF OROH«> P 0 BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY HN 55323 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 38 33-118-23 33 0004 60135 CRYSTAL CREEK RD J A 8 L 600DWALD JERRY 8 LORRAINE 6000WALO 135 CRYSTAL CREEK RD LONO LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 33 0005 00165 CRYSTAL CREEK Rb LAKEWOOD DEVELOHPENT INC LAKEWOOD DEVELOHPENT INC 2354 W WAYZATA BLVD RD LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 33-118-23 33 0006 00175 CRYSTAL CREEK RD CHRIS PAUL A JULIE PAUL CHRIS PAUL 8 JULIF PAUL 175 CRYSTAL CREEJ 1 LONO LAKE MN 5. .. PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/AfWR TOTAL BATCH 502 90030 i'T ..* r0 •* •4, BtSI# ' V'*- d&lNlkaiAiAaiitliiNiMAIi ft.r ./j ro^inr.L*- H § 10.03 lubd. 23. Permit Required. The requirements of Subdivision 19 are not intended to govern the l^mlal and customary rip-rap of lakeshore property. It is unlawful for any person to rip-rap lakeshor^iroperty within the limits of the City without a permit issued by the City Engineer. Any unusu3I rip-rap^all be referred by the City Engineer to the Planning Commission and the Council for action in ahqprdance with this Chapter. Source: Ordinance No. 167 Effective Ca:e: 6-25-74 Subd. 24. Applicatioi^r Permit An application for such permit shall be accompanied by a drawing showing the location d^e proposed rip-rap and such other information as the City Engineer may require from .ane to timieS^pplications shall be filed with the City Administrator and shall be accompanied by a fee in the amomi^prescribed by the current City fee schedule payable to the City. Source: Ordinance No. 196 Effective Date: 8-22-77 Subd. 25. Mining. The commercial extraction of sand, gravel, or other material from the land and removal thereof from the site without procesHog shall be mining. In all districts the conduct of mining shall be permitted only upon issuance of a c^di- tional use permit. Such permit shall include, as a condition thereof, a plan for a finished grade v^ich will not adversely affect the surrounding land or development of the site on which the mining is omng conducted, and the route of trucks moving to and from the sites. A bond will be required for reSoration. Subd. 26. Soil Processing. The operation of processing of sand, g^cl, or other material mined from the land shall be permitted only by conditional use permit. Such corl^tional use permit shall include a site plan where the processing is to be done, showing the locani^ of the plant, disposal of water, route of trucks moving to and from the site in removing processed^aterial from the site, the condition in which the site is intended to be left upon completion, hour of opS(§tion, and such permit shall not be granted for a period of longer than twelve (12) months. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 Subd. 27. Special Standards fc ^ack Lots Created After January 1,1994. • Back lots as defined in this section which were created as part of a subdivision that received preliminary subdivision approval after January 1, 1994 are subject to the following special requirements in addition to the standards required in Section 11.31, Subdivision 5 of the Orono Subdivision Code: A.Dimensional standards for back lots shall be as follows: 1. Lot area shall be 150% of the zoning district requiremenL ORONO CC 259 (4-1-84) § 10.03 street yard setback line of a lakeshore\^aVk lot w ^ JhTfrrf *** ? *“« the back lot, shall meet the zoning district width r^.,* * setoack line of a nonlakeshore Jot will be ffyard starting where the narrow acce«3ot co^d hack back lots shall meet the lot width standard at the shoreline ^8^«horestreet yard setback line. shoreline, at the lakeshore setback line, and at the 1 soy. of th. zoning district fiont yardl^ntTOnt """ *>>all be be 150% of the zoning district yard “Ul Tr** >'>“ shall lot shall meet the zoning district lakcLre yard rcSfrlmems ' ‘ ‘>“'h • frontrijack iot division shall meet all zSg1l^W^areI*iridih md'^ th°"v'°' fte required side yard of the ftont lot adjacent to thracceTs o^^^^^^ «“P' "hst Street yard require^ ^nt for that zoning district ^ ^ equivalent to the side C.Access requirements. enough to accommodate drainage snowremoval »nd ^-^um width, and shall be wide properties, ® «<i s«eemng without encroaching on neighboring both front lot «,d back lot sht^e a dri«3Lti^i^“l:*' ^ty may requL-e that u». creating an additional access to the e.xisting street will be a potemi^’Xwd.''''™"" the side or rear lot lines of adjacent lo^™™^^ within a back lot shall be located at least 1 O' fiom located within an access outlot' be served by a driveway outlot except when the intent is^to combtae 1X^1! 'j* platted abutting an adjac toad meettog City stanS of* Public ent access or private D.Screening requirements. screened by fencing or vegetation at thfdiscreUonofSTtv^ adequately ORONO CC 259-1 (12-13-93) § 10.03 2. The street yard of the back lot shall be adequately screened by fencing or vegetation at the discretion of the City; so as to eliminate intrusion of vehicle headlights into the side or rear yards of adjacent lots. E. Standards for 'accessoiy structures. - Accessory structures shall adhere to all requirements of the zoning code, with the foUo>^g additional requirements: 1. Accessory structures within a back lot shall be allowed no closer than 10* to a neighboring property's side or rear yard. 2. Accessory structjres shall not be allowed within the required street yard of a back lot nor within the required rear yard of a front lot which abuts the street yard ofa back lot. 3. No accessory structure shall be allowed widiin an access outlot. (Sections 10.04 and 10.05, inclusive, reserved for future expansion) ORONO CC 259-2 (12-13-93) 1 \ L Oct 09 2003 H:03HH BOMESTROO ROSEME RMDERLIK 6516361311 ^ I Bonestroo Bosene Anderlik & I Associates Engineers A. Architects ■•Mflrao. Natan*. An**>IUi ana Aiiecltivt, lot. )t an Arf»m«U«a Actlon/CNuat Oppartwtfly bpalavar sn4 tmpimymm Ownga r w r October 9, 2002 Prlnclpcft: Otto G. tonflitroo, M • M«wtn L SorwU«. Pi • Ctcnrt n. Cooa. Pt • PoDcrC Q %trgjnKht P£ ■ Jerry A/tovirtfon. Seiner CefiMliamt: »oceft W Poiene. P£. • ioiepn C AmJeniH. PE. • HJcha/d f. lUncr. P£. • Susaa u lotrffr*. Aftocfpte Principeri; iceifh A Coraon. P£ • PoDirc r. rrefftrit. P£. • ficPPRtf W. foutf, f£. • o««ld O lotkotA. Mjrk A. Haruon. PE. • f tautmann. Ft • Urd It Field PE • Xtrvwth P Anefenoa Ft • Mark It Foifi. Pf • Oavl4 A. tcoatireo. M0 A. • fldnty P, WiHlamson. Pf. CS • A9n«i M Ping. MJLA • AHMl *ck Scrvnid* Pt # Thorrai W. Ppitrsoa. Ft • Jarrtt S. Mjfand. Ft • Miles a Jenseh. PE • L Ftn lip IM. Ft • Oarkiri fdg#*toa Pf iynati Mari.ntiL F£. • fhemas A S/lto FE • Sheldon j Johnson • D«)o A Crovt. Pf • Thofrei A Vouinar Ft • RobeA J. Otvofy Pt Offtcoti Sc Pawl, SL Ooud. Pochesrer and Wtlimar. VN • Miiwtakrr, Wi • Cn:cago. IL yMbelfoi WMTw^ort stroo.com Wendy Bottenberg Zoning Administrator/Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Re: Boyer Building Corporation File No. 139-02-000 Plat No. 02-2839 Dear Wendy: We have reviewed the survey for the Boyer Building Corporation property. The site is located at 3320 Watertown Road. The applicant is proposing to subdivide the property into two buildable lots. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: The site is comprised of primarily low-lying wetlands. The wetland boundaries adjacent to the buildable portions of Lxit I and Lot 2 and all of Outlet A should bedelineared and the ^ delineated wetland boundaries shown on the survey. Drainage easements should be provided over all wetlands and drainage ways. Drainage and utility easements should be provided 5-feet wide along all lot lines except along the railroad and Watertown Road frontages where they should be 10-feet wide. Access to Lots 1 and 2 will be provided from Watertown Road across Outlet A. The existing grades on CXitlot A north of Watertown Road exceed 13%. Tbe driveway that serves Ixits I and 2 should not exceed a 10% grade. The driveway should be constructed to a minimum width of 20-feet. Driveway construction may impact the exi.xting wetlands and mitigation may be required. Final driveway plans should be submitted to the fire department for review. A driveway access easement/agreement should be provided ovei Outlot A to provide access to Lots 1 and 2. If you have any questions please call me at (651) 6C4-4863. Yours very truly. BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa. City of Orono 2335 Ui «$t Highway 36 • St. Paul. MN 55113 - 65I-636-4600 > Fax: 651-636-1311 OCT-08-2002 155 53 MINNEHftHfl CREEK URTERSHED 612471'J682 P.01/02 Minnebaha Creek i I Watershed District GrayFrishwsurCcnltf - Hwyt1sai9,Navan« Mall: ZSOOShadywoodRoad Excelsior, MN 5S331-9S78 Phone: (952) 471-O5Q0 Fk (952)471-0682 Erndh •dminQniinnehitacruk.QrB WsbSIte; wwwjtiinnehahflcreek.of9 Board of Hanegtra Pamela Q.BIxt JwnasCaOdns Lance FWiar Monica Gross Scott Thomas Richard MIer Robert Schroeder T Improving Quality cfWater, QualiyofUfi ^ec^d /ols/o9^ October 8,2002 Wendy Bottenberg City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Long Lake, MN 55356 Boyer Building Corporation 18279 Minnetonka Boulrv* n Wayzaia, MN 55391 RE: Two-lot subdivision at 3320 Watertown Road, Qty of Orono Dear Applicant: This lener is to inform the property owner and City of Greenwood chat after reviewing a brief project description for the location cited above, it appears that the project will require permits from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Once tire project design is finalized, MCWD encourages you to submit an application as soon as possible. Projects of this nature will require approval of the MCWD Board of Managers which typically ranges between 30-45 days. Delays in subminals will ultimately result in project delays. Please consult MCWD Rules for guidance on the required exhibits to be submitted with an application. In addition to the items included In the District Rules, the following bulleted items must be submitted as a part of specific project application: • Rule A; frocedural Requirements 1. Submit address labels obtained from Hennepin County which cite the name.<; and addresses of all of the property owners who reside within 600 feet of the project areu 2. Notification of approval or preliminary approval from the City Council or Planning Comiiussian • Rule B; Erosion Control 1. Flan must state with detail vegetation and stabilization will occur within 48 hours of completed grading 2. An erosion control plan must be submitted with this application. This includes indication of silt fence and all other necessary erosion control measures, which must be placed on all downhill slopes in areas where grading will ocenr. • Rule D: Wetland Protection 1. A wetland determination must be performed on this site OCT-00-2002 15:53 MIMCHPHfi CREEK URTE««-ED 6124710602 Hiineliiilia Creek Oiy FiwtiwtiarCwiter Hiya.15A19,NMn HM; 2S00SiadywoodRoad EicMar.MNe6a31-9S7S nww:(g62)471-0SU F<K(9S2) 471-0682 Emal: •MnOininndMhMreriioiB VM>SK k wmrjnftinelulucreeiLoig Board of Ihnaoin PUMlaQ.BIb(t JmtOilldns LineoFhhar Monka Grass SoattThofflos noardinv RobortSdvosder L Watershed District Improving Quality ofWater, QuaUty tfUfe 2. ]f w^ands a« found to be present, a delineation of each basin and delineation rq)ort must be submitted 3. Riling ud excavation activities are guided by the Wetland ConservaOon jTai replacement be included in accordance with MCWD Rule D guidelines Wetland tmffws r^e between 16.5’ to 35’ and are proportional to the sire of the weUand basin. Assess the sire of the wedand and designate buffcre ftdjacent to ftll wetland boundaries on the prupeity. upcoming submittals, staff may find the need to request Sincerely, Michael D. Wyatt District Technician 4 4 Tnrroi p eo Wendy Bottenberg • letter to city.doc Page 1 10/2/02 Orono City Council City of Orono 2750 Kelley Pkwy Orono, MN 55356 Subject: stomi water assessment at 3320 Water Town Rd. Dear Mayor, City Council and Staff, Boyer Building Corporation is requesting a division of one 50-acre parcel of lar.d into two parcels. The two new home sites will consist of one site at bppro.\imately 6 acres of land of which 5 acres are buildable and another site 44 acres in size of w hich 5 acres are buildable. It has come to our attention that due to a recent assessment, the lot split will trigger the burden of storm water management fees assessed at $2700. per acre. For this 50 acre property that will amount to an unreasonable $135,000. This assessment over the 10 buildable acres comes to $ 13,500 per buildable acre and $67,500 per home site! With the 40 acres of surrounding wetlands on this site it is unlikely that this property will ever need municipal storm water systems. As a developer, I understand the importance of a storm water manage,.tent system to the community and I agree the community should burden the cost of sc :h a system. I think it makes sense though, that the costs need to be relative to the use. I'm hoping that given the high percentage of wetland on this site, these assessments can be linked to the zoned density of the site and the number of units proposed. Our property is in a RR-IB zone of one unit for every 2 acres. Would an assessment of 2 units at 2 acres each be more fair and applicable to this situation? The resulting fee of $5400 per site is at least somewhat manageable and comparable with the costs applied to sites of like zoning but no wetland acreage. Respectfully, John Boyer New home division Boyer Building Corporation Cw':David Trua\ of Burnet Realty /X /3 Revl ’ id Concept Plan Approval Date: September 9,2002 (Resolution #4860) Concept Plan Approval EfTectivc Period: September 9.2002 • March 9,2003 To; From: Date: Subject: Chair Smith & Planning Commission Members Mike Gafiron, Planning Director^j^^^f^ October 17,2002 ' Professional Properties of Orono, 2765 Kelley Park^^'ay - Public Hearing #02-2842 Proposed Rezoning of “2745" Kelley Parkway (Adjacent Parcel) #02-2843 Approval of Final Development Plan (Medical Office) Summary of Request Applicants received Revised Concept Plan Approval per City Council Resolution No. 4860 on September 9,2002. They have now provided final development plans and request Development Plan Approval. Because the adjacent parcel is now being used to provide parking for this site, staff is recommending that that parcel be rezoned B-6/PUD and its further development be subject to the PUD process. Therefore, w e have scheduled and noticed for a public hearing for tl.at rezoning concurrent with the medical office approval l.earing. Wetland Issue Unresolved The applicants have yet to sign a purchase agreement with the City. The primary unresolved issue is whether a wetland e,xisting on the site will fall under WCA rules and require mitigation. This wetland is at the center of the site and would be filled when the site is developed The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) convened a Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) on Monday October 7 to view the site and attempt to conclude whether the wetland is subject to mitigation requirements if it is filled. The City Engineer’s office has requested that the wetland be considered as incidental ’ and exempt from WCA rule. The basis for the exemption request is that aerial photo evidence suggests the site did not exhibit w etland characteristics until after 1991, and only exhibits such characteristics today due to high rainfall this summer and poor drainage due to past site disturbance. The ruling by the MCWD is due by the end of October, undi-r the 60-day mle. If mitigation is required, the City Council will have to determine whether the City will be involved in providing mitigation or leave that to the purchasers. List of Exhibits A - Final Development Plan Sheets: CO. 1 - Title Sheet Cl.l - Existing Conditions/Demolition Plan C2.1 - Preliminary Site Plan C3.1 - Preliminary Grading Plan C4.1 - Preliminary Utility Plan A1.1 - Construction Floor Plan El.l - Exterior Elevations E1.2 - Exterior Elevations E2.1 - Preliminary Sit^ Lighting Plan .'2.1 • Preliminary Landscape Plan B - Resolution No. 4860 and Exhibits C - City Engineer’s Comments D * Final Development Plan Approval Punchlist #02-2842/2843 ProfcHlonal Properties ofOroao October 14,2002 Pasclof? [ Review of Final Development Plans P*®” nearly identical to the layout approved in the Revised Concept Plan Approvak- Thc easterly entrance to Kelley Parkway will be a full access shared entrance with the adjacent property to the east, and is located directly across from the Orono Police driveway as required bytheCitytoeliminateleft-tumingconnictsforexitingvehicles. The existing Police driveway may become more commonly used in the future, as the preliminary Traffic Study being conducted by Bonestroo & Associates suggests that the southerly driveway from the City Administrative Complex to Old Crystal Bay Road should eventually be closed... The westerly access from Kelley Parkxvay will be “in-oniy” which provid<>s easy access for patient drop-off and pick-up while providing less of a stacking backup conflict for cars exiting onto westbound Kelley Parlovay. The easterly parking lots are connected by two “through ” corridors to additional parking on the adjoining property. Required parking is 72 stalls, of which 67 are provided on-site and 5 are provided on the adjacent property. A total of 15 stalls are provided on the adjacent property to serve this site, yielding excess parking of 10 stalls which applicants believe will be necessary to scr\e their intended medical office use on the comer property. Parking layout meets the appropriate design standards in terms of stall size, driving lane width, etc. The trash enclosure has been located on the adjacent parcel, to accommodate future shared use. It opens to the east for ease of trash vehicle access. Its architectural styling is identical to that of the proposed medical building. The site plan provides for just over 36% green space, well in excess of the 25%b minimum. Architectural Style. The single-story building is approximately 16,000 s.f in total floor area and retains the same architectural styling as the original approved plans. The building is oriented with Its front entrance facing northeast toward Kelley Parknvay. The plans incorporate an outdoor seating garden area on the southwest side of the building. All four sides of the building will be faced with bnek above a split stone veneer with pre-cast stone highlighting, with pitched roof and asphalt sh^ingles. We assume absent further infomiation that the materials presented earlier are still proposed (the board showing the materials will be available at the PC meeting). The abundance of windows, especially those extending above the main ceiling height, provides for an attractive facade from all viewpoints. Silt ligllling - The lighting plan indicates eight freestanding 25' high light poles with a 'Somerset' style shoe-box fixture. The average lighting for the site is 1.2 foot-candles, with a range from 0.0 M2-3S42/2843 ProfessloDal Properties ofOroao October 14,2002 Ptge2of7 A to 10.4 foot-candles within the site. While Orono Code does not contain numerical standards for lighting, staff has reviewed codes from a number of other cities and would suggest the following: - NeLall cities limit the heiglit of freestanding light fixtures; Plymouth limits them to 30' but not higher than the principal building, or 25' and not higher than the principal building when within 300' of a residential district. The 25' fixtures proposed are similar in height to those used along the center of the main front parking lot at the new Orono Middle School, and similar in height to those on the perimeter of the Otten Brothers site. The peak height of the proposed medical office building is approximately 32'. As a contrast, the lighting fixtures in the City Hall parking lot are 14' above grade. - Among other cities there appears to be a wide range of lighting Mimi»s' as measured in candlepower at the lot line; the typical standard for a non-residential property not abutting a residential property is Vz -1 foot candle at the lot line; the proposed plan exceeds this along the west and south boundaries, primarily because the City is requiring the developer to provide lighting for the trails. - Plymouth has established a minimum of 0.9 foot candles at any point within a commercial parking lot for purposes of personal and traffic safety and crime prevention; the proposed plan has many locations that will be darker than 0.9 foot candles. At an average of 1.2 foot candles, the site might be characterized as adequately lit without being excessively lit; however, for example, one of the more poorly lit areas is the 4 handicap parking stalls.... Orono ’s goal should be to provide for adequate lighting for safety and security while maintaining the dark night skies that residents have come to enjoy. Absent ordinances that establish strict standards for how this should be accomplished, staff believes the proposed lighting plan is reasonable but might be improved upon by judiciously adding more lightingfixtures and placing them at a lower height. Signage. Site identification signage is shown on Sheet EM and has been slightly enhanced from earlier versions with architectural features similar to the building. Both are backlit, which is allowed by code. The sign along Highway 12 will be 12' in height and that near the comer of Kelley and OCB Road will be just over 6'. Height and location of both signs meets code requirements. The sign along Highway 12 has a defined signage area of about 68 s.f. per side (2 side ?); that at the NW comer of the site is 24 s.f. per side. Per the B-1 standards which govern signage in the B-6 zone, no individual sign shall exceed 50 s.f. in area. Planning Commission should reach a recommendation regarding whether this signage is acceptable, remembering that this is a PUD review process so the sign may be allowed to be oversized without a variance. Total signage allotment for the site is approximately 300 s.f which will not be exceeded by the two signs proposed. 002-2842/2843 Professional Propertio of Orono October 14.2002 Page 3 of 7 Kcllcv Parkway Lighting. The City has yet to reach a conclusion on the style of street lighting to be provided along Kelley. The developer is responsible for this lighting under the terms of the Concept PUn Approval. Building Limited to Ofilcc Use. The Concept Plan Approval indicated that a formal amendment of the PUD would be needed if more than 5% of the gross floor area is proposed for retail use. Applicants have suggested that 5% may be too limiting. Staff would suggest the 5% limit remain in effect unless applicants can present a strong case for a higher limit. Other Engineerine Issues. Tom Kellogg has made a number of comments regarding sewer and water connections, storm sewer and grading, and trails/streets/parking, each of which would appear to require additional action on behalf of the developer but which for the most part will not affect the site layout or building design. The primary issue to be dealt with immediately is where the stormwater ends up, and in the future, where the trail along 12 will be placed. Landscanine Plan. The Landscaping Plan is shown on Sheet L2.1 and includes a wide variety of shrubs to enhance the building and the entry island. It also provides a nice screen to the trash enc losure. The trash enclosure opens to the east; should it be further screened to limit direct view by westbound Highway 12 traffic? The sign islands are highly landscaped and the southwest facing point of the building apperas to have a significant evergreen (black hills spruce) buffer to the trail, presumably to provide some patient privacy for that treatment area. If the Highway 12 trail ends up within the site, we might expect similar treatment along the southerly w'indows... The trees proposed along the OCB Road trail are proposed in a fairly wet environment; applicants ’ landscape designer should confirm they will thrive in the wet conditions. Along Kelley Parkway are proposed two sugar maples (either side of the west entrance) and three Skyline Honey locust. Since the City has not decided on a streetscape for Kelley Parkway, staff would propose that final City acceptance of these species and their spacing be left for future reconsideration. Developer should confirm that the landscaping plan meets the minimum 525,000 valuation required by the zoning code for this SI.5 million project. Tom Kellogg has revised his Letter of credit improvement valuation listing to how the landscaping at the $25,000 valuation level. Rezoning of “2745" Kelley Parkway The applicants control the adjacent parcel and are using a portion of it to serve the needs of their medical office use. Because the adjacent parcel is guided for office use in the CMP, it should ultimately be zoned B-6 Higli»^ Commercial District as will be their comer lot The B-6 District a02-2S42/2S43 ProfcitlMal Propcrticf Orooo October 14.2002 Page 5 of 7 allows the limited, primarily non-retail uses consistent with how this area is guided in the Comprehensive Plan. Because cezoning of the adjacent parcel was not the subject of the initial public hearings for this project, staff h^ scheduled and noticed for a separate hearing on the rezoning. The applicants must provide the City with a copy of their purchase agreement for the adjacent site and confirm whether the current owners have any objection to the rezoning. Staff would note that mere rezoning to B-6 will not guarantee the site is developed via the PUD process; note that the PUD process was required for the comer lot because the City owns it and made that a requirement of the sale, but we don ’t have that control over the adjacent parcel. Because applicants have incorporated a portion ofthe adjacent parcel into their site planning, the City will include language in the final development plan approval that requires future development of the adjacent parcel must be via the PUD process. Planniog Commission Action Requested ^^pi«^^ requested to make a recommendation to Council regarding the following 1. Rezoning of 2745 Kelley Parkway (adjacent parcel) to B-6 Highway Commercial District. 2. Approval of site layout. 3. Approval of architectural design. 4. Approval of lighting and signage plans. 5. Approval of landscaping plan. Planning Commission should review each of the above-mentioned plans and determine whether any revisions are necessary. A recommendation for approval should include the following conditions; a) Final approval by Council should not be granted until the following issues are resolved: 1) Wetland existence and mitigation if necessary. 2) Stormwater plan satisfactory to City Engineer and MCWD. 3) Purchase Agreement to be finalized. b) Approval shall be subject to a Development Agreement to be drafted by the City, such agreement to incorporate conditions of development approval as outlined in the Concept Plan Approval resolution, also including conditions for future development of the adjacent parcel. V02-2842/3S43 Profctslonal Propertin of Qrono October 14,2002 Pa|e6of7 k c) City Council should reach a conclusion regarding the streetscape of Kelley Parkway within a timeframe that allows the applicants to plan for boulevard trees and street lighting consistent with the remainder of Kelley Parkway. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the rezoning, site plan, architectural design, lighting and signage plans, and landscape plans as presented subject to comments noted in this memo, and subject to conditions a), b) and c) noted above. This item will be presented for final Council action when the Conditions of Development Plan Approval (Resolution No. 4860) have been completely satisfied (also see Punchlist, Exhibit D). i02-2l42/2S43 Profenlogil Prop<rti« »rOr«g9 Octobtr 14,2002 Pi«<7«r7 6*3 <Ct^$i^14 Kir r-» pr VJV ert ___riMe >U> } i» 1 .VI U>CK»* ^JO • v«r«fii iI1• INOTES i a^ocMuc t^owunoM ruim tan a or amtM MMAtfT M> fowBMA<f a«Mn #MMmo fv ca a nc • UMc. *c o* m«Di ii mo7 movom. VfVrrr M«nk«tti »o«m «0 m^^no tr orr 9 MCW. »»M^A 0-«UlT OtAWMCS UlO»««« d»»M» «yttaauan. tr.** urmitn ct )««rr«n t to na »£OMtCJ Of tcw ’A-w ft tfr.«n m? «U. ML9 COCTTM »«UU) « *«9 »WMO ««• TO c»«'mjcroA p Mt o»ca**M»i mu x^fvo ft jioax. \ji0apm\ 9tua m trwpartky wofpw at n« 9*t» Kx Maojrot > T0 M arwM 0QopiMr Slate On Cafl iteNCTT^ a w> ail NI amm iOiAtem VMN-Jtel tM scAu m rarr '______ shea L J fooioniiwiM HA6SCC nmsc^frai 6610^104 T 8123»»S7 P 112 341 2830 •rwte l^•aMlcom > »» «< Ni|«l > » Client: CaONO PROFESSIONAL CENTER protect tilic: DENTAL CLINIC ORONO.MN LANDFORM •4IHI*fA»OLIt-teHOC*«IK sheet title: EXISTING CONOmONS/ OEMOUnONPLAN srMdnc4 8402911 Kif r-2BP drrMbv PP ¥JV 8iE ____•>1802 M. <m IwiSIV •;» J t.7:CXtChff KJ i *■. .t-iW CifXf^ ’•JO A i/«OimjNNiT 9TAA ^ ftNVTAk c ——• C1.1 - T [I>\ 9 -/ <ELLEr PAs?.<ilAY tD : Ssi 8g*lfi.^.fi" F nn Q^^' 0 r ^fT») "l’ j‘5}' ^#~ r-! 'vr»rT»»»Ty*; E>-\ G>\ I'n/Q-liHi ) NOTES OSSSE J1 *».W* w,*€. iT»t USIf VM., fcsvja %<V*K (»rr; O X I]i? I IH'irSrftMyfe 'V ^ P-: V‘.*.;LNV .ST" irr*; 0 •?. >-i< I’'^*-(7^ i ** «*>*-'A on •*> 1^ >F ;;':.'^«;S ^Vf•J4V4 j'i^v ^i' f»" 'Mis m i~r if \ Lj i •ACi^aaxr 9^<m%Tot ttam mc»« a ccrv*«AnDii 9 nrmt^ 9dH^ry »jO mj«v«v9 m»c»iw rr OKMMC * A»0C. •<, 0« nA#o. i W7. MC»rc«*i »rv*^ »#carA*at »or» «o *«c%c«o r» ory c» ounc «v««kr* o-«x^ mt09€X uic»ae« 9h «s « vaWAM'n^ •r>ct i««t«MO Of wrtt.^ as to T>« tCQMt^ 0» •#Or‘AT«»i M£Vf«S rr (T««t5 AMT •<« •iA »«u) r«»cra« »<sxo « >itd •w»io met to C^KSrVLiC'VX 0 MT 06Cas#A>OM ULi <n 3 rvt •*<»«t«. uA<cK«r. *<uo M maArK ’ tc*#* at n% oMo HJf ttscumx o •ni*ASi9 loct % :L "TrrPT 51 "IS 3 \ f ort'Ooa %oi>* O) Mt '0 **4r» > am *#c ii’MDt *jaj »«: i*AAn <*ru3 o*>«a ««a Q>^utK TO M s*mo •*- A «• «o» tf»rf #AArto sra^ Aotos Aflus TO M purw a •* «rt •♦rt OA».nd OTVt 9 OC «C AT «S OACSM A mXA) TO STA.^ 4 f.« CVaCtMT «Taa At/ «MO Tam H 0«*am O »*Cr^ *V« Ia C a MA TO M J90 KTi ta. OO’^jt"*/* }T«oc a C'V'US 0 A a /» oo<~tt/«#os tt-AffM n«i« m>ms a ^ r»« ac**A At/s #»3t Acr*/T r<4»«to rrfOAtvT avt * asAjneat n« slajm : wasoat AS »«*«A| ON T.« A>_A>t ItfO CN n« OI0TM. Ato Wa A M COTVAtltD TO n« *4mn vtu:^\MM. K*tO vmto or r.« ce»tfijk£fiM Amja TO rAA>c Acrwts 5 MO C£V:saT» Ott aa C O.t'M S ac .p.'sio a <« aai ACWAri AViOTMM M« CCAOi't JUtt Afi? OT'IO 9 ACUA0S4O ACi AU. Atauc s*m»s. 331 iWioiniu. G>■9t« A a O tV'CT* StS'Se CCMOt'l CkMt A a O OUf^H. c nUAV^ TO A«iJA03«t? MO CJt9 M0 O/TTM a>c*is smtn y va eaPARKIKG SUMMARYCSSMffiSa OA StAa, AM 700 SA 9 I4SMU 9ULiM< twSAAtl 9AJ»« • TOTA a 9X0AC > gf%i fTTAA • AOOO $/ t«A*« >fc* • V^£OCi •» 1/ • 4400 5/ »A4»»^ » {><400 S> 1/7C0 • n $rHlS m ,, S^' B1 5«W«ii&32 ^kj. ,6r\E2l a| TCTA4. • 77 STAiAt IWYtnO^AMMC STaa C aa O rAaS l« »*lj 4J haaocm rau.*(M70J 4 STaa «a «9 tTAu3 LCM 9T|i i^TO)8 3i H TflTAk aa /km: sta ^ M>«to 6Z3AREA SUMyARYl cm«<«aa£« txAi. to 7m 9 r^H, ama Mt<iaiarmA>4iAAiaj rv^/.i^S SvB4 s/. )tA*0 t# TOT At •TfTN M 0CC* ■t^ N 89*15'26 " VT 234.64 feaasi^^ . ill UTZTJIL HK jW’^’AT no . 12 m m GoplMT state One Call TMterTTAAiB* •MMA’MMg IM IM SCALl nsrr shea L J 100 lorTi 1031 tirtri lutf 65Cc mfflutoi. CM S5403t*94 r 6i2iX2:57 f e:234»sjo wttM i^«#^kceffl 4<>«aCc'4>> 4«r«a)V«>» ------------—--------*--m e c * s.T IU7 AAAf.'-v 1♦1---------- •.......... * *»0WBMa • 8nM<UI T«m.i T.v# <<9M/c;ri/* Client: ORONO PROFESSIONAL CENTER project title: DENTAL CUNIC CRONO.MN 4tL LANDFORM MIMNfAAOt. It • OmOCNIH Sheet title: PREUMINARY SITE PLAN pr::icT>io:IM»0t4 r AA» Cl>lc>K8r 11I>» M. Mt S A «2 'SI .* COC l/T /O MA«trM««T rAA AMSrt^ WC.iCTMA*JifiW«V«W a^’/uncii V XI (j dJ 1 liww ii~rrKi» -afc-" — e-*4^f5 ^-r KuT shea i. J lOOBOfllMM MUOe iwwpci^wi &S403'tSM TI123M22S7 P<12J4«2»0 vwvshmnk.flan l>» Client: ORONO PROFESSIONAL CENTER •«£ CJ<* OUTM UE5T ELEVATION »■ • I -C‘ projtdMIt: DENTAL CUNIC ORONO, MN llisttIHto; EXTERIOR aEVATIONS kc «RT>4 east ELEVATICN !,«• • I .^• t «•«* I I ifi* ■ i------------ ...t -nr--' 4 mi MOfyMMnMT — Aw,?- » C»N A! eAC«w ? 4^'n wf **!•» —9 * ••C^f f9r>%Aw HAT19 A*.J-fNJ- *'■%* *AC»» • AA-’l ur^« - CAi* CA» CAf ot (•9 4- “ •<>,< »A^! ► CA*r L-4’ » I -C* CA^. ♦.♦•wa > -fi* <s-U. • c* 524100 on^or. 1/4* • I -C*cai i.lfc.rcc; Mnc^tir^ M. Mi navipeMifMliiMi mfinatmttmmmtmimt ____imaoiA LJi^___till E1.1 ,l»4 ... ^ I RTu E^ST ELEVATION CFTIgNl 1 I r-o ‘ shea L J lOOnoroiMM •yttftSOc mwpBUwn SS401-ISM f 6t23MSS7 P C12349 2930 VMijfiiMeon >>> clienL* ORONO PROFESSIONAL CENTER CM^r jtfO Bf-tCSC project liilo; DENTAL CUNIC ORONO. MN sheet litiv EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ©NCRTM IlE&T ELEvATICN I/d* • r-o*proncfncL Mil 00 AONOrO) Iriiwpy tfmaaibf m. iiAi _______ WKX"* < • • 4 V. - ^ :£NC lC5URE ^ ‘ — --------------------- C-*r CJiP »-^e c-id* i'cve t^ T vcscn iasu tmmrnm I iMy o>«» Mta aMR ipBiedo ■r Miaia JBUC_________MMMtA KELLEr PARC jUAT \ •> «-S' i iiiruriKXK) xtum wsn a c^riMTDi m $oj€uy tte Mvt*i pmmr%9•T CttMMC ft AMOC. »C, * nMCH ft tCCKOm. urvrv •ftoanAiiM «m wc >vm rr orr 9 0iM9 rVMICtA A9-«ftT MAaftCS U«K«* •*!» «0 v«ftffA«?ML Hftftft wimj (S mrru. u 10 n« Aconc* 9 Aftcftmrpw fti9«i0 tv 9i«fti «kt a >o •u »«kp COOTM »<U0 M »«0 VMW fW TO CCMSrftuCTIM ft «(fr OMMftMCtS M» •9*10 r>« ftCMic UMCKftn »«jL9 • rvftOftkribT i«Tftfte *f m r*ftftAft04 CMO Ml «MU/nOlA ea LUMINAIRE SUMMARYI u«l •». MC. UW ■0*9 IBBSTATIST1CSI AM rwA It 40CV CCAflO 40500 0-7J «4K 90 K WCS\ r.-i Qophtr stilt Ont Call ^^arr Mmx at ai laii «0u.«m. wftg^-ifti ift#SCAll LN PEST / '= vy 'i shea L J lOOflOdllMsM •AISOC iiiwtsi^clt. m 5S40S-1S94 f S12Uf2257 M12»9»30 wmUlMfMlCCfQ l>» ««aftifHl»» client ORONOPROFESStONAl CENTER project title: DENTAL CUNIC ORONO.MN LANDFORM •hcetutlt: PREUMINARY SITE LIGHTING PLAN MMtns IM»t4 tala:l••2(r drnxihr Pf crccMdbr w m.____________I-1M2 M. tM Jl1* - i ilMMI ^JO lifTtlSH. ; t, V ftr>»9 c^«ca^ ftuo 1 9/1 It.-UO U»<10^ ^ • «/•orvtioftfftMf stAoi lAO ^RaCaMANASfKftCVCW mm mmm cinTfCArcN f11t1«1•1M Mi •••• . r\ 'V;, -•*1 -m / GXD tt» r*» -J. . ■ • <iWi% ‘^. • ^>.<*v '^'■5 ‘ »/• >1 <.-V»4r #• »r ^ %'-v^. ■s> >.S-:/-T' ‘rrr-'.M iii L<-. mi:riu:.y }lv 's^'^’isPpi-. /--vTMI>— V 'Wp>^ '■f -, ^9?M.*• I -z> >-v [<?^'' C'-'Sj^«£ K«y v<S..- \rki » ...,. il>J3 1 t wr. /Ji- S- r.•:':r oi’-w^i • r.i n— 'JE>. iPRKUMINAHY PlJ^’T SCHEDULEKasm C9TO* <mi%ta^rrc HAT*«CM*X ->nj»C.rrt«r5 MCM ;gi ■c-p!' ^<^*n K-.»# po#-.:c*.-it CJ;*t%A T^i»trxc% Mns 93- CH.•V • [jyO »*v. ca-» 7Y CH.«V • *Ot C!>Z>• »i. C A W rvt* f«J»ff'A> •4./*9 • K'f QXI^ *<^’’ E> oRNAUism mx3 -----------1 *X»*. s«c'* VIM **.*• H • CM. C -t <► • <• DXI^ >•. 04 QXi^ [£> COMKSIROLS TREES •l».i v%.:i c.M<A • •«KV . «• ca.£» CCCTVOfS SH!’»JB3 0 M CerfHT *tt.ann ^Jmg^ *(tCWl49 Ca»’4C*4 9 CM 90**-.*• qxd • 4M CO.JB o 4]94444 ••Ma?M4*’j9 9 CM 90f CDO •44k c-.ua ax4'U £1*3-4*; *4 0 4 CVrl*444L 9'n4 } CM P31 4» 1 •«M.-vw o K aw.* A.ri ^■4 tic rm**« :hH*v*Ak *1 iV.4 H*V4 4 9 CM a.*T QXD44 1 C4 V—4'i—4-M*Mtt >.4 4KT JV • JJ4 dXZ^■'i‘n 4«.*->.9 •» *W;i#9TVM4 >9C«.r4 9 CM.99*•v94«J Mf»*i^.'kV’ 0tidir 4 4«.*.4efw ?W^4»*ci4 4AVI3CI*a 2 C44.9Ct «> . 494 QXI^*i9*»a T>M#s40(**i •T IM3--"*- V* **9'.«f.JC5rj5 A44Xt*-.A4 a«.K.*’X-44 1 C4..HJf a . Vki*9 t*4 rvtRGREEM SHHU33 FERENNIAL3 fK-'Ct* M* n« cnt« A*MW ktC:ttk CiTTMt AN»^4 n'.*•-<’ •tc *«.•.■» M-J-4 X» V.V” }-iu* :• 3IC c* -.4 • tMi.9 t !*»0* iMArA# 4-••^#3 a«*N99 3t* CSi^ <WCC*.*M»S ’’tOM* » CM. M" 1 CM 1 CM M- < wr M« >.*?• [T^fr> #.Mc«t4 ^ (TXO r.»*cai?* • Vi • 14 (T^fO 4-if* [TyO •.14-AW. v«*At ia4iMltOkVa M'l-* 1K»3» ►*.-*4.<*^1 fk X .V.* • CM • CM I CM ( CM 4CT* Hr *• • »>* (T>T> > » ^ »a-M» ► * ^ (Tyr^ H-’^4 tV • ^CDe>M.VIi rr*-^ A» c fT c' cx.‘‘;. r» KSfMkk’VM I M. > **r -A'tllM} vm. __ 9 *M»M1 »M Mm, a • -Mi,* 1*,%' »«»• »4.4* :«404 V« i^4xi*fCM • *'>44» 3 • .'I. *M • H'Mf-. M/iaJ cM MMCl i*( ♦»• J>* r>« M.TM4 - ^ — O, rv« 4^m« tM MM. VM, t >l*i» ■MTW* »CVi n v'A«*l*« V# :,V4m*v» WMi Mk, J U> **t0 MUJI *ij M,- (.MCM t*» ;W-VM» CtMttM'tOW £ •**«. a»«4M ».,».*4J.-.4 * “ ‘ via» Mr«e« VCV4 T"^ *-k 4^JIF» y ■» .. [T^Mi M*,* »-i 9 m* m •.•xt 4*'- V4 • m:^ aM-t M.n tcoM ».»*■» omm»« at M4M.S^ lAM M* rf",*! <4 * X.mK> «4'4. » »«i ■ HO W*4 .M.« • («i Mx'< :>AT« 14 ».«M.i.'> MA-4.AV aos *ur«* ca* m-m-io 44mm> n« ntt* • M4M4*t>i o 4»m,mj m4 9.ti VI V M ;«io«3 9v Mo^ai ccaviAcrai rry-u-r*. *w* M n? *4MT.::« wt. «' a«# m mc *«« imL r nt4 m ^ H4J444M •a?i rOajD M. ’“j»> M»o ,»j xBir •< ,**j » 3«i»''*l -lie :•• ^.w.* V i*.*!. ui •-‘•m a.MrT-15 *.-4 jxv>» c vxm’j* 9 ’j mmi XM49f m:.v,»4; •i-'«4 vmx, 94 ati* Mr»*tc a>c r># .4 x.ta'i a-M* C.'.M4 mm .?.1C • MM4* M>«JU4 • %\ »C« »Ml* .ac X'1 VM* C«W»t » 'jrva »iJ •'<4 H«Ll M*« M1VJ ,J »XM t .» .a-flMiM HC'UM ao '4* P *14' -013 ««4 C-A’ •Kt: \ 14 ,*--M ..V IM 4 1 -J M. .mT?W ’ M> 4J IMlM kM#« iC-lc .» V » Ajy * «i f%pj^ I •«>«• av «^MU17 TMM 4* t»* C4i, f*rm fTS*****^ MCV44 Mc T3 « a VMi’k? •»-. ca<u» i»*r» 4* -r* i* I—✓ >*4.» M. am.*»«i. ,• X.4M ",-vto IM4 j*vm m*,;m •BBLANDSCAPE RLQ'JlKEMEMSSIIl^^Eiira:3i£Z3a2!Z3 t CaiuAta ««|rj VM. -*-• • *»#'X* CMn4 *11 MT*41 C>#*».V3 ’4 »1 V-A** « * Mirvr J» ]■ »4t9 a •*&■* JMW34*M ^hMS >Mfc «4<» • -141i^ CM^4 ' %•*>«* I 4MBK u.'’ t**C*<:*4t f»!t1 Mm. » 4*iV«lC 4» 3« O t .> >9 *W *<» ••<>• 9 MtOMt 444Sm: VMrS 4«£.4«c OI <1M4.4 4«M'4.M trt«U.'* M£>r»c • n shjpjclx ((ix-iaiM 4ao4 ,» »*MJ >* «r*9 • *9 >3,3 • » 9H40 % •»• .4MVOI MMi MM. VAjrO • 4 XX4*-T-» • ‘•TO) «MJl M CCn^CVaMk •r-" KM.MMi MC*<'9 »M.» a4."MC C.M91jC'*>* v» Xf>ii«>44lM 4>C V> r44t--<1 l^-li a a.VXV - |:3CtfX3 IVraniC MWJC1 44m9 • I VX!X^9 *tir\r .MCV441 »4*3 • |.*ixa Mnr* k4M% 4->l »M*t ,M' 4yc4-ij.) i;;x» . a » -Mice* i4i.di H » I.XC3C4 ^o— *•01 :r<ii Gopher State One Call *va c.'r» 4a«M »k *04... 4<«l »4 shea ICC '<rr W21SL-M fTjVfUili mn C5i33 1S4 T 612133 2:5? f 812 3i9»jO ftv« k^jc^/’u.ctni client; CRDt.O PR0FESS10r;AL C£?4TER picjeci ttlla: DENTAi CUMC CROfiO, WN LANDFORM •41 mmC4»31 I S PHOCal ■ Sheet title: PRELIMl.'UWY LA\OSCAPE ?m 5Ac:ci4 r • 2Cr c?-y4rt t#______ in________»i?*C2 00 CiU lt»Ji6!iw I •»•' -». c M'v ‘M t « :.*• •✓%,'. *. J 9,1 eXV 441M3VM c»—• ^.:-!CT yuk-iACt^ ^ m ^ mn mmm Cl-*fCA^CH L2.1 jt-’*i^x. 6, CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 ft ft o A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REVISED GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2765 KELLEY PARKWAY FILE NO. 02-2782 ^VHEREAS, Professional Properties of Orono (hereinafter the "applicant") has an interest in property located at 2765 Kelley Parkway within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Willow Properties Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "Property"); and >VHEREAS, the applicant was granted General Concept Plan Approval for Planned Unit Development of the Property via City Council Resolution No. 4823 on June 10, 2002. Resolution No. 4823 granted conceptual approval for rezoning of the Property from RR- IB, One Family Rural Residential District to B-6/PUD for medical office use of the parcel, and granted General Concept Plan Approval for a 15,000 s.f. one-stoiy medical office buildine on the Property; and * WHEREAS, the applicant has revised the General Concept Plan and has requested City Council approval of the Revised General Concept Plan; and WHEREAS, the revisions to the General Concept Plan include expansion of the proposed medical office building to 16,000 s.f as compared to the 15,000 s.f building initially proposed; reorientation of the building toward Kelley Park-way as compared to its ori^nal onentauon toward the Highway 12/Old Cr>stal Bay Road intersection; revision of site traffic circulation and parking layout; and use of the adjacent parcel (legally described as Lot 1, Block 2, City of Orono Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota; hereinafter the “Adjacent Parcel”) for parking and shared access; and * WHEREAS, the Orono City Council makes the following findings in regard to Revised General Concept Plan approval: FINDINGS 1.The City Council finds that Findings numbered 1-5 and 7-10 of Resolution No 4823 remain applicable to the Revised General Concept Plan, and are incorporated herein by reference. Page 1 of 12 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 8 6 0 The proposed medical office building at 16,000 s.f. in area rather than 15 000 the oSa? plan architectural styling as The building orientation has been reversed so that its front entrance is facing northeast toward Kelley Parkway rather than southwest toward the intersection of Hwy 12 & Old Crystal Bay Road. miersection Applicants have advised the City that they now have a signed purchase agreement to acquire the 2.5 acre Adjacent Parcel to the east, and the Revised Concept Plan indicates ^e potential for additional parking on that site as well as a shared access to Kelley Parkway. The easterly entrance to Kelley Parlavay in the Revised Concept Plan will be a full access shared entr^ce with the Adjacent Parcel. This was formerly an “in- onl/ access point. It is located directly across from the Orono Police driveway as required by the City to eliminate left-turning conflicts for exiting vehicles. The westerly access from Kelley Park-way will be “in-onl>-” which provides easy access for patient drop-off and pick-up while providing less of a stacking back-up conflict for cars exiting onto westbound Kelley Parkway. The easterly parking lots are connected by two “through” corridors to additional Adjacent Parcel, Based on applicants’ revised submittal C2.1 required parking is 72 stalls, of which 67 are provided on-site and 5 are provided on he adjacent property to the cast. The site plan indicates that a total of 15 stal s are proposed on the Adjacent Parcel to serve this site, due to the applicants expectation that a total of 83 stalls are likely necessary to adequately serve heir intended use of the building. The revised parking layout appears to meet the appropnate cngmeenng and zoning design standards in terms of stall size, dnving lane width, etc. The 2.5 acre Adjacent Parcel for which the applicants have a purchase agreement. IS similarly guided in the Orono Community Management Plan for commercial office use and is also currently zoned RR-IB. It would be appropriate for this oroM^S^ ^rih* B-6/PUD concurrently with rezoning of the to the same development standards as the property, as they will be guided and zoned identically. Page 2 of 12 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILnNO. 6q 9. The applicant has provided revised preliminary plans attached to tiiis resolution as Exhibits A and B including site plan and landscaping plan (both dated 8-5- 02) and revised conceptual building construction plans (dated 8-6-02) which the Council finds are sufiicient to indicate the intent of the developer and the potential impacts of the project. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the Revised General Concept Plan for development of a 16,000 s.f. medical office building on Lot 1, Block 1, Willow Properties Addition, subject to the following declarations and conditions: 1. 2. The City of Orono will approve rezoning of the properly to B-6 (PUD) as described herein upon City Council finding of satisfactory completion of the Conditions for Development Plan approval. The City of Orono will approve rezoning of the Adjacent Parcel to B-6 (PUD) as described herein upon City Council finding of satisfactory completion of the Conditions for Development Plan approval, subject to successful completion of a public hearing by the Planning Commission regarding said rezoning. The Adjacent Parcel may be developed for any permitted or conditional use allowed in the B-6 District, but shall be developed only via the PUD review and approval process. 3. Conditions for Development Plan Approval are as follows: A. Development Standards and General Conditions. 1) The Development Plan for the Property shall meet all setback standards for building construction and parking as established for the B-6 District in the zoning code, as defined in the following table: Page 3 of 12 GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 8 6 0 ^uUdioK/DeveloDment Standards Required Lot Area 2.0 acre min. Lot Width 100* Principal Structure Setbacks Front (N)35- Side (E)iO' Rear (S)30' Side Street (W)35* Parking Setbacks -includes driving lanes Front (N)20’ Side (E)5' Rear (S)15' Side Street (\V)15’ Building Height Peak Height N/A Defined Heioht 30' max. The above table values are based on the B-6 standards for residential zoning of the Orono municipal facilities to the north and the Orono Schools to the west; the industrial zoning to the south; and the intended commercial office zoning of the Adjacent Parcel to the east. Required off-street parking per Section 10.61, Subd. 10 shall be provded at a ratio of no less than 5 stalls per 1000 s.f net building floor area. Final parking layout and traffic flow shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Parking provided on the Adjacent Parcel to serve the minimum parking requirements or for excess parWng for the Property shall be subject to an agreement as provided for in Orono Zoning Code Section 10.61 Subd. 6. The area of the Adjacent Parcel used to meet the minimum parking requirement for the Property shall be excluded from pertinent calculations when the Adjacent Parcel is developed. Page 4 of 12 L 8) CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 ft fi A The northeasterly access driveway to the Property shall be a shared driveway with the Adjacent Parcel, shall be centered on the common boundary between the Property and the Adjacent Parcel, and shall be operated as a standard “in-out ” access. Appropriate trafTic and parking signage within the site shall be installed subject to the Orono staff and City Engineer’s review and approval. Applicants shall demonstrate to the Council ’s satisfaction that the southwest facade of the building facing the Highway 12/Old Crystal Bay Road intersection is treated architecturally as a primary facade that presents a positive visual image toward said intersection, with commensurate high quality landscaping. The percentage of the Property that is devoted to green space (not including areas within road rights-of-way) shall be ma.ximized to the greatest extent possible but in no case shall be less than 25% of the lot area. ^dscaping plan shall meet all landscaping standards established for the B-6 District in Section 10.45, Subdivision 6(H). In addition, the Developer shall be responsible for sodding the boulevard of Kelley Parkway and any other areas outside the Property boundary that may be disturbed. The developer shall create a “parkway” character through substantial landscaping along Kelley Parkway, shall provide substantial deciduous trees along the west boundary, and shall provide a combination of deciduous and coniferous trees along the south boundary of the Property Along Kelley Parkway, the Development Plan shall incorporate a green (sod) boulevard no less than 8 feet in width behind the curblme of Kelley Parkway; a concrete sidewalk 6 feet in width located partially within the right-of way and partially on the Property, and a setback to parking from the north lot line of no less than 20 feet. The Property owr.er shall be responsible for mstallation and maintenance of the sidew alk and boulevard. Page 5 of 12 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 R H O Street hating along Kelley Parkway adjacent to the Property shall be provided by the Developer and shall be of a style, number height and location approved by the City Council. Along Old Crystal Bay Road, the setback from the eastern edge of the existing trail to the back of parking lot curb shall be no less than 5 feet. A suitable buffer to provide a sense of physical separation between the parking lot and users of the trail shall be provided, in the form of a hedge or vegetative barrier, a berm, a short barrier wall, additional separation, or some other method acceptable to the City Council. A trail easement shall be granted to the City over the westerly 25' of the Property. The City shall be responsible for maintenance of this trail. The proposed pedestrian trail along Highway 12 shall be constructed by the developer and shall be 8’ wide, of bituminous surfacing and shall be located either within the Highway 12 right- of-way, subject to MnDOT approval, or within the Property approximately abutting the south Property line. The intent of this trail is to provide a connection to the existing and future trail system along Highway 12, while pro\iding separation from the traveled portion of the right-of-way. Because it is unknown at this time whether the Highway 12 shoulder may be converted from a lural section to an urban section, the exact location and design of the frail c^ot be determined at this time. Therefore, construction of this trail may be deferred until such time that development of the Adjacent Parcel occurs, and/or until such time that a decision on the design of the Highway 12 shoulder is reached. The City Council shall make the final determination of when and how the trail is to be constructed. Developer shall post suitable financial secunty in the interim for such construction. The City shall be responsible for the maintenance of this trail upon its completion and acceptance. Signage and lighting on the site shall adhere to the pertinent zoning code standards, and shall be subject to approval by the City Council. Site lighting shall be low and shielded, similar to Page 6 of 12 CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 R fiO the style of lighting found at the Orono Administrative Facilities. Site lighting along the west and south boundaries shall be provided adequate to light the trails along these two sides of the property. Final decisions by the Developer regarding colors, types and qualities of building materials shall be subject to Council approval. The proposed building shall be subject to the Architectural Standards for the B-6 District per Zoning Code Section 10.45, Subd. 6(1). The proposed dumpster enclosure shall be compatible architecturally with the proposed medical building and may be located near the southeast comer of the Property to allow for joint use with the Adjacent Parcel. The use of the building is specifically approved for profeisional office use. Retail uses accessory to the office use may be allowed through a formal amendment of the PUD, but if approved the combination of all such uses shall not exceed 5% of the gross floor area of the building. Applicants’ architect shall submit final development plans to the Metro Council Enx'iromnental Services to determine the exact number of SAC units to be charged at the time of the issuance of building permits. Developer shall provide suitable evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) approval of the stormwater management plan before Development Plan Approval will be granted. Erosion control shall adhere to "Best Management Practices for Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas". All erosion controls as required by the City and by the MCWD shall be in place prior to commencement of excavation on the site. This Revised Concept Plan approval is based upon the knowm issues that may affect this project, but this approval does not limit the City from revising or amending these conditions as the review process continues. Page 7 of 12 c. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. - J**® plans and specifications shall 1) Final plans ^d specifications for all proposed utility lines and ser^ces, including any proposed revisions to existing service facilities. Proposed plans shall be provided to the City for final review Md approval with the Preliminary Plan set. The Public orks Department and MnDOT shall review and approve all utility improvements. Final sanitary sewer and watermain plans shall be Depatoen^t ”** subject to approval by the Public Works 2) Final grading, drainage and erosion control plan showing existimt and proposed contours, building locations, elevations, stormwater facilities md calculations, utilities and erosion control measures to be used duimg construction. Development Plan Approval will Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and MnDOT have approved the stormwater plans. 3) Final landscaping design plan Nvith planting schedules includimt numbers and species, in accordance with the landscapine requirements of the B-6 zoning district. 1) Final building construction plans, including; a) elevations of all sides of the building; type and color of exterior building materials; proposed floor plan; b) c) d) building dimensions; and e) the location of trash and recycling containers and of heating Ventilation and air conditioning equipment. Page 8 of 12 CITY of ORONO E. F. 6) 7) RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 8^0 Parking lot construction plans, including confirmation that parking lots and driving lanes will be paved and provided with concrete curb and gutter, and that all driving lanes within parking lots shall have a 9-ton minimum pavemeu. section. A geotechnical evaluation f the soil shall be done in conjunction with the pavement design and shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. Detailed signage and lighting plans. Any additional plans and specifications deemed necessary by the City as review progresses. D. Development Agreement. Development Approval is contingent upon the successful execution of a Development Agreement between the applicant and the City. Such Agreement shall address all specific City requirements for the development. Financial Guarantee. The Development Agreement shall include a financial guarantee by the applicant to ensure the completion of site improvements. The City Engineer shall complete an estimate of improvement costs, including but not limited to landscaping, grading, erosion control, utilities, driveways and parking areas, trails, sidewalks, retaining walls and stormwater management facility construction, and the applicant shall provide to the City a financial guarantee of 150% of the improvement costs. Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee. The standard Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee for commercial development shall be paid by the developer at the rate of S6,480 per acic (2002 Fee Schedule). The City Council shall determine prior to final Development Plan approval whether the Developer will be charged additional fees for off-site stormwater improvements that benefit this property. The Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee shall not be charged for the acreage within the Adjacent Parcel that is to be developed to serve the propert>", said Fee for the acreage in the Adjacent Parcel shall be charged at the time the Adjacent Paxcel is developed. Page 9 of 12 r L CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 8 60 3. 4. 5. G.^ determine prior to Development or fee payment prior to Development Plan Approval. H.™ ™ isrzr»“'s; ";rr,'r.'; s.■?: by use of the following fonnula: X 2.0 acres x SI4,115/acre « Connection Charge Due where: A = number of SAC units required for the office building 2 - number of sewer/water units paid previously 2.0 acres = area of the Property $14,115 = per-acre connection fees for 1989 Highway 12 municipal sewer & water project. This Revised General Concept Plan Approval resolution approves the development concept subject to the applicant meeting the requiremeL of this resoluhon and all ofter requirements of the City. This reliron does---------- ic4uiicmcrus oi me uty. T constitute approval of the rezoning of the property nor of the Adjacent pIrceT Such approval shall only be considered when the Citj ~ - - “Conditions for Develonment PlanConditions for Development plan Approval" as idendH^d herdn L^et^ This Revised General Concept Plan Approval shall be effective for a period of It'* resolution. If Development Plan Approval is not ^Mted within mat penod. the terms and conditions of this resolution shall be period" Council at its sole discretion may extend this effective Page 10 of 12 GITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.__4A60 __ Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of September, 2002. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Applicant (for Professional Properties of Orono, LLP as Developer) Ronald J. MotSfse (for the City of Orono as Property Owner) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this / 7^av of 5epffr>itrr 2002 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporatiori and said instmment was executed on behalf of the City. , • >1 RACH'L 00331 a § l.-' NOTARYPUcUC-Kr..;:'?*; a 'M.Oc g-vCx-C Occ/tpL Notary Public Page 11 of 12 miu!« STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO, 4 8 6 0 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this «p 2002 by Linda S. Vae, City Clark of tha City of Orono. a Mi^S3Sl;,u^cipaf corporation and said mstrument was executed on behalf of the City municipal R*Ch3LDO.?nc Mrcen«rW£^:.^*3.;:\, I Notary Public o STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this / «p "£^i}L£p3^, 2002 by Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator of the City of Orono a Minnesota nunicjpaJ .corop^^^ipp, ynd instrument was executed on behalf of the ritv fi / .•.' ■j RACHEL DOCX3E NOTARY PUBUC-MNfErOTA 8 MyComniutonEt;!rwJa.T3l, ncr. | Beasvsfmii f'Dcc-C STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this___day of Notary Public , 2002, personally appeared before nie]^ -------who is personally known to me ------ whose identity I proved on the basis of ^vhose identity I proved on the oath^aflirmation of j a credible witness------------------------------ T — Md who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed on behalf of Professional Properties of Orono, LLP Notary Public Page 12 of 12 RESOlUTIONNv ^^2 3 IARCA tOCAllOM MAfC SAiMCVUTiomi lx-- m itXe Kr‘ fo*:tits-— |t p:. P ^5f» nL-tr — •*— DENTAL CLINIC ORONO. MN EXHIBIT A-1 COVERSHEET louviM tmtoue; I- ?II IS S2S5C?- ** lfer“ E-rSl. S7" i fc \ 0 till mm\ r:r. •41^ I' rru =.X mm ZiTt E.-C. a> <S>. CL.I ^ CaStTt fYUBOUl s:___ rL' « ■* —^ 41 CZ}C1M»H cowniot STVtOlK cavnuTY sniBoiK czDsrn;/vnim coirtAcni —-P- •Ml 1 mmmm,«« — —•1llIIIIISSL.I!i11SS* f•mm casumr sYinoui cacim sMtn mou •M M« A3 i r*:r Oophar Stale One Cal tMM f MMW (MMMOfltSnML CUTUI MMiak: OCNTM.OMC OMWOLIM A LANDFORM ihMl ■» CM mu U€H r»m C0.1 O Mo SS5 ^ o00 Z O' C og O •X C3l«T1 Tmi^M ««. I « rA HS5 m53& C3f ijHSMc suwimGBzaaB »mm M •»«* **** •••• * ^ COAlfA mm m mi mm» m ■• hrLJ kau m nn = gH 2 M < 's3 r 9 ^-1 rwaav fMMM owMorniMMi curmi HwUtOMC (NMIIM landformI**—••♦•%«••»—■»«» *S3» inipuii E«K C2.1 i OP 5 i g s I J U S MMUr K9. 0 RESOLUTIOiN NO.ll2S EXHIBIT A-3 ■arg-yjjs PRELWnNARY GRADING PLAN «M *41 0^ «i«« » i^*ti i « —ii « •t**^*^ P* ^^4 «M •# ^ I «^0V *• ^ -«»l ^ *4 Mb 0 m trn^m^9 'tm^m 90 00 0m *i* m0 _ M«^il .7*4 M 0 •«4i • ai«»4444 I 00* m0 »4I • M4 «MM0 mmr yypj4^ •» »m « «MM fMMfl* • «0M» MM-« —^»»b444 m^mm mm >w4— i«^ **** fci" 0^ I < Ma %B r ^ «■ M * •« m9^mm mm mm mm $mmmm mm • mmmrn Sm*mm3 0mmmm0 mm CD2.rr5s:.*s guL^^iasa?- * SriiM^'Mr^SMrt!^ * M*Sa^ GapiMfSMtOttCJl hrLJ •XU M lUT O O m i|- i^> r 5 P|^ o00 z Os n O C H tMMBW «MMM CiMt OOOMOPmSSOML cudiii P0mmrn ourr/naMC onoNOiiif LANDFORM “ISir MtOk; POfUMMr CIMMGAiM r«i HS52fir=«" r^x^issssisrus^xt C3.1 k IL a NO. a RESOLUTION NO.482 3 camrat £?i5S5 m «M« EXHIBIT A-4 PRELINHNARY UTILITY PLAN ^swS2r=a=s- STv- §If! * ?mT73 mS^ ***********”**** ** c>s»us£r3%»7£snEri&« •S?535?5.%5ag5:=. Q>2s;jLr~ • “ • I <■N «•« I M •• I cssm/imtiTT coprrAcnc&2ez3BZS3 »«« 1 Mi SISmw AM*5SSL esass**SISs- i MCffl • •• «• ruTUj •CMi ct rttr PiAk O Sp 5 So ^1=5 t( p > 5-^ V ifi' iiii -‘ f MMM imatmmm (MONoraonssoiM. conn pnfHlMK OCNTAOMC OOMliM LANDFORM wiwnpiM r*» ^ C4.1 czapftuiaffAirr fuwr scncouui •»*. m»mmm m «i*«» (DCD O'— -M ».«. 0® j# »►«■• GX*> E> mmmtjrtn. nus §• • sw •« mm •». •»CDG> ^ nXD UMMMV & CMTWMt IMS* # •9i9 str-•«-§m» mm gxd 0*9 M—«•••••a m»m QXD - — 0 9 CS-*SS!.-**• M tm»$m GXD - — 0 •-...GXD — 0 •i tM -GXD — 0 9 sr (•a •••••MV GXD —9 •3Stt • ••%•m •»••«•gxd — mMWUi MUM 0 ■«V9» 99 5Si**m m»»m 1GXD —0 •su*cntr—m ••• 1GXD —0 •m M*fU {GXD-^0 •r:;.*t--~.« «-*••*• GXD ■ ■■— m m 99 9^.M.• ••M C3G> -MM 0• m m 32? **STT*• M.•m m»m »«M KR“7T*> mmmtm**-iXD*^ shea L J fmmmm QNOMomrssoMtGnm praUdMc ocmcuMcomuar landform caumscAPi itoumcMcimc 54ar ^ S^^3KS^’s33S?fD&a-* • SSEfisiSJnaS^ • <*•*« M •« »i««Ki«« •>! waa^ • a m gf •«■ »^*i I •m\m» am ^ xm 0 a« mh ^sj«wrcr ' — UWDVffUR £>iu3 r » m 2? »||a ?i ^ C/j ■CMA ft fUf fT.i L2.1 M 2 ’ •Q n ?55a ooS•> LJ o 4' O « H» £ ^ ^ w •-?O H r PH it O S o 5 s/)ea L J A’l fmmwm OWNOfmSSOlN. caiTi/i pmum OCWT/HOMC BNUMr rUXMfLMt joeLJSi P1.1 I -T*F*t*T-T^*T*»‘r-f-T‘T*T-T*Tn*WV j FiJ * « ■ * __ ^ -\ ; —i»m wfcM* igf— 09 A m C fi X F<^o 52 09 r: w s o ^ ^ M ?0 Mr m rr r 5^y> *<I :?5?a O M • (/>^ oQO Z 9s Co C5 s shea L J ft^tmam 9 $sitmmm omofwnssoiML C£jmji pNKfMK OnTTALClMC CMONQLIM iMMk OCnMOMUUMO tUVAnOHS MW E1.1 M-#s9 t>qn i^^SSS t •ww g> gw gmitfagS^yATMNa Mr*PI shea L J fMSiav » MMaa CCMIBI PJ » W ->r^|g< &> PI S =► = 2m§ H m o o H WmALClMC (MONO.IM ornmiuLOMo MOflUM DCIOSMC EUVAnONS »«i»l o y (/) !»29 i r * 2 O P S p Co 2 ®3 El .2 A-^ o 'JL r n£SOLUTION NO.___4_8.2jJ e*-g* t. I. ■f • I • I ORONO PROFESSIONAL CENTER 2725 KaLEY PARKWAY F.XIIIDITD-4 ENTER/EXIT ' PR£U.\UNARV SIGNAGE PLAN •ALltllNUn SIGN URTM BACKLIT UJMITE LETTERS Wi \^FRB CAST CAP ~PRECA5T’ STONE IB*-4' -BRCK ROCK FACE RECAST STONE 7^ SI^NA^E 'A*©1/4* ■ * DATEi 4-I1-2002 T------ • rs N J TirV iSt^ PLAN yffittl ORONO PROFESSIONAL' CENTER V^PRE CAST CAP -----PRS CAST STONE -----ALUiKLfI SION URTM BACKLIT IS TOTAL PARKMO STALLS PROreRTY LINE UWITE LETTERS a-BRICK . ROCK FACE PR£ CAST STONE MIGNUiAT 12 13**4*i M*-0* |4-R00 <^..PR5 ©PN SITE PLAN 1/30 t |'.0* DATEi 4>n>}£02 r\ signage !:©'©I/4* .DATEi 4.1V2002 Pi §1 NORTH v% - ■! sS H r •« L r 5 o shea L J lOOMiMinM MSHet «*W4pJK«l tSttS-tSM TI1t»ft2S7 p •in4tn:o «w.tf»4WUaa cfltftt: ORONO PAOFESSIONAI CENTER pro]ictQ0e: DENTAL CLINIC ORONO. MN shitl title: SITE PLAN ANO SIGNAGE tnti« Ase% AMS.tf.rn tBil n BMIr 1. ( kM4k* 1 VIMi OITMifrUl •11Sr• • • S1.1 Oot 17 2002 8:18nt1 BONESTROO ROSENE RMDERLIK 6516361311 P. 1 « •• -r : ■ t r • •• . 1/1 Bonestroo ffjg RDsene . vv Anderlik & ^ I Associates Englhc»ers-& Architects 8on«tiroo« toicn#. Aotftrllfc and Ajtodaitf« tnc. It an Arririnailv* Aetfen/Equal Opporrunliy Cmplo>|^^ Md Owned FrlACipaitt Otto G. ■onosivoo, P£. • Marvin 1. Sorvafa. PC. • GJervs e. Cook. PC. • Pobert G. Schunicht. PC. • Jerry A. Bourdon. PE. . .* Stnioe ContulCanti: Pobcrt W. ftoscne. P£. • Joseph C Ancierfife. Pf • Blchard E. lUmer. P£. • Susan M. Ebertlrv Cpy Associate Principals: Keith A. Gordon. P£. • Bobert R. Pfefferfe. PE. • Richard W. Poster. PE • David O. Loskota. Pi Mark A. Haruoa PE • Michael T. Rautmcm. PX. • Ted K. Field. PE. • Kenneth P Anderson. PE • Mark E Rolfs. p£. • David A. Bonestroo. MJA. • Sidney P WlUarmorv PE. LS. • Agnes M. Rin^ MBA.* ARan Rick Schmidt. PE • Thomas W. Peterson. PE • James K- MaiarHt PE • Miles E Jensea PE • L Phillip Gravel ML PE • Daniel J. Cdgertorv p Ismael Martir)eE PE • Thomas A Syfko. PX. • Sheldon J. Johruon • Dale A Grove. PE • Thomas A Roushar. PE • Kobert X Oevery PE September 25.2002 Offices: Sl Paul. Sc. CJoud Rochester and Wmrnar. MM • Milwaukee. Wl • Chica^. E Mbsite: wwwboncstroo com Mr. Mike Gaffron.. Planning Director City of Orono ' ^ Post Office Box 66 ‘ Crystal Bay, MN 55323 . Re; Professional Properties of Orono . File No. 139-02-000 Plat No. 02-2782 Dear Mike: We have reviewed the development plans for the Professional Properties building. The site is located at 2765 Kelley Parkway in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Ch: Crystal Bay Road and TH 12. The proposed use of the site is for a dental/medical coii;pt«- Wr have the following comments in regards to engineering matters. 1. Sanitary Sewer: The sanitary sewer service is shown connecting to an existing manhole along Old Crystal Bay Road. The proposed 8-inch PVC service pipe will connect at the existing manhole invert elevation of 1006.4. The developer may want to install the service pipe at a grade of less than I % between the building and the existing manhole to minimize the excavation depth for the service pipe. This will require the construction of an outside drop at the existing manhole. Final plans should include profile views of the sanitary sewer. The plans should also include ' typical sections for trail and street repair. All repairs to the trail and street shall be made immediately after they are disturbed. 2. Water Main: The proposed water main design appears acceptable. The proposed connection to the existing water main stub should be coordinated with the City and instiled in accordance with City standards. 3. Storm Sewer/Grading: The proposed sturm sewer is shown discharging east of the site. The proposed pipe invert is something less than 1014.93 (proposed upstream invert at CBMH-5). Based on existing topography the discharge pipe invert elevation will be 5 to 6-feet under ground. The applicant should provide additional detail as to how this storm sewer system will work. Riprap should be provided at all outlets. The southwest comer of the site should be graded so drainage is directed easterly into the existing MN/DOT ditch. The existing culvert under Old Crystal Bay Road should be bulkheaded and abandoned. The proposed grading plan shows grading within the MN7DOT right-of-way. Plans should be submitted to MN/DOT for their review and approval. The proposed grading plan shows grading and parking lot construction on the adjacent property to the east. The applicant should verify they have control over this parcel and include additional grading information to identify how drainage will be handled on this site. 2335 Weit Highway 36 ■ St. Paul. MN 55113 > 651-636-4600 . Fax: 651-63^4311 Oot 17 2Q02 8:18RM BOME8TROO ROSENE RNDERLIK 6516361311 P*2 Additional storm sewer may be necessary on the easterly parcel to convey storm water flows. Final plans should show plan and profile views of the proposed sewer and include storm sewer details. .A drainage area map and storm sewer calculations should be submitted for our review. Silt fence and any other erosion control measures should be in place prior to any site grading. Final plans should be submitted to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) for their review. 4. Streets^Trails/Parking: A geotechnical report, R-value recommendation and pavement design should be provided for review. A typical street section for repairs to Old Crystal Bay Road should be included in the plan set Details should be provided for the proposed bituminous trail along TH 12. MN/DOT should review and comment on the location and design of the trail. 5. Flnracial Guarantee: We have estimated the cost of site improvements to be $196,936, the itemized estimate is att^hed. The applicant should provide a financial guarantee of 150% of this amount or $295,404 prior to any work on the site. The financial guarantee can be reviewed and reduced periodically as work is completed and accepted. The financial guarantee should never be less than $20,000 until the job is complete and all work has been accepted by the City. Please contact me at (651) 604-4863 if 3tou have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very druly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERUK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg Attachment Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono Oct 17 2002 a:18nM BONESTROO ROSENE RNDERLIK 6516361311 P‘3 CITY OF ORONO PROFESSIONAL PROPERTIES COMMERCIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAT FILE NO. 2782 SITE IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATE: EST. _______________ITEM __________UNIT QUANTITY Mobilization Site grading Common excavation Select granular material Aggregate base, Cl. 5,100% crushed Type 31 bit. base course Type 41 bit. wear course Bituminous material for tack Concrete curb and gutter Landscaping Concrete walk y DIP 8' DIP 6* gate valve & box 8* gate valve & box Hydrant Connect to existing water main 12" RCP storm sewer 15" RCP storm sewer 18" RCP storm sewer Storm catch basin w/casting Storm catch basin MH w/casting 8" PVC sanitary sewer Sanitary sewer cleanout Connect to existing sanitary sewer Silt fence UNIT EST. PRICE COST LS LS CY CY TN TN TN GL LF LS SF LF LF EA EA EA EA LF LF LF EA EA LF EA EA LF Estimated Construction Cost <4-50% Security Deposit Total Security Deposit Required 1 1 3000 1500 1800 680 400 400 2200 1 1920 20 160 1 1 1 1 194 183 225 2 4 187 3 1 700 $5,000.00 5.000. 00 5.00 16.00 11.00 32.00 35.00 1.00 8.00 25,000.00 3.00 20.00 25.00 800.00 1.000. 00 1.500.00 1,000.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 1.200.00 1,500.00 23.00 300.00 1.000.00 3.00 $5,000 5.000 15.000 24.000 19,800 21,760 14.000 400 17,600 25.000 5,760 400 4.000 800 1.000 1,500 1,000 4,850 5,490 7,875 2,400 6,000 4,301 900 1,000 2,100 $196,936 98,^468 $295,404 Final Development Plan Review Punchlist ^02-2782/2842 Professional Properties of Orono - IVIedical Office Building #02-2841.Professional Properties of Orono - Rezoning of “2745" Kelley Parkway Legal Descriptions: Lot 1, Block 1, Willow Properties Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and Lot 1, Block 2, City of Orono Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (Adjacent lot) PINS #:33-118-23 12 0002 33-118-23 12 0008 General Concept Plan Approval: Resolution No. 4823 on June 10, 2002 granted conceptual approval for rczoning to B-6/PUD for 15,000 s.f. medical office use, incl. preliminary site plan approval. Revised General Concept Plan Approval: Resolution No. 4860 on September 9, 2002 granted approval for the revised layout including expansion of the building to 16,000 s.f, reorientation of the building, and use of the adjacent parcel (Lot 1, Block 2, City of Orono Addition) for parking and shared access. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: o Signed purchase agreement for principal lot □ Copy of signed purchase agreement to acquire the 2.5 acre Adjacent Parcel. Also need consent of current pwner to rezone. Under the staff-proposed terms of the rezoning approval, the Adjacent Parcel may be developed for any permitted or conditional use allowed in the B-6 District, but shall be developed only via the PUD review and approval process. This requirement may need to be established via a covenant for the property. □ Draft “Shared Access and Parking Agreement" for the shared access driveway and the 5 stalls that will be on adjacent lot to meet the parking requirement for the main lot, agreement must indic ate conditions of use, etc. as provided for in Orono Zoning Code Section 10.61 Subd. 6. The area of the Adjacent Parcel used to meet the minimum parking requirement for the Property shall be excluded from pertinent lot area and parking calculations when the Adjacent Parcel is developed. □ Suitable evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) approval of the stormwater management plan before Development Plan Approval will be granted. □ Parking lot striping & traffic signage plan Page 1 of 4 □ Site sigoage and lighting plan. Shall adhere to the pertinent zoning code standards, and shall be subject to approval by the City Council. Site lighting shall be low and shielded, similar to the style of lighting found at the Orono Administrative Facilities. Site lighting along the west a«d south boundaries shall be provided adequate to light the trails along these two sides of tlie property. Street lighting along Kelley Parkway adjacent to the property shall be provided by the Developer and shall be of a style, number, height and location approved by the City Council. □ Final building construction plans, including: a) elevations of all sides of the building; type and color of exterior building materials; proposed floor plan; building dimensions; and the location of trash and recycling containers and of heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipnient. b) c) 'i) e) □ Samples of final colors, types and qualities of building materials. The proposed building shall be subject to the Architectural Standards for the B-6 District per Zoning Code Section 10.45, Subd. 6(1). The proposed dumpster enclosure shall be compatible architecturally with the proposed medical building and may be located near the southeast comer of the Property to allow for joint use with the Adjacent Parcel. □ Parking lot construction plans, including confirmation that parking lots and driving lanes will be paved and provided with concrete curb and gutter, and that all driving lanes within parking lots shall have a 9-ton minimum pavement section. A geotechnical evaluation of the soil shall be done in conjunction with the pavement design and shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. □ Final plans and specifications for ail proposed «tilit>' lines and ser> ices, including any proposed revisions to existing service facilities. Proposed plans shall be provided to the City for final review and approval with the Preliminary Plan set. The Public Works Department and MnDOT shall review and approve all utility improvements. Final sanitary sewer and watermain plans shall be provided and are subject to approval by the Public Works Department. □ Filial grading, drainage and erosion control plan showing existing and proposed contours, building locations, elevations, stormwater facilities and calculations, utilities and erosion control measures to be used during construction. Development Plan Approval will i»ot be granted until the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and MnDOT have approved the stormwater plans. □ Trail & sidewalk plans as well as final landscaping design plan with planting schedules including numbers and species, in accordance with the landscaping requirements of the B-6 zoning district. These guidelines must be met: - Must present a positive visual image toward Kelley Parkway. Page 2 of 4 L • - Landscaping plan shall meet all landscaping standards established for the B-6 District in Section 10.45, Subdivision 6(H). In addition, the Developer shall be responsible for sodding the boulevard of Kelley Parkway and any other areas outside the property botindary that may be disturbed. The developer shall create a “parkway ” character through substantial landscaping along Kelley Park\vay; shall provide substantial deciduous trees along the west boundary; and shall provide a combination of deciduous and coniferous trees along the south boundary of the property. - Along Kelley Parkway, the Development Plan shall incorporate a green (sod) boulevard no less than 8 feet in width behind the curbline of Kelley Parkway; a concrete sidewalk 6 feet in width located partially within the right-of way and partially on the property; and a setback to parking from the north lot line of no less than 20 feet. The property o\vner shall be responsible for installation and maintenance of the sidewalk and boulevard. - Along Old Crystal Bay Road, the setback from the eastern edge of the existing trail to the back of parking lot curb shall be no less than 5 feet. A suitable buffer to provide a sense of physical separation between the parking lot and users of the trail shall be provided, in the form of a hedge or vegetative banier, a berm, a short barrier wall, additional separation, or some other method acceptable to the City Council. A trail easement shall be granted to the City over the westerly 25' of the property. The City shall be responsible for maintenance of this trail. - The proposed pedestrian trail along Highway 12 shall be constructed by the developer aad shall be 8' wide, of bituminous surfacing and shall be located either within the Highway 12 right-of-way, subject to MnDOT approval, or within the Property, approximately abutting the south Property line. The intent of this trail is to provide a connection to the existing and future trail system along Highway 12, while providing separation from the traveled portion of the right-of-way. Because it is unknown at this time whether the Highway 12 shoulder may be converted from a rural section to an urban section, the exact location and design of the trail cannot be determined at this time. Therefore, construction of this trail may be deferred until such time that development of the Adjacent Parcel occurs, and'or until such time that a decision on the design of the Highway 12 shoulder is reached. The City Council shall make the final determination of when and how the trail is to be constructed. Developer shall post suitable financial security in the interim for such constiuction. The City shall be responsible for the maintenance of this trail upon its completion and acceptance. □ Draft Development Agreement. Development Approval is contingent upon the successful execution of a Development Agreement between the applicant and the City. Such Agreement shall address all specific City reouirements for the development. □ Financial Guarantee. The Development Agreement shall include a financial guarantee by the applicant to ensure the completion of site improvements. The City Engineer shall complete an estimate of improvement costs, including but not limited to landscaping, grading, erosion Page 3 of 4 control, utilities, driveways and parking areas, trails, sidewalks, retaining walls and stormwater management facility construction, and the applicant shall provide to the City a financial guarantee of 150% of the improvement costs. □ Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee. The standard Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee for commercial development shall be paid by the developer at the rate of $6,480 per acre (2002 Fee Schedule). The City Council shall determine prior to final Development Plan approval whether the Developer will be charged additional fees for off-site stormwater improvements that benefit this property. The Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee shall not be charged for the acreage within the Adjacent Parcel that is to be developed to serve the property; said Fee for the acr. ^ in the Adjacent Parcel shall be charged at the time the Adjacent Parcel is developed. □ Sewer and Water Connection Charges. The applicant shall pay sewer and water connection charges to the City in an amount to be arrived at by use of the following formula: A - 2 X 2.0 acres x $14,115/acre “ Connection Charge Due A where: A = number of SAC units required for the office building 2 = number of sewer/water units paid previously 2.0 acres = area of the Property $14,115 = per-acre connection fees for 1989 Highway 12 municipal sewer & water project. Additional Items to Remember: - Applicants' architect shall submit final development plans to the Metro Council Environmental Services to determine the exact number of SAC units to be charged at the time of the issuance of building permits. Page 4 of 4 General Concept Plan Approval Date: August 26,2002 (Resolution #4852) Concept Plan Approval Effective Period: August 26,2002 • February 26* 2003 Final development Plan Approval Application Date: September 18,2002 60-Day Deadline: November 17,2002 /</ To; From: Date: Subject: Chair Smith & Planning Commission Members Mike Gaffiron, Planning Director October 18,2002 #02-2789/#02-2840 Dahlstrom Development, LLC, “2550" Wayzata Boulevard - Public Hearing - Request for Approval of Final Development Plans The applicant has submitted Final Development Plans for City approval, per the requirements of Concept Plan Approval Resolution No. 4852 adopted by the Council on August 26. Applicants presented the Plans to Planning Commission at a work session on October 7, at which time Planning Commission members made a number of comments which applicants will address at the public hearing. The applicants request that Planning Commission make a formal recommendation for approval on October 21, and request final action by the Council on November 12. List of Exhibits A • Applicant’s Submittals (See listing attached) B • Additional Information Distributed October 7 B-1 City Engineer Comments Dated October 1,2002 & Erosion Control Comments B-2 8/20/02 Memo from US Bancorp - Don Solie B-3 Ma.xfield Market Study Dated 8/20/02 B-4 Business Histories - Dahlstrom, Hassler C • Additional Submittals Received from Applicants After October 7 C-1 New Sheet C2.1: Stonebay Site Plan C-2 New Sheet L7.1: Stonebay Entrance Monument Detail C-3 Stonebay Outlots A & B Concept Plan (For Reference Only) C4 Possible Xcel Energy Street Lighting Models C-5 Landform Additional Information Submittal Letter 10-16-02 C-6 Examples of Townhome and Condominium Developments (Comparisons) D - Concept Plan Approval Resolution No. 4852 E - Ron Moorse Letter re Affordability 10/18/02 Additional Submittals Not Attached (but Available) - Declarations/Covenants: 1) Master Declaration (attached) 2) Stonebay Ramblers* 3) Stonebay Twinhomes* 4) Stonebay Condominium* 5) Stonebay Villas (Willow Dr)* - Drainage Narrative - September 12, 2002 Dahlstrom Development LLC #02-2789/02-2840 ‘Stonebay’ Final Development Plan Review October 18,2002 Page 2 Key Issues- for Review There are a number of key issues on which the Planning Commission should focus its review. These are pnmanly items that were not dealt with in depth at the Concept Plan stage, and for which a ^eater level of detail now has been provided at the Development Plan stage of the review process. Various City consultants and staff have reviewed the plans and have made verbal or written comments, summarized below: 1.Wally Case of DSU, Inc. has reviewed the Final Development Plans, specifically the landscape plans. He also was asked to comment on the scale and massing of buildings, open space, circulation, etc. While his written comments will not be available for another week or t%vo. Case did verbally provide his comments to staff in a phone conversation on October 17. He indicated that the proposed landscape plan is very good and substantially exceeds the mimmum requirements of the RPUD District. Case had a number of suggestions and comments about various aspects of the plan. The following is a brief summary of his comments: ^ Landscaping: In general, the landscaping/grading of the site incorporates many retaining walls. Based on the cover sheet key, most of these will be modular block walls, although the detail suggests they will be mostly boulder walls. Which is it, or is there a mix that is not clearly apparent. What is the type of stone to be used in the boulder walls - Limestone? Igneous boulders? Most of the walls appear to be less than 4’ in height; those over 4’ will need to be engineered. Where boulder walls are to be used, the detail suggests a tiering by boulder size, biggest on the bottom, smallest on top. This is conceptually correct, but an experienced boulder wall contractor should be used to ensure attractive, high quality, stable wall systems that don t look “layered”. - The boulder wall along the NW comer of the east Lofts building leaves no pedestrian access above the boulder wall... could this be tweaked, and is it a potential fire access issue? - In general the landscaping plan is excellent, incorporating suitable tree and plant species and seed mixes. The proposed tree sizes are appropriate. Case has some suggestions regarding a few tree or plant species he would rather avoid, and he might suggest more use of native species, but overall the planting plan is very well done. He suggests that pH readmgs be taken before planting so that certain tree species might if necessary be traded out for those most tolerant to actual site conditions... - Note that the shrub beds are not edged, which leads to a softer look but perhaps unkempt until plantings mature. r f Dahlstrom Development LLC #02-2789/02-2840 *Stonebay' Final Development Plan Review October 18,2002 Page 3 - Jr wetland restoration areas or where prairie grasses are proposed, it would be appropriate to include in the Development Agreement a long-term management plan for these areas. - Irrigation system should include rain sensors to avoid watering during rain events... Site layout, building design and quality : - In a few of the 3 unit groupings the roof designs will concentrate roof runoff - careful drainage control (positive sloping grades, gutters, or other measures) will be needed. - Roof massing will be soAened by the use of layered shingles; the style proposed by applicants appears to be a embossed layering rather than actual layering... - While building design styles are subjective, keep in mind that the public will generally see three sides of a building, so design features such as brick and stone should be carried to the sides where there is high visibility. The same might be said about the rear of the 2-story towrJiomes, where in many cases the rear windows and balconies look across at another unit’s rear facade across the street. - Again subjective but perhaps a visual issue is that many views within the development involve garage doors; use of attractive door styles and window features will contribute to a warmer feel of the neighborhood. - Consistent use of window features may be appropriate for some types of units; the detail for the 2-story townhome front facade mixes window styles (12 pane and 4-pane). Again, these features might add to the quality look of the buildings without adding higher costs... - The vertical brick work on the Lofrs and the use of covered entry porches helps to reduce the massive look of the buildings. Are there other design features that could be added to break up the long front facade? - The proposed layout of the two story townhomes has been ^veaked to eliminate most parking conflicts. There is still one situation just west of the main entrance whe; the first 2-story unit fronting on Kelley Parkway has at best only one driveway parking space available without blocking the adjacent garage (See Sheet C3.3). Pedestrian movement : • (See Sheets C2.2 and C2.3) For the 2-story townhomes along Kelley Parkway, the interior sidewalks are proposed at 3’ widths; they should be widened to 4' for two persons to comfortably walk side-by-side. Most other sidewalks on the project arc proposed at 5' widths; Case suggests they should be expanded to 6 ’ where feasible. In general, the pedestrian w ays and connections are well located and provide for good movement around the neighborhood. Dahlstrom Development LLC #02-2789/02-2840 *Stonebay ’ Final Development Plan Review October 18,2002 Page 4 - (Sheet C2.3, North Lane Section) The parallel parking along North Lane is in close proximity to a retaining wall with little space for vehicle driver or passengers to exit the vehicle. These areas should be provided with additional width and/or railings to eliminate this potential conflict. - Handicap accessibility - sidewalk cuts are shown at 12:1 slope, could be flatter (20:1 suggested by Case) - need to review in terms of ADA requirements. - The pond ‘overlook ’ across Kelley Parkway from the main entrance is located and sized to accommodate a future bus shelter. 2.Tom Kellogg has provided comments in relation to engineering issues in his letters dated October 1,2002 (Exhibit B-1) and in his comments on the Concept Plan dated May 9,2002. Sheldon Johnson provided his original comments regarding transportation matters in a ’memo dated August 8,2002. Many of the issues ’orought up at the Concept Plan stage have been resolved. A number of issues remain to be addressed. These include: ^wsl: Sanitary sewer capacity south ofHighway 12 will be limited until Mn/DOT rebuilds the sewer lines along the New Highway 12 corridor and Orono rebuilds the segment between 12 aiid the tracks. Since under Dahlstrom ’s staging plan the first units needing sewer capacity reconstructions are planned to happen in 2003, we believe that capacity will not be exceeded. Per Kellogg s latest letter, plans should show how the commercial Outlets will be served by sewer. Manhole details need to incorporate Infi-Shield exterior sealing system or equivalent. Water: No remaining design issues. Stoi^ Sew^r: The stormwater pond outlet under Highway 12 has been revised as requested to align with the downstream ditch west of the golf dome. A number of requested details have yet to be submitted: 1) Grading plans to show 100-year highwater elevations and proposed emergency overflow elevations and locations for all ponding areas. 2) 2’ of freeboad must be provided between all basement elevations and pond high water levels 3) A drainage area map, storm sewer and ponding calculations must be submitted for review. 4) Wetland delineation report must be submitted for review. 5) Need MCWD review and approval of stormwater plan. Site grading : Overall site plan should include an earthworks summary to quantify the proposed cut and fill. Retaining walls over 4’ require an engineered design. Erosion control comments by Bonestroo and Associates are included herein as part of Exhibit B-1. Dahlstrom Development LLC #02-2789/02-2840 *Stonebay* Final Development Plan Revic^v October 18,2002 Pages Streets and Trails : Plans should confirm horizontal curve has been changed to meet 500' radius. Vertical curves must be indicated on the plans. Right-of-way east of Kelley must be widened to accommodate turn lanes and snow storage, i.e. 15' behind the curb, or snow storage will end up on private property. Changes to Willow Drive are also required as part of this project: A center northbound left-turn lane and southbound right turn lane. The trail crossing at Willow/Kelley should be nioveo eastward to the intersection rather than 75' west of it as currently shown. The trail segment along Willow south of kelley should be constuxted in the commercial outlot as part of this project. A geotechnical report, R-value recommendation and pavement design should be provided for review. Traffic : The roundabout design does not meet the standards for a typical moving van. There are a number of options to resolving this, including widening the road or adding a surmountable inner curb with 4’ sidewalk at the perimeter of the roundabout. The City Engineer is recommending against the recently added separate access to West Lane. The reason for this access apparently was to deal with elevation differences between the cast Lofts bui. Jing parking entrance and the drop-off circle at the lofts shared entry level. This will likely generate some discussion Sheldon Johnson of Bonestroo is expecting to complete his study of traffic issues for the Highway 12 area within the next two weeks. Mr. Johnson has indicated he will be at the October 21 meeting to address any questions Planning Commission may have regarding the traffic study. His comments related to the impacts of the Dahlstrom project have been incorporated into Tom Kellogg ’s letter of October 1 and discussed above; specifically, the need to add a northbound left turn lane (for easy access to Kelley Parkway) and a southbound right tuni lane at Willow/12 (to reduce stacking in the southbound through lane). These costs should be borne by Dahlstrom. Johnson has indicated a number ofehanges will likely be recommended to area roadways and intersections in addition to those at Willow/Kelley and Willow/12, but they are not directly a result of the Dahlstrom project. 3. City Fire Marshal Bill Meyer has reviewed the plans and has indicated he has no significant changes that would impact site layout or design. He indicated that other than refining a few hydrant locations, he does not see any issues from a fire safety standpoint. He plans to meet with Long Lake Fire Dept, representatives the week of October 21 to determine whether they have any comments. Dablstrom Development LLC #02-2789/02-2840 *Stonebay’ Final Development Plan Review October 18,2002 Page 6 4.Staff would offer the following comments on a variety of topics: Kelley Parkway Streetscape. Review the proposed streetscape for Kelley Parkway, focusing on the width ofboulevard, sidewalk locations and connections, proposed plantings, etc. Does the streetscape reflect your expectations in terms of a ‘parkway’ feel? The landscape plan indicates an 8' wide boulevard except along the parking bumpouts on the north side, where the sidewalk abuts the parking stalls for easy pedestrian access. The boulevard trees proposed include hardwood species of red oak. ash. maple and linden, with mature heights ranging from 50-75'. This mix should be adequate when mature to minimize views of the building. At the proposed approximately 30’ on center spacing, this should provide a heavily wooded streetscape in the far future. Lighting along Kelley Parkway has not been strictly defined by the applicant or the City. Applicant has provided samples of decorative lighting styles that could be used for the ^enor road system as well as for Kelley Parkway, for Planning Commission consideration, ^e primary issue is whether the City wants decorative lights with a visible lighting source ining the streets (i.e. similar to the Victorian style of lights lining Highway 12 through Long e), or would rather see downward cast shielded-source (“shoebox ”) lighting as we lequire or parking lots. Planrung Commission is requested to make a recommendation to Council on the style of lighting it would like to see within the interior of the development as well as along Kelley Parkway. Iiml Svslem. Look especially at the area around the stormwater pond. Do the proposed trails provide the connectivity and pedestrian options the City was looking for? Are there ^y trail segments that need to be added or relocated within the development? Does developer have a proposed staging schedule for trail development, and are you satisfied with that staging plan? The City Engineer and staff recommend that all trail segments except those adjacent to Highway 12 be constructed as part of the RPUD project; the current plans accomplish this with the exception of the segment along Willow south of Kelley which should usi be delayed pending commercial site development. Building Design and Materials. Particularly consider the elevation views of the Lofls. Does the root and building design enhance the development while incorporating sifficient design Clements to limit the visual height impacts? Is the "court” area between the two lofts uildmgs designed attractively and functionally for access and as a common entry' amenity? Applicants have provided brick and stone samples and color palettes which will be available or review at the PC meeting. Staff believes the proposed materials are of the high quality expected, and include face brick, cast stone and ‘hardiplank’ lap siding. The shingles arc an asphalt with decorative shading to give them some depth; would actual layered shingles provide a better appearance a; slightly added cost? Dahlstrom Development LLC #02-2789/02-2840 *Stonebay* Final Development Plan Review October 18,2002 Page 7 Interior Building Site Layout. Do the plans indicate sufficient open space between buildings? Do each of the townhomes have sufficien. yard area, and are they oriented to take advantage of view lines? Is there sufficient parking provided for each unit, and is the on-street parking handled appropriately? Recreation Amenities. New Sheet C2.1 (Exhibit C-1) indicates the shaded areas proposed as private recreation areas meeting the RPUD requirement for 10% of the site in private recreation areas. The designated areas are within the commons areas of the project and include 3.3 dry buildable acres. Since the dry buildable site acreage is 26 acres, it appears the 10% requirement is met.? Note that a tot-lot is proposed along East Lane and a fire pit is shown at the rear of the West Lane townhomes. Applicant should be asked to provide a calculation and diagram to show which 10% of the site is being proposed as meeting the 10% requirement. Entry Monument . Details of the entry monument are shown on new Sheet L7.1 (Exhibit C- Does Planning Commission have any comments? Use of MnDOT Pond Property for Kellev Parkway & Pond Expansion. Orono is submitting on Dahlstrom’s behalf a request for MnDOT permits for construction of Kelley Parkway and construction of the stormwater pond within existing MnDOT right-of-way. Those permits are likely to be processed and approved by MnDOT in early 2003. Concurrently, Orono is submitting a request to MnDOT for reconvey'ance to the City of the por^-nn of MnDOT right-of-way to be used for Kelley Parkway. This reconveyance would invef c deeding to MnDOT the portions of newly created pond that will be outside of L' J)OT’s current right-of way. An issue lor future discussions betw-een MnDOT, Orono and Hennepin County (w hich will ‘inherit’ the pond when New Highway 12 is completed) is who will maintain the stormw ater pond. It is being expanded to serve as a regional pond, benefitting the roadway, the Dahlstrom development, and additional areas upstream. Our expectation is that Orono will ultimately be responsible for maintaining the pond Development Phasing. The applicants have provided a phasing plan that establishes Phase 1 as construction of Kelley Parkway, the stormwater pond, and a westerly grouping of rambler and rivo-story townhomes. Future Phases with no distinct timeframe include (.^) the North Lane rambler townhomes; (B) the East Lane/East Circle rambler and two-stcr\' townhomes; (C) the four ‘Villas’ accessing directly from Willow Drive; and (D) the Lofts condominiums. Additionally, development of each of the two commercial outlets might be considered as separate phases, with no specified timeframe given. i Dahlstrom Development LLC #02-2789/02*2840 *Stonebay* Final Development Plan Review October 18,2002 Page 8 To-this end, applicants have formally requested that the preliminary plat for the entire development be approved, with final platting of the various phases to occur at the time of their development. The initia) overall Hnal plat would plat each Phase as a separate Outlot with the final platting of Pha^w A-D withheld until they are ready to be developed To effect’ this scenano. applicants request that the Effective Period of Preliminary Plat Approval be extended for up to five years. This is generally allowable under Orono Subdivision Code section 11.10, Subd. 15. ^e benefits for the applicant are at least two-fold. First, no changes the City makes to the Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Code could impact the development ’s approval during the effective penod of preliminary plat approval. Second, the properties would presumably actuanyVlaUed^^^**^ ^ outlets and open land rather than as building sites, until they are tolQpment Fees; Effects of Phasing. Applicants have also formally requested that tn nf a^^l't'on to the approximately S22.000 the applicant has paid o the Ciy to date in application fees, certain development fees are required to be paid at the ti^me of development. These include Park Dedication Fees, Sewer and Water Connection Charges wd Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fees. Staff has calculated an estimate of the expected development fees to be charged for this project, summarized as follows: Development Fees Summary Residential: Park Dedication Fee................................ § 545,000 Sanitary Sewer Coruiection Charge........... 221,046 Municipal Water Connection Charge........ 365,432 Storm Water & Drainage Trunk Fee......... 235.600 Residential Total $ 1,368,078 Commercial: Park Dedication Fee.............................. S 137 400 Sanitary Sewer Connection Charge........ 52,66S Municipal Water Connection Charge....... 87,070 Storm Water & Drainage Trunk Fee......... 5 4 152 Commercial Total S 341,290 A detailed analysis of the fee calculation methods was attached in the work session exhibits Md IS available for review. The rationale for applicants phasing request is that the City does of the development that generates those fees until the actual e elopment occurs. The City has not committed to phasing of the development fees as of IS \\n mg; however, this is a matter for Council discussion. Note that while the park tn,nTT^ calculated on a unit basis, the sewer & water charges and the stormwater the fee phasing request, the fees would be prorated based on number ofunits or number of acres within each Dahlstrom Development LLC #02-2789/02-2840 ‘Stonebay’ Final Development Plan Review October 18,2002 Page 9 Commerc ial Outlots Development Viability. The applicants were requested to submit for the record a conceptual diagram showing that the two commercial outlots could be developed for their intended purpose. That concept sketch is included as Exhibit C-3 for demonstrative purposes only, and is not to be construed as either a proposal or as an approved development plan for the Outlots. Housing Affordability. Potential City Contributions . Staff and applicants met in early September with Donald Solie of US Bancorp to discuss the financial aspects of making housing affordable. Please review the Affordable Housing Proposal dated September 18, 2002 by Terry Dahlstrom. Staff concluded that the ability to create affordability within the types of units proposed likely woul involve a partnering between the City and the developer. Because the sales prices of the units are above most accepted definitions of affordability, the developer is proposing that a small number of units be priced at the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency’s ‘Community Activity Set Aside* (CASA) program maximum level of $199,000 (or whatever level the CASA program sets in future years). The CASA program provides special financing to qualifying homebuyers. The developer ’s proposal is to provide one of the following options: a) Two condominium units and nvo 2-story towmhome units affordable at the CASA maximum; or b) Three two- story townhome units at the CASA limit. The developer proposes that Orono contribute funds/resources equal to 15% of the CASA maximum, i.e. approximately $30,000 per unit. Potential methods for the City to contribute might include the following (estimates only): - Waiver of park dedication fees: - Waiver of sewer and water comiection charges: - Waiverofstormwatertrunk fees: - Waiver of building permit/plan review fees: $3250 per unit $3500 per unit (conversion from acreage basis to unit b''*"’*;) $ 1400 per unit (conversion froi. acreage basis to unit basis) $2000 per unit It should be noted that the Council ’s conversion of the 1989 Highway 12 Sewer & Water connection charges from a “per-unif ’ to a “per-acre” basis for fee calculation has resulted in a great savings to any de\ eloper of the Hi^way 12 area properties benefitted by the 1989 sewer and water improvements. This fee structure was established not merely to accomplish repajment of the bonds on the 1989 projects based on the vacant acreage remaining to be developed in 2000, but to also have the positive effect of reducing the unit connection fees to a level that might allow for development of more affordable housing at the higher densities planned for the High ’ay 12 area. Had this fee structure not been recently changed, applicants would be paying approximately $10,500 per S & W unit rather than the $3500 per unit at the 6 unit per acre density of Stonebay. This could be considered as an already- realized $1,169,000 contribution by the City ($7,000 x 167 units)... Dablstrom Development LLC #02-2789/02-2840 ‘Stonebay* Final Development Plan Review October 18,2002 Page 10 Qlher potential funding methods the City might consider may include a variety of as yet unexplored affordability grant programs. At its October 14 meeting the City Council directed staff to obtain from the developer financial information regarding the project to enable an evaluation of the feasibility of a more aggressive affordability effort. Please review Ron Moorse ’s letter of October 18 2002 (Exhibit E). Declarations/CQvenants. Applicant has provided 5 separate Declaration documents which create the various associations and govern the various ‘communities ’ to be created within the Stonebay development. The Master Declaration was included in the PC’ work session packet md staff will be happy to provide you with copies of the individual community declarations if you would like to review them. These will be reviewed by the City Attorney. Staff has not yet had a chance to review them in any detail. Similar Devejopments for .Comparison . Applicants have provided listing information for vanous tj^es of similar housing units available in the western metro area, for Planning Commission to use as a comparison (Exhibit C-6). pgvelpper Quali fications Information . Applicants iiave provided information regarding their backgrounds in the development industry (Exhibit B-4). Market Analysis . Applicants have provided a market analysis by Maxfield research regarding the market viability of the proposed housing development (Exhibit B-3). The study makes the following conclusions and recommendations: "The proposed Orono development plan offers a strong housing mix for its intended target the area " " *^*’*" average range of those currently selling in The site location offers prospect! -e buyers convenient access, a strong residential character and substantial open space and natural amenities. The proposed Orono development will attract a diverse mix of target markets ranging from young households through and including seniors, all of whom will be looking for housinu products that offer greater Hexibility, but do not sacrifice amenities. In reviewing the proposed product types, we suggest that you consider increasing the average size of the condominium units and that the pricing on these units could also increase and still be very marketable.” Dahlstrom Development LLC #02>2789/02>2840 ‘Stonebay’ Final Development Plan Review October 18,2002 Page 11 Stair Recommendation Planning Commission should review each of the topics presented above and determine whether they have been adequately addressed by the developer. Planning Commission is requested to make recommendations to Council that focus on the following issues: 1. Acceptability of site layout. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Acceptability of building styles and proposed materials & color palettes. Acceptability of provisions for pedestrian circulation, accessibility and connectivity. Acceptability of recreation amenities, both private and public. Recomn.endations on site lighting as well as Kelley I’arkw'ay lighting and streetscape. Acceptability of overall landscape plan. 7. Recommendations regarding housing affordability. S. Recommendations regarding development covenants. Plamiing Commission is again encouraged to identify any issues with any of the above and recominend revisions or changes as you see fit. Applicants have requested that Plaiming Commission make a recommendation to Council for Council action on November 12 in order to meet applicants schedule. If Planning Commission feels that for some reason the Final Development Plans require substantial revisions or additional Planning Commission review beyond the October 21 meeting, your options include scheduling a special meeting or tabling until your November 18 meeting. Any recommendation for approval should include a recommendation that applicants work with staff to resolve outstanding engineering and other related issues either noted in this memo or which may come to light in the future. A ^02-2840 Dahlstrom Development LLC FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTALS for STONEBAY Revised List October 18,2002 /0 ’/9-0Z. Plan Sheets: Sheet Indei No. Title C5.1 Preliminary Plat incl.future phases (1 *4 of 4) Final Plat Drawings Sheet Inden No. Title AU A1.2 A1.3 A2.1 A2.2 A3.1 A3.2 CO.l CM C2.1 C2.2 C2.3 C3.1 C3.2 C3.3 C3.4 C3.5 C4.I C4.2 C4.3 C4.4 C4.5 C4.6 Rambler Townhnme Drawim^s: Typical Plan and Elevation Typical Roof Plan and Elevation Typical Elevations Two Story Townhome Drawinffx: Floor Plans and Roof Plan Elevations Lofts Drawings'. Roof Plan and Floor Plan Elevations General Title Sheet Existing Conditions Site Plan (See 10/18 Exh. C-1) Preliminary Design Guideline Plan Preliminary Design Guideline Plan Grading and E osion Control Master Grading Plan Pond Grading Plan & Details Central & West Lanes Grading Plan Northwest Lane Grading Plan Grading Details Sanitary Sewer dc Water Plans/Proftlp^ Master Utility Plan Kelley Parkway (east halO Kelley Parlway (west halO Central Lane Northwest Lane West Lane C4.7 C4.8 C4.9 C4.10 C4.I1 C7.1 C7.2 C7.3 L2.1 L2.1A L..2 L6.1 L6.IA L6.2 L6.2A L6.3 L6.4 L6.5 L6.6 L6.7 L7.1 L7.2 L7.3 Streets & Storm Sewer Plans/PrnfitpK Kelley Parkway (cast halQ Kelley Parkway (west ha 10 Central Lane Northwest Lane West Lane Utilities/Roads/Etc. Construction Detaih Construction Details Construction Details Construction Details Landscape Plans: Overall Landscape Plan Phase 1 Landscape Plan Seed Mixture and Erosion Control Plan Kelley Parkway (West) Enlarged Plan Phase 1 Kelley Parkway (West) Enlarged Plan Kelley Parkway (East) Enlarged Plan Phase I Kelley Parkway (East) Enlarged Plan Main Entry Landscape Enlarged Plan Roundabout Landscape Enlarged Plan Open Space Enlarged Plan Northwest Lane Enlarged Plan Willow Drive Enlarged Plan Landscape Sections Landscape Sections Landscape Details Miscellancotts Exhibits: M-1 Final Dev. Plan Submittal Letter - September 18, 2002 M-2 Affordable Housing Proposal - September 18,2002 •I • ••l * *s —U- X T ^ .’f 1J itl. ^ \ r > % # # • ► r f •. -1- i STONEBAY CR DOC. NO ^ ^ r % r • ^ ■ I ► / ► • • , % « I • w • « ' •i- I ^ - 4 •y • ^ «• 4 *>4. J-. DPAiNACt AND utility EASEMENTS SHOWN AS THUS \ too ’ilJ 1-5 Tf'£ T ocNorts 1/? > 14 INCH #»CN PiPt SET AND Ma R kCO R;.S 257IS T SCALE IN rCET Bf«N0 5 FEET IN #0Tm AND AO jOiHjNC lOT iiNCS UNLESS OTHERUdSC >ND*CATE0 AND 6C SC 5 FEET IN moth ano AOX)»iiNC R ight Cf «at liNES UNLESS OTHERMSC INOiCATEO A r- \ V LANDFORM 55P SHEET 4 OF 4 SHEETS - y''-.,-^ •■■•.,.N:*iP V . '.• -jr — i-'.y;. ‘ i .^■.; 'v ‘ •'•'i. ,•■•* ,■■-/■-• ;■• k , ^ T------> ■'• »l , > f. ►k - - >■-?’^.y> • i.rVi - - ' ■' ? ' 'r ‘- : . -r-* ■: . :: • ^ If STceer side £L£vatiom ' -.*»',w'., ^ - ■^■‘ ar-'T ' V ..I,- > . •% » -V ^v ~wr- ■.*'•, .fc “ •■.■»'" ■ » “r. ' '' -/i’/. **-:.• V- -t yr*- ■k:r.v^- -: - -r 0 4 1 DiM5nioMimjOPiieru£ TOUlf 04111000 ntsiouasufc M4fii’ai0vr,ioisii MtOtfTijTwiAL Mir tm «•<•*» •M 1/fi* • r o‘ 6T FLOOR PLAM 0 4 0 !/8* • r- o ’ KiosaiMOToirr fICUttrr MAMAOO KfMDl^ MlDI&ili M COtimCATION PKOlCT; STONEBAY ORONO. MINNESOTA J6 .9* «/0 (0 (MVtj %• tcl4l i>4*5 tg>rtl ilvtL lOXi^ 37«» iv:*v U**» LANDFORM MIMN|Ai»OLIt ^HOfMMf LOWFR LFVFL FLOOR PLAN 0 4 1 1/8’ - l‘- 0* tS - J {.v; '■* » f III t'lii III V''v I'lll « Ml I ^^•rt nri in •'•>^^ ^ ^•'Ml ■ III 'i in iitn I in ' " %ntun I'ln i * Pi tiin • Ml I i-iif tnii • fl Ilf ■'in • s^t-in inn i in ■ i > "I * i'l >'3l^On •’••! ■'Ml I—lun inn nil nil III! II IIII 111 r*c.fc^9vteS^.- *111:il!ll2!l ii 11 IIII nil II nil null IIII IIII nil nil WeTLAMD SlOe tieVATION dmmimjmmuc jmtoiuummn«Poutnuic MAPirattw.MiiBiii MO«TicTv«AL tnnr »co 0 4 B 1/8- - r-0- IM0NH9TOKY fBAJKT BfMW nlDMim conwAnoN nojtct: STONEBAY ORONO. MINNESOTA 79sm LANDFORM niMMlA^OLIt•^HOCMIM ftf W4A« nojKriA AIGSmM rmcAitoofnAH ANPEUEVATION A1.2 . h *S?-- s eieVATlOM m m 52imrJU 8 Ji pmms| y^fifcuB r«ipr- « if ?S?^‘':'V v?^ tLEVATkJN ? Si X •rnmmmm f\l HA*«h30Zf70»9HG r^Qjtatc, lL£yAT10N5 A2.2 PUHMiC Aaormxj*^ rtAACTNa ItOOF PLAN AND aoonriAN A3.1 jsatsJi m*torn III III III m HI m iim"'III lllil III I II lillililllil III I II IIIIBIlll II I III llllllifllil II I III lillii i||ii II I III |l|||l|^B|f||lH ^ i!imi''nni!lll ‘ iri]i[’!iff iinlmli = .'* •» iM-yi . ^ - ■ ^ .V -. . ' . ^ Wi'fiiifllldiiiiiitiiiiiiill. !i! > !■ !i’ltiiiiiiii. Hill linn; III; H >.VvC>: *>><.,- " ^ r ^ ■■ »-5 TYPCAL lOFT eUlDNC ELEVATION v'f.'A'•.?■■ ^'■ 7 ^ > -'fJ Sl'^ 't -*>.1 '•■ - .-.•v.t - ., i • ’ - ; i* •T < .V- :^ I J OMMVtLOPIl DAiunioMDevEion 10UITIMIIII1QMntfiouattum yAUfOKifniiisii rriic Mo«nci>Mi KOWONNSflKY flOJKT IWWMK KCMDV mD caxmcAXOi \ \v’"v/!’av-?’a> lllill -- - r*>'^v!*: Hill---- ;>illlllR::liriiiiilllSI^^|:3'JMjiifl~(nEHBlllKn1illlv^ ■Ui TWal LOft eytOJC ELEVATlOrj • « • i/ii* • 1-0* nCJKTi STONEBAY ORONO, MINNESOTA LANDFORM HINMCA^OLIt-^HOfMlM >tf PKAAcna ASnSWUMI nemom A3.2 OMMJLOfVnmX lAREA LOCATION UAP>DAHI^niOMDEVELOPMD^ TUUTDaMLSTIDM JTOVCUUBSUIC Mmxaiov(iM9Bn miiw ruoM»i STONEBAY CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOT CK\9i<£r9CO i'•a® 9M ___i X MWW *«• *— , Jtmmm *%iT J?/ • •••MM .«« Mm..'’ — ••■•w V. ftfTar •••MWA/MMi ««••• mm !*»«• ••m—* ftauti*oR fiA Am&Jtt lABBREVUTIOKS '- Y W. 0« ^ ••*• *<C •A'i •mV ••. “ •<’0 •»tf • C• n (• ^ «*t I^XBjnc* • eK* t naIS,. i * c* t»r** tm t* i.r9 C C MT CJN‘« CJ* Ml • A t ;$ 1 ••* H •Uk »-.t« iMjr «•.’« tJ •n A^ %•# • ft t •ft0»c • 9*oc» #»• *«»9 » H •♦A I* I*!*' a tM M M#•«•» ■*•319 ••M.; 9 M M •9-J M A. KM ▼•» » A«w Am •tm t'^A* •f C«At«M« v»« • •MM ••^•M / AiMM At »W m t>A ••MMM •4M*>M •rtMatt / Ar<«aM<M« •«• 9 C«» 2nt!r*^ fti—Mt l»Mt« fttMHM (AaM*/ is Ca i V CM Cm Cm Cm O C <M <•• Cm Cm I r »•»» ^ >m-mA •M Cm I'M AMI IMM* !■«• f^mrt IM AtMt Ca»* JC I M AhM •m> »•• •MA«« ^A ^ !•••• (9wt«A4 cmmm CA« 3 mm> (•MM 0t»Ma» / Ow M 0>MA r«MMM (vTmTVm Af* mm laMtMVt <Xm*m« 9>*m • ■;• M*i tM* tM-MM I MMM !••■■■• ImM !•••«• • mma MA MiA • •VMi •« A«M« • ••A .M* *«M i>M • t« r»MM<M^ Cawi. *M«i ‘MCf • a ftMHIM* MA IA »A ftw* (Mt IV* »Mr*« M iMrMM *«MM« ®MM IA MM ftlAA Cmma CmM'VIA' iM^A *AA toAM C«M C^ At •aa »A jf i* iP 19 iC-r iJNc ( • ■MK' *VJ •Vi •t 'M rtC* »»A 'ft! tv •iiyt rv* H mem) es §mrt•**$»«• •twl Of 00 01c^* <9VS one 9C. 9i AW 9i. 0« 9a 90ft 939 9»l 9 I Site Siti 9» t 9« 9I9# m9 Al- • rvr 9>-H iTW Ol» 9 tA?r ■ 0 91 90 99 •C9 9 9 At •tt# \ «• «•*«• tai »««AI tAMacAfi M-irr Mou V ‘.A DRAWING SYyB0l£flai lUTIUTY SYMBOLS ILEGAL DESCRIPTION! 19 VV9’«*« t»MI *••«» IOT AaM / l«a9 fWWM 9aa 9 IMM CfMMMAM UA IM* / l«9«t« 'WmA nmmm 'V.«a«A iWWMWM rVAMt rwA / r«ut E> © © A rwtivM P9 i9<iai 0* UwstmxMm •tot* •Ml M Ctototot •ATWt «M«t fM»MtA •totol «MM iMA •to CtMM cUiAi CtotM— LWtoui Imiuc O Mtoito ckAMi lAA Mmm im 9m» a CaiMAt 9m* a toMMlMI Ami MtoMM «Mt 9| A 9.^ ^MMI Am* a ■*«Mi* A«m Am 9*Mt« »M AaaM Am 9mm* «■* Am* a 'm**! 9m* a »mi«* Cmx Am* a *mi«a taM* Am* a tMi«A t*« rAMitato* 9*amia / Pwrnm’m Pwtmmt :2T Cm, »aA-t>MA» (*H Om'M •m* 0*m CaatM I iM ** 9a*iMia« Cmmma 9*MMf*9 *«ri ftemto 9tto«AC 5'A*i. CJUit Mtr ntM. COtMCfttotl Atftlt aiAQui . AcvjuctTAi ire 0««0 **«• (fi« 0<M> 9-rMA' .>*•« IMA -♦-•V’9 •ip ISITE SYMflOLSi (ftjcvrrut M.IUC A-<- ——- ——*t*—— --•to *: tet :i.csVx M s> tlisr «m«9 UH^nn S9t«-«A5n KH..> rV9( 9w9A cstst »»5:tn «A'l«r>M »« lA* (9 S9A9A3I) *« oi9^«rftMi c<M«acM «tf«93r MAftC «9lCt CU»f9f ft U4> 39CtM« CA5 IM )Ci «««AM Hiciac-ovtMtft**^ KICTK '(AM 9CKOAi' -C»i9t9*;/ rKi«M»« A»<> IA*N WtA^itf Hill* ifVia* • suj>t pstyns'ni ticnnc tutto Aata mS fcs 9»A«*t0t9 UAAATtVMl (9 T9AttyOl••(%»• 9toMI 0» MAt HAT itf 7>*^» l^t. MMM4I-«**MAm f/ l^ * / UA •*• • •-«■* ^ AMI Tl O • / Ut toto «•*• *AMAtoM MI*A ^ ^ •A Mu*> *M*M> MM MM*** AM 3^ < lA* mam ia^> mmm* mm mmaa Am M-t !*.«• MMM* toto MMJM AM ^ 3 •• > M^< MMM* urn I I Ma I (mma * Am •A A* A'M* ISrrE/UTlUTY CONTACTS I I c1-------; czzzz'3 NM I 9» «t 9i cmzm: V a 9.*MM Mir 9«.«» / 9*i«*« 9UI•ffs oa arm ■Ma *3 31m toM* S9 9t*t Wi iMMAt lAato MCI VlIM) 19 'Wk li* »#C3 IM OA to'!toia ir S**M ant to*MameVMtiaMA Vm* !”♦*Vm* %aM lto*M »tp SimMaI S9.C3 to'MIM A S93 ^M*AV«A 1 'toMTM 3 a •to A 9* I 31 •to A »A 3toV *MMAM 1 rus •k**> / ’to*-*M 1 <9 3aA wnO jaMM MaM JiaMi»•• tSS ftM«M ¥C IMUA C-Ai* 9J •Ail 9 **9•««• Ai. »A>«A•%33 •i-AM 3T •*• af^• AUM Am* m at •mma »a9 a '• ai a 9 •I MM • ■3 • to Jm •tn,• amMa• AAttito •»toi •V •a4 It «a •ft- »• ®© Cito'Aa S9i73 tUtAfOt •uxtoc (JM9U(JU*C St*AT\A9l 9Mtoc'AD CiftrvtTt BBSURV Mi9»«JU9 99tt*£ c\*AAttt iXtoi • Kxa 9 9Ait«a«c3 %i»« (JMtCIKSa • i CvMO 9*A r\X3.AM A*'*AAa. Akii to\t.«t at its*. ••*• 39M SA.4 ♦-■ — • va tovtai • (kvc**<ma mwttn CJNt9JC Httfl 9 Uto3 $fto«4Ap u 9CV39 9CU • men atttatma >1 Ptmaat, s***i U latoci to«9f Cft3«A • toUAM SBSB • — -»- — - lEROSION CONTROL SYMBOLSI )ir«a. £%*A'T|* i/7 »aA ftr 0 #*> ex n«A»»*0 *At w* Cto^^O A"M A Aliorc t«A> LAI4? I.WI9 9 r^^^ CWiTI *<kJtA ^»4.Mii3 a«99 9l»3 ISM v-*frt «CU Vt|9 a.'* »Ai VPitr i9>t ’»UA»**« ftOi Va93*9t M*t« njsssXM r*«o« ftAvt 5TJWf3 «*«9 nto#«\i CA'I »••»* |«« A-I*toit ««tl9 n/sMM A1*»9*i» w’»ri k99% ^99C*JUr *l»-*39t Ui*«.K.V»4.' ttCi»'»A»9 Mvesr^tar CAS J4«* JtJLN. CJia»/TV AtUATtoA* VAftttft S9AI9 it jicn sti«9 OAtfO 9Aft SEHYXC COMPAMin COKTACni ?to«3*93 «vt9r ft A*rt« lTi Jt orotto atstat* rj atst u CtTSlAi ftAt ®to SSMJ art'. ..ottoJk At (V I* 9.a siAtis •Hi A5? -?a4 a*O0 •A* l.lw-tiW tm A-7 9C* a r«M«AU0 M* '*y**if IM'A rvcv«®tov •tot A»7'«30-Jj;' t 1 JVI5T 9W SC*9»3 iAI< ft0A0 IR tru/®A 3*« VMA7 m AAT4<C«*t • to4.99«A ?i(j fst-aik ’Sim •A'lto to CAS ««>itocr IMAw' ®»#4-*SC.’ 9cV iA5«i.li AiliAft 90 aLH ^ta r»A9toMtt fat C>iA« »%•<%*• tiu Ac;-7;-to» **« A /- Kl-A-33| *tV»CN»«5T0«V ' 119MV mmm M I ft m ;* at tototo tVaa ■ A**ai «• to»M«ti*A .Aitaa «*to *a*!|A <\M • AMM • • A •% to</«A ntOJI£t MAMA0CX RCV«W am **• AtoM cifnAioroN PUP MAS1EWPLAN&PHA5E1 SEPTEMDEK 10. 2002 nzjicx. £L3DES1GN CONTACTS CBSam %•* ItiftftMf Cjmtsx tSMCl iS'toCAOP/ MlfftAt Ct*09di (•♦•.* IV3«| •»ftojii*A't £••»£>• a*ito lt;rti<i MBENCHMARKSMBBBMMMHMBMMMWB^ II 109 lA/l i« •«« ssntm Af lift •*«•■«•** JLAatotott J fi« to’IAVs'ito i9U9» L9i»« At4i i^jAiAt a autA'cftiMtrTSc** m< StJlVlCC CUMPANU3 contacts i<«>At*t«:|M4* • *0 to'.IA **••- ot ••n*« rftA«to\CS fto S>t0J S’lit 9>*er.*a At <:®«9 i»»*«’t.*i A| »K9 *17','9 J-AO to »*v • rvtoa •A.>A<ic*vat iA<A 3tr •%) tor’ll* lAtorA *.«; B’ •iKM lAto'H ratAA^vs m tssjt ♦i«toiA9 Uiftt toA •&• t*u A.*? .’-57 w tAA afj-fii sen A. trtcfutt 1 lAtC*iV»' AV to/llt* toV’A S*3 53 AtMAB *«39’a taaatsitja ta$ tusof *e aun •KA ••; .*97 ■V’O •A« A 7 79? to”3 vAKtnwi Ate to’l** itflfA atf 53 Aitoato rBA9«9JLto *to 55A01 lufl4Msi^m~is:s 3tti to7-757-AO30 »AV «a>797'«7ri ajtaat iAMA.W’ • « toj’lt* IIAW3A 9*7 at •iHAto iCto’A rWAAto'Vd fto M40J •to* (.•••*»« MS 3tu to7-757-AOtO »AA AJ 757-to'M li.A* rvutevN JUt*c n»A'to ca9 »00 A'Al 3t'%«# •L* 'MiaA••• ••*•«• rtoitoAtoJUS »*• *Vi07 BtoBi ntuttototo • Hi AO-MA'BM • At B</-M4-toto 9« ‘'JS9 t Jto>tol4£ toAW>9ftM’AA toriVts .-.ttoAMt •V*M •»;) 9fcRB iAM mmsivc m v»i>t riMB ixVmawi; 3|U M7 A(to B*5’ • AA M7 «ik-«Ma STONEBAY ORONO. MINNESOTA LANDFORM MINNCAPOLIt ^HOCMIK Am9M9»4»» Gopher State One Cal r«»t (73» A«A - s*»~*u-ooeni TAA Mai • t #»X» rUHAJNC WOfTTCUPMO n.XMcrma rooOOl TmESHeET CO.l 1= * '.;:iMiAK5. oomozffno moca BOdtlNO C0NPm0N3 Cl.l N'V«r A. jfc^. ^ p:«lli|l ’iv, » *9*^1 TUI CM KUr *<C C**' u S»*-^ 7«HCV o DE6K3N GUIDELINE STREET ENTRY SECTION 0 DESIGN GUIDELINE EAST LANE SECTION o DESIC»4 GUIDELINE ______ 0 EAST LANE/ OPEN SPACE SECTION ■» «*f 0 DESIGN GUIDELINE KELLEY PARKWAY SECTION PUP MASTEK riAN & rHASe I SEPTEMDEIM0, 200Z STONEBAY ORONO, MINNESOTA LANDFORM HINNfAPOLIt PHOEMIX aomouMC Tooioca nCELMNATf PESOHGUlDiUNEnAM h", ....nWMl#' \ CM CMikS orrk»« sen! -jiW E5 ^ ‘-5J w 6»^ ■ f|l» C«l< IU< »*€> crv »• JUM t*<«> jtr r*( mu*x P4I? cuw- (»M> 79 •■« stmT riu. U9 ILK ••O CTV »• Art tiMW K r*c «Ti*a J CM CMMI £»'!». DESK5N GUIDELINE nortmu €6t lane section (mauoimoFn DAH5I110MDEYEL TimTOAlUTinM ntffQuattuuc MAfuaovLMiaaiii niMmw r*MM7Mi • *-. J TLLC a^aicntffa (•4 ^____^ tM mmi0 mtm m*a €tt mrnim m-m,* MU«* • ; ri mt: ■'ii* \ HAMBi.E'R ttu CO ILK *«c cr« »• Art IM04 _________?« »*. /- 91 ti*a -1 040 OBi iri>> 79 • •9i«vr K 0) r l>M«CAn»«STMOa • ^ ^ itSlA c a*«i« - AMfK MIA} Cirr c» 0«Cf4O R a BUC ttCIM :^-3©r£i. •«»%.■ AM* y fAi« rM V-4A MOMC lilOMK ----^ AX> 9T|ua • » ? f ECM5O«M5r0KY 040 C^M$ KVPi riocn MMwn Kiww }1M«f rAMM CmVICATXM ■ Au. DESK3N C a UIDEUNE NORTH LANE SECTION rUP MASTEK PLAN & rHASE 1 SEPTEM0EK10, 2002 najKit STONEBAY ORONO. MINNESOTA MP «M «Ma | '^UEiF~>C *4* i0«l lc »t® at *H OTTOMyjf »«*7 0tm*€. :trt-r rit v*<5 LANDFORM himmca ^olIt•^Hoe«l* DESIGN GUIDELINE UJE5T LOFT SECTION ItlNMC aastvjv^ FtcjiaNa man nUOMNAItY otatOHOvoamn/M C2.3 } ____Va * * '%♦* n -• ^ ^ •*—* \ / au» Im ' / . :^;7 / / / / / / ^ \ / r*-f/-■•■/;^^:^[i U \- — • • i r "^1 N> yrlri - « i- i ^ L J« I, f----- /t" I 1 1n Ji sm c»0T«jcfick« \.' ll\.s' .' (NOTES rC I • \ Q • XOj> :.f«3 4 / V » •» mcuw^^y ■• «■ — ^ «*<« •».___?___3 la* • ■-•• wv** ^ **■> 1--------------------•» X :: -- -1^-^.:^ OtP. -VJL Y?^:sirn II C I n 9M 9^C»< kfkM >0i AOPraONM. ttOMgrVMTS I (MAcrcuo Mcamfvw lau* »«IT< ioroc««^4C %»vf ▼ n«vW*o •« u*4>wi »i#«ivk.f KM r*« mojct AfloroMi ••ovnArtK XMM «AS *»^no •* t*« ort <» oki «0 m4> 0110 AMXM<»4 witlli lAAlOA TO « *«i0 *M»«C M«M TO ltCA>ATM>/c.M9faL4rr«kt f AMT oocaMMcts a « notio . t*« »cu0 M rmwmT Mcnvtp toi iraa^TVM 7 '^*\fV9 «t« PHMATIO pv (A mA u C tMVVCAOVMTM »H> I«t0 l/XCA'KI «T tAMVOar 0MC»MU* M CtCtfWC. «•«« AMI A£A«» W PKtrvu. TCOi J 99»0%0 yt*t IU»An0M »«0ln( At OjCflM) AA tUMlM lUVAttM tAil99 MVAtip 0t>*««m • rA.tc Mcra«A « ftT.r««'j9 #Afu; n* ■T.r*«v» MAO {»»©0r not «»i TAC» COAT ir»4X7T ?«»» ar fttv/Maxs PAX tf»ct?T rt»« }•) *• CA3i » AC£>t^*l PAX >09/ 7«* XV Kt dVAMiAO PAX ifv«vt c^tcto » COMXItl VAUVAr} A' *Al&- **t r fC «VT 4* >«« Ai^aivATI PAX ItPCCT >M40XiccfTtiUtf %maun i XT\>Va V> .»At^A.» r M PAX C JUtX «r cot ca;x«o vipitop at» 5 cpaoatcn » p|4« TO aprcfTfACAtod N tm aoTfCMPTM aioovt non ccr«<ufi At tr« (» xjprtTfAi) Kx AMt mcraxav sn mPA«At«X •• MDA'VM X XOCKlMtS « vrr lUTATlVI A pOiAI a ? rAtCW pA'MT ON t»4S MAM OO *471 PIHACT 7* CAS'Nw XPT AM> ACTut 0T lUVAtCMP M OTUTr x<irp »x actlpa or luvArcMp I rpoTKr Au xoAv*! «t| HAtum mit •rrto kx nnovAv A tP»«9 **”n' »X #ftp>K 9NAV1 X «riMO N M# Tf* Mcvdcac 4iXTT iiwrtvjxv •</ .tua **.; IMX'l VK l « 9lAOt»0 fM CAOHA CJt».»ATt.N Ml* tM AMtlXXtAfNf to HAOI tPHP tj « 4A«tt> X ctriAio 4 •«0*vc wmcam ; AAitPAi rx%.p.> to m nrwto m* arK ‘<«p.Ai, acvVTPM^A’vxt »#o»t ivaxpc am / AA.trtNt aaas tArrAJvl fiS'AC *TA’l«Av9 riAf M '•40 vAMMv'AM A0IAS AMI ABMACMI Ml- X-A»T 'TAtUBM. A.' •• TMIPC PAi't AMI aa MO A/tA) tM PAkliti rTAiirPi •*». $t t AVAt’lil tty c» ivt 9tAM-AM0 iPMnAft »*<J»tT P»*.A*0«N«» I* V%$ lAJtN OAX* tC) lAiirr TM tx tMM Ktt (>J C» TM pA^AItA TMACN VAU M fOTTACnO tO COt nMrt* M A0KAS VMM >tv tUVKM tiM M«t (C/ rM *u X C-PVACIIO »0 4PA PtfOtr MXX to MACMC AfPUMXMl M fttCPC 4AM AM) AAvtC AMIAS Ai«. tCA^VP AMI UMftAJU %P X<*»i X PtTVvtO A m M*MM4iit t|9'M; t«n >.A^ MPPT TM C AP-KT ’CN ami nrVNAi o X^AM: AM) IMTfAat V».9 N€> «*.vi» tM nxit) X tMx ti^t) to tM tMXPtP AM) aivr a tM AU VP) •AXiii X X A^ M<> OAXACttO OXC iPt tMPMtXP •m.'m A«t corp AMAXt rwropci to tM rtM x au AM tM A4>XACtX PAVA: OXC tM CXXAC1JP VOU0 X (A4AXt X vXtAMC AM XCXWPMMO COMAAOtWA UVX9 tMOLA>«An AM e«t0t tMXMW X TM AU xt 0 Xaauom ottuc «Atw "At liar gicuc ■Atio x\io x OrpAtO AC1>1 AAV |AAA»AruN> AS POTN AS 40SXP4 P CaOM* «AT|0 X lAXXNt ft tM iKAvAtVft 0> P Tap tUVXO SIPS MS VAT AM xetAXi xjo A« cxxAn apm opmpc saacs as itP NTW. vpts X Hi J fkp CX.'PATtX VAvi MStAU »f Hxn MXCX tO CXTPHfSC CtAOPC ACtirrA.i aa C i Vaaa rx«tAM SAC a «n C| A a » olcaiun X CXX’^JCflX ACtNItpS vftXi tStAPIXCPAlf X tUX t*P C0Art> .*iX SftAU PXTXt XT APMO AM) OBTOX XAXTI M T*p «ACS VAli X IlCAVA'tO AS |AX» ft TM CXaTPUCTOV rrvvtss AS 4CX5P4I TH cXrtACtX PtAvi. XAT h * AMt Xt A«l« t*P !►.»<* MtlP »XA 9 MtAPiAPCI N TM AftOPCt r, AA'HT CAK4*. 9 :X*»4 »l 'M C.KlAAvT,* Wa A MIlAAi XVI A> XOft* CK tM (PAM TO r*ru» IK^TiAH • AA'^lNt StXltS to X KPAH0 GUAM OM T aa C SM#T aiA« VP44it (» TM CCUTtACtOK VAVi itv MS ACtVtfS TO TM OTAiW lOfTp SmVn Cft tM tPAi**. K am %i cxatpucnift ACtA«tS Sma A CJTfa.t ^rMv'JCAv OAtUM*! C fM L.N'AA^tjir >*<u. vmiaju m) .MAAfLAA to rpxvt pp cet\^si0 MSA At »0ff ij»\m rrp ■4 Au (Xtxstc AAft 4A«tO A#tAS SmA al X XSfXSO vAtM A<xx X'M* t*'j X tvAAVP AM Xtc OB VJt) AS fSaCTK) P» TM I'UMVA VAIM* t) •^V.ATS X UrXifVJN X XA(«« ACtP^t ft 1MI AAM'^UVAO A*tA TO Au XIO VV tPA-V AM) *1*11X0 X*Aa CXPJtfT *s»* WUCBSC rppAn SHLfVAtAMi AS fpxppo murw 3S XMI (TfPi V) 043 kJ AO • ItVjA P 40 X A^'l rucw it*M I WSC A a *»«XI*/ Mvl'»4IP UMPAV fiAiVtMl \ OM»€JK;Ofvnom DAm^ntoMDEva lUUTOPlUfTWM n«KugutuJcMAiuoKm;.iMaBBii TliC o\9»*urpco ms'm ^xi— A«« / «M« ^ m px MUJ* Px«i»X« MUJ« .y pxpracTXiarAAj ( *p» «*PXA <{»# •« *«x lAMlSCAft S^iST MPU \ XPI xx«xx« Xxti X.PX mmm m uPiMpA mmm nveiON»«»TOKY XX IftXX XPB *«.•* ft —ti * ••/•fft XC/<A ntOJKT MAM^OCt KfVCW ctfffMonoN V ■ ■ ■ H ^ WMB m XV A** ****'"** * *** •» ftPMftV*3S» arnTSm PUP MA5TEK rUN & PHASE 1 5ErTEM0EKt0v 2tX)2 flOUKT. STONEBAY ORONO. MINNESOTA LANDFORM HlXWCAPOLitXHOCMIM 100 200 l^ALB IN rE£T rtf xaiac nomcTNa caoTOiaxtj Tooiooa MA5TW GKAPMOflAN C3.1 rnr»j •Pt luM »07l . •tAMC »«U. -------------- J!22}*3 -------------------':!:!\ ; ' -------^vm«ry ; m -~r.._ - ~T HI •■ —r 'IX?—r 5W .c* c*rcx tAMt r- *.t »t««n 0 «0«i) StiM * •■ f* I't ,1 inn' TYPICAL POND SIDE SLOPE NO scAte M r d» r« MOM 0<«Uft Nfftit ' 52Y* •* atsiam> to m t*^*aw«JJJ ».« MU ACCmiAriO to 1/7 »«», ot«^^ ^ 14 ’ Tss.’^^ srj: -•»»'•«—•»«»« ^ MCM Horn tvaMt «<> • S S2S •*“ SILT PENCE CATCM BASIN PROTECTION HO scAi.e OlTfM’U *< BOULDER RETAINING OJALL 0 UK«t4nO Uk ffim '' V 3K « r K.>*k t*« ii*i«««c *«wt iM. J MU1'» M'7 »•« »» »•• #Ai.7 ^1 .» »4 *•««.>• I K »ff»U •» «n atictr: 4C 4 «—Mp . W» f1’»* • I4> I JM‘»A n*i*A* «i% 4»* VKi. • A «rir J .- »»•.’ »4 J»A4 •»«> M’ •»*» !*• A*.Mt »4 .»«»Mkk b*AAC • .**cw< nt 4MC7 ON »4 «* «•€ >««;* iM *« lALl *ti SILT FENCE DETAIL LANDFORM HINNCAPOLIS PHOCMIK rA? SCAI&o7^ STABILIZED ROOC CONSTRJCTION ENTRANCE NU 5CW.6 0 •ii wn »wfCTBAi nr>tn ««t ra ft tc^ajjv MWi u> »Tut j» uwo pb 'jommlI P42 rwMTaUd ■ M'lAUt* •«> MMtM. 9<AI a A «» <P4« CO«ra«;fOt »’• N.■**!»»» 44 »0 OU^JI 14 t«M MtCIK'n*. MIA TREE PROTECTION FENCE NO SCALE FUHMC CSOTTOOiM F«CJb7N0 TOOOOI rtMPGKACMS riAMANPOCTAtS C3.2 LMMCVtSKITtOU Mr «■ HIMMCA^OLIt •^HOCMIK CA0tm9»C ftomrtKa fWXX MMTDtinurrnAN C4.1 . ?i • »•* MO«R - »* VER r.a’ n* ---------f- \ ♦ p • ^ • . .. 4 - P # ;sl• ^ ft _ i J IC3& HIK 1^23 \C7C «* M CCS*# vS»f «U )O\0 \COb )000 omaumum lifmmKmmsmuc TUMTOAtCJTlDIIn«raujttiLAi« MAflXGamRMIBMl CM.a*€fTt«D • * •• • m. p i; Vto . •# '% LAlMCATt 8K*’ ->ix lAf mm» m»> k*< >—<»«» k>* *<«• KcvttCNKBrocr M MW mm* jmmm ¥um r«n»« r« «« #!■ jp»» Ipvi PV/KCT MAMA/» BfMM #* ■»mm —■ & aXlMCATION PUP MA5TEX riAM & rHAS€ 1 9EPTEM0E1M0. 20P2 f»o«a. STONEBAY ORONO. MINNESOTA LANDFORM MIMMCaPOLIt ^HOCMIK ****** *****T51 HI HA a €C«0iUK'aA«O ncuun'Ma TWioca SAMTAirr 6fMU AMATUMAM WC5TLANE OMNDimvfiflm DAH^niOMDeVEL THWTIMMIJT1CM niSfOLAMSUISymxQiov^iiisti • ;<73i TU£ C>19*CCTNPO mmm «• T*4 f\* ntni ni mo %m* Mmm IS* d\i mo m turn IM m»m am /iS'4&9 .•m mmrn>am ,z nt mtmt ^ $r«* ft Mt 4M mm*m ^v»« muo* mmm* «U#«i •4 • (*• •••■ e»t LA»MCAfl a»€fT MPU tCV15«M»«nXY x.'f ^ « ?• J9 *« J»l» J»<«« ,MV< ■«. «L «• A* •MCA* A4B • A«a nUXJin MAHACCK KfWW rUP MASTER riAN & PHASE 1 SEfrHMSElMS. 2002 fVUUti STONEBAY ORONO, MINNESOTA LANDFORM HINNfA^OLIt•PHOfMIX •mmtmtmm tSmSSm 51 nojtctm. Otau^/bCAJttO moot. STREET A STORM SEMDC CENTRAL lANE C4.9 LAM>flCVl 8I«ET MOU acermom ftCjE£T«Cl TPocca CONStKUCnON PCTAJl dHEET C7.3 '4 - W I NOTES! t«r«u« r>7w>*o^ >\c r;I \X >-m .-•* . /k & m # ^ r ^-fv* I.** k4»# ■t«mn tM»M9«S ^ •' •rr i** > ./ V“ •n Mvt Lfti c«>« k4>e«C4l^ CH.AMC& ^4N —' »n m—i Q.«ra ««mt# 4-r; J' /; ^-----MS5>4I’..» ? ^MS 5>4I’ ..» ^4«UJir ««»'• t.>M.scjirs tM.s«kts n.sN / t rAV'V^fi !.fe'- Q O Wf Wf • k^scarc n.AN lauKi ICILLCT S r piwniiiT acrfiATv L__________I T-JiL t*Ck»«w. i« .77«< ^iso ■Si—^ set Si<I* L*srwAS. ismr L^fCrfCA^ »«.4«ltP P^Jm <s N \ ^ « MltH MW BLANDSCAPE OPTIONS (PER HOt^E TYPE^l l»ii • t««' iH» • I - .KnMSMM ’«! i Y I (1«<r.«t«aW' »A«JCA iXVvviV SKBlIV s ^ ‘ %it\u mx*** iwrjcc vn* SA^^rst C V - ^ . • V*.M» rfu ,»M UA»1r?> : f«n« o*r • I - TM1 ) H I UkAA *Sw* • tj - , J .•* f */«•«««'SirtiS noc*Mi> PcVAVT VCiA A>«^»T) k .V - !■ -Ak J I>»«H c.a» «»*rt (XVX ir| ^/«A<t ,«M «ii«3^5) utButJwctsn. I SNP IMS A I ■> r<M <19* I nM\» >♦*»»» «>* nMXii B I . fklt .« -»i(«»«.<« >«' f I - 'm i^r vjx I ‘ i«*>kUs<M- «**toX>A cv;k'WvVt3 (mmt c ;« • WBJB5 J »M., .KA'M"vr «(<"•« «<•>%' ft ft ^ * N| iH«M (4«svs^ 9M* ma»b aA».s im iu«*i» jm ^a>«»j : *BQU >MS • I - f«rt I) V % I I«la.a£ nMU iSC»*« AM me (VAtJ s I . ^AM >B •«’) (V».. | *• c I - *«• V I M •'A^A AWAS^ SHM4M 0 4- I .A, • (nww.xt 1 AIAS » : «s««a unsjnsi ansi va*» mala s it %s*m ym* «Bs3^5i ' lA* • A/V#* • rmwm-%t i SA ti>asc> ss\S*nATo« iaum »#o« t^ocsa^* Mrvtf susovto f» iA#ct sn »vv»9%» Hja •»« «tOBci •amchM M.sriAusi ba7«m «a5 m^mcsc s> as <7AMS CTM CB <sr,.xtf AaO 0T1^ A>MCAT|« lOCAikMS 10 • fti0 wISSSC Mtui t<9 »ArA«AftM/cm»faumcN s amt csicsmambs m* motip. r*« mcm«s MAAP M STBOAriil ttflStO K« SSSOa/AOM ILANDSCAPE LEGENDI ssalandscape notes i PK.A.: tplA* ()4, >• ttAjl M tnk**,^s, •« 0SJ PW • IJO IM I«?I0 (J) iS tPlAHS) S 90P «7P S0S ns TOt0 iSOi V »<*I0..0 0 sc*0 %}0 \2t»s» iW %» IPIAA .4. 0 1v*AUi- A «4 •A n SB i«'( - M't . t|.M W.l. «*t1 <•« ^<t rV*« V’ V«rr<»4. AM t'M-w^ •A'%>* Y’- Y-% >,t IMCvM^ ..W,*AA_t.S Wl. MA.t Mi. »4**-A.»»4 >r4'|\ t.kAfir AWlM I-' AN* J»«. I«« IA»4“. MS s M* Wl4. .OC«lA«At| MIAuAUA. «rii« BMAAk v M'AAclw* Ml A%AM* nAS|<1A»» V>A*i .vA# HAT «<Tw l»« AfBnriW ATVA^SAM JA )‘*fA'A*irt AN' ♦•Ml M JS HAST' *.'I4 *• ai^VMaB VM1AJA AMS {tS«aSAt|.>« S TMtlf » • lAkktAW • M'«4tA IM tAftNS J» »\AmI4 ,M fis ist A»A- »►• >APtlMJ ><••« iA t»s ^AAi M ^Am VAU •^SM« IRAIN GARDEN PLANT USTaaBBBBB^ •am i.^pnm mami «:t.mA«t« m . jstaio ja t«« as>.ss •<4 v«. • Ml V<A4i .«4| «mA/ VAkSU M\B> Tp«kt aiAM* !«••• V4»vB At.^ *«^M riA* «MASE> f^A*4 l«tt •* » .XA».tP A AAntm ate VMl »••»•• •• MVAIK) 0 OMMO iM AStt i?7 KA.f A *xjB ♦. »,xs ;«Art sia A«d.x«i< ..xs* fu*s a»i Mtst %M o*P »*• ab mt^sji vwii M »VA#.*HU Vt *.« SMI HiMk •XANtAfc »*11 V>Au. . >«>#>< .• >4; 4AS-U mA5 SHW AiUP l>«l Ol *»»#4S J» 4.rttAw'<M AMlta* A*4> «/t IA0P CS *tAf HA%n iSS C«Ml iAMI •U SmiMM MP AStAS ASI in «l4tNt ?•* *00tM lt<”.* 4» IXAMtMU v% MIV* In A\M.tA«. IAA<*VMS i .K'i^A^tc* e m CvXMMAtl MIm UMCH to MS0S 1.0/ iSMSI ASS r«l AS tMlTtP flN OLMBa; ^*0 %S«I CJi iAM’A AA CJMI«M'<t» 0 IS A<«A4Mi AAA IA»«**>.AM MlAAt AS MrvM 4AAJM 47l>0SMM MntO «M «Aam» umhBMt afcteiBfc aori eu. Svtfl KAC A* vns CA4AA10 a CA a «A4.A A a STISS AlS'XAi 4AN*i,)|*<V a mMX r%A*»IC AVUllAl IA AS mA'A cn 0V HS1AA0 il’is A*'|S bkXAi ANUA« SiStasttr tsii^sr* A4.*aw *4 A attHAb VB •nr. fi«'A ■i\ 01100 iM* n .4 -Al cn 0AAI*rwivnrtniA a >JUMw t» Il0 PSA00 ISlSlSViA 4.MA a r%4.*- trw. AalIM 1.0 ICM •A,’’ .*•*! K\^ n in AA*i< •»’*• 'rftts M'l tAA'IV M 0 «l' A*0A5 vA4l^$ *M,^A ■«A 14% A»»l I t>« ItilArl V-A»4 •• 0«X.AfM3 MtH M> lA« •• 0Sl.A'«iM SM'in t*« M«44 M •* ^«0 SAUA’AM .-A aA. I.S *.♦ 0AVA’XM iWAA.*,.* B U %atv Vxr .'XAaSa. 0» SSaa-aA. :SMM MS t.A4U4Afc»<t lOi I.A AStS* i’ ^Ari*A'MS ASrM'lx I MUK IJ WSIAca^UM SkuAiAM i LM»rfA^T,w a ij its« a.4 cn» ^.sfSA. .ati AM MJLWI'SnTI “NrSA,V Iv* m I-X0 <••) SaV »«u4*0 .wM'aX’ *14 i-V> M *44 B4R0 SK’ AAiAS ^.•SA *« ’0 M 1*7 l*SH AA0I •*ASWC4P —^tA.A *14-H M A»4 MkWIAk iK> AM.»5 . rSku. ’ A* AaIAJ •• i JA#l'*M XA. M4 9* X||%v 4l' —^St;ll ArtAS I.’ • XASSf At. %vAt<‘ AaSAA i>4A(tS (MM SI »M«( AMAS *ii M AMAS &4»«p USS IMM St E>k,» nMil «A(|«0k O » > M MTl^Ti? IT dM CX-*r|k JIAN '”•'« iB'l-. >■ «XAN( V>S I.U 1*4 tnlll laANT^tS »•■ iS'AM <JM:ia • 0 a lv*»M.I SIAWIS A. .01Mb TJ lA'Jtl WY- STMtM l*S IStA N.XA-I0 MS 1*0 '.A«Sm ■» AM>'^ Wki S.NtMk IfiAh. <XAMTlt4S «M0 JU*M. < . M A«S X >S<AAI Ctantt' IJ M 1» iBItViA ^JM AS VlCttOl CCOi • I -« ratsV/iA CB..0 r»»Atr|wt SSInCAlXM <>S>A Ik* tlrtM*A!Xi« »«•• ’tS 10|> i» !•« 3M;7 0 Id M Slv>»ttO 1(7 l*t tMS-VA»0 ASiMI|.n Al HAS! W PA«S MTUr l«7 MIlMlA'AM CAl| MfsS IP VM I k?/ A*M SMS) IS* SMtBS MS) tSIABUtStSl MACICtt 0 C(K*aMri(V a to lOi^ au ^antsc NSirsmcM aao SSw'SkM C.M144X *«A!X0t0S AOt 1*0 ISIAM»St«< 4» •0(1S mio rU'tM AS SPK00O M rtCXTT MAfitC niMiAk Tpnp 0 vAASni Mt U;J*M >ci*s IOIAa AaMIUBS AaM ;i»n •*t*il Al Bs*0» M MAMS AMAt *JUAA0ff»S Mi H V AA tkU ASMWk tsrs LMCISSA^ AS »CM< M . M04 A«0 jr*»>0 (AJU *u • nn«00P 0* M.AMI A.A4 »M T« C«7St fUMI BZt A«r ItMBi MT»Mf AS Va*»*i 3. ISAHS IMSIIAM AS40IKI Ml i JUMMMt# MlM tMS*V AMI v tA>t«A4(BI ip AAMkJt AlAM* Sl*014A« 1(7 rail CS0M OBAtSB A a V IP I0IT (3Tt •uunrawts I WOODLAND GROUNDCOVER UST •ASVMS) pMAMA.'kM to m iir%%fm.f 4» i>s kx4^*»a*. >Sk.kJ C4miijMn A/sa AM ca^40A0 Vt.7 WVM^t .A CAmM A MlXA«.tAl LA4«I 4AM ASn«f 4MAMW MASl^SMS 0.40 «M.vM MmSAM ihm I PERENNIAL PLANT f i<yr gy-— M4SMAA1 MAMit 10 « CiBfWtt) P» tk# K)U PWa. SMCtt Piinax iiKl tSJblniJi AaS|..S . NAbA'fVi 0V AiribS Six l*Ar A* A?A4A4* .AAkMtSB SA AlHP 'lA.:4.«A*rui0 MS HA0*rH<-tri caamisms -*P» ASAvl iMASA A'A k’S r*Mftxr ajumh •t MmUBiil MmB c- jW -Akas 0<r *4<« *0 :4»sn.Mi0 SMn(A 0 A.1 I rt S40AN <A4aMM SA»» 'aSIIM CvAUi Milt m MBS0M $A a3 •sniA »0vM« >0A A •M.i*iSMS«0 HSBtSvPvM tStUVMw HSM »V t'.MA.VSM 0M MM 1^ MM^tA SMf SA40A 0M •M0I tM ivAwtTA OIPMSM 0M AJ'IB >M •StXkSSA SAM m0.\%P A*BS.aY A> M.M* STM k»AA MM •0X*MM«A ’ISrtSSA •a ZOtlP ve 1 ffum 1 1 1i~iGiiOf~~r"sn 1 OICIDUOUS 1WCES 1 Q «»•C0II00N 010 OAA iy 10 BS0QSO•sM stt«0<; slUTM ? 5* CAL.•SB §SI C0HS rr\M74A* %jUkM mas >y C0 •SB BS AI0SXAA* IS40S JS- *0 BSi g n PAirwB aim* AV JS‘ C0 BS0 ST iwiosi ajvis /y 10 •S0 0 U eso soetr mtu jy 10 •SB ©St tui imsMvr)py C0 ••• (9 Tt aS4A« AJPS m >S* C0 piAinr'j ••B 1 coNtrcRoua tkccs 1 •Ts SMTS V0ULI S -a 7 Ml •SS 0 0 »4I 4*«S( WUlt t -S7 *0 •as 0 «S 4A/AI01« 140*1 A? -«P -T ••B I OIWAIOINTAi, cm T 1ly C0 oar 0 J 040 0IOI 0XI«B*4ll| IV 10 oot o SS »r*<T4««0l (rumiini ly 10 001 o 0 a •Aga>A OUCVJA0 |fSA*ortrv ly 10 oar so save Snc *» Cts0 ly 10 oor 1 Dicmuous SHBUBS 1 O to MO O!«0 OrVMOXti s t;0 oar 0 SI ai0 %0tr AtAbfANiam*:S .A*oar •4 PSAIS 0a >sa : 0.-»* S .^A*oat 0 0 v»i<l4Hk««S £0 oar 0 rr Oeval aMCynmXV S OS oat •nr PSAS4 aw *A*S »XA->4S 1 wA*oat 0 too CiTBPAi Picm SiOMMfi J S0 oar 0 10 mac: cambi 9 C0 oor »0tA ■Lvilj'j'*ROUS SHRUBS •JT 0.0^0S CKPMSS Ik- VWAfc.oar s DO SAkSi SSS00 S bA.oar •SO «0 u>« 0is rot AS400 } US oor s 44 riA>«7 MS S C0 oar 1 PWNMlAilfl _____.•44 iSOi H0N 1 £0 oat •T0 aOM JA 040 astpsm 1 60 oor 1st*ISiS*S«A4 1 60 oat <r^ ismmmas 0AAII u»f CRAM * GROimUCOVUtS s 0 HAra« Mio OIA>S • 60 mot wm ■ AS. »AAT|Sl I\AN* v.»fAA4l* 0>s - •SM sAsi ..aaksn him * lai « k-lAAkA;a. A.- I IV 1*4*. lA*I«1_•SH sXIlAfA it.A*4X .**«■ .») ILANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS! I .Mr-M' ;s 4'tti.n 'ktii ^ 'wji n.- >.-i vi a«i hii d» Mis** Jt t lat 0A A.) lAS K Hi* > ISaMS (M V>«.4»|P 0 Af|f tiv CAbfsP *0ru*, 7 f.»«i4X0 itsAS iMOsn lA sps o aguBAo cMsss'.sif rn«s iv>i ■ aspiA vs (* •sspi rtstiii J .AAI a HJB* MS0S >?p at.i'.l VJLaa I fill m MA.*«. » .» > «M0 nw x> .ISA* »•«• J» VI ISktStiC •44.S.IC a .^lA’IS t) rni’itf -Brsv, 4 t»»Mr(i«iAk »rt»i mJi ns.0sc iki i»n 0M*srt«t«* tsus .m» subsiauis an .•.lAltJA l 1041AAA0 f«S vflM ,'S0 J» ipi** a AMti' t0«AV.0> »BM 1) UV C0J0« r0#ir> 0STSS. 1OA0I lOOtAa 70«<7P SI flta MA0SO MtWMi /kS«Vv0i 'HIS • no ippo SI 70 «A COMS0.VS »HtS 00 ji 0SP ano^tarr AS M <JC«MS'0* WUB1 \ no too y T0 • H U0*Mmsl0 IBM 7 4JL0 I anoiuwi •All nj^ N^fl bCAiX i: 160 FttT tmauatmomt DAH^IlttMDEVElOf^L^ lUWT (MltSTinM n«POLOiSLAlK M sac am. Ml 9011 OH9iCCT»<iU «% I—>— I6s« ftiutnw»—!% ffimii,•« mmmtjm *<mm arnm. Am . ^mAm S'tA% mmmf «t« .m *«m umA OMMO t9BLW»l AAI mu* hs^aiiS*MAA * .'Sn LMOSi:aP18I«TMOU M • n mttr ■%.** t4*kn «. :« AT "•• A««4.^w> i jA«r* A*, a #f MS MAfIM MM> a MWAi rtojca iMNMXK uvew 0» 10 aenncAnow rUP MASTER flAN & rHASE 1 5EPTEM0ER1*. 2002 fttxca: STONEBAY ORONO. MINNESOTA ■ttBk LANDFORM aiMMCABOlIt PMOCMIX RJL ftoubcrio iJonpozoNO fW«r C^ERAU. LANQSOfEfLAN L2.1 t aumjui tiif n i *>««( cm I’ltMti IV Cli PO'ton » :0 9 IMA CiXJf m V*.* 19* CH.9^nn t O0 »Ma CIX09 4 c 'fc in ly cii 901 on $ Ow .Hi. cajs J Wt4. 9m: 9 (SA0 fV* 1 Vi*«. ■ ly <:**.. e 9 *Mi I.A -« 4 «tc-ow«k >««n 9«**.l*9 -A»M>1 V- ( lio *Ma (.line fcJV.K»»i ’»».n «4At^ Tu*9 901 »M4 (a«« •U> M^nruA'i 9 CH 901 IM4. CAM it Ocr«N>*» h<«#' t* Mxiuoir* 9 CM 901 9m • 9«IMa CAO* tl S**«» *.'>• •4,*« 'VXliJ i« .u« u?« nr* 9 cm 901 *Ma lU.M a caam^i* Uw«ir*» 1 CM 901 r- t t»»AA> « to V>1» vmi 1 CM 901 t9M . f9 »Ma cam •»v m9 Hi^i w e *- c •**> »^ '6#t • -*; ••tr. t *« w 0 c - ■«• •* -i^l .*.V>.»1» anw,' w m M • ' 9 f - J .%1 • »♦ *v< ' t ^ \;mc iM r^' ■'--I • *«»» •■•[sXD ( I 1 \ a ■tToaAVi !! )( ' /f ' FI 1—*i—*^ ijat rr ' i';::■ J t ««t c«o.a \ \ pvr>nto t» AI m »v - i (T*#| I >:.7/^ X I ii \| IUM« i#«^1 dUMtlTM Of nct>xui TtfM9 tfC >1CS« Cfi ^fftt v>«rtu ut 1«n*i *o» M^O« 9lk Mtra i7i CKTM *»4f iJCk«c»a lais ttc M KV tALiUiMkC >\«m*h; ^1) C;>«et CI» r *4 M rM« 1k40<kfi.*« » • a»«««UL rc*« tO^UN^ AC« f*«t« J» cjmrvk *t«iti3« t«r» »ai irt Of ft*# m9 i/^ t«#P o» #»*t KTus mt cumc i«#i> (^cjM«*rTc« s f«7 Kaiv** ««c««; »at«iArkK Stf| *n#«#*tL*i *4 •!« t>« 4«tc*«: rw«jH >vVVl c*t«)4 «*'u> i»4 t.« t*#c>VM4 w«#e jv w t.« -#4 »«*’»»• auuu« » Cv*<iif*ct,w iii>.>e«ti K» ••*«»«. fv*»*4. itJito «#t*4 •»« #!*•*.#£ «•».• *lP *•. «.I4W 't? K — 10 * »vtt>a'»<u s**'t c><ttJu:fo« ^0 ^ONtM# n»*<M<^»ci «K««. vJU MC X*4^Tt CvX*#^ k.rr4 i^t r|l *4 4tK»*. t»tr lilt at«44 >««>t 10 m rw#(r«#«c *t > « K>«4 fj* I9O *lf«4 a M|V\>£t4» 4IK««. *»r 10 iM»4 Of lni.^V9C *#t*4 *5 Vk’wN lV *ti V4it» . fOtfCljm V«UA «l4t «t KX fiW «iC40 Mt*4 <»« tB«*V OftlA^O X/*4K« 0» 4t*MO in'4 na*«; <m i»«ju^ a.«#M>'t* txa»M fr^:^c*CT ^ a 10 fxXiiTw *n «*ns*0 rf*ai«u:Ti.»* f#'»«'> *4 a« »•« 9t\tf4> *.» 4tA«( avli a*J-’VK; .Wtftx*# «AKirt<* xutk»^. •*''14 I.vm«4 *jl,oh '•« •n**r. fkX>4«^ ILEGENDI gga* / '^Beaxa, u m t* J »T.#» > rr> *•#« fa fv I • a*t «t*><*4 K.t* juixc ft f #*l Jf ITALL WET SEED UIXl •a*. *•• «nc •• jai.^ac ^4 C ^*n#k* »»X **t I. vkNK'vm A4 «) ••r.'w j|*»4 #• .a.*'#* A> KMw •*,''*«3' #^4 H;v7\a«» *ar ;**« i Jk.*f^« ’4'4 v ««*k»*ar 1 ;j% A# #t rti’fai »«i'*£a»4 ait dn aA#^'a> 'b«t#\.4 I’liAatta tut 7*4 •>.■■01 jtt'a ,%.Tt»»->4 •*%#•*■» att <ca M**" aa #*<; vte .,*•«#* i->ait « J4 x W ijiAli at*r *U Mt »C » •’•4* .Tlf*** ' W' »•*» •«' *». -*• vt tu. tMia 4mi^ a aitP GBUIXEO HEIGHT MESIC SEED UIXl <•; ••t • c*n a a ^ aai ftfjtfM o*»ti itTtvjr (v;Mfa4a tot«#'«x>#*t .•a t# ^aH'a#> 4k.<va «ori; .a#vx' %.^r> .*(«tk«>c« tM'Va# y^frr •%t^v aVit*4*4 •**#>*• ti *5'*# a'-'W •<•*» \Hl4 •<• **«..a^C *!'•# a4T|a •*••*« aj*JL» «.' 4 *W*It *. ’«* *'T|« .»»#1 /k| *\a' a'*t* **-'•* .tati.a'-aj '*»#l. a 'wt • ,« Vl.lt#' ,. a««avfll 7 #t •*«. f.aa',**#• a»*a» ia*a'.»*f ,iraf* kt*>t>. ;~lw«-*X' iv'»##W Jf**# \«i •aiTtatt..^ •• i*4r tv'flu.t J*ft» I.*^a#f.l4 XaMftJt; >;>.rn»« 4-t •4ia«Ta .rfta' 4 ’ t>**1 •.•' k."«4»lk»* #*#ar«*'t#' •to 15 *9 «t*a A «, ta« aia*; ra# i.a'«s •".'v«A.<4favra; fno at.v*.-* fv»»*ift)* *r ••t'f *4i»#t ’v^4»rf .A'lw ^'fnr st»rAv> ••a.'t Al*19 -’t^H ••Mi'jftjr 'k.iai'a* *9»' #».*•«.'*4 »Vf phJffftft-) atvi ft: •\(«i:iA ••«•. tt* .0114 • 1 wxf^o »ixr* '9«v« a* '-at*-t#" .t4' a#r\#i, ' 4 >!)(•*«> •«*a»a <a5 t'a, a M«ttO >ta .*4 a • aikt 1 t't 0A<»«4 #.f H#>nas'«#i •a.'MLir; .juat atuatiJt* >M4 aati) tu. 9f ait «M^4 I# • atcaa *f * #*f| Ji J 454 /MU f«u« u a aa> m ifM) ».a K ajiirifi (1 o#t^i fit a.A, f4« ..'*«4 tmXiiUJif via*V4>4\iai »44 #..1 4ata«a »ti/ #'# *V"V CtMtatawi ^4 7*A >at>.v gBo. fi*. at i5 .a 4 "4i a.44art a «* -'wr »• »*#t#i> at 74 .a »4ia« i*a?4 iaa>t4V#t#* a.*w« a* OJA •4Mf* w^taao (4#.«.au!.f a*i#.uaaa au to a Atvto at a ta-i i» 0 iO*. Mat to fur't«tf ;at#*» i •<<.' c^rnrr#*# t.« vtt a>a#« m i>4 tiAxotac ««.jkom# JMPJ Vatat a MA90 70a taa».4t a..«;ia >a.t'Airti 70A »#ajt»*4t ,#a.’ *•**>»• ia.*Jt*.»4 tta UMaAtatt MAJUV* 4aUVli<4 7 a a.' -**t • •»«» aiaiauj naMOMi •JA t«arw *41# ia5t|# m .A44> 4^k J’M TltAKi iCl«1.*“#‘. *'*v.*ia’a> 7 -a 4*a¥k»a ttl ti«a A A v\««n . a ^.t-Ut I • oa ■ ma ot «'i ..4t».»*T0 tc\ moif AwAf# iitJUiA:* ^a^ia'ai tva aao at.at. 4ta# ;#'aR •'#*.a; lea ra. a«3«. Vt# UA'CrtJ at ,4#*0ta»f*a 4Ja 410 x>44 1.014*5 Urt-ir.t Ka 410 <aaa.ra «4Ml5ji. 44a »r» «aa#A avM# utaoaiKA#' .a/iitr • .a fusai a*M avAi« ,#itai^atiMr lOA taajr* #.«a uiaa a#»a^oAtu; « a aa.1 1 '1 • .a*. ..lt« .X« »» •..a .1. •a 1 '.It *toJ 'ii-ifavi^' » a L0».f4'♦ '•' V iVtl'*.-’ 4'«#fW *14 4 0%4ta< ^.t At 1 tt *.»> 4XX *■ JOl >«a • 0.x *•41.1 ■.%! tw %90V%fi f; .a •« *4<ti».M« i.im*# 4»aa:'*j la ru.f.5 a..1* *• •4*r.#> * .a i.a.l'* a.1 M*tk> I.V.* atataj att 4«ao^t4 tj n Mkio at a oa 04 *04 ^ .*a. NOKtH leo SSCALf: IN KLtT C»t.S*€Cf»«U 9m at« «•'<«» • .«• VrW aM ^ \\ I —^4 ’•» I a# «ii «‘«l 41.'ft 40/t yte#* atc4«: a#t* «tau Mf i*«C' f«t| «H7 »ua« o«a94 af fail o» 0 #o#4a Uff m'«i %H> ffffO 4la*‘.4a4#4 at «ai| e» I »^AM5 414 AOiTl atc xvf -iAto ccM# c«j# o M.Ait>i at io ri.i4«0 41# av4l •>• Al}*'* 4Jtr %9c*^ att«*. a#ta i-wc .4t>t '*a- *ft/ »*! a«J tU'M ouatt at a-a'I A 0 4Aa«5 .5* a^n ail) a»i*o 4ii4ieat#4 at «att c* l •aA>*5 at# atw aio >*wf UUP euii# c«j# ^ m jmn *i 70 #o#«0 44# axat at« vi.'ttB vjff at04* 4H<9< a#ta (at«*O0 ta»t t^i atP m» ato N4'\t L41M tf «*t| c4 0 4«# * '5 att> aewo 4Ai4wat#4 ai gni of j laiua i# acn aiil V*»T UU*> eOM# l#Jf A 4>«;#lt'* 4t V 401445 41# *4. at fSS3AUENDED TALL WET SEED UIXOH^a arta«t) tai •*) ai9 r«t i*t«i wt j*. a. ajj'iat I a-it.*•>-,»• iff ft.f: m a).a • atuia uo 4 ■! 'tvitta .*Ma.t*c«». ^4 47 JA ia a*,i .►>at4vr r|l_*».i-j 4.1 4 .a tCUH 04*14 %a.>ul'#rt i/'aMji 0,4 1; JA Mol A«tt l#a44 aiM'#«#.atO CfMft**Om Mt 0 a uia.i*M at-j i.Mtf oaa.i.r4; j a •*;>•.'1 n *a.5 wiatii *ii l7^% JWtttl nt#L-V* V 1410 aUM|«0i tltl Ji% »0tl wfajA V>00 . f»*a**5( 011 ita uatit 04r 4t*e tyaa.MAt' »i#'ca#«*X'.) *At u;a coai; <3*44 tvauau uotautat att to m 9KMP at a «aa j» e u»4/«k«i t0»;at,*4 a>4 tA44l*aMl t.* tau Mt att> fit t*4 fAtLa**. «i**i.'vif ati5 vtik m atiiiA iO\ UfJKfmt v#«t MrAA.** i*ii*^»a.A« K9U.Mxrj «(a •ati4 •!•«'**• (*t.-vu aa.«t/a«i#i» I tea UapL?a .atfit .*.»l#t at.a»»*<*i lOA ■:*»#** a.«fV4« *>4a4« a»rfi.t't40) 7i.a Ja*/** .av'u*ta> *•*«>«**] J 'A 4M«llt *t't« a>’t4 •*•• l■.la'k.5l J.A •* • t*a.i**« tit** avi# •*%*4 a*«l«*i |.a 4IO-4t*>**r *4'l# lavt* i*.a«lo5l i^a a*t aj'i* ■avi# .#ai*t*to4t (01 kAMOa 'tt Tiitf 1 ii-niAf >.**tat«««tc» »ia al at'l •!«■ K*-af.wr» ru Uaf.#*; U OA a*4iit K4 at.ltf ♦4*> Arff.f; jvA -taf4 ;ia.ie ^.i.4>a.v' ivitMaiia u«a0»#.i^j Ijl •«i.9*«*o ■•I.t*#/' ao'Uaav* , >01 atM' ma#tO*t« XaM'4 51 lOl .'4 A-I > Ji .*#*) 4t a%*44 •■.•»» ‘«>fi#air'4'4*»a*».#ii ua vio are *44 «t#a i.« 0^a 'a* 0a,-»*, j'a# 4va*5ta •*'*,. IJA ato at’-a.“l'< la^ua »n'.*-^-a *01 #•<•1 niaai wl-'U# (#va,.5’«a#* Caa««Mti >.a a*## .uM# a’atoi'ia#' 4i#f.#*-#ij (01 ruia4aa. *•*( 4'cai*t'.*rir« .•.MJait') *.A aat t'lD V.-.4M ovta.i* •«'•/ ? ,a 4'4* ol.l**.-! VlltvO 41.l a» >.a »a* *ta*»i.a #.* '•a**'ain ;'*)•.*#H#t7 •tOA a.l rt#»*a« •rf*M«a •*a>iata» iiTl •■•Aitto <»!#.*«(• laai Jiatai >.A i.t>i#4 4->c~ ft*.*9 ait*>.r ow.aaij'ti 7.a -..til** *u«ia*Mi4 (X04* va«*i i>Macvt6*trr»«u UMSttNMS'OCr M mmm m t a 4. at »aa* «.«• a**i^ ■* • • a. .••••' (M* ^ • Aj» a • IX. * 4 •4 t« cixrvcAnoN • tn^ M0 «• *• «• Mi 4 *M«* a* < •■MBia •# Mk^U^^g^.Mnaa ^ *>1 **4!«SS*C^jy4iSa?raSa PUP MASTER PIAN & fHASE 1 5ETTEM0ER 1S« 2002 najur SrONEBAY ORONO. NtINNESOTA 7^9m LANDFORM HIMNfAPOlIt ^MOfMIM HlHMC f«JUK£TN0 {JDSTMXLfftfO moot SCEP MOmjRE A ER06I0N COKnUXPLAN L2.2 issnr K ■. J ./ X on^9Vfwf\ont DAHLJlfiOMOEVELOPMOiTLLC T» OAjijmmM n VliUlISL*5C on. 9»«£T»ca - -y r«.. n» I. . »« 4t> w* *«* m *» m • m*»m ^ m mm -1 i t «• MAM# i»«M« 4 mmmi • «• > I <»>«' *•«••«• >• m.*' mmmmmi faM-nfc-*» L«‘«4 r-<« M « «t .-■•-4U •* •'«• -41# #. «k • •! LA#C4CVl 9*'in MQU ••■ •*.«• <«#•• •■•• •« H* •r«rc< 7y 1.1k t •.'•»«ii iU-* • »»#♦ * '■**WM « r f ♦ •U f Xi* COICFCAOUS TB£B • »* & • •»r» *#A» **• UAU* «*|A »«t Km*' xrcux « k^ #t M4 T%» » rvm * k; M« M« »•* > i • ORNAMmAL TR£U © Oo 1 «I^ l»» X* .♦X4 • 0K.X* lkV»»X ru n’in, <;mi..i *«#< WiM •«• M»^kl • • 'C* •» 'tk^ X# ty IXt r .% • Hf9 • 0« OtCIDUOCS SHRUBS »(«XA« a*a*Mx.%.x 1•Ck# Ta«t;a l.kAMX l»sx»Ma #1^m^mm j 1 R<9*axkAAx 'wataA #tkr- _ CONTTWOUS SHRUB3 ^ •• iu«i» umt mwrjuj_____ I M n»f««k »’kWH k0» QMS k omMtKxmn « » Uk I# • I# }•• • %m > <»« ««1 M*i> «*•««•Mh K««»«al ^«# • 1« »«U 4.A.W A « • Xu i.vXJB •«* ioijn •ikA i.x.» ItMiUMM •XU CQilV % tAMniA#! ..krtjK’xi Mk> »ni» »»• ir» •{? %«rvi’»«u • K* *J xi ai tarx## »•- .>«**kWk !.« vUX'-aX/t V» >*%4 *iX»l Xk* i####^-**** fl.’Xl iJIXilV '-C UCI <•< iUA'VUX .'>)«X>4.tJ« >«k4 »(X**»lXtkXl ri- aax*% .^Vix. Ki »xu»’ rx'irxil >uki c.»# »fi »*• u «»«.*n *•.>» #'•»« i» »«fc'4# *x«* )iu 4 *»4>4 U4 h a •«««.> Itjti »kit »x.r« C'xnx^A ux> .rkcixx'iu • <•«•« D X »xv n<'*w • xi'xit** *4« >xrM« g* *\u<n on i*« ust x»4’ i*4 •XAtxx *%.*9h a* «.« ^xx t.4 «XUi Mx. w4Xt«X riv«CN»«s'CO' D E> Ui V«L« Vik4 •u.t ♦XvT' fiA* X#fX^ •<x.«> VUXC IvOI ajXAl n*M VCVS ML X0IX1 «4 • X •X.a# MV* 4X '• XT <•• .•■• X*XT« •• •, 4» <k# ■•»•■• #«i X *•« ncma »c u* ’rrtx •*.” *xxtig x «i' v#*4 •♦•t x *vxji i«. »*>'' ikxrx i* IkMtkXV mXA#4X* »xA fXA.M CXV<»«^Vi*V *m X0€ '•* •• >••'« MvX^ 4 Mjixnv «Tm mtx *k^ liAX«K; •« Mt xnx5 4X«4^ MXLXtiO X r.4 larn irt w,k « tr«k.x'tt •*« cxxkx^.xxi rfCXTyu xrjtm f»* vx*»»' w,4 • .kwxi •' »►« (x.vx'ix 4v»<’xx4’iW k*x,xtx»« Ci.x»'*x» T»* a I4) xjrf* rk«r kkx#M. .» Xki.*'l.X< C«:#.4« UX? .«4AX i»A »wai t.M Wi>«« •« iXMtiMX Kt tvxw «g xn'HkXUU xn.xttJN i.guixx4,'ivxi a tj r«tt xii cw ''••••x- cjixi x«c' txajaetf«Mt> ij M xoa to ••> aattJWO MX«t7w.«v 4x01 m xu *«i» mv xmas »•••# tr r >«•«) VWIUXAJ hmk.««a X; 4x « rtx.u »• xit mmmtm cnnRCAftik vM ij M t«0 AOx5Or F~^xt* ’aw Xxtxj uD«A«iy •• 4JMi«xuru« 9u m K%t9.' jm »tt«’ [ ) r7\x»t «XN» r*Tt«uk a »i* m 90KfC m- tx i.eno ..•> %•«.»*• 1—''*m t.uK xxk.T'ixt »at «»A« cjutfx. T.a a »xx.t ax«t« xi 'J .x-.xt VXv»«; <•« xx*x MX xTtv *H> TtX Xrx^M. J0 a.xxr«* a#k< xx4itit»» A>xft tf unxM’ KmiKit kAak k; TXX44-uk vx *.• tx4t »%.»*. txxx.t»t; ixii va .4 c.uon* • ’.••vx 'J ••x •• •<*» ••••• xiM.' fTXtrt •■JUX') 4» c^«c.i» •tc’kiax ^ '»xy # •xx' -Aft-i Aia umv • Xu •»•»•#••* mo x#ixi Mt »J Cicixt a' *wx»» ctr*# .* axioxc. vx v axxtT»«k ixM-vux x^kkAtia a »t> 4 0>«iwt i^’# tg t«AJa »mx» taaga .^x^i x*t -a* x» ax •ar gu .jiua*. ^.x*. a* »*« IXM”*. X4X k.^«x. T • • »vV.-'# 4M*-ki x<a .X ' *4» XJ >«*^ kX44*X i/ItXx#©* a.'*u (»• rpvato MXktHi a k. a«*» i; t h» axca gay .>• »•« aiJxt* *—^v-kt » '0 m Jt '*••*. 'X >jB x« aa.atk > vXx.a < •> **• ra#*vxk »%• '.»^4.i x:^-.* x**»t ’ka Ax*.-xr4»» *m»»*x. »*• gao* .* >*•* a 'J • »XfMkl' »0 T*« k.XM'kXXX X#.H*»v“1 Xt »J Xl* kJPXTk^a T(? MJtXuXTkU cx»i skiTX.t -X *v*- X k • k at«.«4. *W4.U AX 4T '•« TVS’ nx«'i« ^ xn X,’*« t a k * • X »4.a Xa » *X Xk’M, X«X<#IA T|k| M«.> I. -k '.X ■» kx’k* a*- ’m'.m x. u 'M- MXX'IU t»t *'•* kXt’ x*t X. XM<«4> f.axx.n *H! at %•«« i'« • • -m<%a »m .x#4-kx»t «vnx*k •XXk’ mu Uk. «X« • •» AX-' X.MXM T. ,^^T .kxxK Vt XM U'r**- X» x-fkk .u ax<a iXMVxn xx.TX t.t #ti ..vk-.Mxa a*- iXM^xX^ ’.a K* xaxkrft *xxx»» mmju* <a ax! »Jk»> gxrtatx xm7 «a a*» ca» *k *a»f%T4i^ fUD MASTER PLAN & fHASE 1 SEPTEMSER tS. 2002 noji£r SrONtBAY ORONO. MINNESOTA IHERKNNIAI t plant •k#«M«k Tkxxi'^ '' a »kvrt. w.»tia Vk» AASfXi.JAfl LISTS L» t-x » 4*,VM,kt 1 % «iaa<A> .1 »»x»f I «1 rax aa Vk . M*T .a%« WA • X ( i X »AXM t4k*4«f« aa Xlltkl . «a Mt*9 aa A.kMU UUl an ’x m u’ »M X #U W-X^kX •uXi-'i-at* »«••> %a I ki k-r >x» '•■- '.r kw 4* •#«. tx va M» • X •MM lA #MA'k u x "«'i a# axxati va X* |J« *a M X axt aa MX NBA XfCi\X»Ai« iMkx ym #x.«TviMvx f|«a#ka a.k .^kt#' V# LANDFORM HINkirAaOL It PrtOfMiM XX AX I t«ua A"-- ■ ^ ..xt I ^14 VJkTM ;kj »ii XXAUC rtajtc*Y«o nxwai «U£Y PAR WAY fB«dT) lDPIAHENUR6E! L6.I s(AU IN fin mm U' 1T.^- \ M.1 >.U».' **’vk?» »** »»JT' **-tti •' IM«» wn »J» !►« ►*U*C1 M ••' •' »*4 c*»*4«f tn T <» v«*»€/ C’*J OVk.VT|^ l/t»/1 * »*> •• HvJ rt*ttv 10 » Am> DA •A.’ftP <•« WXL9 tt rrttu’iif *»« rfv%u’t»« LANDSCAPE NOTESi f ’ t.,> ( •—^mo I »r»» '■« »’t «“»► 'C iiirt^’i*. * M Tj et.<rt • *rtxf •>« ■•*•1 »a LU:«tK) mx f(> •*<« !•« i«MU’V*A ..W’XACtiJt VMi.^ COJU*i»T| M31*u.A!lX {JtfilH CcKlitA^TJir 7 Ail *V'ff*i* %^i C.*4 %J1 •»’- T»« Vtf» »3V«X'l«i <* If. *ri-, k»* V<^4. M > «MV' ^fi^I ♦fit »* r>£tSief l*.“X k WA> ,rHj.MHlCH » • » ' * itV t flftwtIN ’*4 titltftf t* i.*» I-4 kO «#*' r>4 iCnM# A*»t M fW* •*♦»* pT'' aii*i >u«i •xri •<<»»«* !r»4ft' ti^Ji a**rt' »*je Mi* »«•» ^ lUk* *«**s f4 4 14 4.U ,4» It *’•♦.* M. ar » K«* r*k lori n*Afitr ^— - < j «««t » 14 fMi 'll M ir<H »/•!»».j, *« IM' f'# '•»« «*J *>.1. a nw»:.‘ •♦’•* '««t4 •4'* 4j«:*'ic »• V4X «y •••»» n<L^ t9 5 t«rn t»'f VkKl M »#'%.*"!' X’** »»4 5f1M« *a •'1 va.1. M •’ *•• '»*• ku»<ff *»■’X fa -a'«s**fx ft *0 tw-v ,x**44. -» m.**i*« •»*! i.**a*'4.>« •<■ »-• *ff»W f.f 8 fJ f%ff flA tJt » <4^ *•»- 1.44“* *I • »* 1^ 9» *iJt» «'t v«n44l.‘ • ‘X »A*I l< Au %*B 8K< *«*5 f*<» f.«f r, »«a4 %*»X4 * -4.1 • XI »4.i 'VI. - *1 »4.. a«f»a»4^ t»*f »«»• oaujitMJ •• c»>«»«vrtt>. wii « %w*4> of »•;%« ^ nrs*.i lAfltTiln O l.f M VKtf tt .». .»•.•!* ***f'*fts k8»lp kX ^4*11 var.*!! I__HX t,.x'».*».fjfc S t*’ »V*4l ♦tx.f3 •I’- *1.* MX I'K* X*® fa a^Xt.>«l k» ^iKil aa^i tiXt** ffax xx<f4|) vNtrf xx»f “f* •• »n*#.f xat.411 •) V% »<• •*.-» *Ia M »4•*»’•«; i»*3 C iMSB’ t» f *<>,» ia4»* -*i Xiifi' •••m iJk k» ♦Mf'tJU’ ar IMI,' k» Mxf axi*? aa ckA. «arp , .44 a.v.a. M4 x«xj .A *0 «<!♦• «^4 m'»4. ixMfv *a jxi'v., ’ X .. 1.' \xi*^ « • --*MfK «i3 iMxn f»ai t»tfcx WKXltS »A 'Xf X3 jx .JfXkXX, aXH '•! tl‘ ,j fM kJkM-X XA 8 fj ♦a.JX Xu lxm-» xX 1»»x*S M >X*iX« ^xx.tl w»fa»w©i •xfllt' kX »vxMt XK- a., xt Mxx'ir ft ’ V ^V’ ’ r*v Xfnxt x4VX'.Xk 'V-X f' Axt.ix. .M* -M. fa f " afL%«fr ft? kfM'ixav xrf.at., i xi iix^t v .x.4 r.x* •cixkkxx*. txt| ft4 It'xaf^ftxf •a’tl wo r8tk*» X> a '»*x t •«.♦•. *ax . xxj 8 xxH'-ft Mxxft .*« fas %4*f lA X.-. i»rM) »<* a jiJ •'a* i ixm'Vxa t^nxiS 81 wi ’ k.’# *>-x fx*.» I kax<v as fJ'aS ^.♦X4 aw ViX.rLa •%! ei cs'i*rwc »' 'V^ aitxf xs xxfwx aaa« ixM-vvs x- a i f Ai i i^-v as a-xx, i.a 10 *Ma4i vatxw i0 ttf' W*«* io i%t • cm ••kIM'StfS o <«sna«a im ' i'M Ch-nn »x«»i'*a SkaM ftx*»X .."ita. m 1M4X f X.t'VWt JWf« XV DtCmUOUS SHRUBS o 7i Cf«x^ BJ%» •€»« 'SkACf •Lfr*va CONIFCROUS SHRUBS O ra<a 4x«sx POUINMIALS — — •8>.'xa ^ «tk>xsAaxxi vafO •81 4S«t*Ma 1 GRASS Ac CROUNDCOVEItS « s Mx*a« mo otxss ; k’< ^ j .tfSkfeawiK-...X \ n o . ■>*! i ; *% . tv ^ i .• 1 ‘Aof*y .*4 r.-< o Ik •t * •» *.• m\ ' H > .Ak •> t #»»€1 .Ak PEIUCMNIALS—-----— •••- >»«« •ll ■'A>.*« .> k « f\ f • k ! , •« . . »• •• «• M lZJ • Mi • •W. .*>* *v» iSaPRELQIINARY PLAK1 O OPEN SPACE DECIDUOUS TREES MS »r»%%» O © ft I’Kl. COKITEROUS TREES 7 Vtr DECIDUOUS SUKUBS O o M «r (AK l-¥i —P4 NOTJCSI ^jk I .4 *»4 »« <t4f* *w » w f.*. f%yt * O! f .» «.»*.' •■! '".J l« *,«U>N . f l^r m.VKi» Mn»«f ♦ .* LANDSCAPE NOTES 4 V^. .i%’ • i.k 4’*:.' •’>4« ’ ' <#•* !%.>«. Ttft > «».i **4ti ..*# vr 4’4^4«V5 V.444 m .» *ft*i » 1 ?»€« O • Wv«»’4#« t H'MtH T.ft »« '>4 »V«M r»4 A*M V^4 ..M«< [E> E> 4^4 >ft • 'ft>i p^>*4 r« Mf.n ?i4» 4«|4$ 4.4 *4**4 •• * A4»*i ••*.•. 4 MM Vft*n*<> *«4S/« \% »4« ^«r* utjtjmto *«»M .ft* iji4*iv ft * *>« i*i*vt v*i VW4.4 a* <.k..4iic • Vskki at •• «•-• Kkk.4'i». V«.ft kft4«»ft • frVft4*4». ;*14.*. 444 4«irA**.'t k%%.m ftS*ft44*kft Mj C'4.U1 4M«I a>vl4LtfV*(t* E>>tan« fi* ti *dui («’) (ft-ft wncMc r.«rt {y-n •*'rrs*ti.:M ftf«f*j ^ •«! ft44.4 E> ll> 4.* tift* 4a* 4t .Wkftft '.i •»>«iUl 444 Aft.' rftt|*'a, i 1 ' m 14 4.1 (4’*44 '*4 'ift I* k.l • AT Mif V4 »ft 14« 4a|4 Mftl JLftfttrra*. (M*{ X4ft* t' ft A4ftt Vi A 4aC*ft V* * ft #4.* n.»ft A 4M*t, ft**'.’ fAf** lIi #%M4 4 4* t.k»T*a.. «4ai’ 4.4 Akfaaa. 4ai4i 4^ •« Aft<‘»ft I4a«*. 4><* •.'4 4.1ft ^ Oiki** 4tft ** t 4* m »!(’ 4ft JIH O t>« i4a«.'i4.ft« .’jft'^k^r.ft n *Ai ft.'**© ,M A440 E>•4*. •*»• •* »4%.4'i4' ^ ft Ift la »•. (ft • 'ftM • > r*v , •**%•<* 4*v» -*« «' ;•*;■. *4} '•« lft4*V4/* 44 •*-1.' 4.ft*«ft V» 9 *.7 * u.'» 4»4 A4ftTft *.« J5'4Arar*ft* » liftrfti vu »4V4*it< ift r»r» v*» • 4at A-4-# > "*» Vt»*4. »\«f .M»*4. l4a4-» ftn • *44* A 4ftt «t« .'4ft ««i M 4* '»«r* :• ftft ft'Kff 4 1 m’v*. 4« AftA kft4 4.ft’. 4. ' V fj i«ft4w'l A4ft* Viftiu n jfti'*««*t NCTESI ■ LANDSCAPE NOms tnt.M i t* t j> 1p€, t4 *r» ~rm • »• ^ !««•••.%• *,» «.C4I ♦ C*" » » WL «C I"" 3 m !•''•••'•.•» : » ** ;rh.i mu»*K * *5* aaPREUMINARY PLAKT DtCDUOCS mZ3 ««• »JUA4 u«.t» r* ’ -V I u«l*» •* - #» ( / DKCtUUOU.S SliMUBS o 1 «t ; l*\.4 I 1 •**' IA*A • Glu^ A L3 ••-•I KAIN GARDEN PLANT NORTMUJC ST_J. ANE ASD ^In 'ciAf^¥N ail aOSU a «Mft Sk^l •ft *•**’ *\A..A. .Mk.A •a r4MA«4 A««A9««AA>>A9| fta mrftk r%j •ttt*A9k ftk>*«« rA*^*Ai. A . ’*• A^)|W •A .*4 ».**A« t .*1 •«« .•4^l>«l •3 H^A vA. iO>.'fc-« itl •aI •«A«(« *A4,>.Mi,-* I (ftKfta’ Mam)«A»k VH UAI A (• *.4 »4*V4< 4'.A«** ;* Akk •9>|k«AAk • .. A«t*3 * -Ai*‘V M« ’!• wi. ^ «*t ««•« «o %.arr''f. ^ m- •: m »» ir-*- <i« MC-n< -A.» A,. ;«««*.« !•< ^ •»#» w». > jm—M, v* .’ «»; «# »••' #••• r.« ***1-• • <«k^a >9^ m ■9^* • • !»>:! a*f» ♦• .»■ ir«i-|A4 w« :««w:. •'* -«•, • »•*•• 4 * '•« «m« •» AJMa'S DU t<« ^ MP U« <Ct«M »«>«>• » s« 0\m ’j4 ft«i« *.M« .**»•'* I # i- AUnC «li' V»U ‘••t • »iAif l«: *-X*» ♦ v nA-“ »«M •« .l*-V UV-»*. * 9t.jL»'H.- »!■•►• 'aMt k ■A'*l- *• » •*■' *91 •' L**!" M% *U v> * %4K. • »VvA ’»i^ ••'»• *<• *4*4J».»»4 ».•.*•»•• » 31*'’ iBMk ^ 9| a 9‘ '>• Kav* -•• •»'•*»’ * '*4 •*«-•■••• B %4il’ *«» .«*•».. > Aa4 A.AA **0 »>« #.« i«»»« 9f l^>4i Aa% •• -ri.< k«^» »e-i4vA*Ua ;«• | «u CU • «W«MD ,:.MA w II* '>«.k 1M.« vr*t ««•«• KMC '«br* fka» •m»'i »*(ar wu« *Mft* ri4«Ki o»*«« •*' mb*»F~v^ *••» ,«'/ t«v< MA rUt» •« Ait V€i9 Ar aaa) QJ^nivV rj m rwy ?.«m (,- r ^V'mxv •*« m:** •* ^ A**»#4*a «.** a4i«» .r». fci**j4u:!a. •»;. « ViW' •* A;»t f 1 4 Atk A*»k' O ta • V*i19 (T C»i A*»»»1»T»4 vfl'tw" ^ ^ AI4! )0«tAlt •*» »'»'•» «,V H’*J* i 0 fc’ AAt At ” .A 1,1 9At« Af *Hk «•.**. '•« *a- K«A'li. «wc< yiA^Ai .» AA*4<^ »«A»^ ‘••A ,N9* XAk«Wf i. ^ V>4.U* V A*N-»A u »A *-.« •Ak.l KkJ«. AlM*-a«. V«ii > •-•-*% ’J •*4« "At «t<* A^v t.%*t klj *AHr^ > fur^UM »/» ‘J* f*.AA«'A«. .*AC‘VA»9 .A.! ijrAktA AM f9 ' a5 1M O <>4 .a«*^a»4 ,..«■** ' ^▼•k*fcAni ••..••tc *t /iwk rr\»f. *«« A'K^ B M M r»TA»-^>4'' Oiva #*t>> , A4A«M> *.> .AAft*% A«> M - .*»-«A ■.• 'A f > AiS. .•» ^•4 *' *«rAr%«it ,» k^ri » U-AAk'-fA *4*. A-HI ,«| »A,A • 1M l»4t’ i; I »k iAA^-VA^ »*nAiJ ft »A.Ak AA a# «k< :^a< •*. t% 4.’. Ai H.* Ai C JA .a, ■.• ff lA^Aa'i A« Jftt'ft'M*iXC W X o 9*IfVt k m 'rytt’i Mr^ » r*IV CH WT ?»*• • a»»i^k. li«lS o II ^*,.4.* l>».* *li Ai*t* «»V i.H r-n *••• # *-*• DCC3)U0U3 SHRL-BS G w rf*'.’' ■•n • •■7 m • It! •»H4 . -t w c>L 01 *•— • v*»i«1 • • I .** * r»«M . « •»».. C.4.W l*»v' 'V «« 1 V. ; ♦ V 1 !• i'.* . . i < ./♦ m ..* *% 1 • r 5*^f 9M VW? C^ i »0« t*««r »C‘U« n \ .................•Hill || >»jB «#i 8TONEBAY l: ' .rti'.»« ».< ii.'tk 1 f •** i »!•'>« •t«*>\ •‘ i»t«r v«' A»4> iMk niv-’I.MN \t>C«ka«'t« kCXT tllP, •• kPAlU P*'M rv tti u* rjkl.* o SECTION A-A- ENTR>UJCE SION VK* f ^ ^--•-.. s mmrn »rt -uM |MP^ ''• P *4 ^4 M k««* 0- ^».i*r Artipf section B-B island falls X*»4 ^ »0 SECTION C-C ISLAND FALLS V*kP P « V <4,^ X i L do^f wvrioffi DAHbTHOMDEVELOPNerriiJC 1LIUIV OAivjrmnM n«ft KUOUS UL«C M4Fii;ciDrc.uY:oii inMarsM P4iou4»ai 0\ SP^f f Ptfj r» ■ »| «.• Wt ri' H* M»< (t- »* «a 11 J •«* . •*.** «M <t4 •M ^ • IA.WI (>• •* • alM ill ••I* «’ • «» *«••« .«• ■•> .aa ««« «k« ••-*>•• •• a^M .*■««•« a Ml <li AMaa a Mt •Mklii*: MM !V«i IIWIM «»• *».M ' ■ aa> lau? p*^arfv«> I rvaxp i>*sat a»M ^/a *aa *1^ w« a«a I ^ >11 Bar ^ M ac aa^ai ai'ai aaa 4 ■a >Ma««- ■>«' aaoiac aia v * ■ a a aaa •• .• •• ■ «*■ m •aaw aM ^■' >«.•• ••<•#•' •••> aaaaaa a«a aaa •*.j • >M *• >«a-aa •a.Ia «aa ' -41 •«* aa. >a aaMM a» * .a* aaM«a>a> aa>« «a aa«M AM a* aaa vai aaaaa* «aa ^ —« 4a aa Mar- a* m«-aaa aaa OM •• ' •»*■ M> '•aaaa- •••> aaaaaa •aa aaa »*.J- •M*r >«a- aaa ai -«a aa« aa aaa >aa »a» aaaaaa aaa >4* «. a M aaaa-M a« • X .aaa aa a a4« trviSCNMBTOrr (M * M m •# •. -V a aa >t. aj Jata< •4 a -a*a •aa«> aaar> *a -a»-aa aaa * <aa« ftCUfCT M/JiAOCt f rv«w P> CP Cl*l1HCAflON iPaaMiPi •-laa axZVl2*aS PUD MASTER PLAN & PHASE 1 SEPTEMSER IS. 2002 ntojicT STONEBAY OKONO. MINNESOTA LANDFORM HINNfA>»0l It P H 0 f N 1 M MPnaaMi ■»«««>#• W W mmm VMM 4«aMlM!4P F4i HAP«i?criVA;*>o Ft^jurTNa TBOW2 lANPSCAfEscmoNS L7.1 *jw mmrnm i a S iH rSs6 “^ ffiwES^K^.UT'l: •a B.*-- i, 7^1iKS«B«f.i. 5 TS! Lonwrifc f^d V •.>t\«#« r.vr»«. IP* »*.AMr»«. >jt s -r^r O SECTION D-D’ ROUNDABOUT V«i« P 9 '\ '' VyS r •< A Vi -^1 ir^^ i»i / -y y > y r J\ •t ’ vt » JK« il^C .*« ■^ •^•M' . atl / »HW i. Tji* l*H< ’#1 •*'%..< »i ’« 9'V \A- ; fkJUi«« «*4i»»»•') ’-Ar' i»’ V% #<j»V JfICJJ AA»T «.^mj4ff r,«» Al ‘«l«r>f.,f ►1 IM» >•*.»> / „,z_„ likMiiiLliiL. «r * »*^- U_-y A l\#» i»»#J •• *.w^%T' A- « £*<“T, UHJ arc » W^t* am C«iS»« G SECTION E - E' NORTHUJEST LANE RAIN GARDEN kia« ■ $ ..-- /i.m .w X oni€JL«fvricr! 1 DAHLSTROMDEVELOPMEimir Tvmv OAiixmnM n«R3lAJUSLJUfK MmXCH0VC.UNS&3tl mmiwnmm ttmmmwn A *' 'iy CM.S*«ET»00 :i r#» «« ifc V <!■%■< rt» •• rt/ diM •«»««« ri > m%^ , • flHM^£AaUk (9> i« it; m*ams0 • •# ;|| *^4« .«« ttV AAtf .A« m^ai0^ *Ksm cjt m m% ( • • «»t «• .*%.' « «4» A •> ^M»*4 «4 I • »•«••«• A«» k^«% ,m4• •• «»^ fLA I fWi^i :«* t«u4* #««•«• .f'M .»»•% ^•4 ^ faM'Mfc ’tfl t<?Mj .-•. i.W M •'«! Ct i ••'<•< •» Mat <■• * t.»«*a» IK • «l \i •i G tWTt SrUT MbU V ^---------------------- —ft y-,-...—‘<1S t*^« iti' itM ^ < \ AM 4A^* «»4' MaM# l%«* ^ lAM^CAfl Mil MQU i ^ «a» 41# k*» «’•*••* Ai’ A «*• AA« aA^* «»4' •* MT* M «*Ji AM tAU' •««••• M lAi *«A •#>«• ,«r%M M« a** «•«*«%* kam a* «*4 a*I «%.« a«^J» am M4 «• A««r .«« 4 AkkA am M—A* <%a if* 4*# kM'%M 4*9 aM^ M • tCMMMMsrorr a»a mmm •* .) ^1 .««•; a. kJ ww' <■ .*• «V •••.•■« ja««' Jan • «r •M-M AiM • <KM •« *v nuuia uA*w)u crww cunMLAncM PUP MASTER PIAN& PHASE 1 SETTEMSER IS. 2002 ntaufCT STONEBAY ORONO. MINNESOTA LANDFORM HIHMtAPOtli FHOCMIX »M4 RUHAaf LTOmXlZ^aiO nxiuiHb rooocz lAHOdCAfl 5EO10N5 L7.2 5*®-AOe D'A-E^Ei^6P^E DEPTw 1* C44n«C* »09\H rt*r 4T r CAW9 70» (94 »r - •• r C4*r9i »tr r99ir* (44 7T ' /• w 4* 04.M4 4T f%»tn (44 A* - 4tf V CAf9«vr T0nr' 04 a* ' #r V 4‘ t 4.494 AT '♦#■»»» (»4 «>• U* '»14* 9PATII t >• 1 4.»9*(94 9P ((jrtrAt N-N*! 9* C4099 (AT fwvr C94 ir (orifiA V4(ii> r C44999 %r rwv* (94 at (opifm virt 1 <r CAfW «xr C94 99* (A'’H4i V4(» ) **?•! Cv>r«M«Clv> 'VUAAi 0 TTPI^I. 5«RUB PL~NiTIN<j IX«K» •* £* HMI -* f • U^-tl «t«#i •* 9 \ r\f« iW #A*i'Mn^ (.•->»% »>(/<'»u )tCMT tif J i*,:m tqi tc M*vi n«i tJi $ 9r|H 9tMI1 Kk..K. - l>4 •ki CAMMAii »1 M r«CMA*4.'Ki« V«(«0 Md* rticV 4) ««:vt£> Ai %4«t i;i A am 'Mu »% r 1 r ■ )r »At.' 91441 »t *r *m;.4 Ntni »•>*» *J •• «n.^ 4’i»« A»<- »« • ^ 4#4) •*n«»a. •« X»9X »»» *»4 4*141 r»* ut» luxn sr9!|« «X*.'44> !.« *1 411^4«a\| »0» •4»t9 ■» 4 Kv*%*»^ UK ..•* I It tfiktf 4i T|« N»«. *'A<'»«4 *»7!i C.».’44.'ffV 0 «.X;J9 'Tti T « o *4| «M ^ r f*l AxMk'Utl iu«*e4 ’u> •T o t»« C lW»» 'till MW44 K« fiVX*. 1r4#'n Aril [r- •iri:J; rtAuM 45 9>%OI4i' .«« %««i lil •fiM J A iKKljn t* 4 l«.>49 eilt4C> Tr« 4V4(<t9 »iVt 9l>t»n nri« 44ti' 414N*»*. au 4<4' 94cn<4. V* (i>«%L44.>i« riiKi 444> I «14?l Vtviir 4BI.144.' *iM<r «i<M i>« >^M4> iT4i4C> no • »CM0 CB4i» T o Q n pic-l. EDGE DETAIL AT FLANTiNCj BED aKiittv ^iT4 ir n% y* xhi59 C“»*v««i •« <-i4t« i; M M Cv^tiv’ •-'H nt-.tm V4*im ATI If uv ,J» •4.U riAV ij nAMTM. o T’^FiCi^^L SP^J^DE-REuCC^TED DETAIL FOP DECIDUOUS TREE H3 V ml‘T» H4HJ liXaiH »00»9 04 cv>«i4*ttfu>v n4iirA4 (TtT) 494jf*4% ruix *9 Vimc ON »44l B _:; ■ . A '•K Jlfc » ;0;'i *’ . * • ■ -------------W*I«| V4»o tk;«j 4K»«'4*tt Al Mt' **<I»U A% •‘►msijxiA.i ^Ltv 9*€' I ut»4!t 9A14.1C 4«AMP 4tAKl «!<•< M. !-• - 9 0 Ti PiCAL perennial PLANTING \ pgMi ^0710 I NOTES! i UCtaOMf •♦OWVTIO* IMIM *«9« tCPOOIA^MC Mr»«v VMKW »T Uk«<»cwi IMM&r »Oi M «H4Cr ATOncMi »««M «o #i0voio rr n« or? oi otcN9 a ^o orttf o9oc*fi3. i/Tut? wac&ne»e to m mlo »t«r«o awo to HCAiTAr>o«/cooT«jr»i»t o mt oamr*^i ms «tio. m »04<o »<uo « rrooiAfiiT hotmo >oi ascLi/m«. I VfTUiCS y0m OILMATW t? tjoumx tMWVOCIXTU «#0 »«U> iOCAftO UHJKm OKHWl? M OOCMM. «WI iwO AOM* •« noroM. ?oci ^ »»*>• M T^ AM DO AA3 9 OM A«0 •«rMBDO AfcC* » auLSktf lAOM M0r«0 o%oaat. • t»« ajan*TT cvAi tci. cao m ariMO Km t*m »?o4m. • TO M uMO NM Hi ca^^wuevin «tmj< ictwris r a *?? R»CWA?Ctr« ar%«AN •«» fCA«a M> TK OC^At. HAS Itst. Mcr^T Ipoom rTvoATHT K» a«unH tk AOC*KKT AS »OM 3. nfl HJH A*0 flM T»0 t*rAi Ki >>**i « C{TTAd»0 TO TK KiH r«<llAAi HHO OtCO TO ACrvrni (9M s^AOi AfTvjre « ‘Xli?"A4. »T1 iTSiAJT M *T AOS) Aosn Vt*VJ»0 HAH?* so AT 0« ACttS aACA«r-«A iMOAO so AT 7ISA JW^S •CHUTtHH OHM «Pa A (Tvsf a cm » amcjAnAA ib^ahti (MOOS M »f. )A AO »««• so AT SJ AOttS • ? OfJhu.vcmonM. DAHljniOMDEVELOPMEKrLU: lOAT DAiLSIUDM no kxjouslcc UAitc cnnn;»«tnti OX5A-U1 >CO rai w< o» •» ■ J> L*AC5CA^ s«^irr »«cx f rr«c*« rjs’TDcr JAM M •*. /» • .W <A#<<*rMHwA. ft0.ta w»iAOCR KfWM aXTJXA'CH PUO MASTER PLAN a PHASE 1 SEPTEMBER IB. 2002 na.icT. STONEBAY ORONO. MINNESOTA LANDFORM MINHCA^OLIt-^HOCNIV niSAAC cacfraciM hc .ipppca too 200 ntEIMNATY SIHEriAN ■• i Hl^OMKDLVCVnmX DAHLSTOOMDCrameriLCw'^*' *-.v ‘ '. **v; u • ' ’4 *• ’*-V ^. . ? * *_^ " V.. OTS A & B CONCEPTS - STONEBAY ___/^-/9-oe- _ ^-3> EXHIBIT 5TCsEeArwcnoo2 101*14/02 scale FEtT Id LANDFORM ^ MINNEAPOLIS • ^MOf NIXSeptember 18, 2002 Michael Gaffron City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway PO Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 RE: RPUD Development Stage Plan, Preliminary Plat and Final Plat Request for StoneBay development to be located at Willow Drive and Highway 12 Dear Mr. Gaffron, On behalf of our client, Landform is pleased to submit the above-referenced applications for property located at the northwest comer of the intersection' of Willow Drive and Highway 12. The plans for the RPUD Development Stage Plan, Preliminary Plat and Phase I Final Plat are consistent with the RPUD concept plan approval granted by the City Council on August 26, 2002. At that meeting, the City Council also made findings that the requested rezoning from RR-1B to RPUD was appropriate and would be final at the time of RPUD development plan and plat approval. In accordance with the developer ’s purchase agreement, we request that City Council approval of the rezoning and RPUD development stage plan be contingent upon filing the final plat. The RPUD development stage plan Is requested for the property north of Kelley Parkway. At this time, no development is planned south of Kelley Parkway. That property will be platted as two outlots. At some future date, development will be proposed south of Kelley Parkway and the applicant will be required to submit the necessary applications for site plan review. As always, our proposal includes construction of Kelley Parkway in the first phase of development. We are proposing a total of 167 homes, as approved in the RPUD concept plan. The area is planned with a mix of 56 rambler tovmhomes. 47 two-story townhomes and 64 loft units. The RPUD development stage plan complies with all ordinance requirements and the conditions in the concept pian approval. Furthermore, we have met with City staff to identify methods for making some of the units more affordable and we will continue to work with staff toward this end. It is my understanding that this item will be scheduled for Planning Commission review on October 21, 2002 and City Council action on November 12, 2002. We request that a joint Planning Commission/City Council workshop be scheduled for eariy October to allow both the Planning Commission and City Council an opportunity review the application and detailed drawings prior to taking action on the request. 650 Bu*LC« north B uilding 510 First avcnuc north minnsipolis . mn 554C3• • ^ OFFICE: 612.252 90:0 FAA, 612 252.6077 wwwTTjnrjform.ntt Michael OafTron Page 2 Re: StoneBay September 10. 2002 plTn'development stage We also ^Quest that the City of Orono extend the effect of the subdivision approvals pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 462.358, Subd. 3c. which states that no amendment to a comprehensive plan or other official control shall apply to or affect the use. density, lot size, lot layout or dedication or platting required or permitted by the Orono Village development Is a multi-phase development that will be period of 3-5 years. Consequently, we request that the City extend the RPUD and other approvals for five years as allowed by State Statutes. As always, our development team Is available to meet with City representatives at anytime to answer questions. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Steve Johnston or me at 612.252.9070. Sincerely, LANDFORM Kendra Llnd^l, AlCP Planner COPY: Terry Dahlstrom, Dahlstrom Development LLC Bruce Malkerson, Malkerson Gilliland Martin LLP ENCL: Application Form Affordable Housing Proposal Mailing Labels Draft Association Documents •Lindfonm Engineering Company doing business as Landfomi 650 BUTLER NORTH BUILDING 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, K!N 55403 OFFICE: 612.252.9070 FAX* 612.252.9077 www.landforTTUlft September 18,2002 Mr. Ronald J. Moorse City Administrator City of Orono, MN 55356 RE: Affordable Housing Proposal for the Orono Development 2550 Wayzata Boulevard Dear Mr. Moorse, As per our discussions with you and the City of Orono staff members, it has been mutually acknowledged that our housing sales prices are above what is considered affordable by any of the present definitions of affordable housing. Nonetheless, we will work with the City of Orono to jointly place several of our condominium units or two-story townhome units at a sales price that will meet the definitions of “CASA Affordable Housing”. Presently the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) Community Activity Set Aside (CASA) program has a maximum sale price of S 199,000.00. We propose that the City of Orono and Dahlstrom Development LLC together contribute funds and resources to aid reduction of the sales price of several units to meet the CASA mr; <imum limit. Aner .evirwing our development site plan and the present CASA limits, we will, at our discretion, provide one of the following two options: Two (2) condominium units and two (2) two-story townhomes units for sale at the CASA maximum limit or, alternately, three (3) two- story townhome units. The locations of the units for the two options have yet to be determined. These units will be built to a similar design will be slightly smaller in size than the related condominium or two-story townhome counterparts. Our proposal and anticipated contribution of funds or resources by Dahlstrom Development and the City of Orono are outlined below. The sales price of these umts will be the maximum sales price limit of the CASA program in effect at the time these units are placed for sale. The City of Orono will contribute funds or resources equal to 15% of the effective maximum CASA limit sales price at the time of completicji of the units, and will apply these funds or resources to help reduce the sales price of these units. Dahlstrom Development LLC will make up the difference in the actual cost to reduce ’.he sales price to said maximum CASA limit in effect. With joint participation, we feel that this affordable housing proposal can be implemented within our development. The affordable housing proposal may necessitate participation by the City’ of Orono in the filing of applications to outside agencies and cooperation with Dahlstrom Development in identifying and structuring any special requirements that will allow the designated units to be restricted to persons that meet affordable housing guidelines. We appreciate this opportunity to work with the City of Orono. Sincerely, /Terry Dahlstrom Dahlstrom Development LLC. if J Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & \ Associates Engineers & Architects October 1,2002 Mr. Mike Oaffron Planning Director City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Stonebay PUD Master Plan, Phase I File No. 139-02-000 Plat No. 02-2789 '* " -‘—/ro-OppoMwnl.y B-Pfincipair Otto G Boneitrco, PX • Marv!n L Sorvjfa. P£ • Giervi ft Cook PL • RcDert G. Schcnicht, PL • Jerry A. BoufcJoa PX , Aifocljte Prlncfpjri: Howard A. Sanford. PL • Ke tr> A. Cortfoo. P£ • Pcfceri » Pfefferfe PF P<chjfd W. foitcr. PE. • David O. loxkota. P£. • Rsten C. Rujieic A.LA. • Mark A. Hanson pr .* Micftael T. Rautmarn. PX • Ted iCfiefd. PL • KerveL*i P. Anderioa PX • Mark R Roift P£ • David A. Bcneitroo. MBA . S-drey P. \fcrjNarr,jon. PX. LI • Agnes M R.ng. MBA . ^lan R.ck s<h,r,ct. P£ Offices: Sl Paul. Sl Clou^^. Rcchesrer and WilUrdr, MN • Milwaukee. Wl Uebsice: wwwtcneirrco com Dear Mike: 1. .. anitary Se« cr. The City should review MnDOT plans and schedules for utility improvements as pan their T.H. I- improvement project. As noted in our previous review comments the sanitary sewer between T.H. 12 and the railroad tracks will need to be upgraded to serve the ultimate development of the Stoneba> site. The plans should I entity |;c\v sanity service will be provided to Outlot A. The sanitary sewer manhole details should be rc vis<*d to include .an Infi-Shield exterior sealing system or approved equal. 2. \\ atcr Maiii: Hydrants should be installed at all high points in the system. Stainless steel bolts shall be used on all h>drants. All water mam bolls shall be stainless steel or Cor-Blue i-bolts with protected caps. All water main installation shall be in accordance with City standards. T uTa^vv P'an set docs not show relocating the downstream pipe from the ponding area north of T.H. 12. Wc recommend the pond outlet pipe be relocated westerly to align with the cxistine nordt/south ditch along the vvest side of the golf dome. As noted in our previous letter, the golf dene e xperiences parking lot and building Bood ng during heavy ram events The realignment of the pond discharge will eliminate two bends in tlie ditch and divert storm water away from the golf dome parking lot. A minimum of 2-fcet of freeboard should be provided etwten a.i basement elevations and pond high water levels. Grading plans should include ICO-yeai high water elevations ano proposed emergency overBow c!evat.ons and locations for all wetlands and ponding areas A drainage a.'ca map. storm sewer and ponding calculations should be submitted for our review Erosion control pbn comments will follow under separate cover. The wetland delineation report should be submitted for review Final plans should be submitted to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) for th.eir review and approval. Streets/Trails: We recommend a rr.inimum radius of 500-feet for all horizontal curves on Xelley Parkway to provide an added .measure of safety and improve sight distance. Plan.x should include venical curve information The r.glK-of-way width shown along the e.-vstorlv 500-feet of Kelley Parkway is inadequate for the proposed suect i-oign. The right of way width should be increased to provide a minimum of I5-fect behind the back of curb. A ccni-r non bour.^ Icfi turn hrt and southbound ri^ht turn lane should be consirucied on Willow Drive as part of (his project. The trail shown along Willow Drive north of Kelley Parkway should be realigned to intersect with Kelley Parkway at the intirsection with Willow Drive. The plans show a trail and sidewalk adjacent to each other along the w-ii n It'S unclear why a trail and side walk are necessary. The trail along f I constructed to T.H. 12 as pan of this project -nS^designguidelin! for Kelley Parkway on Sheet C. 2 shows a 5-f.^t sidewalk directly behind the curb. The City should review and comiTKnt whether this is adequate tor snow s:ctage. The same design guideline shows a 5 -foot "trail" on the other side of the street, all trails should be constructed to a minimum width of 8-fcet. A geotechnical report, R-value recommenJatio.i and pavement design should be provided for review. 4. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 651-636-4600 • Fax: 651-636-1311 5. Traffic: Our turning movement template indicates a WB-50 truck (typical moving van) will not pass through the roundabout. It appears the street would need to be widened by 4-feet to allow the WB-50 turning movement. The roundabout should be redesigned to accommodate a WB-50 truck. Another possible solution short of widening the ^ curb along the inside nulius of the roundabout with a 4-foot wide concrete side^ behind the curb. The rear ^es of the WB-50 truck would ride on the sidewalk and the turning movements could be accoounod-ited without dismrbing any landscaping. This latest version of the plans has added another access onto Kelley Parkway near the west end of the project We would strongly discourage the addiuonal access Md would encourage a redesign of West CircIcAVest Lane that provided two accesses onto Kelley Parkway rather than the three shown. The West Lane access onto Kelley Parkway should be constructed 28-feet wide face-to-face. 6. Site Grading: The overall site plan should include an earthworks summary to quantify the proposed cut and fill Retaimng walls over 4-feet in height require a separate engineered design submittal. 7. Finwclal Guarantee: When final plans have been completed we will prepare an estimate of the total cost for the site unprovements to determine the amount of the financial guarantee required. 8. General: All utility and street construction shall be in accordance with City engineering standards. Future half size plan submittals should be scaleable. Please contact me at (651) 604-4863 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. /cyyy^ Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono Oct 09 20C2 2:42PM BOMESTROO ROSENE flMDERLIK 6516361311 P. 1 Memo ^ene Andcrll(4 l\Jl Amcirai Project Name: .Stoneba/ To: TPK From.* JLH Re: City of Orono Client: City of Orono File No: 139-02-000 Date: October 3, 2002 levelopment. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. arrr»rr„c,ca=od SrHf.e« P.pr valooitica, and dSsa°:j;:r tampe^a^^^^^^ "^>a,‘^ g;^^p^r.%S ,.~pp.en. ai„ tha nortHeil endTwe developmer"'''^ « in Plan, 3a;rtldTpo^SrS£^^^^ »» ™ s ESSkt”*" as necesM^°'’ "^aa eilt fence installed and mainlalnod prettoZsSj'Ssted^ ‘‘a"a'°P'"a™ a'tes should have a rock construction anlrarca, as Oeariy dolined rpponsible authority shall be provided to project engineer prior to work c“TorreZs“'agaVtrerion aTd* edlmenl Po8l-lt* Fax Note 767i °“*roA/oz («g«»^ TS'r^ K«lUc« Co/D«pt.Co :5i Phor« i Fi3rv® # Fax # Boneetroo, Rosonc. Anderllk mndAssociates. Inc.____________ Highway 36 4 St. Paui. MN 55113 + Phone: 651-636-4600 •*• =ax: 651-636-1317 [T^bancorp. National Account Services, LLC TO; FROM: RE: Terry Dahlstrom Don Solie 8/20/2002 Affordable Housing Units In Orono Project In response to your question about affordable housing units In your proposed development in Orono I would like to break my answer / Information into several parts. As we have discussed several time there are numerous definitions of “affordable housing" depending on whether you are discussing existing or new construction homes, what geographic area (urban, suburban or rural) you are in, v/hat agency you are dealing with (state, federal, city, county or redevelopment area). The general Information relates to: 1. Definition of affordable housing by sale price 2. Definition of low and moderate-income buyers. 3. Generic outline of currently available financing programs for low to moderate income buyers. 4. Reasonable expectations of what will be available In 2004 when units vrill be closing. 1. For the sale price limitations for affordable housing for your development In Orono we will use the limits for Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) Community Activity Set Aside (CASA) Program. That maximum sale price Is currently $199,000 for the 11 county metro areas. This Is the most likely type of financing to be used for purchasers for these homes so we will use this limit for simplicity. It also needs to be noted that the various allowable sale price maximums for different programs change, normally, but not always on an annual basis. Because of the cost of land development and construction in toda/s metro area It Is very difficult to produce units at or below the referenced maximum sale price. 2. Like maximum sale prices there are also numerous definitions of what is the maximum allowable income for low to moderate-income buyers. One of the most commonly used is again the limit for MHFA - CASA mortgages. This is basically 80% of the median income for a family of four in the Minneapolis - St. Paul metro area. As a note to tie number 1 above together with maximum income we need to look at the relationship bebveen income and maximum sale price. In general It should be noted that if the maximum income used for new construction affordable housing units is less than the previously mentioned MHFA - CASA limit it is exceedingly difficult if not impossible for a purchaser to qualify for a mortgage unless they have a 30% to 40% down payment. Obviously low to moderate income buyers will probably not have a $50,000 to $65,000 down payment, therefore it is imperative that there be a reasonable relationship between the income limits and sale price limits. A. -The aforementioned MHFA - CASA program has been available for several years and should be available In 2004. The one point that needs to be made IS that CASA is a Community ACTIVITY Program, which does entail some participation on the part of the city. B. Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) first time and low income programs that assist buyers to qualify with very lov/ downpayments (3%). There are variations of these programs also available through Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC). FNMA and FHLMC are the largest sources of mortgage funding and continue to enhance their offerings of programs to assist buyers for developments such as yours. C. Bank sponsored programs may be available that can provide additional lov/ downpayment options and aid in funding some buyer’s closing costs. D. Assistance from grants or gifts acquired from non-profit organizations to aid lov/ and modGrato-incomG buyGrs buy homGS. for purchases of properties closing tv/o plus years in the future it is dirticult to estimate what will be available orv/hat will be the terms for maximum sale pnces or income levels. The best assumptions would be that we can use today's numbers and if there are properties that fit into those guidelines these properties could be offered as “affordable housing" units under the requirements of the Metropolitan Councils affordable guidelines when marketing begins in the future. Whenever we deal with new construction affordable housing it is a moving target. The maximum allov/able sale price moves, as does the maximum allowable Income Also because there are numerous guidelines that do not necessarily move in tandem. There have been instances whore a sales price limit has not changed for years but Income limits have changed annually. However, from a financing standpoint it should be safe to say that if you have units available at a sale price of under $200,000 v/hen you begin marketing the condominium units (2004) they should qualify as affordable units according to the Metropolitan Council and MHFA and be eligible for some and hooefullv numerous financing programs at that time. ^ Before you and the city .«elect the specific criteria for affordable housing in this development it would seem prudent to reevaluate the situation in mid to late 2003 when you will be able to establish approximate sale prices in the condominium building and we will be in possession of then current, updated information on financing programs. I will be traveling on business until 8-26. USB OnCNO AIFCRD HCUSE . Oco 8-20<2 • . ieldRe«eaith Inc. August 20,2002 Mr. Jofin Hassler Dahlstrom Development LLC 8266 Xene Lane No. Maple Grove, MN 55311 • RE: Proposed Orono Multifamily/Mixed Use Developmenl-Orono, Minnesota Dear Mr. Hassler: As you requested, Ma.xfield Research Inc. has reviewed your proposed development concept for the Orono Development, a 165-unit for-sale multifamily development that will consist of a mix of one- and two-level townhomes and 64 condominium units in an elevator building with underground parking. As we imderstand, there is also the potential to provide a commercial component that would include some professional office space and nei^borhood retail. General Market Conditions The proposed Orono development offers housing products that are increasing in popularity throughout the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. During the past few years, the proportion of multi family development has been increasing against single-family development. This is due to a variety of factors including the following: • An overall aging population, the majority of which are baby boomers who are moving into the empty-nestcr stage of their lives; • An inCTeasingly mobile and independent senior population who are looking for alternatives to their single-family homes and often spend their winters outside of Minnesota; • An increasing desire for many households to free themselves of the burden of home maintenance and to devote their leisure time to their families or to other hobbies and activities. • Young professionals seeking a first home that would like to start families; The Orono development addresses a growing market demand for moderately-priced for-sale housing that presents options for a broad age range and lifestyle considerations. The development proposes to offer: 615 I* Avenue NE #400 Minneapolis, MN 55413 (612)338-0012 (612)904-7979 FAX Mr. John Hassler Dahlstrom Development. LLC August 20,2002 Page 2 “ «■'> wa«;-o« lower level. For e™p„. .oLVee„«rel,oo.ie.ai.«oo^wl.‘’u.e.o:tle^^^^^^^ are those »P<^ «f livias resident base. Multifamily Home Values and Condominium Developments M pa“dtii' “ s: ir“117“"““'' L7 "O'few years. ’ ” ^ appreciated dramatically over the past Rambler Townhomes = $509,430 Two-Story Townhomes = $320,410 Condominium (3-story) = $809,400 multiple townhome developments that have units listed for however!^ere is oXne 7 7 two-story product types. At this time resulted in a very hi^ average oric^^v" currently marketing luxur>' units which high-amenity Son We note Uiat^hrtt upper-bracket units in a 615 1" Avenue NE #400 Minneapolis, KIN 55413 (612)338-0012 (612)904-7979 FAX Mr. John Hassler Dahlstrom Development, LLC August 20,2002 _______Page 3 comman(l^ upper-bracket product. In order to achieve a more rapid absorption rate and maintain a market position in keeping with the other components of the project, the condominium product proposed for the Orono development will be pric^ much lower than the average shown above. We provide additional information regarding condominium properties that are currently marketing in the western suburbs that are positioned similarly to those proposed for the Orono development. We note that the pricing for the proposed Orono development townhome components falls easily within the average price point that is currently for-sale in the area. The following condominium developments are currently being marketed and are under construction in tlic western suburbs: Villas at Bassett Creek in Golden Valley - 55 units; one- to -thrcc-bcdroom units \vith pricing as follows: 1BR = $ 149,900-$274,900 2BR = $192,900-$277,900 3BR = $280,000 The property began marketing only three months ago and already half of the units are sold. Residents include a mix of empty-nesters, young seniors and mid-age professionals. Grandview Square in Edina - 68 units-Phase 1; two- and three-bedroom units with pricing as follows: 2BR = $253,600 - $353,900 2BR+D *= $385,900 - $422,700 3BR = $433,900 - $559,500 Ur:.ts arc tinder construction. Initial marketing of this property resulted in a higher demand for larger size units. Some of the original units were combined to create units with more square footage. The average square footage for units at Gr.'ndview is 1,569 square feeL The property began marketing in June 2001 and to date, 60% of the units have been sold. The majority of the buyers have been empty-nesters and seniors. Fern Hill Place in 3t. Louis Park offers 30 two-bedroom units with pricing as follows: 2BR-$259,000-$384,500 615 1 “ Avenue NE #400 Minneapolii, NIN 55413 (612)333-0012 (612)904-7979 FAX Mr. John Hassler Dahlstrom PevclopmenL LLC August 20,2002 Page 4 amenities: averagesiz~eo^fL*ts'bWrbSghT48^^^^^^ marke^ginJanuaiy2001. The empty-nesters and seniors. ’ ^ are feet. The majontyofthe buyers have been covered spaces per iLt. ^TOs ra°in e”^ building an average of 1.7 We note however, that the pricing of unit^ ufoow^^tv^^r condominium properties, market. For mid-priced product, offerin2 a^v^I^ ^-^ "^^^°r" generous and %vill be well-received in thf marketplacT^^ Site Characteristics He proposed dovciopmont also offers prospecrivc buyers (he follorvirrg • Convenient access to major highways - Highway 12 • r.n!ion .dj.™,rtcrc«io.=t .r.t vi,„. (wiS, r.k«. gio) Overall MarLhik!i.'ty developme„(s. We are seeing m^ny iSy devdoiXo '>!>« “f (o in“e “TglSelTinlo (he housing allows other families to ourrhac^ • r ^ the provision of this household nrix in (he comarurniy and pro^i for Sta^o^S ”' sl^rpf io nrost of the larger size the LUre Mi^e on?a ei'Zn^;i«™'rl ‘’s1“ r" " IMted developnrent in despite the fact there “suZSran^'ZZThltg'™^^^^^^^^ 615 1“ Avenue NE #400 Minneapolis, KIN 55413 (612)338-0012 (612)904-7979 FAX Mr. John Hassler Dahlstrom Development, LLC August 20,2002 _______Page 5 Summary_ ^ In reviewing your proposed concept, we believe that: The proposed Orono development plan offers a strong housing mix for its intended target markets at price points that fall well within the average range of those currently selling in the area. The site location offers prospective buyers convenient access, a strong residential character and substantial open space and natural amenities. The proposed Orono development will a*tract a diverse mix of target markets ranging from young households through and including seniors, all of whom will be looking for housing products that offer greater flexibility, but do not sacrifice amenities. In reviewing the proposed product types, we suggest that you consider increasing the average size of the condominium umts and that the pricing on these unit*; could also increase and still remain very marketable. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me. Sincerely, MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC. Mary C. Bujold President 615 l*AvniueNE #400 Minneapolis. MN 55413 (612)338-0012 (612)904-7979 FAX Kni’slfTtl WK^iYIIiltl L!IlliM«[t7 i!ias««2»n57i Ly»I«M fW wBinirsTiT^ [4fr*iiMii:*i r Ok f ... * J X ^ t id. axfleld .^ lewardl lac. Land Use Planning that enables clients to retlenne downtown areas, redevelop older neighborhoods, explore the highest and best uses oT land and evaluate the capa bilities of diverse land uses. Consulting Services are customized to meet Individual client needs, and mav Include a varied of services tailored to the Individual project Maxfield Research Inc. provides specific recommendations for development based on extensive primary and secondary research conducted by a staff of highly qualified research professionals. il. w pxfleld ^ Research Inc. • •-- ' * • , “ . 4^:/■..-... • •.* . • .Mp. -■■ ■■'■■ ■ . • 15.^.: Mary C Biijold President/Director of Research \ ' 'iT: • m?'- «wlK’ ‘ ^■Si I Mary joined the firm in 1984 shortly after Maxfietd Research was established. Working initiaUy with multihimUy residential developments, Mary rapidly expanded her expertise to Include, finandal institution studies and retail analyses. She is considered a market expert in the field of residential real estate and In market analysis for financial institutions. A- Director of Research, s-e is responsible for overseeing and directing aU research P oj.cts for the firm. In c.dition, she also heads project assignments for large-scale lar;d use and do.vr.tow-. redevelopment studies for private developers and municipalit-es in the Twin Cities and in the Upper Midwest A graduate of Marguette University in Business Administration, Mary also holds an M.B.A. Degree fre.-n the U.-iversity of Minnesota. She is a licensed real estate broker in the Stite of Minnesota. % f • Business History - Terry Dahlstrom QUALIFICATIONS Land developer since 1986 coupled with a residential builder license (#4549). DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION HISTORY Current Member -Dahlstrom Development LLC Dahlstrom Companies, Inc., Maple Grove, MN. 1986 to Present OWNER /.PRESIDENT - Directed all land development and construction activities centered exclusively on building $300,000 to $700,000 price range residential homes. I have successfully implemented and completed all developments as designed and proposed to the Cities referenced below as well as all Equity participants and lenders. Further, I enjoy a flawless reputation for following through on all warranty requests from current and past clients. DAHL STROM CONfPANIES INC. OWNER / MANAGING PARTNER - Accountable for construction and business functions for the following Land Development General Partnerships, including development and admimstration of all financial budgeting, staffing, subcontracting, materials and work schedules. Developments include a 12 lot single family residential development in Shorewood MN ($700,000 to $850,000 price range) completed in two years, a 46 lot single family residential development in Plymouth, MN ($400,000 to $500,000 price range) completed in three years, a 73 lot single family residential development in Maple Grove, MN ($350,000 to $500,000 price range) completed in three years, 53 lot single family residential development in Maple Grove, MN ($300,000 to $4OO,O0O price range) completed in three years. LAND DEVELOPMENTS Qw-ner / Managing Partner. Dahlstrom Abington Development LLP. Shorewood, MN. Development Name - “Watten Ponds ” Financing thru CMIC Owner / Managi ng Partner. Dahlstrom, Eiden, Peterson LLP. Pl>mouth, MN. Development Name - “Plymouth Oaks” Financing thru CMIC Owner/ Managing Partner. Crosswinds Development, Maple Grove, MN. Development Name - “Crosswinds” Financing thru Richfield Bank and Trust Pmier / Managing Partner. Minnesota Valley Partners, Maple Grove, MN. Development Name - “ Timber Bay Estates” Financing thru Minnesota Valley Savings and Loan Mankato, MN. MILITARV SERVICE United States Navy - Honorable Vietnam Veteran Business History - John Hassler John Hassler is a licensed Realtor in the State of Minnesota Current Member of DahJstrora Development LLC _ • Real Estate Background Member of MinneapoUs Area Association of Realtors - 1982 to present Member of National Association of Realtors - 1982 to present Real E^ate Associate, RE/MAX Results. Plymouth. MN - 1991 to present General Partner of Counselor Realty, Minnetonka, MN - 1986 - 1991 Real Estate Associate Burnet Realty, St. Louis Park, MN - 1933 - 1986 Real Estate Associate Century 21, New Hope, MN 1981 - 1983 SALES AND MARKETING QUALIFICATIONS hTw j constmetion sales and marketing has been my primary focus for the past 11 yean I new cmT'* r"* lalenled real esiale agenis to specialize in the sales and marLing of new construction developments throughout the Twin Cities area for local mid-sized builders Sales nS^^lv^T? S2I.000.000 annual sales revenue. Housing type focus has Ln Lury cLte Brooklyn Park - 30 units Burnsville - 40 units Burnsville - 28 units Burnsville —16 units Chanhassen - 150 units Eden Prairie - 5 units Hopkins - 56 units Minnetonka - 88 units Minnetonka-21 units Mirmetonka - 40 units Oakdale — 55 units Richfield — 40 units Tonka Bay - 16 units VVayzata - 80 units Additional single family de«lopments include: Plymouth - 12 units; Plymouth - 120 units; Maplewood irougbout fte°mro'meI " Rcsidentid development Md construction services range from reviewing the marketability of a chosen ‘o purchase, reviewmg site optimization for density and building layout, house plan design n.flna opinion and customer profiles. Sales services include MuSliIc- Listing Service placement, appomtment setting, staffmg of model centers, developing sales systems^ CirenTsTrSe"^ “T cfprocedures, public relations, media presentations and sales staff development. Client services mclude mtenor design selection, interior design revision, assistance with mortgage^ aes. title companies, appraisal companies, closing compam’es and site management companies.compames, For the past seven yean I have represented a large upper-bracket builder under the RE/MAX Resulu !! °‘'^rage. My team of real estate agents advanced the company’s market share and set record sales for die SroX.bpm°o'.““ “f »pecif.cauy utilized io die mice md mar! ctiug of t • ORONO PROJECT MANAGMENT Business Location On site administration, sales and construction office, Orono, Minnesota Core Staffing Operations management - Terry Dahlstrom Construction Superintendents • 3 Construction and warranty persotmel - 3 Sales/Marketing Management - John Hassler Sales StafT - 4 Model Home Hosts - 2 Office Staff - 3 Management Terry Dahlstrom will be accountable for business operations as well as oversight of all bidding, contract letting, construction supervision, construction subcontractors, civil engineers and utility contractors. John Hassler will be accountable for sales services include Multiple-Listing Service placement, appointment setting, staffing of model centers, developing sales systems, advertising and marketing procedures, public relations, media presentations, sales staff development and client services. 4^ LANDFORM MINNCAPOLISFHOCNIXOctober 16, 2002 Michael Gaffron City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 RE: Additional Information regarding StoneBay Development Dear Mr. Gaffron, We have submitted an application for approval of the RPUD development stage plan, preliminary plat and phase I final plat for StoneBay development. On October 7. 2002* we attended a workshop with the Planning Commission and were asked to provide a few additional details prior to the Planning Commission meeting. The additional information is included with this letter and the material samples will be available at the Planning Commission meeting on October 21,2002. We have provided typical architectural plans for the rambler townhomes, two-story townhomes and loft buildings. The townhomes will be finished with high-quality materials such as stone, brick and hardiboard siding in earth tones, but the developer will allow customization by the individual homeowners. It is our intent to allow homeowners to choose from a customized material palette that will ensure continuity within the development while allowing buyers to tailor the homes to their individual style. The loft building will be designed with a material palette that complements the townhomes. The final design of the lofts will be submitted with the final plan application for that phase of the development. The entry signage is shown on the plans and will be constructed of materials chosen to complement the homes in the StoneBay neighborhood. The entry monument at the main entrance will be incorporated into the water feature and landscaping planned for the entry into StoneBay. Sign details are included on the plans. We have also reviewed the recreational space requirements and included those area calculations on the plans. The ordinance requires 10 percent of the residential RPUD area to be set aside as private recreational space. We have provided 3.3 acres of upland private recreation space where the ordinance requires 2.6 acres. These recreational areas are noted on the plans. We have reviewed the available street light options and have attached several choices for City review. We believe that any of these street lights would be appropriate within the StoneBay development. We will continue to work with the City to identify the street lights to be used along Kelley Parkway and within our development. 650 8UTi.£B NCPT h B liLOiS j 510 FtRST AVENlE NOPT h MiNSfAPOLJS VN 55403 Office 612.252 9070 fAt 612 252 9077 www lanflfofm Michael Gaffron Page 2 Re: StoneBay October 16. 2002 On behalf of our client, Landform is requesting that the development fees (park dedication, impact fees, etc.) be phased with development. As we will be final platting this project in three or more phases, we are requesting that the fees due at final plat stage bq paid when the final plat is filed for each phase. This is consistent with what other communities require and would result in payment of the fees when the homes generating the demand for these City services are approved for construction. We are proposing to develop only the land north of Kelley Parkway. We do not have any immediate plans to develop the commercial/office property south of Kelley Parkway and, therefore, we are platting that area as two outlots. We have prepared a sketch plan showing how the outlots could be developed simply to ensure that the two outlots would be developable. While we are not proposing any development on the property south of Kelley Parkway, the City has requested copies of this sketch plan for their files. Copies of these sketch plans are provided for informational purposes only and are in no way to be construed as a request for approval or a plan for development on the commercial property. It is my understanding that this item will be scheduled for Planning Commission review on October 21, 2002 and City Council action on November 12, 2002. Landform respectfully requests City Council approval of the RPUD development stage plan, preliminary plat and phase I final plat. We also request that the City of Orono extend the effect of the subdivision approvals pursuant to Minnesota State Statutes Section 462.358, Subd. 3c, which states that no amendment to a comprehensive plan or other official control shall apply to or affect the use, density, lot size, lot layout or dedication or platting required or permitted by the approved application. The Orono Village development is a multi-phase development that will be constructed over a period of 3-5 years. Consequently, we request that the City extend the RPUD and other approvals for five years as allowed by State Statutes. As always, our development team is available to meet with City representatives at anytime to answer questions. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Steve Johnston or me at 612.252.9070. Sincerely, LANDFORM* endra Lindahl, AlCP Planner COPY: Terry Dahlstrom, Dahlstrom Development LLC Bruce Malkerson, Malkerson Gilliland Martin LLP ENCL: Revised RPUD Site Plan Lighting Options Commercial Sketch Plan Options ’Landfom) Engmeerng Company doing business as Landform 650 butler north BUILDING 510 FIRST AVENUE NORTH OFFICE; 612.252 9070 FAX; 612 252 9077 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 554C3 www.landform net October 15,2002 C-6? TO: •Orono Planning Commission FROM: Dahlstrom Development LLC RE:StoneBay of Orono Per your request, enclosed are examples of townhome and condominium communities for the puipose of comparing exterior materia] selections, product design and site density. StoneBay Specific Competition - Multi-Family Housing New multi-family residential construction within a 15 mile radius of the Orono site, ranging in price from $180,000 to $750,000. itigrtvilie ^ GUI ^St. __ Dafnond Ul Tsl 1191 inoka -c-'l^her Q DU] lampljn__ s - ^ "**^<Burschville J .cKford - ^ • J.4ke Sdf 4^ Hackamoro '^Hdmclj jndepend^nTct ■Afjnit^nq ~ ~ - fTAcP' I4p2« Plj[n.__ . \ 1 a .................' SagaHillX Bay c__.Mou nT r ■ T VI •!^l a m 1J9J u ^ ^ » r ^ "J^^_:^£xcel5ior ^Carver ^ tdrU"Eden P ilcTtinc ■ CD msmi ChAska o (Tr)'^ ijrriam QI fAt* *B-------"^'SC ood- 0»Lr%. 1 .A La ^ Direct: New multi-family residential construction within a 15 mile radius of the Orono site, ranging in price from $180,000 to $750,000. Specific Competition - Multi-Family Housing Eden Prairie A - Durst & Cans Construction - model $489,900 - others from $400,000 B - Manley Brothers Construction - model $459,900 - others from $350,000 C - Orrin Thompson Homes - model $389,900 - others from $260,000 D - Orrin Thompson Homes - model $209,900 - others from 160,000 E - Ryland Homes - model $283,000 - others from $220,000 K - Wooddalc Builders - model $269,900 - others from $220,000 Maple Grove G - Town & Countiy - model $235,000 - others from $150,000 H - Oak Ridge Builders - model $324,800 - others from $220,000 1 - Centex - model $224,500 - others from $170,000 J - Eagle Crest Inc. - model $269,900 - others from $246,500 K - Eagle Crest Inc. - model $199,900 - others from $190,000 L - Orrin Thompson - model $335,000 - others mid $200’s M - MJB Homes - model $336,900 - others from $294,900 Medina N - Signature Homes - model $489,800 - others from $379,000 Minnetonka O - Ron Clark Construction- model $698,000 - others from $395,000 P - Ron Clark Construction - model $489,900 - others from $395,000 Q • Minnstar Builders - model $566,900 - others from $441 ,000 Orono R - Eagle Crest Inc. - model $194,900 - others from $190,000 Plymouth« S - Swanson Homes - model $379,900 - others from $350,000 T - JMS Homes - model $347,800 - others from $299,800 U - Langseth Construction - model $399,900 - others from $350,000 V - Rottlund Homes - model $179,900 - others from $160,000 W - fowTi & Countiy Homes - model $195,000 - others from $150,000 Victoria X - Jasper Homes - model $289,900 - others from $289,900 Y - Rottlund Homes - model $269,900 - others from $190,000 Waconia Z - Jasper Homes - model $233,900 - others from $220,000 ZZ - Prime Builders - model $195,000 - others from $150,000 L Customer Quarter Report Page 2 of 2 thin a 15 mile radius of the 00. ,900 - others from $400,000 59,900 - others from $350,000 } - others from $260,000 [) - others from 160,000 from $220,000 S220.000 J'J m ^ T2 T V Single Family Residential List» 1S86188 Status Active Map Page/Coord; 105 / El List Price $ 309,900 List Date: 5/23/2001 1350 DOUGLAS OR Unit#: 106 GV - Golden Valley, MINNE5S422 -t*"m ■4 Coun^y HENN - Hennepin Style (CC) Low Rise (3-Levels) ^ Beds 2 LakeA/Vaterfront Creek Fireplace 0 Public Remarks: Baths Total: 2 Air Conditioning: Central Garage Stalls 0 Exterior: Brick/Stone tnformation Deemed Reliable But Not Guaranteed O 2001-2002 Regional MLS of Minn., Inc. All Rights Reserved rs from $150,000 thers from $220,000 70,000 from $246,500 s from $ 190,000 s mid $200’s om $294,900 rs from $379,000 - others from $395,000 - others from $395,000 :rs from $441,000 , from $190,000 ; from $350,000 in $299,800 others from $350,000 j from $ 160,000 0 - others from $ 150,000 •om $289,900 5 from $190,000 ;ZB Construction. Inc. Model Home Price $234,900 * Others From $189,900 ■ Medley Hills Condominiums • 9225 Medicine lake Road 763-593 1089 • 763-593-1322 Medl'^y Hills Condorr.mufrs is an eic ting ne.v deveJcpfH^.t of cre-leve! living Th:ese innovative contionTtfiuj^s are of e»cuiv!e design, featuring spacious iv.c-anc-tnfee-oedfocm semi-custcn units Vbill>nine-foct ceilings, six-foct Mndcvss and underground neared pa'kirg •,v;:n e ’evator Pr^ate Wftop -.’sta overlook -g Ved:e/ Ht;!s Park You one-ie*.e! living /. ts se'enity ar*d a.Tef^.es6n., a ccnd.Tiinium can offer 1.42-1 i to 2,000 square feet. ^295\, N A M€::.ne Uke Pea: P5‘ii r.cO C/’rj? futirghtj V2 *,Vj c 'f Like rj V. n rom $220,000 i from $150,000 http://\vwAv.northstarmls.com/SearchDetail/Scripts-'PrtBuy4/PrtBuy4.asp?CSSName=CSSNaine«S:CSST ... 10/15/200 Customer Quarter Report Page 1 of2 Single Family Residential List^ 1591783 Sla!us Aclive Map Page/Coord 105/El List Pnee S 154,900 List Date 6/11/2001 1350 DOUGLAS DR Unit#: 303 GV - Golden Valley. MINNE55422 County HENN - Hennepin ^ fityle (CC) Low Rise (3- Levels) Beds 1 Lake/Waterfront Creek Fireplace 0 Public Remarks Baths Total 1 Ar Conditioning Central Garage Stalls 0 Extenor Brick/Stone Single Family Residential List# 1586413 Status Aclive Map Page/Coord 105/El List Price $239,900 List Date 5/23/2001 1350 DOUGLAS DR Unit#: 119 GV - Gulden Valley. N55422 County HENN • Hennepin Style (CC) Low Rise (3- Levels) Beds 2 Baths Total 2 Air Cond.t.oning Central Lake/Waterfront Creek Garage Stalls 0 Fireplace 0 Exterior Brick/Stono Public Remarks Single Family Residential List# 1586120 Status Active Map Page/Coora 105/El List Price $ 259.900 List Date 5/23/2001 1350 DOUGLAS DR Unit#: 101 GV - Golden Valley. MN55422 County: HENN - Hennepin Style (CC) Low Rise (3- Levels) Beds 2 Baths Total 2 Air Conditioning Central LakeWaterfront; Creek Garage Stalls 0 ^•replace 0 Extenor Brick/Stone Public Remarks Single Family Residential List# 158^^97 Status Active Map Page/Coord 105/El ListPnee $ 272,900 List Date 5/23/2'‘Ol 1350 DOUGLAS DR Unit#: 107 GV - Golden Valley, MN55422 County HENN • Hennepin Style (CO Low Rise (Z^ Levels) Beds 1 Baths Total 1 Ar Conditioning Central Lake.Watertronl Creek Garage Stalls 0 Fireplace 0 Extenor Brick/Stone Public Rema ks THE VILLA ON BASSETT CREEK. 55 DISTINCTIVE CONDOMINIUMS RANGING FROM $149,900 TO $299,900. NOW TAKING RESERVATIONS SUBJECT TO FINAL PRICING. OCCUPANT FALL OF 2002. PETS ALLOWED. UNDERGROUND PARKING ASSOC DUES APPROX. tnfcrmaticn Deemed Re'iat!e But Not Guaranteed O 2001-2002 Regional MLS of Minn., Inc. All Rights Reserved http://w\\A\.nonhstarmls.com/ScarchDetaiL'Scripts/PnBuy4/PrtBuy4.asp?CSSName=CSSN’jime&CSST... 10/15/2002 Customer Quarter Report Page 1 of 1 —'tUWi ID ■'/ . Single Family Residential Ust #: 2055089 Status; Active Map Page/Coord; 177 / E3 List Price $ 551,900 List Date: 7/13/2002 21957_Minnetonka Blvd #11 Unit#: 11 GREW - Greenwood. MINNE55331 County: HENN - Hennepin Style. {ZC) Low Rise (3- Levels) Beds: 2 Baths Total: 2 Air Conditioning* Central Lake/Waterfront Lake Front Garage Stalls: 2 Fireplace: 1 Exterior Shakes, Brick/Stone Public Remarks: MOST AFFORDABLE END UNIT ONLY 30 STEPS TO YOUR BOAT SLIP-THE CITY OF EXCELSIOR. HIKING TRAILS & RESTAURANTS OUTSIDE YOUR FRONT DOOR MAKE ST ALBAN'S BAY VILLAS YOUR BEST BUY ON THE LAKE^EE MLS# 2049164 FOR 1 VIRTUAL TOUR Status: Active ■ rmi Map Page/Coord; 177 / E3 List Date: 4/2/2002 OOd, MINNE5S331 OC-iP. Single Family Residential List# 2023304 List Price; $ 729,900 21955 MINNETONKA BLVD #3 GREW-G..« County; HENN - Hennepin Style (CC) Low Rise (3- Levels) Beds: 2 Baths Total: 2 Air Conditioning* Central Lake/Waterfront: Lake Front Garage Stalls 2 Fireplace: 1 Exterior: Shakes, Brick/Stone Public Remarks: St Albans Bay Villas offer benefits of lakeshore ownership w/all the comforts & services of a 5-star resort-There are 20-2 & 3BR homes-28ft boat slip & heated garages for all homes-This is model-call for a private showIng-see MLS#2049164 for virtual tour I. . %SJ.v« a [LC Single Family Residential List #; 2055041 Status: Active Map Page/Coord: 177 / E3 List Price: $ 826,900 I ist Date; 7/13/2002 21957 Minnetonka Blvd #16 Unit#: 16 GREW - Greenwood, MINNE55331 County: HENN - Hennepin Style (CC) Low Rise (3- Levels) Beds: 3 Baths Total: 2 Air Conditioning Central Lake/WaterfronL Lake Front Garage Stalls; 2 Fireplace 1 Exterior; Wood, Brick/Stone Public Remarks DRAMATIC VIEWS OF 2 BAYS A YOUR BOAT SLIP FROM THIS 3 BDRM VILLA. ENJOY YOUR MORNINGS IN TH»2 SUN BATHED PORCH A WATCH THE SUN SET FROM YOUR DENI YOU ENJOY LIFE WHILE ALL THE WORK OF LAKE LIVING IS DONE FOR YOUI SEE MLS#2049164 FOR VIRTUAL TOUR. Information Deemed Reliable But Not Guaranteed e 2001 -2002 Regional MLS of Minn., Inc. All Rights Reserved hnp://u-ww.northstarmls.com/SearchDetail/Scripts/PrtBuy4./PrtBuy4.asp?CSSName=CSSName&CSST... 10/15/2002 r s ~ \x. •« • • /• —:7 / \ Oi i 0 :* ^ " . • * ’ * . ? /* r '... . ... excelsior B4y ^ '■ =3001%Qon ^?s>-'N ;.^xcelsior i’ ' •n:; V StAlbeniBi^* • •• . ■ ;. W’f. . ' ■• ■ •?> .’< ■'• T , ^ ^ -t, Excob or BMl 21957 Minnetonka Blvd # II Excelsior, MN 55331-8616 .. 02002 MioQu»fioom. Ina: 02002 SUvoxtoi* Tr .Ancbao« rri.x 'I 1350 Douglas DrN Minneapolis, MN 55422-4305 •V ^ V- ‘1^ ”v- ’ ?«--K Uv JJ-jL;i Customer Quarter Report Page 3 of.* Statjs: Activt Map Page/Coord: 132 / C4 List Date: 7/11/2002 tf 91 ittt It o'n ti t -r'Vi Single Family Residential list#: 2054420 List Price $ 359,900 .1S7.95Jh.eJPjiifS EDNP • Eden Prairie, MINNE55347 County: HENN • Hennepin Style: Twin Home Beds: 3 BaUis Total: 3 Lake/Waterfront Fireplace. 2 Exterior: Brick/Stone, Hardboard/Masonite Public Remarks: One of the Premier Developments of Eden Prairie.. Settlers Ridge.... Walking trails, parks, even a serimming pool.. Homes exceeding 2 million. One of the best lots in the 'rJ Development Built by Kroiss 2 years ago. Professionally decorated. Truly Turn Key Air Conditioning Central Garage Stalls: 2 A: single Family Residential List #; 205166! Status: Active Map Page/Coord: 132 / C4 List Price: $ 429,900 Ust Date: 7/2/2002 17536 HACKBERRY CT EDNP - Eden Prairie, MINNE55347 County: HENN - Hennepin Style: (TH) Side x Side Beds 2 Baths Iota: 2 Air Conditioning Central Lake/Waterfront: Garage Stalls 2 ^ Fireplace: 1 Exterior: Stucco, Brick/Stone, Hardboard/Masonite - .X. X' -* Public Remarks: BEAUTIFUL MODEL HOME LOCATED IN EDEN PRAIRIE’S EXECUTIVE TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT ’HERITAGE VILLAGE’ MANLEY BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION ■ CHERRY WOODWORK THROUGHOUT LOTS OF ATTENTION TO DETAIL - V n Single Family Residential :-v 1 List It: 2023643 ;< . List Price: $ 499.900 Status: Active * M Map Page/Coord: 134 / C4 List Date: 4/2/2002 17540 HACKBERRY EDNP - Eden Prairie, MINNE55347 County: HENN - Hennepin Style (TH) Side x Side Beds: 3 Baths Total 2 Ar Conditioning Central Lake/WaterironL Garage Stalls: 2 Fireplace 2 Exterior. Brick/Stone, Hardboard/Masonite Public Remarks Information Deemed Refiabte But Not Guaranteed C 2001-2002 Regional MLS of Minn., Inc. All Rights Reserved hnp;//\v\v\v.northstarmls.conx/SearchDetail/Scripts/PrtBuy4/PrtBuy4.asp?prp=Mls&whcre=+&RctumNu... 10/15/200 Signature Homes • a Charles Cudd Co. c3'Model Home Price $499,800 • Others From $390‘s ..vl?’ .*1 ,|/rrr' ^ i| ! I il it) Medina Highlands • 3839 Linden Drive E. 612-889-6980 * 612-333-8020 WWW. charlescudd. com This s^tat^o^the*a^T Medina lo-Anhome, located sn ihe^^ara School Oistna. features unique OoeJewlr^g with light and Ajrtdows on four s»deSrWrroib(e gourmet kitchen Aith adjoining sitting aicove. Sun room and deck overlooking beautiful pond and wetland. Finished lovyer-le/el walkout^rKludes huge reaeaion room, bedroom and balJUf^-car garage mduded. Up to 3.000 fmi^Jj^^uare feet of luxury living! Evergreen • 55 Atst to Highv^y 101 ronh 1/2 rr > ro f»e<gfpen; right to modei MNU t20I3S474 Sfptfmber 20f)2 Thundm Sunday 12 nonn-^ripm 5853 Forestview Ln N Plymouth, MN 55442-1275 AC'm I ^ Jr"- 85^m 30001 'T\<^ > e«Jy.HfcCr Murftekj Cfr J ^ -■'' . i KTogawoog . ^^22^5 5396 Ashcroft Rd Minnetonka, MN 55345-4008 iA Han(/| 02002 MioQu^Uoom. Ino : 02002 N^vtMtbn T«chnobq^ •:»AA^wg^T':^------------------ f 8 2 I-— o TonUiMOod Of ^ . y -?--- .Daj Pi . 1300a 15699 Sussex Dr Minnetonka, MN 55345-1449 Itc s ■: jt.- J •u ____ 02002 MioQuoUoom, Inc ; 02002 N^vaaton Tachnobobs Hopkins, MN 55305-2827 mm'oa I • iffdimere .^/ Height! f 4rk .1 X , — I iSOOm 14Kc »)i?y -• CasTMOOd Cl 18795 The Pines Eden Prairie, MN 55347-3550 ^ CrastMOQdlor ‘-Tumb\4Wl j U)m Ui 02002 UioQifMldom. Ino.. 02002 rU'^bn T*ck-ob^ Hackberry Ct Eden Prairie, MN 55347-4276 ^ Hmop^ y Vai^Rd Ced«r HiOt coif Coune I CraAi^mdTor - TiimNilfVI 02002 MaoOu^^toom Inc.. 02002 Ncvojton Tncltnobass / ipijWm y'\. Customer Quarter Report ------- Single Family Residential List U 2077083 List Price $ 443,900 Page 1 of 3 Status Active ^ 221 1st Avenue NE-Unit«10 MPLS - Minneapolis. MINNE55413 Map Page/Coord: 106 / D2 List Date 9/20/2002 --- • - ^ . m -fc I'- • •fc. . County HENN - Hennepin Style (TH) Side x Side Beds 2 Baths Total; 3 Air Conditioning Central LakeAA/aterfront: Garage Stalls' 2 Fireplace 1 Exterior: Stucco, BricldStone Public Remarks Urban living @ the Village @ St Anthony Falls! Hennepin floor-plan provides over 1600* of space w/2 br A 3 ba. Maple cabs, granite countertops, stainless app, Fp & 2 parking spaces. This unit also has an upgrade of custom-slat blinds & windows. See Supp. Bii 3JfSSSSk: .y . - : r.. Single Family Residential List # 2077186 Status Active Map Page/CoorJ 105 / B2 List Price $ 247.000 List Date 9/19/2002 890 TRENTON LANE NO PLYM - Plymouth. MINNE55441 County HENN .Hennepin Style (TH) Side x Side Beds 3 Baths Total 2 Air Conditioning Central Lake/Walerfront Pond Garage- Stalls 2 Fireplace 1 Extenor MetalA/inyt. Brick/Stone Public Remarks THE VILLAGE AT BASSETT CREEK IS A SMALLER TOWNHOME COMPLEX NEAR MEDICINE LK. END UNIT FEATURES QUALITY UPGRADES THRUOUT AN OPEN/SPACIOUS FLR PLAN. NOTE; RM DIMENSIONS & ALL MEASUREMENTS ARE BASED ON BUILDER ESTIMATES.SELL. AGT TO VERIFY. i » Single Family Residential _ List# 2027231 Status: Active Map Page/Coord 116 / El ^ ^ List Price $ 229,900 List Date 4/15/2002 5710 VILLAGE TRAIL Unit#: 5710 MOUD • Mound. MINNE55364 County HENN • Hennepin Style (TH) Side X Side ^ Baths Total 3 Air Conditioning Central I Smin'il Lake/Walerfront: Garage Stalls 2 < Exterior: MetaUVinyl t - :.v:Remarxs ITS LIKE NO PLACE ELSE IN THE TWIN CITIES. 5S1IS ’ .K Single Family Residential List # 2047803 Status Active Map Page/Coord 105 /B3 List Price $498,196 List Date 6/19/2002 253 Willoughby Way West UniW: 209 MTKA - Minnetonka, MINNE55305 County HENN • Hennepin Style (TH) Side x Side 2 Paths Total 3 Air Conditioning Central Lake/Waterfront Garage Stalls 2 Fireplace 1 Exterior Stucco, Brick/Stone Public Remarks: • - - Information Deemed Reliable But Not Guaranteed ® 2001-2002 Regional MLS of Minn., inc. All Rights Reserved hitp://v\wv.nonhstarmls.coiu/SearchDetaiyScripts/PrtBuy4/PrtBuy4.asp?CSSName=CSSName&CSST... 10/15/2002 Customer Quarter Report Page 2 of .^.^77.: • •• ;? • •‘ V..* ’Mn Family Residential List# 2073765 Status Active Map Page/Coord 105 /B3 >3 ListPnee $ 241,900 List Date 9/11/2002 626 Willoughby Way W MTKA • Minnetonka. MINNE55305 j County HENN • Hennepin , St/»c (TH) Side X Side Beds 2 Baths Total 2 Air Conditioning Central Lake/V/aterfront Garage Stalls 2 Fireplace 1 Extenor Metal/Vinyl Public Remarks IMMDEDIATF OCCUPANCYI WONDERFUL 2 BR, 2 BATH HOME W/LOTS 01 AMENITIES. CLOSE TO FREEWAY, DOWNTOWN AND SHOPPING. OPENE AND AIRY, & GREAT LOFT OVERLOOKING LIVING ROOM. LOTS OF UPGRADES SHOW & SELLI /r . Status Active f -- ■ / Single Family Residential 2068576 • :-j List Price S 299.900 • 9816 Cove Drive MTKA • Minnetonka. MINNE55305 * -^1 County HENN - Hennepin ^ V ^ Map Page/Coord 105/B4 List Date 8/24/2302 Beds 3 Lake/V/aterfronl .-T;•7-.. j Fireplace 1 Baths Total 3 Air Conditioning Central Garage Stalls 2 Exterior Metal/Vinyl, Brick/Stone Public Remarks ,( f. ^.80 Single Family Residential List# 2041061 Status Active Map Page/Ccord 105/A3 List Price $ 334,900 List Date 5/29/2002 973 Fairfield Court MTKA • Minnetonka. MINNE55305 County HENN - Hennepin Style (TH) Detached Beds 3 Baths Total 3 Air Conditioning Central LakeWaterfroni Garage Stalls 2 Fireplace 1 Lxtenor Motal/Vinyi, Br ck/Stone Public Remarks Wonderful location! 10 minutes ti downtown. Light and open end unit with many upgrades including French Doors, Ceramic Tile. Custom Window Treatments. Wall.if distance to Ridgedale and West Ridge! Mid-September Occupancy. ■ JU: Single Family Residential List# 2045035 Status Active Map Page/Ccerd 105/A3 List Price $ 359,900 List Date 6/10/2002 979 FAIRFIELD CT MTKA • Minnetonka. MINNE55305 County HENN • Hennepin Style (CC) Converted Mansion Berts 3 Baths Total 3 Air Conditionirg Central LakeiV/aterfroni Garage Stalls 2 Fireplace 1 Extencr Wood, Metal/Vinyl, Brick/Stono Public Remarks HIGHLY DESIRABLE END UNIT. SPACIOUS & SOPHISTICATED TOWNHOUSE- STYLE CONDO. NEAR SHOPPING. PUBLIC TRANSIT, WILDLIFE HRESERV FRENCH DOORS. LIGHTWOOD TRIM. CERAMIC TILE FLRS AND LIKE-NEW CONDITION THROUGHOUT. QUICK POSSESSION POSSIBLE. Infcrmalon Deerr.ed Reliable But Not Guaranteed 12001-2002 Regional MLS of Minn., Inc. All Rights Reserved hup:' vvuAs.northstarrnIs com SearchDctail'Scripts/PrtBiiy4/PrlBuy4.asp?CSSNamc=CSSNamc&CSS f... 10/15/20 Customer Quancr Report Page 3 of3 n I - » ——» i-*•* -t Vxf • n . •'M: fx- ■■ r- Single Family Residential List #. 2059191 Status Active Map Page/Coord 105 /A1 List Price $ 369,900 List Date 7/25/2002 970 Fairfield Court MTKA - Minnetonka. MINNE55305 County: HENN - Hennepin Style (TH) Side x Side ^ Baths Total 3 Air Conditioning Central LakeA/Vaterfront Pond, Other Garage Stalls 2 Fireplace 1 Exterior Wood, Metal/Vinyl, Brick/Stone Public Remarks Challenges comparison! Prime end unit w/breakfast room overlooking prairie. High demand assoc. *West Ridge*. Granite bar. Kit w/wood 'Jarrah* fir. off breakfast/solariuni. F.P. in F.R. LR, formal DR. Ex/studio/BR in walk-out LL. • ]!l 71^ Single Family Residential List #; 2048164 Status Active Map Page/Coord 105 / B3 Lis! Price $ 494.912 List Date 6/20/2002 197 Willoughby Way West Unit#: 205 MTKA - Minnetonka. M NNE55305 County HENN - Hennepin Style (TH) Side x Side ^ Bains Total 3 Air Conditioning Central Lake/Waterfront; Garage Stalls: 2 Fireplace. 1 Exterior Stucco. brick/Stone Public Remarks •'I’.s?...-- - - .Wl Single Family Residential List# 2062295 Status Acb've Map Page/Coord 105/b3 List Price $ 539,000 List Date 8/7/2002 ^ 141 Willoughby Way West MTKA - Minnetonka, MINNE55305 County: HENN - Hennepin Style (TH) Side x Side 2 Baths Total 3 Air Conditioning Central Lake/Wjterfront Garage Stalls: 2 n Fireplace 1 Exterior Stucco, Brick/Stone I Public Remarks: ✓ •' • ♦ * • fsi I Single Family Residential List# 20S162S ' List Price S 211,606 'tatus Active Map Page/Coord 132 /C4 List Date 7/2/2002 17675 HACKBERRY COURT EDNP - Eden Prairie, MINNE55347 County HENN • Hennepin Style (TH) Side x Side ^ Baths Total 3 Air Conditioning Cerilral ILJii jea »>ake/Waterfront: Garage Stalls 2 Fireplace 1 Exterior: Metal/VinylN-Public Remarks inforrnalion Deemad Reliable But Not Guaranteed © 2001-2002 Regional MLS of Minn., Inc. All Rights Reserved http //U WV. nonhstarmls.com Scarcmetail/Scripts/PrtBuy4/PrtBuy4.asp?CSSName=CaSNarnc&CSST... 10/15/2002 b30gl‘soony ■. % ■' 221 1st AveNe Apt 10 Minneapolis, MN nicplletiflanl . ^ % .’. • *' Chute Squire \ ' -' > ■ N\ # *HoimeJ •' ' ^ / ' © 02002 MfoOu«stoom. Ine : C2002 N«vn«ton T«chnoba9S / •: wu^wi^T*^ ^Chicago & <5 i300« > \ \Olh Av» N ‘"‘’ ” *P c -J c<« f 89U Trenton Ln N Minneapolis, MN 5544 M497 f 's ''■:^^ ? <5: 02002 UioOu««l c»ni Inc.: 02002 N«va«ton Tnchnobaiiv.'-’-X^ir vlAA^tWOTV Three Po« Pifk iBOOmieooft510 Village Trail ...... 'Mound, MN linq-lon Like \ fl"M^und Bay I { Pl'k fOle^cod Rd r^Mo^rid --Storq^ D f Maywood Rd ~ • Seton Live jp ‘^*“5 V'- '|gl-, ^ --■■ ii:5 - , _ Mompovnh = Co?M Cay Mane has iflr Rd- HampiDn Rd 55364, 02002 M«oCc«»tooin Ine. 02002 NjvoAton Technokxaei •: IAA^Wf%T\-3300m %Oft • ^ P^Og •rrowni Ave w Willoughby Way W UnonTwrac^UN HopkinS, I I Oborlin Rd ^liC la s? Faftstd Rd W J" ^ joak unoli 02002 MioQuestoom. Inc 02002 Na^txaton Technobows - ■> wettMood Mrk ? '■’I 5 4 Wtyaa O*^ 55305-5378 iii fef I l-y-.-^.-. I.—:. 9816 Cove Dr Hopkins, MN 55305-5800 ©2008 ItaiOOTiteoni Ine.; ©2003 Nntoaten iMnoboM 1 *^.4^ «s Cberlin P4fk Knotl Obofiin Rd Jjiirfidld Rc I 973 Fairfield Ct • Hopkins, MN 55305-1403 ■ :‘4 -Crtn* LaVe 02003 MioQiiMioom. Inc 02002 N«viMti>n T«ciinobQ^ •:MAR%wr%TV _____ Obertin Rd ItortonLnW i(S9i Obcrlin PatK Knoll 979 Fairfield Ct I Hopkins, MN 55305-1407 t. l*V'fo Crane Like ...---------------i 02002 MioQmt oom. Ine : 02002 NeviMtbn Tecbnnba‘»m I W ''Siiii ilL > u iTr® I .LLll I ..V b CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 8 5 2 A RESOLUTION APPROMNG THE GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT “2550” WAYZATA BOULEVARD HLE NO. 02-2789 WHERE AS, Dahlstrom Development LLC (hereinafter the "applicant'') has an interest in property located at ”2550'' Kelley Parkway within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City”) and legally described as follows: Outlot B, Willow Properties Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except Parcel 201 and 201a Minnesota Department of Transportation Rieht of Way Plat No. 27-57. (hereinafter the "property"); and \\'HEREAS, the property is located in the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area for which the City has established special requirements for rezoning and development per Municipal Code Section 10.52; and WIIEREAS, the City of Orono Highvvay 12 Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinance (Mumcipal Code Section 10.53) requites a multiple step approval process for properties developing via the PUD process; the General Concept Plan approval stage is the first step in the process followed by the Development Plan approval stage; and \\T1EREAS, the applicant has requested General Concept Plan Approval for Planned Unit Development of this approximately 51-acre property. Proposed is a rezoning from RR-IB, One Family Rural Residential District to RPUD Residential Planned Unit Development District for construction of 167 residential multi-family dwelling units on approximately 41 acres of the site, and creation of two commercial outlets on the remaining 10 acres to be developed at a later date; and Page 1 of 2 1 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 8 5 2 fT,;c r »• ''^EREAS, the Orono City Council makes the following findings in reoard to this application for rezomng and PUD/RPUD General Concept Plan approval: ^ " findings A. Community Management Plan Conformity. Rernnina 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #02-2789. Tht property is currently 2oned RR-IB One Family Rural Residential Zoning Distnct, rcquumg a minimum residential lot size of 2 acres. The property consists of approximately 51 acres. ^ ^ The proposed use of the property is consistent with the Orono 2000-2020 Commum v Management Plan (CMP) guiding of the property north of Kelley Par^vay for attached residential du elling use, and for commercial office uses south of Kelley Parkway. The proposal locates Kelley Parkway consistent with the CMP intent for a single tier of commercial office uses bet%veen Kelley Parkway and Highway 12 vAth no direct access to Highway 12. The proposal creates two outlets for potential commercial use behveen Kelley Parkway and Highway 12. Because the property south of Kelley Parkvvay is guided in the CMP for commercial office use, that property should be rezoned consistent with the intended and guided use. At this time the applirani does not have a specific proposal for development of the commercial oftice outlots. The most appropriate commercial oftice uses is B-6 Highway Commercial ^ ^ specifically created to accommodate the uses giiided by the CMP for the Highway 12 corridor. The B-6 District primarily a ows non-reta.ll uses such as offices, banks, libraries and motels/hotels, and allowClass I restaurants only as a conditional use. Rezoning the two proposed commercial outlots to B-6 would be appropriate at the time of Developmenf Plan atXaTtfmr^^^^^^ " J'ctlier the outlots have been proposed for specific uses Page 2 of 21 6. 7. 8. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO._ 4 8 5 S North of Kelley Parkway, the proposed mix of units and pricepoints includes 56 rambler townhomes at S450,000*plus per urut, 47 two-story townhomes at 5325-350,000 per umt, and 64 Lofts condominium xmits at 5225-250,000. This mix of imit styles and pricepoints provides housing options generally consistent with the City’s intent for this property and consistent with the Community Management Plan (CMP). In the CMP’s Housing Action Plan six “implementation policies ” are presented Policy 3 on Page 3C-25 reads in part as follows: ”3. Orono will encourage developers to provide a variety of housing types and cost ranges. Whenever a multiple family or clustered housing development is proposed, Orono will actively encourage setting aside a reasonable number of units for large families and'or for low and moderate income families. Orono will participate and assist developers in applications for loan guarantees or other suitable forms of housing subsidy aids which may be available....” Council finds that it would be appropriate for the Developer to suggest and implement methods for making a number of the units available at price points nearer the Metropolitan Council ’s ’affordable’ standard, and to propose methods to price a number of units within the “affordable” price range, under Met Council or other criteria, given that the overall density requested is at the very lop of the City’s intended 3-6 units per acre density range. The property is within the only area of Orono guided by the CMP for a density range of 3-6 units per dry buildable acre (including use of the north half of Kelley Parkway for density credit). The proposed density of 1 -story and 2-story towi^ome units if considered separately is 4 units per acre as proposed. Similarly, the density of the Lofts condominium units is approximately 18 uruts per acre as proposed. Combined, the proposed overall density is 6 units per dry- buildable acre, within the 3-6 unit per acre range established in the Community Management Plan (CMP). ' [at Page 3 of 21 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 8 5 2 9. The Lofts are a tj^e of housing needed to meet the City’s housing goals. The proposed location is appropriate for this type of housing in terms of visual impact and impact on adjacent uses. 10. The proposal meets the intent of the CMP in terms of housing density, housing types, and mix of units, "nie proposal provides for multi-family attached dwelling units at a density of 6 umts per acre which meets the density guidelines proposed by Orono and accepted by the Metropolitan Council. 11.Rezoning the portion of the property north of Kelley Parkway to RPUD Residential Planned Unit Development is appropriate based on the multi-family residential nature of the proposal, which meets the following general purposes of the RPUD District: y ^ a) b) c) d) e) 0 g) incorporates flexibility in land development and redevelopment in order to utilize new techniques of building design, construction and land development; provides lifecycle housing with the potential to meet affordable and moderate cost housing needs; incorporates energy conservation through the use of attached building designs and the clustering of buildings and land uses; preserves desirable site characteristics and open space and protects sensitive environmental features, including sensitive wetland areas; provides design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned; results in a sensitive development in the transitional area located between single family uses to the north and commercial uses to the south alone tlie Highway 12 corridor; and yields development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Page 4 of 21 * I CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 8 S g B. Si:e Planning & Amenities: Transportation; Miscellaneous 12. Platting of the portions of the property south of Kelley Parkway as outlets for future commercial office use as guided in the CN-IP is acceptable given that the developer has no specific users identified at this time. The Developer ’s schematic drawings showing how the outlets could feasibly be developed should become a part of the record as an indication of the viability of said outlets for their intended use. Developer and City in making decisions about the nature of Kelley Parkway should keep in mind that future uses south of Kelley Park\vay will most likely be non-residential in nature. 13. The Lofts will be 3 stories in height and will exceed the 30' RPUD height limit for multi-family buildings. The estimated visual peak height with a 4/12 pitch will be approximately 40' above finished grade as viewed fi-om the south. The ‘defined height’ similarly will be approximately 40'. A low-pitched roof of 4/12 or 5/12 should be designed for the Lofts in order to limit the visual impact of the excess height. All residential buildings including the Lofts should have pitched roofs rather than fiat roofs to maintain a rural residential character. 14. The proximity of the Lofts to the Orono Public Works facilities will require that substantial measures be taken to limit the impacts of the City facilities on the residential use. Such measures may include buffering, special setbacks, disclosures to prospective buyers, etc. 15. The proposed commons open spaces are a positive feature and should be included in the final development plan; these features include but are not limited to: - The Plaza and northerly green areas providing substantial separation between the two Lofts buildings: - The open green area north of hvo-story townhomes It 15-19; - The traffic circle at the center of the site (pedestrian access safety concerns must be addressed); - The commons oval surrounded by 2-story townhomes #39-47 with possible tot-lot; - Bus-stop/pond overlook on south side of Kelley Parkway across from main entrance; - The various linear trails and water features shown on the concept plan attached as Exhibit A-1; Page 5 of 21 16. 17. 19. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4852 - The interior spaces of the three cul-de-sac loops; The wetland areas shown as open space on the Concept Plan. Additionally tlie stormwater pond has potential to be a significant open space amenity for both the residential and commercial development of the property and conditions for development of the commercial outlots should be established to protect the penmeter of the pond from commercial development encroachment to enable pedestrian amenities and a trail around the perimeter of the pond. The proposed open space areas within the development will be private open spaces, and will be maintained by the homeowners association. These spaces need to be hi^ quality spaces, and the overall landscaping plan must be of similarly high quality. Further, site layout, building orientation and design, and buildin® separation distances must be considered by the developer to maintain the ‘open space character intended by the City for this development. Interior private street lighting should be at a low level consistent with the surrounding rural residential character while providing the necessary level of security, and will be maintained by the horaeowmers association. Public street lifting along Kelley Parkway will be provided by the developer, then maintained compS/^^'^^"'* agreement between the City and the appropriate public utility There are no identifiable public parkland needs at this location oLher than e.xtensions of the City ’s public trail system along Willow Drive and Hiehwiy 12 However, development of the proposed housing and future developmern of office uses will generate additional use of e.xisting City park facilities in the area. On the basis of the Developers ’ statement that the public trail easements will be granted without requesting a park fee reduction. Council finds that no park lands need to be dedicated and the park dedication should be in the form of a Cash Contribution in Lieu of Lands as allowed by the Municipal Code. The City Council finds that it would be prudent to conduct a traffic study as soon as possible to determine the impacts of this plan on roads and intersections outside the development, to review internal circulation, and to determine whether specific revisions to the proposed development plan or offsite roadway improvements are required, either as a direct result of this development or due to conditions not directly related to this development. Developer has indicated a willingness to pay an appropriate share of the costs of this study. Page 6 of 21 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 8 5 2 20. 21. 22. 23. While the proposed overall level of parking at 4 stalls per unit (including garage spaces, driveway spaces and on-street defined parking) is double the amount required by code, the Council finds that it would be appropriate that the developer give special attention to providing adequate parking for the anticipated residential uses. The City ’s goals in terms of pedestrian transportation for this development are to provide functional and safe walkability' within the residential development; to coimect the residential development with existing or future trails and sidewalks providing access to surrounding areas; to provide walkability for commercial users to easily access nearby commercial or public areas; and to provide a safe, continuous separated bike trail approximately parallel to Highway 12 with no driveway crossings between Willow Drive and Old Cr>stal Bay Road. This bike trail is likely to connect westward along Highway 12 to the City ’s ‘Lurton ’ park property in the future. Stormwater management is proposed to be provided by stormwater catch basins and storm sewer lines as well as open swales which will discharge to a regional stormwater pond to be located between Kelley Parkway and Highway 12 between the two commercial outlets. This regional pond is proposed by the developer as an expansion of the existing MnDOT stormwater ponds at this location, requiring MnDOT approval. The City agrees to work with MnDOT and the developer to gain MnDOT approval for this pond expansion. In addition to the City of Orono, MnDOT and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District have approval authority over the applicants’ stormwater management plan. The City' recognizes that approximately 1.4 acres of Wetland Conservation Act (WCA)-protected wetlands will be impacted by filling or excavation with this project. The conceptual wetland impact plan provided by the applicant indicates those areas impacted are primarily linear wetlands along ditch lines, small pockets of wetland separated from the major wetlands on the site, or portions of wetland fringe. The City Council finds that these impacts appear to be minimal and can be suitably mitigated by compliance with rules of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the provisions of the Wetland Conservation Act which is administered for Orono by the MCWD. Page 7 of 21 24. 25. 26. 27. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 ft R g Because the City has not adopted a specific streetscape plan for Kelley Parkway It would be appropriate for the developer to submit a streetscape proposal to the City for consideration. Such a plan should not include a center median m Kelley Pwkway, but should include substantial vegetation and provide a parkway* character that is pedestrian oriented while maintaining functional SSvay public uses that will also be served by Kelley The City ’s goals for the internal residential road system are that it be privately ovvmed and maintained; designed to adequately accommodate normal residential traffic as well as emergency and service vehicle traffic; and be safe and comfortably walkable for pedestrians. The City %vill herein establish minimum acceptable internal road standards, and will encourage the provision of sidewalks where feasible and appropriate to minimize pedestrian and traffic conflicts and to connect residences with on-street parking areas. Internal pedestrian wav^ are mtended to be privately owned and maintained. The applicant has provided General Concept Plaris attached to this Resolution as Exhibits A-1 through A-6 including: A-1: Sheet C2.1 - Concept Plan submitted 8-12-02 A-2: Sheet C2.3 - Conceptual Design Guideline Plan submitted 8-12-02 A-3: Sheet C2.4 - Conceptual Design Guideline Plan submitted 8-12-02 A-4: Sheet C5.1 - Conceptual Plat submitted 8-12-02 A-5: Sheet C3.2 - Conceptual Wetland Impact Plan submitted 6-24-02 A-6: Sheet C2.1a - Alternate Concept Plan (Kelley Parkway located north of MnDOT pond property) Applicant has also provided additional preliminary' plans not attached hereto. Counci' finds that the plans submitted are generally sufficient to indicate the intent of the developer and the potential impacts of the project. The City Council finds that the development of this property must set a high standard for the quality, character, conte.xt and compatibility of development desired by the City for Kelley Parkway. While Orono has not created specific design guidelines for commercial or residential development within the Highway 12 comdor area, minimum standards for site design and building construction have been mcorporated into the applicable zoning codes. In order to ensure that development of the property will result in an expression of Orono’s open space Page 8 of 21 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 8 R g character and image, City Council will herein establish minimum Concept Plan Approval conditions to be met by the developer in order to gain Development Plan Approval. 28.The City Council finds that the proposed rezoning and proposed development of the property for mixed multi-family uses is appropriate for the propert>’, will not have negative impacts on the surrounding properties when all Concept Plan Approval conditions are met, and is in keeping with the goals, policies and phUosophies of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the General Concept Plan for development of the property at “2550" Wayzata Boulevard by Dahlstrom Development, LLC subject to the following declarations and conditions: 1.The City of Orono will approve rezoning of the property north of Kelley Parkway to RPUD as described herein upon City Council finding of satisfactory completion of the Conditions for Development Plan approval. 2.The City of Orono will in due course appropriately rezone the property south of Kelley Parkway, including the two outlots, to be consistent with the guided commercial office use as indicated in the CMP. 3.Conditions for Development Plan Approval are as follows: A. RPUD Development Standards and General Conditions. 1) The total number of residential dwelling units shall be 167 units including 64 Lofts units, 47 two-story townhomes and 56 rambler towTihomes, generally as configured on the Concept Plan attached as Exhibit A-1. Page 9 of 21 I f : CITY of ORON RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 8 S S Developer shall provide a Development Plan for the residential development that conforms to all standards of the ^UD District (Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.33) and shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Council that all RPUD standards have been met and shall demonstrate where such standards have not been met, and shall satisfy the City Council that non-comphance with said standards is remedied in a manner acceptable to the Council. Developer shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Council that the RPUD standard of 10% of the gross project area has been set aside for private recreational uses. Developer is advised that the wetlands which are protected under the Wetland Conservation Act may not be used towards the private recreational area requirement Developer shall install a Tot Lot as one of the private park & recreation amenities of the development. Developer shall provide a landscaping plan meeting all of the requirements of the RPUD District. The developer shall create a “parkway” character through substantial landscaping along Kelley Parkway subject to approval of a streetscape plan to be provided by the Developer and approved by the City Council. Fmal landscaping plans will be reviewed by the City’s consulting landscape planner for conformity with the RPUD standards. Landscaping plans for the commercial outlets can be deferred until those sites are developed. Street lifting along Kelley Park-way adjacent to the property shall be provided by the Developer and shall be of a style, number, height and location approved by the City Council. Public street lighting along Kelley Park-%vay shall be maintained through standard agreement benveen the City and the appropriate public utility company. Interior private street lighting shall be at a low level consistent with the surrounding rural residential character while providing the necessary level of security. Such lighting shall be of a style, number, height and location approved by the City Council. Interior street lighting shall be maintained by the homeowners association. Page 10 of 21 8) CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO 4882 Final decisions by the Developer regarding colors, types and qualities of building materials shall be subject to Council approval. The proposed residential buildings shall be subject to the Development Standards for Attached and Multi-Family Dwelling Structures for the RPUD District per Zoning Code Section 10 33 Subd. 5(G). ■ ’ The separation distances between townhome buildings are generally acceptable as shown on the approved General Concept Plan, with the majority being at least 15' at the nearest point with greater separation as the building walls diverge. Any separations less than 15 ’ shall be reviewed to determine if a greater separation is feasible, and Developer shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Council that suitable architectural styling, building orientation or other methods will be used to mitigate the lack of separation. The Orono Fire Marshal shall review the building separations and any revisions required for fire-protection purposes shall be made by the Developer. The berm along the Public Works site east boundary may be extended easnvard to assist in establishing a buffer to the Lofts; however, any buffer walls, plantings or other improvements shall be located on the Lofts site as shown in the approved General Concept Plan. The Developer shall take extraordinary efforts to minimize impacts on existing vegetation and enhance screening and buffering in the area northwest of the Lofts west building. A disclosure regarding the Lofts buildings proximity to Public Works shall be required of Lofts buyers to help limit the expected complaints about City activity and noise fi-om the Public Works site. All residential buildings including the Lofts shall have pitched roofs rather than flat roofs to maintain a rural residential character. Roofs for the Lofts umts shall be low-pitched rather than steeply pitched to decrease the impact of excess building height. Page 11 of 21 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 fl K g Developer shall submit proposed conditions for development of the commercial outlets to maintain the natural amenity values of the ^nd and protect the perimeter of the pond from commercial development encroachment. B. Transportation 11) Kelley Parkway shall be platted as a public roadway as shown on the Conceptual Plat. The following design standards for Kellev Parkway shall be adhered to: Platted Width: 60' minimum £aved Wjdth: 32' fc/fc (face of curb to face of curb). ^yStrecc Parking: On-street parking %vill be allowed ^n the north side of Kelley Parkway only, to be accomplished by addiUonal 8' wide ‘bump-outs ’ with a number of breaks to allow for appropriate landscaping to maintain a “parkway” character. Design considerations will be required to ensure ease of maintenance for snow removal. Turn La.nes! consultant. Per recommendations of City transportation The mtenor road system shall be platted as part of the Commons Lot as showm on the Conceptual Plat. All of the streets and sidewalks within the Commons Lot shall be private, with the e.xception of the Public Trail located along Willow Drive. The appropriate City standard private street and utility easements shall be required over all streets and utilities within the Commons Lot. Maintenance of the private streets and sidewalks within the Commons Lot will be the responsibility of the Developer or an incorporated homeowners association. The Orono Fire Marshal and a representative of the Long Lake Fire Department shall review the mtenor road system, and any revisions required for fire- Pagel2of21 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.___4 8 5 ^ protection purposes shall be made by the Developer. The following design standards for the interior road system shall be adhered to: M.a}p acce??: Design shall be revised to limit the two intersection poitits to one-way in and one-way out. These lanes shall be limited to a width of approximately 16-18' to make WTong-way access less likely. Appropriate traffic control signage shall be installed. The separation of the inbound/outbound .access roads must be at least 100' to minimize traffic conflicts. Eg?d Widths: Two-way interior roads: 22' minimum fc/fc (face of curb to face of curb) One-way interior straight roads: 16' min fc/fc One way curved roads, esp. at roundabout: 18' fc/fc Enuy roads to Lofts: 28' fc/fc In General: All curve radii shall be reviewed to ensure that moving vans, garbage trucks, fireirucks, etc. are accommodated. Egynd^bout: Developer shall work with City staff and consultants to create a design incorporating traffic controls, walkway design features, landscaping, etc. that will provide for safe pedestrian accessability to/through the roundabout interior. Earking- No parking on interioi streets except at designated bumpout areas. §E A connection between the east lane circle loop and Kelley Parlc.vay is not necessary from a general traffic standpoint; ‘emergency vehicle only’ access would be desirable. An emergency-use-only connection between the East Lane cul-de-sac loop and Kelley Parkway shall be incorporated into the final development plans. An 8' wide bituminous surfaced public pedestrian/bicycle trail shall be provided by the Developer along the Willow Drive and Highway 12 frontages of the property. Such trail shall be located Page 13 of 21 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 8 S ft within the Cottons Lot and within the Commercial Outlets Such trail may be located within the Highway 12 right-of-way if a 20 sep^ation is maintained from the traveled roadway of Hi^way 12. and if T^nDOT approval is obtained. Portions of the trail may be located wthin the right of way of Kelley Parkway north of Ae stormwater pond. Said trail shall be curvilinear along Willow Dnve as sho-.vn in the Concept Plan drawings. The trail snail provide a continuous connection along Highway i2 from the cast boimdaiy of the property to the west boundary, connection across the stormwater pond area may be along Highway 12 or may jog up to and back down from Kelley Parkway along the stormwater pond perimeter. If portions of the trail are located adjacent to Kelley Parkway, that portion should be designed to nmction as both a trail and sidewalk at a total width of 8'. The constructiori of the portions of said public trail within the Conunercial Outlets adjacent to Highway 12 may be deferred until a determination is made whether the Highway 12 boulevard area w'l 1 be converted from a rural section to an urban section and/or w-n developed. The portion of trail along Willow Dnve m the commercial outlet sha’l be constructed during the imtial phases of residential development, to ensure that the area desi^ated for frail use is not commercially developed. The City shall be responsible for rnaintenance of the public trails upon their compl^etion ^d acceptance. Public easements including a suitable shoulder width shall be granted over the public trails. Sidewalks along both sides of Kelley Park-^vay shall be provided by the developer as follows: Ngph artej South Sides of Kellgy . PM-^vay : 5' concrete sidewalk separated from back of curb by S’ to accommodate deciduous trees and landscaping in boulevard. All frails and sidewalks, whether public or private, shall be installed concunently with the development phases and prior to occupmy of residential units, to avoid neighborhood resistance to trail development at a later date. Page 14 of 21 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO-—4^5 2___: Maintenance responsibility for the Kelley Parkway sidewalks shall be the responsibility of the Developer or the homeowners or commercial maintenance association(s). Appropriate traffic control and parking signage within the site and on Kelley Parkway shall be installed by the developer subject to the City Engineer's review and approval. C. Utilities; Storm>vater Management Water mains shall be looped near the north end of the site. Developer shall accomplish this without impacting wetlands. All internal watermains shall be 8" rather than 6"; the main in Kelley Parkway shall be 12", 17) 18) The proposed 8" sanitary sewers are acceptable. City will own and maintain the sanitary sewer and water mains within the development. City will inspect these systems during then- construction to ensure proper installation. Drainage and Utility Easements shall be granted to the City of Orono over all sewer and water utility lines and facilities, including the rights of way necessary to maintain same. Applicants' architect shall submit final development plans to the Metro Council Environmental Services to determine the exact number of SAC units to be charged at the time of the issuance of building permits. 20)Developer shall provide suitable evidence of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) approval of the stormwater management plan before Development Plan Approval will be granted. The stormwater drainage system will be owned and maintained by the homeowners association. Page 15 of 21 i. GITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 fi S g D* Wetland Impacts 21) 21) While the City recognizes that the wetland impacts depicted in the Conceptual Wetland Impact Plan are for the most part necessary to allow a reasonable development of the site, applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Council that all requirements of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as administrator of the WCA regulations on Orono’s behalf, are complied with. ’ Orono’s 26' wetland setback requirement (Zoning Code Section 10.55, Subd. 8) which disallows filling, grading, dredging, excavation, hardcover, temporary or permanent structures, obstructions, septic system.s, wells or other construction, is in effect on the site. Final grading and site plans shall indicate those locations where grading or filling within the 26' setback is necessa^ to accomplish the Plan. While filling of the 26' setback area will be allowed as necessary to accomplish the plan, no encroachment of buildings, retaining walls or other constructed features will be approved. £. Grading, Erosion Control 23) Erosion control shall adhere to "Best Management Practices for Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas". All erosion controls as required by the City and the MCWD shall be in place prior to commencing excavation on the site. All such erosion control measures shall be maintained in working order until the site is revegetated. 24) The construction limits shall be clearly marked with adequate fencing to prevert any construction damage or disturbance of any trees and vegetation outside of the construction limits area. Developer shall identify trees to be preserved on site, shall mark them on a site plan, and shall take extraordinary measures such as fencing, signage, etc. to ensure they are not disturbed. Page 16 of 21 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^ S S g F. Other General Conditions. 25) Monument signs may be provided by the developer at each entrance to the RPUD development site. The signage shall be limited to a development name and/or logo and street address on the monument signs. Final design/materials of monument signage shall be provided as part of the final development plan submittals and shall be subject to approval by the City Council. • 26) The applicable general engineering comments and or conditions provided by City Engineer Tom Kellogg in relation to the original Concept Plan review and which are included in the Planning Commission’s July 12, 2002 packet shall be suitably addressed by applicant in the development plan submittal. 27) Developer shall provide market study information to confirm that the proposed units at the proposed pricepoints are marketable and ^vill indeed meet housing needs of this area. 28) Developer shall provide copies of proposed covenants and documents describing the structure, rights and responsibilities of the various homeowners associations to be reviewed by the City Attorney. G. Plans and Specifications. The following plans and specifications shall be submitted for review and approval by the City and other appropriate jurisdictions: i) Final plans and specifications for all proposed utility lines and services, including any proposed revisions to existing service facilities. Proposed plans shall be provided to the City for final review and approval with the Preliminary Plan set. The Public Works Department and any other pertinent reviewing agencies shall review and approve all utility improvements. Final sanitary sewer and watermain plans shall be provided and are subject to approval by the Pubhc Works Department and City Engineer. Page 17 of 21 H. I. J. iv) V) Vi) CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _____4 8 5 2 Final grading, drainage and erosion control plan showing existing and proposed contours, building locations, elevations, stormwater facilities and calculations, utilities and erosion control measures to be used during construction. Development Plan Approval will not be granted until the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and MnDOT have approved the stormwater plans. • Final landscaping design plan with planting schedules including numbers and species, in accordance with the landscapin® requirements of the RPUD zoning district. Final building construction plans, including: Detailed signage and lighting plans. Phasing Plan vii) Any additional plans and specifications deemed necessary by the City as review progresses. Platting Process. Applicant shall complete all requirements for Final Plat Approval as outlined in a forthcoming Preliminaiy Plat Approval Resolution. Development Agreement. Development Approval is contingent upon the successful execution of a Development Agreement between the applicant and the City. Such Agreement shall address all specific City requirements for the development. Financial Guarantee. The Development Agreement shall include a Hnancial guarantee by the applicant to ensure the completion of site improvements. The City Engineer shall complete an estimate of improvement costs, including but not limited to public and private streets, curb & gutter, stormsewer, landscaping, grading, erosion control, utilities! driveways and parking areas, trails, sidewalks, retaming walls and stormwater management facility construction, and the applicant shall provide to the City a financial guarantee of 150% of the improvement costs. Page 18 of 21 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 8 % 2 4. 5. 6. 7. Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee. The standard Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee for residential development shall be paid by the developer per the City Fee Schedule (2002 Fee Schedule). L.Park Dedication. The Developer shall pay the standard Park Dedication Fee in an amount to be determined prior to Development Plan Approval. M.Sewer and W’ater Connection Charges. The applicant shall pay the standard sewer and water cormection charges to the City per the 2002 City Fee Schedule. This concept plan approval is based upon the known issues that may affect this project, but this approval does not limit the City from revising or amending these conditions as the review process continues. The potential use of the MnDOT stormwater pond right-of-way for Kelley Parkway presents an unknown factor which could change the nature of the Concept Plan if such use is not feasible. If Kelley Park-way must move northward to avoid the MnDOT pond property, the City Council will determine whether a revised Concept Plan requires further review including referral to the Plaruting Commission.. This General Concept Plan Approval resolution approves the development concept subject to the applicant meeting the requirements of this resolution and all other requirements of the City. This resolution does not constitute approval of the rezoning. Such approval shall only be considered when the City Council finds that all ‘‘Conditions for Development Plan Approval” as identified herein have been met. Additionally, the Council ’s rezoning approval will also depend on the Council s evaluation of the financial strength and organizational capacity of the Developer. This General Concept Plan Approval shall be effective for a period of 6 months from the date of this resolution. If Development Plan Approval is not granted within that period, the terms and conditions of this resolution shall be null and void. The City Council at its sole discretion may e.xtend this effective period. Page 19 of 21 I ji CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A ft S 2 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 26th day of August, 2002. ATTEST; ____________^jLe^ iCincIa £. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Applicant (for Dahlstrom Development, LLP as Developer) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 2L day of 002 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipauSDoration and said mslrument was executed on behalf of the Cityj KRISTI B. ANDERSON W M0T/WPU6UC-M'NNES0TA ••VCw!is3’onEip>aJ8n.31.2007 Notaiy Public Page 20 of 21 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _4.8 ff 2___ STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The^foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this riav nf /J^ RACHEL DODGE NOrARrPUBUC*MJWa-OTA V'-^y MyCcnwiW6«6*pltMJM.31.iC;' K S333ses^ D( Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of 2002. personally appeared before me, ____who is personally known to me ____whose identity I proved on the basis of v. hose identity I proved on the oath/affirmation of j a credible witness and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she/they executed the same as his/her/their free act and deed on behalf of Dahlstrom Development, LLP. Notary Public Page 21 of21 LIST OF EXHIBITS-RESOLmiON NO. 4 8 5 2 A-1: Sheet C2.1 - A-2: Sheet C2.3 - A-3: Sheet C2.4 - A-4: Sheet C5.1 - A-5: Sheet C3.2 - A-6: Sheet C2.1a Concept Plan submitted 8-12-02 Conceptual Design Guideline Plan submitted 8-12-02 Conceptual Design Guideline Plan submitted 8-12-02 Conceptual Plat submitted 8-12-02 Conceptual Wetland Impact Plan submitted45-24-02 - Alternate Concept Plan (Kelley Parkway located north of MnDOT pond property) I £: GITYof ORONO Municipal Oflices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Patitway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323^)066 October 18,2002 Teny Dahlstrom Dahlstrom Development, LLC 7745 Polaris Lane Maple Grove, MN 55311 Dear Mr. Dahlstrom: I have reviewed with the City Council the affordable housing proposal detailed in your letter of September 18,2002. The reaction of the Council to the proposal was that reducing the cost of three to four units is only a token effort. A worthwhile effort should involve setting the price point of a much larger number of units at $199,000. The Council also indicated the City will not provide a financial subsidy to the development. The City does not have any financial information regardmg the project to enable a determination regarding the developer’s ability to reduce the price of a substantial number of units to the $199,000 price point. The Council has requested that you provide the City with financial information regarding the project to enable an evaluation of the feasibility of accomplishing a worthwhile affordability effort. One element to be included in the feasibility evaluation of the affordability effort is the project wst related to sewer and water fees. In 2001, the sewer and water connection fees for the Highway 12 area were converted from per-unit fees to per-acre fees. A major reason for this fee restrucmnng was to reduce the fees to a level that would enable the higher density housing planned for this area to be more affordable. If this fee structure had not changed, the sewer and water connection fees would have been approximately $10,500 per unit vs. the $3,500 per unit being charged to the Stonebay development based on the six unit per acre density. This is a reduction of $7,000 per unit for restructuring has reduced the total cost for sewer and water by $ 1,169,000. This is a major cost reducUon that is, in itself, sufficient to enable a large number of umts to be developed at an affordable price. It is important that you provide the City Telephone (952) 249-4600 • Fax (952) 249-4616 www.d.orono.nin.us Terry Dihlstrom October 18,2002 P«ge2 With information that shows how the cost for sewer and water fits into the overall financial picture of the project **** *"****°^ providing the requested financial information SinMrely, Ronald J. Moorse City Administrator MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, September 16,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. ROLL The Commission met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Chair Sandra Smith, Commissioners David Rahn, Cynthia Bremer, J. Mark Fritzler, Liz Hawn, Janice Berg, and Jeanne Mabusth, Representing staff were Planning Director Mike Gaffron, Zoning Administrators Paul Weinberger and Wendy Bottenbcrg, Council Representative Jay Nygard, and Recorder Kristi Anderson. Chair Smith called the meeting to order at 6:32 P.M. CONSENT AGENDA (#1) #02-2824 BETZ BUILDERS, 1045 BROWN ROAD SOUTH, VARIANCE Hawn moved, Mabusth seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2824 Betz Builders, 1045 Brown Road South, approving the lot area variance subject to recommendations set forth in the memo dated September 3,2002, in order to construct a new residence on the Jot. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#2) #02-2826 MICHAEL AND DEBORAH BENEDICT, 25 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD, VARIANCE Hawn moved, Mabusth seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2826 Michael and Deborah Benedict, 25 Orono Orchard Road, approving a variance to allow the placement of a 28'X35 ’ accessor}’ structure between the principal structure and the street per the proposed plan. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. OLD BUSINESS (#3) #02-2813 MARK WELSH, 3625 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCE 6:35 p.m. - 7:23 p.m. Mark Welsh, the Applicant, accompanied by Jeanne and Linda Welsh, was present. Weinberger explained that the applicant had received variances to construct a new residence on the property in February, 2002. The applicant had not yet built the residence and w ished to make two changes to the approved plan. Weinberger reported that the changes to the plan included shifting the residence on the west side from 8.5 feet to 7.5 feet from the property line, straightening the residence to run parallel with the property line versus the lakeshore and add 65 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#3) #02-2813 MARK WELSH, 3625 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued s.f. to the front of the house by adding a 4.5 foot prow, “v-shape” glass point on the lakeside of the residence. On August 19,2002, the Planning Commission tabled this application and advised the applicant to revise the site plan to push the house and eaves back on the property to meet a 50 ’ setback to the lakeshore. Furthermore, Weinberger noted, the applicant could not e.xceed 660 s.f, which was the existing hardcover in the 0-75’ setback. Weinberger reported that the new site plan does meet the parameters as established by the Planning Commission. The revised application, however, requires review of the following variances; Side Yard Setback to permit addition to be 5’ and 7,5’ from the west property line. The 5’ side yard setback was approved to provide one additional parking space on the property. Structure within the 75’ lakeshore Setback and Hardcover are other variances for review. In order to redevelop this property, Weinberger noted that Lot Arealot width. Side Yard Setback encroachment, and Required parking in a Residential Zoning District were required variances for this parcel as well. Weinberger advised that staff was recommending denial of the application as revised due to the fact that relocating the house to meet a 50 ’ lakeshore setback pushes the house further back on the property and into the shared driveway. The new house on this property would encroach 5’ to 6’ into the driveway. The addition of the 4.5’ “V-shaped” prow and overhang causes the driveway encroachment. The previously approved plan had the house meeting a 53 ’ setback to the shoreline for the house, with the overhang being 48.5’ from the shoreline, but no part of the house at that time encroached into the driveway. AAer visiting the property, Weinberger noted that staff determined that the two adjacent homes were located at approximately the same setback as the existing house. He cautioned that, if this house location were approved, it would set a new standard to where houses along this driveway would be built. Weinberger stated that the primary concern with the proposed relocation of the house is the house would be located 6’ into the shared driveway, which two other properties must cross for their only access. Weinberger maintained that reducing the width of the driveway from the existing 22 ’ to 16’ would make parking and passing of vehicles more difficult than it is now. The decreased width of the driveway would also contribute to potential snow storage problems for the driveway. Weinberger indicated that there is little space to store snow along this street because of the steep grade up to North Shore Drive to the north. Weinberger continued that the reduction in driveway width would make backing of vehicles out of the garage stall difficult. Oftentimes, 16’ is not adequate to properly maneuver in and out of a garage. Weinberger contended that the concept of shifting the driveway to the north or adding a PAGE 2 WiiniTi lui ®RWi •iiiniiTti •lOlt]in V: u r« ■ m A Vi n rtinnuTO OTin i rRiliTi n IT^umr^MSi nioBii [tllWi*lUW BtM •JDTi] • I I rtlBOTUiVf^ •ICtlVAiTiTi ' L. • rniititflra Mdtl nmn •ictivn itJO] [f trtl 1IKI •JCtFi]Mimi] - r f f MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. i#3) #02-2813 MARK WELSH, 3625 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued that since this is a private driveway maintained by the residents, with regard to snow removal and gravel maintenance, he felt the City should not have issue with his proposal. Chair Smith indicated that, although the current residents are very responsible with regard to maintenance, future owners might not be as dependable, which may also contribute to the cross easement issue later. Weinberger pointed out that, typically, the City requires approximately 24 ’ of traveled road, even for private roads, and he felt that 16’ was simply too narrow. Having visited the site, Rahn stated that if people parallel park along the driveway there would quite obviously be no room. He voiced his concern that potential fire or emergency access to the driveway would be drastically impaired if someone were parked along the roadway. Mabusth questioned if there were a legal description of the 10’ cross casement the two homes to the east have granted. She asked how much of the hill fell within their property. Mr. Welsh pointed out that the middle of the roadway was not reflected accurately on the survey provided. Jeanne Welsh indicated that she had spoken to Hennepin County this morning and had been told that their ROW is 33’ from the center of North Shore Drive and marked by a marker on the hill. She believed they could likely remove some of the embankment, but they did not wish to do so. Rahn stated that the stake was quite clearly up in the hill and the survey did reflect the lot fairly accurately. Chair Smith asked for a recap of what was originally approved. Weinberger noted that the applicant had been required to meet a 50 ’ setback from the lakeshore and had not included the prow extension at that time. Mr. Welsh stated that the prow was not included but the eaves were at that time. Chair Smith rciicraicd that, based on the August recommendation to push back the prow, the applicant has encroached into the traveled roadway more than the Planning Commission is comfortable with were the prow not there. Mabusth pointed out that the prow plus eaves extends approximately 8.5’ further into the lakeshore setback. Rahn maintained that nothing had been drawn up the first time through which indicated that a pointed V-prow was coming ofTthe lakeside. PAGE 4 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o*clock p.m. (#3) #02-2813 MARK WELSH, 3625 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued Mabusth concurred, stating that even during the first series of meetings, the Planning Commission stated that eaves and all structure must meet the 50 ’ encroachment limitation. Hawn felt the proposal to be an extremely tight proposition for the lot, and indicated that the road issues were real, issues with the cross-easements exict, aiid the County would not likely allow them to cut away at the hill to obtain a backout area. She u'^ged the applicant to look to the future should the neighbors not be as cooperative as they are now and could not support the home being moved further into the drive or traveled rotdway. Hawn added that she had reservations with regard to allowing the side yard setbaeJ: as well, as the two houses arc already very close to one another. Chair Smith maintained that the extra foot does not impact emergency access too much, and pointed out that access will likely need to occur from the other side altogether. While she felt the applicant had done much to meet the City’s needs. Smith indicated that the prow, a.s proposed, encroaching into the traveled driveway does not work well with the Planning Commission. She felt the Commission could support the side yard setback and parking spot only. Jeanne Welsh asked why the Planning Commission was restricting Mr. Welsh from protruding into the driveway and not restricting the first neighbor from doing so. Fritzler maintained that the first home is nonconforming currently and, when given the opportunity for redevelopment, the Planning Commission will require that it not stay that way and more closely meet the code. Mabusth reiterated that the Planning Commission is defining what the future development will be along that roadway by this property. This is the first step in that direction. Chair Smith asked if the Planning Commission could approve some of the revised application, including the shift of the side lot line by one foot. Mabusth asked if the Commission needed to define the new setback requirement from the roadway. Weinberger stated that, beyond the standard conditions, it could be appropriate to define the setback from the traveled roadway as 35 ’. Rahn stated that the first footprint reflected a 53 ’ lakeshore setback, with eaves allowed a 48.5 ’ setback. He suggested a 33’ rear side setback in order to give the applicant some parameters for both the lake and street side to work with. Mabusth indicated that she could, once again, support 660 s.f of hardcover and a 50 ’ lakeshore setback, as stated in the August meeting. She questioned why the applicant did not use this PAGE 5 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#3) #02-2813 MARK WELSH, 3625 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued suggestion and return with a plan this month that meets those requirements. She admitted that the Commission had obviously failed to spell out the limitations imposed by the northwest lot line and the traveled roadway. Bremer suggested the applicant table the application in order to redesign the prow to meet these requirements. Chair Smith explained that, if the applicant preferred, the Plaiuiing Commission could act on what was in front of them and send it on to Council; however, it sounded to her as if it would not meet with their recommendation for approval. Hawn pointed out that, if the applicant chooses to go on to Council without a recommendation for approval, there is the possibility that the City Council would table the application and send it back to the Plaiuiing Commission for further discussion. Chair Smith indicated that the Planning Commission could support the side yard setback variance and the parking spot. Weinberger pointed out that the parameters set in the original resolution never allowed an encroachment closer than 50 ’. Berg stated that the only existing issue is that the applicant docs not have an acceptable setback from the driveway. She asked what number they could give to the applicant for direction. Weinberger indicated that 35 ’ plus or minus 6 inches would be an acceptable setback figure. Chair Smith reviewed that the applicant would be allowed a side yard setback variance, require a 35 ’ driveway setback, 50 ’ lakeshore setback measured from the overhang, and up to 660’ s.f of hardcover. Hawn inquired whether the applicant and Commission would be more comfortable with a driveway setback measurement that keeps the home in line with the neighboring garages. Rahn agreed that an average rear setback, no closer than those of the average neighbors setback, be used as the setback requirement. Weinberger stated that the February approval had referenced the same driveway setback requirement as the original home. Berg moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2813, Mark Welsh, 3625 North Shore Drive, requiring the same setback as required by the February approval mandating no encroachment into the 50’ lakeshore setback; and a rear setback In PAGE 6 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o ’clock p.m. (#3) #02-2813 MARK WELSH, 3625 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued line with the average rear setback of the existing homes on the road; Approval of a side yard setback which shifts the residence on the west side from 8.5 ’ to 7.5’ from the property' line and permits a side yard setback of 5 ’ where a 10’ setback is required; with total hardcover not to exceed 660 s.f. The motion includes approval of lot area, lot width, and parking variances. Jeanne Welsh asked for clarification that, beyond the February approval, all that the Commission was allowing would be the front comer shift of one foot. Rahn stated that this approval was all they would be granted by the Planning Commission in order to move it forward to Council. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS (#4) #02-2820 MICHAEL LASHER, 1360 RAILROAD AVENUE, VARIANCE 7:24 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. Michael Lasher, Applicant, was present. Bottenberg explained that the applicant has requested a front yard setback variance to construct a covered deck on the street side of the residence. The property falls 1/3 in the 250-500 ’ hardcover zone and 2/3 in the 500-1000 ’ zone. The proposed deck would fall within the 500-1000 ’ setback zone. There w ere nc public comments. Fritzler pointed out to the applicant that the future railroad ROW could be used as a recreational trail and questioned if the applicant might prefer the deck towards the back versus the front. Fritzler reminded the applicant that he %vas requesting this position and was aware of the potential future ROW use. Mr. Lasher indicated that he was aware that the recreational trail could be constructed in the future and stated that he would deal with that at that time. Hawn moved, Mabusth seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2820, Michael Lasher, 1360 Railroad Avenue, granting a front yard setback variance to construct a 10’X20’ covered deck on the property. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. PAGE 7 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#5) #02-2822 DANIELLE HENELY, 3422 LIVINGSTON AVENUE, VARIANCE, 7:31 p.m. • 8:06. p.m. Danielle Henely, Applicant, was present. Bottenberg reported that the applicant has requested variances to permit a detached garage to be located between the principal structure and the street. The ptupused residence meets all setbacks in the LR-IB zoning district, as well as, structural and hardcover coverage requirements of city ordinances. A conditional use permit is required because this lot Is considered a “through” lot, whereas both street lines shall be front lines for applying the Zoning Chapler. Bottenberg explained that, since the original application, the applicant agreed to move the detached garage 10 ’ from the side property, thus, eliminating the need for side yard setback and crowding principal structure variances. By downsizing the detached garage to 20’X24 ’, the applicant would no longer need a hardcover variance in the 500-1000 ’ setback zone. Bottenberg indicated that staff would recommend approval of the variance and conditional use permit to construct a detached garage on the property if the garage were located 10 ’ from the side property line and reduced to 20’X15 ’, and the deck reduced to 14 ’X10 ’ to meet yard setbacks. Henely pointed out that she would be willing to alter the deck size to bring it under 6’ and remove it from the structural coverage equation. She stated that it was important to her to construct a two car garage and intended to design a 20’X22’ structure. This would bring the total structural coverage to 1496 ’ s.f, just below the 1500 ’ allowed. Rahn believed that the original deck was built without a permit and asked if it was encroaching or in compliance currently. He suggested shaving a comer of the deck near County Road 19 to better meet zoning standards. Henely indicated that she would be willing to shave off a comer of her deck to meet the setback and use landscaping to correct erosion p'-oblems near the deck.. Gaffron pointed out that a deck without a railing needs to be 30 ’ from County Road 19, and asked if the Planning Commission was comfortable with a retaining wall near the County Road. Not knowing where the original dirt was, Fritzler suggested the applicant lower the deck and bring in the comer versus raising the grade to meet the deck. Henely stated that she would prefer to comply, lowering the deck and using a retaining wall. Gaffron reminded the applicant, and her landscaper, that any proposed grading or fill with a steeper slope than 3:1 would likely force the Commission to reconsider. PAGES r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#5) #02-2822 DANIELLE HENELY, 3422 LIVINGSTON AVENUE, Continued Henely asked if she could drop the deck and cut off the comer. If the lot were not a “through” lot, Hawn asked what the setback would be from the County Road. Gaffron stated that, typically, the required setback would be 10’, however, due to the County Road, a 30 ’ setback is required. Rahn indicated that it would be difficult to allow a deck at all on the north side due to the setback requirements. If the deck were lowered, eliminated from the stmctural coverage equation, and reduced to meet a 10’ setback. Chair Smith asked if the Commission could allow the applicant a 20 ’X22 ’ garage. Fritzler suggested lowering the deck by two feet and cutting the diagonal comer of the deck. Since the home never possessed a garage. Chair Smith inquired what moved the applicant to request a detached garage at this time. Henely indicated that she had gone to great lengths to diminish the hardcover previously on the property, including removal of concrete sidewalks, pads, and edging. Although the home did not possess a garage at the time of purchase, it was all that she could afford and the applica.nt felt she would constmet one later. Having faced car trouble last winter, Ms. Henely decided that a garage would be desirable sooner. Mabusth asked if the comer of the deck could be shaved closer to the home in order to acquire a 15 ’ setback. Gaffron felt this to be a reasonable request, since the home to the northwest was 15 ’ from County Road 19. He suggested the applicant measure 15 ’ from the County Road and angle the comer off, which would allow a 6 ’ walkway around the comer of the house. Chair Smith recapped, stating that the Commission would recommend the applicant drop the deck, stay 15 ’ away from the County Road lot line, and create a diagonal deck walkway in order to fall within the proposed 1500 ’ structural coverage limitation. Chair Smith stated that, in her opinion, the detached garage proposal which blocks the house was not the most aesthetically pleasing concept, she could support the application, acknowledging that it is the applicant who has to live with the design. PAGE 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o’clock p.tn. 1 (US) #02-2822 DANIELLE HENELY, 3422 LIVINGSTON AVENUE, Continued Roxann Beisch, 3436 Livingston Avenue, stated that while she had no problem with the garage placed in front of the house, she wondered if turning the garage to a side access might offer a more complimentary design. Rahn pointed out that more asphalt would be required if the garage were turned, forcing the applicant over her hardcover allowance. Due to the slope of the drive, Fritzler added that runoff from the side loading garage could cause problems. GafTron noted that there would not be enough room for a side loading garage if the Commission wished to maintain 10' side yard setbacks. Hawn moved, Fritzler seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2822, Danielle Henely, 3422 Livingston Avenue, granting a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Building and Accessory Building Location variance to construct a 20’X22’ detached garage on the property, subject to lowering the deck under 6’, adjusting the corner of the deck to run diagonally with the angle of Count}' Road 19, and allowing a walkway which runs no closer than IS’ to the County Road. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#6) #02-2823 RONALD CLOUD, 3460 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCE As the applicant was not present; therefore, the Commission postponed. Discussion follows #9. (#7) WAYNE AND KAREN SOOJIAN, 4496 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, \ ARIANCES 8:08 p.m. - 8:35 p.m. Wayne Soojian, Applicant, and Blake Waters, builder, were present. Bottenberg explained that the applicant was requesting lot width, lot area, and average lakcshore setback variances to construct a new residence on the lot. The existing residence would be demolished. Bottenberg pointed out that an average lakeshore setback variance is required because the proposed residence lies closer to the lakeshore than the two adjacent properties, even though the home will be located in the same place as the existing residence. Bottenberg stated that staff recommends approval of the requested variances and reminded the applicant that in order to obtain a permit, the new residence would need to meet all setbacks, hardcover, and structural lot coverage requirements. She suggested that the Planning Commission give consideration to making a recommendation regarding the driveway situation. Due to existing drainage concerns by neighbors and the steep drop off to the yard, Bottenberg indicated that staff would suggest gutters be added to the garage to extend runoff and that PAGE 10 MINUTES OFTHL ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#7) WAYNE AND KAREN SOOJIAN, 4496 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued consideration be given to slanting the driveway slightly to encourage runoff to the east of the house. Chair Smith questioned whether the yard and grading would need to be slanted as well. Gaffron pointed out that, at the time the City would issue a permit, the applicant would be required to provide grading details which would address these concerns. He indicated that he had two questions for the applicant, first, Gaffron asked if the proposed garage had moved further east than on the original survey. Bottenberg noted that the new proposal incorporates the requirements of a turnaround style driveway. Mr. Bichanich maintained that they had kept the east side of the home in its original location, utilized the same footprint, and removed 8 ’ from the width of the house in order to accommodate the turnaround. The garage and home were then shifted over by those 8 ’. In fact, Blake believed they were smaller than the original footprint and under on hardcover. Secondly, Gaffron asked if the applicant felt it would be workable to tilt the driveway, garage, and/or lot in order to alleviate any additional runoff. As it is, the lot currently slopes towards the lake and would require swaling near the garage. Bichanich indicated that with the current slope towards the lake, the applicant would need to tilt the driveway in order to direct drainage away from the doors. He fell there was no question that the water would need to be directed around both sides of the house. On the backside, the precast garage should allow them to minimally impact that side of the property. Since the home and garage have been shifted 8 ’, Gaffron asked if the applicant had the opportunity to build a swale along the west boundary next to the garage. Bichanich stated that he could look into that question, but was unsure whether the drop off allowed enough room for a swale. Gaffron explained that one of the issues the City is wrestling with is that one of the neighbors to the northwest is concerned about getting any additional water over his property. While the neighbor has acknowledged that the runoff won ’t affect his home, he is concerned about it going through his property. Gaffron stated that it is the City ’s goal to come up with a grading plan that protects he and others. In his opinion, Bichanich felt that what has been proposed will affect the neighbors much less than what had been there previously because there will be far less hardcover and paving. The grading and angled garage will aid with the runoff issue as well. PAGE 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#7) WAYNE AND KAREN SOOJIAN, 4496 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Conlmucd Mr. SoojiaJ, pointed out that it was his goal to stay away from the western boundary and keep that area natural, filled with vegetation. Chair Smith asked if the Commission was comfortable with this application and whether they should require a drainage plan. Council. Jon Bessesen 4500 North Shore Drive, indicated that he was the aforementioned neighbor to ‘he nort^a^d rSipienls of the water runoff from this property. He e.xplamed that many residents alone this strip were the unfortunate recipients of the runoff problems seated by e development along Tonkaview Road several years ago and were forced to Its 000 to Drove that While he had no problem with the proposed residence, Mr. Bessesen wohuniiy .0 view a site plan and drainage repot, since .hey are located downh.ll from the parcel. Chair Smith indicated that she was aware that drainage became an expensive issue for these residents. Mabusth asked if the neighbors would feel more comfortable if they were allowed the opportunity to see a drainage plan. While Mr Bessesen stated that he did not wish to see the applicant have to spend any more I "eytan he wanted s.afT.o be well aware of the po.enual .ssuestha, could be crested by additional runoff. Mr. Soojian stated that he was confident that he could come up with a plan lhat would meet with everyone’s satisfaction. Mabusth moved. Chair Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-28 , Wayne and Karen Soojian, 4496 North Shore Drive, granting lot area and “'"“Se lakeshore setback variances, subject to provision of a drainage plan which "o***** iH^ra^e'rnS XlUZJlZo direet'dralnage .long the west lot line away from the property towards the lake. While it is reasonable not to increase the runoff. Mr. Soojian suggested that he be held .0 a runoff amount lhat is no more than what is currently draining to the north. Mabusth encouraged the applicant to reduce the runoff as much as possible. PAGE 12 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o*clock p.m. (#7) WAYNE AND KAREN SOOJIAN, 4496 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued GafTron indicated that staff could provide before and after calculations with regard to runoff, with the goal being that the applicant reduce the runoff and create no more drainage that runs to the west than is currently occurring today. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (Recess taken from 8:26 p.m.- 8:35 p.m.) (#8) #02-2827 SVEN GUSTAFSON, 4515 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCES 8:36 p.m. - 9:23 p.m. Sven Gustafson, Applicant, and Jeffrey Gustafson, the Applicant’s father, were present. Bottenberg reported that the applicant is proposing to tear down and construct a new residence on a lot that does not meet lot area or lot width requirements. The lot is served by sanitary sewer and currently has a house and detached garage on it. She indicated that the proposed residence does meet structural and hardcover coverage requirements of city ordinances. Bottenberg pointed out that the subject property is non-confomiing in lot area and lot width and there is a vacant parcel of similar size to the west. The same person had owned the two properties since the early 1980 ’s; however, the two properties were never legally combined and have now been sold to different parties. Bottenberg maintained that City ordinances do not prohibit separate sale of adjacent substandard commonly owned lots in sewered areas. She indicated that staff recommends approval of the lot area and lot width variances to construct a new residence on the property. Since two substandard lots that have never been legally combined can be sold separately, Gaffron cautioned the Planning Commission that if they chose to deny the application, tliey would have to come up with some significant findings to do so. Bottenberg noted that letters and comments received from neighbors have centered around concern about the separate sale of the two lots, added development in the cove area, safety, and similar drainage and runoff issues as discussed earlier. As a builder and Sven s father, Jeffrey Gustafson stated that he was disappointed to hear of the neighbor’s letters and objections. He stated that he had sent out letters to the neighbors telling them what the applicant was proposing and inviting them to visit him to discuss the development. Although purchased by separate parties. Mr. Gustafson pointed out that it will be nice that both homes are being designed in correlation with one another, compliment each other, and hopefully be an asset to the neigliborhood. As the builder, Gustafson ensured the neighbors that his group was trained in building in established neighborhoods and would do so in a timely manner. PAGE 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#8) #02-2827 SVEN GUSTAFSON, 4515 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued Neighbor across the street, Kathy Sawicki, 4520 North Shore Drive, commented that she was surprised to hear that the City had no requirement about combining these two lots. As the recipient of the Tonkaview runoff at her front door, Ms. Sawicki was concerned about the amount of additional runoff that would be created by two homes instead of one on this site. In her view, this development was a threat to her property, property that has recently become a pond due to the water levels. Ms. Sawicki demanded to see the water management and drainage plans including swales. Mr. J. Gustafson indicated that, normally, he w'ould like to have addressed the neighbors concerns ahead of time, answering any questions they might have. Not being given this opportunity, Mr. Gustafson stated that he would be meeting with Hennepin County to address drainage issues along North Shore Drive and plans to have those details worked out before obtaining his permits. Chair Smith encouraged Mr. Gustafson to speak with some of the neighbors about these issues. Mr. Gustafson indicated that he would do so and has staff to address these types of concerns. Harold Albrecht, 4545 North Shore Drive, voiced his objection to the subdivision of these two lots. As owner of an acre lot in this one-acre district, Mr. Albrecht was concerned over the compaction problems being caused by overdeveloping the cove. He pointed out that, initially, the neighbors were told there was one buyer for the two lots and he believed Mr. Gustafson obtained an additional buyer and is selling the other lot. He argued that adding two houses will only increase the runoff issues and erosion problems. If the City truly wanted to save the lake, isn’t this why they designated the area a one acre district, in order to preserv’e natural resources. Mr. Albrecht believed he would be losing value in his property if the City allowed this devclopment.to occur. Mr. Gustafson maintained that the City wasn’t allowing him to subdivide the property, these were two lots. He pointed out that, originally, he had looked into purchasing the vacant lot; however, Mr. Lund purchased this parcel and he the other. John Bessesen, 4500 North Shore Drive, stated that he had assumed the property was one parcel. As owner of one of the truly one acre lots, with 147’ of lakeshore, he questioned whethc- there should be restrictions on the number of boats allowed on smaller lakeshore lots. He was concerned that the new neighbors would be stewards of the lake. Rahn reiterated that the City is not splitting the two lots, they were never legally combined. Gaffron pointed out that the LMCD is charged with regulating dock setbacks, number of boats, canopy systems, etc. He stated that it would be precedent setting for a City to limit the number of boats on a 50’ lot when they have never done so before. PAGE 14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#8) #02-2827 SVEN GUSTAFSON, 4515 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued Mr. Albrecht maintained that everyone in the neighborhood is unhappy with the development. Chair Smith repeated that the buyer is not legally obligated to combine the two lots. Although the City takes environmental concerns vcr>' seriously, Gaffron pointed out that the proposed developments for these two lots do meet the 25% hardcover limitations and other setbacks. He made the case that the hardcover of two homes at 25% would be the same as that of one massive home at 25% if the lot were one. In fact, Gaffron argued that there would likely be more drainage issues created by one massive home than by two smaller homes. Once again, Gaffron pointed out that the biggest challenge for the builder will be to direct the flow of runoff away from the home to the east. Chair Smith stated that, typically, if a home meets all the setbacks that are required, the City approves it. Mabusth agreed with Gaffron, that there would be a better opportunity to control drainage problems with the construction of two homes than one massive one. Fntzler stated that he was opposed to the development simply because these two subs'.nfjdird lots should be combined in the one acre zoning district and not allowed to remain non-c*.wbfj> ng. Rahn reiterated that it was not a subdivision that was before the Commission and the applicant can do as they wish. Rahn stated that he would prefer two smaller homes, at 25%, which fit the character of the neighborhood since everyone maxes out their lots anyway. Chair Smith repeated that drainage remains the key issue for the neighbors, which fortunately, can be addressed by the applicant. Mr. Gustafson indicated that they would be tearing down the existing residence and asked what Commissioner Fritzler was opposed to. Fritzler stated that he was opposed to two neighboring substandard lots being sold separately in the one acre zoning district. He felt this was the time for the lots to fall into conformity. Mr. Gustafson stated that he understood Fritzler’s position, and had the economics been in line, that might have been an option. In light of residents concerns, Mabusth questioned whether it would be advisable to require a drainage plan, with the Engineer’s comments, before the application heads to Council. Rahn asked if the drainage issue would be addressed at the permit stage. PAGE 15 r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#8) #02-2827 SVEN GUSTAFSON, 4515 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued While that was true, Mabusth urged the Commission to require the plan prior to Council and the permit phase, especially in the case of substandard lots where neighbors have concerns. She f,*lt Council would benefit from having the Engineer’s comments on hand, as would neighbors who wish to see the proposal prior to construction. Gaffron stated that either the Commission needs to require it before it goes to Council, or it will be required after. Chair Smith felt the Planning Commission would be more comfortable requiring the plan prior to Council in order to show Council Members that the Commission is aware there is an issue. Hawn felt that the neighborhood would be more comfortable being given the opportunity to look at the plan prior to the Council meeting as well. Mabusth stated that previous Commissions have held up applications waiting for drainage plans. She believed that the City Council should be given a formal plan and background, which would enable them to deal with both of these applications more knowledgably. Gaffron indicated that he would be hesitant to ask the Engineer to comment on an idea before a formal plan is submitted. Hawn asked the applicant if that would be a problem. Mr. Gustafson stated that, with winter coming, he would like to get the process moving as soon as possible. He committed to submitting a drainage plan to the City within one week of the application moving to Council in order to give the Engineer time to comment. Gaffron noted that the application would likely go to Council on October 14; therefore, he asked the applicant if they could get the plan to the City Engineer prior to that. Berg commented that turning in a formal drainage plan would now be a condition of the application before it moved to Council for approval. Ms. Sawicki requested that the neighbors be allowed to review the drainage plan with their hydrologist prior to Council to assure them that the plan is acceptable as well. Chair Smith repeated that submittal of the drainage plan will precede a Council date. Rahn recommended that the Planning Commission be consistent with this requirement for both properties, especially in light of neighbors concerns, and high water years. PAGE 16 Moa .J MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monriay, August 19,2002 <i:30 o’clock p.m. (#8) #02-2827 SVEN GUSTAFSON, 4515 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued Mabusth maintained that it would be beneficial for the City Council to have drainage infonnation in hand, especially in these cases, in order to make informed decisions. Rahn moved, Chair Smith seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2827, Sven Gustafson, 4515 North Shore Drive, granting lot area and lot width variances, with the stipulation that the applicant provide a complete site drainage plan, that meets with the City Engineer’s approval, prior to the City Council meeting. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 1, Fritzler dissenting for reasons cited in earlier. Gustafson asked where to submit the drainage plan. Gaffron suggested he provide staff, either zoning administrator’s Bottenberg or Weinberger with a copy, as well as. Engineer Tom Kellogg at Bonestroo. (#9) #02-2828 TONY LUND, VACANT LOT NEXT TO 4515 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCES 9:24 p.m. - 9:50 p.m. Tony Lund, Applicant, and Jeffrey Gustafson, Builder, were present. Gaffron reported that the applicant was proposing to construct a new residence on a vacant lot that does not meet lot area or lot width requirements. Once again, this property has been vacant and owned by the adjacent property ownc*- since the early 1980 ’s. The subject lot was never built on and continues to be in character witn ilic surrounding properties. The City does not have an ordinance that requires that 2 lots have to be combined if they arc owned by the same person, neither can the City prohibit the sale of vacant substandard commonly owned lots except in unsewered areas. Gaffron pointed out that, currently, there is not access to the property from North Shore Drive, and since it is a county road, Hennepin County will decide where that access should be located. A copy of the application was forwarded to Hennepin County regarding the access question and the applicant will need to get approval from them before bringing access to the property. Gaffron noted that staff recommends approval of the lot area and lot width variances to construct a new residence on the property, subject to: no other variances shall be granted, payment of the sewer connection charge of S6,703, access location to be approved by Hennepin County prior to City Council action, and additionally, the property should require a drainage plan similar to the adjacent lot. Mr. Lund asked when the sewer connection fee charge was payable. Gaffron stated that these fees would need to be paid prior to issuance of building permits. PAGE 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#9) #02-2828 TONY LUND, VACANT LOT NEXT TO 4515 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued- Lund questioned whether these fees would go up if they did not file for permits until 2003. Gaffron noted that these charges fluctuate with inflation and the applicant would likely save a little money by filing and paying now. Lund acknowledged that, obviously, the drainage issues would be similar to the previous applicant since this property is similar in character to the neighborhood. Mabusth questioned whether the applicant would be able to save any of the mature trees that reside on the property. Other than the ones that would need to be removed where the house would go, Lund indicated that they intend to save most of the trees. Gaffron referred to Exhibit C, which shows both parcels, and asked the Commission to examine the average lakeshore setback line that would be used to judge the two properties. Normally, one estimates the average setback based on the two adjacent homes. In this case, he suggested the Commission look at the eastern lot and consider how its placement affects the views of the house cuirently there. He pointed out that whichever home is built first, either the vacant lot or the existing home lot, the average lakeshore setback will be determined by the other. Lund stated that the architect and surveyor had taken this into account. In order to avoid any conflict later, Gaffron indicated that the average lakeshore setback determined by w hich home is built first would need to be documented up front in the resolution. He reiterated that the City does not want to be put in the situation where they’ve upset a neighbor, by allowing a home to be built that obstructs that neighbor’s view. Rahn questioned whether the Commission can man late nc other variances be granted if they go in at different times. Gaffron pointed out that if the City has protected the lake views of the neighbor with the average lakeshore setback the applicant could tear down the existing home, build the residence at 4515, and then build on the vacant lot based on ti.at newly defined average. Mr. Gustatson committed to tearing down the existing home and permitting the westerly house construction prior to building the easterly house. Chali Smith moved, Bremer seconded, to recommend approval of Application #02-2828, Tony Lund, Vacant Lot next to 4515 North Shore Drive, granting variance for lot area and lot width, subject to staffs recommendations, a complete site drainage plan approved by PAGE 18 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#9) #02-2828 TONY LUND, VACANT LOT NEXT TO 4515 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued the City Engineer prior to going City Council be submitted, and demolition of the existing house at 4515 North Shore Drive will occur before construction of this lot to ensure the average lakeshore setback will be r«:::}gnized as illustrated on Exhibit C. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 1, Fritzler dissenting for re r^^ns cited earlier in the Minutes. (#6) #02-2823 RONALD CLOU.©., 3460 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCE 9:50 p.m. 10:05 p.m. While the Applicant, Ronald Cloud, s js absent, Doug Schmidt of Hastings Conscr\ atorics was present. Bottenberg explained that the applicant had requested varianees to side yard setback, hardcover in 75-250 ’ setback zone, average lakeshore setback, and lot coverage by structures to replace a deck and construct a three-season porch to the lakeside of the existing residence. Bottenberg pointed out that the applicant had removed the existing deck due to safety concerns and the proposed deck was slightly larger than what existed. The proposed deck is 20 ’X30 ’X17 ’, (571 s.f.) while the deck that was removed was 19 ’X30 ’X15 ’ (512 s.f.). Since the original deck was removed and the permit on file does not specify its dimensions, the applicant had provided the City with an aerial photo and hand drawn measurements. The deck including the railing is 6 ’ in height and is considered structure and encroaches 19 ’ into the average lakeshore setback. Bottenberg noted that the hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback zone is more than the allowed 25%, in fact, without the deck, the hardcover is 36%, down from 43%. .^he continued that the shed located by the lakeshore is non conforming and staff had attempted to get the previous property owner to remove it since the 1980 ’s. The lot coverage by structures was 2,000 s.f. (2,512 s.f. with the old deck) and is proposed to be 2,571 s.f., an increase of 59 s.f. to what previously existed. Mr. Schniidt stated that he was unfamiliar with the existence and history of the lakeside sbed and could not commit for Mr. Cloud to tearing it down. Chair Smith suggested that Mr. Schmidt convey the Commission’s thoughts to Mr. Cloud and they table the application. Fritzler asked if the other outbuildings wou'd be allowed to remain. Gaffron questioned whether a 10 ’X12’ she..’ the driveway was to remain, Mabusth stated that it adds to the lot coverage. PAGE 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. i»6) #02-2823 RONALD CLOUD, 3460 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued Hawn stated that, in her opinion, the proposed conservatory would be something that would be obtrusive to the neighbors. Having visited the site, Rahn indicated that the footings that are there dictate the size of the deck. He believed that the previous deck size had been overstated and would recommend it be replaced by something similar to the original. Gaffron suggested reviewing the assessor’s records to see if there was a measurement of the old deck recorded there. With regard to staffs recommendations. Chair Smith agreed that, item #3, the shed located by the lake be removed. Berg inquired as to whether the shed at the rear of the property near the driveway should be removed also. Mabusth reminded the Commission that this is the first opportunity they’ve been given to mandate the removal of the rear shed. If a permit cannot support its existence, Hawn suggested the shed be removed. She asked what the hardcover would be at if these things were removed. Mabusth reminded the Commission that they required a grade level deck for the Livingston application and suggested the Commission offer the applicant the opportunity to replace the shed with a lockbox. While visiting the site, Hawn indicated that one of the neighbors approached her stating that they did not wish to see any additional hardcover on the property. In fact, due to the road being paved and the excessive amounts of hardcover in the area, the neighbor asked if there was anything the City could do about the poor overlaying job and runoff. Gaffron stated he believed that the original overlay may have raised the grade and he would follow-up. In conclusion. Chair Smith indicated that the deck needs to remain the same original size, the shed by the take needs to be removed, the rear shed by the driveway removed, and due to the amount of structural coverage she felt the proposed three season porch would not fly. There were no public comments. PAGE 20 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o'clock p.m. (#6) #02-2823 RONALD CLOUD, 3460 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, Continued Hawn moved. Chair Smith seconded, to table Application #02-2823, Ronald Cloud, 3460 North Shore Drive, to allow the Applicant’s representative to convey staff and Planning Commission recommendations to the applicant VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#10) #02-2831 HOPE CHEST FOR BREAST CANCER, 3850 SHORELINE DRIVE, FINDING OF SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR USE AND COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW 10:06 p.m.- 10:56 p.m. Barbara and Jay Hensley, Applieants, and John Chenoweth, owner of Bay Furniture, were present. Bottenberg explained that the applicant, Barbara Hensley, intends to purchase the property at 3850 Shoreline Drive, which is currently operated as “Bay Furniture”. The applicant intends to operate an upscale resale store called “Hope Chest for Breast Cancer ”. The proposed business will continue to sell furniture, antiques, crystal/china. jewelry, and home accessories such as lamps, pictures, and rugs. There will be a limited amount of clothing and accessories. The application is two-fold: 1) Finding of Similar Use to allow the furniture store to operate as a permitted or conditional use. If the Planning Commission and City Council deem the proposed use to be substantially similar to other uses in a specific zoning district, they can allow it. 2) The second part of the application is the commercial site plan review. Bottenberg pointed out that Ms. Hensley was asking for the same consideration that was granted to Bay Furniture in 1986, noting that “Hope Chest for Breast Cancer ” is compatible with the other uses in the zoning district and would operate substantially similar to a “gallery” and furniture. It was estimated that 90% of the donations would be picked up by the business at donor homes or businesses and delivered daily to the dock area. Drop offs would only be allowed during business hours. Bottenberg reported that the proposed business hours would likely be Monday - Friday from 9.AM - 7PM, Saturday 12PM-5PM and Sunday 12PM-5PM, with the potential to stay open later until 9PM one night a week depending on need. Bottenberg explained that hardcover was not reviewed with the original site plan review in 1986 because the Shoreland Ordinance establishing hardcover limits for commercial district was not adopted until 1992. The proposed signage meets the 50 s.f requirement. Staff recommends approval based on the conclusion that the proposed use is substantially similar to the existing use as a furniture store and to other permitted uses in the district. Staff recommendation was accompanied by three conditions: 1) the parking lot be striped so that each stall is 9’X20’, with a minimum of 12 spaces, per the approved plan. 2) A sign shall be clearly visible on the drop-off serv ’ice door stating that drop offs arc only accepted durins business hours. 3) The applicant and staff should develop a set of controls to ensure that drop offs don ’t become a problem. PAGE 21 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#10) #02-2831 HOPE CHEST FOR BREAST CANCER, 3850 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued. Ms. Hensley ensure the Commission that the resale shop will be an upscale business, offering a unique mix of furniture and gift items. She indicated that they had been collecting items since January and had received a donation from Van Gogh’s Daughter, who gave their entire inventory to the Hope Chest for Breast Cancer when it closed its doors in Wayzata. In fact, she indicated that Super Value had given them 20,000 s.f. for storage until the grand opening. Chair Smith inquired as to the hours of operation. Hensley believed they would operate similar hours to other boutiques in the arc, probably 10AM - 5PM, 10AM-7PM once a week, and weekends 12PM - 5PM or 6PM. There were no public comments. Hawn stated that she was pleased to se ’ interest of Ms. Hensley in this location. Chair Smith asked if the Commissioners had any concern about the shop fitting in. Mabusth saw the proposed use as similar in nature to a gallery or gift store. Fritzler contended that it was not a substantially similar use and questioned what sort of gift items would be available. Hensley indicated that the “Hope Chest” items would be tastefully designed gifts uniquely designed for the woman undergoing breast cancer treatment, with their needs in mind. Chair Smith stated that the proposed resale shop is not the traditional resale clothing shop. Hensley maintained that the donations they have received have been simply beautiful and she would not be afraid to turn down items that did not meet their standards. She indicated that the Bay Furniture Store is decorated well, the perfect store and location for this shop. Jay Hensley indicated that 95% of the store would be filled with furniture. By allowing this resale establishment to move in, Fritzler asked the Commission if they were opening themselves up to a lower scale resale shop wishing to move in five years from now stating that they are a substantially similar use. Hawn didn’t agree, stating that this resale shop is more similar in nature to a gallery, which docs fit the code. PAGE 22 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o^cIock p.m. (#10) #02-2831 HOPE CHEST FOR BREAST CANCER, 3850 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued While Fritzler believed that this was a good cause, he wondered how to establish substantially similar use that the Commission could live with in the future. Rahn pointed out that each conditional use is examined on an individual basis. Mr. Chenoweth maintained that this is a retail location that was built to be a retail store, and questioned how the Commission felt qualified to judge what retail is. Chair Smith asked if the Commissioners had any further comment with regard to use, of if they could move onto the hardcover issue. Gaffron reported that he and zoning administrator Weinberger had driven over to the site this evening and determined that it possessed approximately 40% hardcover. While there were no hardcover limits in 1992, Gaffron pointed out that today the commercial hardcover limits are 30- 35%. It is the City’s desire to limit hardcover, and Gaffron pointed out that the whole parking lot has been recently repaved to the outer edge. Although you don’t need a permit to repave over pavement, Gaffron questioned whether the paving project went beyond the original pavement. He pointed out that the owner would need to pull fill out of the wetland buffer that had spilled over, and indicated that a 10 ’ buffer of green space should run the lot line. He also pointed out that pylons or a barricade should surround the hydrant near the doors. Gaffron suggested the parking be realigned to run along the building in order to meet the space requirements. Chenoweth pointed out that beyond the pavement had been a gravel parking area, which had always been used for parking equipment and cars. Because the gravel was in such poor shape, lull of poi'iioles and dips, he repaved it to make it more attractive and useful. While what was there previously had not ever been addressed. Gaffron pointed out that there is no green space around the perimeter of the parking lot, and nothing but asphalt. Chair Smith suggested landscaping be added to enhance the green space. Chenoweth stated that he recently redid the landscaping, removed rock and added mulch. Gaffron suggested he consider adding an island, removing the pavement at the north end near the wetland buffer area, and plant 10 ’ of green space along the lot line. Hensley stated that she thought the landscaping on the grounds was beautifully done. With regard to parking, Gaffron suggested Chenoweth provide a 10 ’ buffer to the north and around the end, run four stalls in front of the doors, plus two by the sidewalk, and 7-8 spots PAGE 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o^clock p.m. (#10) #02-2831 HOPE CHEST FOR BREAST CANCER, 3850 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued opposite those, allowing a lane for back up from the dock landing. This would still allow extra space for an landscaping near the front comer. As a customer, Berg maintained that the parking lot is difficult to maneuver. She felt that taking 10’ from the parking lot for green space might be too much. Gaffron indicated that he would prefer to have a traffic engineer look at this proposal and make a recommendation, perhaps 10’ would be too much. He indicated that staff would need to take a closer look at the % of hardcover there now and evaluate what to do. Chenoweth stated that the lot and gravel area had always been used for parking and he had only made improvements to the building since he took ownership. Gaffron stated that what is there today does not match what was approved 5 years ago and this is the City’s chance to improve the situation. Jay Hensley asked if it was okay that the drainage was being directed to the northwest. Gaffron indicated that they do want the drainage to run to the north, however, he believed a swale may be necessary to the property. Berg pointed out that the Commission could not make any recommendations without detailed hardcover calculations. Hensley apologized, stating that she would provide those to the Commission once the surveyors completed their work, which she had believed might be available tonight. Gaffron informed the Commission that they did not have in front of them tonight ail that they needed in order to make a recommendation on what should be removed to make the plan work. Hensley pointed out that in order for them to buy the building, they need to know that they can use the building for their needs, the Hope Chest for Breast Cancer, and that it will fall under the cost they have allowed. Chenoweth reiterated that the Commission needs to consider that the gravel lot area had always been used as a parking lot, even though it hadn’t been paved in the past. Fritzler asked the owner if went beyond what he was allowed when he paved the lot, even though the gravel had been used for that. PAGE 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#10) #02-2831 HOPE CHEST FOR BREAST CANCER, 3850 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued Chcnoweth stated that he had called the City to ask about paving and repaving his lot and had not been given the impression that this was beyond what he would be allowed. Although gravel, it had always been a parking area, even before his occupation of the building. Mabusth asked the Commission if they would be comfortable if staff and the applicant were able to design a site plan with 13 stalls and it involved some excesses in hardcover. Rahn stated that the Planning Commission did not know what the site plan would be and therefore could not make a recommendation tonight. If the survey showed that the property was within 35% hardcover parameters, Hensley inquired whether they would have to wait for the next Planning Commission meeting to present their plan to the Commission. Chair Smith suggested that consideration be given to adding this item to an upcoming work session agenda. Hawn asked if there were setback required for parking lots. Gaffron noted that within the B-5 district, the minimum is 3*. Rahn stated that the sur\’cy is simply the beginning of the site plan. Berg indicated that, in her opinion, the Commission could grant their approval for the similar use, however, would need to give further consideration to tlie wetland and swale issues. Jay Hensley asked ifstaIT believed the parking lot could fit the required 13 cars. Gaffron stated that he believed it would. Berg suggested the owner take measures to protect the hydrant and remove some of the blacktop at the north end. She felt the Commission could approve nothing further since there was nothing in front of the Commission to look at. Hensley requested that they try to consider a plan sooner than later. Gaffron indicated that the Dahlstrom representatives wished to schedule a work session in October and suggested the Commission discuss adding this item to the agenda after adjourning this evening. PAGE 25 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o*clock p.m. (HIO) #02-2831 HOPE CHEST FOR BREAST CANCER, 3850 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued. Chenoweth indicated that he needed to have time to liquidate and change the parking lot. In order to get these things in motion, he requested that he be given an understanding of where the Commission was at. Gaffron stated that the parking lot changes could possibly wait until after the closing, and suggested staff, the owner, and applicants meet later this week to discuss the survey results. Hawn moved. Chair Smith seconded, to recommend conceptual approval for Application #02-2831, Hope Chest for Breast Cancer, 3850 Shoreline Drive. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#11) #02-2764 PROPOSED ZONING AMENDMENT, PROPOSED SECTION 10.46, COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE Chair Smith opened the Public Hearing at 11:00 P.M. and closed the Public Hearing at 11:01 P.M. The Planning Commission agreed to accept staffs recommendation. Fritzier moved, Berg seconded, recommending that City Council grant conceptual approval of the CPUD Ordinance, subject to an additional study or visioning process for Navarre be completed prior to adoption of the Ordinance. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#12) #2333 PROPOSED ZONING CODE AMENDMENT, SECTION 20.20 SUBD. 4C, HOME OCCUPATION STANDARDS Chair Smith opened the Public Hearing at 11:05P.M. and closed the Public Hearing at 11:06 P.M. Hawn complimented staff, stating that is was nice to see the ordinances in final form. Hawn moved. Chair Smith seconded, recommending approval of the revised draft Ordinance of the Home Occupation Standards as presented bv staff. VOTE: Ayes 7, Navs 0. (#13) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS OF AUGUST 26,2002 AND SEPTEMBER 9,2002 August 26, Fritzier had nothing to report. September 9, 2002, Rahn stated that most Planning Commission items appeared on the consent agenda. PAGE 26 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, August 19,2002 6:30 o*clock p.m. i»l4) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Gaffron pointed out that the Planning Commission would need to schedule a work session date for October. It was determined that they would do so after adjourning. (#15) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR AUGUST 19,2002 Hawn moved, Rahn seconded, to approve the Minutes of the August 19,2002 Planning Commission Meeting as presented. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0, Berg abstained. Chair Smith pointed out that the requested changes of the July minutes had not been made. (#16) SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON SEPTEMBER 23 AND OCTOBER 14,2002. September 23 - Mabusth October - Berg ADJOURNMENT Fritzler moved, Mabusth seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 11:12 P.M. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 11:12 P.M. Sandra Smith, Chair PAGE 27 m CITY OF LONG LAKEOctober 18, 2002 OtyofOrono Attn; MikeGaffron P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0056 Re: Stonebay Plan Review Dear Mike: The City of Long Lake has received the October 18,2002 staff report and a copy of the plans for the 167 unit Stonebay development (application #02-2840) located on the north side of West Wayzata Boulevard between Willow Drive and Old Crystal Bay Road. We appreciate the opportunity to add to the public discus^on of this proposal, which appears to have many strong elements that may complement or directly benefit the Qty of Long Lake. The purpose of this letter is to provide comments on these plans. Of primary concern Is the future development of the four outlots, in particular Outiots A and D, and how the development of these outiots may be ben^dal or harmful to our community. Community Management Plan Map 3B-7 identifies this area as Parcel Group 1, which further refines the Xommerdat" guidance for this area as office and retail that Is accessory to the office. We understand that these outiots are not proposed to be developed at this time, and an additional public review will be required when development is proposed. The Long Lake Planning Commission supports steering these parcels for office development, and to a limited degree, limited scale retail that is clearly and directly associated with the office land use. The office land use would compliment our efforts to implement the Downtown Master Plan, which encourages the intensificabon of the downtown area by bringing more people to our community during traditional business hours. Permitting non-local, medium- or large-scale retail uses to spread along the existing Highway 12 corridor would significantly impede the short- and long-term success of the downtown core. Limiting the possibility of future retail and related commercial development supports our historic efforts to encourage the clustering of retail and related commercial development in the downtown area to work towards achieving a greater critical mass to support a more diverse and lively downtown area. We are also encouraged that the additional households in this development and the new senior housing project wiil five in such close proximity to the downtown. This expanded population base will undoubtedly enrich and support the shops, services, and other activities found In downtown Long Lake. 1964 Park Avenue • P.O. Box 60ft • Long Lake. Minnesma S5356 • 952-473.6961 • 952-476*9622 (fax) • hup;//www.ti.long-lako.ojn.u.< C00/2C0*a 0C6i.# 3XVI S.SOl 40 Alio ZZ96 9Li tS6 6IS9I tOOtilflOO